Andfjord Salmon – ESG's Charm is the Death of Cash

Stocks
, , ,
1

What: Fish farming company
Where: Northern Norway, Andøya island
Status: Startup/growth
Exchange: Norway / Oslo / Merkur (Euronext Growth)
Size: approx. 170 MEUR
Price: 30 NOK

(Images in the post are from the investment presentation. I recommend reading through it.)

Like many other Finns, my holiday trip took me to the vicinity of the Lofoten Islands. Driving along the main road of Andøya island, one couldn’t miss the large construction site on the outskirts of a small village. “Land-based salmon farming,” the locals said.

ESG darling par excellence

True to its name, Andfjord Salmon builds salmon farming pools which, according to the Norwegian state’s long-term vision, would be the best way to raise fish instead of net-pen farming. Net-pen fish escape and are prone to diseases. The nutrients produced by the fish masses are also one of the problems.

Since 2023, Norway has taxed sea-based salmon farmers with a 25% “fjord tax” (resource rent tax) on the value added in the sea. Land-based operators avoid this tax. Political winds can turn and tax rates change, but the trend in this capital-intensive business aligns with ESG ideals, whether one likes it or not.

Founded in 2014, the company attempts to solve the aforementioned problems using a flow-through system. The pool water is not recycled as in typical RAS (Recirculating Aquaculture System) systems; instead, the water used in the pools—which is replaced 16 times a day—is taken from the sea at a depth of dozens of meters. Algae and fish diseases do not thrive in deep waters, and there are no other net-pen farms in the nearby areas, which reduces the risk of disastrous mass fish deaths.

The water has a steady temperature, and while it isn’t optimally warm for fish growth, the cooler water should favor fish activity and result in better meat quality. Thanks to the Gulf Stream, the water is exceptionally warm for the location, which was a significant reason for placing the farm on this particular coast.

image

The water is purified before being returned to the sea, and the waste produced by the fish is cleaned from the pools using robots. There are plans to turn the waste into biogas, and at this stage at the latest, ESG funds are pushing their money forward. So, excuse my Anglicism, where’s the catch?

Large-scale startup

In a village called Kvalnes, one test pool (1,000 t) was built to practice construction and farming techniques. The first farming cycle began in the summer of 2022, and a year later, the survival rate for the smolt was 97.5%. The starting weight was approx. 100 g and the harvest weight was between 1-6 kilos. Most significant was proving the technology mature for growth. Based on these results, investors and banks were brought on board.

image

The plan is to grow rapidly from the 1,000-tonne pool at Kvalnes to 40,000 tonnes (HOG - head on gutted) by 2030 through a combination of equity, debt, and cash flow (estimated plan).

According to the CEO, the equity portion for construction costs is already secured. The excavation and infrastructure work for Phase 1 (pool foundations, harbor, etc.) is being built front-loaded, so further expansion will be cheaper than the initial phase, and there will be no production interruptions due to construction work. Currently, farming operations are suspended due to extensive excavation work.

A construction loan (825 MNOK) has been negotiated (NIBOR +3.5%, 2-year grace period), and with the share issues (06/2023 and 05/2024), the rest is “only” (sarcasm warning) down to the company’s own performance and, of course, the price obtained from the salmon market. The total budget for the Kvalnes construction (phases 1-6) is estimated at 150 million euros.

Construction of Kvalnes Phase 1 has progressed faster than scheduled and within budget, with the most difficult stages now behind them. The target to start production operations (=stocking fish) is in the summer of 2025, and the first sales batch will be ready 12-15 months after that, so the stock is not for the impatient.

It could still go south, so why should this be of interest?

Compared to net-pen salmon farming, land-based farming is more expensive as an investment, but in Andfjord’s case, the larger scale and lower production costs make investing at this stage attractive. In the private placement in Spring '24, the share price was 33 NOK, so at the current price, there’s a discount of around 10%.

The EBIT chart in the investment presentation shows the company’s own estimate of sensitivity to the market price of salmon. At the lower end, EBIT would accumulate to 360 MNOK, making the market cap 5.5 x EBIT. Premium fish should command a better price compared to net-pen salmon, but pessimism and safety margins are appropriate. The company’s ability to manage a larger production volume is untested.

In the Fifax analysis conducted by Pauli Lohi, the EBIT multiples for comparable traditional fish farmers varied between 7-11. These can provide some direction on whether the current share price is considered expensive or not.

image

The EBIT example is naive and does not account for simultaneous construction project costs, not to mention other unexpected expenses. The company’s own EBIT estimate may be optimistic, but it is currently the best metric available.

