I believe we should have a community where we can be more transactional in conversation about Fermi. I personally am almost overly bullish on Fermi and their success long term. I’d love to hear opposing opinions and just everyone’s viewpoints on governance, EPC, price action, headwinds & tailwinds, news, etc. and just share how are investments / trades are developing along the way. Hoping to create a constructive community where a conglomerate of shared opinions, data, and resources on Fermi lead to personal monetary success!

Similar to options exercise by Rick Perry on same day. The privately executed sales discounts to the prevailing price on 06/30 is baffling to me: $7.59 & $6.08

The link to the following Schedule A can be found under Attachments/Exhibits at the bottom of the SEC Schedule 13D link:

https://archive.fast-edgar.com/20260702/AB26L22MQ222G222222822Y2HTNLZ2223282/

SCHEDULE A

Reporting Person Caddis Holdings, LP
Trade Date 06/30/2026

Shares of Common Stock Sold 4,427,294
Average Price per Share ($) 7.59

Shares of Common Stock Sold 702,083
Average Price per Share ($) 6.08

Type of Sale Private Sale Pursuant to Option

FRMI 06/30 Metrics:

Open $9.36
High $9.53
Low $8.95
Close $9.16

Welcome to today’s open discussion on Fermi America - $FRMI and the broader AI sector.

💬 Thread Ideas:

• Any new updates or insights/rumors about Fermi America/Project Matador?
• Personal position update!
• What’s your outlook for FRMI this week/month/year?
• Spot any AI sector trends worth noting?

⚠️ Reminder: Please follow Reddiquette and our subreddit rules.

Welcome to today’s open discussion on Fermi America - $FRMI and the broader AI sector.

💬 Thread Ideas:

• Any new updates or insights/rumors about Fermi America/Project Matador?
• Personal position update!
• What’s your outlook for FRMI this week/month/year?
• Spot any AI sector trends worth noting?

⚠️ Reminder: Please follow Reddiquette and our subreddit rules.

Welcome to today’s open discussion on Fermi America - $FRMI and the broader AI sector.

💬 Thread Ideas:

• Any new updates or insights/rumors about Fermi America/Project Matador?
• Personal position update!
• What’s your outlook for FRMI this week/month/year?
• Spot any AI sector trends worth noting?

⚠️ Reminder: Please follow Reddiquette and our subreddit rules.

Shout out to Recent_Whole3294.
I’m gonna be honest I thought I knew almost everything there is to know about Fermi. But he apparently read the million page Texas tech ground lease document and found this awesome info.

Permitted Phase One Subtenants  

1. Google and affiliates.

2. Amazon.com and Amazon Web Services.

3. Meta and affiliates.

4. Microsoft and affiliates.

5. Apple and affiliates.

6. Oracle and affiliates.

7. Tencent Cloud and affiliates.

8. IBM Cloud and affiliates.

9. SAP Cloud and affiliates.

10. Salesforce Cloud and affiliates.

11. Coreweave and affiliates.

12. Paperspace and affiliates.

13. Nebius and affiliates.

14. Lambda Labs and affiliates.

15. Vast AI and affiliates.

16. OVH and affiliates.

17. Vultr and affiliates.

18. DigitalOcean and affiliates.

19. Rackspace and affiliates.

20. xAI and affiliates.

21. OpenAI and affiliates.

22. Crusoe and affiliates.

23. Nvidia Corporation and affiliates.

 

Welcome to today’s open discussion on Fermi America - $FRMI and the broader AI sector.

💬 Thread Ideas:

• Any new updates or insights/rumors about Fermi America/Project Matador?
• Personal position update!
• What’s your outlook for FRMI this week/month/year?
• Spot any AI sector trends worth noting?

⚠️ Reminder: Please follow Reddiquette and our subreddit rules.

Exercise of options, but wondering about the execution mechanics behind selling 864k shares at $7.31 on 6/30.

