Hut 8 Corp (HUT) 2026 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Good morning, and welcome to Hut 8's second quarter 2026 financial results conference call. Joining us today are our CEO, Asher Genoot; and our CFO, Sean Glennan. Following the presentation, we will open the line for questions. This event is being recorded and a transcript will be made available on our website.

早安，歡迎參加 Hut 8 2026 年第二季財務業績電話會議。今天與會者包括我們的執行長 Asher Genoot，以及財務長 Sean Glennan。簡報結束後，我們將開放提問。本次活動將進行錄音，並將在我們的網站提供逐字稿。

In addition to the press release issued earlier today, our full quarterly report on Form 10-Q is available at hut8.com, on our EDGAR profile at sec.gov and on our SEDAR+ profile at sedarplus.ca. Unless otherwise indicated, all figures discussed today are in U.S. dollars. Certain statements made during this call may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities laws.

除今日稍早發布的新聞稿外，我們完整的季度報告（Form 10-Q）可於 hut8.com、sec.gov 上的 EDGAR 檔案，以及 sedarplus.ca 上的 SEDAR+ 檔案查閱。除非另有說明，今日討論的所有數字均以美元計價。本次電話會議中的部分陳述可能構成適用證券法所定義的前瞻性陳述。

These statements reflect current expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. Certain key risks are detailed in our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025, and are continuous disclosure documents. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements.

這些陳述反映目前的預期，並受風險與不確定性影響，可能導致實際結果出現重大差異。部分主要風險已於我們截至 2025 年 12 月 31 日止年度的 Form 10-K 中詳述，並載於持續性揭露文件中。除法律要求外，我們不承擔更新或修訂任何前瞻性陳述之義務。

During the call, management may reference non-GAAP measures such as adjusted EBITDA. We believe these measures, alongside GAAP results, provide valuable insight into our performance. Reconciliations of GAAP and non-GAAP results are included in the tables accompanying today's press release available on our website.

在本次電話會議中，管理層可能會提及非 GAAP 指標，例如調整後 EBITDA。我們認為，這些指標與 GAAP 結果一併使用，能為我們的表現提供有價值的洞見。GAAP 與非 GAAP 結果之調節表已包含於今日新聞稿所附表格中，並可於我們網站取得。

We'll begin with a moderated Q&A session with our CEO, Asher Genoot, followed by a detailed financial review from our CFO, Sean Glennan. Let's get started.

我們將先由主持人與執行長 Asher Genoot 進行問答對談，接著由財務長 Sean Glennan 進行更詳細的財務回顧。我們開始吧。

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. I'll start today with a conversation with Mark Eidelman, our new Head of Investor Relations, who joined us in June from NextEra Energy. Mark has spent the last several weeks speaking with the research and investor community. And I asked him to share some of the comments, questions, observations that he has heard most.

各位早安，感謝大家加入我們。今天我先與我們新任投資人關係主管 Mark Eidelman 對談；他於 6 月從 NextEra Energy 加入我們。過去幾週，Mark 與研究機構及投資人社群進行了許多交流。我請他分享他最常聽到的一些評論、問題與觀察。

After our discussion, Sean will walk through the quarter and then we'll open up the line for questions. Thanks, Asher.

在我們討論之後，Sean 將帶大家回顧本季表現，接著我們會開放提問。謝謝你，Asher。

Investors often describe Hut 8 as a bitcoin miner that transitions to data center development. I do not think that framing is quite right. What is Hut 8 and what does power-first actually mean?

投資人常把 Hut 8 形容為一家從比特幣挖礦轉型為資料中心開發的公司。我認為這樣的框架並不完全正確。Hut 8 到底是什麼？而「以電力為先」（power-first）究竟代表什麼？

I think everything starts with one simple observation. Electricity is becoming one of the scarcest resources in the economy. Hut 8 is an energy infrastructure platform we build large-scale digital infrastructure around scarce power, AI, bitcoin mining, high-performance computing and whatever comes next, are applications running on that platform.

我認為一切都始於一個簡單的觀察。電力正成為經濟體中最稀缺的資源之一。Hut 8 是一個能源基礎設施平台；我們圍繞稀缺電力建構大規模數位基礎設施，而 AI、比特幣挖礦、高效能運算以及未來可能出現的任何應用，都是在該平台上運行的應用。

AI happens to be the highest value application today. Power-first is not simply a development strategy. It is the operating system for how we allocate capital, manage risk and build the business. So bitcoin mining was our first proof point. We learned how to source low-cost power, build infrastructure faster and more efficiently and operate assets at scale.

AI 恰好是當下價值最高的應用。「以電力為先」不僅僅是一種開發策略。它是我們如何配置資本、管理風險並打造業務的作業系統。因此，比特幣挖礦是我們的第一個驗證案例。我們學會了如何取得低成本電力、更快且更有效率地建設基礎設施，並以規模化方式營運資產。

AI infrastructure rewards those same capabilities but across larger deployments, longer-duration contracts and more financeable cash flows. The operating model has not changed. The opportunity has expanded. In practice, our framework is repeatable - originate power, secure site control and interconnection, commercialize with high credit quality counterparties, finance efficiently and build and operate against long-duration contracted cash flows.

AI 基礎設施同樣獎勵這些能力，但其部署規模更大、合約期限更長，且現金流更具可融資性。營運模式並未改變。機會則擴大了。在實務上，我們的框架可重複複製——發掘電力來源、取得場址控制權與併網、與高信用等級對手方進行商業化、以高效率融資，並在長期合約現金流的基礎上建置與營運。

River Bend, Beacon Point and the financings we will discuss today are outputs of that same framework. We're not building a collection of projects. We're building a platform that repeatedly converts scarce power into long-duration contracted infrastructure assets.

River Bend、Beacon Point，以及我們今天將討論的融資，都是同一套框架的產出。我們不是在打造一堆專案的集合。我們是在打造一個平台，能反覆將稀缺電力轉化為具長期合約的基礎設施資產。

That makes sense. Many companies now described themselves as Power-first or as AI infrastructure developers. How should investors distinguish capability from the client?

這很合理。現在許多公司也自稱是「以電力為先」或 AI 基礎設施開發商。投資人應如何區分「能力」與「客戶」？

Power-first is not the differentiator, capability is. The differentiator is the ability to consistently originate commercialize finance and execute infrastructure around scarce power. That starts with how we allocate capital. We don't underwrite applications. We underwrite scarce power. Applications change, customer demand changes, technology changes.

「以電力為先」不是差異化因素，能力才是。差異化在於能否圍繞稀缺電力，持續且一致地完成：發掘、商業化、融資與執行基礎設施。這始於我們如何配置資本。我們不以應用情境作為投資承作基礎。我們以稀缺電力作為承作基礎。應用會改變、客戶需求會改變、技術也會改變。

Our job is to preserve the flexibility to commercialize that power through the highest value use case over time. Beacon Point is a good example. When we first invested in the site, we underwrote a bitcoin commercialization path because it offered attractive risk-adjusted returns when we weren't sure the location hit the requirements of AI workloads. But we never underwrote the investment around one outcome. We preserved multiple commercialization paths from day one.

我們的工作，是保留彈性，讓這些電力能隨時間透過最高價值的使用情境來商業化。Beacon Point 就是一個很好的例子。當我們最初投資該場址時，我們以比特幣商業化路徑作為承作假設，因為在我們尚不確定該地點是否符合 AI 工作負載需求時，這條路徑能提供具吸引力的風險調整後報酬。但我們從未把投資押注在單一結果上。從第一天起，我們就保留了多種商業化路徑。

And as AI demand accelerated and locations start being more of a preference rather than a requirement, we commercialize the same underlying power through a higher-value application. We do not predict the future. We built the flexibility to adapt to it. Our first two AI campuses were not existing bitcoin mining facilities that we convert. And I think that's really important for people to understand about the Hut 8 story.

而隨著 AI 需求加速、地點逐漸從「必要條件」變成「偏好條件」，我們便透過更高價值的應用，將同一份底層電力進行商業化。我們不預測未來。我們建立的是能因應未來的彈性。我們前兩座 AI 園區並不是把既有的比特幣挖礦設施改造而來。我認為這點對理解 Hut 8 的故事非常重要。

So our first two campuses that we've announced were not existing bitcoin mining facilities that we have converted. They were greenfield campuses that we originated from the ground up, commercialize with investment-grade anchored counterparties and finance in the investment-grade markets and are now executing through construction.

因此，我們已宣布的前兩座園區，並非由既有的比特幣挖礦設施改造而成。它們是我們從零開始發起的綠地（greenfield）園區，與具投資級信用的錨定對手方完成商業化，並在投資級市場完成融資，目前正進入施工執行階段。

At the same time, approximately 700 megawatts of our infrastructure supports our affiliated tenant, American bitcoin. That demonstrates that we can commercialize power through more than one application. And the market has already provided meaningful evidence of that capability. We have three 15-year leases with investment-grade anchored counterparties in the last nine months alone two of the first investment-grade construction financings for single sponsored data center projects and multiple greenfield campuses advance through origination, commercialization, financing and now construction.

同時，我們約 700 兆瓦的基礎設施為我們的關聯承租戶 American bitcoin 提供支援。這證明我們能透過不只一種應用來將電力商業化。市場也已提供了具意義的證據來佐證這項能力。僅在過去九個月內，我們就與具投資級信用的錨定對手方簽署了三份 15 年期租約，完成了兩筆由單一贊助方支持之資料中心專案的首批投資級建設融資之一，並推動多個綠地園區從發起、商業化、融資到如今進入施工。

In infrastructure, capability is not measured by what you say. It is measured by what customers sign and what capital markets finance.

在基礎設施領域，能力不是用你說了什麼來衡量。而是用客戶簽了什麼、以及資本市場願意融資什麼來衡量。

So one of the things I want to talk about is financing at JPMorgan, I financed projects at JPMorgan and helped build projects at NextEra. So one of the things I'm going to kind of introduce is why I left all of that and joined Hut 8. I think the best way to answer that is to start with what I've learned over the last 20 years.

所以我想談的一件事是融資；我曾在摩根大通（JPMorgan）為專案融資，也曾在 NextEra 協助建置專案。因此，我想先介紹的是：為什麼我離開那些工作並加入 Hut 8。我認為回答這個問題的最佳方式，是從我過去 20 年所學到的事情談起。

Great infrastructure companies are not built around individual assets. They're built around repeatable systems that can consistently originate, commercialize, finance, build and operate infrastructure over long periods of time. That is what stood out to me about Hut 8. River Bend alone do not convince me. Beacon Point alone did not convince me.

偉大的基礎設施公司不是圍繞單一資產建立的。它們是圍繞可重複的系統建立，能在長時間內持續且一致地發起、商業化、融資、建置並營運基礎設施。這正是 Hut 8 最吸引我的地方。僅靠 River Bend 並不足以說服我。僅靠 Beacon Point 也不足以說服我。

What convinced me was that both were produced by the same system. Projects can be replicated, systems compound. Before I joined, I spent a lot of time to challenge you, Asher, and the team on the risks, power origination and interconnection, customer relationships and counterparty quality, delivery timelines and construction risk, capital formation and financing, repeatability in the long-term vision.

讓我信服的是，兩者都是由同一套系統產出。專案可以被複製，系統則會複利成長。在我加入之前，我花了很多時間就風險、電力來源取得與互聯、客戶關係與交易對手品質、交付時程與施工風險、資本形成與融資，以及長期願景的可重複性等面向，去挑戰你（Asher）和團隊。

And you all had you had well-thought-out answers to each of my questions that demonstrated that you understood the core risks and we're mitigating them effectively. I was not looking for every risk to disappear. Infrastructure is not about eliminating risk. It's about understanding it, structuring it and allocating capital accordingly.

而你們對我每一個問題都給出了深思熟慮的答案，展現你們理解核心風險，並且正在有效地加以緩解。我並不是期待所有風險都消失。基礎建設並不是要消除風險。而是要理解風險、設計結構，並據此配置資本。

Having spent my career financing and helping build infrastructure businesses, I recognize the same characteristics I've seen in the very best platforms, disciplined capital allocation, rigorous risk management and a repeatable system for creating value. This is also a rare opportunity to help build an infrastructure company at the beginning of its journey around one of the most valuable resources in the economy - power.

我職涯一直在為基礎建設企業提供融資並協助其建設，我在你們身上看到了我在最優秀平台上見過的相同特質：嚴謹的資本配置、嚴格的風險管理，以及可重複的價值創造系統。這同時也是一個難得的機會：在一家基礎建設公司旅程的起點，圍繞著經濟體系中最有價值的資源之一——電力——共同打造公司。

Large infrastructure platforms are built by repeatedly applying the same disciplined framework over many years. I believe Hut 8 is at the beginning of that journey. So Asher, topic we hear most from investors execution risk. Hut 8 has not yet delivered projects of the scale on this timeline for counterparties of this quality. What is the basis for your confidence in on-time delivery?

大型基礎建設平台，是透過多年反覆套用同一套嚴謹框架所建立的。我相信 Hut 8 正處於這段旅程的起點。所以 Asher，投資人最常提到的主題是執行風險。Hut 8 尚未在這樣的時程內，為這種品質的交易對手交付過如此規模的專案。你對準時交付的信心基礎是什麼？

I think execution starts long before construction. People often think execution begins when you start forming concrete. And I think construction is the final stage of execution, not the beginning of it. By the time construction starts, A lot of the most important decisions should have already been made. That's why we think about execution as a system and not an event. It starts with disciplined underwriting, power origination, site control, permitting, engineering, procurement, financing, counterparty alignment, construction sequencing.

