株式会社アストロスケールホールディングス (186A) Q3 2026 Earnings Call Transcript

Note: This document is an English translation of the original Japanese language document and has been prepared solely for reference purposes. No warranties or assurances are given regarding the accuracy or completeness of this English translation. In the event of any discrepancy between this English translation and the original Japanese language document, the original Japanese language document shall prevail in all respects.

April 15, 2026

Company Name: Representative:

Astroscale Holdings Inc. Mitsunobu Okada Representative Director and President, Group CEO (Securities Code: 186A; Tokyo Stock Exchange Growth Market) Contact: Nobuhiro Matsuyama Director and Deputy President, Group CFO (Tel. +81 3-3626-0085)

Business Update (April 2026) Q&A Transcript Presentation materials for Business Update (April 2026) Transcript: Business Update (April 2026) Recording: Business Update (April 2026) *Japanese Q: Given that many civil projects are bespoke, to what extent can repeat bookings or reuse of outputs be expected? A: Non-defense civil projects often require bespoke development, and therefore tend to have lower profitability compared with defense and commercial projects. However, the technologies and know-how gained through civil projects can be reused in defense projects and commercial services. From the perspective of developing new technologies and linking them to the acquisition of repeat bookings in the defense and commercial domains, it is therefore important to continue securing civil projects to a certain extent. Q: If repeat bookings improve R&D efficiency, could total contract values decline under cost-plus pricing structures? A: Pricing differs depending on the customer and project characteristics. In non-defense civil projects, contracts are typically tendered based on predefined mission scope and cost estimates, which tends to result in relatively lower profitability. In contrast, commercial projects allow profitability to be managed through the Company’s sales execution and strict cost control. Defense projects adopt various contract structures and combine characteristics of civil and commercial projects; however, many are fixed-price contracts, under which profitability must be secured within the agreed contract amount. Based on this, the Company places strong emphasis on managing its project portfolio to balance profitability and technological advantage. While civil projects remain important for maintaining technological leadership, the Company’s strategy is to increase the proportion of repeat bookings in defense and commercial projects to improve overall profitability. This shift is also reflected in the updated potential pipeline, where the share of defense projects has increased relative to civil projects. Q: After providing services to Customer B’s satellite, is LEXI-P expected to be deployed to another satellite operated by the same customer, or to a satellite operated by a different customer? A: In the future, either scenario may be possible depending on contractual arrangements. For the first unit, LEXI-P, the current assumption is that after completing service for one satellite operated by Customer B, it will be redeployed to provide services to a satellite operated by a different customer. If a fleet management contract is concluded with a specific customer, services can be provided sequentially to multiple GEO satellites operated by that customer. This would indicate the customer’s adoption of a fleet management strategy that incorporates life extension services, a model that the Company intends to promote over the longer term.

The current contract with Customer B is limited to a single satellite. However, as Customer B operates a large fleet of GEO satellites, the Company expects that, if the effectiveness of the life extension service is successfully demonstrated through LEXI-P, this could potentially lead to a fleet management arrangement in the future. Q: In the potential pipeline, the number of commercial customers in “Preliminary Discussions” has increased from five to fourteen, while none have moved into “Contract Negotiations.” Are these customers waiting to assess the outcome of the service provided to Customer B? A: Among the fourteen customers in preliminary discussions, some have progressed beyond NDA execution and are in discussions toward term sheet agreements. Once a term sheet is agreed, such projects are expected to move into the “Contract Negotiations” stage. A portion of these customers are potential follow-on candidates to Customer B and are assumed to be serviced by LEXI-P. At the same time, the group also includes customers that plan to conduct a full evaluation after completion of the LEXI-P on-orbit demonstration, as well as customers considering use of LEXI spacecraft from the second unit onward. Q: How does the Company view the timing to achieve profitability through securing repeat bookings in defense projects? When is the Company expected to reach a stage where multiple satellites are deployed on orbit and stable revenue can be generated? A: Repeat bookings in defense projects typically involve large contract values per project, and as a result, the timing of bookings may affect the timing of achieving profitability. However, the Company’s basic policy of aiming to achieve profitability from the fiscal year ending April 2028 onward remains unchanged. While a significant contribution from repeat bookings is not expected to materialize immediately in the fiscal year ending April 2027, such bookings are considered important for maintaining and stabilizing profitability once breakeven has been achieved. The Company views the acquisition of repeat bookings in defense projects as a strategic initiative to support stable profit generation and medium- to long-term growth. Q: Are discussions toward securing repeat bookings in the defense domain, in preparation for the next Defense Buildup Program, currently underway? A: Discussions with defense authorities are being conducted on an ongoing basis, not limited to the next Defense Buildup Program, in Japan and other countries. The Company recognizes that it has contributed to the process by which the need for on-orbit servicing has been incorporated into the space defense strategies of major countries. As these needs have been reflected in policy documents, considerations toward budget allocation and program implementation have progressed across countries. The Company intends to continue its dialogue with relevant authorities going forward. Q: The number of projects in “Preliminary Discussions” within the potential pipeline has increased significantly. What factors have driven this increase since the previous pipeline disclosure in October 2025? A: In civil projects, one contributing factor was the ministerial-level meeting on budget formulation held by the European Space Agency (ESA) in November 2025 (CMIN25), at which budgets were allocated to multiple projects. In the defense domain, while not all projects have finalized budget allocations at this stage, discussions with government authorities have become more concrete. Progress in U.S. programs, including the Golden Dome initiative and selection into the Competitive Range for the Missile Defense Agency’s SHIELD IDIQ contract, has also been reflected. The timeline for these projects to reach contract execution varies significantly by project. However, among civil projects for which budgets have already been allocated, bidding is expected to proceed sequentially, and some may move into the “Bid / Contract Negotiations” stage during the fiscal year ending April 2027. Defense projects are also expected to become more concrete in stages as planning for the next Defense Buildup Program progresses. Q: With regard to defense-related projects in the United States, how does the Company view the expected timing of bookings and the types of services to be provided?

