r/FRMI

holding the stock right now? i understand there are some bag holders here from IPO, but if you’re new then why hold now? if they execute then this is a ~2 year out play and if we aren’t going to appreciate at all off signed leases it’s pointless to be an early investor. there are opportunity costs to this. why not just come back later?

my avg is $5.90 so i don’t care. i do believe they can possibly execute, but i could go elsewhere and come back later if there is no point in being in early.

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.

All this good news and still a steady decline. What gives?

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.

CARSON COUNTY, Texas (KFDA) - International investment company InfraTech announced today plans for a $2.7 billion data center in Carson County.
The center would be in addition to Fermi’s Matador facility near Pantex. InfraTech said in a statement that it would soon announce its first tenant and investors when details are worked out. The statement says the new data center will be on more than 5,000 acres.
Copyright 2026 KFDA. All rights reserved.

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.

month. this stock has spent more time above its current share price when there was no deal and management issues.

it’s like no deal or anything significant has happened.

is this stock toxic?

losing confidence.

This certainly won't be the last state where data centers will have to deal with stricter regulations or even outright can't build due to moratoriums. As we see more of these type of developments Project Matador increases in value.

We have 4.8 GW of secured power with more to come. Fermi is perfectly positioned. Just a matter of time before they announce more tenants. ⚡️

Updated, sorry guys the AI summary was trash. Here is the word for word with a few unrelated things taken out.

Fermi IR Call — Questions & Answers

Question 1

Question:
On Hillcore, what economics does Fermi retain on every megawatt ultimately sold to a data center tenant?

Rodrigo:
So here, we haven't broken out specific price per megawatt spread publicly, but think about this deal as—imagine, like a good way to imagine how this deal works is imagine if Excel told us, Excel, the local utility, I will give you 2.5 gigawatts more. You won't pay for anything. You are going to be able to lease more power land, more power shells, or more turnkey based on that availability of power.

So the way Fermi makes money on this is it allows us to lease data center or power land faster. And Hillcore, the way that they make their money is similar to the utility. They charge their price per kilowatt hour. It is a straight pass-through. Fermi will make money there, unless Hilcorp would have a base power charge that we haven't disclosed. But if Fermi is able to negotiate a higher power price, we'll make that margin.

But the reality of this deal is that this allows us to bring NOI faster from leasing, from rent activities, faster, and that is the goal of this deal. If we can make some money on some margin on the power, of course, you know, we'll always negotiate to make it as attractive as it can be for us. But the goal of this is allow us to bring NOI for leasing activities faster without Fermi putting any capex or operation capital towards that part of the power.

On top of that, we haven't disclosed that, but there's going to be a rent that Hilcorp pays on the footprint that they have on the site. But again, we haven't disclosed that, but that is not the goal for this deal. It's more about the economics that it unlocks for us.

So I'll pause there to see if you have any follow-up questions.

Me:
No, I think it's a great deal, especially with how much demand is out there right now and how much demand will be out there the next two or three years. Being able to capture some of that stuff early and sign contracts long term, even though they're going to be building up the power kind of separate from what y'all are building, going ahead and getting tenants leased to the power that they're building right now and signing up that demand while it's out there, I think it's genius. I think it's a great deal. I'm very excited that y'all are able to find something like that.

Rodrigo:
We see it like that, and again, we're incredibly excited with the partnership. And again, we'll, in the next, I don't know if today, but definitely this week, you'll see a release from us with a PD of Hakopo explaining this as well. But again, we just want to give more clarity on Hillcore.

If you don't mind, I'll go to the next one.

Question 2

Question:
Can you help bridge the 5.5 billion tensor wave phase one contracted revenue?

Rodrigo:
What I can tell you here is that these 6.5 billion on the 15 years is the base rent plus a fixed power charge. So there's not going to be economics on top of this 6.5 as it relates to variable power charge. That variable power charge is going to be a straight pass-through.

So what we have disclosed of the 6.5, that is the economics for Fermi on the deal, and we haven't also told the market the breakdown, the exact split of what is base rent and what is the power charge.

