HelioForge Power Energy Systems Business Plan — Financial Plan

This section and the four that follow present a complete, internally consistent financial model. The modelling philosophy is disciplined and transparent: the sponsor’s revenue and EBITDA targets are preserved exactly, while every line below EBITDA, depreciation, financing cost, taxation, dividends and returns, is independently re-derived from first principles. The balance sheet is constructed to tie in every year, and the cash flow reconciles to the movement in cash. Where our figures differ from the sponsor’s, we disclose the variance openly rather than smoothing it away.

Key performance indicators to monitor

Lenders and equity investors will track a defined set of indicators through the build and ramp period. The dashboard below sets out the metrics, their purpose, and the modelled trajectory, the same measures against which drawdowns, covenants and board reporting should be structured.

Indicator	Why it matters	Trajectory
Blended EBITDA margin	The integration / value-add thesis	~14% → 23% as EPC & storage layer on
Plant utilisation	Volume vs installed capacity	~60% → mid-80s–96% by Year 5
Module-price / import competition	The central margin risk	~US$0.10/W — defended via integration
Net working capital	Liquidity / cash absorption	~13% of revenue (inventory + EPC receivables)
DSCR	Debt-service headroom	2.45x minimum, above a 1.30x floor
Net debt / EBITDA	Leverage & deleveraging	Below 0.5x throughout; near net-cash by Y5
Installer / partner network	Route-to-market reach	120 → 800

Modelled KPI dashboard

Metric	Year 1	Year 3	Year 5
Revenue (R m)	420	1,200	2,450
EBITDA (R m)	58	248	560
EBITDA margin	13.8%	20.7%	22.9%
Module-equiv MW shipped	210	470	720
Utilisation	60%	85%	96%
Re-derived NPAT (R m)	27	138	375
ROCE	8.5%	25.3%	45.7%
Net debt / EBITDA	-0.50x	0.41x	-0.31x

Central assumptions

Assumption	Value	Basis
Revenue & EBITDA	Sponsor headline	Preserved exactly; below-EBITDA re-derived
Blended EBITDA margin (Y5)	~22.9%	EPC, storage & integration lift the mix
Capacity (Y1→Y5)	350 → 750 MW/yr	~85–96% utilisation at scale
Blended revenue / MW	~R2.4–3.4m	EPC & storage lift over bare modules
Installer / partner network	120 → 800	National go-to-market footprint
Depreciation	Straight-line by vintage	Plant depreciates from commissioning — no J-curve
Debt : equity	55 : 45 (R264m : R216m)	DFI / commercial-bank anchored, incl. B-BBEE
Cost of debt	11.5%	~ prime + 100bps
Working capital	~13% of revenue (net)	Inventory + EPC receivables; WC facility alongside
FX exposure	Net importer of cells	Weaker rand raises input cost — compresses margin
Tax	27% + 80% loss cap	SA corporate rate, post-2022 rules
Dividends	30% of NPAT	Deferred to Year 3
Exit multiple	6.5x EV/EBITDA	Integrated solar mfg + EPC + BESS comparable

Sources and uses

Uses	R m	Sources	R m
Manufacturing plant	180	Senior term debt (DFI-anchored)	264
Machinery & equipment	120	Equity (incl. B-BBEE)	216
Battery assembly facility	45
Distribution infrastructure	35
Working capital	60
Marketing & expansion	20
Technology systems	10
Contingency	10
Total uses	480	Total sources	480

Figure 17. *Capital structure — debt and equity*

NoteA working-capital and trade-finance facility sits alongside the term debt

The R480 million raise funds the plant, machinery, battery and distribution infrastructure and R60m of initial working capital. But an integrated manufacturing, EPC and distribution business at this revenue scale requires substantially more working capital than the initial allocation, module and battery inventory, imported-component stock in transit, and EPC receivables and retentions build ahead of customer payment. The model funds the ongoing build from operating cash at a net ~13% of revenue, but a committed working-capital and trade-finance facility should be arranged alongside the term debt and sized to the peak inventory-and-receivables position. Committing that facility at close is as important to bankability as the term-debt structuring.