Infratil Limited ($IFT)

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Infratil Limited Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Jason Boyes, Chief Executive. Please go ahead.

Good morning, everyone. It's Jason Boyes here, the Chief Executive of Infratil. We're very pleased to be talking to you this morning about some contracts that CDC have signed and announced overnight. There's a release that's gone out to the exchange and a presentation that we're going to run through with you here this morning. [indiscernible] opportunity questions and answers here at the end. I'm joined by Greg Boorer, CDC Founder and CEO; and David Collins, the CDC CFO as well. We're going to do the bulk of the lifting on the presentation. I won't steal any of their thunder, and I'll hand over to Greg now who will be on Page 3 of the presentation. Over to you, Greg.

Thanks, Jason, and good morning, everybody. I love a great day to be talking to everyone after a long buildup, which has taken quite a few months to get this significant contract across the line, but the largest contract in CDC's history, but also probably one of the bigger contracts in the history of APAC. So it's a wonderful day, and that takes us up to more than 1 gigawatt of contracted capacity. And the slide in front of you demonstrates the rollout timetable for that capacity over the coming years. Now the size of this contract and the length of the contract are quite significant. And that really goes to the heart of the confidence that the customer has in CDC's ability to deliver certainly from a capacity and capability perspective, but also from the wherewithal in terms of the capital to meet the size and scale of the opportunity. It also speaks volumes to the technological flexibility and something that I've been talking about for a long time, the adaptation that's inherent in the model that we created nearly 20 years ago, which enables customers to adapt to changing technologies and densities and methods of cooling architectures, et cetera, over time. And that plays a big role in our ability to win these outside contracts. It also speaks volumes to the sustainability story. The sustainability story of CDC is really, really significant. And this is an absolute differentiator, just like the other elements or pillars of our offering around security, technological future-proof fairness, the sustainability is increasingly important and one of the most important considerations. And the fact that we are going to be in calendar year 2026, the first 100% certified net zero data center operator is proof of those credentials. But I think more importantly, which one of the bigger challenges when it comes to consenting or application approvals in Australia is the use of water. And this contract alone through CDC's unique cooling architecture that uses closed-loop cooling architecture, which uses no water will actually save 14 billion liters of clean drinking water per annum that won't be used for evaporative cooling, which is part of the industry standard today, unfortunately. So that's a really important takeaway, and that is very important to our end customer, of course. The end customer, it's a single customer. It's a U.S.-based hyperscaler, probably no surprises there and investment-grade counterparty, which then increases the investment-grade counterparty percentage in CDC's business from a capacity basis to pretty close to 100%, which is amazing. And one of the reasons why the wonderful rating agencies continue to support an investment-grade credit rating for CDC, which then goes to speaks to our ability to raise capital very, very efficiently in market-leading rates, which then transforms into even more momentum for the business in the future. If we change slides and go to the development program. What's important to take away here is that there's no real risk here because the capacity that we've contracted yesterday is going to be delivered through existing sites that are well down the development path much faster consenting and permitting in all of those things, and we're actually delivering these buildings as we speak. And that then leads into the conversation of the size and scale of the pipeline. So from 1 gigawatt of contracted capacity, we still have more than that, 1.6 gigawatts of land that we own, power that is secured that we're progressively going to work through. And that's important because the size and scale of the business today is such that we need to have a large pipeline to continue to grow at the velocity that we have been growing in recent times. And we do feel that, that growth is really in sort of -- in the large-scale growth is only just beginning. And we're very, very confident of doing more business of this size and scale in the future, hence, the importance of that 1.6 gigawatts of capacity that we're slowly bringing into -- bringing online over the coming years. What's also important to recognize here is the size and scale of the opportunity for Australia is significant, but the number of counterparties that actually have all of the characteristics that make them suitable to be a delivery partner in the new AI world are becoming smaller and smaller. And that's because not everybody can actually have to find the capital to deliver at this scale. And not many people have the expertise or experience or the referenceability to actually deliver these very, very sophisticated liquid cooling AI builds in the way that CDC has. And again, that differentiation whilst in a rising tide in terms of AI and capacity, people might argue that most all boats will float higher. It's just not necessarily the case because the cost of the IT equipment, the GPUs is so high now and the risk of getting liquid cooling wrong and destroying that equipment is such that the biggest customers in the world, the most important customers in the world are really relying on a smaller and smaller number of trusted counterparties that have that capability to deliver. So given our credentials, given the fact that we've been doing this for 20 years and the liquid cooling story is part of our history from day 1, then I'm very, very confident that we will continue to grow in a faster rate in an outsized way relative to the industry, which is growing fast, notwithstanding. So with that, we might -- I might hand you over to our Chief Financial Officer, David, to step through the financial impacts of this contract on the business, but also, most importantly, how we plan to fund this and to give everyone confidence that we've got all of those details in hand. Over to you, David.