As I mentioned, you know, the tenant, it is very sensitive for us releasing this breakdown. We'll see. I cannot guarantee this, but we want to be more forthcoming with project economics. But after the—

Me:
The guarantee has been announced.

Rodrigo:
Gotcha.

Me:
Yeah, that'll be good. Yeah, yeah, it's, I mean, it's early. I, as much as anybody, love, like, you know, punching stuff in Excel, kind of seeing where the NOI will go over time and kind of trying to paint the picture. But again, it's still early days, and over the coming months and years, we'll be able to dial that stuff in a lot more.

I cannot give you a timeline, but definitely it's on the top of our list to give more clarity on economics. So, you know, if you write about this, that I expect you will, don't put a timeline. It's, you know, it's coming.

Me:
Okay, absolutely. Yeah, that'll be great.

Question 3

Question:
What exactly does the investment grade backstop guarantee, and does it run for the full 15-year lease?

Rodrigo:
The guarantee is signed to backstop the tenant contractual obligation under the lease. This is both the rent and the fixed power charge, not the variable energy pass-through.

Again, this is something that, as you heard from the call, we wanted to announce the deal. That was the important thing for us under 90 days. We understand that a very important thing for this to get built, especially when the tenant is not an investment-grade counterparty directly, is to announce who the backstop is.

That is, you know, upcoming. We cannot build and we cannot project finance until we get this, so expect updates on that soon.

Me:
Okay, great.

Question 4

Question:
Once the backstop is executed, what conditions remain before the lease is fully financeable and Fermi can issue the full notice to proceed?

Rodrigo:
After the backstop is announced, we go and run to our project finance syndicate and to our bank partners to determine what is the best way to project finance this. The gating item here is the backstop. Once that happens, with the guarantee and the counterparty that is guaranteeing, we don't expect to have any issue for getting the financing need to build this project.

Me:
Okay, great. Yeah, I remember Anna always saying that she was kind of running those two things in parallel with each other. As they were doing their tenant conversations, they were also checking up to make sure everything was going to be financeable and that they were going to be able to get project finance. I remember her saying that she kind of runs those at the same time, so I figured it wouldn't be too difficult or it wouldn't be like surprising a bank or something that they got this contract, you know.

Rodrigo:
No, no, no. And again, you can imagine the opposite has also happened. Like the big banks that we're talking for the syndicate, they knew who we were talking with. They have an idea and understanding of who the backstop is. But once we announced the tenant, we have also received the amount to, hey, we're very interested in being part of that financing.

So this is the type of deals that Wall Street loves, right? There's an investment-grade backstop. There's off-takers. You know, this is not going to be hard. It's going to be time-consuming, of course, because again, this is a separate process, and we have tried to advance it as much as we were able throughout the negotiation.

But the bank needs to do their own diligence on the documentation and the power and all of that. But again, we expect this to happen, right? It's the bread and butter of large infrastructure for Wall Street.

Me:
Right.

Question 5

Question:
Has the investment thesis shifted from can you find customers to how fast can you build capacity for the customers you already have?

Rodrigo:
Yes and no. So that is a fair read, and we have the risk demand side with the tensor wave, but the broader pipeline is still very important for us.

We think that we have all the conditions and capacity currently to have tensor wave extend to the full 660 megawatts of the three phases of the project. But given that we also have, from the power that we own and control, 1.6 more gigawatts, and from the Hillcore, 2.5. So commercial activities don't stop until we lease all that power, and then we go and get more and we try and lease more.

So definitely our operational focus is on delivering the power on time and on budget, but our commercial focus is strong as ever.

Me:
Awesome. One quick question to plug in there. So I know the Hillcore power, the 2.6 gigawatts, I think y'all said that was expected to be 30 months on that construction, based on, you know, different factors. But was y'all's 2.2 gigawatts y'all have, what was the timeline y'all were thinking on? And I know it depends on tenant signing, project finance, but were y'all thinking 24 months on putting that 2.2 gigawatts, that construction?

Rodrigo:
That is all contingent on lease agreements being signed and project finance. There is, we understand there's currently a mismatch there in between where... When we have said that that full power that we control, especially the first 1.5 gigs, can be in place versus what's contracted.

