Vistra Corp. (VST) 2026 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Good day, and welcome to the Vistra Corp second quarter 2026 results conference call. (Operator Instructions) Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Eric Micek, VP of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

各位好，歡迎參加 Vistra Corp 2026 年第二季財報電話會議。(接線員指示) 請注意，本活動將被錄音。現在我想把會議交給投資人關係副總裁 Eric Micek。請開始。

Good morning and thank you for joining Vistra's investor webcast discussing our second quarter 2026 results. Our discussion today is being broadcast live from the Investor Relations section of our website at www.vistracorp.com. There, you can also find copies of today's investor presentation and earnings release. Providing our prepared remarks today are Jim Burke, Vistra's President and Chief Executive Officer; and Kris Moldovan, Vistra's Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Other senior Vistra's executives will be available to address questions during the second part of today's call as necessary.

各位早安，感謝您加入 Vistra 的投資人網路直播，一同討論我們 2026 年第二季的業績。我們今天的討論將透過 www.vistracorp.com 網站「投資人關係」專區進行即時直播。您也可在該處取得今日的投資人簡報與財報新聞稿。今天的預先準備發言將由 Vistra 總裁兼執行長 Jim Burke，以及 Vistra 執行副總裁兼財務長 Kris Moldovan 進行。視需要，Vistra 其他資深主管也將在今日電話會議的第二部分回答提問。

Our earnings release, presentation and other matters discussed on the call today include references to certain non-GAAP financial measures. All references to adjusted EBITDA and adjusted free cash flow before growth throughout this presentation refer to ongoing operations adjusted EBITDA and ongoing operations adjusted free cash flow before growth. Reconciliations to the most directly comparable GAAP measures are provided in the earnings release and in the appendix to the investor presentation available in the Investor Relations section of Vistra's website.

我們的財報新聞稿、簡報以及今天電話會議中討論的其他事項，包含對若干非 GAAP 財務衡量指標的引用。本簡報中所有對調整後 EBITDA 與成長前調整後自由現金流的提及，均指持續營運之調整後 EBITDA 與持續營運之成長前調整後自由現金流。與最直接可比的 GAAP 指標之調節表，已載於財報新聞稿以及投資人簡報附錄中，並可於 Vistra 網站的投資人關係專區取得。

Also, today's discussion contains forward-looking statements, which are based on assumptions we believe to be reasonable only as of today's date. Such forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or implied. We assume no obligation to update our forward-looking statements.

此外，今天的討論包含前瞻性陳述，該等陳述係基於我們截至今日認為合理的假設。此類前瞻性陳述受若干風險與不確定性影響，可能導致實際結果與所預測或暗示者有重大差異。我們不承擔更新前瞻性陳述之任何義務。

I encourage all listeners to review the safe harbor statements included on slide 2 of the investor presentation on our website that explain the risks of forward-looking statements, the limitations of certain industry and market data included in the presentation and the use of non-GAAP financial measures.

我鼓勵所有聽眾查閱我們網站投資人簡報第 2 頁所載的安全港聲明，其中說明前瞻性陳述的風險、簡報中所含特定產業與市場資料的限制，以及非 GAAP 財務衡量指標的使用。

I will now turn the call over to our President and CEO, Jim Burke.

現在我把電話會議交給我們的總裁兼執行長 Jim Burke。

Thank you, Eric. Good morning and thank you all for joining us today to discuss our second quarter 2026 results. We remain on track to achieve another record result in 2026 as the business continues to perform very well. Within the geographies we serve, we are observing a structurally improved demand environment with both PJM and ERCOT hitting new all-time summer peak loads in July. This recent experience reinforces our focus on operational excellence, delivering power to our customers in a reliable and safe manner when it's needed most.

謝謝你，Eric。各位早安，感謝大家今天加入我們，一同討論 2026 年第二季的業績。隨著業務持續表現非常出色，我們仍按計畫在 2026 年再創紀錄佳績。在我們服務的地區，我們觀察到需求環境出現結構性改善，PJM 與 ERCOT 均於 7 月創下歷史新高的夏季尖峰負載。近期經驗再次強化我們對營運卓越的專注：在最需要的時刻，以可靠且安全的方式向客戶供電。

Data center development activity remains strong, and we continue to be in active negotiations with large load customers as they seek to meet their power needs, both in the short- and long-term planning horizons. With our large, diversified and flexible fleet, our development capabilities, innovative retail franchise and experienced commercial team, we believe Vistra is well positioned to deliver on these opportunities.

資料中心開發活動仍然強勁，我們也持續與大型負載客戶積極洽談，協助其滿足短期與長期規劃視角下的用電需求。憑藉我們規模龐大、多元且具彈性的機組組合、開發能力、創新的零售事業平台以及經驗豐富的商務團隊，我們相信 Vistra 已具備良好條件把握這些機會。

The activity level we see today reinforces our view that the long-term expected improvement in power market fundamentals is underway, and we remain excited about the growth opportunities ahead. Turning to slide 5. The team has worked hard across the business, building on the first quarter momentum to deliver strong first half results for the company. We achieved second quarter adjusted EBITDA of nearly $1.8 billion compared to second quarter 2025 of approximately $1.35 billion, representing an over 30% increase year-over-year.

我們目前看到的活動水準，強化了我們的看法：電力市場基本面長期預期的改善已在進行中，我們對未來的成長機會仍感到振奮。請看第 5 頁。團隊在全公司範圍內努力不懈，在第一季動能的基礎上，為公司交出上半年強勁的成果。我們第二季調整後 EBITDA 接近 18 億美元，相較 2025 年第二季約 13.5 億美元，年增超過 30%。

At the core of these results are the 7,000 team members across the organization whose close collaboration and consistent execution across generation, commercial and retail highlights the One Team culture that is central to our success and reflects the strength of the integrated business model.

這些成果的核心，是遍布全組織的 7,000 名團隊成員；他們在發電、商務與零售各領域緊密協作並持續落實執行，彰顯「One Team」文化—這是我們成功的關鍵，也反映整合式商業模式的強大。

Operationally, the team successfully completed our annual spring maintenance cycle, positioning the fleet for strong performance through the critical summer period. To provide some perspective, the nuclear fleet successfully completed planned refueling outages for three of our units, and our gas and coal fleet successfully completed 92 planned outages in preparation for the summer run. This preparation was evident during the recent heat waves in Texas and PJM, where we achieved commercial availability of over 97% across the entire fleet.

在營運方面，團隊順利完成年度春季維修週期，使機組群在關鍵夏季期間具備強勁的運轉表現。提供一些背景：核能機組成功完成其中三部機組的計畫性換料停機；燃氣與燃煤機組也成功完成 92 次計畫性停機檢修，為夏季運轉做好準備。這些準備在近期德州與 PJM 的熱浪期間充分展現，我們全機組群的商業可用率超過 97%。

Moving to the outlook. We are reaffirming the guidance ranges for 2026 adjusted EBITDA and adjusted free cash flow before growth and maintaining the range of potential 2027 adjusted EBITDA midpoint opportunities. Kris will cover this in more detail later. Finally, we are also pleased to announce our partnership with KKR, Nvidia and the Kuwait Investment Authority to be a founding investor in Helix Digital Infrastructure.

接著談展望。我們重申 2026 年調整後 EBITDA 與成長前調整後自由現金流的指引區間，並維持 2027 年調整後 EBITDA 中點潛在機會的區間。Kris 稍後會更詳細說明。最後，我們也很高興宣布與 KKR、Nvidia 以及科威特投資局合作，成為 Helix Digital Infrastructure 的創始投資人。

Helix will focus on combining power solutions for data centers with land and other digital infrastructure, creating a rack-to-grid one-stop shop solution that customers increasingly prefer. As part of this solution, the Helix platform will seek to leverage our deep expertise in power markets, our proven commercial track record and our generation capabilities to deliver tailored energy solutions.

Helix 將聚焦於把資料中心的電力解決方案與土地及其他數位基礎設施結合，打造客戶日益偏好的「從機櫃到電網」（rack-to-grid）一站式解決方案。作為該解決方案的一部分，Helix 平台將致力於運用我們在電力市場的深厚專業、經驗證的商務實績，以及發電能力，提供量身打造的能源解決方案。

Vistra's role will be twofold. First, as a founding investor, Vistra will commit up to $1 billion to be invested over time with any amount in excess of $500 million subject to the achievement of certain milestones. This aligns our participation in what we expect to be a leading digital infrastructure platform.

Vistra 的角色將有兩個面向。第一，作為創始投資人，Vistra 將承諾最高 10 億美元，並將隨時間逐步投入；其中超過 5 億美元的部分，須以達成特定里程碑為前提。這使我們得以參與我們預期將成為領先的數位基礎設施平台。

Second, Vistra will serve as the preferred power partner, allowing us to participate in Helix development projects either through contracted new build projects or through new contracts with existing assets. We believe this structure creates an additional avenue for growth and broadens our participation in a thoughtful manner as the digital economy expands.

第二，Vistra 將擔任優先電力合作夥伴，使我們得以透過簽約的新建專案，或透過既有資產的新合約，參與 Helix 的開發專案。我們相信，隨著數位經濟擴張，這樣的架構能創造額外的成長途徑，並以審慎的方式擴大我們的參與。

And importantly, we retain significant optionality to develop projects with Helix where it makes sense to do so while continuing to develop projects on our own as well. We are excited about the potential this platform brings to our company and look forward to working with the team to execute on this strategy.

而且重要的是，我們仍保有相當大的選擇權：在合理的情況下與 Helix 共同開發專案，同時也持續自行推進專案開發。我們對此平台為公司帶來的潛力感到振奮，並期待與團隊合作落實這項策略。

Turning to slide 6. As we have outlined on previous calls, we see a structurally improved demand environment in power markets that supports our long-term outlook. We believe annual load growth of at least 4% to 6% in ERCOT and 2% to 3% in PJM through 2030 remain reasonable estimates for these markets. In July, we've also seen new all-time peaks in load in both PJM and ERCOT with PJM hitting over 168 gigawatts and ERCOT hitting over 91 gigawatts.

請看第 6 頁。如同我們在先前電話會議所述，我們看到電力市場的需求環境出現結構性改善，支持我們的長期展望。我們認為，至 2030 年，ERCOT 年度負載成長至少 4% 至 6%，以及 PJM 年度負載成長 2% 至 3%，仍是對這些市場合理的估計。在 7 月，我們也看到 PJM 與 ERCOT 的負載雙雙創下歷史新高，其中 PJM 超過 168 吉瓦，ERCOT 超過 91 吉瓦。

While data centers will be an important driver of load, particularly in 2028 and beyond, we believe a significant component of this growth is from sources other than data centers. This includes industrial reshoring, increasing electrification, population growth, particularly in Texas and broader economic expansion.

