haYN Capital

Why $CIFR is the one PSP I bought during this selloff When the whole high beta AI equity trade is selling off what you really want to look for is first the forced selling flow being exhausted Then equities that fundamentally have low risk to further downside Credit/tenant quality is the most important thing to getting your PSP valued at a lower cap rate I modeled the PSPs with the highest credit tenants $CIFR $APLD $HUT And $CIFR was the best Additionally, credit markets have been showing signs of stress which is one of the reasons companies like $IREN recently stated they slowed the amount of Capex they planned to spend in 2027 as they wait for credit markets stress to calm down. $CIFR also came out on top here as all 3 contracted sites have already received funding to build out So why is the valuation here asymmetric to the downside? In June, DLR just bought AA- hyperscale leases at a 6.5% year 1 cap rate with 3.6% annual rent bumps. Assuming exit cap rate ~8.5% 200bps risk premium. The transaction gets DLR an unlevered yield of 9%. I priced Cipher's three signed leases the same way: NOI and the building's resale value, discounted at 9% (10% for the weaker Fluidstack lease) To get PV Black Pearl (AWS): $4.34bn
 Stingray (AWS): $1.52bn
 Barber Lake (Fluidstack / Google): $4.12bn
 = $9.98bn Subtract •$4.54bn of project notes •$2.16bn of converts •$0.72bn of cash and bitcoin •$0.44bn of taxes 
= $3.56bn, or $6.53 a share I bought $CIFR at $5.90 Receiving the rest of their pipeline for free.

Decided to close $HUT take small profits today. Don’t want weekend risk of Iran War potentially heating up again. And like $CIFR more after working on models more

Being flat is worth a flex in this market (I hope the market gods dont punish me for this)

Planning to take a pretty big bet on some of the PSPs down in the gutters here Favorites so far from existing models are $HUT and $CIFR Modeling PSPs seeing which ones have been sold off way too hard relative to - value of their contracted MWs (analysis on tenant credit quality - value of their pipeline (analysis on geogrpahic risks, permitting and regulatory timelines and risks, etc) vaneck.com/us/en/blogs/digit…

You and me are not the same. While you are holding AI shitco bags I am printing cash trading an australian listed gold developer oscillating above and below liquid NAV (to make up for the losses getting stopped out of my AI shitcos)

Sold $SBM.AX at $0.75 Bought back at $0.71 Liquid NAV post Simberi close is A$0.75 At A$0.71 you get a ~26.5% shareholder yield • A$0.13 fully franked special = 18.3% (after the Simberi sale closes; not yet declared) • Buyback of up to 100m shares = 8.2% of the register, starting ~Nov 23 Will be more than happy to sit on my hands and get a 26% yield with additional upside optionality once the market starts to price Nova Scotia at more than $0.

Short $DNA (Ginkgo Bioworks): a cash-burning platform priced like a growth story The stock is ~$12. At that price the market is pricing in ~18–20% revenue CAGR for 10 years (FY2026–36): ~$90–110M → ~$570M, about 5–6x Base rates say roughly only 1 in 10 companies grow revenue 18–20% a year for a decade. Add $DNA’s own numbers and it’s closer to 1 in 20 or worse. The price is a 1.5–2 standard deviation bet that it’s one of them. Why $DNA is unlikely to be one of them: It starts from a shrinking business. Revenue fell 48% y/y in Q2. The industry grows ~0–8% a year. $DNA would need to beat it by 2.5x or more, every year, for 10 years The segment math doesn’t work: ~$200M from government (2x the entire NSF cloud-lab budget) plus ~$300M from pharma data, a segment now doing ~$4M a quarter Neither segment is profitable. 20% compounders fund their growth. $DNA is funding losses with 2 years of runway My model says ~$6, about 50% downside Why it’s a short: Run-rate revenue is ~$80M against ~$260M of opex Cash break-even needs ~$215–280M of revenue, roughly 3x today. ~90% of costs are fixed Cash runway is about 2 years: $302M of liquidity vs a $125–150M 2026 burn guide. A raise looks likely by 2027–28 ~$63M of ATM capacity is left, and they’ve been selling stock into rallies The easy opex cuts are done. Headcount is already down 60% (1,218 → 485) $663M of lease commitments, ~$54M a year on empty space, in a Boston lab market with ~28% vacancy. Subletting won’t save them soon Revenue quality is weak: non-cash deferred-revenue releases and $65M of related-party deferred revenue The AI and autonomous-lab wins are real but small. PNNL is $47M spread over 4 years The trade: Jan ‘27 $12/$8 put spread relative to common stock short a put spread allows the trade to be more path independent and defines risk on a name that tends to squeeze

On the positive side $SBM.AX approved an on-market buyback of up to 100M shares, which is about 8.2% of the 1.226B on issue. It starts around Nov 23, 2026 and runs for 12 months listcorp.com/asx/sbm/st-barb…

$SBM.AX 15-mile did not receive approval to skip a full federal assessment + gold prices breaking down below that $4,000 level likely gonna be a blood bath at open gonna try and dump the rest of my position at open then buy it back below NAV and repeat the cycle Actual Valuation Impact: Going through full federal assessment: Base case FID timeline moved from mid 2028 to beginning of 2030 + Probability of no build raised to 15% Gold Prices: Lowered probability of bull case NPV using $4,500 gold to 10% Raised Probability of base case NPV using $3,500 gold to 60% Raised probability of bear case NPV using $2,500 gold from 20% -> 25% Weighted Avg PT range: A$1.10 - A$1.40 iaac-aeic.gc.ca/050/evaluati…

Reduced my $SBM.AX and $CIFR positions by half based off tensions heating up in Iran. Trying to preserve my capital and front run some potential de-grossing related to this news. Will look for some attractive re-entries within the next couple weeks

Nibbling Entries on $CIFR here Technicals showing signs of approaching peak sell off Went back and really dug into my model and I am confident here that at $8-$9 there really is barely any downside relative to the present value of its existing contract My interpretation is that the main fears driving this sell off is AI labs slowing spending and rising financing costs Out of all the neoclouds $CIFR is less susceptible at this price because - AI labs spending growth slowing only hurts the value of the power pipeline yet to receive contracts - AI labs could default on commitments but $CIFR has prime credit customers in AWS and they have fluidstack on long contracts - they have already financed the buildout of these existing contracts I went back to my model adjusted the discount rate for Fluidstack data center to increase credit risk and lower exit rate for AWS data centers to reflect renewal risk and still don’t get much lower than existing market price.

