$IREN: SemiAnalysis crossed a line… If you recall my post from yesterday, I wasn’t going to keep dragging this topic out. $IREN clearly intends to handle the situation pragmatically and collaboratively instead of turning it into a public fight with @SemiAnalysis_, and I didn’t want to stand in the way of that by pouring gasoline on the fire. However, after hearing what none other than Kent Draper, $IREN's Chief Commercial Officer, had to say yesterday, I don’t think I can stay quiet on it anymore... There are several parts of Semi’s portrayal of $IREN that deserve additional context, because once you hear IREN's side of the story, some of the claims in Semi’s ClusterMAX report start to look very different. Kent went on @McnallieM yesterday for a 1 hour interview and, toward the very end, directly addressed the new ClusterMAX ranking and the accusations surrounding $IREN's Prince George site. I’ve attached his full response below because I think everyone should hear it for themselves. But read this post first, then watch the clip... It hits much harder with the full context and my added commentary. The first issue starts with the ranking methodology itself. ClusterMAX explicitly says it is ranking managed Slurm and Kubernetes clusters. Yet as Kent confirmed, $IREN does not even have a live managed-services environment today. Investors following the company already knew this. Managed services are a capability IREN is only now building out following the @MirantisIT acquisition, which brought in the orchestration layer and enterprise cloud expertise needed to move beyond predominantly bare-metal compute. That immediately raises a pretty obvious question: If ClusterMAX is specifically a ranking of managed clusters, and $IREN does not currently have a managed cluster product available for Semi to test, why is IREN being ranked as "Underperforming" in the first place? The fair classification was always "Unavailable". That may technically sit below Underperforming on the ranking, but the implication is completely different. Unavailable simply tells the reader that there was no qualifying product available to test. Underperforming tells the reader that Semi tested $IREN's managed offering and found it poor. According to Kent, they couldn’t have done that because the product isn’t live yet. This becomes even stranger when Semi goes as far as recommending that $IREN “stop pretending to offer managed clusters and inference endpoints” because of the supposed shortcomings of those services. How exactly do you reach a conclusion on the quality of a managed service that has not launched? If anything, the limited evidence we currently have around $IREN's forthcoming managed-services capabilities points in the opposite direction. Kent specifically said IREN has already signed managed-services clusters with NVIDIA for its own internal R&D workloads. That sits alongside NVIDIA’s broader five-year, $3.4B cloud agreement with $IREN across 60MW of capacity. NVIDIA obviously understands GPU infrastructure better than virtually anyone on the planet, and as Kent pointed out, they conducted extensive diligence around $IREN's ability to deliver before signing a contract of that size for their own workloads. So before $IREN's managed-services platform has even properly launched, one of the first companies willing to underwrite it is NVIDIA itself. Semi somehow found room to tell IREN to stop marketing a service that isn’t live yet, but apparently didn’t find that worth discussing... Then we get to Prince George, which is where most of the really aggressive language in Semi’s write-up comes from. Kent did not deny that Prince George has experienced issues, nor did he try to pretend the site was built from day one like IREN's newer AI infrastructure. He explained that Prince George was originally a Bitcoin mining facility that $IREN has been retrofitting for AI compute, and the company was installing additional power redundancy as part of that process. The important part is WHY the GPUs came online before all of that redundancy was finished. According to Kent, customers wanted access to the compute as quickly as possible. $IREN therefore brought the GPUs online while the redundancy buildout was still progressing, and those customers were fully aware of the setup from the beginning. That is a very different picture from IREN secretly cutting corners, handing customers an inferior product and then getting caught after the fact. It was a known tradeoff... Customers wanted the GPUs immediately, $IREN had the capacity available, and they were willing to accept reduced redundancy during the retrofit in exchange for getting access to scarce compute sooner. And today, the very power redundancy Semi criticized as “missing” is already being commissioned. There is also a pretty funny detail here that I think deserves more attention. The only customer relationship Semi actually names in connection with the Prince George problems is TogetherAI (@togethercompute). Semi tested Together capacity running out of Prince George and says it knows of multiple unhappy Together customers using that infrastructure. Semi also claims to have heard complaints from customers renting directly from $IREN, but none of those customers are identified. Meanwhile, Kent confirmed in the exact same interview that Together recently renewed or expanded its relationship with IREN. In other words, the one company sitting between Semi and the Prince George cluster they use as their clearest example of $IREN's supposed unreliability decided to do more business with IREN. That doesn’t mean an outage never happened or that every downstream Together customer had a flawless experience. It does, however, make the broader portrayal of Prince George as some completely dysfunctional operation rather difficult to square with the commercial behavior of the customer Semi itself links most directly to the site. If the experience was truly as irredeemable as the language in ClusterMAX suggests, why is Together signing up for more? The fiber accusation gets even more interesting... Semi specifically mocked Prince George for supposedly having a single Internet Service Provider (ISP) with no redundancy. Yet, Kent directly contradicted that. $IREN does have redundant fiber at Prince George. What happened over the summer was that wildfires in British Columbia damaged parts of the surrounding fiber network, temporarily reducing the level of redundancy available to the site. Those are two very different things... A site being architected without redundant fiber is an infrastructure decision, while a site having redundant fiber and then temporarily losing portions of that redundancy because wildfires physically damaged external lines is an operational event. Yet if you only read Semi’s version, you would walk away believing $IREN simply built the site with one ISP and called it a day. Prince George also tells you very little about how IREN’s next generation of infrastructure is being built. Kent confirmed that Horizon, the future Childress deployments and Sweetwater will incorporate full power, mechanical and cooling redundancy from day one, including full concurrent maintainability. Semi itself even acknowledges that Childress and Sweetwater look considerably better than Prince George. Which makes the attempt to use a retrofitted Bitcoin mining facility in Northern Canada as some sweeping indictment of where $IREN's cloud platform is heading even more questionable. Reporting genuine outages, reliability problems or customer complaints is completely fair game. I want publications like Semi digging into that stuff. But there is a difference between reporting those problems and taking issues at one transitional retrofit site, assigning an Underperforming rating to a managed service the company doesn’t even offer yet, telling $IREN to stop pretending it offers that service, calling Prince George the “#1 worst site in the industry according to some anonymous users”, and then suggesting NVIDIA’s involvement might help IREN “cut less corners this time around.” That is where, in my opinion, the report crossed from analysis into grandstanding... Especially when a considerable amount of the missing context could have been cleared up with a direct conversation with $IREN. And that brings me back to how IREN itself handled this. I have never shied away from criticizing $IREN's investor relations and communication when I thought they deserved it. I dedicated an entire section of our latest earnings report to the issue and have raised it publicly numerous times over the past year. But I’ve also been equally vocal in recent weeks about the improvement I’ve seen. There has been a meaningful uptick in investor communication, more context coming directly from management, and a much greater effort to shape the company’s own narrative before somebody else shapes it for them. This situation is another example where I genuinely could not have asked for a better response. $IREN didn’t put out some dramatic press release attacking Semi. They also didn’t start throwing accusations around on social media, and they didn’t turn a research report into a corporate feud that would only give the entire story more oxygen. Instead, their Chief Commercial Officer went onto an investor podcast, answered the question directly, explained the facts behind the situation and left it there. No grandstanding, no personal attacks, just context. At the same time, as I mentioned yesterday, IREN appears intent on working more closely with publications like Semi as its managed-services platform actually rolls out, which is exactly the right approach from a corporate perspective. There is zero reason to burn bridges with an influential industry publication when you can instead give them access to the real product once it exists and let the results speak for themselves. As a shareholder, I couldn’t be happier with how $IREN handled this. And massive credit to @McnallieM for hosting another excellent interview and asking Kent the question directly. This entire discussion would have remained one-sided without it. Now everyone has both sides of the story. Watch Kent’s full response below. Cheers! ✌️

