🐷Porkshire Oink🅰️way 🐽II

Hi! Regarding the $FRMI / @FermiAmerica deal with @tensorwave - the revised October 31 closing extension was largely about finalizing an investment grade guaranty. $AMD subsequently signed a credit support agreement with $FRMI, which by any objective measure, is a significant *positive* development. Are we (me included) fearing the worse and assuming the deal collapsed simply because no "successful closing" announcement has materialized? Might we have been erroneous in believing (or expecting) an announcement like this? Something that I've kinda been overlooking: Successfully closing an already announced lease doesn't automatically require a new SEC filing. It's not even really clear thast NASDAQ or the LSE would require that granularity given it's an alredy announced lease. By constrast... *terminating* a material agreement (like the one that is in place between $FRMI and TensorWave) most likely *would* trigger disclosure obligations. In other words, silence isn't necessarily bearish. The nature and scope of the Phase 1 project financing remains the key unknown. A new material financing agreement *could* trigger its own disclosure requirements, although the lease's financing condition could already be satisfied or waived. I'm not claiming the $FRMI / TensorWave deal definitively closed. But given $AMD's involvement and *no* reported termination, my base case is that the TensorWave agreement remains intact! 😀