Investor Update | July 10, 2026

Several weeks ago, I published a research update arguing that Horizon Aircraft was materially undervalued around $1.59 per share. At the time, my message was simple: investors weren’t chasing an aircraft already in flight, they were standing on the runway before takeoff.

Shortly thereafter, the market began recognizing some of that disconnect, driving the stock to approximately $3.80, representing a gain of well over 100% from the original thesis.

Since then, however, the market has done what markets often do. Profit-taking emerged, momentum faded, and sentiment cooled. The stock retraced sharply, leading many investors to question whether the original thesis had changed.

From my perspective, it hasn’t.

If anything, today’s valuation presents another opportunity to step back and separate price action from business execution.

Markets rarely move in straight lines. They advance through cycles of optimism, consolidation, profit-taking, and renewed accumulation. During those periods, price can temporarily disconnect from underlying progress. For long-term investors, those disconnects often create the most compelling opportunities.

Recent trading suggests the selling pressure that dominated the past several weeks may be beginning to exhaust itself. The market has responded constructively around recent support levels, and while additional testing of that support would not be unusual, the broader technical picture appears to be transitioning away from a sustained downtrend and toward a healthier accumulation phase.

Technical analysis alone never determines investment success, but when improving technical conditions begin to align with an unchanged fundamental thesis, I pay attention.

More importantly, the business itself continues moving forward.

The long-term value of Horizon Aircraft has never depended on day-to-day price fluctuations. It depends on execution.

- Execution means continued prototype development.

- Execution means advancing certification.

- Execution means expanding strategic partnerships.

- Execution means validating technology through flight testing.

- Execution means converting engineering progress into commercial opportunity.

These are the milestones that reduce uncertainty. As uncertainty declines, markets typically begin assigning higher valuations, not because the business suddenly changes overnight, but because investors become increasingly willing to pay for reduced execution risk.

This is what I have consistently referred to as the re-rating process.

Successful growth companies rarely experience one single repricing event. Instead, they move through multiple valuation phases as each major milestone removes another layer of uncertainty.

The market does not simply reward revenue. It rewards increasing confidence.

In my opinion, Horizon Aircraft remains in the early stages of that process.

Whether the stock immediately moves higher or first spends additional time building a stronger technical base is largely noise within a much larger investment story. Short-term volatility is normal. Long-term value creation is what ultimately matters.

The original thesis was never based on predicting next week’s share price.

It was based on identifying a meaningful disconnect between market valuation and future potential.

Today, I believe that disconnect still exists.

The company has continued executing. The opportunity remains substantial. The risks remain real, as they always do with emerging aerospace companies, but the fundamental trajectory appears intact.

The market may continue to fluctuate.

Sentiment may continue to fluctuate.

My investment thesis has not.

As always, every investor should perform their own due diligence and consider both the risks and opportunities before making any investment decision. This reflects my personal opinion based on publicly available information and should not be considered financial advice.

- New Horizon Aircraft outlined plans for its Cavorite X7, a 7-seat hybrid-electric eVTOL targeting 250 mph top speed, 500-mile range.

-Design centers on a patented fan-in-wing system using 12 electric lift fans with transforming wings for vertical takeoff and landing.

- Program timeline targets a full-scale aircraft ready to test in early 2027, with type certification finishing in 2030 via Transport Canada.

- Presentation cited a cash position of USD 75 million+, operating cash use of about USD 3.5 million per quarter, runway of 24+ months.

- Stock price shown at USD 2.61; capital raised listed at USD 125 million+; headcount at 52 full-time employees.

https://irp.cdn-website.com/738186d2/files/uploaded/Horizon+Aircraft+Investor+Presentation+-+June+2026.pdf

One of the largest concerns surrounding early-stage aerospace companies is dilution.

This concern is not unique to Horizon Aircraft. Across the advanced air mobility and eVTOL sector, investors have repeatedly watched companies issue substantial amounts of equity in order to finance:

• prototype development
• certification programs
• manufacturing expansion
• engineering payroll
• supplier commitments
• flight testing infrastructure
• operational scaling

In many cases, these dilution cycles became severe enough to materially impair long-term shareholder value despite strong technological progress.

As a result, one of the primary bearish arguments historically directed toward New Horizon Aircraft Ltd. (NASDAQ: HOVR) has centered on eventual fully diluted share count expansion.

The assumption was relatively straightforward:

A small-cap aerospace company pursuing advanced aircraft development would almost certainly require massive future equity issuance in order to survive long enough to commercialize its platform.

For many investors, this became embedded into long-term valuation models.

However, recent financing structures and strategic ownership arrangements may now warrant a substantial reassessment of those assumptions.