Speculation here--

Re-listened to Toby's call with a focus on the tenants... he mentioned "there is no doubt Marius Haas has deep connections" ... We all know about the Dell connections but he is also connected to Intel --

Could this be in play?

per chatgpt "Earlier in his career, Marius Haas held several leadership roles at Intel. He wasn’t just passing through—he spent over a decade there. One notable area was in strategic planning, where he was deeply involved in driving Intel’s enterprise products and solutions to market"

see comment below for further BayPine connections

Welcome to today’s open discussion on Fermi America - $FRMI and the broader AI sector.

💬 Thread Ideas:

• Any new updates or insights/rumors about Fermi America/Project Matador?
• Personal position update!
• What’s your outlook for FRMI this week/month/year?
• Spot any AI sector trends worth noting?

⚠️ Reminder: Please follow Reddiquette and our subreddit rules.

There is another competitor in the market for selling GPU's, thats why we are seeing a sharp pullback in companies like Nebius and Corweave, which I think is a bit of an overreaction because there is plenty of demand to go around, but I get it. But how does this affect Fermi?

If Meta plans to become another could provider, we have another trillion dollar company that will be trying to secure power. Meta's cloud ambitions increase total industry demand for power infrastructure, it doesn't decrease it.

I think its possible smaller companies that were evaluating Fermi that were just needing GPU access could potentially do business with Meta instead. But Hyperscalers, Enterprise compute operators, and the big chip players are looking to add gigawatts of dedicated power, they are trying to secure physical infrastructure for years.

Elon making a move here??? Jk but also kinda not

https://x.com/tobyrneugebauer/status/2071971474290741737?s=46&t=aOhw6HfhYp4LYxvH2x2rhQ

Toby: Join me at 4PM ET TODAY for a live Town Hall webcast where I will be answering questions from analysts who have covered Fermi in real time.

Might be interesting to hear the conversation based on the information he has shared so far. Also sharing thoughts and opinions could be valuable for the future of the company.

10K WIZARD 8:06 AM ET Jul-01-2026

http://archive.fast-edgar.com/20260701/AE2ZDQ2CLZ22NZB222ZC2ZY2ER7LZ222YQ86

Filed on: July 1, 2026

ChatGPT summary:

Bottom line

This July 1, 2026 Schedule 14A / DFAN14A is a Neugebauer-side definitive additional proxy filing, not a Fermi company filing. It attaches the June 30 town hall investor presentation and transcript titled “Securing Maximum Value for Fermi Shareholders.” It does not disclose a signed tenant, financing, permit, court ruling, sale offer, or Project Matador construction milestone. Its main value is that it gives a fuller, live Q&A version of Neugebauer’s argument.

What is new

The most important new point is that Neugebauer says he plans to extend the proxy timeline until after a judge rules, saying investors should vote after they have more facts. He frames this as avoiding a proxy fight over the July 4 / America’s 250th birthday period and letting shareholders see the legal record first.

That matters because the prior late-June filings had suggested momentum toward a near-term shareholder confrontation. This filing implies Neugebauer may slow the timing, at least tactically, until the court process clarifies the disputed governance issues.

Core message of the presentation

Neugebauer’s main theme is that contracts are either assets or liabilities. He argues that for Fermi, this is “exponentially” true because the company must enter very large, complex contracts relative to its balance sheet — including EPC, gas, grid, tenant, and other execution contracts. He specifically mentions the Primoris EPC contract, gas supply, grid connection, and tenant contracts as examples where structure and stewardship can either create value or create serious liability.

His argument is not “do not sign a tenant.” It is: do not sign the wrong tenant / EPC / financing package without competitive tension and independent board oversight. He says a tenant contract can be an “asymmetrical asset or liability,” because successful execution could be highly valuable, while failure could bring penalties, financing guarantees, and liquidity strain.

Tenant 1 discussion

Neugebauer gives more detail on why he says the original “Tenant 1” deal was not signed. He claims Fermi had at least 10 meetings with Tenant 1 into February, but that Tenant 1 used Fermi’s stock-price decline and increased float pressure to push for harsher economics and much larger penalties if Fermi failed to perform. He says the rent was not the main issue; the bigger concern was the penalties and execution risk.

He also says the team had two other tenant opportunities after exclusivity expired and that those alternatives offered better SLA and liquidated-damages terms with more money. He references Oracle directly, saying that meeting “did not go well,” and says he is not aware of many truly new tenants beyond the ones already in process before his exit.

