10/16/2026
🚨 WHO’S ON FIRST? WHAT’S ON SECOND? AND WHO’S ACTUALLY DEVELOPING THERMO? 😂⚾
Remember the famous Abbott and Costello comedy routine, Who’s on First?
Well, I’m starting to feel like we’re living in the Sulphur Springs version!
MSB says one thing. CyrusOne says another. The story keeps changing, and I’m just trying to figure out who’s actually on first!
Hang with me, friends. This is a long one 🤪
We now have various versions of the same data center project, and the story keeps changing.
MSB Global Services has completely redesigned its website. Meanwhile, CyrusOne sent an October 12 email updating our community on the proposed Thermo development.
CyrusOne even stated:
“Where anything here differs from what you heard from us earlier, this is the current information.”
Well, let’s compare what we’ve been told.
1. Project size
MSB before: 3,000 MW, 30 buildings, with 800 MW in Phase 1.
MSB now: Still advertising 3,000 MW and 30 buildings, but Phase 1 has dropped to 300 MW.
CyrusOne before: A potentially massive campus with multiple buildings, with the final size dependent on further evaluation.
CyrusOne now: No site plan, no determined number of phases, and no finalized building layout.
Why is MSB still marketing 30 buildings when CyrusOne hasn’t even determined what it intends to build?
2. The power plant
MSB before: Advertised 1,400 MW of microgrid power available “today,” a dedicated substation, and a 20 year power purchase agreement at approximately 6 cents per kWh.
MSB now: “Power strategy under active development.”
CyrusOne website: Says the project will be powered by new natural gas generation on the property, operated by a major U.S. power company.
CyrusOne October 12 email: Says the power source has not been decided. They’re considering either connecting to the electrical grid or building a natural gas plant. The potential plant’s size, technology, noise and water requirements are still unknown.
How did we go from supposedly available power and a planned gas plant to not even knowing how this project will be powered?
And remember, this property is involved in ongoing litigation over commercial power generation.
3. Construction timeline
MSB before: Published schedules projecting hundreds of megawatts by 2026 and 2027, with full buildout by 2028.
MSB now: No firm delivery dates, but its website advertises a three year construction program, specific construction staffing, and permanent job openings available today.
CyrusOne before: Early planning and due diligence, with construction dependent on further studies and approvals. The ground is suitable and stable.
CyrusOne now: Another six to nine months of due diligence, no construction start date, and full ground studies still incomplete. The deed restriction must also be resolved before the project can advance.
How is MSB advertising construction staffing and permanent jobs when CyrusOne hasn’t even completed its evaluation of the property?
4. Who is actually developing this property?
MSB before: MSB and SSDC1 were developing Matrix Reserve under agreements with the City.
MSB now: Still marketing the 3,000 MW campus, accepting leasing inquiries, and promoting active construction.
CyrusOne before: Publicly introduced as the new developer stepping in after MSB.
CyrusOne now: States, “Our relationship with MSB is buyer and seller.” CyrusOne says it is still evaluating the property and could decide not to develop it.
Anyone else confused?
5. Jobs and the mystery tenant
MSB before: Advertised 7,000 construction and IT jobs. The City’s development projections included up to 1,500 permanent jobs.
MSB now: Still advertising 7,000 jobs, listing specific positions and salaries, and claiming an executed “anchor tenant LOI.”
CyrusOne before: Potential customers remained confidential, and employment depended on the eventual development, but “hundreds” was noted.
CyrusOne now: Estimates approximately 30 to 40 permanent operations jobs per building, but the number of buildings hasn’t been determined.
Who is the anchor tenant? Is CyrusOne involved in that LOI? And how many of the advertised jobs would actually be permanent local positions?
6. The tax breaks
MSB before: Advertised a 35% tax incentive for 10 years.
MSB now: Continues advertising a confirmed 35% incentive. Its homepage also claims a tax abatement has been secured through its partnership with the City.
CyrusOne before: Promoted potentially substantial property tax revenue for local governments.
CyrusOne now: Promises full school district property taxes, acknowledges possible local economic development agreements, and says the total tax impact remains unknown.
So where is the agreement confirming this 35% tax break? When was it publicly approved, and who is receiving it? I haven’t found one yet 🤔
🚨 Now consider the bigger picture.
MSB’s website is advertising a 3,000 MW development, 30 buildings, an executed anchor tenant LOI, a signed City land lease, a secured tax incentive, and specific employment opportunities.
It’s official address is back on Main Street again 😉
It also prominently displayed the CyrusOne logo multiple webpages for about 24 hours.
Meanwhile, CyrusOne’s October 12 email tells us a completely different story.
Plans change. That’s understandable.
But when plans change this dramatically, shouldn’t someone explain it to the taxpayers?
Who’s developing the property?
What’s actually been signed with CyrusOne?
When is construction supposed to begin?
Where is the power coming from?
And why can’t we seem to get one consistent answer?
I’ve been digging. I’ve filed TPIAs. I’ve compared the documents and the public statements.
And somehow, I’m still trying to figure out who’s on first! 🤷🏻♀️😂🤷🏻♀️