The Original Dilution Framework

Earlier investor models surrounding Horizon Aircraft commonly projected eventual fully diluted share counts approaching or exceeding approximately 134 million shares.

These models generally incorporated:

• future at-the-market offerings
• warrant exercises
• shelf registrations
• private placements
• strategic capital raises
• employee compensation expansion
• long-duration certification financing requirements

Under these assumptions, future valuation upside became heavily constrained on a per-share basis.

For example:

At a hypothetical future $2 billion market capitalization:

• 134 million diluted shares implies approximately $14.93 per share

At a hypothetical future $3 billion market capitalization:

• 134 million diluted shares implies approximately $22.39 per share

These models implicitly assumed that Horizon would follow the same broad dilution pathway experienced by many speculative aerospace peers.

But recent developments may indicate that management’s capital formation strategy is evolving differently than originally expected.

The Strategic Ownership Limitation Structure

One of the more important and potentially misunderstood aspects of Horizon’s recent financing activity involves structured ownership limitations tied to strategic investment agreements.

Specifically, certain investment arrangements appear designed around maximum beneficial ownership thresholds near 9.99%.

This distinction is critical.

In traditional high-dilution small-cap financing environments, investors often fear:

• unrestricted warrant expansion
• serial toxic financing
• uncontrolled conversion structures
• open-ended share issuance
• continual float expansion

However, ownership-capped structures operate differently.

When a financing agreement includes a beneficial ownership blocker, commonly set at 9.99%, the investor’s ability to accumulate additional equity may become structurally constrained unless ownership percentages are actively reduced through sales or unless contractual provisions are amended.

This creates several potentially important implications:

• dilution pacing may become more controlled
• float expansion may occur more gradually
• strategic investors may behave more like long-duration holders rather than rapid converters
• future financing requirements may become more targeted and less indiscriminate

Importantly, ownership blockers are often associated with strategic positioning rather than pure financing extraction structures.

While this does not eliminate dilution risk, it may materially alter the projected trajectory of future dilution expansion.

Why the 9.99% Threshold Matters

The 9.99% ownership threshold is not arbitrary.

Crossing beneficial ownership thresholds above 10% can trigger:

• additional regulatory scrutiny
• insider reporting obligations
• short-swing profit rules under Section 16
• expanded disclosure responsibilities
• increased market visibility

As a result, many strategic investors intentionally structure agreements just below this level.

In Horizon’s case, the significance may be even greater because the structure potentially suggests:

• long-duration positioning
• strategic alignment
• controlled accumulation
• negotiated participation rather than uncontrolled open-market financing dependency.

For sophisticated investors, this distinction can dramatically alter the interpretation of future dilution models.

Reassessing the Fully Diluted Share Count

One of the more interesting implications of the revised financing framework is the possibility that prior dilution estimates may have materially overstated Horizon’s eventual fully diluted share count.

If strategic financing structures continue operating within controlled ownership thresholds, some investors now believe eventual fully diluted share counts may settle substantially below earlier estimates near 134 million shares.

Certain emerging investor models now speculate that long-term fully diluted share counts could potentially fall closer to:

• 95 million to
• 105 million shares

depending on:

• certification timelines
• future capital efficiency
• partnership structures
• non-dilutive funding sources
• warrant exercise sequencing
• strategic investment participation

This difference becomes highly significant when applied to valuation modeling.

The Mathematics of Dilution Compression

Per-share valuation is directly impacted by share count expansion.

Even if enterprise value assumptions remain unchanged, lower-than-expected dilution materially increases implied per-share upside.

For example:

Scenario A — Original Dilution Model

Future valuation:

• $2 billion market cap

Diluted share count:

• 134 million shares

Implied share price:

• approximately $14.93

Scenario B — Reduced Dilution Model

Future valuation:

• $2 billion market cap

Diluted share count:

• 100 million shares

Implied share price:

• approximately $20.00

This represents a roughly 34% increase in implied per-share valuation despite identical enterprise value assumptions.

That distinction is enormous.

In speculative aerospace sectors where future valuations are often driven by:

• strategic positioning
• technological milestones
• institutional participation
• certification progress
• comparable sector multiples
• defense applicability
• future TAM assumptions

Small changes in projected share structure can produce very large changes in long-term price targets.

Why This Thesis Is Beginning To Matter More

Historically, many investors treated Horizon Aircraft similarly to other early-stage eVTOL companies:

• highly speculative
• heavily dilutive
• capital constrained
• structurally risky

But as Horizon continues progressing through:

• prototype validation
• transition flight milestones
• aerospace partnerships
• certification pathways
• manufacturing preparation

the capital structure itself is beginning to receive more scrutiny.

