AetherGrid Digital Infrastructure — Funding Structure & Implementation Roadmap

The capital requirement and funding stack, the implementation roadmap, the milestones and dependencies, the programme governance, the precedent transactions, the capital-structure optimisation and the target investors underpinning AetherGrid.

Section 9 · Business Plan

Funding Structure & Implementation Roadmap

9.1 Capital requirement and funding stack

The R22.5 billion programme is funded by a diversified stack blending
sponsor and strategic equity, infrastructure-fund and DFI capital, and
senior debt. The equity-weighted structure reflects both the
development-stage risk profile and the deliberate choice to keep gearing
conservative through the build.

Capital requirement	R m	Funding source	R m
Land acquisition	900	Sponsor equity	4,500
Construction	10,200	Strategic investors	4,500
Electrical infrastructure	5,500	Infrastructure funds	3,500
Cooling infrastructure	2,200	Development finance institutions	4,000
Fibre networks	800	Senior debt facilities	6,000
Security systems	350
Working capital	1,400
Contingency	1,150
Total	22,500	Total	22,500

Figure 18

Figure 18 — Funding structure: R22.5bn (73% equity / 27% senior debt)

Figure 19

Figure 19 — Capital deployment schedule over 10 years

Honest finding, the equity cheque is large and
front-loaded

At roughly 73% equity, AetherGrid asks equity to fund the bulk of a
R22.5bn programme, front-loaded into the construction years before
revenue arrives. This is the real shape of the ask: about R16.5bn of
equity and quasi-equity (sponsor, strategic, infrastructure funds, DFIs)
committed and staged against milestones, alongside R6bn of senior debt.
The conservative gearing keeps the debt safe and the DSCR strong, but it
means equity returns depend on disciplined capital deployment and the
exit. A future re-leveraging of stabilised campuses, lifting gearing
toward the 50–60% typical of operating data centre assets, is the
natural mechanism to release equity value ahead of exit, and lenders and
equity should structure for that optionality from the outset.

9.2 Implementation roadmap

The programme runs over ten years, phased around power access and
lease-up rather than a fixed calendar. Critical-path items are
grid-connection applications (which gate energisation and therefore
revenue), Project Atlas financial close and construction, and
anchor-tenant pre-leasing. Renewable procurement and interconnection
build-out run in parallel across the whole horizon.

Figure 20

Figure 20 — 10-year 155 MW build-out Gantt

9.3 Milestones and dependencies

Milestone	Target	Depends on	Gate
Platform, team & capital raise	Year 1	Sponsor capital; key hires	Holdco ready
Atlas grid connection secured	Years 1–3	Utility process; site control	Power (critical path)
Atlas financial close	Year 2	Power; anchor tenant; debt + equity	First close
Atlas COD & lease-up	Year 3	24–30 month construction; energisation	First revenue
Horizon (CPT) COD	Year 5	Subsea/renewable siting; construction	Second campus
Oceans (DBN) COD	Year 6	Gateway siting; construction	Third campus
Phase 4 national expansion	Years 7–10	Proven model; power; demand	Scale to 155 MW
80% renewable energy	Year 10	Solar build + PPAs	Sustainability target
Refinance / infra-fund exit	Years 9–10	Stabilised operating platform	Exit optionality

9.4 Programme governance and delivery discipline

Execution risk concentrates in power access and lease-up. The
programme is run under formal stage-gates: no campus advances to
construction without secured grid connection and at least one committed
anchor tenant, and capital is released against certified milestones.
This discipline, power before capital, anchors before scale, is the same
approach that has allowed the market’s leading operators to build
multi-campus platforms without stranding capacity.

Power before capital. No major capital is
committed to a campus without a secured connection path and a
captive-renewable plan, the discipline that protects against the 24–36
month connection risk.
Anchors before scale. At least one hyperscale or
financial-services anchor pre-committed before energisation, de-risking
lease-up before colocation is layered on.
Ring-fence each campus. Each campus SPV carries
its own financing and completion support, protecting the holdco and
other campuses from any single project’s delay.