Thanks, Greg, and good morning, everyone. It's great to be with you today. I'm on Slide 5. I wanted to make a couple of comments on EBITDAF and CapEx forecast following this contract announcement. So starting with EBITDAF, we are seeing a significant step-up in EBITDAF looking forward as contracted capacity comes online. Existing guidance for FY '27 is unchanged at $680 million to $720 million. We are advising today that expected EBITDAF in full year '28 will exceed $1 billion. As always with our earnings subject to us the timing of build delivery and customer activation. And looking past full year '28 to when this contract is fully deployed and we will be over 1 gigawatt of contracted capacity, that will deliver annualized contracted EBITDAF of around AUD 2 billion. So a very significant step-up as we look forward in EBITDAF as a result of this contract. Moving to CapEx. CapEx does lift and will lift in full year '27 to support the ongoing strong capacity demand that we're seeing in the market. We are guiding today to full year '27 CapEx guidance of AUD 3.8 billion to AUD 4.2 billion, excluding land, which is up from the full year '26 guidance of $1.9 billion to AUD $2.2 billion. In terms of the cost of CapEx per ICT megawatt, that does vary by site, location and customer. But on average, on a per million measure, that is in the mid-teens for CapEx, excluding land. And as you would expect and as our history shows, we have a continued focus on efficiently deploying our capital and aligning that with revenue generation and indeed with customer demand. Moving on to Slide 6 and some comments on the funding capacity of our business. If I start with debt and make a few comments around the debt platform we have within our business. Starting with what we have in our hand at the moment, we have AUD 3.9 billion of cash and undrawn bank borrowings as at the 31st of March. So we're in a very solid position from a liquidity perspective. Our weighted average cost of debt is around 6% at full year '26. Very importantly, on the 21st of April, Moody's announced a public credit rating for CDC Australia at Baa2 and stable. What that rating gives us is a path to a deeper and broader range of capital markets, broadening from our existing funding sources of bank debt and USPP and allowing us to extend into broader debt, both senior and hybrid capital markets. As you will have seen recently, we did complete a structural separation of the New Zealand business from the Australian business, which was done for reasons of both capital and operating and balance sheet efficiency, and that did deliver $827 million of capital back to the Australian business, which helped to reduce debt on the Australian side of our business. Importantly, for the New Zealand business and that part of the structure, whilst it's not publicly rated, it does maintain an investment-grade profile and will support the New Zealand business going forward. A couple of specific comments on Moody's and on the announcement on the 21st of April. This was a critical milestone for our business. We have long held a private rating at investment-grade Baa2, but this is a public acknowledgment and announcement for Moody's. They do point to in their report, the strength of our business around demand, proportion of investment-grade weighted customers, long weighted average lease life and indeed our approach to CapEx. So very important for us as we look forward to funding the growth of our business. We have a detailed plan to fund this contract. We are active on that plan at present. We are looking at both senior and hybrid capital markets. And I would note specifically with hybrids, it's important to note the equity content that comes with hybrid issuances in the marketplace. Lastly, in terms of equity, we are privileged to have very supportive and strong shareholders who have supported our business over time and indeed, most recently provided $500 million of equity in February of this year, of which Infratil contributed their share at $250 million. Today's contract announcement does not require any equity going forward to fund, but indeed or instead, we will fund this through the debt capacity we have in our business, as I've just outlined. With that, I'll hand over to Greg for Slide #7. Thank you.

Thank you, David. This slide builds on the update that I provided investors in Sydney at the end of March, so not so long ago and shows the global requirement in terms of data center capacity over the coming years. Now this has been also echoed in recent announcements or earnings calls by every single major hyperscaler, where every single hyperscaler mentioned that they are also very, very capacity constrained in their data center portfolios. And so I think the future looks very, very bright. And indeed, we are working with a number of large clients as we speak on large-scale future deployments, which I'm really excited about and hope to be able to provide even more clarity on those conversations at the end of May during Infratil's earnings and end of year update. But this reinforces this announcement last night today that sort of reinforces the fact that we've been -- CDC has been working really, really hard for 20 years across lots of different sections of the addressable market and has been very successful at adapting to the changing demands, requirements of customers. And it also speaks volumes of the differentiation of the CDC offering relative to the industry and why we continue to grow faster than the industry as a whole. So looking very forward to getting our teeth into execution and delivery. We'll continue to execute to continue to meet all of the time frames, which are really important. That's one of the important elements here is the largest customers in the world will only back the companies that they have trust and confidence that can hit the dates that they have been promised in their contractual agreements because the implications financially to the largest customers in the world if those dates are missed are quite material. So with that, I might hand back to Jason to round out this morning's conversation and then to invite a question-and-answer session.

