Why now: campaign-01: capital deployment window 2026-09-08

What was noticed?

Equipment orders and nuclear customer commitments support the electricity constraint; financed compute hosts require separate delivery and funding analysis.

Why might it matter?

The campaign verdict is INTACT. The unresolved branch cannot be promoted from a price move or a historical model alone.

What evidence is real, and what is still only a pointer?

Receipt selector: GEV-Q2-2026 in the campaign thesis review and its accompanying receipts.

Still required: Reconcile remaining project expenditure, customer obligations, financing and cancellation exposure; keep equipment orders separate.

Which existing research does it update or duplicate?

The registered ai-power-bottleneck perspective. This question tracks the unresolved branch of the campaign review, not a duplicate completed finding.

What should be written if the evidence clears?

A sourced perspective update adjudicating this exact test: Named host delivery or recurring rent paired with verified project funding, customer obligations and dilution terms.

Reviewed September 6 using September 4 settled prices. September 7 is the U.S. Labor Day holiday; the decision window is September 8.