9.5 Precedent transactions and market validation

The structure and valuation basis are validated by recent market
activity. The South African data centre sector has attracted substantial
institutional and strategic capital, and the asset class trades at
premium multiples globally, supporting both the financing approach and
the exit thesis.

Precedent / data point	Relevance
Digital Realty’s acquisition of Teraco (majority, ~$3.5bn EV)	Validates institutional appetite and premium valuation for SA platforms
Teraco JB7 — ZAR 8bn debt facility for 30–40 MW	Template for large-scale SA data-centre project debt
Vantage / Attacq 80 MW Johannesburg development	Infrastructure-fund-backed scale build precedent
Microsoft R5.4bn (2025) AI infrastructure commitment	Confirms hyperscale demand depth and AI supercycle
Global peers (Equinix, Digital Realty) at 20–25x EV/EBITDA	Anchors exit-multiple thesis; 13x base is a conservative SA discount
Actis, Berkshire, IFC-style infra capital in African DCs	Confirms DFI and infrastructure-fund mandate fit

The financing ask is therefore well-precedented: campus-level project
debt against contracted lease revenue, infrastructure- and DFI-anchored
equity, and an exit into a deep pool of infrastructure and strategic
buyers. The distinctive features are the multi-metro carrier-neutral
platform strategy and the disciplined, power-first phasing, not novelty
of structure.

9.6 Capital-structure optimisation and re-leveraging

The initial 73:27 equity-to-debt structure is deliberately
conservative for a development-stage platform, but it is not the
intended steady state. As each campus stabilises, reaching contracted
occupancy with proven cash flows, its risk profile falls sharply,
supporting materially higher gearing. The plan therefore contemplates a
phased re-leveraging: refinancing stabilised campuses at 50–60% gearing,
releasing equity for redeployment into later phases or distribution.

Phase	Gearing approach	Rationale
Construction / ramp	Low gearing (~27%); equity-led	De-risk debt through uncertain lease-up
Post-stabilisation	Refinance to 50–60%	Contracted cash flows support higher debt
Platform maturity	Portfolio-level financing	Optimise blended cost of capital
Pre-exit	Recap / dividend	Release equity value ahead of sale

This staged approach reconciles two objectives that the single
headline structure cannot: keeping debt safe during the risky build
(which the conservative gearing achieves), and lifting equity returns
once risk falls (which re-leveraging achieves). Modelling the base case
at low gearing is prudent and understates the equity return available
through disciplined capital-structure optimisation, an upside the plan
flags for investors and lenders to structure around.

9.7 Target investors and capital-raising strategy

The capital raise is sequenced to match investor mandates to risk
phases. Development-stage and construction capital is anchored by the
sponsor, strategic investors and DFIs able to underwrite build risk;
infrastructure and pension funds enter as campuses stabilise and the
profile becomes annuity-like; and senior lenders provide campus-level
project debt against contracted lease revenue. This staging aligns each
capital source with the risk it is best suited to bear and optimises the
blended cost of capital across the programme.

Investor type	Mandate fit	Entry point
Sponsor & strategic investors	Development risk; strategic value	Financial close, Phase 1
Development finance institutions	Impact, sustainability, digital sovereignty	Construction; concessional/blended
Infrastructure funds	Contracted, long-dated cash flows	Post-stabilisation; re-leveraging
Pension funds	Annuity-like, inflation-linked returns	Mature platform; portfolio-level
Commercial & DFI lenders	Senior project debt vs lease revenue	Campus-level financial close
Strategic acquirers	Platform scale; interconnection base	Exit

The DFI role is pivotal in the early phases: beyond capital, DFI
participation brings governance standards, blended-finance instruments
and a signalling effect that catalyses commercial and
infrastructure-fund capital. The strategy explicitly positions
AetherGrid’s sustainability and digital-sovereignty impact to access
this pool, bridging the development-stage risk premium until the
platform’s contracted cash flows attract lower-cost infrastructure
capital.

Confidential — this business plan is provided to prospective investors and lenders for evaluation purposes only and may not be reproduced or distributed without the written consent of AetherGrid Digital Infrastructure Holdings (Pty) Ltd.