The fact that early-stage construction work has stayed on budget and schedule gives some support to the largest cost item, and as operational costs are assumed to be lower than competitors’, cash flow should be sufficient for expansion carried out with leverage.

Due to the pace of expansion, there shouldn’t be a risk of heavy taxation on dividends for years, especially if the company’s plans to expand operations later to the villages of Breivik and Fiskenes on the same island come to fruition.

Final Clause

For the patient waiter. I bought my first batch today at a price of 30 NOK. If there are those among us who know more about fish farming, I welcome any counter-arguments with joy. I won’t be surprised, however, if I end up updating this thread occasionally all by myself :slight_smile:

42 Likes
2

Arctic Securities has prepared an extensive sector report on the Norwegian salmon farming industry. In Arctic’s view, the farms’ problems with fish diseases have weighed on the entire sector, and in the report, 9 out of 10 companies receive an “Add” or “Buy” rating.

Andfjord is given a target price of NOK 54 and a Buy recommendation. I haven’t been able to get my hands on the report or any part of it, so the reasoning behind the target price remains a mystery.

ANDF 54 Initiating coverage with Buy

The second piece of news is more concerning. The Tromsø Museum Authority wants to halt the construction of Andfjord’s water intake tunnel to investigate remains from Sámi settlements. The company itself states that it has taken the museum’s concerns into account, as the tunnel passes underneath a protected cultural heritage area.

An interruption would mean a break of nearly a year for the tunnel construction site, so the consequences of a negative decision for Andfjord’s plans to launch fish farming would be significant. Even if other construction in the area continued, the tunnel is essential for the project as a whole.

The decision from the Nordland County Council and the Sámi Parliament is expected during the autumn.

4 Likes
3

Andfjord Salmon’s Q2 results are out. At this stage, all interest is focused on the construction of the Kvalnes fish farming complex, as was hopefully clear from the opening post.

Construction work is progressing on track regarding schedule and budget. For example, the completion rate of the technically challenging water intake tunnel increased from 57% to 73% between early July and September 3rd.

The crushed rock excavated from the tunnel is used to manufacture the concrete elements for the pools on-site, so the progress of the tunnel work secures the schedule for the fish pools. I won’t go through the other tracks in more detail, as there is still nearly a year until the start of fish farming operations and schedules are still subject to change.

There was no mention in the report of the risks related to museum authorities mentioned in the previous post. If the risk were significant, it should be disclosed at least in the section listing significant events after the quarter.

I found a local newspaper article stating that the museum authorities’ advice was already taken into account during the planning phase, so based on that, the risk of delays should be small. Let’s keep an eye on the situation, as conservation efforts and earthworks aren’t exactly besties.

3 Likes
4

How does this Norwegian setup differ from the Finnish Fifax?

5

The following is, of course, a simplification of the differences, so for a more detailed examination, pull up Fifax’s extensive report and compare.

If I understand Fifax’s process correctly, the RAS (Recirculating Aquaculture System) recirculates the same water, meaning the cycle is almost closed. (Excluding evaporation, etc.) The water is heated to suit the farming needs.

In Andfjord’s basin, water is taken from a tunnel at a depth of 50m “as-is,” meaning no heating. At that depth, there are no fish diseases. The water in the basins is exchanged ~15 times a day, so the technology is flow-through, not water recirculation.

Despite the warmth of the Gulf Stream, the seawater used by Andfjord is at a lower temperature than the temperature that maximizes growth rates in RAS systems. (I don’t know the temperature used by Fifax.) The lower temperature should have a positive effect on the taste, as the fish are more active. The aim is for higher quality fish, and the slower growth is compensated for by a better price per kilo.

I’ll leave out the water purification technologies and the sidestreams/waste they produce, to avoid getting too bogged down in the technicalities.

At least in the calculations, Andfjord’s higher CAPEX is offset by lower OPEX. The scale is naturally larger compared to Fifax, because otherwise the payback period for the CAPEX costs would stretch too far.

6 Likes
6

Hi, thanks for starting the thread!

I wonder what valuation this interesting company will get in the future? Where will the market cap be with 40,000t capacity? And what about the long-term goal of 90,000t?

