Veridis: Ashkelon before 2027, how much of the water value is really secured
The main article showed that Ashkelon has shifted from a leveraged asset into a cash-upstream engine. This follow-up shows that a meaningful part of the value through May 2027 is indeed protected by tariff mechanics, availability and dividends already moving upward, while the layer beyond 2027 still sits on an open tender rather than secured value.
The main article already showed that Ashkelon moved in 2025 from an asset that primarily served financing into an asset that is starting to push cash upstream. This follow-up isolates only the question the market still has to solve: how much of the water value is already secured now, and how much of it rests on a future win that has not happened yet.
The answer is sharper than headlines like "the concession ends in 2027" or "the new tender is already out" suggest. Through May 2027, Ashkelon carries a meaningful layer of value that is already economically protected. VID's project debt was fully repaid in October 2025, the water segment already received about NIS 43 million of dividends from VID in 2025 versus about NIS 31.5 million in 2024, and at the listed-company level Veridis received NIS 96 million of dividends from Veridis Water in 2025 plus another NIS 28 million in February 2026. That is no longer abstract potential.
But this is exactly where the reader needs to stop. Anything beyond May 2027 is still not secured value. It is an operating and strategic option. The new tender does open the possibility of another 25 years and annual capacity of 220 million cubic meters, but it also requires fresh design, financing, refurbishment, expansion and renewed operation of the plant, and in some cases a separate decision path around a power station. The right reading of Ashkelon is therefore neither "the asset is about to disappear" nor "another 25 years are already in hand". The right reading is that there is a mature asset with protected cash through 2027, with a continuation option on top that has not yet turned into a win.
Four points hold the whole thesis:
- The current concession ends in May 2027 and the plant is meant to transfer to the state without consideration. Even so, the company says no material additional costs are expected before handover, beyond the orderly maintenance already being performed.
- The economics of the current concession are better protected than they may look: even if the state reduces production volumes, it still has to pay the full fixed component, and over the life of the agreement there were no material offsets.
- In 2025 the plant supplied about 123.8 million cubic meters, and for 2026 VID received a base plan of 120 million cubic meters together with willingness by the state to purchase up to 9 million additional cubic meters if operating capacity allows.
- What is not protected is the next stage: the new tender, published in September 2025 and open for bids until June 15, 2026, gives a new 25-year concession only to whoever finances, refurbishes, expands and operates the asset under a new structure.
What Is Actually Protected Through May 2027
The first point to clear up is that Ashkelon at the end of 2025 is no longer the same infrastructure unit that was mainly read through its debt burden. In October 2025 VID's project financing was fully repaid. From that point on, cash is no longer trapped first in debt service. It begins moving upward. The segment presentation already shows that shift in numbers: water-segment EBITDA rose to NIS 106.8 million, and the company explains that the increase came mainly from higher dividends received from VID, about NIS 43 million versus about NIS 31.5 million a year earlier. In the fourth quarter alone, NIS 15 million was received from VID versus zero in the comparable quarter.
What matters even more is that the protection of this cash layer does not rest only on the plant operating well. It is embedded in the contract structure. The state does not commit to a minimum desalinated-water purchase quantity, but under the procedure governing annual desalination volumes it is supposed to make an effort to buy at least 40% of the annual quantities set in the agreement. More important, even if the state chooses to reduce production, it still has to pay the full fixed price. That means Ashkelon's value through 2027 is not exposed only to how many cubic meters are produced in practice. It also rests on plant availability and on a fixed component that behaves more like availability-based infrastructure than like a business whose economics sit purely on volume.
The 2025 operating pattern reinforces that reading. The desalination authority asked VID for additional quantity above the annual volume it had already notified, and actual supply reached about 123.8 million cubic meters. In October 2025 VID was notified of a 120 million cubic meter plan for 2026, and later received willingness from the authority to purchase up to 9 million cubic meters more if the plant can produce them. In other words, heading into the final two years of the concession, the asset is not being drained on purpose. The operating demand still appears firm.
The tariff itself adds another protection layer, though not a uniform one. The fixed component includes the financing component, the return on investment and fixed operating expenses, and is paid as long as the plant is available. The variable component mainly covers energy and variable operating costs. The fixed price is indexed mainly to CPI, while the variable price is indexed partly to the time-of-use electricity tariff, partly to the dollar and partly to CPI. In plain terms, there is a formula that protects part of the project's economics, but it does not eliminate sensitivity to every input cost or every operating shift.
This is also the place to be careful with the word "secured". Ashkelon is not on flawless autopilot. The agreement includes offset and liquidated-damages mechanisms if daily, bi-monthly or annual quantities fall below defined thresholds, but the company says there were no material offsets over the life of the agreement. There is also a buyout right on paper, yet the group itself assesses the probability of that being exercised before the end of the concession as low, partly because the state has not used such a right before and partly because the end of the current term is already near. So the risk exists, but both history and the company's own framing still point to a relatively high stability layer through handover.