我認為執行在施工之前很久就開始了。人們常以為執行是從開始澆築混凝土那一刻才開始。但我認為施工是執行的最後階段，而不是起點。在施工開始之前，許多最重要的決策就應該已經做出。這就是為什麼我們把執行視為一個系統，而不是一個事件。它始於嚴謹的承作評估（underwriting）、電力來源取得、場址控制、許可申請、工程設計、採購、融資、交易對手一致性，以及施工排序。

Every one of those decisions is made to reduce uncertainty before we mobilize on site. And so our confidence rests on three things - priority, delivering River Bend and Beacon Point on time is our number 1 priority. Our reputation and the repeatability of the model depend on it. Discipline, permitting, procurement, site work, power delivery and counterparty coordination all run in a single integrated schedule with conservative assumptions. And three, demonstrated capability.

上述每一項決策，都是為了在我們進場動員之前降低不確定性。因此，我們的信心建立在三件事上——第一，優先順序：準時交付 River Bend 與 Beacon Point 是我們的第一要務。我們的聲譽以及模式的可重複性都取決於此。第二，紀律：許可、採購、場地工程、電力交付與交易對手協調，都在一份單一整合的時程表中運行，並採用保守假設。第三，已被證明的能力。

We have energized industrial sale capacity before and repeatedly. The application has changed, but the discipline required to deliver has not. And every campus we develop makes the platform stronger. It improves our engineering, supply chain, execution, institutional relationships and ability to deliver the next campus. Execution is not something that we hope for. It's something we design for. Every campus we develop makes the platform stronger.

我們過去曾經、而且多次，完成工業規模容量的送電（energization）。應用場景變了，但交付所需的紀律並沒有變。而我們每開發一個園區（campus），平台就會更強。它會提升我們的工程能力、供應鏈、執行力、機構關係，以及交付下一個園區的能力。執行不是我們寄望發生的事。而是我們為之設計的結果。我們每開發一個園區，平台就會更強。

Talk about campus. Let's talk about River Bend. Where does construction stand today at River Bend? And what are the key milestones between here and energization?

談到園區。我們來談談 River Bend。目前 River Bend 的施工進度到哪裡了？從現在到送電之間的關鍵里程碑有哪些？

So delivery is part of our model investors can verify in real time. And we're very pleased with where River Bend stands today. The team is executing well. So structural steel erection began in early June. The building foundations are expected to be completed before month end, and that opens up additional work front that allows crews to move in, in parallel rather than sequential right now.

交付是我們模式的一部分，投資人可以即時驗證。我們對 River Bend 目前的進展非常滿意。團隊執行得很好。結構鋼構吊裝在 6 月初開始。建築物基礎預計在月底前完成，這將開啟更多作業面，使工班能夠並行進場，而不是像現在這樣依序進行。

We began steel erection on the substation in mid-July. And now we're beginning slab-on grade pours across the auxiliary support yard in the main building. And none of that is accidental. It's what disciplined sequencing, integrated planning in one delivery schedule are designed to produce.

我們在 7 月中旬開始變電站的鋼構吊裝。現在也開始在主建築的輔助支援區與主建築範圍內進行地坪混凝土澆置（slab-on-grade）。這些都不是偶然。這正是嚴謹的施工排序、在單一交付時程中進行整合規劃所要產生的結果。

So every milestone does more than advance River Bend, it strengthens our engineering supply chain and execution capabilities and our credibility behind the next transaction. As our customers and our partners look at how we execute, they build more and more confidence. And so River Bend is not -- it is not only a building. It's a campus. It's building capabilities that will make every campus after it and every building on the campus much better.

因此，每一個里程碑不僅推進 River Bend，也強化我們的工程供應鏈與執行能力，以及我們在下一筆交易背後的可信度。當客戶與合作夥伴觀察我們如何執行，他們的信心就會愈來愈強。所以 River Bend 不——它不只是一棟建築。它是一個園區。它在建立能力，讓其後的每一個園區，以及園區內的每一棟建築，都做得更好。

Thanks, Asher. Let's check to Beacon Points. We announced a second Beacon Point lease last month. What does that transaction demonstrate?

謝謝你，Asher。我們來看 Beacon Point。我們上個月宣布了第二份 Beacon Point 租約。那筆交易證明了什麼？

Beacon Point Building 2 is important for a much bigger reason than just signing another lease. It's another proof point that our framework is repeatable. The progression matters. River Bend demonstrated that we could commercialize a greenfield campus with an investment-grade anchor counterparty. I know a lot of people are waiting for that, and we were able to announce that last December.

Beacon Point 的第 2 棟建築之所以重要，原因遠不只是再簽下一份租約。它是另一個證據點，證明我們的框架是可重複的。這個演進過程很重要。River Bend 證明我們能以投資級的主力交易對手，將一個綠地（greenfield）園區商業化。我知道很多人都在等這件事，而我們在去年 12 月就能宣布。

Then Beacon Point Building 2 -- Building 1 demonstrated that the framework was repeatable, but with a different customer. And then Beacon Point Building 2 demonstrated something different. Again, an existing customer chose to expand under the same commercial framework. So different customers, same operating model, similar lease structure, same long duration, contracted cash flows.

接著是 Beacon Point 第 2 棟建築——第 1 棟建築證明該框架可重複，但面對的是不同客戶。而 Beacon Point 第 2 棟建築則證明了不同的事情。同樣地，既有客戶選擇在相同的商業框架下擴張。因此，不同客戶、相同營運模式、類似的租賃結構、同樣的長天期合約現金流。

And the second Beacon Point lease is for 352 megawatts of IT capacity and represents about $9.8 billion of expected base term contract value. With that lease, the campus is now fully commercialized with full gigawatt of utility capacity supporting contracted investment-grade cash flows.

第二份 Beacon Point 租約涵蓋 352 兆瓦的 IT 容量，預期基礎租期（base term）合約價值約 98 億美元。隨著這份租約簽署，該園區現已完全商業化，具備完整 1 吉瓦的公用事業容量，支撐已簽約的投資級現金流。

And the customer chose to double its footprint at Beacon Point. We think that's one of the strongest forms of validation that an infrastructure platform can receive. And customers don't expand because of presentations. They expand because they have confidence in the asset, confidence in our ability to deliver. And Beacon Point also reinforces how we allocate capital.

而客戶選擇將其在 Beacon Point 的占用規模加倍。我們認為，這是基礎建設平台所能獲得的最強驗證形式之一。客戶不會因為簡報而擴張。他們擴張是因為對資產有信心、對我們的交付能力有信心。Beacon Point 也再次印證我們如何配置資本。

We originally, as I mentioned, underwrote the site for a bitcoin commercialization path, but we preserved these multiple paths from day one. And so when the market evolved, we were able to commercialize that same power through a higher application and build it from greenfield.

如我先前提到的，我們最初在承作評估時，是以比特幣商業化路徑來評估該場址，但從第一天起我們就保留了多種路徑。因此當市場演變時，我們能以更高階的應用將同一份電力商業化，並從綠地開始建置。

And we didn't change the asset, we just changed the application. So at the platform level, Beacon Point now represents 704 megawatts of contracted IT capacity, roughly about $19.6 billion of expected base term contract value.

我們沒有改變資產本身，只是改變了應用。因此在平台層面，Beacon Point 目前代表 704 兆瓦的已簽約 IT 容量，預期基礎租期合約價值約 196 億美元。

And so together with River Bend, total contracted AI data center capacity is about 949 megawatts, representing roughly $26.6 billion of expected aggregate base term contract value, all produced by the same operating model in less than a year. And so every commercialization expands the platform. And it's what compounding looks like for us. So Mark, a key part of River Bend and Beacon Point is not only the signed lease, but the executed financing behind it. When you look at the River Bend financing from the outside, what did it signal to you?

因此，連同 River Bend，已簽約的 AI 資料中心總容量約為 949 兆瓦，預期合計基礎租期合約價值約 266 億美元，且全部在不到一年的時間內由同一套營運模式所產出。因此，每一次商業化都會擴大平台。這就是我們所說的複利成長。所以 Mark，River Bend 與 Beacon Point 的關鍵不僅是已簽署的租約，還包括其背後已完成的融資。當你從外部看 River Bend 的融資時，它向你傳遞了什麼訊號？

Sure. Well, let me start with what impressed me most. It was not the size of the financing, it was what the market agreed to underwrite. Transaction consisted of $3.25 billion of fully amortizing senior secured notes due 2024, rate investment grade issued at the project level, nonrecourse to Hut 8 and backed by contracted lease revenues from campus still under construction.

當然。那我先從最讓我印象深刻的地方談起。重點不在於融資規模，而在於市場同意承銷的內容。該交易由32.5億美元、2024年到期、全額攤還的優先擔保票據組成，屬投資級利率債，於專案層級發行，對 Hut 8 無追索權，並以仍在興建中的園區之已簽約租賃收入作為支撐。

Investment-grade market has historically not financed construction stage data centers, especially single sponsor, single-asset projects. The rating agencies and fixed income investors underwrote the contract structure, counterparty credit and backstop, Hut 8 delivery model and risk allocation for 16.5 years, covering the expected construction period and the entire 15-year lease.

歷來投資級市場並不為施工階段的資料中心提供融資，尤其是單一贊助方、單一資產的專案。評級機構與固定收益投資人承銷了合約架構、交易對手信用與後備支持、Hut 8 的交付模式，以及為期16.5年的風險分配，涵蓋預期施工期與整個15年租約。

Having spent years on the other side of that analysis, I can tell you that credit committees do not finance ambition. They finance certainty and execution. That was institutional validation of the development model, especially the most rigorous currency there is committed capital at investment-grade pricing. It also proved the capital formation model. Each project raises debt against its own contracted cash flows, nonrecourse to the parent and fully amortizing.

我在那類分析的另一端做了多年，我可以告訴各位，信貸委員會不會為「雄心」提供融資。他們融資的是確定性與執行力。那是對開發模式的機構級驗證，尤其是最嚴格的貨幣——以投資級定價承諾的資本。它也證明了資本形成模式。每個專案都以其自身已簽約的現金流舉債，對母公司無追索權，且全額攤還。

That generally ring-fences development risk and preserves capacity at parent level. River Bend did more than finance one campus to create a repeatable template for financing future campuses. Beacon Point then apply that template again and on even better terms.

這通常能將開發風險隔離（ring-fence），並保留母公司層級的融資容量。River Bend 不僅為一個園區融資，更建立了一個可重複使用的範本，用於未來園區的融資。Beacon Point 隨後再次套用該範本，而且條件更佳。

River Bend did just not finance a campus to create a repeatable engine for funding growth. So after that Beacon Point financing, as I mentioned, was executed on better terms than River Bend, a higher rating, higher pricing, greater scale. So what did that improvement tell you? And how does the capital structure support growth from here?

River Bend 不只是為一個園區融資，而是打造一個可重複運作、用以資助成長的引擎。因此在那之後，如我所提，Beacon Point 的融資是在比 River Bend 更好的條件下完成：更高的評級、更高的定價、更大的規模。那麼，這樣的改善告訴了你什麼？而資本結構又如何支持接下來的成長？

I think it tells us that capital follows capability. We did not get an investment-grade financing because we wanted it. We earned it through the disciplined execution. And so when we first started River Bend, I talked about this in one of our previous earnings, we went to the rating agencies and the investment-grade result was because of what we presented them, not because we went in expecting that.

我認為這告訴我們：資本會追隨能力。我們不是因為想要就拿到投資級融資。我們是透過紀律性的執行把它賺來的。因此當我們一開始做 River Bend 時——我在先前一次財報電話中也談過——我們去找評級機構，而投資級的結果是因為我們呈現給他們的內容，而不是因為我們抱著「理所當然會拿到投資級」的期待走進去。

And so Beacon Point consisted of $4.25 billion of senior secured notes. The notes were rated one notch higher above River Bend, and they priced 20 points inside of River Bend. And the offering was substantially oversubscribed with repeat investors returning and also new investors joining. And we pushed amortization from two years on River Bend to four years on Beacon Point. We did not copy the transaction.

Beacon Point 由42.5億美元的優先擔保票據組成。該票據的評級比 River Bend 高一個級距，且定價較 River Bend 低20個基點。本次發行獲得大幅超額認購，既有投資人回流，也有新投資人加入。我們把攤還期從 River Bend 的兩年延長到 Beacon Point 的四年。我們並沒有照抄那筆交易。

I think that's really important because it would have been easy to do so. We structured every term from first principal to GAAP. And the result resulted in improved ratings, pricing, scale and amortization. And we didn't negotiate our way to better terms. We earned it through the way that we structured and the way that we built the second project.

我認為這點非常重要，因為照抄其實很容易。我們從第一性原理一路到 GAAP（一般公認會計原則）把每一項條款都重新設計。而結果帶來了評級、定價、規模與攤還條件的全面改善。我們不是靠談判把條件談得更好。我們是靠我們的架構設計方式，以及我們打造第二個專案的方式，把更好的條件賺到手。

The structure is also what allows us to scale. It's fully amortizing, so there's no refinancing wall at the project level. It's nonrecourse, so there's zero recourse debt at the parent level. And it's nondilutive to equity holders. And each project is designed to generate sufficient cash flows to support the related construction financing. So growth is not constrained by the corporate balance sheet, and we can develop multiple campuses at once.

這個架構也讓我們得以擴張。它是全額攤還，因此在專案層級不存在再融資到期壓力（refinancing wall）。它是無追索權，因此母公司層級沒有任何追索權債務。而且對股東不具稀釋性。每個專案的設計都旨在產生足夠的現金流，以支撐相關的建設融資。因此成長不受公司資產負債表所限制，我們可以同時開發多個園區。

And so together, River Bend and Beacon Point Building 1 represents approximately $7.5 billion of investment-grade capital raised for construction stage development. Every successful financing expands the platform's ability to finance the next one. And this is capital formation compounding in real time in front of you all. Capital follows capability and better capital is earned through better execution.

