Core Scientific, Inc.

Greetings. Welcome to the Core Scientific Fiscal First Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. Please note, this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to your host, John Charbonneau, SVP Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Great, thank you. Good afternoon and welcome to Core Scientific's first quarter 2026 earnings call. Before we begin, I need to remind you the statements made on this call, other than historical facts, are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are based on our current expectations. Words such as anticipates, estimates, expects, intends, and believes, and similar words and expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ substantially. For further information on these risks and uncertainties, we encourage you to review the risk factors discussed in the company's reports on Form 10-Q and 8-K filed today with the SEC and the press release and slide presentation contained therein. The forward-looking statements we make today speak as of today, and we do not undertake any obligation to update any such statement to reflect events or circumstances occurring after today. Today's presentation is available on our website, investors.corescientific.com. The content of this conference call contains information that is accurate as of today, May 6, 2026. Joining me today from Core Scientific are our CEO, Adam Sullivan, Chief Operating Officer, Matt Brown, and Chief Financial Officer, Jim Nygaard. We will conduct a question and answer session after management's remarks. We will now begin with remarks from Adam.

Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us. platform designed to support the most demanding compute workloads in the market. Over the past year, we've translated that strategy into execution, delivering high density capacity at scale across multiple states. Those sites were an important starting point, but our first customer was never Core Scientific's full story. Delivering these initial sites enhances our operating credibility and provides a significant capital foundation we need to scale meaningfully from here. We have shown clearly our ability to deliver at scale. Across five sites, we are now developing one of the largest multi-site AI infrastructure build outs in the market. We are now earning revenue on approximately 245 megawatts with another 200 megawatts expected to be earning revenue in the coming months. Our execution, combined with the favorable structure of our CoreWeave contracts, has enabled our next phase of growth. Today, we closed on a $3.3 billion capital raise supported by that contract, with the proceeds to be used for future growth and the development of projects for other customers. The fact that we have five facilities fully leased and financed by our tenant is a meaningful differentiator. We have the ability to push the next phase of development in a disciplined way by securing the land, labor, and equipment to protect timelines and accelerate delivery. As these new projects are leased, we expect opportunities for further financing to continue the cycle of our forward development go-to-market strategy. Our next phase of development has already begun, and late last year, we committed existing cash on hand to purchase equipment for our other existing sites. With the new secured financing, we are now accelerating development activity across multiple sites, including Pecos, Muskogee, Hunt, Dalton Phase 3, and Auburn. This positions us differently in the market. We are not waiting for deal negotiations to conclude before advancing sites. With capital in place, we can move early, bringing RFS timelines within the 12 to 14-month timeframe that customers are actively trying to solve for. We are also scaling our campuses in a repeatable way. Today, we announced a path to approximately 1.5 gigawatts at Muskogee, closely following a similar plan at Pecos. A key enabler of that scale is power strategy. Customers are increasingly focused on solutions beyond existing grid capacity, including behind the meter options. We are proactively positioning our sites to support those needs, including efforts to secure natural gas infrastructure where appropriate to enable future expansion. Pecos is a clear example. We are actively converting the site from Bitcoin mining to high-density co-location with construction already underway and a pathway to RFS within 12 months. Muskogee is another. We see a path to 1.5 gigawatts of gross power supported by grid expansion, the Polaris acquisition, and behind the meter solutions. And we expect to deliver additional data center capacity outside of our current contract in late 2027. Stepping back, we are executing a repeatable model. Secure strategic sites, invest ahead of contracts where appropriate, and create assets that are increasingly compelling as they approach readiness. That brings me to our commercial progress. We are engaging customers from a position of strength. Because development is already underway, our timelines are not dependent on contract timing, an important distinction in this market. As we previously discussed, we are engaged in an exclusivity process with a hyperscaler across Pecos and Muskogee. That exclusivity is now expired. However, three hyperscalers immediately engaged on those same sites and we are now in active discussions. This reinforced both the strategic value of these assets and the depth of demand for large scale, high density capacity. It also informed how we approach exclusivity going forward. While it likely remains a necessary part of some deal negotiations, it must also include clear milestones. In a market like this, we will not keep high-value assets off the market longer than necessary. More broadly, our conversations with potential customers have increased significantly since the beginning of the year. Hyperscalers remain our primary focus, and we are also seeing growing engagement from chip makers, AI labs, and NeoCloud providers. These emerging customer segments represent meaningful opportunity, though they often require additional credit support. We are actively working with customers and financing partners on structures that can support long-term financeable commitments. Stepping back, our position is clear. We are building a scaled, high-density digital infrastructure platform with a diversified site portfolio. We are deploying capital to secure timelines and accelerate delivery. We are also seeing strong customer demand. Based on our execution, capital position, and commercial momentum, we are confident in our ability to continue expanding and creating long-term value for our customers and our shareholders. With that, I'll turn the call over to Matt Brown to provide more details on our operations and development progress. Matt?