Investors are increasingly asking a different question:

What happens if Horizon succeeds while diluting materially less than originally projected?

That possibility may be more important than many investors currently realize.

Potential Implications for Institutional Valuation Models

Institutional valuation frameworks often rely heavily on:

• future share count assumptions
• enterprise value modeling
• peer comparison analysis
• dilution-adjusted price targets

If Horizon’s eventual dilution profile compresses materially below prior expectations, several downstream effects may occur:

• per-share valuation models may rise
• analyst targets may require upward revision
• strategic ownership concentration may increase
• float dynamics may tighten
• scarcity premiums may emerge

This becomes particularly relevant if Horizon eventually transitions from:

• speculative development company to
• recognized aerospace platform company

because valuation expansion combined with lower-than-expected dilution can create highly nonlinear upside scenarios.

Risks Still Remain Significant

Importantly, none of this eliminates dilution risk.

Horizon Aircraft remains:

• pre-revenue
• capital intensive
• early-stage
• dependent on successful execution

Additional financing remains likely.

Future dilution could still exceed current investor expectations depending on:

• certification delays
• macroeconomic conditions
• capital market access
• manufacturing expansion costs
• engineering setbacks
• commercialization timelines

Furthermore, ownership-capped structures do not inherently prevent future secondary offerings or additional strategic financing rounds.

As a result, all dilution projections remain speculative.

Final Thoughts

The emerging dilution thesis surrounding Horizon Aircraft may ultimately become one of the most important aspects of the broader investment narrative.

For years, many investors assumed Horizon would eventually follow the same heavy-dilution pathway seen across large portions of the speculative aerospace industry.

But newer financing structures may now suggest a more controlled and strategically managed capital formation process than originally anticipated.

If Horizon ultimately:

• advances certification successfully
• secures additional strategic partnerships
• maintains disciplined capital management
• limits dilution more effectively than peers

then prior long-term valuation models may prove materially conservative.

In that scenario, the market may eventually begin reassessing not only Horizon’s technology platform and aerospace positioning, but the company’s entire long-term valuation framework.

Powered by Electricity

written by Death Smiles

The Robinson family represents a three-generation aviation lineage spanning:

• WWII military aviation (Royal Canadian Air Force bomber operations)
• Post-war experimental aircraft construction
• Contemporary aerospace entrepreneurship (eVTOL / hybrid aircraft design)

This lineage directly informs the founding and technical architecture of Horizon Aircraft.

Robinson Family Lineage Click to read more

Powered by Electricity

written by Death Smiles

Disclaimer

This note is speculative research based on publicly observable facts and historical relationships. It is not evidence of any undisclosed partnership, investment, or transaction.

The Thesis

A growing number of Horizon Aircraft developments appear connected to individuals, organizations, and suppliers associated with the Bombardier–Mitsubishi aerospace ecosystem.

While no direct partnership has been announced, the pattern may suggest Horizon is positioning itself within that network as it advances toward certification, manufacturing, and commercialization.

Observable Facts

1. MHIRJ Partnership

Horizon announced a partnership with MHIRJ to support development of the Cavorite X7.

MHIRJ's expertise originates from the former CRJ regional jet organization acquired from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries following the Bombardier CRJ transaction.

2. Richard Alexander Connection

Richard Alexander spent approximately 23 years within the Bombardier ecosystem and participated during the transition period that ultimately connected portions of the CRJ program to Mitsubishi.

His addition provides Horizon with direct access to decades of aerospace manufacturing, certification, and industry relationships.

3. Strategic Partner Build-Out

Over the past year Horizon has announced partnerships covering:

• Engineering support
• Flight testing
• Composite manufacturing
• Wing manufacturing
• Certification support
• Propulsion systems

These partnerships collectively address many of the requirements necessary to move from prototype development toward commercial production.

4. Management Commentary

Management has repeatedly referenced ongoing discussions with strategic partners and the pursuit of relationships that could accelerate commercialization.

5. Bell Logo Removal

Following the recent financing transaction, Horizon updated its investor presentation.

A side-by-side comparison of the prior and updated versions indicates that the Bell logo was removed while the remainder of the presentation remained substantially unchanged.

The significance of this change remains unknown, but it appears to have been a deliberate modification rather than part of a broader presentation refresh.

6. Financing Structure

The recent financing introduced a large investor utilizing a 9.99% beneficial ownership limitation and warrant structure.

Such structures are common in capital markets transactions and do not independently imply strategic involvement. However, the timing has prompted investor interest.

Why Bombardier Is Discussed

Bombardier possesses capabilities that Horizon will eventually require:

• Aerospace manufacturing expertise
• Certification experience
• Production infrastructure
• Supply-chain management
• Global support capabilities

As Horizon transitions from development toward commercialization, relationships with established aerospace organizations become increasingly important.