因此，River Bend 與 Beacon Point 第一棟合計代表約75億美元、用於施工階段開發的投資級資本募集。每一次成功的融資都會擴大平台為下一次融資提供資金的能力。各位正在眼前看到資本形成的複利效應即時發生。資本追隨能力，而更好的資本是透過更好的執行所賺得。

Ash, let's shift gear a little bit. Behind the model of the capital as an organization, how do you build one that can deliver at this scale and keep delivering as a platform grows?

Ash，我們稍微換個話題。在「資本作為一個組織」的模式背後，你要如何打造一個能以這樣的規模交付、並在平台成長時持續交付的組織？

I think people are ultimately what determine whether a platform can compound over time. Organizations don't scale because they own great assets. They scale because they build capabilities that can be repeated and people create those capabilities. We built the organization around actual life cycle of a project, not around a traditional corporate org chart. So origination, underwriting, development, financing, delivery, operations.

我認為最終決定一個平台能否隨時間複利成長的是人。組織之所以能擴張，不是因為擁有很棒的資產。而是因為建立了可重複的能力，而人創造了那些能力。我們是圍繞專案的實際生命週期來打造組織，而不是圍繞傳統的公司組織圖。也就是：開發來源（origination）、承銷（underwriting）、開發（development）、融資（financing）、交付（delivery）、營運（operations）。

And we've been equally deliberate about the type of people we recruit. We want builders who take ownership, enjoy solving hard problems, think from first principles and want to build something that compounds over decades, not quarters. I spoke about having more of a -- being a company that's more of a religion rather than a job on my last quarterly earnings.

而且我們在招募人才類型上同樣非常刻意。我們想要的是建造者：願意承擔責任、享受解決難題、以第一性原理思考，並希望打造一個能在數十年而非數季中複利成長的事業。我在上一季財報電話中提到，我們更像是一種信仰，而不只是一份工作。

And honestly, I've had multiple folks interview and bring that up and say, I want to join this mission. And so like-minded folks really attract each other. And I think of the team we assemble for a project almost like a group of Navy SEALs and not an Army. Everyone brings a specific skillset. Everyone has operated at a high level in that function, and they come together as one unit to execute from start to finish.

老實說，我有好幾位面試者提到那句話，並說他們想加入這個使命。因此志同道合的人確實會彼此吸引。我把我們為一個專案組建的團隊看得更像是一支海豹部隊，而不是一支大軍。每個人都帶來特定的技能組合。每個人都曾在其職能上以高水準運作，然後作為一個單位從頭到尾共同執行。

And we have also invested in talent with deep backgrounds across power, development, infrastructure, procurement, project execution and capital markets. I mean, Mark, you're an example of that. That investment shows up though in SG&A. And we do not view it as overhead creep. We view it as an investment in platform capacity and capability because we're so focused on growth and scale.

我們也投資於在電力、開發、基礎設施、採購、專案執行與資本市場等領域具深厚背景的人才。Mark，你就是其中一個例子。不過這樣的投資會反映在 SG&A（銷售、一般及行政費用）上。我們不把它視為管理費用膨脹。我們把它視為對平台產能與能力的投資，因為我們非常聚焦於成長與規模化。

After our first two campuses, we now have a repeatable framework across design and engineering, supply chain, contracting, financing and delivery. And organizations learn, capabilities compound. Every campus improves the team and the improved team makes the next campus better. So people are not separate from the platform. They are in the platform, and they are the capability that compounds every other capability.

在完成前兩個園區之後，我們現在在設計與工程、供應鏈、合約簽訂、融資與交付方面，已建立可重複的框架。組織會學習，能力會複利。每一個園區都會讓團隊更強，而更強的團隊會讓下一個園區做得更好。所以人並不是平台之外的因素。他們就在平台之中，而且他們就是那個能讓其他所有能力複利成長的能力。

Thanks for that, Asher. Let's talk about the pipeline. Investors want greater visibility to the development pipeline. How do you decide what enters the pipeline and what changes this quarter?

謝謝你，Asher。我們來談談專案儲備（pipeline）。投資人希望對開發儲備有更高的能見度。你如何決定哪些項目進入儲備，以及本季有哪些變化？

Look, I think it's a fair ask. And I think the first step is to frame the question correctly. The goal is not to build the largest headline megawatt number. The goal is to convert the right opportunities into financeable commercializable infrastructure. And we manage the pipeline like an underwriting exercise.

我認為這是合理的要求。而我認為第一步是把問題框架設對。目標不是打造最大的、最吸睛的兆瓦數字。目標是把正確的機會轉化為可融資、可商業化的基礎設施。我們把 pipeline 當作一個承銷作業來管理。

The project must clear a series of gates before it moves forward. So power scale and speed to power, interconnection certainty, site control and a path towards permitting, network access, customer demand, capital intensity and risk-adjusted returns. Every megawatt in the reported pipeline has already been tested against those criteria. And that's what makes the number meaningful, not simply large.

專案在推進之前必須通過一連串的關卡。因此包括電力規模與可上電速度、併網確定性、場址控制與取得許可的路徑、網路接取、客戶需求、資本密集度以及風險調整後報酬。已揭露管線中的每一兆瓦都已依據這些標準進行檢驗。這才使得這個數字有意義，而不只是看起來很大。

Through that lens, the development pipeline now stands at about 8.7 gigawatts, up approximately 300 megawatts from last quarter. We have 11 sites in the under-diligence and under-exclusivity stages, averaging more than 650 megawatts each. On average, those opportunities are larger than each Beacon Point building.

從這個角度來看，開發管線目前約為 8.7 吉瓦，較上季增加約 300 兆瓦。我們在盡職調查與獨家階段共有 11 個場址，平均每個超過 650 兆瓦。平均而言，這些機會都比 Beacon Point 的每一棟建物更大。

We did not only grow the pipeline, we advanced it. The exclusivity stage increased by 200 megawatts as projects move forward from diligence. And what's really, really important is the reported number also excludes M&A opportunities behind-the-meter power generation solutions and potential River Bend expansion, where the tenant holds the right of first offer on the next gigawatt. So the direction of opportunity flow is also changing.

我們不僅擴大了管線，也推進了管線。隨著專案從盡職調查往前推進，獨家階段增加了 200 兆瓦。而真正、真正重要的是，所揭露的數字也排除了併購（M&A）機會、表後（behind-the-meter）發電解決方案，以及 River Bend 的潛在擴建——該租戶對下一個 1 吉瓦擁有優先要約權（right of first offer）。因此，機會流入的方向也正在改變。

River Bend and Beacon Point have led more developers and power producers to bring opportunities to us rather than the other way around. They see our ability to execute our ability to finance at scale and have tenant -- deep tenant relationships. And so we're having more inbound interest from an M&A perspective more than ever from developers who have a piece of land and interconnect and need someone to commercialize that for them.

River Bend 與 Beacon Point 讓更多開發商與電力生產商把機會帶給我們，而不是我們去找他們。他們看見我們的執行能力、我們的大規模融資能力，以及我們與租戶——深厚的租戶關係。因此，從併購角度來看，我們收到的主動洽詢比以往任何時候都多，來自那些擁有一塊土地與併網條件、但需要有人替他們把它商業化的開發商。

I think that's a sign that the platform itself is beginning to compound. And so we don't optimize for the biggest pipeline. We optimize for the highest quality pipeline and investors should underwrite the platform's ability to repeat not only the next lease.

我認為這是一個跡象，顯示這個平台本身開始產生複利效應。因此我們不追求最大的管線。我們追求最高品質的管線，而投資人應該評估的是平台的可複製能力——不僅是下一份租約。

Last question for you, Asher. There was clearly a philosophy underpinning these answers. How would you simply summarize our philosophy for investors?

給你最後一個問題，Asher。這些回答背後顯然有一套哲學。你會如何為投資人簡單總結我們的哲學？

It comes down to a handful of principles we return to every day. Scarcity creates opportunity. First principles identified that opportunity. Optionality protects capital. Commercialization creates value. Execution earns trust. Capital follows capability. Platforms compound. Everything starts with power, and we have built the operating system that turns those principles into contracted cash flow.

歸結起來就是幾項我們每天都會回到的原則。稀缺性創造機會。第一性原理辨識出那個機會。選擇權（optionality）保護資本。商業化創造價值。執行贏得信任。資本追隨能力。平台會複利成長。一切始於電力，而我們已打造出一套作業系統，把這些原則轉化為具合約保障的現金流。

And we are proud of what the team has accomplished, but we still believe we are very early. Every campus strengthens the platform. Every financing expands our capabilities. Every customer deepens our relationships and every great person makes the organization stronger. What I would encourage investors to underwrite is not our next project. It is our ability to compound capabilities over time, create projects that create earnings and compounding capabilities that create enduring enterprise value.

我們為團隊的成果感到自豪，但我們仍然相信現在還非常早期。每一個園區都強化平台。每一筆融資都擴大我們的能力。每一位客戶都加深我們的關係，而每一位優秀的人才都讓組織更強。我會鼓勵投資人評估的不是我們的下一個專案。而是我們隨時間累積能力、打造能創造獲利的專案，以及累積能力所帶來的長期企業價值的能力。

Asher, thank you. Sean, let's turn to the quarter's financial results. Investors can read the income statement in the 10-Q. So I want to focus this discussion on what the numbers say about the underlying business, the balance sheet and Hut 8's ability to finance growth. Revenue increased meaningfully year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA improved, yet the quarter still showed a significant GAAP net loss. How should investors reconcile those results?

Asher，謝謝你。Sean，我們來看本季的財務結果。投資人可以在 10-Q 中閱讀損益表。因此我想把討論重點放在這些數字對底層業務、資產負債表，以及 Hut 8 融資以支持成長的能力所傳達的訊息。營收年增顯著。調整後 EBITDA 改善，但本季仍呈現顯著的 GAAP 淨損。投資人應如何調和這些結果？

Thanks, Mark. I think there are three key takeaways in our financials. One, the operating business grew. Two, margins expanded. And three, EBITDA improved. Moving to the P&L items themselves, revenue increased approximately 81% year over year to $74.9 million, while cost of revenue increased by approximately 23%. That produced gross profit of approximately $48 million and expanded gross margin to approximately 64%, compared with approximately 47% in the prior year period.

謝謝，Mark。我認為我們的財務有三個關鍵重點。第一，營運業務成長了。第二，利潤率擴大了。第三，EBITDA 改善了。就損益表項目本身而言，營收年增約 81% 至 7,490 萬美元，而營收成本僅增加約 23%。因此產生約 4,800 萬美元的毛利，毛利率擴大至約 64%，相較於去年同期約 47%。

Adjusted EBITDA, excluding digital asset mark-to-market movements, was $10.4 million. That compares with $4.2 million in the prior year period. The GAAP net loss of $177.1 million was driven primarily by $138 million loss in digital assets. bitcoin declined during the quarter while it had increased materially in the prior year period. So the year-over-year comparison is dominated by a non-cash mark-to-market swing.

調整後 EBITDA（排除數位資產按市價評價的變動）為 1,040 萬美元。相較於去年同期的 420 萬美元。GAAP 淨損 1.771 億美元主要由數位資產 1.38 億美元的損失所致。本季比特幣下跌，而去年同期則大幅上漲。因此，年對年比較主要被一個非現金的按市價評價波動所主導。

Thanks, Sean. Let's go one level deeper. What were the most important drivers across power, digital infrastructure and compute?

謝謝，Sean。我們再深入一層。在電力、數位基礎設施與運算（compute）方面，最重要的驅動因素是什麼？

So Compute remained the primary operating contributor. Revenue increased to $72.5 million from $34.3 million, which is driven by an increase in bitcoin mined from approximately 308 to approximately 935. That growth reflects additional operating capacity following the commencement of operations at Vega and the re-energization of our Drumheller facility.

運算（Compute）仍是主要的營運貢獻來源。營收由 3,430 萬美元增加至 7,250 萬美元，主要由比特幣開採量從約 308 枚增加至約 935 枚所帶動。這項成長反映了 Vega 開始營運後新增的運轉產能，以及我們 Drumheller 設施重新送電。

Compute cost of revenue increased at a much slower rate than revenue itself, resulting in a segment gross margin of approximately 66%. That operating leverage is important because it demonstrates the earnings capacity of the current platform even before our contracted AI data center revenues begin contributing.

運算（Compute）的營收成本增幅遠低於營收本身，帶動該分部毛利率約為 66%。這種營運槓桿很重要，因為它顯示即使在我們已簽約的 AI 資料中心營收開始貢獻之前，現有平台就已具備獲利能力。

Digital infrastructure revenue was $1.3 million. That was broadly consistent with the prior year period. Today, that segment still reflects the legacy base. Its financial profile changes materially as River Bend and Beacon Point data halls are delivered and the associated long duration lease revenues begin coming online. Power revenue declined to $1.2 million from $5.5 million and that is primarily because the prior year quarter included a full quarter of activity from the Far North portfolio, which we sold in February. That decline is, therefore, not a function of decline in revenues, but it's a function of portfolio management.

數位基礎設施營收為 130 萬美元。與去年同期大致一致。目前該分部仍反映既有基礎。當 River Bend 與 Beacon Point 的資料機房（data halls）交付、以及相關的長期租賃收入開始上線後，其財務輪廓將出現顯著變化。電力營收由 550 萬美元下降至 120 萬美元，主要原因是去年同期包含 Far North 投資組合整季的活動，而我們已於 2 月出售該投資組合。因此，這一下降並非營收能力下滑所致，而是投資組合管理的結果。

General and administration expense increased substantially. How should investors distinguish between recurring overhead and investment in the platform?

一般及管理費用大幅增加。投資人應如何區分經常性管理費用與對平台的投資？

Yes, it's something Asher touched on. It's something that we focus on a lot. It's really important to us. Reported G&A was $76.1 million, and that compares with $30.2 million in the prior year period. However, approximately $43.6 million of the increase was share-based compensation. So the majority of the year over year was non-cash. Cash investment also increased as we added talent and capabilities to support a much larger development platform.