Thanks, Adam. As we reflect on the first quarter, our operational priorities remain clear. Execute our existing build pipeline, bring capacity online efficiently, and position the business for the next phase of large-scale expansion. Demand for high-performance compute infrastructure remains strong, and we have focused on aligning our delivery timelines, supply chain readiness, and power strategies to meet that demand. I'll begin with an update on our CoreWeave dedicated facilities, where we continue to execute at pace and at scale. Today, I am pleased to announce that we have delivered 243 megawatts of billable capacity to Corweave. This includes a milestone with a full turnover of both our Marble, North Carolina and Dalton, Georgia Phase 1 data centers. At Marble, we completed construction and successfully transitioned the entire facility into operations, bringing 65 megawatts of billable capacity online. At Dalton Phase 1, we likewise achieved full site handover and delivery 30 megawatts into service. These milestones reflect the team's ability to execute efficiently at scale. Transition assets seamlessly from construction to revenue generation and consistently aligned to customer timelines, all of which remain critical as we continue to move forward. Across our remaining contracted sites, We will continue delivering billable megawatts over the coming months while scaling execution on the CoreWeave contract, positioning us to deliver more than 450 billable by the end of the summer, while remaining on track to deliver the full 590 megawatts by the early 2027. Now, turning to our non-CoreWeave developments, where we are advancing our development strategy. Our Pecos, Texas campus is one of our most significant development opportunities with a plan to scale from 300 megawatts to 1.5 gigawatts through a multi-pronged expansion strategy. At the core is our power roadmap. We've secured an additional 300 megawatts and are advancing a mix of grid connected and behind the meter solutions to support long-term growth. The behind the meter strategy leverages low emission generation and concludes the construction of a linear gas pipeline to the campus. Together, these efforts are designed to accelerate time to power, enhance resilience, and reduce the supply chain risk while enabling us to meet hyperscale demand. In parallel, construction of our initial 431,000 square foot, 185 megawatt facility is progressing from civil work into foundation phases with precast walls arriving for vertical construction. All long lead items equipment has been secured, helping reduce execution risk and support timelines. We are also advancing infrastructure for high density co-location, including redundant fiber capacity and a new regional interconnect point in Midland, Texas, linking back to the Pecos campus. At our Muscogee, Oklahoma campus, today we announced plans for the expansion of the site to 1.5 megawatts of gross power, or approximately one gigawatt of leaseable capacity. Similar to PACUS, this expansion will leverage a combination of behind-the-meter infrastructure and utility supply power, including the roughly 440 megawatts acquired through the Polaris transaction. With our general contractor already secured on-site, and we have begun development of the first 82.5 megawatt building, with initial delivery expected in the second half of 2027. And finally, turning to other development sites, Hunt County, Texas, Dalton, Georgia Phase III, and Auburn, Alabama. Each continues to advance through pre-construction milestones and remains on track to meet their initial delivery timelines. In closing, as we look ahead, we remain confident in our ability to execute against our commitments and capture opportunities in front of us. The combination of strong demand, a growing portfolio of scale developments, and continued progress on our power infrastructure strategies position us well for the quarters ahead. With that, I'll turn it over to Jim.

