jain.com

Barber Lake facility cash flow commencement

Company: Cipher Mining - Project: Barber Lake Facility

Subject kind
facility timeline
Statement date
2026-03-24
Current status
stated

The claim, verbatim

Company expects Barber Lake facility to commence cash flows, triggering increased minimum liquidity requirements

Source (primary)

Cipher Mining 8-K filed 2026-03-25 (SEC EDGAR, sec_filing)
View cached copy (2026-08-31)Live source ↗

Quote: “minimum Liquidity as of the last day of each fiscal quarter of not less than (i) $100,000,000, prior to the commencement of cash flows of either the Barber Lake facility or the Black Pearl facility, (ii) $150,000,000, after the commencement of cash flow of one but not both of the Barber Lake facility and the Black Pearl facility”

How we checked this

This claim has not yet been checked assertion-by-assertion against its source. It carries a cited source and quote, but the deeper check has not run. When it does, the result appears here whatever it says.

Additional evidence

confirms Cipher Mining 8-K filed 2026-03-25

Quote: “minimum Liquidity as of the last day of each fiscal quarter of not less than (i) $100,000,000, prior to the commencement of cash flows of either the Barber Lake facility or the Black Pearl facility, (ii) $150,000,000, after the commencement of cash flow of one but not both of the Barber Lake facility and the Black Pearl facility”

View cached copy (2026-08-31)Live source ↗

Record of changes

September 1, 2026 — statedlater found incorrect
Automated extraction from the cited source. Recorded automatically from the cited source when it was published, then queued for evidence review.
September 2, 2026 — withdrawnlater found incorrect
Evidence review against the cited source. The source describes the tiered liquidity covenant structure triggered IF/WHEN the facilities commence cash flows, but contains no statement that the company expects the Barber Lake facility to commence cash flows.
September 2, 2026 — stated
Correction after re-verification. Re-verification found the cited source does support this claim. The earlier withdrawal was made in error and has been reversed. The attributed quote appears verbatim in the cited source (deterministic check).