雖然資料中心將是負載的重要驅動因素，特別是在 2028 年及之後，但我們認為這波成長中有相當一部分來自資料中心以外的來源。這包括製造業回流（reshoring）、電氣化程度提升、人口成長（尤其在德州），以及更廣泛的經濟擴張。

Importantly, despite the strong level of growth, the performance of power grids during these recent summer peaks demonstrates that the power grids in our key markets are able to meet this growing demand. As a diversified company with multiple forms of generation across the country, Vistra is well positioned to benefit from strengthening fundamentals across markets.

重要的是，儘管成長力道強勁，近期夏季尖峰期間電網的表現顯示，我們主要市場的電網有能力滿足這項持續成長的需求。作為一家在全國擁有多元發電型態的多元化公司，Vistra 已具備良好定位，可受惠於各市場基本面轉強。

Although recent demand trends, combined with strong weather have driven strength in PJM forward pricing, the power price environment in ERCOT has softened recently. We view this as normal with variability expected as load additions are lumpy and weather impacts can change year-to-year.

儘管近期需求趨勢加上強勁天候推動 PJM 遠期價格走強，ERCOT 的電價環境近期則有所轉弱。我們認為這屬正常現象，因為負載新增往往呈現不均勻（lumpy），且天候影響每年都可能不同，因此預期會有波動。

We believe long-term growth fundamentals remain on track across our key markets, and our team is committed to delivering on our strategy given this growing load environment. This quarter has demonstrated strong execution across our business.

我們相信，長期成長基本面在我們主要市場仍維持在正軌上；在負載成長的環境下，我們的團隊也致力於落實既定策略。本季展現了我們在各項業務上的強勁執行力。

Not to be left out of the discussion, we have been very active on many fronts related to the regulatory process and advocacy in our key markets. While there is still more to finalize, overall, we are encouraged by the direction of travel. I kept my opening remarks brief, recognizing that we will have an opportunity to provide our perspective on this topic in Q&A.

此外，在我們主要市場與監管流程及倡議相關的多個面向上，我們也一直非常積極。雖然仍有一些事項需要定案，但整體而言，我們對目前的發展方向感到鼓舞。我在開場致詞中刻意簡短，因為我們將在問答環節有機會就此議題分享觀點。

With that, I'll turn it over to Kris to provide more details on our second quarter results, our outlook and our capital allocation.

接下來我把時間交給 Kris，請他更詳細說明我們第二季的業績、展望以及資本配置。

Thank you, Jim. Turning to slide 8. Vistra delivered second quarter adjusted EBITDA of $1.767 billion, representing a more than 30% increase compared to the second quarter of 2025. This strong performance was driven by contributions across both our generation and retail segments, reflecting the benefits of our integrated business model and comprehensive hedging program. Our generation business delivered approximately $994 million of adjusted EBITDA in the quarter compared to approximately $593 million in the second quarter of 2025.

謝謝你，Jim。請看第 8 頁投影片。Vistra 第二季調整後 EBITDA 為 17.67 億美元，較 2025 年第二季增加超過 30%。這項強勁表現來自我們發電與零售兩大部門的共同貢獻，反映出整合式商業模式與全面避險計畫所帶來的效益。本季我們的發電業務貢獻約 9.94 億美元的調整後 EBITDA，相較於 2025 年第二季約 5.93 億美元。

The year-over-year improvement was primarily driven by favorable hedging activity, resulting in the company's average realized prices being approximately 5% higher on a per megawatt hour basis compared to the same quarter last year, higher capacity revenues in PJM, optimizing the run profile of our flexible gas generation assets to capture margin opportunities, the restart of Martin Lake Unit 1 and contributions from the assets acquired from Lotus in the third quarter of 2025.

年對年改善主要來自有利的避險操作，使公司平均實現價格以每兆瓦時為基準較去年同期高約 5%；此外還包括 PJM 較高的容量收入、透過最佳化我們具彈性的燃氣發電資產運轉曲線以掌握利差機會、Martin Lake 1 號機組重啟，以及 2025 年第三季自 Lotus 收購資產的貢獻。

Retail also had a strong quarter, contributing approximately $773 million of adjusted EBITDA compared to approximately $756 million in the second quarter of 2025. As a reminder, the second and fourth quarters are typically the strongest quarters for retail given seasonal timing of margins.

零售業務本季同樣表現強勁，貢獻約 7.73 億美元的調整後 EBITDA，較 2025 年第二季約 7.56 億美元增加。提醒一下，由於毛利的季節性時點因素，第二季與第四季通常是零售業務最強的季度。

Turning to slide 9. We are reaffirming our 2026 adjusted EBITDA guidance range of $6.8 billion to $7.6 billion and our adjusted free cash flow before growth guidance range of $3.925 billion to $4.725 billion. Given our performance through the first half of the year, we are confident in our ability to deliver at or above the midpoint of these ranges.

請看第 9 頁投影片。我們重申 2026 年調整後 EBITDA 指引區間為 68 億至 76 億美元，且成長前調整後自由現金流指引區間為 39.25 億至 47.25 億美元。鑑於我們上半年表現，我們有信心達成這些區間的中位數或更高水準。

Looking forward to 2027, current ERCOT forward curves are meaningfully lower than they were on October 31, 2025, which form the basis for the 2027 midpoint opportunity range we provided on our Q3 2025 earnings call. However, due to several offsetting factors, including higher prices in PJM, the support from our comprehensive hedging program and the downside protection afforded by the nuclear PTC, we are maintaining our 2027 adjusted EBITDA midpoint opportunity range of $7.4 billion to $7.8 billion.

展望 2027 年，目前 ERCOT 遠期曲線水準顯著低於 2025 年 10 月 31 日，而該日期的曲線是我們在 2025 年第三季法說會所提供之 2027 年中位數機會區間的基礎。然而，基於多項抵銷因素（包括 PJM 較高的價格、我們全面避險計畫的支撐，以及核能 PTC 所提供的下行保護），我們維持 2027 年調整後 EBITDA 中位數機會區間為 74 億至 78 億美元。

As a reminder, that range excludes any contribution from the pending acquisition of Cogentrix and the premium above market we expect to receive under the long-term power purchase agreements at our PJM nuclear sites with Meta.

提醒一下，該區間不包含尚待完成的 Cogentrix 收購案之任何貢獻，也不包含我們預期在 PJM 核能場址與 Meta 簽訂長期購電協議（PPA）下可取得的高於市場的溢價。

Finally, turning to slide 10. Our forecast indicates that we will generate more than $10 billion of available cash in 2026 and 2027. We have been opportunistic yet disciplined in allocating this available cash. We have allocated approximately $3 billion to our equity holders in 2026 and 2027 through share repurchases and common and preferred dividends. Notably, our share repurchase program continues to create significant value.

最後，請看第 10 頁投影片。我們的預測顯示，2026 年與 2027 年合計可產生超過 100 億美元的可用現金。我們在配置這些可用現金時，採取機會主義但仍保持紀律。我們已規劃在 2026 年與 2027 年透過庫藏股回購以及普通股與特別股股利，向股東配置約 30 億美元。值得注意的是，我們的庫藏股回購計畫持續創造顯著價值。

Since initiating the program in November 2021, we have retired approximately 171 million shares at an average cost of approximately $38 per share. We currently have approximately $1.2 billion of share repurchase authorization remaining, which we expect to exhaust no later than the end of 2027.

自 2021 年 11 月啟動該計畫以來，我們已以每股約 38 美元的平均成本註銷約 1.71 億股。目前我們尚有約 12 億美元的庫藏股回購授權餘額，預期最晚將於 2027 年底前用罄。

I am also pleased to report that with the amount of repurchases through August 3, we have returned over $6.5 billion to our shareholders through share repurchases since initiating the program in late 2021, well ahead of the target we communicated at that time of at least $6 billion through year-end 2026.

我也很高興報告，截至 8 月 3 日的回購金額顯示，自 2021 年底啟動計畫以來，我們已透過庫藏股回購向股東返還超過 65 億美元，遠早於當時對外溝通的目標：截至 2026 年底至少返還 60 億美元。

Pursuant to the opportunistic design of our 10b5-1 trading plan, our repurchase activity through July continued to run ahead of pro rata pace given the elevated free cash flow yield indicated by our share price. We will continue to evaluate our allocation to our shareholders with the flexibility to allocate additional cash to share repurchases in 2026 and/or 2027 should market conditions warrant.

依據我們 10b5-1 交易計畫的機會主義設計，截至 7 月的回購活動仍高於按比例（pro rata）的進度，因為股價所反映的自由現金流殖利率處於較高水準。若市場狀況需要，我們將持續評估對股東的配置，並保有在 2026 年及／或 2027 年將更多現金配置至庫藏股回購的彈性。

In addition to allocating significant amounts directly to our equity holders, we also expect to allocate approximately $4.5 billion to $5 billion to accretive growth investments, including the Cogentrix acquisition, the development of the Permian gas units, the PJM nuclear uprate supported by power purchase agreements with Meta, the development of the Oak Hill II solar facility supported by a power purchase agreement with a large investment-grade counterparty and now our capital commitment to Helix.

除了直接向股東配置大量資金外，我們也預期將配置約 45 億至 50 億美元於具增益性的成長投資，包括 Cogentrix 收購案、Permian 燃氣機組開發、在與 Meta 的購電協議支持下進行的 PJM 核能增容（uprate）、在與大型投資級對手方之購電協議支持下開發 Oak Hill II 太陽能設施，以及我們目前對 Helix 的資本承諾。

Although we cannot predict the amount or timing of any potential capital calls by Helix, we believe it is prudent to allocate a portion of our available cash to cover any such request. Even after these significant allocations directly to our equity holders and growth, we expect approximately $2 billion to $2.5 billion of additional cash available to allocate through year-end 2027.

雖然我們無法預測 Helix 任何潛在資本催繳（capital calls）的金額或時點，但我們認為，預留一部分可用現金以因應此類要求是審慎之舉。即使在對股東直接配置與成長投資做出這些重大配置之後，我們預期截至 2027 年底仍將有約 20 億至 25 億美元的額外現金可供配置。

As always, we will be disciplined in how we allocate this remaining capital, balancing return of capital to our shareholders, strategically investing in attractive organic and inorganic growth opportunities that meet our mid-teens levered return threshold and further strengthening our balance sheet. Speaking of the balance sheet, we have achieved investment-grade credit ratings from two of the major credit ratings agencies.

一如既往，我們將以紀律方式配置這些剩餘資本，在股東資本回饋、策略性投資於符合我們「槓桿後報酬率達十幾％」門檻的具吸引力之有機與無機成長機會，以及進一步強化資產負債表之間取得平衡。談到資產負債表，我們已獲兩家主要信用評等機構授予投資級信用評等。

However, we don't plan to stop there. Our long-term goal is to achieve mid-investment-grade credit ratings at all three major credit rating agencies. We believe we can achieve these ratings primarily through disciplined EBITDA growth, but we will also consider allocating some of our available capital to additional debt paydown as necessary or appropriate.