Thanks, Matt. During the first quarter, we reached an important inflection point as our co-location revenue scaled to a level sufficient to cover operating costs and began expanding margins. This marks a meaningful milestone in our transition, with co-location now becoming an important driver of our overall financial profile. Today, we are billing for 243 megawatts, which equates to more than $350 million of annualized co-location gap revenue. with significant additional capacity expected to begin billing over the next several months. As a reminder, under GAAP, revenue from the CoreWeave contract is recognized on a straight-line basis over the 12-year Weave term, effectively pulling escalators forward. From a Bitcoin mining perspective, we remain focused on optimization and are running that business to help offset contractual power costs as we continue the transition toward high-density co-location. Going forward, we expect mining activity to continue winding down over the course of the year with a meaningful step down in miners online in the second half. Earlier this year, we monetized a significant portion of our Bitcoin holdings and currently retain only a modest amount of Bitcoin on the balance sheet. Moving on to costs, first quarter SG&A on a cash basis was just over $30 million. While we are not providing explicit SG&A guidance, we believe this level represents a reasonable baseline for corporate expenses going forward, with the potential for opportunistic investments to support growth over the next few years. Separately, you may have noticed that we increased our target cash gross profit range for the CoreWeave contract to 80 to 85%, up from our original target of 75 to 80%. We first introduced that target roughly two years ago, and today we have much greater visibility into the associated cost structure, given we are now billing for a meaningful portion of the contracted megawatts. With that operating backdrop, let me turn to capital formation, where today marked another major milestone for Core Scientific. We closed our previously announced $3.3 billion CoreWeave project bond financing at a 7.75% interest rate, which we view as highly attractive cost of capital for a financing of this scale. After closing costs and funding the required debt service reserve account, net proceeds were approximately $2.9 billion. For additional context, the bonds include a lockbox structure, which is a cash control mechanism where project revenues are paid directly into a designated account and then applied through the indenture-defined cash waterfall, first to operating expenses, then to debt service, and finally to other uses permitted by the indenture. Unlike a traditional project finance structure, where a lockbox is created to fund a specific project under development, our structure enables the distribution of the vast majority of offering proceeds up to the corporate level to facilitate investments in a variety of new projects outside the box. Going forward, the lockbox will service the debt secured by CoreWeave contracted site assets and cash flows. From this perspective, the transaction significantly strengthens our consolidated capital position, validates the quality and predictability of our contracted cash flows, and gives us the ability to execute the next phase of our growth plan with greater flexibility, speed, and certainty. We expect to deploy roughly $2 billion of total capital expenditures in 2026. This includes approximately $700 million for both the Hunt County, Texas site acquisition, which closed yesterday, and the Polaris acquisition at our Muskogee, Oklahoma site announced earlier today, as well as expenditures to begin preceding approximately one gigawatt of new billable capacity. This includes long lead time equipment procurement and various site development and utility support activities across multiple project locations. We are strategically positioning the business to sign attractive new customer contracts with capacity outside of CoreWeave available for delivery starting in early 2027. The platform we are building together with cost-effective capital we have secured for new project equity investments is differentiated in the market. and we believe it positions Core Scientific to create meaningful long-term shareholder value. Lastly, we recently welcomed Jorge Rey as our Chief Accounting Officer, further strengthening our finance and accounting team. Jorge brings valuable accounting and public company reporting experience, and his leadership will be important as we continue to scale the business and support our next phase of growth. I'll now turn the call over to the operator for questions.

Thank you. We will now be conducting a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star 2 if you would like to remove your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. And our first question will come from Brett Noblock with Cantor Fitzgerald.

Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my question, and congrats on the site expansion at Petco and Muscogee. I guess maybe just on the hyperscaler exclusivity, it expired. Clearly, there's demand with additional tenants kind of backfilling that, but could you maybe shed light on why it expired, why it didn't progress? Is there anything that maybe the sites

um were not of interest or they weren't interested in or just there's more color around that dynamic yeah absolutely and thank you brett yeah i mean those sites as you mentioned are incredibly attractive both pecos and muskogee given their ability to scale represent tremendous opportunity for hyperscaler um you know as we noted in prepared remarks three hyperscalers immediately engage you know they're incredibly attractive sites And really, with the one that we were under exclusivity with, it's hard to determine the exact reasons why. But for us, I mean, we got to the end of the exclusivity. And we thought this is the best time for us to bring these back to market because hyperscalers were knocking at the door and asking questions about the sites. And we knew we could have an opportunity to bring another hyperscaler into the fray. So we feel great about our position today, given the competitive dynamic.

Perfect. And maybe just one follow-up. You know, it seems like kind of the AI pendulum is swinging into full, you know, bull mode here. And you guys do have, I believe, a lot of capacity available to be kind of RFS, you know, by early 27th. Do we think we're closer to maybe second tenant today than we were, you know, when you guys reported 4Q in early March?

Yeah, I mean, when you look across our site portfolio, you know, we have five sites with First Data Halls RFS in 2027. It's an incredibly unique position given the different size and scale and geography spread that we have inside our portfolio. You know, we're in conversations with all of the hyperscalers, chip makers, AI labs, neoclouds. You know, really, we're in a unique position here just given the asset spread that we have. And so I would say definitely across the entire site portfolio, we are closer than we were before.

Awesome. Really appreciate it. Thank you, guys.

Thanks, Brett.

Our next question will come from John Todaro with Needham & Company.

Hey guys, thanks for taking my question and congrats on the expansion of power. Two from me, I guess just one going back to the other three hyperscalers you're now in conversation with. I guess if we frame it up, was there already some dialogue at some point? I mean, obviously it's a little bit of a limited universe, but should we be thinking it's kind of, starting the process anew with them or there's already been, you know, at some point along the way pretty far along where, you know, just we could get something maybe a bit sooner than necessarily restarting the process?

Yeah, thanks, John. Yeah, I mean, our relationship with these groups is not new. We are engaged in them on other sites. So this was just really bringing back, you know, both Pecos and Muskogee back to the table. And that's really why we were able to immediately re-engage with those customers.

Got it. Understood. That's very helpful. And then just, you know, you mentioned starting some of the process on building out some of these assets, you know, it sounds like before a lease gets done at some of them. Just kind of, I guess, is there any guardrail on how much CapEx you would start putting forward before you get a lease?

Yeah, I mean, the way we're thinking about it right now is we want to take the first data haul to full RFS. And, you know, as part of that, that means we're securing the labor, securing the trades, we're securing long lead equipment, and we're putting ourselves in a position where if a customer signs really within, any time period leading up to the RFS for the first data haul. We can just continue to extend all of that labor that we have secured on site. So, you know, that's kind of our guardrail right now in terms of where we sit. But we feel very confident in this strategy and the ability to show the progress that we're making across each of these sites to customers is really what's forcing the engagement here because everyone's incredibly interested in capacity that's getting delivered in 27 right now.

Yep, understood. Thank you for that, gentlemen.

Thank you.

And we'll go next to Tim Horan with Oppenheimer.

Thanks, guys. So do you have a rough idea when you might sign a contract? And can you maybe just talk about the pricing trends, you know, at a high level?

Yeah, I mean, I would just say we're actively engaged right now across every major group, and we feel very confident based on where we sit today versus where we sat three months ago. The only thing that's changed is our assets have continued to build more value. We've continued to deploy more capital, and we've continued to get closer to the RFI state. So we have high confidence in the customer conversations that we're having today. And if you could just remind me, Tim, what was your second question?