是的，這也是 Asher 提到的。這是我們非常關注的事情。對我們來說非常重要。揭露的一般及管理費用（G&A）為 7,610 萬美元，對比去年同期的 3,020 萬美元。不過，增幅中約 4,360 萬美元為股份基礎給付（share-based compensation）。因此年對年的大部分增加是非現金項目。隨著我們增聘人才並擴充能力以支援更大型的開發平台，現金投資也有所增加。

Salaries and benefits increased by approximately $4.1 million, primarily from additional headcount supporting growth initiatives, not maintenance initiatives, particularly in our energy origination group. We evaluate SG&A spending through a growth-first maintenance lens. The organization required to maintain today's operating base is meaningfully smaller than the organization required to originate, finance, construct, and operate multi-million dollar campuses in parallel.

薪資與福利增加約 410 萬美元，主要來自支援成長計畫（而非維持性計畫）的新增人力，特別是在我們的能源開發（energy origination）團隊。我們以「成長優先、維持為輔」的視角來評估 SG&A 支出。維持當前營運基礎所需的組織規模，明顯小於同時並行開發、融資、建造與營運多個數億美元園區所需的組織規模。

That does not mean growth spending is unconstrained. We expect every investment in people, systems, and capabilities to be tied to specific commercial outcomes. More high-quality power origination, faster project conversion, lower cost of capital, improved execution, and stronger operating leverage over time.

這並不代表成長性支出不受約束。我們預期在人才、系統與能力上的每一項投資，都必須與具體的商業成果相連結。包括更高品質的電力取得、更快的專案轉換、更低的資金成本、更佳的執行力，以及隨時間推進更強的營運槓桿。

Let's talk about the balance sheet. It looks very different. Cash and restricted cash increased to approximately $7 billion and total debt increased to approximately $7.6 billion. What is the right way to interpret those figures?

我們來談談資產負債表。它看起來非常不同。現金與受限制現金增加至約70億美元，總負債增加至約76億美元。該如何正確解讀這些數字？

So the first distinction is between corporate liquidity and project restricted capital. At June 30, we had approximately $233.6 million of unrestricted cash and approximately $6.8 billion of restricted cash and cash equivalents. The cash -- the restricted cash primarily represents proceeds from the River Bend and Beacon Point financings, and those are held in project accounts and can only be used for construction, debt service reserves and other specified project purposes.

首先要區分的是公司層級流動性與專案受限制資本。截至6月30日，我們約有2.336億美元的非受限制現金，以及約68億美元的受限制現金與約當現金。這些現金——受限制現金主要代表來自River Bend與Beacon Point融資的募集款項，並存放於專案帳戶中，只能用於建設、債務償付準備金及其他特定的專案用途。

It is not excess corporate cash and the related debt is not general corporate leverage. Similarly, the majority of that approximately $7.6 billion carrying amount of debt consists of the $3.25 billion River Bend notes and the $4.25 billion Beacon Point notes. Those obligations sit at bankruptcy remote project subsidiaries. They're secured by the applicable project assets and accounts and importantly, are nonrecourse to Hut 8's parent company.

這不是多餘的公司現金，而相關負債也不是一般性的公司槓桿。同樣地，約76億美元帳面金額的負債中，多數由32.5億美元的River Bend票據與42.5億美元的Beacon Point票據構成。這些義務位於具破產隔離（bankruptcy remote）的專案子公司層級。它們以相應的專案資產與帳戶作為擔保，更重要的是，對Hut 8母公司不具追索權（nonrecourse）。

So the consolidated balance sheet has become larger because of two of our three projects under construction are fully financed. Economically, each project is designed to service its own debt from its own contracted lease cash flows. That's the financial architecture we want, ring-fence project risk, preserve parent flexibility and minimal reliance on corporate equity.

因此，合併資產負債表之所以變大，是因為我們三個在建專案中的兩個已完成全額融資。從經濟實質來看，每個專案都被設計為以其自身已簽約的租賃現金流來償付其自身債務。這正是我們想要的財務架構：將專案風險圈定隔離、保留母公司彈性，並將對公司股權資金的依賴降到最低。

Investors will also note that interest expense increased sharply, while interest income increased to $27.1 million. How should we think about the construction period carried on these financings?

投資人也會注意到利息費用大幅上升，而利息收入增加至2,710萬美元。我們應該如何看待這些融資在建造期間的資金承擔（carry）？

Interest expense increased because we closed $7.5 billion of long-duration project financing during the quarter. That's expected when fully funding two campuses before the related lease revenues begin. Importantly, the proceeds are not sitting idle. Undrawn construction funds are invested in short duration instruments within project accounts.

利息費用上升，是因為我們在本季完成了75億美元的長天期專案融資。在相關租賃收入開始之前就先為兩個園區完成全額資金到位，這是預期之內。重要的是，這些募集款並非閒置。尚未動用的建造資金會在專案帳戶內投資於短天期工具。

Those funds generated $27.1 million of interest income in the quarter, partially offsetting the interest cost on the notes. We also capitalized $5.7 million of interest into construction in progress during the quarter. The accounting, therefore, reflects three components: interest expense recognized currently, interest income earned on undeployed proceeds and interest capitalized as part of the cost of the assets under construction.

這些資金在本季產生了2,710萬美元的利息收入，部分抵銷了票據的利息成本。我們也在本季將570萬美元的利息資本化計入在建工程。因此，會計呈現反映三個組成：當期認列的利息費用、未部署募集款所賺取的利息收入，以及作為在建資產成本一部分而資本化的利息。

I think the broader point is that we structured these financings to remove refinancing risk and secure the full construction capital upfront. There's a cost of carrying committed capital during construction, but we believe that cost is outweighed by the certainty of the funding, protection against future capital market volatility and the ability to execute without returning to the market to build.

我認為更重要的一點是，我們設計這些融資的目的，是消除再融資風險並在一開始就鎖定完整的建造資金。在施工期間承擔已承諾資金的持有成本確實存在，但我們相信，這項成本會被資金確定性、對未來資本市場波動的防護，以及不必為了建造而再度回到市場募資的執行能力所抵銷並超越。

How did the Coatue conversion of the FalconX refinancing change the parent level balance sheet during the quarter?

Coatue將FalconX再融資進行轉換，如何在本季改變母公司層級的資產負債表？

In our minds, it was pretty meaningful. So in May, Coatue converted the approximately $159.3 million of accretive principal balance of its note into 9.7 million shares. That eliminated our only remaining parent recourse debt. We also refinanced $200 million Coinbase facility with a new $200 million FalconX term loan. The coupon declined from 9% to 7% as a result of the refinancing and the facility is collateralized by bitcoin, not the parent.

在我們看來，影響相當顯著。因此在5月，Coatue將其票據約1.593億美元的增值後本金餘額（accretive principal balance）轉換為970萬股。這消除了我們僅存的、對母公司具追索權的債務。我們也以新的2億美元FalconX定期貸款，為2億美元的Coinbase融資額度進行再融資。再融資後票息由9%降至7%，且該融資以比特幣作為擔保，而非以母公司作為擔保。

Those transactions simplify the parent capital structure. Excluding ordinary course obligations, the parent is not obligated under the River Bend or Beacon Point notes, and the remaining significant financing is secured by a discrete pool of bitcoin.

這些交易簡化了母公司的資本結構。排除日常營運義務，母公司不需就River Bend或Beacon Point票據承擔義務，而剩餘的重要融資則由一個獨立的比特幣資產池提供擔保。

That matters because one of our most valuable corporate assets is flexibility. A clean parent balance sheet gives us the ability to fund early-stage development, absorb timing differences, pursue strategic opportunities and choose the right financing for each asset rather than being forced into the financing that happens to be available at a specific given point in time.

這很重要，因為我們最有價值的公司資產之一就是彈性。乾淨的母公司資產負債表，讓我們能夠資助早期開發、吸收時點差異、把握策略性機會，並為每項資產選擇最合適的融資方式，而不是被迫採用在某個特定時間點剛好可取得的融資。

Beacon Point Phase 1 finance and the second phase is now contracted. What principles will guide financing Beacon Point Phase 2 and the broader development pipeline?

Beacon Point第一期已完成融資，第二期現在也已簽約。在為Beacon Point第二期以及更廣泛的開發管線進行融資時，哪些原則會作為指引？

So I think it really comes down to four principles. As always, the first principle is going to be asset level self-sufficiency. We're going to seek to finance each project against its own contracted cash flows with risk generally ring-fenced with the project and no recourse to the parent wherever feasible.

我認為這主要歸結為四項原則。一如既往，第一項原則是資產層級的自給自足。我們將尋求以各專案自身已簽約的現金流來為其融資，並在可行的情況下，將風險大致圈定在專案內、且不對母公司追索。

The second principle is optimization rather than repetition. River Bend established the market. Beacon Point 1 improved on that execution with a larger issuance, a lower coupon, a higher rating and a later start to schedule amortization. We will not assume the next financing should look identical. We're going to evaluate the asset, the lease, the construction schedule, market conditions and investor demand from a first principle's perspective.

第二項原則是最佳化，而非重複。River Bend建立了市場。Beacon Point第一期在執行上有所改進：發行規模更大、票息更低、評等更高，且攤還時程的起始時間更晚。我們不會假設下一筆融資應該長得一模一樣。我們將以第一性原則的角度，評估資產、租約、施工進度、市場狀況與投資人需求。

Third principle is disciplined use of equity. Equity should fund the portions of the development cycle where it creates the most value, origination, site control, interconnection, design and other work required to convert an opportunity into a financeable project. Once contracted cash flows are in place, we want long-duration project capital to fund construction.

第三項原則是有紀律地使用股權資金。股權應用於開發週期中最能創造價值的部分：案源取得、場址控制、併網、設計，以及將機會轉化為可融資專案所需的其他工作。一旦已簽約的現金流到位，我們希望由長天期的專案資本來支應建造。

And the fourth and final principle is preserving liquidity across the portfolio. The model needs to support several campuses advancing at once, not just one project at a time. That means matching duration, amortization, covenants and recourse the economics of each asset while maintaining capacity at the parent.

第四也是最後一項原則，是在整體投資組合中維持流動性。此模式必須能支持多個園區同時推進，而不只是一次推進一個專案。這意味著要在維持母公司資金承載能力的同時，讓期限、攤還、契約條款（covenants）與追索權安排，與各資產的經濟特性相匹配。

Thanks, Sean. To close, what should investors take away from the quarter from a financial perspective?

謝謝你，Sean。最後，從財務角度來看，投資人本季應該帶走哪些重點？

Yes. And I think this is really important. So first, the operating business has strengthened. Revenue grew, gross margins expanded and adjusted EBITDAX, excluding digital asset mark-to-market increased year-over-year. Second, the capital market -- the capital formation model moved from concept to repeatable execution. We raised $7.5 billion of investment-grade long-duration project financing for two construction-stage campuses with no recourse to the parent.

是的。我認為這點非常重要。第一，營運業務已經轉強。營收成長、毛利率擴張，且調整後EBITDAX（不含數位資產按市價評價）年增。第二，資本市場——資本形成模式已從概念走向可重複的執行。我們為兩個建造階段的園區募集了75億美元投資級、長天期的專案融資，且對母公司不具追索權。

Third, the parent balance sheet became cleaner. The Coatue note converted, the bitcoin-backed facility was refinanced at a lower coupon and the majority of consolidated debt is now matched to contracted project cash flows. And finally, the financial profile is in transition. Today's income statement is still dominated by compute and digital asset accounting.

第三，母公司資產負債表變得更乾淨。Coatue票據完成轉換、以比特幣擔保的融資以更低票息完成再融資，且目前合併負債的大部分已與已簽約的專案現金流相匹配。最後，財務輪廓正處於轉型之中。目前的損益表仍主要由算力與數位資產會計所主導。

As River Bend and Beacon Point are delivered, the mix should shift meaningfully towards long-duration contracted digital infrastructure cash flows. Our focus is to manage the transition with discipline, execute the projects, protect the parent balance sheet and finance growth in a way that compounds value per share.

隨著River Bend與Beacon Point交付完成，收入組合應會顯著轉向長天期、已簽約的數位基礎設施現金流。我們的重點是以紀律管理轉型、執行專案、保護母公司資產負債表，並以能夠提升每股價值複利成長的方式為成長融資。

Thank you, Sean. That concludes our prepared discussion. Operator, please open the line for questions.

謝謝你，Sean。我們預先準備的討論到此結束。接線員，請開放電話線供提問。

(Operator Instructions)

(接線員指示)

Stephen Byrd, Morgan Stanley.

Stephen Byrd，摩根士丹利。

I wanted to just dive into behind-the-meter generation and really just get your overall temperature check in terms of how desired is this by your customers? I guess this can really help to create much larger sites and move much faster, potentially. So it strikes me as a very good complement to the grid access that you have.

我想直接切入談談表後發電（behind-the-meter generation），並想請教你們對於客戶需求強度的整體溫度檢視：你們的客戶有多渴望這項方案？我想這確實可能有助於打造更大型的場址並且更快推進。因此我覺得這與你們現有的電網接入能力形成非常好的互補。

And, Asher, you've spoken to this before. But just curious, your latest thinking in terms of, you know, how likely is this in your view? How important is this to your customers to be able to sort of achieve both the timing and scale objectives that they have? I'd love any comments you might have on that.

另外，Asher，你之前也談過這點。但我想再請教你目前最新的想法：以你的觀點，這件事發生的可能性有多高？對你們的客戶而言，能夠同時達成他們在時程與規模上的目標，這有多重要？也很希望聽到你對此的任何評論。

Behind-the-meter, and thanks, Stephen, appreciate the question. Behind the meter capacity will happen. We see the demand. We see the opportunities for them within our pipeline. And they're the fastest speed towards power.

