Thread by @valwithcatalyst

$ORGN I am seeing misinformation on cash needs following elevated redemptions. A thread to hopefully clarify. Some of this is my opinion post calls with the company and comparing to $PCT. As always, open to pushback.

TLDR: I don't think they will need to raise equity

1/6

The #SPAC was too large for this deal (my opinion). As a result they did one of the smaller PIPEs, despite announcing the transaction during the hottest point in the PIPE cycle. Many large institutional funds were scaled back significantly

2/6

Planning for no redemptions, this forced $ORGN to show very conservative plant financing - otherwise there would be too much cash and the deal wouldn't make sense. Let's compare the plant financing assumptions to $PCT, the debt % is still lower in the revised case!

3/6

This increases my view that $ORGN's initial project finance assumptions were very conservative. In speaking with the company I believe even the 70% debt is conservative (banks offering more leverage) which is supported by the $PCT data. See the respective slides attached

4/6

One other observation: despite not generating revenue for another year (like $ORGN) $PCT has been able to put debt financing in place - $250mm in bonds to support the construction of its first plant in Ohio.

5/6

$ORGN has no interest in issuing equity . Things change and issues come up, but if they can execute on the current plan on the current timeline I don't believe additional equity issuance is required

6/6

#spac #spacsquad @LeaderSpac @spacanpanman @SpacGuru @valuepretender