Yeah, you know, so, you know, what are you seeing in the pricing trend? So the pricing of the new contracts, do you expect?

Yeah, I mean, I think you could expect to see pricing continue to firm up. You know, really, that's the result of both labor and equipment continuing to inflate. And so what you're just seeing is a similar move in pricing.

And then just lastly, behind the meter power, can you give us just a sense of what's the lead time on that? And, you know, ultimately, how will your cost for, you know, build your own versus the grid, you know, compare?

Yeah. No, I mean, right now what we're looking at really is to deploy behind the meter solutions, you know, anywhere from about 12 to 14 months. But the great part is for us is, you know, these are opportunities given the locations that we have available to us. is really going to represent a great opportunity for continuing to expand at those sites. You know, the other site that we haven't talked about, Hunt, you know, Hunt has the opportunity to potentially bring behind the meter, but that's something that we're still in the evaluation phase today. Haven't necessarily done as much of the due diligence that we've done across Pecos and Muskogee and the work that is currently being performed there.

And is the ultimate cost of a customer about the same as grid or a little bit more?

it's about the same um i mean the economics for us as a developer uh look very similar so um the the end the cost to the intended to on a blended basis uh for power rate uh is not materially different thank you and michael donovan with compass point has our next question hi guys thanks for taking my question so another

Question on behind the meter. The Muskogee announcement this morning referenced Oklahoma's behind the meter legislation. Can you explain what that legislation changes for Core Scientific's ability to develop and whether it gives Muskogee a timing or cost advantage versus opportunities in Texas?

Yeah. I mean, Governor Stitt has been a big advocate of bringing behind the meter opportunities to the state of Oklahoma. You know, obviously you saw Governor Stitt's quote in the press release today. You know, Oklahoma is focused on figuring out how to bring more generation to the state. And so our ability to execute at Oklahoma, I wouldn't say it's it. necessarily any easier or any more difficult than our site in Pecos. But we're definitely of the support of the government there to continue to bring more generation to the state.

Thanks. And one follow up, if I may. Have you contemplated owning the generation assets or would you be solely partnering with a power developer? And then how are you thinking about redundancy?

Yeah, I'll take the first part of that question and then I'll hand it over to Matt to take the question about redundancy. As we evaluate the behind the meter solutions, there are potentially some solutions that we would own ourselves and there are others that we would work through a third party that would provide us a PPA and we would be paying for those over a course of time would be included in the power price. So there's a few different methods that we could go down. It really just comes down to the economics question as well as who the behind the meter solution is from. But Matt, you want to talk about redundancy?

Yeah, and to include in that is the maintenance and operation of the behind-the-meter generation sort of comes with that PPA agreement as well. And from a redundancy standpoint, obviously when we're building behind the meter, redundancy becomes much more critical in terms of when you're building high availability services. So we'll think about redundancy in terms, we need to be able to support the full load of redundancy what of the portion of the campus that we're powering from behind a meter under maintenance conditions, meaning that we need to be able to take some of that equipment offline for maintenance, maintain full load, and have redundant capacity still online and available in the event of a failure. So you can almost think about that as that minimum N plus one configuration, maybe an N plus two or an N plus 20% or N plus 30% type of redundancy scheme.

Great. I appreciate it, and congrats on the progress.

Thank you.

And moving on to Joseph Vafi with Conaccord.

Hey, guys. Good afternoon. Congrats on the progress. Thanks for taking the question. Just wondering how you're managing perhaps the labor side of the builds here. I'm not quite sure if you're employing a few large GCs. on the build, or are you looking at construction labor as any constraint in the market right now? Thank you.

