The US CLOUD Act lets American authorities compel US-owned providers to hand over data - even when that data physically sits in an EU data center. Ownership, not server location, decides who can be forced to comply.
Between late 2024 and early 2026, the price of an H100 hour fell by roughly two thirds, and more than 300 new GPU cloud companies entered the market in a single year. Capacity stopped being scarce. Trust did not.
Almost all of that capacity sits outside European jurisdiction. Under the US CLOUD Act, American authorities can compel a US-owned provider to hand over data regardless of which country the servers physically stand in - including servers inside the EU. For a bank, a hospital, a defence supplier or a public authority, that is not a technicality. It is a board-level question with no good answer.
Denmark already has one serious AI compute asset in Gefion, the national supercomputer. But Gefion is built for research and large selected projects, not for a consultancy that needs eight GPUs on Tuesday and two on Friday. And the companies that do sell that flexibility are, with few exceptions, not Danish and not European.
So we built the thing that was missing: commercial, self-service GPU capacity, on our own hardware, in our own building, under Danish law - for the workloads most companies actually run.
<5%
of the world's AI compute currently sits in Europe, while US hyperscalers hold over 70% of the regional cloud market.
64-75%
drop in H100 rental prices between late 2024 and early 2026. Raw price is no longer a defensible position.
~70%
of GPU cloud consumption is expected to be inference rather than training by the end of 2026 (Morgan Stanley estimate).