So that is some feedback that we have received this week. We will be communicating to the market soon how those two different power ramps collide.

Me:
Okay, great.

Rodrigo:
So, you know, give me a little bit more time for that. We know where we need to be for the 660 for TensorWave, but for their, call it 900 more of the simple cycle 1.5, that is, of course, contingent on commercial agreements.

What I can tell you is a good place to see that is on our company presentation that we released for the Q. We have the slide that has the—

Me:
The power ramp.

Rodrigo:
The power ramp. Well, not the power ramp, the power, the generation portfolio, and you can see there time to power from contracted. That is the fair assumption of when can this be online assuming contracting. I know it doesn't answer the question because the catalyst for a full power ramp is commercial.

Me:
Right. Okay.

Question 6

Question:
Broad overview, what are the big things you're watching for now?

Rodrigo:
So... In this order, first the backstop, then announcing the project finance. It can be, you know, at the same time because they are unrelated, but second tenant, and then hitting constructions and first power.

Me:
Okay. Great.

Question 7

Question:
On revenue NOI per gigawatt for the 2.2 gigawatt build, would it be in line with the previously discussed $1.5 billion in revenue, $1 billion NOI per gigawatt? How does that differ across Turkey, PowerShell, Powerland?

Rodrigo:
This is part of the work that I've been talking with you through this call. When we did the S11 and we were talking about the PowerShell deal, those economics for PowerShell roughly stand.

But as you can see, on a per megawatt basis, the Turkey, of course, is more profitable. Now, this is part of the work that we need to do and relate to our investors on NOI economics and cost of what a typical full Turkey would look like.

Again, this is, you know, directionally, Turkey is the highest revenue per NOI and NOI per gigawatt, but it's also more capex and capital intensive.

Me:
Right.

Rodrigo:
But what I can tell you on the Turkey right now is that the power and battery is going to be between $3 to $4 per megawatt. And on the data center, turnkey is going to be between 10 and 12 dollars per megawatt.

Me:
Okay.

Question 8

Question:
Will the annual shareholder meeting be in person or online?

Rodrigo:
We haven't finalized that publicly to know if it's going to be in person or virtually. We'll confirm logistics as soon as we can. What I can tell you is that we are going to have that before the end of October, the shareholder meeting.

Me:
You said before the end of October?

Rodrigo:
Yes.

Me:
Okay.

Rodrigo:
So, you know, we're mid-August. We have a month and a half. So, again, we want to be fair to our investors in case it is in person, so they can, you know, make their plans to be either in Amarillo or Dallas, where we select to have that, or New York.

New York is also a—it can be New York, especially based out on we're going to be spending so much time in the next month in New York with the project finance that it might be the best for management to do it from there.

Me:
Yeah.

Rodrigo:
But, you know, we'll communicate that as soon as we're able.

Me:
Okay.

Rodrigo:
But New York is definitely a possibility to your detriment, Kevin.

Me:
Yeah, that's fair.

Rodrigo:
But, you know, having lived there, I also have, you know, a good network there, so it's always fun to be in New York. But yeah, we'll let you know when we have more information about that.

But again—

Me:
We have a month and a half to, to, well, two months and a half, right, to the end of October.

Rodrigo:
But again, we want to be fair to our shareholders and give them ample time to organize themselves, either if it's virtual or if it's in person.

Me:
Okay.

Question 9

Question:
What are you most excited about over the next six months?

Rodrigo:
I believe that we have all the ingredients here to continue to be very successful on commercial activities. That is what I am the most excited about.

But going back to question six, there are catalysts that will happen in this quarter. We haven't given a timeline, but, you know, the backed-up project finance and start constructing, that is, that, you know, has me very, very excited. But the most, of course, is, you know, bringing in more tenants.

Me:
Gotcha.

Question 10

Question:
For the 222 megawatt tensor wave phase one, how much capital does Permian expect to invest? How much will Permian fund itself, and what stabilized NOI yield should investors expect?

Rodrigo:
That is, again, going back to what we have talked internally and with our investors and sell side, we plan on being more forthcoming with this.

What I can tell you now is three to four dollars on power and batteries per megawatt, and ten—sorry, million dollars. I wish there was dollars.