不過，我們不打算就此止步。我們的長期目標是在三大信用評等機構都取得中度投資級（mid-investment-grade）信用評等。我們相信主要可透過具紀律的 EBITDA 成長來達成這些評等，但也會視需要或適當性，考慮將部分可用資本配置於進一步償還債務。

We believe mid- investment-grade credit ratings would allow us to maintain financial flexibility to continue to opportunistically grow our business and would position us well for long-term value creation. In closing, we are pleased with our second quarter results and the momentum we have built through the first half of the year. We continue to see load growth materializing in our primary markets, and we believe our integrated business model positions us well to deliver significant value to our stakeholders.

我們相信，中等投資級信用評等將使我們得以維持財務彈性，持續把握機會性地擴張業務，並讓我們在創造長期價值方面具備良好定位。最後，我們對第二季的業績以及上半年所累積的動能感到滿意。我們持續看到主要市場的負載成長正在逐步實現，並相信我們的整合式商業模式能讓我們為利害關係人帶來顯著價值。

With that, operator, we're ready to open the line for questions.

那麼，接線員，我們準備開放電話線進行提問。

(Operator Instructions)

(接線員指示)

Shar Pourreza, Wells Fargo.

Shar Pourreza，富國銀行。

Hi, good morning, team. It's actually Constantine here for Shar. Appreciate the time today.

嗨，各位早安。其實今天是Constantine代替Shar發言。感謝今天撥冗。

Hey, Constantine. How are you doing?

嗨，Constantine。你最近如何？

Oh, not too bad. Good morning. I just wanted to get your view on Texas, the data center audits, potential delays in Batch Zero. Have there been any commercial or counterparty concerns that you've heard just from existing or potential customers. And as we kind of get through this uncertainty, especially with the curve impacts that we're seeing, is there any kind of pressure on near-term outlook and mitigation strategy for hedging, especially for '27, '28, portfolio is a little bit wide more open?

噢，還不錯。早安。我想請教你們對德州、資料中心稽核，以及Batch Zero可能延遲的看法。就你們所知，現有或潛在客戶那邊是否有任何商務面或交易對手方面的疑慮？另外，當我們度過這段不確定性、尤其是我們看到的曲線影響之際，近期展望是否面臨任何壓力？以及在避險的因應策略上是否有任何調整，特別是針對'27、'28，投資組合的曝險區間似乎更寬、更開放？

Yeah, sure. There's a lot there. I appreciate the question. Let me start by framing it first as we put out a load forecast a little over two years ago in May of 2024 with an expectation of 115 to 120 gigawatts of load in ERCOT in 2030. That's still what we're projecting.

好的，當然。這裡面涵蓋很多面向。謝謝你的提問。我先從背景說起：我們在2024年5月、也就是兩年多前，發布了一份負載預測，預期ERCOT在2030年的負載將達到1.15億至1.20億千瓦（115至120吉瓦）。這仍然是我們目前的預測。

So from a long-term fundamentals of the business, we haven't actually changed our forecast for ERCOT, even though the queues have certainly grown. And I think that's part of the challenge of what policymakers are balancing is I think the concerns around generation supply are overstated when you look at a lot of the media reporting.

因此，從業務的長期基本面來看，即使排隊佇列（queues）確實成長了，我們其實並未調整對ERCOT的預測。我認為政策制定者在權衡時的一部分挑戰在於：若你看許多媒體報導，對發電供給的擔憂被誇大了。

And I think the demand is overstated when you look at the interest that's being expressed in these queues. So policymakers are saying, we need better information to make decisions because they're going to prioritize reliability and affordability for customers, and we support that.

而且我也認為，若以這些佇列中所表達的興趣來看，需求同樣被高估了。因此政策制定者會說：我們需要更好的資訊來做決策，因為他們會優先考量客戶的可靠性與可負擔性，而我們支持這一點。

We fully support it. So I do think in the near term, I think the audit is going to probably pause some of the reviews for a couple of months. We don't know exactly the time frame. The key project that we have in our portfolio at Comanche Peak, we're looking to energize at the end of 2027.

我們完全支持。所以我確實認為，短期內稽核可能會讓部分審查暫停幾個月。我們不確定確切時間表。我們投資組合中的關鍵專案是在Comanche Peak，我們預計在2027年底送電（energize）。

We don't see that being affected at this point, and we support the conversation that the governor is wanting to have with the data center community to make sure that Texas does this right. So I don't think it's a concern in the intermediate and long-term. I think and we'll talk, I'm sure, at some point in the Q&A about the forward pricing but what you see right now is the grid has more supply on it. This load that we expect to hook up, we expected to hook up in the '27, '28 time frame.

目前我們看不出它會受到影響，而且我們也支持州長希望與資料中心社群進行對話，以確保德州把這件事做對。因此我不認為這會在中期與長期構成疑慮。我想我們在問答中某個時點也會談到遠期定價；但你現在看到的是，電網上有更多供給。我們預期要併網的這些負載，本來就預期會在'27、'28這個時間窗接入。

So 2026 being soft is not that big of a surprise to us. That's also why we do the comprehensive hedging that we do. So I'd like to see the queues culled at the end of the day, I think everybody, if we raise the criteria and raise the bar on what is being proposed from the data center load, an ERCOT queue that has at times been expressed as over 400 gigawatts.

所以2026年偏弱對我們來說並不算太意外。這也是我們進行全面性避險的原因。總之，我希望最終能把佇列「清理」一下；我想大家都一樣——如果我們提高資料中心負載提案的標準與門檻，ERCOT的佇列有時被說成超過400吉瓦。

We think is somewhere in the 12 to 15 gigawatts by 2030. So when you have numbers overstated by more than 20 times, it causes problems for policymakers. So we support the thinning of the queues and getting the better realistic decisions to make sure we can all move forward.

我們認為到2030年大概是在12到15吉瓦左右。當數字被高估超過20倍時，會讓政策制定者面臨問題。因此我們支持縮減佇列、取得更貼近現實的資訊，以確保大家都能向前推進並做出更務實的決策。

Excellent. I appreciate that. And then maybe just shifting to some of the commercial constructs. There's been multiple data points recently from peers around new projects, IRRs, pricing, margin expectations on existing gen. Do you have a view here? Should long-term contracting still focus on the new build cost kind of in that 90 range? Or is there room for clean premium speed to market, et cetera?

很好。謝謝你的說明。接著也許轉到一些商務合約架構。最近同業針對新專案、IRR、定價、以及既有機組的利潤率預期等，提供了多個資料點。你們這邊有什麼看法？長期合約是否仍應以新建成本、也就是大約90那個區間為基準？或者在潔淨溢價、上市速度（speed to market）等方面，還有上調空間？

Yeah, there's a big spread. Obviously, that's one of the ironies of this discussion, again, from a media standpoint. There's a view that power prices are too high. They need to come down. It depends on what you're measuring off of. Year-to-date, ERCOT wholesale prices have been $30 a megawatt hour. They were $30 a megawatt hour last year. 30 is not going to get new stuff built. That's part of the dilemma.

是的，差距很大。顯然，這也是這場討論的一個諷刺之處——同樣從媒體角度來看。有一種看法是電價太高，需要下降。但這取決於你用什麼作為衡量基準。今年以來，ERCOT批發電價是每兆瓦時30美元。去年也是每兆瓦時30美元。30美元是無法促成新建的。這就是困境的一部分。

I think even when we talk about PJM and talking about a cap on the RBP of $555, that might get some things built, but there's still a lot that may not get built if you're looking at that as a hard cap. Now there's a range with that $555. So some things can bid above it, if some things clear below that. But in our role as investors and also owner operators, the price of equipment, in some cases, has doubled, if not tripled. So what was an acceptable price to build at a year or two ago is no longer an acceptable price.

我認為即便我們談到PJM、並討論將RBP上限設在555美元，這或許能讓一些項目得以興建，但如果你把它視為硬性上限，仍可能有很多項目無法興建。當然，555美元之內其實有一個區間。因此若有些項目以低於該水準成交（clear），其他項目就可能可以出價高於它。但以我們作為投資人以及業主營運者的角度，設備價格在某些情況下已經翻倍，甚至三倍。所以一、兩年前可接受的建置價格，如今已不再可接受。

So I think the challenge is going to be from a contracting standpoint is when the customers, the large load customers they are in contracting with existing, and they are in contracting at a premium with existing because it's still a discount to what new build would require, whether you're doing it bilaterally or you expect to do it on your own. So as behind the meter or island.

因此我認為，合約面的挑戰會在於：客戶、也就是大型負載客戶，正在與既有資產簽約，而且是以溢價與既有資產簽約，因為相較於新建所需的成本，這仍然是折扣——不論你是採雙邊方式，或是預期自行建置。例如表後（behind the meter）或孤島式（island）方案。

So there's a big spread there. That's why I think our large baseload position; there's a big spread between what we're currently receiving in a day-ahead spot type market versus what new build looks like. So we still see that interest level from the customer base.

所以這裡面的價差很大。這也是為什麼我認為我們的大型基載部位很有利：我們目前在類似日前現貨市場所取得的價格，與新建的成本之間存在很大的差距。因此我們仍看到客戶端的高度興趣。

And I think you're going to see customers still contracting for new because there's areas of the country they want to be and they're looking for speed, and there's going to be customers that are contracting with existing. So our views on that have not changed. And as far as margins and premiums, our views on that haven't changed. I think the cost of new build has continued to tick up. If there's anything that's changed, that's kind of been where we've seen the pressure.

我認為你會看到客戶仍會為新建簽約，因為他們想在某些地區布局、並追求速度；同時也會有客戶選擇與既有資產簽約。所以我們對此的看法沒有改變。至於利潤率與溢價，我們的看法也沒有改變。我認為新建成本仍在持續上升。如果說有什麼改變，那就是我們看到壓力主要出現在這一塊。

And the preference for Vistra is still kind of the hybrid solution, so mix of new plus existing capacity for this sort of deal?

所以對 Vistra 的偏好仍然算是一種混合式解決方案，也就是在這類交易中結合新增與既有產能嗎？

Yeah, look, we have been a bit of an all of the above. It really is customer-driven. And some customers are going to put more of a preference on new and additionality. Others are going to look more for speed and where can they get hooked up.

是的，你看，我們一直以來有點採取「全方位」的做法。這確實是由客戶驅動的。有些客戶會更偏好新建與「新增性」（additionality）。另一些客戶則更看重速度，以及他們能在哪裡更快接入。

So colocation, for instance, can bring a speed advantage to hook up that even a new build, even if it were islanded might still take more time. So yes, we're going to be in all forms of that. We have to get a return that we think is attractive for our shareholders, but we have the capabilities to be in all of those solution sets, and I'd expect us to continue going forward.

