Kevin Matte OP Keiith : Thank you for your relevant comment.
Indeed, the legal uncertainty surrounding the arbitration cases is a key risk factor that must be incorporated into any analysis of Venture Global.
At this stage, I have treated this risk as a weighting factor in the valuation target, adjusting my pessimistic/neutral/optimistic scenarios accordingly:
In the event of an unfavorable outcome, it could significantly increase costs and reduce the company’s self-financing capacity, impacting the applied valuation multiple.
In the event of a favorable outcome or an amicable settlement, operational growth would largely offset this risk.
My approach remains cautious, with active monitoring of legal developments to adjust future valuations as needed.
I am also preparing a specific "Stress Test" scenario model related to the arbitration risks, to better frame this aspect.
(I will be publishing this complementary analysis shortly.)

Kevin Matte OP Tliet : Excellent point, and thank you for highlighting it.
Indeed, the fact that Plaquemines is already operating at 140% of its nominal capacity is an extremely bullish signal for Venture Global.
Taking into account this overcapacity and the spot market dynamics projected for 2025, we arrive at a gross revenue potential of $12 billion USD — approximately four times the 2024 EBITDA, as you rightly pointed out.
This suggests that the theoretical fair price based solely on current fundamentals (2024 sales) likely underestimates the company's future value if this scenario materializes.
In my next update, I will incorporate this factor into a revised valuation model, using a forward-looking approach (forward P/S 2025 or EV/EBITDA 2025E).
Thank you for your valuable contribution — it definitely strengthens the fundamental side of the analysis.