CleanSpark has signed a 20-year AI infrastructure lease, but will need to finance an estimated $1.75 billion to $2.1 billion data center construction.
The Bitcoin miner and data center developer signed a 20-year triple net lease on July 10 for 175 megawatts of critical IT load at its Sandersville, Georgia, campus. CleanSpark disclosed the deal in a Form 8-K on July 14, estimating the initial contract value to be $6.6 billion and average annual net operating income of approximately $330 million.
CleanSpark estimates landowner project costs of $10 million to $12 million per MW, which translates to $1.75 billion to $2.1 billion in construction.
This range exceeds the reported cash of $260.3 million and the company’s stated Bitcoin HODL value of $925.2 million as of March 31, 2026, even when the two numbers are combined. HODL measures include both current and non-current Bitcoin, as well as Bitcoin held by counterparties under collateral arrangements, a structure that differs from unrestricted cash.
The July lease announcement did not disclose lenders, loan commitments, pricing, sponsorship funding or drawing schedules. Phased handover is expected to begin in the fourth quarter of 2027, but the full handover and rental start schedule remains undisclosed. CleanSpark says Anonymous Tenant’s high investment-grade credit profile facilitates access to financing. The final terms will determine whether the project will be financed primarily through lease payments or whether it will impose more leverage, dilution, or Bitcoin collateral risk on the company and its shareholders.
What CleanSpark actually signs
The Sandersville agreement is a binding infrastructure lease covering 175 MW with an annual escalator for an initial term of 20 years with two optional five-year extensions. The tenant is only described as a high-investment-grade global technology company, and its identity has not been disclosed.
CleanSpark estimates the contract value to be $6.6 billion during the initial term and up to $11.6 billion if both five-year options are exercised. The terms originally signed remain at $6.6 billion. Both options must be exercised to reach $11.6 billion.
Calling this a triple net lease does not mean that CleanSpark is committed to building the project. 8-K provides that the tenant is responsible for the costs, fees, indemnities, and expenses specified in the lease agreement. In a release filed with the SEC, CleanSpark separately estimated the cost of the landlord project at $10 million to $12 million per MW, resulting in a calculation range of $1.75 billion to $2.1 billion for 175 MW.
Although the contract value is spread out over several years, the estimated NOI remains forward-looking. A phased construction program may not require you to pay the entire project cost upfront. This number establishes the size of the obligation without revealing when each dollar must be funded.
Risks vary depending on the funding route
CleanSpark’s fiscal second quarter results demonstrate why Sandersville needs funding to match its construction scale.
As of March 31, the company reported $260.3 million in cash, $925.2 million in HODL value, $1.788 billion in long-term debt, and $1.927 billion in total debt. The calculated Sandersville cost represents approximately 6.7 to 8.1 times the cash balance at the date, 1.9 to 2.3 times the HODL value, and approximately 98% to 117% of the long-term debt. These numbers indicate that this project is too large for CleanSpark to finance with its existing cash.
CleanSpark also reported a net loss of $378.3 million for the quarter ended March 31. That figure includes $224.1 million in Bitcoin fair value losses and $38.8 million in Bitcoin collateral losses, according to an earnings release filed with the SEC. These market-linked items can have a significant impact on the reported balance sheet, and net loss is a poor proxy for quarterly cash burn.
Bitcoin remains a potential source of liquidity, collateral, or sale proceeds, depending on the amount owed and the level of exposure companies want to hold. Coins pawned by a lender cannot serve as an unencumbered reserve. CryptoSlate previously investigated how collateralized Bitcoin complicates the liquidity implied by CleanSpark’s headline HODL numbers.
One possible scenario is project financing built around the lease of the site and its tenant support. CleanSpark says the tenant’s credit profile may facilitate financing options, and long-term leases may provide the lender with a contractual cash flow base for construction underwriting. Protection depends on the actual package. Sponsor guarantees, corporate bailouts, Bitcoin collateral, or large sponsor equity commitments could shift risk back to CleanSpark.
The lease ties financing directly to CleanSpark’s ability to execute the project. CleanSpark’s 8-K states that companies must meet applicable financing, construction and delivery milestones and other terms and conditions. Missed milestones could result in leases shrinking or disappearing entirely, and project financing tied to getting CleanSpark’s lease off the ground.
Funding Sandersville through CleanSpark’s corporate balance sheet would expose shareholders to more direct costs. The addition of corporate debt would increase leverage from about $1.8 billion in long-term debt as of March 31. New common stock or stock-related securities may dilute the value of existing holders. Bitcoin sales reduce exposure to government bonds, which could be counted as liquidity for asset-based investors. Bitcoin-backed borrowing may maintain nominal coin ownership while adding collateral, margin, and liquidation risk.
CleanSpark’s zero-coupon convertible debt has a net book balance of $1.769 billion, which is equal to its outstanding debt. The $400 million undrawn credit line backed by Bitcoin remained undrawn as of March 31st, requiring Bitcoin collateral. CryptoSlate’s coverage of convertible financing in 2025 provides context for the corporate route, and Hut 8’s AI landlord model shows how project debt and Bitcoin-backed bridge funding can coexist. The final structure of CleanSpark remains unresolved.
While the tenant’s credit profile may support project financing, final pricing, recourse, collateral, and capital requirements will determine how much risk remains for CleanSpark.
Why does the $6.6 billion value remain conditional?
The $6.6 billion headline still comes with strings attached. The financing, construction, delivery and other milestones and terms disclosed in the 8-K tie revenue opportunities to CleanSpark’s ability to execute. The relief is conditional, and the application states that applicable defaults may result in rent reduction or cancellation.
The timeline adds another pitfall. CleanSpark expects phased deliveries to begin in the fourth quarter of 2027. It did not say how long it would take to complete the full 175 MW capacity, when leasing would begin in each phase, or whether the average annual NOI listed reflects a fully delivered campus. Using the $330 million run rate from the first day of Q4 2027 would overstate the disclosed timing.
The Texas contract is not part of CleanSpark’s signed contract pipeline. The same tenant has signed a letter of intent and exclusive agreement covering CleanSpark’s 718-acre Texas portfolio and up to 885 MW of what CleanSpark describes as secured and planned power capacity. The arrangement is not a completed lease.
Sandersville has advanced CleanSpark from AI infrastructure proposal to contract execution, but definitive capital terms remain undisclosed.
A look at the funding terms and path to Q4 2027 will reveal who is actually taking the risk: CleanSpark’s Bitcoin holdings, its balance sheet, or its shareholders.