Me:
Man, it'd be cheap.

Rodrigo:
24 million dollars on power and batteries per megawatt, and 10 to 12 million dollars on data center turnkey.

But again, as we have been talking the last 25 minutes, this is something that we do owe our investors on deal economics all the way to the NOI, EBITDA tranche, and the costs. So again, expect us to be more forthcoming in the coming months.

Me:
Yeah. Yeah, I did mine just based off of the numbers y'all's CFO, Masson, I forget his name.

Rodrigo:
Yeah.

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.

https://financefeeds.com/ko/fermi-frmi-sandisk-target/

The received wisdom about SanDisk is that it got lucky on a commodity. NAND flash went short, spot prices ripped, and a spun-out memory business rode the cycle from a $29.62 low in April 2025 to $1,641.11 at the close on 14 August 2026. Tidy story. It is also the wrong one, and getting it wrong is why most investors will misread Fermi (NASDAQ: FRMI) at $6.40. What actually re-rated SanDisk was not the price of a bit. It was the conversion of spot exposure into contracted exposure — and on 13 August the company put numbers on exactly that, disclosing eight customers under long-term agreements covering roughly half of FY2027 bits. Fermi executed the first step of that identical conversion three days earlier, signing a 15-year, ~$6.5bn binding lease with TensorWave. The market has not repriced it. Eight analysts carry a $17.50 consensus target against a $4.10bn market cap.

The insight: multiples follow contracts, not commodities Having tracked the memory complex through the whole of this cycle — the $8.97bn quarter that still sold off 8%, the Western Digital sibling trade, the peak-cycle fear that dominated the investor day preview — the single most instructive fact is this: SanDisk’s multiple did not expand when NAND prices rose. It expanded when the revenue stopped being spot.

At its 2026 Investor Day, SanDisk laid out an FY2028–FY2030 model of mid-to-high-teens revenue growth, roughly 80% non-GAAP gross margin, about 75% operating margin and around 50% adjusted free cash flow margin. Nobody underwrites those numbers off a commodity print. They are underwritten by the structure sitting beneath them: eight customers signed to what SanDisk calls New Business Model agreements, built on committed volumes, enforceable contractual frameworks and minimum financial guarantees, covering approximately 50% of bits in FY2027 and approximately two-thirds in FY2028. That is a cyclical business buying its way out of cyclicality. The re-rating is the market paying an annuity multiple for what it used to price as a commodity.

electron. That is simultaneously the strongest validation of Fermi’s thesis and its most serious long-run competitive threat: hyperscalers that self-supply do not need a merchant campus.

TensorWave itself deserves scrutiny rather than applause, because it is the load-bearing wall of the entire bull case. It is an AI cloud that offers AMD GPUs exclusively, and it raised $350m in June 2026 at a reported $1.55bn valuation, co-led by AMD Ventures and Magnetar, after a $100m Series A in May 2025. The lease will house tens of thousands of next-generation AMD Instinct GPUs. Read that carefully: a company valued at roughly $1.55bn has signed a 15-year obligation of approximately $6.5bn. The contracted revenue is only as good as the counterparty’s ability to pay it across a decade and a half, and no amount of contract length fixes a thin credit. This is the honest gap in the SanDisk parallel — SanDisk’s eight NBM customers are, overwhelmingly, established hyperscalers and OEMs. Fermi’s one customer is a venture-backed startup.

On the equipment side, the incumbents are quietly confirming the same demand picture. Power and thermal infrastructure names have been repricing all year on data centre capex — the Vertiv setup is the cleanest read-through in the listed space. Fermi’s turbine order book with GE Vernova and Siemens Energy is a small, verifiable piece of that same flow.

The numbers: what $6.5bn actually implies

Run the arithmetic the market has not yet run. Approximately $6.5bn spread across a 15-year initial term is roughly $433m of contracted annual revenue. Against a $4.10bn market capitalisation on 640.47m shares, that single lease represents about 10.6% of the entire equity value in annual contracted revenue — from 222 MW. Per unit, the lease prices at roughly $29.3m per MW across the term, or about $1.95m per MW per year.