TRUE BLOCK CHAIN USE CASE by $SOFI . People Talk a lot , @SoFi @SoFiTechSol delivers the 1st.

A suggestion 4 Pres Trump: Since ur hearing frm Big Oil abt diesel prices & the problems w an embargo tell Big Oil 2reduce their prices 4 Americans/not charge global price This is an America 1st issue WHY B ENERGY INDEPENDENT IF WE ARENT GOING 2USE IT WHEN WE NEED IT

Do follow @OInvests , he nailed Dylan. 🙏🔥 $IREN $NBIS

Great clip here from @kentpdraper CCO @IREN_Ltd going over the ratings from @SemiAnalysis_ on the @power_analys1s interview today!!! 🚀🚀🚀 $IREN Check out the full interview here 👇👇👇 piped.video/watch?v=W1Z_O1zl…

EXCELLENT INTERVIEW of $IREN CCO @kentpdraper, answers Semi Analysis, Q4 2026, 2027, $NVDA , 2028. Thank you @McnallieM You are amazing. My take on IREN’s Q4 FY26 update, the 2027 NVIDIA ramp, Mirantis, and what the company still has to prove. Kent Draper’s interview reinforced my view that the AI infrastructure opportunity is enormous. It also put the main bottleneck in focus: IREN must turn secured power and contracted demand into reliable, operating AI Cloud revenue. His response to SemiAnalysis is an important part of that story. Kent said IREN had not provided a live, representative managed-services platform for the review because that offering was still being developed. He also pointed to fuller power and mechanical redundancy in future builds. That explains a limitation of the managed-services assessment, but it does not make the reliability concerns disappear. IREN now has to demonstrate the improvement in operating clusters. Here is my breakdown. Q4 FY26: Contracted ARR versus operating ARR IREN reported $4B of contracted annualized run-rate revenue (ARR) tied to 2026 capacity, of which $1B was operating at the FY26 update. That distinction matters. A signed contract does not become operating ARR until capacity is built, commissioned, handed over, and running for the customer. FY26 recognized AI Cloud Services revenue was $128.8M, showing how early the revenue conversion still was relative to the contracted run rate. For me, the question is no longer whether IREN can announce large contracts. It is how quickly the remaining contracted capacity becomes operational—and how reliably it runs once delivered. Where NVIDIA fits in 2027 IREN expects approximately $700M of ARR from its NVIDIA cloud contract to ramp in 2027. Management explicitly said this is outside the $4B contracted ARR figure for 2026 capacity. I would keep those figures separate in any model. The relationship also brings technical validation. IREN reported NVIDIA Exemplar Cloud status for its GB300 NVL72 deployment, while Mirantis has strengthened the software side of IREN’s NVIDIA ecosystem. The next milestone is turning that relationship into deployed capacity and operating revenue. Horizon: Can IREN repeat the first delivery? IREN delivered Horizon 1, the first of four 50 MW IT liquid-cooled deployments. At the FY26 update, Horizon 2 was in commissioning and Horizons 3 and 4 were in late-stage construction, targeting delivery in Q4 calendar 2026. The value of a repeatable design is speed and learning. But each phase still needs successful construction, GPU installation, testing, customer acceptance, and stable operation. That is why I watch completed handovers more closely than planned megawatts alone. Liquid cooling helps IREN support dense, power-hungry AI systems. It is an advantage when delivered well, and another system that must perform consistently once a customer’s cluster is live. Vertical integration: The full stack Kent described IREN’s platform across three layers: 1. Data centers: Land, power, substations, buildings, cooling, and connectivity. 2. Compute: GPUs, servers, networking, and storage. 3. Software and services: Orchestration, deployment, monitoring, customer support, and managed cloud offerings. IREN also acts as its own general contractor on key projects. That gives it more direct control over construction schedules, equipment coordination, and delivery. In a market where customers want compute quickly, time to operating capacity can be a competitive advantage. Owning the full stack also raises the execution bar. IREN has to build the facility, finance and deploy the GPUs, and deliver a dependable customer experience. Why Mirantis matters Large hyperscalers and frontier labs often bring their own orchestration software and may prefer bare metal. Smaller AI developers and enterprises may need a provider to manage more of the stack. Kent said Mirantis helps IREN serve that second group through orchestration, deployment, monitoring, and enterprise support. It also creates a path toward reserved managed clusters and potentially on-demand compute. That could broaden IREN’s customer base and allow it to earn more value from the same underlying infrastructure. I see the strategic logic. I also want to see the operating proof: a mature