關於表後（behind-the-meter），也謝謝你，Stephen，感謝這個問題。表後容量一定會發生。我們看得到需求。我們也在我們的案源管線中看得到相關機會。而且這是最快取得電力的途徑。

And I think not only do the customers want it, but the grids that we're looking at building at, they want us to bring power and additional to consuming from the grid. They want us to help offset as well. The reason why we don't include behind the meter opportunities in our development pipeline is because we feel like those megawatts are a bit disingenuine. What do I mean by that?

我認為不只是客戶想要，連我們正在規劃建置的那些電網也希望我們能帶來電力，並且不只是從電網取電。他們也希望我們能協助抵銷（負載）一些。我們之所以不把表後機會納入我們的開發管線，是因為我們覺得那些兆瓦數有點不太真實。我的意思是什麼？

What I mean is if we have a piece of land, we have an interconnect on there in terms of substation and transmission capacity, and we have a pipeline. Frankly, we can put as many megawatts as the pipeline can support from a gas perspective, right? So River Bend could be a multi-gigawatt site that we put into our pipeline.

我的意思是：如果我們有一塊土地，上面有互聯條件（例如變電站與輸電容量），而且我們也有一條管線。坦白說，從燃氣供應的角度來看，我們可以放進管線的兆瓦數，幾乎可以多到管線所能支撐的程度，對吧？所以 River Bend 可能會是一個我們放進管線中的多GW級場址。

And so the numbers that we would have in our pipeline would far exceed the over 8 gigawatts that we have today if we include behind-the-meter opportunities. And so the way we see those, similar to M&A, where if they become real and they become executed or contracted, you see that as additional catalysts that come in that are not as trackable, but we're working on a ton of opportunities on both behind the meter and M&A across different functions of the team today.

因此，如果我們把表後機會也算進去，我們管線中的數字會遠遠超過我們今天所說的 8GW 以上。所以我們看待這些機會的方式，類似於併購（M&A）：當它們變得具體、被執行或簽約時，你會把它們視為額外的催化劑；它們不那麼容易追蹤，但我們目前在表後與併購兩方面、跨團隊不同職能，都在推進大量機會。

Brett Knoblauch, Cantor Fitzgerald.

Brett Knoblauch，Cantor Fitzgerald。

I know Greg said a letter yesterday that had a lot of people asking some questions. I'm curious to your thoughts on it, to what extent it's kind of big point grandfathered? And how does maybe that change your view of where you're looking to grow the portfolio from a pipeline perspective?

我知道 Greg 昨天提到一封信，引發很多人提出一些問題。我想請教你對那封信的看法：在多大程度上它算是「既有案」被祖父條款保護（grandfathered）？以及這是否會改變你們從管線角度來看、未來要在哪些地方擴張投資組合的看法？

I think across the board in the U.S. today, more and more politicians are going to want to make sure that ratepayers and their voters feel protected. And so we saw the letter and we trust the legislative process. As we're reviewing, we're prepared to work with the PUC and ERCOT to implement kind of this process.

我認為在美國目前整體而言，會有越來越多政治人物希望確保用戶（ratepayers）與選民感到受到保護。因此我們看到了那封信，也信任立法程序。在我們審視的同時，我們也已準備好與公用事業委員會（PUC）及 ERCOT 合作來落實這類流程。

We feel very confident in the package we put forward during the batch process. and a lot of the things that we had put forward aligns with many of the points that Governor Abbott raised. And that includes grid reliability, water usage, environmental considerations, noise, traffic, emergency and other community protections.

我們對於在批次流程（batch process）中所提交的方案非常有信心，而且我們提出的許多內容也與 Abbott 州長提到的多項重點一致。其中包括電網可靠性、用水、環境考量、噪音、交通、緊急應變以及其他社區保護措施。

And so we actually were one of the ones that voluntarily participated in the PUE survey that they had come out. And we gave them all the information on Beacon Point around the water and power usage of the site, both operating and under construction. And so we plan to do the same exact thing with the governor's request.

因此，我們其實是自願參與他們推出的 PUE 調查的業者之一。我們提供了 Beacon Point 場址在用水與用電方面的所有資訊，涵蓋營運中與施工中的狀態。所以針對州長的要求，我們也計畫採取完全相同的作法。

And as we continue to develop across the pipeline, when we look at places like Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, kind of these southeast border and places across the US, there are some states where they want the business of data centers.

而且當我們持續在管線中推進開發時，像是德州、路易斯安那州、阿拉巴馬州這些東南部邊界地帶，以及美國各地，有些州是希望承接資料中心這門生意的。

But they also want to make sure that their communities feel protected because there's so much FUD and noise out there in the system today. And there are other states that are a bit harder to do work in. And so those were a bit more sensitive in terms of entering and investing significant development capital. But overall, I think you'll just see this as a common part of development, which is you have to do the work to have people feel comfortable that you're not just saying that, hey, we have a closed loop water system. We're not going to use water that cools the chips, right?

但他們也希望確保社區感到受到保護，因為目前系統裡充斥著大量 FUD（恐懼、不確定與懷疑）與雜音。也有一些州的工作推進難度更高。因此在進入並投入大量開發資本時，那些州會更敏感。但整體而言，我認為你會把這視為開發的常態：你必須做足功課，讓大家放心，你不是只口頭說「我們有封閉式循環用水系統」，或「我們不會用水來冷卻晶片」，對吧？

We actually pave our way when it comes to energy infrastructure upgrades or energy capacity. I mean, most of these things we are doing no matter what, because we have I think it's just putting in a bit more process to make people feel comfortable. And overall, I think it's actually very, very healthy for the U.S. because right now, without that, it's just a he said, she said and people are scared and local politicians are scared to do what they think is best for the communities from a kind of ratepayer tax perspective impact, but also from kind of a general sentiment perspective.

在能源基礎設施升級或能源容量方面，我們其實是自己鋪路推進。我的意思是，這些事情多半不管怎樣我們都會做；我認為只是加入更多流程，讓大家更安心。整體而言，我覺得這對美國其實非常、非常健康，因為如果沒有這些機制，現在就只是各說各話，人們會害怕，地方政治人物也會害怕去做他們認為對社區最好的事——不論是從用戶費率與稅收影響的角度，或是從整體民意觀感的角度。

And so I think you will see different politicians try to enact this in different ways to make their voters feel comfortable. And then on the other extreme, you have some states that kind of are just extremely against it. And so I think Texas is one where they're just trying to make sure that the way that this capacity is coming online is thoughtful to the ecosystem, the community. So there's not a huge reversion. We're able to continue to scale.

因此我認為你會看到不同政治人物用不同方式推動這類措施，讓選民感到安心。而在另一個極端，也有一些州基本上就是非常反對。所以我認為德州屬於那種：他們只是想確保這些容量上線的方式，對生態系、社區是經過周全思考的。如此才不會出現很大的反轉。我們也才能持續擴張規模。

Awesome. And maybe if I can just follow up on River Bend. I know there's a lot of talk about behind-the-meter. Curious from a timing perspective, like how quickly could behind the meter at that site get stood up? Would that come before maybe additional power delivery from energy? Or -- and you guys might have commented on this, I might have missed this, but just walk me through how River Bend expands from here via kind of grid or behind the meter or directly from energy.

太好了。另外如果我可以追問一下 River Bend。我知道大家談了很多表後。我想從時程角度了解：該場址的表後方案最快可以多快建置起來？它會不會比從能源端額外送電更早到位？或者——你們可能已經評論過、我可能漏聽了——但能否帶我走一遍：River Bend 接下來是如何透過電網、表後，或直接從能源端來擴張？

So if we think about Building 1, it gets built really across 2027. Each day, a hall gets handed over. And so in order for Building 2 to start and to start delivering data halls, it's kind of on the back of Building 1, right? So you think kind of end of '27 that, that capacity has the opportunity to come online.

如果我們以 1 號樓來看，它基本上會在 2027 年期間完成建置。每天都會有一個機房廳（hall）移交。因此要讓 2 號樓啟動並開始交付資料機房廳，某種程度上是接續在 1 號樓之後，對吧？所以你可以想像在 2027 年底，那部分容量就有機會上線。

When we think about behind-the-meter generation, we have a bunch of solutions we're looking at River Bend and other campuses as well in terms of what is that generation. And some of those solutions, the power actually can get there faster than the data center can get built. And that's obviously not all solutions.

至於表後發電，我們正在針對 River Bend 以及其他園區評估多種解決方案，來決定採用何種發電形式。其中一些方案，電力實際上可以比資料中心建置更快到位。當然，這並非適用於所有方案。

When we think about River Bend, it's a really unique environment because we have such a supportive state and local legislative and administrative kind of community where they want us to bring this business in and to expand. We have an amazing workforce of subcontractors there in all the skilled trades. And so when we look at River Bend, the gas is there.

當我們想到 River Bend 時，這是一個非常獨特的環境，因為我們擁有非常支持我們的州與地方立法及行政社群，他們希望我們把這項業務帶進來並擴張。我們在當地各項技術工種方面擁有一支很出色的分包商勞動力。因此，當我們看 River Bend 時，天然氣就在那裡。

There's plenty of access on the pipelines. We've already confirmed that. And then obviously, Entergy, we're working with as well around capacity. So I actually see a world where you might see some behind-the-meter generation capacity kind of working in concert with Entergy grid connected capacity.

管線的接入容量非常充足。我們已經確認過了。另外很明顯地，我們也正與 Entergy 就容量問題合作。所以我確實可以想像一種情況：你可能會看到一些表後（behind-the-meter）發電容量與 Entergy 的併網電網容量協同運作。

Darren Aftahi, Lucid Capital Markets.

Darren Aftahi，Lucid Capital Markets。

On your exclusive energy basket in your release, the roughly 1.9 gigs, could you kind of characterize maybe where are those sites, brownfield, greenfield? And then just how you kind of maybe also characterize geographic and community risk as Asher you were talking about the governor's letter as well.

關於你們新聞稿中提到的專屬能源籃子（exclusive energy basket），約 1.9 GW，你能否大致說明那些場址在哪裡、是棕地（brownfield）還是綠地（greenfield）？另外，也請你談談你們如何看待地理與社區風險；Asher 你也提到州長的信。

Thanks. Happy to do so. We're pretty diversified. So I think the best way to think about our company, and I'll take one step back and talk through how we develop. When you think about each stage in the development pipeline, and again, to remind folks, these are greenfield opportunities. And so primarily, we're finding land, we're finding interconnect.

謝謝。很樂意說明。我們相當多元分散。我認為理解我們公司的最佳方式，是先退一步談談我們如何開發。當你思考開發管線的每個階段時，再提醒大家一次，這些都是綠地機會。因此主要是我們在找土地、找併網點（interconnect）。

A lot of the M&A opportunities that we have that kind of fall into people have already developed a greenfield to a certain stage or brownfield opportunities, those opportunities are not included in this pipeline. And we have a whole team working on those. And behind-the-meter is not included.

我們有很多併購（M&A）機會，屬於他人已將綠地開發到某個階段，或是棕地機會；這些機會不包含在這條管線中。我們有一整個團隊在處理那些。而表後（behind-the-meter）也不包含在內。

So as we think through kind of how we build a team, we have multiple teams across five different ISOs. So we split the United States into five sections, each section incorporates a certain set of ISOs and we have different teams. So think of them as like separate pods. Each pod has a budget. They have a group of individuals in their team and they go and they develop.

因此，當我們思考如何建立團隊時，我們在五個不同的 ISO（獨立系統營運商）覆蓋範圍內配置了多個團隊。我們把美國分成五個區塊，每個區塊涵蓋一組特定的 ISO，並配置不同團隊。你可以把它們想成彼此獨立的小組（pods）。每個小組都有預算。他們有一群成員，然後去做開發。

And so we have a bunch of these pods across each -- across these five regions and across each region. Capacity under diligence is the pod under their budgets. Go and start putting in land options, interconnect agreement, studies, pre-construction work, site development surveys, geotechs and so forth. When we get to capacity and exclusivity, there's a line of sight on power in addition to obviously the land control and path towards permitting as well.

因此我們在這五個區域、以及各區域內都有多個這樣的小組。在盡職調查（diligence）階段的容量，是由各小組在其預算內推進。他們會開始取得土地選擇權、併網協議、研究、施工前作業、場址開發測量、地工（geotech）等等。當我們進入容量與專屬性（exclusivity）階段時，除了明顯的土地控制與取得許可的路徑之外，也已經能看得到電力供應的可視性（line of sight on power）。

As everyone knows, we've kind of really been working through the Illinois and Logan County process of one of our sites. So kind of local community support is paramount as we think about sites that go from diligence into exclusivity and our confidence level in order to spend the resources and the work to make sure we have the support, because otherwise, like exclusivity is where we have a lot of teams working on those projects and bringing them to development where we're comfortable in the ability to commercialize those projects.

大家都知道，我們一直在推進伊利諾伊州與 Logan County 的流程，這是我們其中一個場址。因此，當我們思考場址從盡職調查走向專屬性時，地方社區支持至關重要；我們必須有足夠信心投入資源與工作以確保獲得支持，否則在專屬性階段我們會有很多團隊投入這些專案，並把它們推進到我們有把握能商業化（commercialize）的開發階段。

That's why we deploy more capital and more investment into them. And so as we think about the overall pipeline, we're pretty well diversified across the United States, across multiple states, multiple ISOs, and do not have a heavy conversation in one area. And I think one that was done by design early on, our belief was the US is a pretty big area.