What Would Strengthen The Thesis?

The following developments would materially increase confidence:

• A manufacturing agreement
• Joint development activity
• Strategic investment disclosure
• Shared facilities or testing programs
• Additional Bombardier-affiliated personnel joining Horizon
• Public collaboration involving Bombardier, MHIRJ, or related entities

What Would Weaken The Thesis?

• Alternative strategic partner announcements
• Evidence Bell was removed solely for branding or legal reasons
• Confirmation that the financing investor is unrelated to aerospace
• Lack of further ecosystem expansion over time

Conclusion

At present, there is no evidence proving a Bombardier partnership.

However, Horizon appears to be steadily building relationships within a network that includes individuals and organizations connected to the Bombardier–Mitsubishi aerospace ecosystem.

Whether these connections ultimately lead to a formal strategic relationship remains unknown, but the pattern is sufficiently notable to warrant continued monitoring.

Just some info to add to the Macro thesis

GE - Patent links

US20250019071A1 - Aeronautical propulsion system having electric fans - Google Patents

US20240326995A1 - Vertical takeoff and landing aircraft - Google Patents

GE - Patent link

US20190023389A1 - Vertical Takeoff and Landing Aircraft - Google Patents

(Notice how the wings open then fold down, seems like a rough forward transition to me, along with more things moving in unity and possible failures. Plus, Horizon has the wing opening utility patent so...)

HOVR - Patent links:

US12129019B2 - Aircraft and flow guide system having a flow guide structure - Google Patents

US11548621B1 - Aircraft airfoil having an internal thrust unit, and aircraft having the same - Google Patents

US11001377B1 - Aircraft airfoil and aircraft having the same - Google Patents

HOVR - Patent links:

1 - US20190055010 Aircraft landing gear and method

2 - US20160221670 Aircraft landing gear and method

3 - WO2015035493 AIRCRAFT LANDING GEAR AND METHOD

4 - CA2924133 AIRCRAFT LANDING GEAR AND METHOD

5 - WO2016141447 AIRCRAFT LANDING GEAR AND METHOD

6 - US20180050791 Amphibious aircraft, landing gear, and method

7 - US20240262493 Aircraft and flow guide system having a flow guide structure

8 - WO2024159328 AIRCRAFT AND FLOW GUIDE SYSTEM HAVING A FLOW GUIDE STRUCTURE

9 - US11001377 Aircraft airfoil and aircraft having the same

10 - WO2021232141 AIRCRAFT AIRFOIL AND AIRCRAFT HAVING THE SAME

11 - US11548621 Aircraft airfoil having an internal thrust unit, and aircraft having the same

12 - CA3014242 AIRCRAFT LANDING GEAR AND METHOD

13 - USD997836S1 - Aircraft - Google Patents

14 - US10730612B2 - Aircraft landing gear and method - Google Patents

15 - US12129019B2 - Aircraft and flow guide system having a flow guide structure - Google Patents

16 - US0000D0997836S120230905

Current events, news, filings, updates, etc. If you see something new, please 🙏 post it here with a link, short description and date. Please remember to add the date to your post so we can all enjoy a chronological, community news library as we grow. Thank you!

HORIZON AIRCRAFT (HOVR)

Institutional Investor Package

Updated Institutional Review Draft — June 2026

I. Executive Summary

Company: New Horizon Aircraft Ltd

Ticker: HOVR (Nasdaq)

Sector: Advanced Air Mobility / Hybrid eVTOL

Founded: 2013 (pivoted to hybrid eVTOL in 2018)

Public Listing: January 12, 2024 (via SPAC merger with Pono Capital Three)

Flagship Aircraft: Cavorite X7 – hybrid-electric VTOL with patented HOVR Wing

Market Cap: ~varies (micro-cap advanced aerospace developer)

Investment Thesis: Horizon offers a patent-protected, certifiable hybrid eVTOL platform with continued prototype validation, expanding aerospace ecosystem partnerships, government-backed funding support, and insider-aligned incentive structures.

Long-term valuation potential remains centered on successful certification, production scaling, and aerospace licensing optionality.

