The customer is secured. The supply still has to be built.

What the parties have committed

Viridis signed a supply agreement with Rhodia Operations, part of Solvay, for mixed rare-earth carbonate (MREC) from the Colossus project in Brazil to La Rochelle. The initial term runs through 2034, with first shipments expected in 2028. The parties are considering a separate technology license and technical support agreement.

Viridis puts minimum MREC volumes at about 70% of forecast output over the initial term. A separate figure, about 64%, applies to forecast production of the four magnet elements in 2029–2034. Viridis disclosed minimum take-or-pay commitments. Price floors apply to the four magnet elements. Exact prices, payment dates and acceptance criteria remain undisclosed.

Why agree before the product exists?

For a new producer, finding customers and finding funding are connected tasks. A prospective lender needs to understand which receipts will repay the debt. A project without a defined customer asks the lender to assess technology, construction and future selling ability together. An industrial purchase agreement reduces uncertainty around one part of that assessment. Revenue can be examined against identifiable commercial obligations.

The credit decision still needs its own evidence. The buyer’s credit quality, rights to reject material, payment timing and consequences of a delayed start all matter. An agreement helps to the extent that its obligations produce cash the project can actually access. A headline estimate of future sales is too blunt a measure of that ability.

The buyer acquires an interest in the supplier’s success

A long-term buyer can influence the shape of a future source. The producer learns what a particular processor requires and can incorporate that demand into its design. The buyer, in turn, links part of its plans to capacity still being created. As its own production becomes more dependent on that route, monitoring progress before regular deliveries becomes a procurement responsibility.

The purchasing team needs separate plans for securing the future source and sustaining current operations. Those plans have different inventory horizons, qualification work and commitments to existing suppliers. If commissioning slips, replacement material must be found on the receiving plant’s actual production calendar. The economics of the new relationship should therefore include the cost of maintaining alternatives during the transition.

How to assess committed volumes and usable supply

A processor needs a usable batch. Reviewing the agreement means identifying the units of commitment, the controlled quality characteristics and the point of acceptance. A percentage of forecast capacity cannot be translated directly into the buyer’s expected throughput without yield, ramp-up timing and tolerances.

Consider an illustrative project-purchasing scenario. A producer delivers the agreed weight, but the customer must perform additional treatment before using it. The economics now depend on who pays for reprocessing, downtime and storage of a disputed batch. This is an editorial example, not a reported Colossus shipment. It demonstrates why quantity must be read alongside conformity criteria and a process for resolving deviations.

Technology introduces another timetable

When a buyer helps improve the supplier’s product with its own technology, the relationship can create useful mutual dependence. The recipient wants consistent material. The producer gains access to expertise it may struggle to reproduce quickly. The feedstock and technology arrangements nevertheless have to meet at compatible dates and readiness conditions.

A buyer should ask what happens if the supply agreement is active while the licence, equipment or staff training is delayed. Is the upgraded product necessary to meet the original obligations? Who verifies that the process is ready? What can proceed before the technology agreement is executed? Until the answers are available, these remain distinct milestones. An intention to transfer technology does not establish an operating capability.

The cost of a long commitment

Predictability can bring value while reducing flexibility. A demand downturn may leave the buyer needing less material. A rise in market prices may make the producer want to sell more elsewhere. A structure in which both sides expect to change their volumes quickly would offer fragile protection for the investment.

Commercial quality therefore includes the ability to survive an adverse scenario. Review the limits of permitted variation, the process for revising the production plan and the funding of involuntary inventory. An attractive opening price can come with commitments that become expensive under different utilisation. Revision mechanisms have value before the first dispute occurs.

What would demonstrate progress?

Viridis says its demonstration plant has sent carbonate to La Rochelle for qualification since June 2026. The next test is acceptance of a commercial Colossus batch against the agreed specification.

Our follow-up would seek three successive forms of evidence. First, completed financing and a funded execution budget. Second, material accepted against the agreed specification, with a credible route to regular delivery. Third, functioning payment and repeated performance against schedule. Together these checks identify where a commercial agreement has become a working supply chain.

An industrial supplier faces a strategic question. How much does the anchor customer enable investment, and how much future selling freedom does that commitment consume? The buyer faces its counterpart. How much involvement in a supplier’s start-up is justified by the value of that source? Answering requires procurement, technical and finance teams to assess the commitments together.