Congratulations. The smiles in the room are pretty big here, everyone. I think what we wanted to capture on this last slide is really should have been evident from what Greg and David are saying the relentless focus on all the little bits and pieces that have gone together to maintain what we see as a very attractive mid-teens plus infrastructure like investment. So you have infrastructure style financing producing infrastructure style cost of capital rolling up to what we continue to see as a very attractive investment for Infratil sitting in that growth very much in that growth driver part of the portfolio going forward. reiterating what David said, this does not require further shareholder equity from shareholders for CDC. And I guess the other key message I was listening to Greg and David talk there is that this isn't the end for CDC. This is the beginning and the business remains incredibly well positioned with pipeline and everything Greg and we have been talking about for a long time to continue to capture an outsized growth like this, which will be amazing not only for CDC, Infratil shareholders, but for the Australian industry as well, which I know is a big motor Greg. We've got here a reference to our own investment-grade credit rating, which was achieved late last year, which reflects our strong liquidity position, backed by the divestment program we've talked about for the last year, which continues to be on track. And so if you look back over the last year, you'll see all these little bits and pieces being put in place, our credit rating, David's credit rating, some of the raises that have been done, some of the raises that have been coming to make sure that when we reach this moment, which is happily here, we're well placed to confirm to the market that the attractive equity investment story certainly remains strong and alive. So with that, I'll finish up here and hand back to you, Ashley, for some questions.

[Operator Instructions] Eric Choi with Barrenjoey.

Can I please ask 2 numerical questions, just one on funding and one on returns. Just on funding, firstly, I just wanted to check the logic on why further equity isn't required. And that is, if we look at Moody's, they've got a 10x gearing target, you're spending $4 billion of CapEx in FY '27. So $4 billion divided by $10 billion is $400 million of EBITDA growth required. Coincidentally enough, your $700 million of EBITDA in '27 probably goes to $1.5 billion by FY '29. So you're actually growing $400 million a year. So my question is, does all of that math actually suggest the credit agencies will allow you to debt fund $4 billion of CapEx every year based on your current profile? And actually, you could fund more CapEx than that if your EBITDA growth ever stepped above that kind of $400 million a year. Sorry, that's a long-winded first question.

I think we got it in the half, but I think we got...

Thanks, Eric, for the question. Moody's are clear with the metrics that -- or the thresholds for us, which, as you know, is 10x net debt to -- it's very important that -- and I'm sure you know this from looking from your experience that Moody's will look through periods of time where entities like us are temporarily above that level when you have rapid deleveraging coming as earnings grow looking forward. So the math broadly that you described is right. It's a 10x net debt-to-EBITDA ratio. What I would point out though is there is variation from year-to-year. There are some years where spend will be higher for commercial reasons, but you can look through that as the deleveraging follows with earnings. So reiterating, we have a detailed funding plan that we are actively pursuing at present for this contract and for our broader business, we can fully debt fund this contract. We do have hybrid markets available to us as well as senior debt markets, all of which we are looking at as we speak. So the rating is important to us. We work closely with Moody's, as you would expect, and we're very confident that we will be able to continue to maintain that rating without the need for shareholder equity support to deliver this contract.

Do you have a second one?

Yes, please, sorry. Just secondly, on returns, obviously, investors are very focused on returns versus your cost of capital spread. But if I oversimplify the return cap to 4 drivers, there's cost of build ramp time, EBITDA per megawatt, cost of debt. It looks like 2 of those are improving, which is cost to build and ramp time. One looks flat based on your guidance, which is EBITDA per megawatt and then one could be worse, which is interest cost. But if you got 2 better, worse and you run that through a DCF it suggests returns are actually improving. So my question is, can we actually conclude the equity IRR on this 555-megawatt contract is actually better than your historic mid-teens IRR?

