UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 20-F
(Mark One)
|
| |
| o | REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR (g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| | OR |
| x | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| | For the fiscal year ended DecemberDecember 31, 20162018 |
| | OR |
| | |
| o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| | For the transition period from _________________ to _________________ |
| | OR |
| o | SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| | Date of event requiring this shell company report _________________ |
Commission file number: 001-36231
|
|
| SCORPIO BULKERS INC. |
| (Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter) |
| |
| (Translation of Registrant’s name into English) |
| |
| Republic of the Marshall Islands |
| (Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
| |
| 9, Boulevard Charles III Monaco 98000 |
| (Address of principal executive offices) |
| |
Mr. Emanuele Lauro 377-9798-5715 info@scorpiobulkers.com 9, Boulevard Charles III Monaco 98000 |
| (Name, Telephone, E-mail and/or Facsimile, and address of Company Contact Person) |
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to sectionSection 12(b) of the Act.
|
| | |
| Title of each class | | Name of each exchange on which registered |
| Common stock, par value $0.01 per share | | New York Stock Exchange |
| 7.50% Senior Notes due 2019 | | New York Stock Exchange |
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act.
Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act.
Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.
As of December 31, 2016,2018, there were 75,298,67671,217,258 outstanding shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Note – Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under those Sections.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer.filer or an emerging growth company. See the definitionsdefinition of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer”, and “accelerated filer”“emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
| | | | | | |
| Large accelerated filer o | | Accelerated filer x | | Non-accelerated filer o | | Emerging growth company o |
If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards† provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. o
† The term “new or revised financial accounting standard” refers to any update issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board to its Accounting Standards Codification after April 5, 2012.
Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:
|
| | |
| x | | U.S. GAAP |
| | | |
| | | International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the international Accounting Standards Board |
| | | |
| | | Other |
If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow:
If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. desires to take advantage of the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and is including this cautionary statement in connection therewith. This document and any other written or oral statements made by the Company or on its behalf may include forward-looking statements, which reflect its current views with respect to future events and financial performance. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides safe harbor protections for forward-looking statements in order to encourage companies to provide prospective information about their business. Forward-looking statements include statements concerning plans, objectives, goals, strategies, future events or performance, and underlying assumptions and other statements, which are other than statements of historical facts. This document includes assumptions, expectations, projections, intentions and beliefs about future events. These statements are intended as “forward-looking statements.” We caution that assumptions, expectations, projections, intentions and beliefs about future events may and often do vary from actual results and the differences can be material. When used in this document, the words “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “intend,” “plan,” “targets,” “projects,” “likely,” “will,” “would,” “could” and similar expressions or phrases may identify forward-looking statements.
All statements in this document that are not statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, such matters as:
our future operating or financial results;
statements about planned, pending or recent acquisitions, business strategy and expected capital spending or operating expenses, including drydocking, surveys, upgrades and insurance costs;
the strength of world economies;
the stability of Europe and the Euro;
fluctuations in interest rates and foreign exchange rates;
changes in the supply of drybulk vessels, including when caused by new newbuilding vessel orders or changes to or terminations of existing orders, and vessel scrapping levels;
general drybulk shipping market conditions, including fluctuations in charter hire rates and vessel values;
changes in demand in the drybulk shipping industry, including the market for our vessels;
changes in the value of our existing vessels and proposed newbuildings;vessels;
changes in our operating expenses, including bunker prices, dry dockingdrydocking and insurance costs;
compliance with, and our liabilities under, governmental, tax environmental and safety laws and regulations;
changes in governmental rules and regulations or actions taken by regulatory authorities;
potential liability from pending or future litigation;
general domestic and international political conditions;
potential disruption of shipping routes due to accidents or political events;
our ability to procure or have access to financing, our liquidity and the adequacy of cash flows for our operations;
our continued borrowing availability under our debt agreements and compliance with the covenants contained therein;
our ability to successfully employ our existing and newbuilding drybulk vessels;
our ability to fund future capital expenditures and investments in the construction, acquisition and refurbishment of our vessels (including the amount and nature thereof and the timing of completion thereof, the delivery and commencement of operations dates, expected downtime and lost revenue);
risks associated with vessel construction;
potential exposure or loss from investment in derivative instruments;instruments or other equity investments in which we invest;
potential conflicts of interest involving members of our board and senior management and our significant shareholders;
our expectations regarding the availability of vessel acquisitions and our ability to complete acquisition transactions planned;
vessel breakdowns and instances of off-hire; and
drybulk shipping market trends, charter rates and factors affecting supply and demand.