這也是為什麼我們會在那個階段投入更多資本與投資。因此，從整體管線來看，我們在美國各地、跨多個州與多個 ISO 都相當分散，並沒有在單一地區高度集中。而我認為這是我們一開始就刻意設計的，因為我們相信美國是一個很大的市場。

And so instead of having one team be spread thin, let's build these kind of separate pods in this incentive structure where we have different experts across the U.S. and different ISOs. And I think that's worked out based on kind of the overall kind of concentration in the market today where we're able to say, all right, you know what, this site, this situation is happening.

因此，與其讓一個團隊分散得很薄，不如建立這些彼此獨立的小組與激勵架構，讓我們在全美不同地區、不同 ISO 都有不同的專家。我認為這在今天市場的整體集中度背景下已經證明有效，因為我們能夠說，好吧，你知道的，這個場址、這個情況正在發生。

It's slowing down a little bit. That's okay. We have these other opportunities that are continuing to progress. And so we're pretty grateful for that and having built the platform day one to kind of support that. And that's where you see, like, the reason why we're investing into this growth SG&A, the magnitude of these opportunities are so large. And so having amazing people to be able to scale our ability to capture this opportunity, we think is a no brainer.

它的進度稍微放慢了一點。沒關係。我們還有其他機會在持續推進。因此我們對此非常感恩，也很慶幸從第一天就建立了能支撐這種狀態的平台。這也是你看到我們為何要投資於成長型 SG&A（銷售、一般及行政費用）的原因：這些機會的規模非常巨大。因此，擁有優秀的人才來擴大我們捕捉這些機會的能力，我們認為是顯而易見的選擇。

Frankly, I wish I would have done it even earlier. I remember when about two years ago, I had a meeting with one of the former CEOs of the largest energy utility in the US. And we were really talking about the analogies behind like data center development versus renewable development. And they arguably were one of the most successful renewable developers, actually a person that ran Mark's former shop and a big comment was around scale, right?

坦白說，我希望我更早就這麼做了。我記得大約兩年前，我和美國最大能源公用事業公司之一的前任 CEO 開過一次會。我們當時在談資料中心開發與再生能源開發之間的類比。而他們可以說是最成功的再生能源開發商之一，實際上那位人士曾經負責 Mark 之前的團隊；其中一個很重要的評論就是關於規模（scale），對吧？

You need to find land, you need to find interconnects. And we really kind of got comfort in that once we felt like we had a repeatable platform and we had that customer demand that was repeatable as well. And we started really scaling over the last couple of quarters, but could have done it even earlier than that before the first deal was announced. And so I think our platform feels very, very healthy. It's very diversified and the current platform we disclose to the public is only one subset of the overall kind of platform internally that we worked on.

你需要找到土地，你需要找到併網點。當我們覺得自己擁有可重複的（repeatable）平台，且客戶需求也同樣可重複時，我們就真正獲得了信心。我們在過去幾個季度開始大幅擴張，但其實在第一筆交易宣布之前就可以更早開始。因此我認為我們的平台狀態非常、非常健康。它非常多元分散，而我們對外披露的現有平台只是我們內部整體平台的一個子集合。

And the main reason is like authenticity of those numbers. Like we can have that platform look really, really big based on all the M&A conversations we're having, based on all the behind-the-meter conversations we're having, but we have a higher threshold to disclosing those because we want those to essentially be near complete to be able to share those to the market rather than early stage where it just becomes bragawatt numbers, which is not our goal with sharing these pipeline numbers.

主要原因在於這些數字的真實性（authenticity）。我們可以讓平台看起來非常、非常大——基於我們正在進行的所有併購（M&A）對話、以及所有表後（behind-the-meter）對話——但我們對披露它們有更高的門檻，因為我們希望在接近完成時再與市場分享，而不是在早期階段就變成所謂的「bragawatt」數字；分享這些管線數字並不是我們的目標。

Stephen Glagola, KBW.

Stephen Glagola，KBW。

I'm sorry if I missed this earlier on the call. Asher and Sean, can you maybe provide more detail on how you intend to fund the equity component associated with the Beacon Point Phase 2 lease? And then, Sean, I'm just curious maybe to get your broader thoughts on what you're seeing in the funding markets today on the debt side? And has anything changed in terms of project financing availability over the last few months?

如果我在電話會議前面漏聽了，抱歉。Asher 和 Sean，你們能否提供更多細節，說明你們打算如何為 Beacon Point 第二期租賃（Phase 2 lease）相關的股權（equity）部分籌資？另外，Sean，我也想更廣泛地請教你對目前融資市場在債務端（debt side）的觀察。過去幾個月在專案融資（project financing）可得性方面，有沒有任何變化？

Yes. I'll take the first part of that, and then I'll pass it over to Sean. If we were looking at doing the exact same structure that we did from building River Bend Building 1 to Beacon Point Building 1, right, in terms of a 16-year IG bond, et cetera, the equity commitment that we have, we have the balance sheet to be able to support that, and we've really thought about, all right, how do we think about kind of equity dilution relative to that.

是的。我先回答第一部分，然後再交給 Sean。如果我們要採用與我們從建造 River Bend 1 號樓到 Beacon Point 1 號樓時完全相同的架構——例如 16 年期投資級（IG）債券等等——我們所需承諾的股權資金，我們的資產負債表有能力支撐；而且我們也確實思考過，好吧，我們要如何看待相對於此的股權稀釋（equity dilution）。

So what we've shared from Beacon Point Building 1 to Beacon Point Building 2 was that we really focused on first principles of what made that deal strong and how do we make it better and how do we make it stronger. And I think from Building 1 to Building 2, we were able to improve kind of metrics across the whole board.

我們從 Beacon Point 第 1 棟到 Beacon Point 第 2 棟所分享的是，我們確實聚焦於讓那筆交易強而有力的第一性原理，以及我們如何把它做得更好、做得更強。我認為從第 1 棟到第 2 棟，我們得以在整體各項指標上都有所改善。

So when we look at -- when we look at Beacon Point Building 2 now, which is the third financing, we're taking that same first principles, which is how do we really think about our overall cost of capital across the different mechanisms that we have and how do we structure something that's the most accretive in terms of long-term kind of creation.

因此，當我們看——當我們現在看 Beacon Point 第 2 棟（也就是第三筆融資）時，我們沿用同樣的第一性原理：我們如何真正思考在我們擁有的不同機制之下，整體資本成本如何配置，以及我們如何設計出在長期價值創造層面最具增益（accretive）的結構。

We'll share more on that in the coming weeks. But as we think about kind of the optionality of what we have with the balance sheet that we have today, the different financing counterparties that want to continue to support the story, we're pretty excited and confident as we think about kind of growth of the platform that what we're working on is going to be interesting and innovative similar to kind of building one at River Bend and building one at Beacon Point. Sean, pass it over to you.

我們會在接下來幾週分享更多。但當我們思考以我們目前的資產負債表所具備的選擇性，以及希望持續支持這個故事的不同融資對手方時，我們相當興奮且有信心；就平台成長而言，我們正在推進的內容將會很有意思且具創新性，類似於 River Bend 的第一棟以及 Beacon Point 的第一棟。Sean，交給你。

Yes. Thanks, Asher. And thanks for the question, Steve. Look, the market remains open. It remains receptive to a lot of different paper that's out there. And I think you're seeing a lot of supply come, that is for certain. But I think there's going to be a real discernment for investors, and this is in our conversations with them, with bankers whom we talk to all the time on really quality leases, quality operators, quality developers and quality structures.

是的。謝謝你，Asher。也謝謝你的問題，Steve。你看，市場仍然是開放的。它對市面上各式各樣的票券（paper）仍然保持接受度。而且我認為你也看到供給正在大量出現，這是肯定的。但我認為投資人會有真正的辨別力——這也反映在我們與他們的對話中，以及我們與一直保持聯繫的銀行家們的交流中——他們會聚焦在高品質的租約、高品質的營運商、高品質的開發商，以及高品質的結構。

And so we spend a lot -- and this is why we are so principled and why we take so much time structuring the debt deals that we do. We want to make sure that they're going to be attractive to the market and that they'll get a lot of receptivity because ultimately, we want to make sure that we're being good stewards of bondholder capital as well.

因此我們投入了很多——這也是為什麼我們如此講求原則、並且在我們所做的債務交易結構設計上花費這麼多時間。我們希望確保它們對市場具有吸引力，並能獲得高度的接受度，因為歸根結底，我們也要確保自己是債券持有人資本的良好受託管理者。

And so I think we've developed a pretty good following in the fixed income markets. And for those who have executed well, I think the market will remain open and provide pretty good pricing and whatnot. I think it's really going to depend on what -- it will be very issuer by issuer, I think, going forward. So we're really excited about where we sit in that ladder.

因此我認為我們在固定收益市場已建立起相當不錯的追隨者基礎。對於那些執行得好的發行人，我認為市場仍會保持開放，並提供相當不錯的定價等等。我認為接下來真的會取決於——很大程度上會是逐一發行人（issuer by issuer）的情況。所以我們對於自己在這個梯隊中的位置感到非常振奮。

Ben Summers, BTIG.

Ben Summers，BTIG。

So Asher, you mentioned M&A opportunities. Curious on what you're seeing in that market? And are there any specific power markets where you're seeing more acquisition opportunities?

Asher，你提到了併購（M&A）機會。好奇你在那個市場看到了什麼？以及是否有任何特定的電力市場，你看到更多的收購機會？

We have a lot of inbound every day from everywhere. I think probably 70% of those opportunities are a bit of a waste of time and 30% are interesting projects. And so we've actually expanded the team to really diligence and vet through those opportunities. But it's across the board.

我們每天都會從各方收到大量主動接洽（inbound）。我想其中大概 70% 的機會有點浪費時間，30% 是有意思的專案。因此我們其實也擴編了團隊，來更深入地盡職調查並篩選這些機會。但機會是全面性的、各個面向都有。

Look, I think right now, everyone is seeing kind of the data center momentum. And so you have every person has a piece of land and the transmission line that falls across that piece of line, thinking that you can build a data center there. And then there's other developers that have really kind of done the work, got in the interconnection agreements, but are unable to get the capital to build, don't have the track record to actually get confidence within the tenant to actually go and execute and build the campus either.

你看，我認為現在每個人都看到了資料中心的動能。所以你會看到每個人只要有一塊地、那塊地上方有一條輸電線經過，就覺得可以在那裡蓋資料中心。另外也有一些開發商其實已經做了很多工作、拿到了併網協議（interconnection agreements），但卻無法取得建設所需資本，也沒有足夠的履歷讓租戶對其有信心，真的去執行並建成園區。

And so I think the three leases that we've announced, the platform that we're building has actually created a lot of good kind of reputational credibility out there, and we're having a lot of inbound. And as we think about M&A, we're also -- like as we look at the first couple of projects we developed, like our development risk capital out there is pretty low relative to how we think about development.

因此我認為我們已宣布的三份租約，以及我們正在打造的平台，確實在市場上建立了很好的聲譽與可信度，讓我們收到很多主動接洽。而當我們思考併購時，我們也——像我們回頭看前幾個我們自行開發的專案，我們在外部承擔的開發風險資本其實相對低，符合我們對開發的風險觀。

We're not putting out nine figures of capital on pieces of land or equipment. Really, most of our capital is deployed post commercialization. Right? We're talking about tens of millions on the land and some long lead time equipment on both of these projects before we actually commercialize, but those dollars really were backwards weighted closer to negotiation of the agreement before the final kind of ink was signed.

我們不會在土地或設備上一次投入上億美元等級的資本。實際上，我們的大部分資本是在商業化之後才投入。對吧？在真正商業化之前，我們在這兩個專案上投入的是數千萬美元等級的土地成本，以及一些交期很長的設備；但這些資金投入其實是偏後段配置，更接近於協議談判、在最後正式簽署（final ink was signed）之前才逐步投入。

And so as we think about some of these M&A opportunities, a lot of developers and brokers and bankers know we're not the firm that will necessarily pay the highest dollar upfront to take all the risk, and we're comfortable with those opportunities going to other developers. But folks who come to us and say, You know what, I'll take right way risk. I believe in your ability to execute and make this possible and maybe I'll take some kind of back-end economics on those opportunities as you commercialize them.

因此當我們思考某些併購機會時，許多開發商、仲介與投行都知道，我們不一定會是那種願意在一開始就付出最高價格、把所有風險都接走的公司；我們也能接受那些機會被其他開發商拿走。但如果有人來找我們說：你知道嗎，我願意承擔「正確方向的風險」（right way risk）。我相信你們的執行能力能把這件事做成，而且也許在你們把它商業化之後，我可以在這些機會上取得某種後端經濟利益（back-end economics）。

So from our perspective is, okay, if we create the value and those are triggers for unlocking value for some of these developers that brought the opportunity, that could be really interesting. And so when we think about structuring, we really think about like structuring them from a right way risk perspective for Hut 8, where we believe in our ability to execute and those sellers have to believe in Hut 8's ability as well, then the deal works.

所以從我們的角度是：好，如果我們創造了價值，而那些又是能為帶來機會的開發商解鎖價值的觸發點，那就可能非常有意思。因此當我們思考結構設計時，我們會從 Hut 8 的「正確方向風險」角度來設計；我們相信自己的執行能力，而那些賣方也必須相信 Hut 8 的能力，如此交易才會成立。

And -- but we're seeing a lot of these opportunities, teams are kind of working through them. And I think today, what I'm most grateful for is we can get indication around interest on sites a lot faster than two years ago. And we have pretty deep relationships across the counterparties that we've executed leases with and a lot of the counterparties that were at the kind of the finish line when we were looking at other customers for those and tenants for those opportunities as well. And so we don't just have relationships with the current tenants we have.

