KW

[KW @KW00329]

@verifriedburner What if $FRMI announces a hyperscaler as its second customer… and then extends TensorWave’s deadline by another month? 😂

[KW @KW00329]

Last time, $FRMI announced the extension of its TensorWave lease closing deadline on September 22—8 days before the September 30 deadline—pushing it to October 31.

Today is October 28, with just 3 days remaining until that extended deadline. We’re now 5 days closer to the deadline than when the previous extension was announced.

The timing is somewhat encouraging, but silence alone doesn’t confirm that the deal will close on time.

[KW @KW00329]

@verona_dev Announcing another one-month delay? I really hope not

[KW @KW00329]

Hope my plan works

[KW @KW00329]

Being bullish on $FRMI is one thing. Surviving this never-ending selloff is another.

Watching your portfolio shrink day after day for so long is quite an experience. Apparently, patience isn’t just a virtue — it’s becoming an expensive hobby.

For those who are still bullish on FRMI, how are you managing your positions?

[KW @KW00329]

I waited. And waited. And kept waiting.

Until I could establish a February 2027 $2.5/$3 bullish risk reversal — selling the $2.5 put and buying the $3 call — for a net credit.

[KW @KW00329]

Some people are predicting that $FRMI will fall below $1 and eventually undergo a reverse stock split.

With a current market cap of around $1.7B, a drop to $1 would shrink its valuation to roughly $670M.

A reverse split does absolutely nothing to increase market capitalization or bring in fresh capital.

The real issue isn’t the share price. It’s the company’s ability to finance its projects.

[KW @KW00329]

$FRMI keeps hitting new all-time lows , yet there’s still not enough buying interest to absorb the selling. I believe three factors are at play: uncertainty around TensorWave financing, concerns about dilution, and weak confidence in management execution. The CEO’s recent letter to shareholders appears to have acted as a catalyst, amplifying these concerns rather than restoring investor confidence. Until these concerns are addressed, buyers may simply continue to stay on the sidelines.

[KW @KW00329]

$FRMI’s market cap is now down to just $1.7B.

At this valuation, convertible bonds (CBs) and at-the-market (ATM) offerings seem increasingly unrealistic as viable financing options.

Raising a sizable amount of capital through either route would result in massive shareholder dilution.

Project financing or project-level equity investment seems more critical than ever.

[KW @KW00329]

If the TensorWave deal were facing serious problems that could prevent it from closing, and the CEO knew that, why would he proactively highlight TensorWave and AMD in a shareholder letter with the deadline approaching?

If he knowingly concealed those problems while reinforcing investor expectations, that could raise serious securities fraud concerns.

That’s very different from simply staying silent. By bringing them up again at this moment, he’s putting his own credibility on the line.

That’s why I lean toward believing management still expects the deal to close—even if financing isn’t fully secured yet.

[KW @KW00329]

I’m still bullish on FRMI’s long-term potential, but I believe how we manage downside risk matters just as much as getting the long-term thesis right.

Curious to hear how everyone is approaching this.

[KW @KW00329]

For BTM nuclear power, a different scale and mix of financing is needed: long-term offtake agreements, major project equity investors, and potentially government loans or credit support. It cannot be funded solely through repeated stock offerings or convertible debt issuance by FRMI.

[KW @KW00329]

My theory on $FRMI’s $25M MUFG amendment fee: the financing backdrop has changed.

The original loan was negotiated without a customer or AMD backing. Turbines were the main collateral, and the terms were tough.

Now, with a customer, AMD backing and turbines delivered, FRMI may be able to secure a larger financing package on better terms.

The $25M could be the cost of making that transition. Still a hypothesis—let’s see the financing terms.

[KW @KW00329]

The Trump administration has facilitated funding through Japan’s and South Korea’s U.S. investment commitments for roughly 16.5 GW of natural gas-fired generation, with NextEra Energy ($NEE) and its partners serving as developers and operators.

$FRMI doesn’t seem to be one of Trump’s favorites.

[KW @KW00329]

@NoldeaReally $FRMI The shareholder letter lacked a clear financing update, and its subsequent revision used less specific language, increasing shareholder uncertainty.

The company should provide more timely, detailed, and consistent updates.

[KW @KW00329]

@Betta_call_saul @hiddenpatriotme $FRMI This shareholder letter was counterproductive. It offered no clear update on financing, then was revised with weaker language, leaving shareholders even more confused.

This team gets a failing grade for communication. At this point, they’re hardly any better than Toby.

[KW @KW00329]

@hiddenpatriotme $FRMI After several careful readings, I noticed the CEO explicitly mentions project equity—bringing investors into individual projects, rather than necessarily issuing FRMI shares or CBs. The letter may be preparing us for shared project ownership.

[KW @KW00329]

My take on the letter — two possible readings:
• More positive: Fermi is proactively shifting strategy, prioritizing powered land deals and reducing turnkey projects going forward.
• More defensive: Even if the TensorWave deal (or similar structures) may require Fermi to provide guarantees or additional capital, the company wants to reassure shareholders that this won’t become the norm and they’ll be more restrained in the future.