We have based these statements on assumptions and analyses formed by applying our experience and perception of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors we believe are appropriate in the circumstances. All future written and verbal forward-looking statements attributable to us or any person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained in or referred to in this section. We undertake no obligation, and specifically decline any obligation, except as required by law, to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events discussed in this annual report might not occur.
See “Item 3. Key Information—D. Risk Factors” for a more complete discussion of these risks and uncertainties and for other risks and uncertainties. These factors and the other risk factors described in this annual report are not necessarily all of the important factors that could cause actual results or developments to differ materially from those expressed in any of our forward-looking statements. Other unknown or unpredictable factors also could harm our results. Consequently, there can be no assurance that actual results or developments anticipated by us will be realized or, even if substantially realized, that they will have the expected consequences to, or effects on, us. Given these uncertainties, prospective investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements.
PART I
|
| |
| ITEM 1. | IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS |
Not applicable.
|
| |
| ITEM 2. | OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE |
Not applicable.
Unless otherwise indicated, references to “Scorpio Bulkers,” the “Company,” “we,” “our,” “us” or similar terms refer to the registrant, Scorpio Bulkers Inc., and its subsidiaries, except where the context otherwise requires. We use the term deadweight tons, or dwt, expressed in metric tons, each of which is equivalent to 1,000 kilograms, in describing the size of our vessels.
On December 31, 2015, we effected a one-for-twelve reverse stock split. All share and per share information throughout this annual report has been retroactively adjusted to reflect the reverse stock split. The par value was not adjusted as a result of the reverse stock split.
| |
| A. | Selected Financial Data |
The selected Consolidated StatementsStatement of Operations data and the Consolidated Balance Sheet data presented for the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017, 2016, 2015 2014, and for the period from March 20, 2013 (date of inception) to December 31, 2013,2014, are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements. Such selected financial data should be read in connection with the consolidated financial statements contained in this report.
| | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Period from March 20, 2013 (date of inception) to December 31, | For the Year Ended December 31, |
| | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | | 2013 | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Dollars in thousands, except per share data | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Consolidated Statement of Operations Data: | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Total vessel revenue | $ | 78,402 |
| | $ | 62,521 |
| | $ | 48,987 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 242,502 |
| | $ | 162,205 |
| | $ | 78,402 |
| | $ | 62,521 |
| | $ | 48,987 |
|
| Total operating expenses | 179,133 |
| | 554,130 |
| | 166,475 |
| | 5,505 |
| 199,192 |
| | 187,777 |
| | 179,133 |
| | 554,130 |
| | 166,475 |
|
| Operating loss | (100,731 | ) | | (491,609 | ) | | (117,488 | ) | | (5,505 | ) | |
| Total other loss | (24,104 | ) | | (19,180 | ) | | 923 |
| | (802 | ) | |
| Operating Income (loss) | | 43,310 |
| | (25,572 | ) | | (100,731 | ) | | (491,609 | ) | | (117,488 | ) |
| Total other (loss) income | | (56,008 | ) | | (34,154 | ) | | (24,104 | ) | | (19,180 | ) | | 923 |
|
| Net loss | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | (510,789 | ) | | $ | (116,565 | ) | | $ | (6,307 | ) | $ | (12,698 | ) | | $ | (59,726 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | (510,789 | ) | | $ | (116,565 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Basic weighted average shares outstanding | 56,174 |
| | 21,410 |
| | 11,466 |
| | 3,327 |
| 71,827 |
| | 71,794 |
| | 56,174 |
| | 21,410 |
| | 11,466 |
|
| Diluted weighted average shares outstanding | 56,174 |