I can talk a little bit to that because we've guided that in the past, you might have a contribution. I think the -- yes, so the mid-teens is actually our overall investment in CDC, right? And so individual developments will generally be higher than that. But of course, we're holding a bunch of operating assets that are probably like a 9% to 10% cost of equity. So when I talk about it from an Infratil perspective, what I want to see a big part of the portfolio is a mid-teens plus profile, and we're well and truly in terms of the blending on profit. I don't know if you have anything to add on.

I would just add 2 things to that. As you understand, we don't quote IRRs on individual contracts at a CDC level or even in total. But what I would say is that you get variations across customers and sites according to the particular contract. We do have, over time, as we look forward, very strong and improving operational leverage. So you will see that as we scale, we get more efficiency in the use of our cost base, and you will see our EBITDAF margins grow over time. On interest cost, as you mentioned, sure, in the market at present, interest rates have increased, particularly with what's happened in the Middle East. However, what I would say is we have a forward-looking hedging profile, which looks to smooth out the impact of market volatility on interest rates. So that's something that we think is an important part of the overall mix for us. So -- and probably one last comment. A number of our contracts as we look at them now and negotiations with customers are at campus level. So a campus has multiple data centers on it. And again, that drives efficiency, scale and operating leverage for our business, all of which ultimately feeds margins and IRRs. So that's probably what I would say.

Your next question comes from Roger Samuel with Jefferies.

I've got 2 questions as well. First is just on the delivery time frame. It looks like you have to fulfill this new contract by the end of FY '29. My question is what gives you confidence that you can meet the delivery time frame given the sheer scale of development required?

Thanks for the question, Roger. We have lots and lots of confidence. We have a significant in-house capability in terms of construction code management alongside our trusted general contractors. trusted general contractors have been with us for many, many years and built many, many data centers. And so -- and plus, the campus model that David alluded to a moment ago actually improves the speed significantly because you can have a rolling workforce that kind of stays on your land for a number of years, never never leaves. And that makes it much more efficient to deliver these buildings. And the fact that I think we've built about 28 data centers so far in CDC's history, and we have a wonderful track record of delivering data centers efficiently to a really high standard. And that gives us, again, confidence to do it. We have a detailed construction and implementation plan. We are one of the largest partners of the largest infrastructure providers in the world, which gives us incredible leverage in the long lead time equipment and supply chain areas. And we've been prepositioning long lead time equipment for this particular opportunity and indeed, our forward-looking pipeline for many years already. And so I'm very confident every which way that I consider this and look at it that we will not only meet those time frames, but hopefully exceed those and generate the revenue even earlier.

Yes. Okay. And my second question is on that EBITDA for this new contract, yes, it looks like it's not going to be much lower than $2 million per megawatt despite such a large size. I'm just wondering how competitive was the tendering process for this contract? Perhaps it's not very competitive given that you're probably the only one in Australia who can actually deliver the 100-plus megawatt contract.

Yes. It's -- the global nature of some of these workloads is such that we're not necessarily competing for these contracts with other organizations in Australia or APAC. In many instances, you're actually competing for these workloads with other organizations around the world. But I think the strong the strong economic returns and the value that we've been able to negotiate here is a direct reflection of the differentiated model, the trust that is required in terms of counterparty risk to deliver and the knowledge, experience of the particular technologies that need to be deployed, which we've built up over 20-odd years in the liquid cooling and high-performance computing space. And customers will pay more for confidence, for certainty, predictability and Australia is an increasingly attractive location when you think about all of the other major characteristics, which are important, which is penetration of renewable energy, which is the sort of safe and secure nature of our location, particularly post recent events in the Middle East, our Five Eyes alignment, rule of law, stable government, et cetera, et cetera. So there's lots of things that feed into what customers will be prepared to pay, but we definitely have to be very competitive globally. We are very competitive globally. But the token economics, the economics of an accelerating AI world where demand far outstrips supply for intelligence generation today means that the profits that can be made by these organizations are so attractive that the relativity of the cost of the data center to the overall technology stack to deliver is quite a modest portion when you look at the entire economic model around token economics, et cetera. So we're very, very comfortable. This is a great contract in terms of returns. And notwithstanding the scale, just even if it was a smaller scale, it will be still very, very healthy. And so the scale only makes us more excited. But again, reaffirms CDC's credentials as a trusted partner in every way that you think about it and Australia being a very, very trusted, trusted geography in a world that is getting increasingly geopolitically unbalanced. So I believe that those -- this momentum will continue for a long period of time as will the healthy economic returns because everyone is making healthy economic returns in this space given the demand and supply ratio.