II. Aircraft Platform – Cavorite X7

• Configuration: Pilot + 6-passenger hybrid-electric VTOL
• Propulsion: Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A turbine driving electric lift fan system (hybrid-electric architecture)
• Range: ~800 km (~500 miles) with 1,000lb payload (Max useful load 1,500lbs)
• Speed: 250 mph Max @ 10,000ft

Key Differentiators:

• Patented HOVR Wing with closable fan-in-wing system
• ~98% fixed-wing operation during cruise flight
• No reliance on grid charging infrastructure
• Hybrid turbine-electric redundancy for mission resilience
• Designed for regional + defense + utility aviation use cases

Cost per mile vs. Bell model 429: ~21% per mile based on 500 hours annually

• Models compared are 6 ticketed passenger or crew + cockpit for pilot
• Projected operational cost savings of 79%

Development Milestones:

• Hundreds of test flights completed
• Successful forward flight transition (May 2025)
• Full-scale prototype assembly progressing (2026)
• Flight instrumentation integration underway
• Certification aircraft build phase initiated

III. Certification Pathway

Lead Agency: Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) Bilateral Validations: FAA (U.S.), EASA (Europe) Certification Partner: Cert Centre Canada (3C)

Projected Timeline:

• 2025: Transition and propulsion evaluations (completed phase)
• 2026: Full-scale prototype assembly & ground testing
• 2027: Initial flight test campaign
• 2027–2028: TCCA Type Certification progression
• 2028+: FAA and EASA validation processes

Strategic Regulatory Advantage:

• Canadian certification-first pathway reduces initial regulatory friction
• Harmonized bilateral validation framework (FAA/EASA)
• Conventional aerodynamic cruise profile simplifies portions of certification relative to pure lift-only eVTOL designs

Government Funding Support:

• INSAT (Canada Sustainable Aviation Initiative) — non-dilutive funding support (~C$10M class program allocation disclosed in filings/announcements timeframe)

IV. Commercial Traction & Strategic Collaborations

Letters of Intent (LOIs):

Strategic Collaborations:

• AFWERX / U.S. Air Force – HSVTOL Challenge Phase 1 participation
• Canso Investment Counsel – Convertible note financing (C$6.7M, Dec 2023)
• MT-Propeller – Propulsion integration systems
• Andrea Mocellin – Cabin + industrial design architecture
• ZeroAvia – Hydrogen-electric propulsion collaboration (research-stage)
• Cert Centre Canada – Certification advisory partner
• Pratt & Whitney Canada – PT6A turbine integration partner (key propulsion supplier)
• MHIRJ (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Regional Jet) – engineering and flight-test instrumentation collaboration
• Motion Applied (McLaren Applied spinout) – inverter and power electronics development
• RAMPF Group – composite manufacturing systems support
• North Aircraft Industries - manufacture and test custom-engineered wings

V. Team & Strategic Talent

Executive Leadership:

• Brandon Robinson – CEO, Founder, Chairman; former RCAF CF-18 fighter pilot, Canadian Top Gun graduate, mechanical engineer, MBA, and aerospace program leader.
• Brian Robinson – Chief Engineer, Founder; Professional Engineer with 55+ years of aviation experience, aircraft designer, inventor, and founder of a Transport Canada-approved AMO.
• Jason O'Neill – COO; technology and aerospace operations executive with 20+ years leading engineering, product development, and organizational scaling initiatives.
• Brian Merker – CFO; public company finance executive with IPO, SPAC, M&A, SEC reporting, and capital markets experience.
• Tom Brassington – CTO; aerospace engineering leader with 18+ years of experience in aircraft systems development, integration, and certification.
• Phil Kelly – SVP Business Development; former Royal Marines aviator with 40+ years in aerospace, Sea Harrier FA2 and Harrier GR7/9A pilot, and former UK Head of Carrier Strike & Maritime Aviation.
• Stewart Lee – Head of Strategy & People; MBA and CPHR executive focused on organizational development, workforce scaling, and corporate strategy.
• Richard Alexander – Chief Engineer of Certified Programs with 38 years of aircraft development experience. Former engineering leader at Bombardier, Vertical Aerospace, and CAE, bringing deep expertise in aircraft design, certification, flight physics, and large-scale aerospace program execution.

Board & Strategic Advisors

• Jameel Janjua – Director; experimental test pilot, former RCAF fighter pilot, USAF Test Pilot School instructor, MIT aeronautics graduate, and Wharton MBA.
• Dr. John Maris – Director; founder of Cert Center Canada, former RCAF pilot, Transport Canada Delegated Test Pilot, and aviation certification specialist.
• Trisha Nomura – Independent Director; CPA and Audit Committee Chair with extensive public company governance experience.
• John Pinsent – Independent Director; former Ernst & Young executive with significant accounting, governance, and public company oversight expertise.
• John McKenna – Strategic Advisor; former President & CEO of the Air Transport Association of Canada.
• Justin Peng – Strategic Advisor; former VP of Strategy at Lilium and specialist in Advanced Air Mobility commercialization.

