Mora Munoz Partners
Case Study · 2025

Multi-Phase Capital Architecture

Capital planning · Fusion energy · Prototype through Nth-of-a-kind. A pre-tax, unlevered planning model and memorandum, built for management to take to investors.

01 — The Engagement

The capital path, phase by phase.

A long-range planning model for a fusion energy developer, built to test whether the platform creates durable value once the full capital path is made explicit.

Phase 1
Prototype
Pre-commercial unit
Phase 2
Pilot
Pre-commercial units
Phase 3
FOAK
First commercial unit
Phase 4
NOAK
Repeatable standard units
Inputs
Management's strategy, our structure
Management supplied the plant sizes, long-term cost targets, power pricing and margin expectations. We supplied the structure, the order of the phases, capital phased over each construction period, pre-commercial and licensing costs modeled explicitly, alternative deployment pacing, and a discount rate for each stage of execution risk.
01
Phases
What each phase pays for
The prototype and pilot carry the pre-commercial spending and the one-time cost of licensing the platform, which is not repeated plant by plant. The first commercial unit comes only after technical validation, manufacturing proof, regulatory clearance and readiness to replicate. From there, standard units roll out in a fixed set of plant sizes, each with its own construction period, fixed operating cost per facility and variable cost with output.
02
Learning curve
Built on management's cost targets
Capital cost per megawatt steps down as units move from the validation size to the larger repeatable configurations, anchored on management's long-term cost targets for commercial units. The base and conservative cases carry higher capital cost, longer construction and higher operating cost than those targets, to show how much of the result depends on the curve being met.
03
Capital
Unlevered and pre-tax, on purpose
The model keeps the economics of the platform apart from financing and tax decisions that had not been made. The choice between corporate and project-level financing, and the layering of capital by investor type, was scoped as a separate phase rather than assumed into the numbers. Discount rates worked as risk proxies by stage, highest before the first commercial unit and lowest for a mature platform.
04
Output
The capital bridge
The output was the capital bridge, the peak cumulative funding requirement, the year cash flow turns, and how both move across downside, base and upside cases. Power price and the discount rate were the two inputs that moved the result most. Management wanted the framework and model to go out and raise capital. The engagement covered the framework, the model and the supporting documents, not the raise itself.
05
The standard was set at scale. It is applied every week.