Your next question comes from Phil Campbell with UBS.

Just a couple of questions from me as well. David, I just wanted to check the independent valuation for CDC and the Moody's rating, do both of those take into account this contract?

Sure, Phil. So in terms of the independent valuation, the last published valuation was 31 March, which Infratil released to market in early April. The sites that are part of this contract were included in that valuation, but they were included as uncontracted because they were uncontracted at that point, which would mean that there would be -- you can expect for the next valuation, there would be a compression of discount rate attached to these sites. So it was included, yes, but in an earlier uncontracted phase. In terms of Moody's, they have our existing forecast with them. They are aware of the contract. We've briefed them on it. They -- the last published opinion they had had these sites being developed in it, but not a specific contract because at that point, it had not been signed. That was in April and that Moody's have all of the details and indeed have our detailed funding plan as well. So we don't anticipate any concerns on that front.

Okay. Great. Second question was just on what's going on with the New Zealand business. I'm assuming that's just some sort of tax issue that's going on there. We shouldn't view that as kind of some separation of the New Zealand business from CDC.

No, Phil, that separation was done, and it's a structural separation just for reasons of efficiency. So from a balance sheet efficiency perspective and a gearing perspective, the ability to separately fund the Australian and New Zealand business, it makes more sense to have the 2 structurally separated. So you should not read into that, that there is any change in our strategy or ambition and growth in New Zealand. It's simply an operational and capital efficiency move that we've made.

Your next question comes from Owen Birrell with RBC.

Just I wanted to get a bit of a sense on this contract. I mean one of the things that we've constantly heard is that CDC provides a varying level of redundancy to its customers based on their requirements. I'm just wanting to get a sense as to, I guess, how high end this contract is. Are you able to give us a sense as to what the redundancy requirements are around such a large volume of your capacity?

I think we do have the ability to provide due to the granular modular design architecture, we do have the ability to offer varying levels of redundancy, resilience and customers are increasingly looking at those advantages for different types of workloads. However, this particular contract, this is the same as just about every other contract that we have. We're guaranteeing 100% uptime. We're doing all the maintenance concurrently. So it's right at the high end of resilience, redundancy availability.

Okay. So fairly consistent with the broader base is what you're saying?

Absolutely, absolutely.

Excellent. And just another question regarding the CapEx guidance. You provided that CapEx guidance ex land. But obviously, the growth profile of your business is going to obviously require a lot more land as we move forward. Just wondering if you could give us a sense as to how you think about land, whether you buy or lease and give us a sense of, I guess, the OpEx or CapEx requirements around this degree of expansion.

You're spot on. We're going to require more land, more power commitments, et cetera, to continue the velocity of growth that we're enjoying today and to ensure that we see -- we capture our share of the market going forward. In terms of numbers, we sort of play it by year, but we've already -- we've still got 1.6 gigawatts of land and power that we already own to work through. So we've got a significant amount of capacity and the cost of land, et cetera, is very geographically dependent. So in terms of guidance, David, we budget for how much...

Yes, sure. Owen, thanks for the question. The reason just adding to everything that Greg has said there that from a guidance perspective, we exclude land is the transactions are binary, of course. They're high in value but low in volume. So from a guidance perspective, we can manage that on a case-by-case basis as acquisitions happen, but felt that it was more useful for the market to see what our pure growth CapEx is from a guidance perspective, excluding land, and then we will manage land from a guidance perspective on a case-by-case basis.

Yes. No, I understand that. And that's actually a very useful way to provide that information. But just in terms of just, I guess, what the cost of the land underneath that as we try to model CDC as a whole, if there's any sense of guidance you can provide?

What I would say without giving a specific number is it very significantly based on where the land is. It sounds like an obvious thing, but which city you're in and indeed, whether you're in the region or the city. So it's probably best not to give a view of land cost because it is extremely variable. But what I would say is, of course, if there's anything significant that happens, we would talk to that and the location and the cost of that acquisition.

Your next question comes from Suraj Nebhani with Citi.

And just a couple of quick questions. Firstly, just following on from Owen's question on the land piece. Maybe, David, can you give a sense of -- if you think about the overall project cost, you highlighted mid-teens per megawatt. What proportion does land make typically in terms of the project costs overall?

