Giganomica / Research model 0.1
Trace a buildout through capital, commissioning, electricity and paid GPU hours. Find the utilization and starting price that would cover its costs—and see what happens when delivery slips.
The cost inputs represent payments along the supply chain: energy and grid access, construction, power and cooling equipment, facility capacity, then GPU systems. See who supplies GPU hosters and the documented contracts ↗
01 / Build a scenario
Every starting value is illustrative. The filing evidence below guides the research; it has not calibrated these inputs.
02 / What must this project earn?
Paid capacity equivalent is online IT MW × paid utilization. It is a revenue normalization, not measured power consumption.
Operating break-even uses the starting price and online ceiling. Capital recovery solves for zero project NPV over the whole horizon, including delay, price erosion and refresh. Both hold electrical load fixed. No debt, taxes, working capital or terminal value is included.
03 / Delivery × demand
Cells show project NPV in $m. Capital is paid for the entire build in every case. Select a cell to change the scenario.
| Online | 25% paid | 50% paid | 65% paid | 75% paid | 85% paid | 100% paid |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25% | ||||||
| 50% | ||||||
| 75% | ||||||
| 100% |
04 / Cash flow bridge
USD millions. Month zero: −$3,600m. Cash flows are undiscounted here; NPV discounts monthly. No resale proceeds at the horizon.
| Year | Average online IT MW | Revenue | Operating cost | Refresh | Net cash | Cumulative cash |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 10.0 | $116.4m | $44.1m | $0m | $72.3m | −$3,527.7m |
| 2 | 70.0 | $755.8m | $98.9m | $0m | $656.8m | −$2,870.9m |
| 3 | 80.0 | $781.3m | $108.1m | $0m | $673.2m | −$2,197.7m |
| 4 | 80.0 | $703.1m | $108.1m | $0m | $595.1m | −$1,602.6m |
| 5 | 80.0 | $632.8m | $108.1m | $1,750m | −$1,225.2m | −$2,827.9m |
| 6 | 80.0 | $569.5m | $108.1m | $0m | $461.5m | −$2,366.4m |
| 7 | 80.0 | $512.6m | $108.1m | $0m | $404.5m | −$1,961.8m |
05 / Evidence before estimates
Selected passages reviewed manually; a research seed, not a complete or latest-quarter coverage universe. No observations below automatically calibrate the calculator. Reviewed 2026-09-30.
Power and cooling equipment
Combined order backlog: 15 USD bn. Orders may be cancelled or rescheduled; most backlog was expected to ship over 12–18 months.
Delivery pressure and order conversion; not a price per MW or a measure of AI-only demand.
Company-wide stock of orders; no matched project capacity denominator.
Read primary source ↗ · Item 1 — Order Backlog; Item 1A — backlog realization risk
Grid and construction
Backlog commitment basis. Backlog includes estimates under master service agreements; these generally do not commit customers to specific service volumes.
Separate contractual obligations from estimated demand before scoring construction visibility.
Contractor revenue and margin do not establish a customer's total project cost.
Read primary source ↗ · Item 7 — Remaining Performance Obligations and Backlog, printed page 50
Data-centre owner
Construction in progress: 2,827 USD m. Construction in progress includes indirect construction costs and capitalized development interest.
Reconcile cost scope and work in progress before calculating completed-project capital intensity.
Portfolio balance at a date; neither period spending nor the completed cost of a known MW cohort.
Read primary source ↗ · Notes — Property, Plant and Equipment, printed pages F-11 and F-26
High-density colocation
Billing capacity: 395 MW. Q2 capital expenditure was $797.5m, including land and development-rights acquisitions.
Track billing delivery separately from capital spent on the wider development pipeline.
Quarter-end capacity is not quarter-average capacity; dividing quarterly capex by these MW would not give completed-build cost. Power basis needs reconciliation with project disclosures.
Read primary source ↗ · Financial Summary and Operating Metrics; capital expenditure footnote (2)
Energy and grid
Customer allocation of grid costs. Entergy describes allocating grid-upgrade and maintenance costs to large data-centre customers.
Collect project tariffs, connection contributions, minimum commitments and regulatory orders.
This is not a reviewed 10-K passage or an applicable tariff. It supplies no usable energy-price assumption.
Read primary source ↗ · Data centers and Entergy customers — Fair Share Plus
One owner-operated GPU fleet with all installed capital paid upfront. Online capacity follows a delay and a linear ramp; the remaining built capacity stays offline. Power has an energy component and a full-site connection commitment. Price declines monthly, with recurring system refresh and zero terminal value. The download preserves the inputs, version and every monthly cash flow.
A landlord charging for leased kW, an operator leasing a facility, a utility and an equipment supplier require different cash flows. Those modules—and project-specific tariff, financing and construction schedules—are the next research layer. Their company revenues must not be added together as total industry investment.
Original quick GPU-payback calculator ↗ · Capacity disclosure ledger ↗