Let’s compare Andfjord to the largest Norwegian fish farming company, Mowi, which guides for a 500,000t salmon volume for this year:

Mowi

Market cap: 94,000 MNOK
P/S: 1.5
P/E: 16.8

Let’s play the pessimist and give Andfjord the same valuation as Mowi:

500,000t = 94,000 MNOK
90,000t = 16,920 MNOK

With this pessimistic calculation, reaching Andfjord’s full capacity would yield a return of approximately 750%.

40,000t capacity would yield a return of approximately 275%.

The calculation does not take into account, among other things, the cheaper production chain or the value of premium fish.

7

A better approach than revenue, earnings, and market cap for this type of business is likely the P/B ratio. Especially land-based farming in tanks requires a lot of capital for construction. Significantly increasing capacity will require raising funds through share issues, and a suitable level is likely between 1 and 2. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were closer to one, in which case such a pessimistic 750% “return” would be generated by investing nearly 750% more money into the company.

1 Like
8

According to the investment presentation, the equity for the construction of Kvalnes has been secured. The latest issue took place in May (350 MNOK). The first phase of construction is the most expensive because that is when the shared infrastructure for Kvalnes (harbor, office, water intake tunnel, etc.) is built. Therefore, the subsequent expansions of Kvalnes will be cheaper.

The two expansions planned after this would be smaller than Kvalnes (25,000 tonnes), and I don’t believe they will be built simultaneously. If Kvalnes works as it should and generates cash flow, securing debt financing shouldn’t be a problem for this ESG darling.

By the time Kvalnes reaches its final size (40,000 tonnes), the planned year is 2030, so a lot of water will flow in the Gulf Stream before the 90,000-tonne production target becomes a reality. The construction schedule for the Fiskenes and Breivik sites has not been finalized. According to the current outlines, they would be around 2026-2027, but time will tell.

Therefore, I don’t dare to guess valuation levels; I only know that if Kvalnes Phase 1 is completed on schedule and within budget, it will be a big step forward for the company. (This is for the author @Veke98)

First, the Kvalnes complex must, of course, be made operational and generate cash flow. High CAPEX costs should be reflected in lower OPEX compared to traditional net-pen farms. For this reason, financing expansions with a combination of cash flow and debt is realistic.

Personally, I feel I have arrived at a well-set table now that previous financiers have already opened their wallets. Of course, I cannot be sure if Kvalnes will succeed and if there will still be surprises during the construction phase. That’s just how investing is…

ed: clarified

2 Likes
9

I came across a series on Netflix that is being released this Thursday.

Billionaire Island (Rahasaari) – September 12
The ruthless owner of a Norwegian fish farm plans a takeover of a local rival to become the world’s largest salmon producer.

It might be more for entertainment, but I definitely have to watch it since I’ve looked into the topic a bit.

A couple-year-old MOT episode Sairaaksi kasvatettu lohi | MOT | Yle Areena was quite critical of farming in the fjords, and things have changed quite a lot in a short time. Apparently, the salmon are much healthier when growing in these tanks, and the waste doesn’t end up in the nearby waters. If I recall correctly, mortality in the fjords has been around 15-20%, while in tanks it’s only a few percent.

1 Like
10

The good thing about tanks is that they are isolated from each other, and compared to net pen farming, fish diseases don’t lead to all the fish at the site being discarded as waste.

In RAS systems, the key is to make the removal of pathogens from the water work. Otherwise, you’re in trouble, as the example of Fifax showed. Recirculation is used to maximize energy efficiency (heating or cooling the water) while optimizing rapid fish weight gain.

In Andfjord’s case, location, location, and location are the reasons that make a flow-through system the best choice here. If Andfjord relied on RAS, let alone cages, I wouldn’t even be interested in it. (This is not a criticism of RAS technology; it has its place!)

In Norway, public opinion has turned critical of cage farming, where polluting water areas is penalized with a “shared infrastructure tax” style tax. In other words, the industry is being steered toward a more sustainable direction via incentives.

It is more likely that cage farming will be moved abroad to South America, so once the lifespans of the current cage farms in Norway are over, their numbers will at least decrease in the fjords. It’s a matter of political decisions, but this is how things look at the moment.

1 Like
11

Relating to the discussion above regarding RAS vs. flow-through – there is preliminary research on the yield differences between different approaches.

Salmon Evolution is one of the pioneers of flow-through technology and, as the article states, production targets have not yet been reached.

Key points:

  • No differences in yield between flow-through and RAS technologies, at least not in favor of flow-through.
  • Optimization and learning of flow-through technology are ongoing, to be done within the limits of the built infrastructure.