例如，共址（colocation）在接入速度上可能具備優勢；即便是新建案，即使是獨立運行（islanded），可能仍需要更長時間。所以是的，我們會參與所有這些形式。我們必須取得我們認為對股東具吸引力的報酬，但我們有能力涵蓋所有這些解決方案組合，我也預期我們未來會持續推進。

Makes sense. No cookie cutter approach. Appreciate this time today. Thanks so much.

了解。沒有一體適用的制式做法。感謝今天撥冗。非常感謝。

Thank you. Thanks for the questions.

謝謝。謝謝你的提問。

Jeremy Tonet, JPMorgan.

摩根大通（JPMorgan）的 Jeremy Tonet。

Hi, good morning.

嗨，早安。

Hey, Jeremy.

嗨，Jeremy。

Interesting times across both PJM and ERCOT. I was just wondering, if you could talk about the relative dynamics between the two. And when you're looking to secure more contracts, I guess, how the conversation trend compares, contrast between the two?

PJM 和 ERCOT 兩邊都處在很有意思的時期。我想請你談談兩者之間相對的動態差異。以及當你們想要爭取更多合約時，我想了解兩邊的對話趨勢如何比較、對照？

Yeah, that's a great question. I'll start off, and I'm going to ask Stacey to comment since she is in the middle of these discussions on a daily basis. The two markets are starting in slightly different places. So as you know, with Texas, and you can see it in the forwards, you can see it in the real-time settles. The Texas market is just a lot less tight at the moment than the PJM market.

是的，這是個很好的問題。我先開頭，然後我會請 Stacey 補充，因為她每天都在這些討論的第一線。這兩個市場的起點略有不同。如你所知，以德州而言，你可以從遠期價格看到，也可以從即時結算看到。德州市場目前的緊俏程度遠低於 PJM 市場。

And what we have here is a situation where customers are just trying to get through the study processes. ERCOT took an approach to do a batch, sort of slow things down for a moment and then study as much as you can realistically at once to give clear guidance to people. Now that's going to pause for the reasons we just covered on the call for a few months, and but the approach is still the same.

我們目前看到的情況是，客戶主要是在努力通過研究（study）流程。ERCOT 採取了批次處理（batch）的方式，先讓進度放慢一下，然後盡可能一次性研究更多案子，以便給大家更明確的指引。基於我們剛才在電話會議中提到的原因，這個流程接下來幾個月會暫停，但整體方法仍然相同。

In PJM, there's still a process that's much more localized in terms of how the study process works. And obviously, even the criteria that's being used around some of the wires costs and whether there's minimum takes and credit and other things that are still not yet settled in ERCOT. So the markets are at different levels of maturity in terms of how different utilities are prioritizing the studies and the load, and we have to work with customers on that.

在 PJM，研究流程在運作上仍更偏向在地化。而且很明顯地，關於部分線路（wires）成本的判定標準、是否有最低承購量（minimum takes）、信用（credit）以及其他事項，在 ERCOT 仍尚未完全定案。因此，就不同公用事業如何優先安排研究與負載而言，兩個市場在成熟度上處於不同階段，而我們必須與客戶一起因應。

And of course, our assets would have some unique characteristics in each market. But since we're having conversations across both those major markets, I'm going to let Stacey provide more color on how she sees these developing.

當然，我們的資產在各市場也會有一些獨特特性。但既然我們同時在這兩個主要市場進行對話，我就讓 Stacey 更具體說明她如何看待這些發展。

Yeah, thanks, Jim, and thanks for the question, Jeremy. We continue to see a lot of interest in both PJM and ERCOT. We're in active discussions in both markets across multiple sites and both about our existing resources as well as new build. And both markets have their own share of regulatory uncertainty and things in flux.

好的，謝謝 Jim，也謝謝你的問題，Jeremy。我們在 PJM 與 ERCOT 都持續看到很高的興趣。我們在兩個市場、跨多個場址都有積極討論，涵蓋既有資源以及新建案。而兩個市場各自也都有一定程度的監管不確定性與變動中的事項。

So I think at this point in time, it really comes down more to where our individual customers looking to expand their presence. And each customer is a little bit different in that regard. They have their own zone type goals. And when they come to us, they kind of share with us where they're looking to locate their data centers, and we continue to see really high interest in both of our largest markets, ERCOT and PJM.

所以我認為在目前這個時間點，更關鍵的是我們的個別客戶想把他們的布局擴張到哪裡。每位客戶在這方面都略有不同。他們有各自的區域（zone）類型目標。當他們來找我們時，會與我們分享他們希望把資料中心設在哪些地點；而我們在兩個最大市場 ERCOT 與 PJM 都持續看到非常高的興趣。

And I'd say the regulatory uncertainty, of course, customers want more clarity. And as we move along, we're getting more clarity. We're seeing a lot of progress at FERC. As Jim started this -- the Q&A session off with, we're also supportive of Governor Abbott's attempt to kind of thin the queue and ensure responsible development. And you've seen customers come out in support of Governor Abbott's efforts.

至於監管不確定性，當然客戶希望有更清楚的資訊。而隨著進展，我們也正在獲得更多清晰度。我們看到 FERC 有很多進展。如同 Jim 在這段問答一開始提到的，我們也支持 Abbott 州長試圖「精簡排隊隊列」（thin the queue）並確保負責任開發的作法。你也看到客戶公開表態支持 Abbott 州長的努力。

So those are positives. Those are actually helping us move towards clarity. And at the same time, as we've seen with even the contracts we've executed to date, customers don't need perfect clarity in order to contract. You can find ways to deal with those risks through contractual provisions. And so they're not waiting on perfect clarity, but obviously, the more clarity, the better. So we continue to feel very optimistic about our opportunities in both PJM and ERCOT.

所以這些都是正面因素。這些其實正在幫助我們朝更清楚的方向前進。同時，從我們迄今已簽署的合約也可看出，客戶不需要「完美的清晰度」也能簽約。你可以透過合約條款來處理這些風險。因此他們不會等到完全明朗才行動，但當然越清楚越好。所以我們對於在 PJM 與 ERCOT 的機會仍然非常樂觀。

Got it. That's helpful. Thank you for that. And then dialing into PJM a little bit more. Just wondering, as PJM continues to evolve here and we step towards the RBP, wondering what Vistra's strategy would be here and the relative level of appeals here. And also how RBP compares to bilateral discussions if there's a preference one way or the other?

了解。這很有幫助。謝謝你的說明。接著更聚焦在 PJM。想請教，隨著 PJM 持續演進、我們逐步走向 RBP，想了解 Vistra 在這方面的策略會是什麼，以及上訴（appeals）的相對程度如何。另外，RBP 與雙邊（bilateral）討論相比如何？你們是否偏好其中一種？

Yeah. So I believe the bilateral discussion was something we've been supportive of even under current market conditions, unrelated to whether we're specifically talking about an RBP and the other framework around this IRAS, which I'm sure we'll talk about. Setting that aside, the bilateral conversation is something that we have real possibilities with customers. We have good sites. We have some opportunities to develop these with their interest.

好的。我認為，即使在目前的市場條件下，雙邊討論一直是我們所支持的方向，這與我們是否特別在談 RBP、以及圍繞 IRAS 的其他架構（我相信我們會談到）其實無關。先把那些放一邊，雙邊對話本身是我們與客戶之間確實存在可行性的事情。我們有不錯的場址。在客戶有興趣的情況下，我們有一些機會去開發這些案子。

Again, that has to meet their needs from a speed and a cost standpoint. So that's a willing buyer, willing seller marketplace. But any bilaterals, as you know, that get done that meet the hurdles could drop the required RBP procured amount. And ultimately, over time, I think if energy markets and bilaterals can continue to develop adequate returns, even less dependence on a capacity market, I think, would overall be helpful for clarity of what kind of returns people can expect in these various markets, including PJM. So we're active in those discussions.

同樣地，這必須在速度與成本面符合他們的需求。因此這是一個「願買願賣」的市場。但如你所知，任何達到門檻而完成的雙邊交易，都可能降低所需透過 RBP 採購的數量。而最終，隨著時間推進，我認為如果能源市場與雙邊交易能持續提供足夠的報酬，整體而言對容量市場的依賴就會降低；這將有助於更清楚地界定在各種市場（包括 PJM）中人們可以期待的報酬水準。所以我們也積極參與這些討論。

When we think about the RBP itself, there's realistically batteries, peakers, CCGTs that you could see bid into that depending on where people are with their cost of equipment and EPC and when they got some of that locked down, the $555, there's going to probably need to be a spread around that $555 a megawatt day for certain projects to work. And so there's going to be pressure there. I think the bilaterals you're going to see some pressure on that.

至於 RBP 本身，實際上你可能會看到電池儲能、尖峰機組（peakers）、CCGT（複循環燃氣機組）等資源參與投標，這取決於各家在設備成本、EPC（工程採購施工）以及何時把部分成本鎖定下來的情況；以 555 美元來看，對某些專案要能成立，可能需要在每兆瓦日 555 美元這個水準上下有一定的價差空間。因此那裡會有壓力。我認為在雙邊交易上，你也會看到一些壓力。

So that is, again, the conundrum of power markets today are still lower than where new build would require power markets to be to earn an adequate return. So whether that's going to come through the RBP or come through bilateral remains to be seen.

所以也就是說，再次強調，當今電力市場的難題在於，市場價格仍低於新建機組要能取得足夠報酬所需要達到的水準。至於這會透過 RBP 實現，或是透過雙邊合約實現，仍有待觀察。

Got it. That makes a lot of sense since you brought up IRAS. Maybe any thoughts you could share there, how you see things unfolding from this point?

了解。你提到 IRAS，這就很合理。也許你能分享一些想法，從現在開始你怎麼看後續會如何發展？

Yeah, I'm going to start off, and I'm going to turn it over to Stacey a lot of detail and tracking all of these dockets and how this is unfolding. I just would like to say that our discussions with customers have been evolving over the last two years, and we've mentioned this that large load customers are willing to be part of the solution. They're willing to offer some flexibility. Our DNA is a choice-based DNA.

好，我先開個頭，然後我會把很多細節交給 Stacey，她一直在追蹤這些案卷（dockets）以及事情如何演變。我只想說，我們與客戶的討論在過去兩年一直在演進；我們也提過，大型負載客戶願意成為解方的一部分。他們願意提供一些彈性。我們的 DNA 是以選擇為基礎的 DNA。

I mean we like customers to have incentives to be flexible, whether that's speeding them up in the interconnect cube, being able to ramp their load faster, maybe getting a discount on wires or capacity if they offered in DR. So we're much more of a carrot approach because certain customers are making investments to be flexible. They should be compensated for it in some form, either actually or with speed.