Engineering Expansion

FY2025–FY2026 saw significant engineering team expansion across:

• Flight test engineering
• Aircraft systems integration
• Propulsion integration
• Structural systems
• Certification and compliance engineering
• Advanced manufacturing and composites

Key hires and technical additions associated with the expansion phase include:

• Flight test engineers
• Systems integration engineers
• Certification specialists
• Composite manufacturing specialists

Leadership Strength: Horizon's leadership team combines expertise across military aviation, flight testing, aircraft certification, aerospace engineering, public company finance, and Advanced Air Mobility commercialization. This blend of operational, technical, regulatory, and capital markets experience is uncommon among pre-revenue aerospace companies and supports execution through certification, manufacturing scale-up, and commercialization of the Cavorite X7.

VI. Insider Alignment

PSU / Equity Incentive Structure (UPDATED CONTEXT)

Insider compensation continues to evolve through:

• Performance-based restricted share units (PSUs)
• Market-cap milestone vesting structures
• Long-duration retention incentives tied to certification progression

Known Structure

VII. Patent & Licensing Strategy

Patent Portfolio Overview

Horizon maintains a multi-domain aerospace IP portfolio covering:

• Fan-in-wing VTOL architecture
• Hybrid-electric propulsion integration
• Aircraft flow control systems
• Landing gear systems
• Internal thrust vectoring systems
• Aircraft aerodynamic optimization structures

VII. Patent & Licensing Strategy

31 Patents total / 16 listed below:

1. US20190055010 - Aircraft landing gear and method
2. US20160221670 - Aircraft landing gear and method
3. WO2015035493 - Aircraft landing gear and method
4. CA2924133 - Aircraft landing gear and method
5. WO2016141447 - Aircraft landing gear and method
6. US20180050791 - Amphibious aircraft, landing gear, and method
7. US20240262493 - Aircraft and flow guide system having a flow guide structure
8. WO2024159328 - Aircraft and flow guide system having a flow guide structure
9. US11001377 - Aircraft airfoil and aircraft having the same
10. WO2021232141 - Aircraft airfoil and aircraft having the same
11. US11548621 - Aircraft airfoil having an internal thrust unit, and aircraft having the same
12. CA3014242 - Aircraft landing gear and method
13. USD997836S1 - Aircraft (design patent)
14. US10730612B2 - Aircraft landing gear and method
15. US12129019B2 - Aircraft and flow guide system having a flow guide structure
16. USD997836S1 (Aircraft Design)

Strategic Implications:

• Protects fan-in-wing VTOL architecture
• Supports certification defensibility
• Enables aerospace licensing optionality
• Creates long-term IP moat for hybrid-electric regional aviation

Royalty Licensing Model

(Theoretical - Accelerated Government & Military Adoption)

VIII. Capital Structure & Dilution Outlook

Basic Shares Outstanding: ~updated range dependent on ATM usage (~40–50M range post-2025 activity)

Public Float: constrained relative to peers

Capital Structure Dynamics:

• ATM financing active in staggered deployment model
• Convertible instruments outstanding (historical Canso note)
• Warrants + PSU conversion potential
• Strategic shareholder concentration remains high

Dilution Framework (Model)

Peer Comparison Snapshot

IX. Institutional Valuation Model

Bull Case Framework

If successful:

• multi-billion-dollar aerospace OEM potential
• IP licensing revenue stream
• defense + regional aviation adoption
• manufacturing scale-up optionality

X. Risk Matrix

XI. Key Catalysts Ahead

• Full-scale prototype assembly (2026)
• Flight test campaign (2027)
• Certification milestones (2027–2028)
• Additional aerospace partnerships (rolling)
• Defense program engagement expansion
• Potential commercial LOI conversions

XII. Final Institutional Summary

Horizon Aircraft represents a differentiated hybrid-electric VTOL platform positioned between:

• urban air mobility competitors (battery-limited)
• traditional regional aviation OEMs (turbine-based)

Key strengths:

• patented architecture
• expanding aerospace ecosystem (MHIRJ, Pratt & Whitney Canada, Motion Applied, RAMPF)
• government-backed funding support
• prototype validation progress
• insider-aligned equity structure
• long-duration certification pathway

Execution remains the key determinant of long-term valuation realization.

Appendix – One-Page Summary

Ticker: HOVR

Sector: Advanced Air Mobility

Platform: Cavorite X7 hybrid VTOL

X7 cost per mile vs. Bell model 429: ~21% per mile based on 500 hours annually

• Models compared are 6 ticketed passenger or crew + cockpit for pilot
• Projected operational cost savings of 79%

Range: 500 miles with 1,000lb payload

Speed: 250 mph Max @ 10,000ft

Max useful load 1,500lbs.