Fish farming is a multi-variable exercise where one must consider a strategy for how much money to invest in initial inputs (smolts), what the target stocking density and harvest size are, and whether a tank overstocked with juveniles should potentially be split into grow-out tanks. Stress caused by interventions (mortality, quality) must be taken into account, and market price and demand must be monitored.

Rearing volume comes with a price, but it better to plan bigger and with higher initial CAPEX and not fail on production targets

The researcher’s statement supports my own investment thesis. With a small initial input, economies of scale remain unachieved. (Note: “small” would be a significant investment by Finnish standards.) As in any business, the ability to execute plans is essential.

Salmon Evolution’s production method is not fully comparable to Andfjord’s. SE controls the water temperature, so the salmon’s growth rate is naturally higher, as are the production costs. Based on the construction pace, both roadmaps aim for the same scale (~100,000t), but Andfjord appears to be overtaking in a couple of years due to the massive initial investment at the Kvalnes site.

1 Like
12

Tämä voisi olla myös kaffehuoneeseen sopivaa, mutta annoin Googlen Gemini AI:n tehdä juniorianalyytikon hommat ja vertailla Salmon Evolutionia ja Andfjord Salmonia. Pieniä mokia löytyy, kuten Andfjordin nykyinen tuotantokapasiteetti ja AI:n kuvitelma keskittymisestä vain poikasten (post smolt) kasvatukseen.

Lopuksi esitin knoppikysymyksen teknologian eroista ja vastaus oli parempi kuin itse olisin kirjoittanut. Aika vakuuttavaa jälkeä.

Lähdemateriaalina tuoreimmat vuosikertomukset.

Comparison of Andfjord Salmon and Salmon Evolution:

Similarities:

  • Focus on Sustainability: Both companies prioritize sustainability, emphasizing environmental responsibility, fish welfare, and responsible practices.

  • Land-based Aquaculture: Both companies are committed to land-based salmon farming, recognizing the advantages of a controlled environment and reduced environmental impact.

  • Financial Performance: Both companies emphasize their financial performance and growth trajectory, highlighting milestones achieved.

  • Growth Ambitions: Both companies have ambitious growth plans, aiming to expand their production capacity significantly in the coming years.

  • Focus on Innovation: Both companies emphasize the role of innovation in driving their success, with a focus on developing unique technologies and processes.

Differences:

  • Technology:

    • Salmon Evolution: Pioneered the hybrid flow-through system (HFS), where seawater is filtered and treated before entering tanks and around 65% of the water is reused.

    • Andfjord Salmon: Employs a natural flow-through system, relying on the Gulf Stream to provide a continuous flow of fresh, oxygen-rich seawater without requiring energy to heat, cool, or clean the water.

  • Location:

    • Salmon Evolution: Established its primary facility in Indre Harøy, Norway.

    • Andfjord Salmon: Located in Kvalnes, Andøya, Norway, where it can leverage the benefits of the Gulf Stream for a more natural flow-through system.

  • Scale:

    • Salmon Evolution: Currently has a production capacity of 100,000 tonnes, with its first facility at Indre Harøy operating at full industrial scale (7,900 tonnes).

    • Andfjord Salmon: Currently has a production capacity of 40,000 tonnes at its Kvalnes facility, with the first pool reaching 1,000 tonnes in capacity.

  • Product Focus:

    • Salmon Evolution: Focuses on producing high-quality, human-grade salmon for a global market.

    • Andfjord Salmon: Emphasizes the production of post-smolt for ocean-based fish farmers, in addition to human-grade salmon.

  • ESG Reporting:

    • Salmon Evolution: Provides a dedicated section on ESG performance, including environmental, social, and governance metrics.

    • Andfjord Salmon: Integrates sustainability reporting throughout the document, making it a core part of their communication and strategy.

Summary:

While both companies are pioneers in sustainable land-based salmon farming, their technological approaches and chosen locations reflect distinct strategies. Salmon Evolution’s focus is on large-scale, full-cycle production of human-grade salmon, while Andfjord Salmon is aiming to leverage its unique location and natural flow-through system to produce post-smolt for the broader aquaculture industry and create a more sustainable value chain. Both companies are actively pursuing growth and innovation in the land-based salmon farming sector.

  1. What makes Andfjord Salmon technology different from Salmon Evolution?

Andfjord Salmon’s technology is significantly different from Salmon Evolution’s in its reliance on a natural flow-through system. Andfjord Salmon leverages the Gulf Stream to provide a continuous flow of fresh, oxygen-rich seawater without requiring energy to heat, cool, or clean the water. This approach is designed to be more natural, energy-efficient, and less reliant on extensive filtration and treatment systems that Salmon Evolution’s hybrid flow-through system requires.