我的意思是，我們希望客戶有誘因去保持彈性，不論是讓他們在併網排隊（interconnect queue）中加速、能更快拉升其負載，或是如果他們願意參與需量反應（DR），就能在線路費或容量費上拿到折扣。所以我們更偏向「胡蘿蔔」的方式，因為有些客戶正在投資以提升彈性。他們應該以某種形式獲得補償，不管是實質補償或是以速度（加速）作為回報。

Some of these dockets, and we understand why go much more to a stick approach. And it effectively says if you don't do these things, you're at risk of disconnection. I think that's a much more blunt instrument. And I think this idea that you might actually be required to curtail before those that were paid to be curtailed -- that feels odd to me. That's not the way markets should clear.

有些案卷——我們也理解原因——更偏向「棍子」的方式。它基本上是在說，如果你不做這些事，你就有被斷線的風險。我認為那是一種更粗暴的工具。而且我覺得這種想法——你可能會被要求在那些「已收費用、同意被削減」的人之前先被削減——對我來說很奇怪。市場不應該用這種方式出清。

You should actually have a spectrum of benefits or attributes that customers are willing to be paid for. And I think we've got to work on this, and we're going to weigh in on this, as I'm sure many of the stakeholders in the process will weigh in. And it's not filed yet, so we don't know all the details. But obviously, there'll be a lot to unpack when it comes in. So I'm going to let Stacey add any comments to this.

你應該要有一個光譜，讓客戶可以針對他們願意提供的各種效益或屬性，獲得相應的報酬。我認為我們必須在這方面下功夫，我們也會就此提出意見；我相信流程中的許多利害關係人也會提出意見。而且目前還沒正式提交，所以我們不知道所有細節。但顯然，一旦提交進來，會有很多需要釐清與拆解的地方。所以我先讓 Stacey 補充任何評論。

Yeah, the only thing I would add really, I mean, I think Jim covered it well is we obviously have said for a long time, we don't support bring your own new capacity mandates. As we referenced even in this discussion today, customers in PJM are already in conversations about bilateral agreements for new build, and we should let the market drive the incentives to do that rather than using kind of the stick approach. So we will be weighing in on that proposal when it gets filed at FERC. Many others will be as well.

好，我唯一想補充的是——我覺得 Jim 已經講得很完整——我們很久以來就明確表示，我們不支持「自帶新增容量」（bring your own new capacity）的強制要求。如同我們今天討論中提到的，PJM 的客戶已經在就新建案進行雙邊協議的對話；我們應該讓市場來驅動這些誘因，而不是採用某種「棍子」式做法。所以當這個提案提交到 FERC 時，我們會提出意見。其他很多人也會。

We do continue to believe that data center flexibility is a key asset really for the grid, and it should be encouraged, but it should be encouraged with incentives, and it should also be recognized as a valuable resource that can be used during times of grid tightness. And so we need to kind of wait and see what the proposal says and see what provisions are really specified in that proposal before we respond. But we do have some concerns about it. We think customers have some concerns about it as well.

我們仍然相信，資料中心的彈性其實是電網的一項關鍵資產，應該被鼓勵；但應該透過誘因來鼓勵，同時也應被認可為在電網吃緊時可動用的寶貴資源。因此我們需要先觀望提案內容，看看提案中究竟具體規定了哪些條款，再來回應。但我們確實對此有一些疑慮。我們認為客戶也同樣有一些疑慮。

And frankly, it may actually even give some advantage to colocation with existing resources, we believe, at the end of the day because there's still a speed advantage to avoiding some of the transmission build that's necessary often to connect front of the meter. And typically, in these colocation conversations, customers are bringing back up generation anyway. And so we actually see it as potentially driving customers to be even more interested in colocation with existing resources.

坦白說，我們認為到最後它甚至可能讓與既有資源的共址（colocation）更具優勢，因為若能避免為了在表前（front of the meter）併網而常常必須進行的一些輸電建設，仍然有速度上的優勢。而且通常在這些共址的討論中，客戶本來就會帶入備援發電。所以我們其實看到，它可能會促使客戶對與既有資源共址更感興趣。

Got it. That makes a lot of sense. Thank you.

了解。這很有道理。謝謝。

Perfect. Thank you.

很好。謝謝。

Michael Sullivan, Wolfe Research.

Wolfe Research 的 Michael Sullivan。

Hey, good morning. Hey, Jim I wanted to ask a little more on the Helix platform and just how you see that playing out. You had a big announcement, you put some money into it this year. How does that materialize through time? Maybe some color on what the milestones are that would require putting more money into it? And then like how does that work at the same time you've been working through some of these existing commercial discussions?

嗨，早安。Jim，我想再多問一點 Helix 平台，以及你怎麼看它後續的發展。你們有一個重大公告，今年也投入了一些資金。這會如何隨時間逐步落地？能否多談談哪些里程碑會需要再投入更多資金？另外，在你們同時也在推進一些既有的商業討論時，這兩者是如何並行運作的？

Yeah, Michael, thank you for that. It's first of all, it is considered an additive proposition for Vistra. So as we looked at the extent of the customer conversations we were having, and I've even mentioned on previous calls, we've added staff to have conversations. And Stacey would say she's still short staffed to have conversations. So it's part of extending our -- what I'd call our channel or our capability to actually evaluate more deals and it's focused on both existing assets and new assets and then bringing a simpler solution for customers so they can talk about the infrastructure of a data center and where it gets its power.

Michael，謝謝你的問題。首先，這被視為對 Vistra 的增量性提案（additive proposition）。當我們看到與客戶對話的廣度——我在之前的電話會議也提過——我們已經增聘人手來進行這些對話。而 Stacey 會說她要進行對話的人手仍然不足。所以這是為了擴展我們——我稱之為我們的通路或能力——以便實際評估更多交易；重點同時涵蓋既有資產與新資產，並為客戶提供更簡化的解決方案，讓他們能討論資料中心的基礎設施，以及它的電力來源。

And today, they're having to string all these conversations together. And it is complicated, and they're going fits and starts. And so being customer-focused, our partnership, obviously, led first by KKR is helping us to bring a platform to a customer conversation. It is an option for Vistra to participate on any of these. So if we want to use an existing asset to support a deal like this, that's our opportunity. It's not a requirement.

而在今天，他們必須把所有這些對話串在一起。這很複雜，他們的進展也常常是時好時壞、斷斷續續。因此以客戶為中心，我們的合作夥伴關係——顯然由 KKR 領頭——正在幫助我們把一個平台帶進與客戶的對話中。這也讓 Vistra 可以選擇是否參與其中任何一個案子。所以如果我們想用既有資產來支持這類交易，那是我們的機會。但這不是硬性要求。

But we're excited about it because the more deals you can evaluate, the better chance you're going to find something that's meeting the spectrum of customer need as they evaluate their business over time. In addition, there's some criteria that if there are certain milestones met and the deals are actually coming and they're valuable to Vistra, then we'd put in an additional $500 million.

但我們對此感到興奮，因為你能評估的交易越多，就越有機會找到能滿足客戶需求光譜的方案，讓他們在長期評估自身業務時採用。此外，如果達成某些條件——也就是某些里程碑被滿足，且交易確實落地並且對 Vistra 有價值——那我們會再額外投入 5 億美元。

And we'd be excited to do so because we wanted the interest to be aligned. That was important for us. That was important for KKR, and the other partners is that they're skin in the game. So we're excited about the opportunity. We think this is, again, a customer orientation, and we view that the chance to market our current assets as well as develop some new ones with someone who has a much greater access to capital in a sense that if it's required to do things like powered shells, powered land, that's something we don't believe our shareholders are expecting us to put a lot of capital in given our core business, but having a partner who can is very complementary, and that's how we see it unfolding.

而我們也會很樂意這麼做，因為我們希望各方的利益能一致。這對我們很重要。對 KKR 以及其他合作夥伴也很重要，也就是他們要有「真金白銀」投入（skin in the game）。所以我們對這個機會感到興奮。我們認為這同樣是以客戶為導向；我們也認為，與一個在資本取得上更具優勢的夥伴合作，能讓我們有機會行銷現有資產並開發一些新資產。某種意義上，如果需要做像是已供電的殼體（powered shells）、已供電的土地（powered land）這類事情，我們不認為在核心業務定位下，股東會期待我們投入大量資本；但有一個能投入的夥伴就非常互補，而這就是我們看待其後續發展的方式。

Okay. Great. Very helpful. And then, Kris, I think you mentioned just in terms of the financial outlook, midpoint or better in '26. Maybe just a sense of what's driving that? And then for '27, the midpoint opportunity, you mentioned the ERCOT softness and some of the offsets there. Should we just think about that as kind of netting out to a similar place or any kind of like upward or downward bias around that range?

好的。很好。非常有幫助。接著，Kris，我想你剛才提到就財務展望而言，'26 年在中位數或更好。能否談談主要是什麼在驅動？另外對於 '27，你提到中位數的機會，同時也提到 ERCOT 的疲軟以及一些抵銷因素。我們是否可以把它理解為大致相互抵銷、落在差不多的位置，還是說在那個區間附近會有任何偏上或偏下的傾向？

Yeah, thanks, Michael. I think on 2026, obviously, what we talked about in the prepared remarks where the start that we've had to the year positions us well. And we see ourselves we don't typically -- it's not typical for us to change guidance absent if there's a deal has closed or something at this time of the year. We're still getting through the summer.

是的，謝謝你，Michael。我想就 2026 年而言，顯然，我們在事先準備的發言中談到，今年以來的開局讓我們處於有利位置。而且我們通常——在一年中的這個時間點，除非有交易完成或類似事件，否則我們一般不會調整指引。我們還在度過夏季。

But we still feel good about the full year and that we'll be at or above the midpoint, and we have confidence that, that will be the case. As we turn to '27, as you mentioned and as we mentioned in the prepared remarks, the ERCOT forwards are meaningfully lower. There are -- that headwind is offset by some higher prices in PJM. And we do have the hedging program and the downside protection of the PTC.

但我們仍然對全年感覺良好，並且我們會落在中位數或高於中位數，我們也有信心情況會如此。轉到 '27，如你所提、也如我們在事先準備的發言中提到的，ERCOT 的遠期價格顯著更低。——這個逆風會被 PJM 的一些較高價格所部分抵銷。而且我們確實有避險計畫，以及 PTC 所提供的下行保護。

I would say that they don't fully offset the ERCOT headwind. So we're -- we would be trending towards the lower end of that range. But of course, we have announced two significant transactions that aren't included in that, and that's Cogentrix and the Meta PPA. They're still excluded. So our current expectation is that we'll provide a guidance update for 2026 and 2027 on the third quarter earnings call.