而且——我們確實看到很多這類機會，團隊也正在逐一推進。我想今天我最感恩的一點是：我們現在能比兩年前更快地取得對場址的興趣指標（indication of interest）。我們與已經簽署租約的對手方建立了相當深的關係，也與當時在終點線附近、我們曾就其他客戶與租戶選項進行洽談的許多對手方保持很深的連結。因此我們不只是與現有租戶有關係。

We have actually relations with a much broader subset, and we're able to get responses on feedback much more quickly. And then the other element that I think has really helped us and we've doubled down into this is we're relatively conservative when we bring opportunities to people, like we tell them exactly all the work that we've done, the risk that we see. And I think as a result, that's created deeper trust. And I think in this business, trust is paramount.

我們其實與更廣泛的一群對象都有關係，也能更快速地取得回覆與回饋。另外一個我認為真正幫助到我們、而且我們也加倍投入的要素是：當我們把機會帶給別人時，我們相對保守——我們會把已完成的所有工作、以及我們看到的風險，完整而清楚地告訴對方。我認為因此建立了更深的信任。而在這個產業裡，信任至關重要。

Do people trust that you're giving all the information to them very transparently. Are you trying to sell them all on a deal? Or are you trying to kind of build the partnership with them? And as we think about these relationships, we think about the next 5, 10-plus years. And so we're never trying to sell any given opportunity.

人們是否信任你能非常透明地提供所有資訊？你是在努力把他們推銷進一筆交易裡嗎？還是你是在與他們建立合作夥伴關係？而當我們思考這些關係時，我們看的是未來 5 年、10 年以上。因此我們從來不是想要推銷任何單一機會。

We're trying to work with them as partners and say, Hey, this is the opportunity that's interesting for you. This is the things that we think are good. These are the things that we think may not be as good. Let's talk through those subset of different points. And so as a result, M&A has become really interesting because our ability to feed that quickly to be able to kill or drive deals forward has allowed us to really focus on the right opportunities.

我們正嘗試以合作夥伴的方式與他們合作，並說：嘿，這是對你們而言有吸引力的機會。這些是我們認為好的地方。這些是我們認為可能沒那麼好的地方。讓我們把這些不同要點中的一部分拿出來逐一討論。因此，併購（M&A）變得非常有意思，因為我們能夠快速回饋資訊，進而能夠迅速終止或推動交易向前，讓我們得以真正聚焦在正確的機會上。

George Sutton, Craig-Hallum.

George Sutton，Craig-Hallum。

Asher, during your Q&A, you talked about existing customers that have the right to new megawatts. I wanted to make sure I understood that in the context of that discussion you were talking about M&A. Are you operating on behalf of some of your customers relative to these M&A opportunities and going to market that way? Just wanted to be clear about that.

Asher，在你的問答環節中，你提到既有客戶擁有新增兆瓦的權利。我想確認我在那段討論的脈絡下理解正確，你當時談的是併購（M&A）。你們是否代表部分客戶就這些併購機會進行運作，並以那種方式去市場上推進？只是想把這點釐清。

No. So when we think about some of the kind of ROFOs we have in place, it is they get a first look at some of these opportunities, and they get to kind of say if they want them or not for the opportunities. But as we think about kind of the subset of tenants, I mean, in my mind, like 6-plus tenants we're very, very close with. There's not that many in the grand scheme of things.

不是。所以當我們談到我們已建立的一些類似優先承購權（ROFO）安排時，意思是他們可以優先看一些這類機會，並且可以大致表態是否想要這些機會。但當我們想到那一小部分租戶時，我的意思是，在我看來大概有 6 個以上我們關係非常、非常密切的租戶。放在整體的大局來看，其實沒有那麼多。

But a lot of kind of these opportunities, Mark, it's still very similar. We're not going in blind. We're going in with two to three people in mind, and we get responses from them within days, not weeks or longer, and we kind of know what people are looking for. We have a very active dialogue. And so as we look at M&A opportunities, we're able to understand what tenants might have interest in that.

但很多這類機會，Mark，其實仍然非常類似。我們不是盲目進場。我們是帶著兩到三個潛在對象的想法進場，而且我們在幾天內就能收到他們的回覆，而不是幾週或更久；我們也大致知道大家在找什麼。我們有非常頻繁的對話。因此，當我們看併購（M&A）機會時，我們能夠理解哪些租戶可能對此有興趣。

Is it a real demand signal, and we know exactly the criteria that matter to them. And so overall, feel very good on the demand side of the equation and now finding the right opportunities that we can execute on well that is good kind of dedication of bandwidth and resources and the economic structures work as well.

這是一個真實的需求訊號，而且我們清楚知道對他們而言哪些條件最重要。因此整體而言，在需求端我們感覺非常良好；接下來就是找到合適的機會，我們能夠有效執行，並且在投入時間、人力與資源的配置上是值得的，同時經濟結構也能成立。

And so from M&A, I think a lot of kind of how historically those opportunities would have worked is and that's why we didn't really do much of it is you would have to take kind of a directional bet that you believe that it would work. And when we think about taking that directional bet, we're much more comfortable with greenfield because the cost basis is so much lower.

所以就併購（M&A）而言，我認為過去歷史上這些機會通常的運作方式是——也正因如此我們以前其實沒做太多——你必須做一個方向性的押注，相信它會成功。而當我們想到要做這種方向性押注時，相較之下我們對綠地（greenfield）更有信心，因為成本基礎低得多。

But two things have changed in the recent kind of year, one, one and a half years. One is that we are actually able to get that demand signal. And we have to put capital at risk, we think we can align that commitment from the tenant with the capital at risk. So we're not actually putting any capital at risk.

但在最近大約一年到一年半之間，有兩件事改變了。第一是我們其實能夠取得那個需求訊號。而且即便我們必須承擔資本風險，我們也認為可以把租戶的承諾與我們承擔的資本風險對齊。所以我們其實並沒有承擔任何資本風險。

And two is we actually have many more developers that say, you know what, Hut 8 is a proven and trusted brand, and we believe in your ability to execute. So we're actually willing to take backend economics on you executing rather than you having to put up the development capital, and they also know how we operate and it's kind of off the table if they're expecting a big payday without us actually commercializing anything.

第二是，實際上有更多開發商會說：你知道嗎，Hut 8 是一個被驗證且值得信賴的品牌，我們相信你們的執行能力。因此，他們其實願意把後端經濟利益押在你們的執行上，而不是要求你們先拿出開發資本；同時他們也知道我們的運作方式——如果他們期待在我們尚未把任何東西商業化之前就拿到一大筆回報，那基本上是不可能的。

Joe Vafi, Canaccord.

Joe Vafi，Canaccord。

Brian Dobson, Clear Street Equity Research.

Brian Dobson，Clear Street Equity Research。

So at the risk of beating a dead horse regarding this statement from Governor Abbott, do you think that this might help wash out some of the weaker players in the queue for ERCOT and favor some of the more established players like yourself?

冒著老生常談、反覆追問州長 Abbott 這段話的風險，你認為這是否可能有助於淘汰在 ERCOT 排隊中的一些較弱玩家，並讓像你們這樣更成熟的玩家受益？

I think a lot of these different initiatives are doing exactly that. right? As we -- like speaking about kind of the M&A piece, we have so much noise out there. And we're Hut 8. We're not even ERCOT getting all of these requests to get submissions and approvals.

我認為很多這些不同的倡議正是在做這件事，對吧？就像我們在談併購（M&A）那一塊，我們看到外面有太多雜訊。而我們是 Hut 8。我們甚至不是 ERCOT，卻也收到所有這些要求我們提交資料、取得核准的請求。

And I think a lot of that noise scares people, right, because the true numbers of development are not actually the numbers that these utilities are getting. Those are a lot of people kind of speculatively spending tens of thousand dollars putting an interconnection and putting a land option and say, all right, I'm going to try to go sell this to the likes of a Hut 8.

我認為很多那種雜訊會嚇到人，對吧？因為真正的開發數量其實並不是這些公用事業單位所收到的那些數字。那裡面有很多人只是投機性地花了幾萬美元去申請併網、取得土地選擇權，然後說：好，我要試著把這個賣給像 Hut 8 這樣的公司。

And so I think it does clear up a lot of the noise within the system. And when you think about development, like it increases the muscles of how do you develop. Well, I think at the end of the day, it is important that as we invest into these facilities and they generate great cash, those campuses are great partners within the communities that they operate within. And this kind of mindset, I think, like runs pretty deep within the culture of the company.

所以我認為這確實能清除系統中的大量雜訊。而當你想到開發時，這會提升「如何開發」的能力與肌肉。但我認為歸根結底，重要的是：當我們投資這些設施、它們產生很好的現金流時，這些園區也要成為其所營運社區中的良好夥伴。而我認為這種思維在公司的文化中其實根植得相當深。

The first site that we ever built and started was actually a former DuPont Sodium smelter in Niagara Falls, New York. There was a 50-megawatt substation there. It was a brownfield campus. We went in and we retrofitted that site and turned it into a bitcoin mine. But when we built those, a lot of the people we hired, their parents and their grandparents worked in this DuPont factory.

我們曾經建造並啟動的第一個場址，其實是位於紐約州尼加拉瀑布的一座前杜邦（DuPont）鈉冶煉廠。那裡有一座 50 兆瓦的變電站。那是一個棕地（brownfield）園區。我們進去後對該場址進行改造翻新，把它變成一座比特幣礦場。但當我們建造那些設施時，我們雇用的很多人，他們的父母與祖父母都曾在這家杜邦工廠工作。

And like that factory was kind of a core impact to that community, and it really, really made a profound impact on the people within that community. And so I think as we develop these large infrastructure assets in these data centers, it's really important to think about the impact on the communities and how do we make sure we're building alongside those.

而那座工廠曾經是那個社區的核心支柱，對社區裡的人造成非常、非常深遠的影響。因此我認為，當我們在這些資料中心開發大型基礎設施資產時，思考對社區的影響非常重要，以及我們要如何確保與社區一起建設、共同成長。

And I think a lot of the companies that are willing to invest into thinking in that way and invest into the time into talking with these communities are usually kind of platforms that are more robust, that have more scale, right?

而我認為，願意以這種方式投入思考、並投入時間與這些社區溝通的公司，通常是更強健的平台，規模也更大，對吧？

If we think about where we were five years ago when we were a much smaller development shop, we didn't necessarily have the resources to do all of those things. And today, we do. And so I think some of the stuff that's coming out will kind of make it better for folks who have a more robust development ability. But I think everybody will have to navigate through kind of these different processes as they kind of become more mature.

如果我們回想五年前，當時我們是一家規模小得多的開發團隊，我們未必有資源去做所有那些事情。而今天，我們有了。因此我認為，近期出現的一些措施，可能會讓那些具備更強健開發能力的人更有利。但我認為每個人都必須在這些流程逐漸成熟的過程中，去適應並穿越各種不同的程序。

Yes. And if I may, just one follow-up. There's some concern in the broader market about CapEx spending from the hyperscalers. Is there anything in your conversations that would lead you to believe that they're taking the foot off the gas in terms of data center development?

是的。如果可以的話，我再追問一個問題。更廣泛的市場對超大規模業者（hyperscalers）的資本支出（CapEx）有所擔憂。在你們的對話中，有沒有任何跡象讓你相信他們在資料中心開發方面正在放慢腳步？

Demand is robust from all the conversations we've had. Demand is real, demand is there. Everyone wants capacity yesterday as has been the story for the last two years since we have really kind of dove deep into these relationships. I mean I'm out of the office most weeks, meeting with tenants, showing campuses that we have and so forth.

從我們所有的對話來看，需求非常強勁。需求是真實的，需求就在那裡。如同過去兩年的情況一樣，自從我們真正深入經營這些關係以來，每個人都希望「昨天就要有」產能。我的意思是，我大多數週都不在辦公室，去和租戶會面、帶他們看我們的園區等等。

Demand is robust. And I think part of that is because -- and Sean mentioned this similar to the kind of the financing side of the equation, we've built more reputation, more trust. And so frankly, I'm not sure if demand is more robust now than it was 10 years ago. But for Hut 8, it definitely is. And so I think there's a little bit of bias in these perspectives because I think we've built more kind of reputational credibility alongside tenants, financing counterparties and so forth.

需求強勁。我認為其中一部分原因是——Sean 也提到，類似於融資端的那一面，我們建立了更多聲譽與信任。所以坦白說，我不確定現在的需求是否比 10 年前更強。但對 Hut 8 而言，確實是。因此我認為這些觀點多少帶有一點偏差，因為我覺得我們在租戶、融資交易對手等方面，建立了更多的聲譽可信度。

And today, we're kind of right in the center fold of all of this and see it firsthanded. And from our perspective today, demand is real, demand is there. Every tenant will ebb and flow in terms of their demand, right? Some folks, they'll have a lot of capacity. Their CFO will say, Hey, let's pause for a second. We'll pause for a month or two, and then it turns back up. And we've seen that same story happen across the last two years. But overall, as kind of a market, we're seeing robust demand. We're seeing anyone who's paused turn back on and kind of that cycle ebb and flow.

而今天，我們正處於這一切的核心位置，並且第一手看見。以我們目前的角度來看，需求是真實的，需求確實存在。每個租戶的需求都會有起伏，對吧？有些客戶會有很多產能。他們的 CFO 會說，嘿，我們先暫停一下。我們會暫停一兩個月，然後又會回升。而我們在過去兩年也看到同樣的情況反覆發生。但整體而言，作為一個市場，我們看到的是強勁的需求。我們看到任何曾暫停的客戶都會重新啟動，呈現那種週期性的起伏。

Patrick Moley, Piper Sandler.

Patrick Moley，Piper Sandler。

This is Will Cox on for Patrick Moley. Specifically, as it relates to your gigawatt diligence agreement with Anthropic, could you give us an update on your talks and relationship with the company and then where this sits on your list of priorities relative to maybe the 50 megawatts under development, River Bend expansion or the movement of any number of megawatts into development from exclusivity or diligence?