Sure. The answer is it's a small proportion relative to the total project cost because of the technology and the capital investment that goes into constructing a data center. So it is a small component. I can't put a percentage around it because it will depend where the site is, what state, what city and whether it's regional or city-based. But you should assume it's a smaller part of the equation when it comes to the total CapEx for either a campus or a particular footprint.

Are we talking less than 5% just sort of very big round numbers or less than 10% -- probably not...

The variability is too high, but it is small.

Yes, not material to...

Yes. Yes. And the second one was -- thanks for the new disclosure on the ICT megawatts as well. That's helpful. Can you just talk to -- so I think the numbers in the presentation, I'm just trying to reconcile them with prior disclosures. So I think Greg mentioned 1.6 gigawatts of additional capacity. So does that mean that this contract total takes you to 1.3 out of the 2.9 contracted. So that implies obviously a lower PUE than what was applicable previously. So just trying to understand that.

We think about the capacity, we're moving the language to be IT capacity, which is what we're working towards delivering because that's what our customers think in rather than the PE element or component and that should make your life easier. But also, please keep in mind, as per my update recently, there is a significant technological evolution happening with GPU infrastructure, which is great because more and more electrons can be dedicated to revenue-generating IT equipment and less and less over time to mechanical cooling support. So that means the numbers that we're saying to you today could actually even become better over time. But that's -- we're thinking in that normally around that 1.2, 1.3 general PUE sort of range when we talk about the difference between IT load that we are working towards delivering for our customers and the total energy capacity to the pipeline.

Got it. And yes, just to follow up on that point. So the 1.6 number in the presentation, that's on a previous disclosure basis, right? So the IT load would be whatever the PU is 1.3 or lower, adjusting that 1.6 down. Is that the right way to think of it?

You're right. That's totally built.

Your next question comes from Conor O'Prey with Canaccord Genuity.

Maybe a question on the pipeline, the 1.6, 1.7 gigawatts you've got and maybe how you're positioned to respond to RFPs and tenders over the next sort of 12 to 18 months given that this contract seems to pick up a lot of your sort of projects that are under construction, where are you sort of sat? Do you need to sort of reload there a little bit for a period? Or do you feel like you can be active in market winning new contracts from here on?

Conor, we're definitely active in market because -- we still have pockets of capacity, obviously, much smaller volumes than what we're talking about with this contract. And we're bringing on new capacity all of the time. And so we are definitely in the market and talking to customers at scale customers around end of '26, '27, '28 and '29. Obviously, the conversations and the capacity gets bigger as you move through those financial years. But we're definitely up and about when it comes to chasing customers, having great conversations, and we're building in every geography that we operate in over and above the requirements for this particular contract.

Your final question comes from Howard Slynn with Citi.

It's actually Suraj Amas from Citi. Howard just raised for me. Just 2 quick questions. First one, just in terms of pricing, that looks extremely strong, right? What are you seeing in terms of escalators looking ahead? Because just conscious, I think Digital Realty was calling out pretty strong escalators of 3% plus as well. Is that what you're seeing as well in this contract?

We have healthy escalation built in over the full life of the contract, which in relative terms is consistent with what you're hearing, but we don't go into specifics on a contract-by-contract basis.

Got it. And second one, Greg, you sort of mentioned this in the last response that you're building across multiple sites, right? I think you've been pretty positive on Perth opening up as well. I'm just wondering whether this contract is talking to Perth as well? Or is it just still Sydney and Melbourne?

Currently, this particular contract is on existing sites. But unfortunately, we can't go into specifics of the locations.

All right. And last one, just in terms of the future, it sounds like we're talking about May, there's still at scale large contracts, right? Given those are yet to be built, how quickly do you think you can deliver the large-scale contract?

Sorry, the question how quickly can we deliver additional capacity or how quickly?

Let's say, it sounds like you're still -- you're in discussions for the large contracts, right? I'm just wondering how quickly you can actually turn on additional capacity, right? I know you have the land and the power given the other kitten stuff, how quickly can we think about other stuff?

We've definitely got the capacity to deliver large scale in the hundreds of megawatts additionally between now and financial year '29. In fact, we're probably going to be a little bit more bullish than that in our thinking, but people should be comfortable that we certainly are not tapped out in terms of delivery or execution capability, and we will be like we always have, trying to develop and execute, contract and deliver our entire pipeline as quickly as possible because that's what we've always done.

There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Boyes for closing remarks.

Thank you, Ashley, and thank you, Greg and David, for all that this morning. Congratulations again on a massive achievement. Thank you, everyone, for listening. We'll talk to you again at our results in May.

That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.