我會說，這些並不能完全抵銷 ERCOT 的逆風。因此我們——會更偏向於該區間的較低端。但當然，我們已宣布兩筆重大交易，這些尚未納入其中，也就是 Cogentrix 和 Meta PPA。它們仍然被排除在外。所以我們目前的預期是，會在第三季財報電話會議上提供 2026 與 2027 的指引更新。

If Cogentrix hasn't closed at that time, we'll wait and likely provide an update to earnings for 2027 on our next earnings call after it closes. Again, with those two transactions, though, as you look to 2027 that we have not included based on our previous disclosures, you could reasonably conclude that they'd add roughly $700 million to our midpoint opportunity, absent any other impacts.

如果 Cogentrix 到那時還沒完成交割，我們會等到它完成後，並很可能在下一次財報電話會議上提供 2027 年獲利的更新。再次強調，根據我們先前的揭露，若看向 2027，這兩筆我們尚未納入的交易，在不考慮其他影響的情況下，你可以合理推論它們大約會為我們的中位數機會增加約 7 億美元。

And those impacts could obviously be further curve moves or what we learn about the hedge levels with respect to Cogentrix among some other things. So we're excited about 2026, and we feel that we have an opportunity to get back to where we want to be in 2027.

而這些影響顯然可能包括進一步的曲線變動，或是我們就 Cogentrix 的避險水位等事項所學到的內容，以及其他一些因素。所以我們對 2026 感到振奮，也覺得我們有機會在 2027 回到我們希望達到的位置。

Great, very helpful. Thank you.

很好，非常有幫助。謝謝。

James West, Melius Research.

James West，Melius Research。

Hey, good morning, Jim and Chris. Hey, James. I was curious to dig in a little more on Helix. Clearly, deep pocket is a good term to use to describe your current partners. But you also described yourselves as founding partners, which maybe suggests additional partners are coming in. So that's kind of the first part of the question.

嗨，早安，Jim 和 Chris。嗨，James。我想再更深入了解一下 Helix。顯然，用「資金雄厚」來形容你們目前的合作夥伴很貼切。但你們也把自己描述為創始合作夥伴，這可能暗示還會有其他合作夥伴加入。所以這是問題的第一部分。

And then the second part is, how are you thinking about this entity and its capital raising abilities going forward? Is it going to be from these platform companies -- sorry, these infrastructure companies that you have and these investors that you have? Or do you think this is something that could be a publicly traded entity over time? I mean how are you guys thinking about the evolution here?

第二部分是，你們如何看待這個實體未來的募資能力？資金會來自你們擁有的這些平台公司——抱歉，是這些基礎設施公司——以及你們現有的投資人嗎？還是你們認為這可能會隨時間推進成為一家公開上市的實體？我的意思是，你們如何看待這裡的演進？

Yeah, Thanks. I think we do -- we are a founding investor, and we do expect that they will continue to add more investors over time and substantially increase the amount of the capital that they have access to. I think from how we utilize that; the best word is we have a lot of flexibility in every deal. There will be deals where we could each deal will be different.

是的，謝謝。我想我們確實——我們是創始投資人之一，而且我們確實預期他們會隨時間持續增加更多投資人，並大幅提高他們可取得的資本規模。至於我們如何運用它；最貼切的詞是，我們在每一筆交易上都有很大的彈性。會有一些交易——每筆交易都會不同。

And we could access some -- we could bring them in as an equity partner in any kind of new build power that we do. We could do that all of ourselves. We could search other opportunities to finance those. So I think each deal will be different. It is -- we do expect to work with them. And but on the power side, it will be a negotiation each time about how we go about financing our portion of any transaction that we get involved in.

而我們可以取得一些——我們可以在任何我們進行的新建電力項目中，把他們引入作為股權合作夥伴。我們也可以全部自己做。我們也可以尋找其他機會來為這些項目融資。所以我認為每筆交易都會不同。也就是——我們確實預期會與他們合作。但在電力端，每一次都會就我們如何為所參與交易中屬於我們的那一部分進行融資而進行協商。

And James, let me just add that one of the things we were really excited about is KKR actually approached us as part of this and wanted us to be the preferred power partner for this relationship. And that gives us a lot of optionality with this and again, not a requirement. If there is an opportunity for Helix to develop a project in a market that doesn't really make sense for Vistra's capabilities, we may not be that the actual power provider in that, and we want Helix to be successful.

James，我再補充一點：我們非常興奮的一件事是，KKR 其實是就這件事主動找上我們，並希望我們成為這段合作關係中優先的電力合作夥伴。這讓我們在這件事上有很大的選擇權，而再次強調，這不是硬性要求。如果 Helix 有機會在某個市場開發專案，而那個市場並不真正符合 Vistra 的能力，我們可能就不會在其中擔任實際的電力供應方，而我們也希望 Helix 能成功。

But since we cover so much of the market and the markets we're in are actually attractive data center markets, we expect to be developing and being in that relationship with Helix to be able to bring a powered solution, whether it's existing assets or new.

但由於我們覆蓋了很大一部分市場，而且我們所在的市場其實是具吸引力的資料中心市場，我們預期會與 Helix 一起開發，並在這段關係中能提供帶電的解決方案，不論是既有資產或是新建資產。

But we want to be good partners. And so if we don't have something to bring to the table on something, we'll just be effectively carried in our financial investment that we have committed on the deal, but we do expect a lot of overlap with what we're doing and what they're doing.

但我們希望成為好的合作夥伴。因此，如果在某件事情上我們沒有什麼可以帶上桌的資源，我們就會基本上以我們在該交易中承諾的財務投資被動參與，但我們確實預期我們在做的事情與他們在做的事情會有很大的重疊。

Okay. Got it. And then maybe just one quick follow-up, and you may have mentioned this earlier and I may have missed it, but with Governor Abbott's moratorium here, is there a certain time line that's been set to go through all the audit process and to clean up the queue?

好的。了解。那再一個很快的追問，你可能先前有提到、只是我可能漏聽了：就 Abbott 州長這邊的暫停措施而言，是否已設定某個時間表，用來完成所有稽核流程並清理排隊序列（queue）？

Yeah, well, first of all, this is also -- and I know I've used the term media a couple of times, and I'm just trying to see -- I'm just trying to recognize that things get distilled to words that aren't being used like there isn't a moratorium at this point in time, and there is a pause on letting people know we were expecting to hear where we would stand from a base load for Batch Zero any day now.

是的，嗯，首先，這也是——我知道我用了「媒體」這個詞好幾次，我只是想看看——我只是想承認，有些事情會被濃縮成一些用詞，但目前並沒有「禁令（moratorium）」，而是暫停對外通知；我們原本預期隨時會聽到就 Batch Zero 的基載（base load）而言我們會處於什麼位置。

We expect that's going to get kicked out. And the PUC and ERCOT are going to work to get through these audits, we think in a couple of months' time frame. But we don't see it impacting our projects in the time frame that we were expecting to energize.

我們預期那會被往後延。而 PUC 和 ERCOT 將會推進完成這些稽核，我們認為大概在幾個月的時間範圍內。但我們不認為這會在我們原本預期送電（energize）的時間範圍內影響到我們的專案。

It is possible that there were people looking to energize here more in the more short-term horizon that might see a delay. But I think this is about confidence and the fact that there's a lot of attention on this data center topic. And I'll give you a simple example because we lived it. We've got two counties around our nuclear power plant. We had an idea that one of the counties would probably be the more ideal location to start citing a data center. There were eight projects being considered in that county.

有可能有些人原本希望在較短期的時間範圍內在這裡推動發展，但可能會看到延後。但我認為這關乎信心，也因為大家對資料中心這個議題非常關注。我給你一個簡單的例子，因為我們親身經歷過。我們的核電廠周邊有兩個郡。我們原本認為其中一個郡可能是開始選址設立資料中心的較理想地點。當時那個郡正在評估八個專案。

Per my earlier remarks, there is a reasonable chance there'll be no projects in that county. But it stirred up, as you would imagine, a lot of concern in the local community about I might be okay with one of these, but I don't know if I'm okay with eight of these. So we welcome the queue getting smaller and let the real projects move forward. But if there's some short-term delay as a function of that in the long run, I think we're all going to be better off if we can start talking about more realistic numbers.

如同我先前的說法，那個郡最後很有可能一個專案都沒有。但這也如你所想像的，在當地社區引發了很多擔憂：我也許可以接受其中一個，但我不確定能不能接受八個。所以我們樂見排隊的案子變少，讓真正的專案往前推進。但如果因此在短期出現一些延遲，從長期來看，我認為只要我們能開始談更現實的數字，大家都會更好。

Makes sense. Thanks, Jim.

有道理。謝謝你，Jim。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Carly Davenport, Goldman Sachs.

高盛的 Carly Davenport。

Hey, good morning. Thank you for taking the question.

嗨，早安。謝謝讓我提問。

Morning, Carly.

早安，Carly。

Good morning. Maybe just one on capital allocation. Just as you think about that $2 billion to $2.5 billion of cash available for allocation, can you talk about your kind of general willingness to lean in on the buyback if the market gives you opportunities? And if there's -- if that's something that you would potentially go back to the Board on in terms of the remaining $1.2 billion on the authorization?

早安。我想問一個關於資本配置的問題。當你們考量可用於配置的 20 億到 25 億美元現金時，能否談談如果市場提供機會，你們在回購上加大力道的一般意願？另外，如果你們可能會就剩餘授權額度 12 億美元這件事再回到董事會討論，是否也有這種可能？

Yeah, thanks, Carly. I think I mentioned in the prepared remarks that we do have flexibility. We have the $1.2 billion left, and we said that we would -- we expect to exhaust that no later than the end of 2027. Both management and the Board are -- have as we look at opportunities for share repurchases, I think there will be -- there could be an opportunity, and we are flexible in adding to the share repurchase program in 2026 and, or 2027. I think if we add to it in 2026, we will go to the Board and ask for additional authorization to make sure that we have at least $1 billion for 2027 and potentially more.

好的，謝謝，Carly。我想我在事先準備的發言中提到，我們確實有彈性。我們還剩下 12 億美元，而且我們說過——我們預期最晚會在 2027 年底前用完這個額度。管理層與董事會在評估股票回購機會時，我認為會——也可能會有機會；而且我們在 2026 年和／或 2027 年增加股票回購計畫方面是有彈性的。我想如果我們在 2026 年增加額度，我們會去董事會申請額外授權，以確保 2027 年至少有 10 億美元，並且可能更多。

Great. Okay. That's very clear. And then maybe just one on you've referenced the moves in the power curves a number of times on the call. Could you just talk a little bit about the hedge updates that you provided? And particularly on 2028, is there any detail you can share across regions in terms of how you've changed activity across ERCOT and the East over the last quarter?

