· 供应链分析

对比不同数据中心租赁期限对收入爬坡及长期竞争力的影响。

涉及标的:

中文翻译

我删除了之前的评论,因为 X 平台有 Bug 导致时间线混乱: 简而言之: $APLD 建设具有显著电力容量的数据中心,然后将基础设施租赁给客户。目前有 $110 亿的 $APLD 和 $CRWV 针对 Ellendale 园区的 15 年租赁协议。 Polaris Forge 2 约为 200+ MW,合同价值 $50 亿。从交易者视角来看,我不太看好较长的合同期限(例如 $CIFR | $WULF 的 10 年),相比 $NBIS | $MSFT 的 5 年合同,因为前者收入爬坡较慢且成本存在变数。但这并非真正的利空,因为如果你投资的是 1 年周期,你会希望收入爬坡尽可能快。 但如果看 FluidStack $WULF 的 15 年合同协议,它为公司在长期内提供了更多保障;反之,如果像 $MSFT 这样的超大规模云厂商最终自建容量和定制 ASIC,那么一些 Neocloud 公司在 4 年后可能会陷入困境。

英文原文

I'm deleting my earlier comment to this since X is bugged and it's messing up my timeline: But TLDR from before: $APLD builds data-centers with significant power capacity and then lease that infrastructure to customers. So there's the $11B $APLD, $CRWV lease right now over 15 years for Ellendale campus. Then there's Polaris Forge 2 is ~200+ MW with a $5B contract. Not much of a fan of longer contract terms (eg. 10 Years $CIFR | $WULF), vs. 5 Year $NBIS | $MSFT, since slower revenue ramp and changes of costs, but this is coming from a trader's perspecitve. Not as an actual negative when I talk about longer contract terms since if you’re investing for 1Y timeframe, you’d want the fastest revenue ramp possible. But if you look at fluidstack $WULF contract agreements eg. 15 years it provides a lot more guarantees for a company over time, vs. if hyperscalers like $MSFT end up building out their own capacity and custom ASICs then some Neoclouds might be in trouble after 4Y

在 X 上查看原推 ↗