Certification Lead: TCCA

AFWERX / U.S. Air Force

Partners: MHIRJ, Pratt & Whitney Canada, Motion Applied, MT-Propeller, Cert Centre Canada, RAMPF, North Aircraft Industries

LOIs: JetSetGo, Discovery Air Chile

Patents: 16+ core filings

Focus: Regional + defense + utility aviation

Key Advantage: Hybrid-electric VTOL without infrastructure dependence

• New Investor Deck Link - Deck Updated 5-28-2026 @ 1:08 pm EST
• New Horizon Aircraft investor deck outlined its Cavorite X7 hybrid-electric eVTOL concept, targeting 250 mph speed, 500-mile range, all-weather operations.
• Design centers on a patented fan-in-wing system with 12 electric lift fans and transforming wings, shifting to conventional fixed-wing flight for most missions.
• Financing snapshot showed cash position of $19.67 million in YTD FY2026, versus $7.55 million in FY2025 and $1.82 million in FY2024.
• Cash used in operations totaled $11.79 million in YTD FY2026, versus $9.31 million in FY2025; capital raised reached $24.73 million, versus $15.19 million.
• Program timeline pointed to a full-scale aircraft ready to test in early 2027; certification track shown as flight testing in 2027 through type certification by 2030.

New Horizon Aircraft (NASDAQ: HOVR) | Webinar Registration Link

Date & Time: June 15, 2026 4:15 PM ET (US and Canada)

New Horizon Aircraft Ltd. (“Horizon”) is an advanced air mobility company developing next-generation hybrid-electric vertical takeoff and landing (eVTOL) aircraft designed to dramatically improve the speed, range, cost efficiency, and operational versatility of air transport. The company’s flagship aircraft, the Cavorite X7, integrates a patented fan-in-wing design with a hybrid propulsion system, enabling vertical takeoff and landing while flying 98% of its mission as a conventional aircraft—delivering materially superior performance relative to both legacy helicopters and first-generation eVTOL platforms.

Key New Hire at Horizon Aircraft.

Richard Alexander

Chief Engineer & Flight Physics

Interesting Point: +22 years at Bombardier 1997 - 2019

Position Announcement w/ comments

Richard Alexander - Linked in Profile

Richard Alexander - Experience

Sample of his Experience listed below with links for your own DD above.

Experience

CAE Electric Aircraft program

As part of Vertical Aerospace's engineering management team, the Head of Flight Physics responsibilities encompass the following disciplines:

- Aerodynamics
- Acoustics
- Thermodynamics
- Loads
- Aeroelastics
- Rotor Dynamics
- Vibration
- Flight Dynamics
- Flight Control Laws
- Handling Qualities
- Simulation
- Aircraft Architecture and Configuration Development
- Performance
- Mass Properties

Aircraft Integrator on CAE's electric aircraft project.

Chief Flight Dynamics Integrator, SpaceJet Montreal Center

Mitsubishi Aircraft Corporation · Full-time

Nov 2019 - May 2020 · 7 mos

Boisbriand, Quebec, Canada

Working on Mitsubishi Aircraft Corporation's next generation of Regional Jets (M100), as Chief Flight Dynamics Integrator. The company discontinued the program. I was responsible for the following disciplines at SpaceJet Montreal Center:

- Aerodynamics
- Aircraft Performance
- Engine Performance
- Flight Characteristics (Stability & Control)
- FBW Control Laws (Claws)
- Simulation
- Dynamics (Aeroelastics)
- Loads
- Acoustics
- Mass Properties
- Thermal

• Over the period, I managed the following disciplines in Core Engineering: FBW Control Laws Flight Simulation Stability and Control Loads Structural Dynamics Aircraft Performance On all Bombardier Aviation programs (Challenger, CRJ, Global and all derivatives, including missionised versions) and in transitional support of the Airbus A220 and Q Series programs. Canada Controlled Goods clearance.
• On all Bombardier's CRJ Regional Jet programs, responsible for: - Customised aircraft configuration (working directly with customers) - Customer Configuration Programs - All CRJ technical engineering leadership: Aircraft & Engine Performance, S&C, Flight Simulation, Loads, Dynamics, Vibration, Acoustics, Thermodynamics, Aerodynamics
• Specialist in Engine Performance and certification. Transport Canada Design Approval Delegate (DAD).

Aircraft and Engine Performance Engineer
- BAe146 inc RJ/FADEC upgrade
- BAe125-900 (Hawker 1000)
- Various legacy military and civil transports: Hercules, L1011, Victor, VC10, Viscount, Nimrod

Alright everyone, I'm home and have all facts fully straight before presenting this to you. No, this is not Chat GPT this time.

What we are seeing now is something extremely important. The actual capital structure evolution is now aligning almost perfectly with the long-term dilution modeling that I had projected publicly in the investor package. This is actually a really, really, interesting development. I’m really excited!