很好。好的。這非常清楚。另外再問一個：你們在這通電話中多次提到電力遠期曲線的變動。能否再多談一點你們提供的避險更新？特別是 2028 年，能否分享一些按區域拆分的細節，說明過去一季你們在 ERCOT 與東部地區的操作活動有何變化？

Well, Carly, I don't think we're going to talk that much about hedging strategies in detail on the call. You've seen some offsets in the portfolio. Of course, you've seen PJM strengthening. You've seen ERCOT weakening, it helps to be a diversified player in this context. And that has played out not only in year-to-date results, but we expect that to continue to play out going forward.

嗯，Carly，我想我們不會在電話會議上非常詳細地談避險策略。你已經看到投資組合裡有一些對沖抵銷效果。當然，你也看到 PJM 走強。你也看到 ERCOT 走弱；在這種情境下，成為一個多元化的參與者是有幫助的。而這不僅反映在年初至今的結果上，我們也預期未來會持續如此。

I think what we're seeing in ERCOT is a recency bias with what we're seeing with the weather. And frankly, a lot of batteries that came into the system post August 2023 when the ECRS payments were rather large. And what we've seen since then is returns on batteries have been about a fifth of what investors probably expected that they would be. And that's the way competitive markets work. There's no guaranteed rate of return.

我認為我們在 ERCOT 看到的是一種「近期偏誤」，與我們看到的天氣狀況有關。坦白說，還有很多電池儲能是在 2023 年 8 月之後進入系統的，當時 ECRS 的支付相當可觀。而我們此後看到的是，電池的報酬率大約只有投資人原本預期的五分之一。這就是競爭市場的運作方式。沒有保證的報酬率。

And so but they are putting more supply in critical hours in that bridging solar hours to wind hours and batteries were able to bridge that at this time. We're seeing the battery queue slowdown, which you would expect. That's kind of natural when you're not getting the rates of return that you expected. And then you're going to see the load eventually hook up. And that is something that we've talked about, obviously, with this data center load.

所以——但它們確實在關鍵時段提供了更多供給，用來銜接太陽能時段到風電時段，而目前電池也能做到這種銜接。我們看到電池的排隊（開發）速度放緩，這也符合預期。當你拿不到原本預期的報酬率時，這種情況很自然。接著你會看到負載最終會接上來。而這也是我們談過的，顯然與資料中心負載有關。

In Texas, the oil and gas and the residential small business load is about 3% of the 5% to 6%. So the data center piece is about 2%. So you've got 3% CAGR on non-data center sectors, about 2% CAGR being driven by the data center. So I think we're going to see some strengthening that you're not seeing at the moment because of the recency effects. And I'd be interested, Shawn Stuckey is here, our Head of Commercial.

在德州，石油與天然氣以及住宅、小型商業的負載約占 5% 到 6% 之中的 3%。所以資料中心的部分約是 2%。因此，非資料中心部門的年複合成長率（CAGR）約 3%，而約 2% 的 CAGR 是由資料中心帶動。所以我認為我們會看到一些走強，只是你現在因為近期效應而還沒看到。而且我也想請 Shawn Stuckey 補充，他在現場，是我們的商務主管。

They did a little bit of a deep dive on the battery performance just to give some insight as to how that affected pricing over the tightest days. And really, we were not close to any reliability event, but we were closer to seeing pricing that would be more expected with the kind of demand that we saw that day. So Shawn, I'd love for you to add some commentary there.

他們針對電池表現做了一些深入分析，提供一些洞見，說明這如何影響最吃緊那些天的定價。而且實際上，我們離任何可靠度事件都不算近，但我們更接近看到那天那種需求水準下、較符合預期的價格。所以 Shawn，我很希望你在這裡補充一些評論。

Yeah. Thanks, Jim. I'll add a little bit of color. If you look at July 22, there was about a 3.5-hour window as the solar was dropping off the grid that you needed the batteries to serve load. And you needed about 25 gigawatt hours' worth of batteries to serve, and there's only about 31 gigawatt hours' worth of batteries available on the system.

好的。謝謝，Jim。我補充一些背景。如果你看 7 月 22 日，當太陽能開始退出電網時，大約有 3.5 小時的窗口期需要電池來供應負載。你需要大約 25 吉瓦時的電池來供應，而系統上可用的電池總量只有大約 31 吉瓦時。

So even though that day cleared $57, the batteries knew that they were not going to run out. And so it was a little bit of a kind of a chase to the bottom as they were looking to sort of deplete their energy toward the end of the day and capture the last bit of revenue that they could get. Had they known that they were going to have the ability to price themselves and be a little bit more competitive, we think it's very easy that, that day could have cleared closer to a $400 or $500 day.

所以即使那天結算價是 57 美元，電池也知道它們不會把電量用到見底。因此就有點像是一種「向下追價」的情況：它們希望在一天接近尾聲時把能量逐步放掉，並把能拿到的最後一點收入抓住。如果它們知道自己有能力把價格訂得更高、並且更具競爭力，我們認為那一天很容易就可能結算在接近 400 或 500 美元。

So it's just a function of this market that you're sort of right on the razor's edge. It very easily with just a couple of thousand megawatts difference in either thermal performance or load and/or wind, $57 could have been $400 to $500.

所以這就是這個市場的特性：你基本上是在刀鋒邊緣。只要熱機組表現或負載和／或風力在幾千兆瓦的差異，57 美元就可能變成 400 到 500 美元。

And just to be clear, razor's edge is more about pricing. There were still reliability reserves that ERCOT was maintaining. But as you know, Carly, there's pricing mechanisms that as you get tighter, you'd expect to see the real-time prices reflect that. And so it really is a closer dynamic, and that's just the way these markets work, but good for customers. I mean, this is exactly the way market should clear. That's what competition does, whether it's on the retail or the wholesale side. And so again, this notion that this is a market that's not able to handle this load growth is not bearing out in the facts.

再澄清一下，「razor's edge」更多是指定價層面。ERCOT 仍然維持著可靠度備轉容量。但如你所知，Carly，當供需變得更吃緊時，依照定價機制，你會預期即時電價會反映出這種緊縮。因此這確實是一種更緊密的動態關係，這就是這些市場的運作方式，而且對客戶有利。我的意思是，這正是市場應該出清的方式。這就是競爭的作用，不論是在零售端或批發端。所以再說一次，認為這個市場無法承受這樣的負載成長，從事實來看並不成立。

Got it. Okay. No, that's super clear. Really helpful color. Thank you.

了解。好。不，這非常清楚。提供了很有幫助的補充說明。謝謝。

Thank you, Carly.

謝謝你，Carly。

David Arcaro, Morgan Stanley.

David Arcaro，摩根士丹利。

Hey, thanks. Good morning.

嗨，謝謝。早安。

Hey, David.

嗨，David。

On Helix, I was wondering if you might be able to give any additional color on the project pipeline in terms of megawatts or any progress or timing that could be possible, just kind of where is it in terms of its development outlook? I'm also curious about return targets, if there's any way that you'd be able to frame that up maybe versus your own capital return targets internally.

關於 Helix，我想請問你是否能就專案管線提供更多補充說明，例如以兆瓦計的規模、任何進展或可能的時程；也就是說，就其開發前景而言目前處於什麼階段？我也好奇報酬率目標，如果可以的話，你是否能協助框架說明，或許可與你們內部自身的資本報酬目標做個對照。

Sure. I'm going to let Stacey take this one, David, since she's working the pipelines, both the internal pipelines that we have and the pipelines that we'll look at with our Helix partnership.

當然。David，這題我會請 Stacey 來回答，因為她在負責管線，包括我們的內部管線，以及我們會透過 Helix 合作夥伴關係來評估的管線。

Yeah, Thanks, Jim. Yeah, it's obviously -- we just launched it last month and -- or I guess, in June. And so it's early days, but we're having a very close collaboration with KKR in particular, and they are staffing Helix up for development. And we're really excited about the opportunity to simplify the conversations, especially on our existing sites.

好的，謝謝，Jim。是的，這顯然——我們上個月才剛啟動——或者說，我想是在 6 月。所以還在初期，但我們與 KKR 尤其保持非常緊密的合作，他們正在為 Helix 配置開發團隊人力。我們對於能夠簡化溝通流程的機會感到非常興奮，特別是在我們既有的場址上。

On our own, we are working on in customer conversations about PPAs for our existing sites. But those end up being, in a lot of cases, multiparty conversations that we have to pull together because typically, for those sites, the hyperscaler customers want to bring in a colocation developer. And so you've got them in the conversation. You've got other equipment providers in the conversation. And Helix really is going to provide us an opportunity to simplify those conversations on our existing sites.

就我們自己而言，我們正在與客戶就既有場址的 PPA（購電協議）進行洽談。但在很多情況下，這些最後會變成多方會談，因為通常對於那些場址，超大規模雲端客戶（hyperscaler）會希望引入一個機房共置（colocation）開發商。因此對話中會有他們。也會有其他設備供應商參與。而 Helix 真的會讓我們有機會在既有場址上把這些對話簡化。

So you can think about -- honestly, you can think about the pipeline as really anything that's in our existing portfolio. We we're able to bring that to bear with Helix and as well as pipeline conversations that they bring to us where they're getting inbounds from customers and they bring us into the power conversation.

所以你可以這樣想——坦白說，你可以把管線視為我們既有投資組合中的任何項目。我們能透過 Helix 來推進這些項目，同時也包括他們帶給我們的管線洽談：他們從客戶那裡收到主動詢問（inbounds），然後把我們拉進電力相關的討論。

So there's a number of those conversations as well where there's opportunities that we would not have otherwise seen, but they're bringing us into the conversation to kind of help them understand what the power possibilities are. So it goes both ways. They bring us opportunities.

因此也有不少這類對話，當中存在一些我們原本不會看到的機會，但他們把我們帶進來，協助他們理解電力供應的可能性。所以是雙向的。他們帶給我們機會。

We show them opportunities, and that's just another channel for us to increase our opportunity set. For us, at Vistra, we would be looking to achieve the same mid-teens return targets that we've always promised our investors. And so we would only do projects that hit our return targets. Obviously, Helix is going to have a bit of a different risk appetite for projects, and that's part of why we think it is a good channel for us to be able to look at projects and just benefit even as an investor from projects where maybe we're not providing the power, but they're taking more risk on capital.

我們也向他們展示機會，這只是我們擴大機會集合的另一個管道。對我們 Vistra 而言，我們會希望達成一如既往向投資人承諾的「十幾％中段」（mid-teens）報酬率目標。因此我們只會做符合我們報酬率目標的專案。顯然，Helix 對專案的風險承受度會略有不同，這也是我們認為它對我們而言是個好管道的原因之一：我們可以評估一些專案，並且即使只是作為投資人也能受益——在某些情況下我們可能不提供電力，但他們在資本端承擔更高風險。

So it's a good opportunity for us to not only have another channel to promote our own pipeline but also to benefit from the economics associated with data centers to the extent that they get those projects done. So we're in very close coordination with them and a lot of activity going on to launch that business, and we're in direct conversations with all of the major hyperscalers about it.