| | 21,410 |
| | 11,466 |
| | 3,327 |
| 71,827 |
| | 71,794 |
| | 56,174 |
| | 21,410 |
| | 11,466 |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Basic loss per share | $ | (2.22 | ) | | $ | (23.86 | ) | | $ | (10.17 | ) | | $ | (1.90 | ) | $ | (0.18 | ) | | $ | (0.83 | ) | | $ | (2.22 | ) | | $ | (23.86 | ) | | $ | (10.17 | ) |
| Diluted loss per share | $ | (2.22 | ) | | $ | (23.86 | ) | | $ | (10.17 | ) | | $ | (1.90 | ) | $ | (0.18 | ) | | $ | (0.83 | ) | | $ | (2.22 | ) | | $ | (23.86 | ) | | $ | (10.17 | ) |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | As of December 31, | | Period from March 20, 2013 (date of inception) to December 31, |
| Dollars in thousands | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | | 2013 |
| Consolidated Balance Sheet Data: | | | |
| | | | |
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 101,734 |
| | $ | 200,300 |
| | $ | 272,673 |
| | $ | 733,896 |
|
| Assets held for sale | — |
| | 172,888 |
| | 43,781 |
| | — |
|
| Vessels, net | 1,234,081 |
| | 764,454 |
| | 66,633 |
| | — |
|
| Vessels under construction | 180,000 |
| | 288,282 |
| | 866,844 |
| | 371,692 |
|
| Total assets | 1,547,157 |
| | 1,473,093 |
| | 1,321,024 |
| | 1,105,684 |
|
| Current liabilities (including current portion of bank loans) | 24,550 |
| | 124,577 |
| | 20,265 |
| | 1,472 |
|
| Bank loans | 493,793 |
| | 342,314 |
| | 29,549 |
| | — |
|
| Senior Notes | 72,199 |
| | 71,671 |
| | 71,222 |
| | — |
|
| Total liabilities | 590,542 |
| | 538,562 |
| | 121,036 |
| | 1,472 |
|
| Shareholders’ equity | 956,615 |
| | 934,531 |
| | 1,199,988 |
| | 1,104,212 |
|
Pursuant to ASU 2015-03, “Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs”, we reclassified unamortized debt issuance costs of $12.3 million and $3.2 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, from Deferred financing costs, net to a reduction in both current and non-current Bank loans, net in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | As of December 31, |
| Dollars in thousands | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Consolidated Balance Sheet Data: | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 67,495 |
| | $ | 68,535 |
| | $ | 101,734 |
| | $ | 200,300 |
| | $ | 272,673 |
|
| Assets held for sale | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 172,888 |
| | 43,781 |
|
| Vessels, net | 1,507,918 |
| | 1,534,782 |
| | 1,234,081 |
| | 764,454 |
| | 66,633 |
|
| Vessels under construction | — |
| | 6,710 |
| | 180,000 |
| | 288,282 |
| | 866,844 |
|
| Equity method investment | 92,281 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Total assets | 1,703,826 |
| | 1,643,410 |
| | 1,547,157 |
| | 1,473,093 |
| | 1,321,024 |
|
| Current liabilities (including current portion of bank loans, financing obligations and Senior Notes, net) | 152,614 |
| | 58,590 |
| | 24,550 |
| | 124,577 |
| | 20,265 |
|
| Bank loans, net | 621,179 |
| | 576,967 |
| | 493,793 |
| | 342,314 |
| | 29,549 |
|
| Financing obligations | 69,229 |
| | 17,747 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Senior Notes, net | — |
| | 72,726 |
| | 72,199 |
| | 71,671 |
| | 71,222 |
|
| Total liabilities | 843,022 |
| | 726,030 |
| | 590,542 |
| | 538,562 |
| | 121,036 |
|
| Shareholders’ equity | 860,804 |
| | 917,380 |
| | 956,615 |
| | 934,561 |
| | 1,199,988 |
|
| |
| B. | Capitalization and Indebtedness |
Not applicable.
| |
| C. | Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds |
Not applicable.
The following risks relate principally to the industry in which we operate and our business in general. Other risks relate principally to the securities market and ownership of our securities, including our common shares and our 7.50% Senior Notes due 2019, which we refer to as our Senior Notes. The occurrence of any of the events described in this section could significantly and negatively affect our business, financial condition, operating results or cash available for the payment of dividends on our common shares and interest on our Senior Notes, or the trading price of our securities.
INDUSTRY SPECIFIC RISK FACTORS
Charter hire rates for drybulk vessels are volatile, and have declined significantly since their historic highswhich has in the past and may remain at low levels or decrease in the future which may adversely affect our earnings, revenue and profitability and our ability to comply with our loan covenants.