service, consistent support across sites, and customers renewing because the platform works well for them. Kent’s answer to the SemiAnalysis question SemiAnalysis’s September ClusterMAX 3.0 report was sharply critical of IREN. It cited customer-reported power, networking, storage, and GPU reliability problems at its British Columbia sites and questioned the maturity of its managed-cluster offering. SemiAnalysis also said the newer Childress and Sweetwater builds appeared better designed for redundancy. Those are SemiAnalysis’s findings and reported customer experiences, rather than incidents I have independently verified. Kent’s response had two parts. First, he said IREN did not submit a live managed-services environment representative of its intended offering for testing at that time. The platform was still under development. That matters when interpreting a rating of its managed-service capabilities. Second, he said future builds would include full power and mechanical redundancy as a standard design feature. That speaks to the infrastructure concerns, especially as IREN expands beyond its earlier sites. My view is that Kent provided useful context, but the debate will be settled by results. A developing platform explains what was available to test; it does not answer every report about live-site reliability. The proof will be sustained uptime, resilient power and networking, effective incident response, and a managed service that customers and independent reviewers can test at scale. Funding the next phase IREN said it secured approximately $19B in funding over the preceding 12 months. That included roughly $3B of equity, with the rest coming from sources including customer prepayments, GPU financing, and convertible notes. The $19B should be understood as funding secured, not as unrestricted cash on the balance sheet. IREN reported $3.6B of investment-grade GPU financing at about 6%. For non-investment-grade customer deployments, it secured $2.8B of GPU financing; a $2.4B Mackenzie portion carries a 9% fixed rate. Recent customer prepayments covered 45%–55% of associated GPU capex on the deals IREN described. This is a powerful financing model if customer demand, asset performance, and delivery continue to support it. Yet IREN guided to approximately $25B–$30B of FY27 capex, so the cost and structure of future funding remain central to the investment case. Texas and the longer pipeline Texas gives IREN room to scale at Childress and Sweetwater. Kent highlighted Sweetwater’s 2 GW power position, existing grid infrastructure work, and the importance of building on a schedule customers can use. IREN is also developing opportunities in Oklahoma, Spain, and Australia, alongside additional deployments at existing Canadian sites. I separate secured power, planned IT capacity, contracted ARR, and operating ARR. They represent different points on the path to revenue. A large power position is valuable; each subsequent step still takes capital and execution. IREN’s main growth bottlenecks 1. Converting power into usable IT capacity. Grid access is the starting point. Data halls, cooling, substations, and networking have to be ready together. 2. Delivering projects on time. Horizon 1 is a proof point. Repeating the handover across later phases and new sites is the test. 3. Commissioning GPU clusters. Hardware delivery alone does not create operating ARR. Clusters must be installed, tested, accepted, and available to customers. 4. Reliability. SemiAnalysis put a spotlight on power, networking, storage, and customer experience. IREN needs measurable improvement and sustained performance. 5. Scaling managed services. Mirantis brings software and expertise. IREN must integrate them into a dependable offering that customers will pay a premium to use. 6. Financing growth efficiently. Customer prepayments and equipment financing help fund GPUs. The scale of future capex means debt cost and potential dilution still deserve close attention. 7. Contracting future capacity across more customers. The next stage depends on matching 2027 and 2028 deployments with demand on attractive terms, while avoiding excessive dependence on any one customer or contract type. My thesis remains that power and execution are the scarce assets in AI infrastructure. IREN has assembled an unusual combination of sites, construction capability, customers, GPU financing, and Mirantis’s software layer. Now the company has to show the full system working together. I will judge that through operating ARR, on-time customer handovers, cluster reliability, renewals, and funding cost. Kent’s response to SemiAnalysis is part of the explanation; performance over the coming quarters will be the answer. My analysis only, not investment advice. Future ARR and delivery dates are forward-looking. Do your own research. @brianfry01 @jiahanjimliu @ilzmcfly @OInvests @TheTechInvest @BitcoinAIGuy @franklee6924T @IREN_Ltd