Yeah, no, great question. Labor is one of the primary constraints of the market, if not, depending on which market we're talking about. But when we look at nationally, labor is a big issue. It's one of the reasons why we think we have an advantage by being able to proactively invest. in development of these sites, being able to secure and tie up the labor through our projected RFS and scaling beyond that. In terms of how we're doing that, so we have a couple of large GCs sort of executing the our sites in development today. And those GCs have a lot of leverage in the marketplace, being able to secure electrical contractors, mechanical contractors, civil, et cetera. And all of those, all except for probably one site, are already fully mobilized and executing our development as we speak. Great. Thank you very much.

We'll go next to Paul Goodling with Macquarie Capital.

Thanks so much and congrats on the progress. Just wanted to ask on these behind the meter opportunities that you've been discussing. I know you just mentioned in response to another question that you might partner with someone who would give you a PPA or you might look at an opportunity to do it yourself behind the meter in terms of generation. How is the air quality component of that structured, or how do you see that potentially being structured? Do you have to still go to market and apply for those emissions permits, or would a partner that you're speaking with already have that in hand? And then I have a follow-up. Thank you.

Yeah, no, great question. As we sort of – I mentioned in our prepared remarks is – The technologies that we're going to get behind and support for all of our behind-the-meter sites are going to be technologies that are low emissions generally, so that will give you a little bit of insight as to what we're not thinking about from that standpoint. And to go and to talk about sort of the permitting standpoint, yes, we will have to certainly go and apply for air quality permits, for many of these deployments. In some cases, that will be in participation with the behind-the-meter operator or supplier, and in other cases, we'll be doing that on our own. And I will say that in both Pecos and Muskogee, we're already kind of far down the path of sort of our air quality studies for the implementation of those solutions.

Got it. Thanks so much. I was just hoping you could also give a little more detail around some of the puts and takes that enabled you to raise the run rate margin profile on the existing energized and billable capacity from that 75 to 80 to 80 to 85. Thank you. Yeah.

So two years ago when we signed the CoreWeave, original CoreWeave contract, we had a scope of service contemplated in that deal. And I think we had an element of conservatism knowing that we hadn't broken ground on the project at that point, knowing that we were going to be deploying over a fairly lengthy period to have what I would call a very solid perspective on what we think we could have delivered. And once you're two years after the fact, you're into it, and we've got you know, more experience under our belt on the specificity of actual heads that are going to be devoted to the activities and the contractors that we're using and actually have deployed on site, it's really just a true-up of that experience. So we feel good that, you know, we're at a margin level that we can deliver today, and we felt more confident that we could be a bit more prescriptive of where we think we're going to end up.

Great. Thanks so much.

Our next question comes from George Sutton with Craig Hallam.

Thank you. As you begin to market to the chip makers and the neoclouds, I'm just curious, do you have a bifurcated sales portfolio where some of the sites and some of the maybe even parts of locations are being marketed to those folks versus the hyperscalers? How is that working through the system?

Yeah, I mean, really, we're showing both chip makers, neoclouds, labs, we're showing them the same sites that we are also showing to hyperscalers. I mean, as we work through these processes, oftentimes they're migrating to one or another site. But in reality, we're showing our entire portfolios to each of the customers that come through our door.

And one other question relative to the decision to execute ahead of the contracts. How does the negotiation get altered with some of these potential customers when you've secured the supply chain and you're kind of moving forward? Does that accelerate discussions? Does that keep them more engaged? Can you just walk through that thought process? Yes.

Yeah, I mean, it definitely keeps them more engaged. I mean, they rarely see sites that come across their desk where there's an RFS timeline really within, you know, 18 months, but even more so, you know, less than that. And so for us, you know, being able to show photos and videos of sites with active construction going on, and the list of equipment that are on order that dramatically changes the dynamic of the discussions because this isn't just a, you know, a photo of a piece of land. You know, this is an active construction site actively progressing towards building a data center.

Got you. Thank you, Adam.

We'll go next to John Hickman with Ladenburg-Solman.