Added to $SBM.AX at A$0.75 at this price you are literally just paying for cash + 2.75% NSR on Simberi that management sounds like they want to turn into cash as well then you get Nova Scotia mining assets for free significant size of my port now. A$0.75 Liquid assets A$0.63 in cash A$880m in cash (post simberi transaction) - A$61m dividend = A$820m + A$0.10-A$0.12 in royalties ~A$150m pv of the 2.75% NSR on simberi A$970m / 1.3B fd shares = A$0.745 This cash balance acts as fundamental value downside protection and reduces beta to gold prices. Gold prices are holding up well and have to drop a lot more to cause damage to $SBM.AX valuation Even at $3,000 gold the PFS headline for 15-mile Hub is C$1,565M NPV5. A lot of technical support here as well 50SMA at $0.75 200SMA at $0.65 Aug 28: Broke out after annual report Sep 10: Broke out after announcing sale of Simberi Both these dates broke out from the daily low of $0.715

Long: Long End Bonds? $ZN Inflation, growth, and front end rising pushed yields up But theres a lot of pressure on growth inflation + rate hikes + slowing AI growth

$CIFR got stopped out at $12.50 Sometimes trades are good process bad outcome and sometimes you are stupid In hindsight it is much easier to figure out why a trade did/didn’t work. For me, my takeaway was too much anchoring on my fair value/PT of the business + too bullish on being close to max pain for macro + underestimating AI fears from OpenAI news + too loose/impatient on technical entry A better entry would have been no entry at all and just waiting. Waiting for a base to form Or waiting for a good breakout & fundamental news flow to relieve macro & AI -> going long after the breakout I have been getting killed by falling knives this year but you live and you learn

$POCI an overlooked way to play LEO/space theme & its earnings transcript from Q4 is why $POCI dropped from $4.65 down to $4.10 back up to $4.60 since their Q4 report. 1) Why stock dropped? Revenue guidance came in flat for FY27 at $30-$33m why? Existing LEO customer had launch issues -> slowing launch rates -> lower consumption of $POCI components -> customer tell $POCI to slow production. management is guiding Q127 revenues for this customer to be down 40% further dropping in Q2 but states strong confidence revenues return to normal after launch issues are resolved annual revenue run rate was $12-$13m before these issues 2) Biggest Takeaway from Q4 transcript They have received engineering orders from another LEO customer - state the customer wants to ramp to production within 6-12 months - expected revenue run rate will be even bigger than the existing LEO programs $13m run rate. Here's the quote from the earnings call “The $50,000 order was an initial engineering order from a U.S. space technology development company developing a new satellite constellation. It was structured on a time and materials basis so that work could begin promptly. Since our announcement, we have received a second order for approximately $50,000 for additional engineering work. The scope of both orders supports design and manufacturing planning and is expected to take a few months. We anticipate follow-on engineering and prototype work to finalize designs and establish production lines. The customer's stated goal is to begin production within approximately 6 to 12 months with a potential significant impact to our fourth fiscal quarter and fiscal 2027. This new customer came to us in part because of our reputation in supplying very precise optomechanical assemblies required for satellite communication systems. While our discussion with this customer started with sub-assemblies similar to what we manufacture for our existing customer, it quickly progressed to include additional higher level assemblies some including electro optics and electronic circuits along with optics and mechanics. These higher level assemblies could allow us to provide more content per unit and take on a broader role in this new customer's system as compared to our existing customers. Based on those discussions, we believe the eventual opportunity could be larger than our existing satellite program, although it is too early to quantify.” "guess the one thing I could say is that the size of the constellations that we're talking about with this customer are similar or even higher, even larger than the customer that we've been working with. In the end of Q4, we were running at a run rate of, I think, $13 million a year for our existing satellite customer, somewhere around 12, 13 or so. In this other customer, this new customer, we expect the product that we make will be higher on the value chain. Therefore, I would expect it to be higher from that standpoint. Especially since the size of their satellite constellation will be similar or larger than the other. We can really say right now is it will be north of that $13 million we expect. It is difficult to say just how much higher it will be.” 3) My $POCI base PT: $6.50-$7 Assume 9 month until production starts existing LEO contract ramped to $13m run rate ~2 - 3 years after initial production = FY29 is when revenues reach that $13m level FY29 total revenues: $50m (16.9% implied revenue cagr from existing $31.5m) - $26m from 2 LEO contracts - $13m from medical programs (was $10m in 2026) - $10m from others ($5m from engineering services + $5m from Ross optical) gross margin: 37% gross profit: $18.5m opex: $11m ebit: $7.5m Discount Rate: 10% Implied FY29 ebit multiple: 13x 4) Is 13x ebit fair? The satellites involved in these LEO programs fall back into orbit after 5 years which means - revenues are recurring for existing programs - looking at industry launch growth rates it is not too bullish to assume further programs won and/or ramping of existing programs I am long $POCI. NFA