When we total the recent offerings together, while excluding PSU conversions that will be hit, the company lands near approximately 64.4 million shares outstanding versus the previously modeled 2027 estimate of roughly 64.22 million shares. That is NOT a random coincidence.

Instead, Horizon appears to be executing something much more A-team style IMO. The first major financing event involved the institutional offering announced in early May 2026. The company raised approximately $20 million through the sale of about 9.25 million shares to institutional investors. (Shares are introduced Fiscal 2027) Importantly, management stated this financing was intended to accelerate development of the Cavorite X7 program, commercialization timelines, hiring, and operational expansion.

But an even more interesting development appears to have happened today.

In the latest prospectus supplement, Horizon amended its ATM agreement with JonesTrading and reduced the maximum ATM capacity from $50 million down to $28 million. That means the company reduced the ATM authorization by approximately $22 million. The filing specifically states the prior cap was $50 million and the revised cap is now $28 million. More importantly, the filing disclosed that only approximately $6.57 million remains available for future ATM sales from this point forward.

That changes things big time. Now ask yourself “Why is that?” It’s because ATM facilities are often viewed by markets as an overhang. By substantially shrinking the ATM capacity after securing institutional financing, Horizon is saying that it prefers negotiated strategic capital raises rather than relying heavily on continuous open-market dilution. Pretty cool right?

Now, there is another interesting structural point emerging here. Another piece of the puzzle. The sequencing of these financings suggests these deals may not simply be random market raises. Just step back and think about it with a wide lens. The first institutional deal appears to have involved a concentrated institutional group rather than broad retail distribution. There were no major chaotic follow-up filings suggesting immediate unrestricted dumping pressure. Structurally, it resembles a coordinated institutional participation event. While we cannot definitively confirm the exact number of participating funds, (4 is my guess) the setup does resemble a strategic investor syndicate more than a traditional distressed financing structure.

Now the announced second financing event is following the same pattern, that matters because it potentially changes the institutional interpretation. A strategic event. (Think about what I said about people beating down the door trying to pre order these and getting turned away)

The current filings, press releases are now validating that the previously modeled dilution path in the investor package was already conservative enough to absorb these financings. The framework projected aggressive multi-year share expansion well in advance. Yet even after these raises, the company is still tracking extremely close to that modeled trajectory. With a huge cash runway**. (Acceleration Money)** Now ask yourself this question. If you accelerate progress and timeline, doesn’t that track with acceleration on getting to the projected 133 million shares?

That means investors who already accounted for dilution mathematically are not facing a broken thesis today. Right now we are actually seeing the beginning of the acceleration phase of that model in real time. Think about the bullish implications here based on everything I have uncovered for everyone in just 2 thesis discussions. I’ve been tracking this from the beginning.

At this stage, the filings suggest Horizon is trying to build a runway toward commercialization while balancing institutional participation, ATM reduction, and long-term funding flexibility. That’s how you build an empire.

The dilution path in the investor package was far more predictable — and far more accurately modeled — than many people believed.

Thanks for reading,

DS

Links to official news sources below

Press Release: News Release (SEC press release filing unavailable, tracking press release)

SEC Filing: SEC Filing (Official filing on prospectus amendment posted prior)

Here’s the plain-English breakdown:

The company originally created a program allowing it to sell up to $50 million worth of common shares into the market over time.

Now they are filing a supplement saying: • They are reducing the total size of that program from $50 million down to $28 million. • Some shares have already been sold under the old program. • After accounting for what has already been sold, there is only $6,567,156 remaining that they are still allowed to sell going forward.

So the key number is this:

Remaining ATM capacity = about $6.57 million

That means: • The company cannot sell another $50M anymore. • The total authorized ATM has been cut substantially. • Most of the revised $28M amount has already been used.

This is generally interpreted as: • Lower future dilution risk than originally feared. • A possible signal the company either: • no longer needs as much capital, • wants to reassure investors, • or is preparing for another financing structure later.

Mechanically, an ATM works like this: • The company gradually sells newly issued shares into the open market through a broker. • Shares are usually sold during periods of higher liquidity or stronger price action. • This increases the total share count over time (dilution).

The wording:

“including the Common Shares previously sold”

means the $28M figure is the total revised cap, not additional capital on top of previous sales.

Example: • Original authorization: $50M • Revised authorization: $28M total • Already sold: about $21.4M

• Remaining available to sell: about $6.57M

Investors often care about this because ATM facilities can create: • selling pressure, • dilution, • and volatility.

Reducing the facility size can sometimes be viewed positively because it caps potential future dilution more tightly than before.