The leverage sits in what remains uncontracted. That 222 MW is about 3.7% of the 6 GW already permitted, and roughly 1.3% of the 17 GW long-term ambition. Applying the same per-MW economics to the already-permitted 6 GW is an arithmetic illustration rather than a forecast — it assumes flawless execution, unlimited demand and stable pricing, none of which are safe — but it frames why the $35 street high exists at all. The gap between the $6.00 low target and the $35.00 high is not a disagreement about this year’s earnings. There are no earnings. It is a disagreement about how many of the remaining megawatts get contracted, and to whom.

The near-term arithmetic is considerably less romantic. Fermi lost $26m in Q2 2026, or $0.04 a share, and burned $49m in operations — though that burn was down 50% quarter-on-quarter. Trailing twelve-month net income is -$737.9m against EPS of -$1.25. Revenue does not begin until late Q3 or early Q4 2027. That is more than a year of pure cash consumption before the first contracted dollar arrives, funded by $431m of convertible notes at a 5.00% coupon maturing July 2031, struck at a ~$9.52 conversion price with a $34.5m capped call limiting dilution to roughly 2% even if the stock triples. Net proceeds were $417m, with no financial maintenance covenants. That $9.52 conversion price is worth remembering: it is the most honest near-term line in the sand anyone has drawn on this stock, and it sits 49% above spot.

Permission to build is the real scarce asset The regulatory tension in this story is not chips or capital. It is consent. The most-discussed data centre item on Hacker News in the past month was research showing most Americans say “not in my backyard” to AI data centres — 146 points and 309 comments — followed by a Wall Street Journal piece on a rural community that turned down $26m rather than host one. Local opposition has become the binding permitting constraint across the sector, and it is almost entirely absent from the models.

targets is unusually wide because the company has no revenue yet and valuation depends almost entirely on how much of its permitted capacity gets contracted.

Why is FRMI stock down more than 80% from its high? Fermi listed on 1 October 2025 and traded as high as $36.99 intraday on debut before falling to $6.40. The decline reflects a post-IPO valuation reset, a long pre-revenue runway with revenue not starting until late 2027, heavy cash burn, and a damaging governance fight in which co-founder Toby Neugebauer was terminated for cause and then ran an unsuccessful proxy campaign. The CEO seat was vacant for over three months.

How is Fermi similar to SanDisk?

Both are capital-intensive businesses in structurally short markets that the market initially priced as speculative or commodity exposure. SanDisk re-rated once it converted spot volume into long-term contracted agreements with committed volumes and minimum guarantees. Fermi has just executed the first version of that same conversion, turning speculative megawatts into a 15-year, ~$6.5bn contracted lease. The mechanism is contract structure, not commodity price.

Who is TensorWave and can it pay a $6.5bn lease?

TensorWave is an AI cloud provider offering AMD GPUs exclusively, backed by AMD Ventures and Magnetar. It raised $350m in June 2026 at a reported $1.55bn valuation. The obvious concern is that a company valued near $1.55bn has committed to roughly $6.5bn of payments over 15 years. Counterparty credit quality is the single largest unquantified risk in the Fermi bull case and deserves more scrutiny than the headline number gets.

Is Project Matador actually a nuclear project?

Not in any timeframe that affects the next several years. Fermi markets Matador as integrating nuclear alongside natural gas, solar and battery storage, but no NRC licensing milestone appeared in the Q2 2026 disclosures, and nuclear licensing runs on multi-year regulatory timescales. Every megawatt scheduled before 2030 comes from gas turbines, solar and storage. The nuclear element is best treated as a long-dated option rather than near-term capacity.

What would make the bear case right?

Three things. A slip in first power or the July 2027 210 MW milestone, which would push revenue into 2028 and force a dilutive financing. A failure to sign a second major tenant, which would leave the campus dependent on one thinly capitalised counterparty. Or a broader shift where hyperscalers self-supply power — as Amazon’s own gas plant plans suggest — removing the need for merchant AI power campuses altogether. UBS already carries a $6.00 target on essentially this reasoning.

This article is for information only and is not investment advice. Prices and analyst targets are as of the close on 14 August 2026 and will have changed.