There is another important qualifier. The settlement with the state already cuts into part of the near-term value. Under that settlement, from the payment for September-October 2025 through the payment for November-December 2026, the state will receive a water-tariff discount with total value of about NIS 15.6 million at VID. In parallel, Adom agreed to a future discount in O&M fees with total value of about NIS 18 million, to be granted in eight payments starting in December 2025. So the right thesis is not that the cash through 2027 is perfectly clean. It is that it is more protected than the concession-end headline suggests, even after taking into account concessions that have already been signed.
| Layer | What is protected | What remains open |
|---|---|---|
| Current concession period | Operation through May 2027, with no material additional costs expected before handover | The plant transfers to the state without consideration at the end of the term |
| Water volumes | 120 million cubic meters in the 2026 plan, plus willingness to buy up to 9 million more | There is no contractual minimum purchase commitment |
| Tariff | The fixed component is paid even if volume is reduced, as long as the plant is available | The variable component is more exposed to energy, the dollar and TOU pricing |
| Operating quality | There were no material offsets over the life of the agreement | Penalty mechanisms still exist if quality or volumes fall below threshold |
| Cash moving upstream | Project debt is gone and dividends have already flowed from VID and Veridis Water | Part of 2025-2026 already carries tariff discounts and O&M concessions under the settlement |
Where The Value Stops Being Protected And Turns Into An Option
This is the core of the follow-up. The market could easily take the stability of 2025, add the debt repayment and the plant's operating record, and slide too quickly into the conclusion that the story simply rolls forward for another 25 years. That is a mistake. What comes after May 2027 is not an automatic continuation of the current concession. It is a new project with new economics.
The tender documents published in September 2025 do not offer only a chance to "keep operating" Ashkelon. They refer to the design, financing, refurbishment, expansion, operation and maintenance of the plant for a 25-year term, taking annual water production to 220 million cubic meters. In note 22 the company spells out that this includes a new adjacent plant with annual capacity of 100 million cubic meters, alongside an upgrade of the existing plant that currently produces about 120 million cubic meters per year. That is no longer the same economic animal as a mature asset after debt repayment. It is a fresh package of capex, financing, construction and tender risk.
| The current asset through 2027 | The next cycle in the new tender |
|---|---|
| A mature plant that has been operating since 2005 | A new 25-year project |
| About 120 million cubic meters of annual capacity | A total target of 220 million cubic meters per year |
| Project debt fully repaid in October 2025 | Fresh need for design, financing, refurbishment and expansion |
| Economics read through availability, tariff mechanics and dividends already moving up | Economics still depend on the bid, the tender terms and an actual win |
| The plant transfers to the state in May 2027 if there is no extension | A growth option, not a vested right |
The company has progressed meaningfully in the tender process. In April 2025 the consortium it participates in was declared a qualified participant in the prequalification stage. In July 2025 it was required to present a desalination expert and an operations-and-maintenance expert. On December 25, 2025 the committee notified the consortium that it also met the interim-stage requirements. The submission deadline was set for June 15, 2026. That is real progress, but it is still not a win.
More than that, the company itself marks the boundary of certainty. It writes that it has a natural relative advantage because it has operated a complex plant of this kind successfully for years, but it immediately labels that assessment as forward-looking information. The filing also points to an additional risk: if the company is included on the list of concentrated entities, the state will need to consult the concentration committee before allocating the right in the tender. So even if Veridis's operating advantage is real, the path from strong execution to actually winning the new concession is not linear.
There is also a limited bridge layer, but it should not be confused with a new concession. Under the settlement, the state received an option to extend the existing term for additional periods of at least 4.5 months each, with prior notice and at a reduced price. That matters because it reduces the risk of a one-day cliff in May 2027. But it does not give the company another 25 years of the current economics, and it does not preserve today's price. It is a possible ramp, not a secured future contract.
Bottom Line: How Much Of The Water Value Is Really Secured
Once Ashkelon is broken into two layers, the picture becomes much cleaner.
The first layer is the protected value through May 2027. Here the picture is actually strong: the plant is active, project debt is fully repaid, 2025 volumes and the 2026 plan remain high, the fixed component still protects part of the economics even if volumes are cut, the company does not expect material additional costs before handover, and the cash has already shown that it can move upstream. That does not make Ashkelon a government bond. It does make the next two years far more tangible than a simple "final BOT years" headline suggests.
The second layer is the value beyond 2027. Here the reader needs to stay much stricter. Nothing in the filing allows another 25 years of Ashkelon to be read as if they were already in hand. The new tender is a real opportunity, and potentially a large one, but it still rests on competition, fresh capital, refurbishment and expansion, timing and regulatory decisions. Until there is a win, this is not secured value. It is an option.
That is the conclusion of this follow-up: Veridis's water value is already stronger than the end-of-concession headline alone implies, but it is not as strong as a reading that capitalizes the entire next life cycle of Ashkelon today. Anyone trying to understand the quality of the water engine in 2025 should give full weight to the cash already protected through 2027, and a much more conservative weight to everything that only begins after that.
Disclosure: Deep TASE analyses are general informational, research, and commentary content only. They do not constitute investment advice, investment marketing, a recommendation, or an offer to buy, sell, or hold any security, and are not tailored to any reader's personal circumstances.
The author, site owner, or related parties may hold, buy, sell, or otherwise trade securities or financial instruments related to the companies discussed, before or after publication, without prior notice and without any obligation to update the analysis. Publication of an analysis should not be read as a statement that any position does or does not exist.
The analysis may contain errors, omissions, or information that changes after publication. Readers should review official filings and primary sources before making decisions.