Inderes.fi-sisällön kehitysideat
13

Carnegie has initiated coverage of Andfjord. Target price is an even 40 NOK, which means an upside of about 30 percent. Translated from a Norwegian source, here are the core points:

company’s geographical location is in a sweet spot and that the throughput technology for salmon farming has a low complexity. They see more upside in the price target if Andfjord Salmon ensures more license capacity

My thoughts exactly. As construction work is apparently progressing according to plan or even ahead of schedule and budget, I would expect target prices to be nudged upwards as the required rate of return (relative to risk) decreases.

1 Like
14

The salmon investment turning into “cod” (a loss) is one step further away. The construction project’s workstreams continue to progress well.

  • The progress on all workstreams is so far in line with or better than the original schedule.
  • this means that the tunnel construction at Kvalnes has already reached 85 percent completion, up from 73 percent in early September.
  • The harbour area workstream has reached 58 percent completion, up from 42
    percent in early September.
  • The concrete pools workstream has reached 45 percent completion, up from 12
    percent in early September.

In plain terms: the risk level is dropping significantly. The approaching winter does not affect the drilling, but the construction of the fish pools will at least slow down due to northern conditions. The goal to start fish farming next summer is very much realistic.

EDIT: Updated the quotes with more detail

Addition: If anyone is interested in reading more about the rock mass measurements, below is a link to data related to Andfjord Salmon. I don’t understand the numbers, but it shows that the drilling isn’t being done haphazardly. They called in a specialist firm in August to investigate the outlet tunnel. The rock mass was softer than expected, but the work has progressed on schedule and within budget despite the weaker drilling site.

https://amberggroup.com/cs/news-events/new/when-salmon-need-underground-waterways

3 Likes
15

Land-based salmon farming is a more complex business than the average equity savings account holder would imagine. Dig a hole, pump in some water, feed the fish, and clean out the waste. From the gutting board to the bank – what could be so difficult?

The Norwegians’ “money doesn’t smell” mentality seems to be shifting towards environmental awareness. The Nordland County Administration is outlining a requirement for IR filtration for intake water in land-based fish farming to eradicate parasites. Expensive business, especially if the intention is to use flow-through technology instead of water recycling. This is only a draft from the county administration, but it is indicative nonetheless—

This topic does not affect Andfjord Salmon for the time being, as the proposed requirement would only apply to new fish farms. As permit conditions tighten, AS should be safe anyway because, as I have kept harping on, there shouldn’t be any bugs at the end of the water intake tunnel at a depth of 50 meters. However, the authorities’ regulatory zeal should not be underestimated, whether the mandate is beneficial or not.

Currently, the debate and unfinished state of permit conditions are keeping new investments on ice, and competitors are unable – at least in the Nordland region – to start their own projects.

In the big picture, this development further improves Andfjord Salmon’s relative position. Andfjord’s example may drive others using flow-through technology toward deep waters as water intake sources. When you consider the effort required to find a suitable location, secure sites, obtain permits, and get financing, those starting from scratch have a long road ahead to reach the construction phase.

Land-based fish farming is becoming more like mining, where the importance of location and scalability is emphasized. I wouldn’t be surprised if many Norwegian farmers move their tanks to other countries.

4 Likes
16

The announcement from early November already stated the essentials, and in three weeks, progress has not been significant in terms of numbers. Q3 is a period with lighter reporting requirements for a First North listed company, so the figures from the presentation are:

  • Overall project still on schedule (or ahead of it)
  • water tunnels 85% - 90%
  • harbor 58 → 61%
  • pools 45 → 51%
  • technical installations 9%

The connections and casting work for the pools to the water tunnels have been completed, so the construction of the pools will accelerate in the coming weeks.

Otherwise, “business as usual,” and with the next quarterly update (February -25), attention can be shifted towards the planned start of production operations. At the same time, we will get an outlook on the robustness of the construction budget. Currently, the budget seems to be holding up well.

The share price has rallied 35% since the start of the discussion thread. The reduction of risks related to construction work (schedule, costs) is reflected in the price. My own purchase and the start of the thread hit close to the short-term price bottom, but that is more a sign of luck than skill.

I have no informational or skill-based advantage in assessing the progress of construction projects; my own aim has been more towards future years than short-term gains. But it’s nice this way too.