The drybulk shipping industry is cyclical with high volatility in charter hire rates and profitability. The degree of charter hire rate volatility among different types of drybulk vessels has varied widely; however, the continued downturnwidely, and in the drybulk charter market has severely affected the entire drybulk shipping industry andrecent years charter hire rates for drybulk vessels have declined significantly from historically high levels. In the past, time charter and spot market charter rates for drybulk carriers have declined below operating costs of vessels. The Baltic Dry Index, or the BDI, a daily average of charter rates for key drybulk routes published by the Baltic Exchange Limited, which has long been viewed as the main benchmark to monitor the movements of the drybulk vessel charter market and the performance of the entire drybulk shipping market, declined 94% from itsa high of almost 12,000 in11,793 on May 20, 2008 and has remained volatile since then. During the year ended December 31,to a low of 290 on February 10, 2016, which represents a decline of 98%. In 2018, the BDI fluctuated inranged from a range between 290, the lowest level it has ever reached, and 1,257.low of 948 on April 6, 2018, to a high of 1,774 on July 24, 2018. As of February 3, 2017,28, 2019, the BDI was 752.658.
Fluctuations in charter rates result from changes in the supply of and demand for vessel capacity and changes in the supply of and demand for the major commodities carried by water internationally. Because the factors affecting the supply of and demand for vessels are outside of our control and are unpredictable, the nature, timing, direction and degree of changes in industry
conditions are also unpredictable. Since we primarily charter all our vessels in the spot market we are exposed to the cyclicality and volatility of the spot market. Spot market charterhirecharter hire rates may fluctuate significantly based upon available charters and the supply of and demand for seaborne shipping capacity, and we may be unable to keep our vessels fully employed in these short-term markets. Alternatively, charter rates available in the spot market may be insufficient to enable our vessels to operate profitably. A significant decrease in charter rates would affect asset values and adversely affect our profitability, cash flows and ability to pay dividends if any, in the future, on our common shares, and interest on our Senior Notes. Furthermore, a significantcontinued decrease in charter rates wouldmay cause asset values to decline, or decline further, and we may have to record an impairment charge in our consolidated financial statements which could adversely affect our financial results.
Factors that influence demand for drybulk vessel capacity include:
supply of and demand for energy resources, commodities and industrial products;
changes in the exploration or production of energy resources, commodities, consumer and industrial products;
the location of regional and global production and manufacturing facilities;
the location of consuming regions for energy resources, commodities, consumer and industrial products;
the globalization of production and manufacturing;
global and regional economic and political conditions, including armed conflicts and terrorist activities, embargoes and strikes;
natural disasters;
disruptions and developments in international trade;
changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns, including the distance cargo is transported by sea;
environmental and other regulatory developments;
currency exchange rates; and
weather.
Factors that influence the supply of drybulk vessel capacity include:
the number of newbuilding orders and deliveries, including slippage in deliveries;
the number of shipyards and ability of shipyards to deliver vessels;
port and canal congestion;
the scrapping rate of older vessels;
speed of vessel operation;
vessel casualties; and
the number of vessels that are out of service, namely those that are laid-up, drydocked, awaiting repairs or otherwise not available for hire.
In addition to the prevailing and anticipated freight rates, factors that affect the rate of newbuilding, scrapping and laying-up include newbuilding prices, secondhand vessel values in relation to scrap prices, costs of bunkers and other operating costs, costs associated with classification society surveys, normal maintenance and insurance coverage costs, the efficiency and age profile of the existing drybulk fleet in the market and government and industry regulation of maritime transportation practices, particularly environmental protection laws and regulations. These factors influencing the supply of and demand for shipping capacity are outside of our control, and we may not be able to correctly assess the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions.
We anticipate that the future demand for our drybulk vessels will be dependent upon economic growth in the world’s economies, including China and India, seasonal and regional changes in demand, changes in the capacity of the global drybulk fleet and the sources and supply of drybulk cargo to be transported by sea. Adverse economic, political, social or other developments could have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.
Global economic conditions may continue to negatively impact the drybulk shipping industry.
In the global economy, operating businessesGlobal financial markets and economic conditions have recently faced tightening credit, weakening demand for goodsbeen, and services, weak international liquidity conditions, and declining markets. In particular, lower demand for drybulk cargoes as well as diminished trade credit available for the delivery of such cargoes have ledcontinue to decreased demand for drybulk carriers, creating downward pressure on charter rates and vessel values. The relativelybe, volatile. Relatively weak global economic conditions during periods of volatility have and may continue to have a number of adverse consequences for drybulk and other shipping sectors, including, among other things:
low charter rates, particularly for vessels employed on short-term time charters or in the spot market;
decreases in the market value of drybulk vessels and limited second-hand market for the sale of vessels;
limited financing for vessels;
widespread loan covenant defaults; and
declaration of bankruptcy by certain vessel operators, vessel owners, shipyards and charterers.