For context, I bought mid May, at around $5.9 a share, and sold $9 a share, because I believed it had entered a reasonable zone. Recent news have encouraged me to revisit the stock, and I have decided to buy back in.

The following analysis focuses on breaking down the stocks price, using 4 specific scenarios, forecasting their cashflows, and using a normal distribution to figure out what probabilities the market is assigning each situation.

My goal is to help us understand what outcomes exist and the odds at different price levels, not to really predict a perfect valuation.

1.TensorWave Breaks Down (Worse case scenario)
FRMI fails to convert the initial TensorWave agreement into a functioning operating campus due to delays, renegotiation, financing constraints, or customer failure. Existing land, generation assets, infrastructure, permits, and equipment retain some value, but the ~$1.55B of PP&E faces substantial impairment/restructuring risk. Long-term FCF settles around $0–25M.
Valuation: $0.75/share

2.Small Developer / Limited Survival
TensorWave partially materializes, but FRMI cannot scale Matador meaningfully. The company retains some infrastructure and power assets but faces heavy financing requirements and potential dilution, ultimately operating as a small specialized infrastructure developer. Normalized FCF of ~$50–75M/year, valued at roughly 10–12× FCF after accounting for capital structure/dilution.
Valuation: $2.50/share

3.222 MW Works, Then Stagnates
FRMI successfully delivers the initial 222 MW TensorWave campus, realizing the economics of the ~$6.5B / 15-year contract, but TensorWave does not expand materially and no second major customer emerges. The ~$433M/year headline contracted revenue includes turnkey development/construction economics, so normalized FCF is modeled at ~$250–300M/year after operating costs, corporate costs and recurring capex.
Valuation: $5.00/share

4.TensorWave Reaches ~650 MW
All three TensorWave phases are successfully developed, bringing the relationship toward ~650 MW. FRMI establishes a legitimate AI infrastructure campus but does not meaningfully expand beyond TensorWave. This implies roughly $1.2–1.3B of annualized contractual revenue equivalent, with normalized FCF of approximately $450–500M after depreciation, maintenance capex and financing costs.
Valuation: $8.00/share

5.Matador Reaches ~1–2 GW
TensorWave reaches ~650 MW and FRMI secures at least one additional large customer, bringing total contracted/operating capacity to roughly 1.2–1.6 GW. FRMI becomes a scaled AI infrastructure operator rather than a single-customer project. Normalized FCF reaches approximately $700M–$1.0B, after accounting for additional capital requirements and financing/dilution.
Valuation: $14.00/share

6. Matador Becomes a 2–3+ GW Platform
   FRMI successfully executes multiple large customer contracts and scales Matador to roughly 2–3+ GW of contracted/operating capacity. Customer validation and successful execution improve financing access, allowing more development to occur at the project level and reducing dependence on corporate equity. Normalized FCF reaches approximately $1.5–2.0B.
   Valuation: $28.00/share

7.FRMI Becomes a Scaled AI Infrastructure Platform (Blue Sky situation)
Matador scales to roughly 5–7 GW with multiple hyperscaler/AI customers, while FRMI proves the model is repeatable beyond the initial TensorWave relationship. Project-level financing becomes increasingly available, allowing FRMI to develop substantially more capacity without proportional corporate dilution. FCF ramps from -$600M in 2027, -$400M in 2028, +$500M in 2029, +$2.0B in 2030, to ~$3.5B in 2031 and beyond. Long-term growth is modeled at ~3%.
Valuation: $55.00/share

Market-Implied Distribution at $6.40/share, normalized centrally
TensorWave breaks down → $0.75 → 25.1%

Small developer / limited survival -> $2.50 -> 22.6%

222 MW works, then stagnates -> $5.00 -> 19.4%

TensorWave reaches ~650 MW -> $8.00 -> 16.1%

Matador reaches ~1–2 GW -> $14.00 -> 11.2%

Matador becomes a 2–3+ GW platform -> $28.00 -> 4.7%

FRMI becomes a scaled AI infrastructure platform -> $55.00 -> 0.9%

Value of FRMI depends on what you think these probabilities fall out to. Personally, I believe the market is being far overly pessimistic at this level, and I am back in.