我是代 Patrick Moley 發言的 Will Cox。具體來說，關於你們與 Anthropic 的吉瓦級盡職調查協議，能否更新一下你們與該公司的洽談與合作關係進展？以及相較於可能正在開發的 50 兆瓦、River Bend 擴建，或將若干兆瓦從獨家或盡職調查階段轉入開發階段，這件事在你們的優先順序中排在什麼位置？

Thanks for the question. Anthropic is a great kind of example of a customer that needs a lot of demand and capacity to fulfill their needs. And so we work very closely with them, have a good relation with them. Obviously, we're building the campus in River Bend for them.

謝謝你的提問。Anthropic 是一個很好的例子，代表需要大量需求與產能來滿足其需求的客戶。因此我們與他們非常密切合作，並且與他們維持良好關係。顯然，我們正在為他們在 River Bend 建設園區。

And so overall, look to continue to work and expand with them as well. But we feel very good with the relationship that we built with them and have some kind of down the fairway opportunities that we're in discussions with them and have some more novel fun opportunities that we're in discussion with them as well.

因此整體而言，我們也希望持續與他們合作並擴大合作。不過我們對與他們建立的關係感到非常滿意；我們也正在與他們討論一些相對順理成章的機會，同時也在討論一些更新穎、有趣的機會。

Chris Brendler, Rosenblatt Securities.

Chris Brendler，Rosenblatt Securities。

Congrats on all the progress. A quick question unrelated to the data center business. Can you give us an update on your ownership and current position in American bitcoin, just given some of the developments there? And then how you're thinking about your still very large bitcoin stack. Any changes in your thought process on holding a lot of bitcoin on your balance sheet?

恭喜你們取得所有進展。一個與資料中心業務無關的快問。鑑於那邊的一些發展，能否更新一下你們在 American bitcoin 的持股與目前部位？以及你們如何看待仍然非常龐大的比特幣持倉。你們對於在資產負債表上持有大量比特幣的想法，有任何改變嗎？

Thanks for the question, Chris. We own roughly around 54% of American bitcoin today. American bitcoin just had their earnings yesterday, and they had a really great operating year, most amount of bitcoin that was ever mined, even though bitcoin was down. I think bitcoin is down double digits over the last, call it, one or two quarters and margins only decreased single-digit percentage points, still roughly around 50% gross margins.

謝謝你的提問，Chris。我們目前大約持有 American bitcoin 54% 的股權。American bitcoin 昨天剛公布財報，他們的營運年度表現非常出色，挖出的比特幣數量創下歷史新高，儘管比特幣價格下跌。我認為比特幣在過去一到兩個季度下跌了兩位數百分比，而利潤率只下降了個位數的百分點，毛利率仍約在 50% 左右。

And so overall, the operating business is strong and stronger than it's ever been. Overall market sentiment and liquidity in bitcoin is obviously not. And so the stock price hasn't done as well. I actually think for a lot of the analysts on the call here today, when they first joined the Hut 8 story after the merger about two years ago, American bitcoin is in a really similar spot, right? The underlying business is actually strong.

因此整體而言，營運業務很強，而且比以往任何時候都更強。但整體市場對比特幣的情緒與流動性顯然不是。因此股價表現沒有那麼好。我其實認為，對於今天在電話會議上的許多分析師而言，當你們在大約兩年前合併後首次加入 Hut 8 的故事時，American bitcoin 也處在非常相似的位置，對吧？其實基本面業務是強的。

There's a lot less attention and the market just isn't there. And so I think overall, as we're thinking about the opportunity, everything from an operational perspective is continue to operate. I kind of shared this, tweeted the other day that the markets are a weighing game in the long term and the voting game in the short term. And all you can control is how well you build the business to be really, really heavy and kind of create a lot of intrinsic value.

只是關注度低很多，市場也不在那裡。因此整體而言，當我們思考這個機會時，從營運角度來看，一切都會持續運作。我前幾天也分享過、在推特上發了一則：長期來看市場是「秤重」的遊戲，短期來看是「投票」的遊戲。而你能控制的只有你把業務打造得多好，讓它變得非常「重」，並創造大量內在價值。

And so overall, business is strong there. As we think about Hut 8's balance sheet, I think, obviously, as we continue to grow and continue to become an energy infrastructure company, bitcoin is a nice asset to have on the balance sheet.

因此整體而言，那邊的業務很強。至於 Hut 8 的資產負債表，我認為，顯然，隨著我們持續成長並逐步成為一家能源基礎設施公司，比特幣作為資產負債表上的資產是很不錯的。

If there's opportunistic moments where we would sell that bitcoin and fund different initiatives, we will. Those opportunities haven't come up yet. We've been able to finance these projects, and we've been able to not have to raise equity in recent time in order to do any of that stuff. But bitcoin on Hut 8's balance sheet is just like another asset, just like cash, we view it. There's no need to hold it on our balance sheet. And then our -- all of our exposure on bitcoin will be through American bitcoin.

如果出現機會性時點，我們會出售那些比特幣並為不同的計畫提供資金，我們會這麼做。但這些機會目前還沒有出現。我們已經能夠為這些專案融資，而且近期也不需要為了做這些事情而增發股權。但 Hut 8 資產負債表上的比特幣就像另一種資產，就像現金一樣，我們是這樣看待的。沒有必要一定要把它留在我們的資產負債表上。而且我們——我們所有對比特幣的曝險都會透過 American bitcoin 來承擔。

Nick Giles, B. Riley Securities.

Nick Giles，B. Riley Securities。

There's a lot of dialogue around upward pressure on build costs. And so I was curious how much of your CapEx is already secured on your contracted capacity? Or are there any further contracts to negotiate with your suppliers? And then can you just speak to how your procurement strategy has shifted as supply chains tightened?

市場上有很多討論都在談建造成本的上行壓力。因此我想了解，你們在已簽約的產能上，有多少資本支出（CapEx）已經鎖定？或者你們是否還需要與供應商進一步談判任何合約？另外，供應鏈趨緊之後，你們的採購策略有什麼調整？

Thanks for the question. All Building 1 and build -- sorry, the first two buildings, so the first building in each campus are fully contracted, 100% of long lead time items are contracted, GC, subcontractors, pricing is fixed, and that aligns with obviously the financing that we've done.

謝謝你的提問。所有第 1 棟以及建造——抱歉，前兩棟建築，也就是每個園區的第一棟建築，都已完全簽約；所有長交期項目 100% 都已簽約；總承包商（GC）、分包商、價格都已固定，並且這也與我們已完成的融資相匹配。

Building 2 was cheaper than Building 1. And now as we're finalizing Building 3, we expect it to be cheaper than building 2. And so for us, interestingly enough, I think we just continue to push like what we believe is possible. I think these things can be built way more efficiently, whether it be from a design, construction, supply chain perspective, we're using obviously some of the best vendors in the world.

第 2 棟的成本比第 1 棟更低。而現在我們在敲定第 3 棟時，預期它會比第 2 棟更便宜。因此對我們而言，有趣的是，我認為我們只是持續推進我們相信可達成的可能性。我認為這些設施可以建得更有效率，不論是從設計、施工或供應鏈角度；我們顯然也在使用一些全球最頂尖的供應商。

And then from a kind of allocation of capacity, we focus on building partnerships, not on just one-off purchases. And as a result, we actually haven't seen a big impact when it comes to lead times, capacity and allocation and queues. At the end of the day, it's all kind of preference and priority. And with majority of suppliers that we work with, I mean, I'm directly connected at the CEO level with all of these companies. And like companies that we don't believe we can build a deep relationship with, we don't engage deeply with.

另外，在產能配置方面，我們專注於建立合作夥伴關係，而不是一次性的採購。因此在交期、產能與配額、排隊等方面，我們其實沒有看到很大的影響。歸根結底，這一切都取決於偏好與優先順序。而對於我們合作的大多數供應商，我的意思是，我與這些公司的 CEO 層級都有直接連結。而對於我們認為無法建立深度關係的公司，我們也不會深入合作。

But we're talking about multinational companies that are all very, very excited by what we're doing. And the way we're thinking about innovation as well. It's not just we're buying equipment for this campus. We're talking about, hey, how do we push the frontier of how do we think about these developments? How do we think about integrating all of your equipment into a skidded design?

但我們談的是跨國公司，他們都對我們正在做的事情感到非常、非常興奮。以及我們對創新的思考方式。這不只是我們在為這個園區購買設備。我們談的是，嘿，我們要如何推動前沿，去思考這些發展？我們要如何思考把你們所有的設備整合進一個撬裝式（skidded）設計中？

So overall, I know there's kind of this talk and this noise around supply chain and costs. But at Hut, we're hyper focused on being able to drive those down and build more efficiently. That's kind of core. And so when we think about what it takes to be successful, we obviously need amazing financing. We've talked a lot about that today and continue to challenge what we do and continue to improve on structuring and terms, but we do the same exact thing on the other side of the house from an operations design, procurement perspective.

總體而言，我知道市場上對供應鏈和成本有各種討論與雜音。但在 Hut，我們高度聚焦於能夠把這些壓低並更有效率地建置。這是核心。因此，當我們思考成功所需的條件時，我們顯然需要出色的融資。我們今天已經談了很多，並且會持續挑戰我們的做法、持續改進架構與條款；但在營運端——從作業設計與採購的角度——我們也做完全同樣的事情。

And so this goes more overall to the kind of the thesis and principles and values in which we operate. But as of today, we're looking to continue to improve on the builds and the cost of this infrastructure. We want to improve on time to build, we want to improve on cost to build, building after building.

因此，這更廣泛地回到我們運作所依循的論點、原則與價值觀。但截至今天，我們希望持續改善建置以及這套基礎設施的成本。我們想縮短建置時間、降低建置成本，一棟接著一棟地持續優化。

Allen Klee, Maxim Group.

Allen Klee，Maxim Group。

On a site level basis for the Digital Infrastructure segment, as the leases fully scale up, how do you think about gross margins and adjusted EBITDA margins?

就數位基礎設施（Digital Infrastructure）部門而言，以單一場址為基礎，當租約完全放量後，你們如何看待毛利率與調整後 EBITDA 利潤率？

You'll see those increase. And so Sean will share some of the numbers as well on a net debt basis. But if we look -- think about the -- about roughly $27 billion of contracted revenue, that's about $1.7 billion per year of cash flow that comes in.

你會看到那些會上升。Sean 也會就淨負債的角度分享一些數字。但如果我們看——想想——大約 270 億美元的已簽約收入，這大約相當於每年 17 億美元流入的現金流。

And because these are triple net leases, all the costs in running those facilities are actually passed through to the tenants, right? And so the majority of that $1.75 billion drops to the bottom line. That's why we showed kind of a 99% NOI margin. And so really, your cost on that capital is just servicing principal and interest on the bonds that we have outstanding. Sean, anything to add there?

而且因為這些是三重淨租約（triple net leases），營運這些設施的所有成本實際上都會轉嫁給承租人，對吧？因此，那 17.5 億美元中的大部分會直接落到最終利潤。這就是為什麼我們展示了約 99% 的 NOI 利潤率。所以，真正與那筆資本相關的成本，就只是償付我們未償債券的本金與利息。Sean，還有什麼要補充的嗎？

No, I think that's right, right? If you think about the actual margins on the project, we've had 99%, 100% basically margins on the projects. And if you look at -- that's going to be kind of consistent going forward as long as we have triple net leases. I think we're going to stay away from guidance for the future years. But the other thing I would say is we're going to continue to have a very keen eye towards what our SG&A is and making sure that we're investing in maintenance and -- or excuse me, growth and not just maintenance.

沒有，我認為是這樣，對吧？如果你看專案的實際利潤率，我們基本上在專案上有 99%、100% 的利潤率。而且如果你看——只要我們維持三重淨租約，未來大致也會保持一致。我想我們會避免對未來年度提供指引。但我還想說的是，我們會持續非常密切地關注我們的 SG&A，並確保我們是在投資於成長與——或更正——成長，而不只是維護。

As Asher says a lot, we could run the existing company with a lot fewer people, a lot fewer expenses. And so we're very -- we're going to maintain a keen eye on that and make sure that we don't have, as Asher mentioned before, SG&A creep. And so as you think about overall margins for the company, it's something we're very focused on, both at the lease level and at the corporate level.

正如 Asher 常說的，我們其實可以用更少的人、更少的費用來營運現有公司。因此，我們會——會持續密切關注這點，並確保不會出現 Asher 先前提到的 SG&A 膨脹。所以，當你思考公司整體利潤率時，這是我們非常聚焦的事情，無論是在租約層級或公司層級。

And when we think about -- I mean, when I look out into the office we have here today, the majority of people in the office know that their job is for net new growth. If the job was, let's run this public company, let's run these three buildings and data center leases that we've announced, we can have significantly less people because more than 50% of the people out here are focused on net new growth and not kind of keeping the lights on.

而當我們思考——我的意思是，當我看向我們今天這裡的辦公室，多數人在辦公室裡都知道他們的工作是為了淨新增成長（net new growth）。如果工作只是：把這家上市公司運作好、把我們已宣布的這三棟建築與資料中心租約運作好，我們可以用顯著更少的人，因為在場超過 50% 的人是專注於淨新增成長，而不是只是維持基本運作。

And that's really, really important. And so look, I think from a cash flow perspective, it's relatively easier to model. You guys know what kind of the lease economics are. The two bonds that we've announced, you kind of can look at what those amortization schedules are on those bonds as well and then you take a prediction on SG&A and that kind of gets to you net cash flow.

這真的、真的很重要。所以你看，我認為從現金流的角度來看，相對比較容易建模。你們知道租約經濟條款大概是什麼樣子。我們已宣布的兩筆債券，你們也可以看看那些債券的攤還時程，然後再對 SG&A 做個預估，這樣就能推導出淨現金流。

And this concludes our question-and-answer session and our call today. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.

以上為我們的問答環節以及今天的電話會議內容。感謝各位參與。您現在可以掛線。