3 Likes
18

The Norwegians declared, like Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear, “more speed”. One cannot fault their lack of courage.

According to an update received today, the construction of Phase 2a will continue immediately, even as the final touches of Phase 1 construction are still underway.

The update states that Phase 1 is progressing “on schedule and on budget,” and the reason given for the faster-than-expected expansion is the desire to benefit from the machinery and personnel already present at the construction site.

Construction of Phase 1 and shared operational infrastructure for all 12 pools to be finalized by Q2 2025, on time and budget
• Decision to start Phase 2a construction immediately, reaping construction synergies from continuous process across phases. Retaining personnel and equipment on-site, allowing for optimized resource usage and accelerated execution time

One reason is certainly the schedule – as spring approaches, the best construction period is at hand, and disruptions to fish production are minimized. The expansion phase is expected to be completed during Q3/26.

According to the announcement, cultivation in Phase 1 pools will begin as planned in Q3. At the same time, the structures and water circulation of the pools have been optimized so that the estimated production volume per cultivation cycle increases by 20%. Plus, preparations are being made for potential tightening of water treatment conditions.

Screenshot_20250226-223439

Since the 2a expansion starts immediately and there is no cash flow yet, Andfjord is seeking 600 MNOK in equity funding from shareholders. The construction budget has increased for the reasons mentioned above, but the increased production capacity is expected to offset the increased costs in less than two years.

2 Likes
19

Action is swift. 600 MNOK in cash a few hours later. The largest owners are subscribing to the issue at a price of 35 NOK per share (10% discount to the share price).

I also understood that minority shareholders would be included in a supplementary offering.

In the short term, there is dilution pressure on the share price, but in the long term, the overall situation is significantly positive. From a risk perspective, it is understandable that a larger project was not undertaken alongside Phase 1 yet. Now that the overall picture is starting to emerge (budget, schedule), a larger portion can be taken on, also from the financiers’ perspective.

A large part of the total sum is still bank loans, meaning the operation is not just about dipping into the owners’ pockets.

The increased production volume quickly compensates for the rise in costs, and if Fiskenes’ new site gets through permitting, the cash flow from Kvalnes will be stronger and the compound interest effect will gain better momentum.

2 Likes
20

The outlet side of the water tunnel is complete, and the inlet side’s hole into the sea will be drilled in June/July. As a layman, I would assume this to be the final operation. Due to the height differences in the tunnel, drilling the inlet hole is practically a “point of no return,” and all other technology must be ready in the basins and pipelines before this.

The estimate for the start of fish farming in the early part of Q3 still seems realistic. According to the press release, the schedule is still on track, despite the modifications to increase capacity.

The same press release reiterates how drawing water from over 50 meters deep prevents algae and parasite infections. This week, Yle’s website also featured news about problems occasionally affecting traditional cage farming of salmon.

Birds are their own risk, and a pelican can hit a black swan, but structural solutions have managed to block the most typical pests from seawater. RAS (Recirculating Aquaculture Systems) are a separate matter, and as the Fifax case showed, even that system can go wrong.

3 Likes
21

A tunnel has also been excavated in the other direction on Andøya island. The most significant ongoing construction work is related to the harbor area. The start date for the fish farm is still estimated to be September.

The budgets for the construction phases were adjusted in May - upwards, of course. This is attributed to expected stricter permit conditions (waste treatment, water purification) and higher construction costs (harbor area).

If in February the capex/kilo was pushed down to 105 NOK/kilo due to structural changes in the tanks, the aforementioned cost factors brought it back to 115 NOK/kilo. Not a big change to the overall picture, but it clearly shows how the cost level of large construction projects almost always creeps upwards from what was initially planned.

In May, the company conducted a smaller directed share issue at a price of 36 NOK to finance the budget overrun, which was smaller than the February issue. It doesn’t paint a good picture if, during the February issue (although for different reasons, capacity expansion), the budget overrun was not foreseen or communicated to the market. Not only the company itself, but also the main contractor should look in the mirror. A significant portion of the construction work for the additional tanks has already been completed, and the riskiest parts are ready, so hopefully, the cost overruns will end here.

From now on, attention will increasingly turn to how the fish farming and the construction of additional tanks can be coordinated.

edit: here’s a structural image from the presentation for fans of engineering porn:

image

https://www.andfjordsalmon.com/en/news/inlet-waterway-successfully-completed-sustainable-landbased-farming

4 Likes