Strategic-alternatives argument

The filing repeats the now-familiar Neugebauer thesis: Fermi should run an independent, banker-led dual-track processcomparing the standalone tenant/buildout plan against strategic alternatives such as a sale, partnership, or investment from a better-capitalized buyer. He again uses the “Three C’s” framework: Capital, Customer, Construction.

The presentation says six buyer categories should be engaged: hyperscalers, oil and gas majors, data-center developers, infrastructure/private equity/sovereign wealth funds, neoclouds, and chip/semi companies. Neugebauer argues that these buyers may value Fermi more highly because they can internalize power capacity, reduce financing risk, provide captive demand, or execute construction better.

Project Matador claims repeated

The presentation again describes Project Matador as an 11 GW+ private power-grid and data-center campus in Amarillo, Texas, adjacent to the DOE’s Pantex Plant, on 7,500 acres under a 99-year Texas Tech University System ground lease. It also repeats claims of a 6 GW Clean Air Permit, another 5 GW application pending, $1B+ in financing facilities, 2+ GW of generation capacity secured, a 450 MMcfpd gas pipeline installed, and an NRC-accepted nuclear COL application. These remain Neugebauer-side presentation claims, not new independent verification in this filing.

REIT / ownership question

Neugebauer was asked whether he would make it difficult for Fermi to become REIT compliant if he loses the proxy contest. He says he has “zero interest” in blocking REIT compliance and claims he has already set up foundations with independent boards to receive shares if needed. He also clarifies that his family’s sell-down was pre-IPO, not after the IPO lockup expired, and says it was done on banker advice to help with ownership concentration / REIT 5/50 considerations.

Dilution risk

Neugebauer directly says yes, he expects potential dilution may be needed to finance the project, which is one reason he keeps emphasizing the Three C’s. That is one of the clearer investor-relevant answers in the Q&A: even under the tenant path, Fermi likely needs more capital, and the terms of that capital could matter a lot for existing shareholders.

Governance and litigation framing

Neugebauer continues attacking Fermi’s 70% threshold for adding directors, calling it effectively a board veto. The presentation argues that with insiders holding a large stake, the supermajority threshold makes it mathematically very hard for public shareholders to expand the board.

He also says the dispute has broader implications for Texas corporate governance and companies considering Texas as a corporate home. That is campaign rhetoric, but it shows he is trying to elevate the fight beyond Fermi into a “shareholder democracy / Texas governance” issue.

Investor-relevant takeaways

This filing is more revealing than most of the social-media filings. It gives a fuller view of Neugebauer’s thinking on tenant risk, EPC risk, dilution, leadership loss, and why he does not want shareholders to treat a tenant announcement as the end of diligence.

It is still advocacy. The presentation contains many claims about tenants, penalties, alternative bidders, board behavior, and legal timing, but the filing itself does not attach contracts, bids, court orders, emails, or tenant term sheets.

The “extend the proxy” comment is the most procedurally important item. If Neugebauer’s side formally extends the voting deadline until after a judge rules, the proxy fight’s timing changes and shareholders may get more legal clarity before deciding.

The tenant issue remains unresolved. Neugebauer is effectively saying: a tenant may be good, but the real diligence question is whether the tenant contract plus EPC, gas, grid, and financing obligations create a durable asset or a hidden liability.

ChatGPT read

This is a substantive town-hall filing, not just another campaign post. It clarifies Neugebauer’s core concern: Fermi’s next contracts could either unlock enormous value or saddle the company with execution and penalty risk it cannot absorb. His remedy remains the same: an independent board majority, a banker-led market test, and a dual-track comparison against the standalone tenant path.

The biggest near-term things to watch now are: whether the proxy deadline is formally extended, what the judge rules on the disputed governance mechanics, whether Fermi announces a tenant, and — most importantly — whether any tenant announcement includes enough contract detail to judge pricing, penalties, credit support, financing obligations, and execution risk.

Starting thread on this- I am first shocked at the setting/lack of professionalism. Very interesting approach