因此，這對我們而言是個很好的機會：不僅多了一個管道來推動我們自己的管線，也能在他們把那些專案做成的前提下，從資料中心相關的經濟效益中受益。所以我們與他們保持非常緊密的協調，為了啟動這項業務有很多工作正在進行中，而且我們也正就此與所有主要的 hyperscaler 直接洽談。

Great. Thanks. Yeah, that all makes sense. I appreciate that. And then I was just curious, looking at Batch Zero, do you have other projects outside of Comanche Peak that you may be working on with partners just within your own development pipeline that might be going through the Batch Zero process? Any color you'd be able to provide there would be great.

很好。謝謝。是的，這些都很合理。我很感謝。另外我也想問，從 Batch Zero 來看，除了 Comanche Peak 之外，你們是否還有其他專案，可能在你們自身的開發管線中與合作夥伴一起推進，並可能正在走 Batch Zero 流程？若能提供一些補充說明就太好了。

Yeah, thanks, David. We do have projects in Batch Zero baseload, in Batch Zero to be studied load and even in the to come Batch one process, which is not yet finalized in terms of the rules for those. So we have multiple projects there. We're not going to comment on specifics beyond that, but we do have projects throughout the pipeline of Batch Zero.

好的，謝謝，David。我們確實有專案在 Batch Zero 的基載（baseload）類別中，也有在 Batch Zero 的「待研究負載」（to be studied load）類別中，甚至也有在即將到來的 Batch One 流程中——而該流程的規則目前尚未最終定案。所以我們在那裡有多個專案。我們不會就此之外的細節做具體評論，但我們在 Batch Zero 的整體管線中確實有專案分布。

And I think on the earlier questions, David, about some of the delays, I think the studied load, which would be studied in consideration of the base load of Batch Zero, that's part of what probably is going to see more of the uncertainty at this point. I think the baseload projects because they've been studied, you'd expect those to be moving forward. I think the to-be-studied has yet another potential of figuring out what's the allocation, when is that going to be completed.

而且我想，回到你先前關於一些延遲的問題，David，我認為「待研究負載」——也就是會在 Batch Zero 基載的考量下進行研究的部分——可能就是目前不確定性較高的來源之一。我認為基載專案因為已經完成研究，你會預期它們會繼續往前推進。至於「待研究」的部分，還有另一層潛在問題：要釐清如何分攤（allocation），以及何時能完成。

And that's why with some confidence, we feel the baseload projects, and obviously, we need to meet delivery dates for our customers, but that's important that we keep moving forward, and we haven't gotten any signals that folks in Austin see the baseload projects at this point as being materially off of a time frame. As I mentioned, if some were looking to energize in the very near future, there may be an issue, but ours are tagged towards next year. So we feel we can continue to make the progress we need.

也因此我們相對有信心認為基載專案——當然，我們需要符合客戶的交付日期——但重要的是我們要持續推進，而且我們尚未收到任何訊號顯示 Austin 那邊目前認為基載專案會在時程上出現重大偏離。如我提到的，如果有些專案希望在非常近期就送電（energize），可能會有問題，但我們的專案是設定在明年。所以我們認為可以持續取得所需的進展。

And if I could just add, the PUC and ERCOT have worked really hard this year to launch Batch Zero in record time, frankly, and a very active stakeholder process. And so of course, we will know more at the open meeting next week where they discuss the governor's directive, and it's very important that they carry out the governor's directive and that what comes out of that are only projects that are going to engage in responsible development. But I would just say, I think that the PUC and ERCOT and really all of Texas stakeholders are motivated to preserve the value that they've created through the Batch Zero process and to get the audit done in a timely manner and in a way that it doesn't result in material delays for the projects there.

如果我再補充一下，PUC 與 ERCOT 今年確實非常努力，以破紀錄的速度啟動 Batch Zero，而且利害關係人流程也非常活躍。因此，當然，我們會在下週的公開會議上得知更多資訊，屆時他們會討論州長的指示；而且非常重要的是，他們要落實州長的指示，並確保最終產出的只會是那些會進行負責任開發的專案。但我想說的是，我認為 PUC、ERCOT，以及德州所有利害關係人，都有動機去維持他們透過 Batch Zero 流程所創造的價值，並以即時的方式完成稽核，而且不致對其中的專案造成重大延誤。

That's a good add. Thanks, Stacey.

這是個很好的補充。謝謝你，Stacey。

Great. Thank you so much. Appreciate it.

很好。非常感謝。感激不盡。

Rinny Singh, Bank of America.

Rinny Singh，美國銀行。

Hi, guys. Thanks for taking the question. Are you ready? I think first, I think, Stacey, you mentioned that the IRAS procedure could increase some of this colocation, especially the speed to advantage in the transmission. I guess how are you thinking about that colocation proceeding? I guess, the time line for it and the remaining uncertainty that kind of we need to figure out for that procedure?

嗨，各位。謝謝讓我提問。你們準備好了嗎？我想先問，Stacey，你提到 IRAS 程序可能會增加部分這類共址（colocation），特別是在輸電方面的速度優勢。我想問你們如何看待這個共址推進的進展？包括它的時間表，以及在該程序上我們仍需要釐清的剩餘不確定性有哪些？

Yeah, thank you for that question. Well, first of all, I'd just say we were very pleased with FERC's colocation order that came out in June. They really -- they have made it crystal clear that PJM and the transmission owners need to accommodate colocation. They need to adopt these new transmission services that do so -- and they've given PJM very clear instructions about amending the tariffs to do so.

是的，謝謝你的問題。首先我要說，我們對 FERC 在 6 月發布的共址命令感到非常滿意。他們非常清楚地表明，PJM 和輸電業主需要配合共址。他們需要採納這些新的輸電服務來達成此事——並且已向 PJM 提供非常明確的指示，要求修訂費率條款（tariffs）以做到這一點。

So that was a very positive development for colocation projects, and we see that customers see it that way as well. They had ordered PJM to make a compliance filing and the transmission owners as well by mid-August. PJM and the transmission owners have now asked for more time to do that. We don't know if FERC is going to grant more time.

因此，這對共址專案而言是非常正面的發展，我們也看到客戶同樣這麼認為。他們要求 PJM 以及輸電業主在 8 月中旬前提交合規申報（compliance filing）。PJM 和輸電業主現在已要求更多時間來完成。我們還不知道 FERC 是否會核准延長時間。

But if they do, I think they will still want there to be as quick of a response as possible because this docket has been pending for some time, and FERC has made it clear they want these projects to be able to move forward with clarity. So I think sometime in the next, call it, 30 to 60 days, whatever amount of time FERC decides to give PJM and the transmission owners, we will see a filing from PJM and the TOs that get specific around accommodating these arrangements and the types of transmission services that apply to them.

但即使他們核准，我認為他們仍會希望回應盡可能迅速，因為這個案卷已懸而未決一段時間，而 FERC 也已明確表示，他們希望這些專案能在更清晰的規則下向前推進。所以我想在接下來大約 30 到 60 天內——取決於 FERC 決定給 PJM 和輸電業主多少時間——我們將會看到 PJM 與各輸電業主提交一份申報，具體說明如何配合這些安排，以及適用於它們的輸電服務類型。

And that will give all of us clarity about the rates that apply to these projects as well. So we're very optimistic about the outcome of that and the order itself, frankly, adopted a lot of Vistra's arguments and positions as we advocated for those projects to be available to customers.

而這也會讓我們所有人更清楚這些專案所適用的費率。因此我們對結果非常樂觀；坦白說，該命令本身採納了 Vistra 許多論點與立場，這些都是我們在倡議讓客戶能使用這些專案時所提出的。

Okay. Great. That makes sense. And then if I could just ask like sticking on PJM, just like what's the appetite for contracting energy and capacity versus just energy with this environment of potentially the bring your own capacity charges and then also the possibility of being flexible in your conversations? Just how is that kind of shaping up?

好的。很好。這很合理。接著如果我可以繼續問 PJM 相關的問題：在目前這種環境下，可能會有「自備容量」（bring your own capacity）費用，再加上你們在對話中也可能更具彈性；那麼客戶對於同時簽能源與容量合約，和只簽能源合約的偏好如何？目前大致呈現什麼樣的走勢？

Yes. We're still seeing robust customer appetite for both energy and capacity. They in order to actually power their data centers, they need both. And so -- and they see a rising price environment. And so they have interest in locking in some cost for that.

是的。我們仍看到客戶對能源與容量兩者都有強勁需求。他們要真正為資料中心供電，兩者都需要。而且——他們也看到價格環境正在上升。因此他們有興趣鎖定部分成本。

So I wouldn't say that we've seen a big increase in appetite for energy-only deals, although, of course, we're open to whatever conversations customers want to have. But the conversations we're in, they're still interested in contracting for energy and capacity.

所以我不會說我們看到對「僅能源」交易的偏好大幅增加；當然，我們也願意就客戶想談的任何方案進行討論。但就我們目前參與的對話而言，他們仍然有興趣同時簽能源與容量。

Okay, great. Thanks so much, guys. Really appreciate it.

好的，很好。非常感謝，各位。真的很感激。

Thank you, Rinny.

謝謝你，Rinny。

This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Jim Burke for any closing remarks.

我們的問答環節到此結束。我想把電話會議交回給 Jim Burke，請他做任何結語。

Thank you, everyone, for joining. I want to take a moment to thank our team for their continued execution and service to our customers and communities, especially during these hot summer months. The other thing that we'll continue to do is give you the most accurate view we can on these supply and demand variables and how they'll actually play out. Well, I'm sorry, I thought I was done here, and now I'm giving you more.

謝謝大家參與。我想花點時間感謝我們的團隊持續落實執行，並為客戶與社區提供服務，特別是在這些炎熱的夏季月份。另外，我們也會持續盡可能提供你們對這些供需變數最準確的觀點，以及它們實際將如何發展。嗯，不好意思，我以為我講完了，結果現在又多講了一些。

But look, it's important that we give you an accurate view on these variables because these are serious policy matters, and we're going to be engaged with customers and our peers in the industry and policymakers to get it right. And we look forward to updating you on the progress of our business. We look forward to seeing you also in the fall, hopefully, in person. And thank you for joining, and have a great day.

但你看，提供你們對這些變數的準確觀點很重要，因為這些是嚴肅的政策議題；我們將與客戶、產業同業以及政策制定者保持投入，確保把事情做對。我們也期待向各位更新我們業務的進展。也期待在秋季再見到各位，希望能面對面。再次感謝各位參與，祝各位有美好的一天。

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.

本次電話會議現在結束。感謝各位出席今天的簡報。您現在可以掛線。