The occurrence of one or more of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.
WeakIf economic conditions throughout the world in particulardecline, particularly in China and the rest of the Asia-Pacific region, this could negatively affect our results of operations, financial condition, cash flows and ability to obtain financing, and may adversely affect the market price of our common shares.
Negative trends in the global economy that emerged in 2008 continue to adversely affect global economic conditions. In addition, the world economy is currently facing a number of new challenges, recent turmoil and hostilities in various regions, including Russia, Syria, Iraq, North Africa, and North Korea. The weakness in the global economy has caused, and may continue to cause, a decrease in worldwide demand for certain goods, and, thus, shipping. Continuing economic instability could have a material adverse effect on our ability to implement our business strategy.
The United States, the European Union and other parts of the world exhibited weak economic trends. The credit markets in the United States and Europe have experienced significant contraction, deleveraging and reduced liquidity since the financial crisis in 2008, and the U.S. federal and state governments and European authorities have implemented andor are considering a broad variety of governmental action and/or new regulation of the financial markets and may implement additional regulations in the future. Securities and futures markets and the credit markets are subject to comprehensive statutes, regulations and other requirements. The Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, other regulators, self-regulatory organizations and exchanges are authorized to take extraordinary actions in the event of market emergencies, and may effect changes in law or interpretations of existing laws.
Global financial markets and economic conditions have been, and continue to be volatile. Credit markets and the debt and equity capital markets have been distressed and the uncertainty surrounding the future of the global credit markets has resulted in reduced access to credit worldwide. These issues, along with significant write-offs in the financial services sector, the re-pricing of credit risk and the current weak economic conditions, have made, and will likely continue to make, it difficult to obtain additional financing. In addition, the current state of global financial markets and current economic conditions might adversely impact our ability to issue additional equity at prices which will not be dilutive to our existing shareholders or preclude us from issuing equity at all.
Also, asAs a result of any renewed concerns about the stability of financial markets generally and the solvency of counterparties specifically, the cost of obtaining money from the credit markets has increasedmay increase as many lenders have increased interest rates, enacted tighter lending standards, refused to refinance existing debt at all or on terms similar to current debt and reduced, and in some cases, ceased to provide funding to borrowers. Due to these factors, we cannot be certain that financing will be available to the extent required, or that we will be able to refinance our credit facilities, on acceptable terms or at all. If financing or refinancing is not available when needed, or is available only on unfavorable terms, we may be unable to meet our obligations as they come due or we may be unable to enhance our existing business, complete the acquisition of our newbuildings and additional vessel acquisitions or otherwise take advantage of business opportunities as they arise.
We face risks attendant to changes in economic environments, changes in interest rates, and instability in the banking and securities markets around the world, among other factors. Major market disruptions and the current adverse changes in market conditions and regulatory climate in the United States and worldwide may adversely affect our business or impair our ability to borrow amounts under credit facilities or any future financial arrangements. The recent and developing economic and governmental factors, together with possible further declines in charter rates and vessel values, may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows, or the trading price of our common shares.
Continued economicEconomic slowdown in the Asia Pacific region, particularly in China, may exacerbate thehave a materially adverse effect on us, as we anticipate a significant number of the port calls made by our vessels will continue to involve the loading or discharging of drybulk commodities in ports in the Asia Pacific region. Before the global economic financial crisis that began in 2008, China had one of the world’s fastest growing economies in terms of GDP, which had a significant impact on shipping demand. The growth rate of China’s GDP is estimated to have decreased tobe approximately 6.7%6.5% for the year ended December 31, 2016,2018, which is China’s lowest0.3% lower than the growth rate for the pastyear ended December 31, 2017. This forecasted growth would be China’s slowest growth rate for the previous five years, and continues to remain below pre-2008 levels. It is possible that China and other countries in the Asia Pacific region will continue to experience slowed or even negative economic growth in the future. Moreover, the current economic slowdown in the economies of the United States, the European Union and other Asian countries may further adversely affect economic growth in China and elsewhere. Our business, financial condition and results of operations, ability to pay dividends, if any, as well as our future prospects, will likely be materially and adversely affected by a furtheran economic downturn in any of theseChina or other countries or geographic regions.
in the Asia Pacific region.
