jain.com

Capacity Auction Pricing Premium

Company: Nebius

Subject kind
product
Statement date
2026-08-12
Promised amount
15.0 percent
Current status
stated

The claim, verbatim

First capacity auction cleared at price 15% higher than any previously charged rate for Blackwell generation

Source (primary)

Nebius (NBIS) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript - The Motley Fool (-, news_article)
View cached copy (2026-08-31)Live source ↗Archive.org ↗

Quote: “The company's first capacity auction for midterm contracts cleared at a price 15% higher than any previously charged rate and 20% higher than the current pipeline for Blackwell chips.”

How we checked this

Attempted on September 14, 2026. We could not read enough of the cited source to check this claim.

The verification run did not return a result for this claim (claude -p exit 1: b'').

What we did: Read our cached copy of the publisher (https://www.fool.com/earnings/call-transcripts/2026/08/19/nebius-nbis-q2-2026-earnings-call-transcript/) in full (56,259 characters, retrieved August 31, 2026) and checked each assertion in the claim against it.

Additional evidence

confirms Nebius (NBIS) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript - The Motley Fool

Quote: “The company's first capacity auction for midterm contracts cleared at a price 15% higher than any previously charged rate and 20% higher than the current pipeline for Blackwell chips.”

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

Record of changes

August 31, 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 1, 2026 — withdrawnlater found incorrect
Evidence review against the cited source. The source specifies that 15% is higher than any previously charged rate (without generation qualifier), while 20% is higher than the Blackwell pipeline specifically; the claim incorrectly attributes the 15% comparison to Blackwell generation.
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).