Hi, thanks for taking my question. And this is a little bit esoteric. But now that you're well into your build out for CoreWeave, could you comment on the experience? Like, what was harder than you thought? What was easier? Where do you think you have a competitive advantage now that you've, you know, put that much, that many megawatts into production?

Yeah, no, it's actually a great question. Kind of reflecting on that, I think the thing that was much more difficult than we certainly gave it credit for was actually executing on brownfield conversions, which is why everything you see that we're doing forward is actually a greenfield site with a very highly standard basis design that allows us to get kind of leverage over our supply chain and be super predictable in terms of our delivery dates. Brownfield sites are highly unpredictable. They require a lot of customization. It's a lot of effort to try to retrofit an existing building. While sometimes that can be faster, it also comes with a lot more complexity. So that's what I would say is probably our biggest lessons learned out of this.

Okay. And so competitively... now that you've learned that. So where, where do you think you are with other people that are trying to, I mean, there's many other competitors that are trying to build data centers.

Yeah. Yeah.

The great part of you kind of,

Yeah, I think the great part of this is that we've had five sites to go, not practice on, but we have been executing these high-density builds across all the CoreWeave locations. I've been able to iterate on those designs. I mean, we've executed more than 150 design changes along the way across the portfolio. And that gives us a little bit of a head of the game in terms of what doesn't work. and what works well. And all of those learnings have been sort of culminated and formulated into a go-forward build strategy. And so I think we have just the advantage of learning all those lessons firsthand in real time. And so we won't make those mistakes going forward.

Great. Thanks and congratulations on the new deals.

And our next question comes from Nick Giles with B Reilly Securities.

Thank you, operator. This is Henry Hurl on for Nick Giles. I wanted to ask about the change in your approach to exclusivity. So in what scenarios would you go into it? And then you also mentioned being in contact with several counterparties. So would you expect to announce exclusivity if you were to enter into one?

Thanks. Yeah, thanks, Henry. I wouldn't say that we would expect to announce in the interim between quarters, but really what we've migrated to here is moving to a milestone arrangement method, which allows us to ensure that the cadence is moving at the pace that we would expect it to in a deal that would move towards closing. So that allows us to bring a site back on market if we don't feel like the pace and cadence is necessarily where we would like it to be. So, you know, we've migrated to this strategy. We're executing on it now, and we feel like it gives us the best shot on gold given the demand that we're seeing in the market today.

Understood. Thanks for that. And then on winding down your Bitcoin mining operations in the coming quarters, do you guys have a definitive target date to be fully out of that business, or will it kind of act as a small hedge going forward? Thanks.

No, I would say, you know, over the course of the remainder of this year, the Bitcoin mining business is going to continue to migrate lower. And by the end of this year, we will only have one or potentially two sites operating Bitcoin mining.

Thank you. Continue best of luck.

Thanks, Henry.

Moving on to Stephen Glegola with KBW.

Hey, thanks for the question. Adam, I just wanted to touch base again on the challenges on securing the leasing commitments at Pecos and Muskogee. From my standpoint, it would seem like you have strong leverage there. The sites have near-term power. You can point to your execution and the core we build out to date. So I guess maybe my question is, are you seeing hyperscalers become more selective in their choice of development partners? And if so, how is that influencing demand or deal timing?

Yeah, I mean, I think the interesting part about this is the exclusivity that expired, that customer is still at the table and still interested in those sites. So I think you are seeing that broadly across the market. You're seeing repeat deals across some of the developers, especially on the private side. So I would agree with that. But also, They're also looking for experience in the development of this type of infrastructure. This is different than the traditional data center infrastructure. And given the experience that we have and our ability to show them five sites that we've built 590 megawatts in progress, of critical IT load, that's a differentiator. And that really puts us in a different bucket here. So as you mentioned, we have great experience building. We have sites under construction. And it really puts us into a pretty unique category in this industry. Thank you.

And this now concludes our question and answer session. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation. This does conclude today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines and have a wonderful day.