A: Some U.S. defense projects adopt IDIQ contracts, under which the timing and amount of individual orders are not predetermined and orders may be issued on a non-regular basis. As a result, it is difficult at this stage to forecast the timing of specific bookings. While details of services under individual programs cannot be disclosed, dialogues with relevant authorities are ongoing regarding services that can be offered based on the Company’s capabilities. Programs such as “SHIELD” are not tied to any specific political administration, and the timing of potential bookings remains undetermined at present. Q: To what extent are repeat bookings from the Japan Ministry of Defense reflected in the defense pipeline, and could the pipeline expand further as projects become more concrete? In addition, how many satellites are expected to be used to protect critical national satellites? A: The defense pipeline includes projects from multiple countries and is not limited to those of the Japan Ministry of Defense, with the understanding that budget cycles and planning progress differ by country. The potential pipeline reflects repeat bookings from the Japan Ministry of Defense to a certain extent; however, the Company is unable to comment at this stage on the number of satellites that may be assumed. In addition, the “Space Domain Defense Guidelines” published by the Ministry of Defense in July 2025 state a policy of protecting critical satellites using multiple satellites. Specific definitions of critical satellites and the number of satellites involved are not publicly disclosed. Q: Does the defense pipeline include the U.S. Andromeda Program? In addition, the Company was not selected in the IDIQ announced in April 2026—what was the reason, and is there still potential for bookings or involvement as a subcontractor? A: Competitive Ranges under IDIQ contracts may be announced in additional phases, as is the case with the SHIELD IDIQ, and the current status does not indicate that the Company has been definitively excluded from the relevant program. In formulating the defense pipeline, the Company has incorporated, to a certain extent, the potential for future bookings and other forms of involvement in related programs. Q: Why is LEXI-P’s service scope limited to approximately 80% of GEO satellites, and why is it not able to service all GEO satellites? A: The Company holds patents for a technology that captures and grasps, via its capture mechanism, the payload adapter ring, which is the interface used to connect launch vehicles and satellites at launch and is adopted by many GEO satellites. Satellites with this structure account for approximately 80% of the total GEO satellite population. The remaining roughly 20% of GEO satellites use different interface structures, which are not compatible with the Company’s current capture technology. While it is technically possible to expand service coverage to such satellites through future development, the Company’s near-term strategy is to focus on GEO satellites equipped with payload adapter rings, which represent the largest addressable portion of the market. Q: Could you describe the current competitive landscape? A: Competition in the on-orbit servicing market has gradually intensified; however, as of April 2026, the Company recognizes itself as the only private company to have successfully demonstrated RPO technologies against non-cooperative targets in space. Space Logistics, a subsidiary of Northrop Grumman, previously conducted an on-orbit demonstration of life extension services in geostationary orbit and was an early mover in this field. That said, recent booking activity in this area appears limited. While the competitive environment remains dynamic, the more direct competitors in on-orbit servicing at present are primarily startup companies. Large aerospace companies are increasingly involved not as direct competitors, but as partners in collaborative mission execution. Q: What are the key sources of Astroscale’s competitiveness in on-orbit servicing?

A: The Company believes its competitive strength is driven primarily by three factors. First, it is the only private company to have successfully demonstrated RPO technologies against non-cooperative targets in space. Second, it has a global operating footprint with presence across multiple regions. Third, these strengths are reflected in its booking track record. As an example of this competitive advantage, in the third quarter the Company secured a repair and refurbishment contract from the European Space Agency (ESA) as the sole awardee among more than 70 bidding companies. In a rapidly evolving space industry, maintaining competitive advantage requires continuously capturing new growth opportunities. While it is likely that additional companies will achieve on-orbit demonstration capabilities in the coming years, this also reflects the expansion of the on-orbit servicing market itself. The Company expects the on-orbit servicing subsector to evolve into an oligopolistic market structure rather than one with a large number of competing players, and aims to become the leading company with the largest market share in this field.