Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Neural Foundry's avatar

Really insightful analysis on how the debt structure has evolved since 2021. The key difernce you highlighted - shifting from ASIC liens to convertibles - fundamentally changes the failure mode for these companies. In the last cycle, when hashprice collapsed and lenders seized hardware, it created forced liquidations at the worst possible time. Now with convertibles, equity holders absorb the pain through dilution rather than asset seizures, which should reduce binary blow-up risk. What's particularly interesting about the Cipher/MARA/TeraWulf $3B raise is that these convertibles are mostly zero-coupon, meaning no cash interest burden even if BTC and hashprice stay depressed. The bet is essentially that AI/HPC revenue can cover the capex before conversion dates hit. The risk has shifted from "can we service debt during a bear market" to "can we actually execute these AI buildouts at scale." Your point about broader buyer base is crucial too - infra and credit investors buying these converts are underwriting power/land/datacenter assets with dual-use optionality (BTC + AI), not just pure BTC beta. This makes the capital structure more resilient in theory, but the execution risk is enormous. If these miners can't stand up revenue-producing HPC at scale, equity dilution could be brutal even without forced liquidations.

Expand full comment
Daniel Popescu / ⧉ Pluralisk's avatar

Regarding the topic, your latest piece, following on the 2021 cycle, offers an excelent perspective.

Expand full comment

No posts