$IREN : Do we need @nvidia Exemplar status or SEMI Analysis FUD Status ? YOU GET THE ANSWER !

Great Find @OInvests on Semi and $NBIS . X is a great place to debunk the $IREN FUD.

$SOFI Innovated Settlement layer and its Live. @SoFi was also 1st one to offer fractional shares which others copied at later point of time. @SoFi always thinks ahead of time to disrupt the status Quo.

Proof Semi analysis is a FUD . $IREN

Ferguson hope you fix the Fraud.

Another outstanding Article @jiahanjimliu . Hope @SemiAnalysis_ reviews content with Jim before posting next time . 🙏🔥🎯 $IREN $NBIS $CRWV

Issues with ClusterMax 3.0 1. $ORCL had a huge security breach today (1) and is somehow ranked above AWS and Azure. 2. Firmus AI has a grand total 32 racks / 256 GPU H200s (2) generating 32m ARR and is a better AI cloud than AWS. 3. Cursor’s Composer Model was trained on FireworksAI (3), ChatGPT was trained on Azure, and Claude trained on AWS. None of these are apparently top AI Clouds. None of the top AI models are from “top AI clouds”. Hmm… ClusterMax is clearly pay to rank ad. (1) nitter.net/rdd147/status/21026490… (2) firmus.co/newsroom/ai-singap… - site taken down but you can get the archived info from ChatGPT (3) cursor.com/blog/composer-2-t… (list FireworksAI and Colfax as collaborators)

HUGE SHOUT OUT TO @hiddenpatriotme for consistently hitting the Ground, Covering $IREN $NAUI $FRMI . Hope we all send Tips 💰 to @hiddenpatriotme for his hard work.🙏THANK YOU

Possible NEXT STEPS for $NUAI 1) PPA letter of credit finalized 2)@Macquarie releases more funding 3) JV announced with @StreamDataCentr 4) Official leases signed