The fair market values of our vessels have declined and may decline further, which could limit the amount of funds that we can borrow, cause us to breach certain financial covenants in our credit facilities, or result in an impairment charge, and we may incur a loss if we sell vessels following a decline in their market value.
The fair market values of drybulk vessels, including our vessels, have generally experienced high volatility and have recently declined significantly.in recent years. The fair market value of our vessels may continue to fluctuate depending on a number of factors, including:
prevailing level of charter rates;
general economic and market conditions affecting the shipping industry;
types, sizes and ages of vessels;
supply of and demand for vessels;
other modes of transportation;
cost of newbuildings;
governmental or other regulations;
the need to upgrade vessels as a result of charterer requirements, technological advances in vessel design or equipment or otherwise;
technological advances; and
competition from other shipping companies and other modes of transportation.
If the fair market values of our vessels decline or decline further, the amount of funds we may drawdown under our secured credit facilities may be limited and we may not be in compliance with certain covenants contained in our secured credit facilities, which may result in an event of default. In such circumstances, we may not be able to refinance our debt or obtain additional financing. If we are not able to comply with the covenants in our secured credit facilities, and are unable to remedy the relevant breach, our lenders could accelerate our debt and foreclose on our fleet. In addition, if we sell one or more of our vessels at a time when vessel prices have fallen, the sale may be less than the vessel’s carrying value on our consolidated financial statements, resulting in a loss and a reduction in earnings.
Conversely, if vessel values are elevated at a time when we wish to acquire additional vessels, the cost of such acquisitions may increase and this could adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flow and financial condition.
A further reduction in charter rates and other market deterioration may require us to record impairment charges related to our long-lived assets (our vessels) and such charges may be large and have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
At December 31, 2016,2018, we had vessels and vessels under construction of $1.4$1.5 billion in total on our consolidated balance sheet, representing 148%175% of our shareholders’ equity. Additionally, as of December 31, 2016, we had $18.6 million of installment payments due on our existing newbuilding contracts, of which $17.2 million remains to be paid.
Our vessels are assessed annually for impairment in the fourth quarter and between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of our vessels and vessels under construction below itstheir carrying value. As of December 31, 2016,2018, we have determined that the estimated undiscounted future cash flows (as determined under U.S. GAAP) of our vessels exceeded the carrying value. However, if there is a further reduction in our charter rates decline, we may be required to record impairment charges on our vessels and vessels under construction, which would require us to write down the carrying value of these assets to their fair value. Since vessels and vessels under construction comprise a substantial portion of our balance sheet, such charges could have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
We are subject to complex laws and regulations, including environmental regulations that can adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of doing business.
Our operations are subject to numerous international, national, state and local laws, regulations, treaties and conventions in force in international waters and the jurisdictions in which our vessels operate or are registered, which can significantly affect the ownership and operation of our vessels. These laws and regulations include, but are not limited to, the U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, or CERCLA, the U.S. Clean Air Act, the U.S. Clean Water Act, or the CWA, and the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, or the MTSA, and regulations of the International Maritime Organization, or IMO, including the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1973 (as from time to time amended and generally referred to as MARPOL) including the designation of Emission Control Areas, or ECAs, thereunder, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974 (as from time to time amended and generally referred to as SOLAS), the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, and the International Convention on Load Lines of 1966 (as from time to time amended), or the LL Convention.
Compliance with such laws, regulations and standards, where applicable, may require installation of costly equipment or implementation of operational changes and may affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels. These costs could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. A failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in administrative and civil penalties, criminal sanctions or the suspension or termination of our operations. Because such conventions, laws, and regulations are often revised, we cannot predict the ultimate cost of complying with them or the impact thereof on the resale prices or useful lives of our vessels. Additional conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted which could limit our ability to do business or increase the cost of our doing business and which may materially adversely affect our operations. For example, the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, or the BWM Convention, which was adopted by the UN International Maritime Organization in February 2004 and entered into force on September 8, 2017, calls for the phased introduction of mandatory reducing living organism limits in ballast water over time (as discussed further below). In order to comply with these living organism limits, vessel owners may have tomust install expensive ballast water treatment systems or make port facility disposal arrangements and modify existing vessels to accommodate those systems. The BWM Convention enters in force on September 8, 2017 and while we believe that our vessels have been fitted with systems that will comply with the standards, we cannot be assured that these systems will be approved by the regulatory bodies of every jurisdiction in which we may wish to conduct our business. If they are not approved it could have an adverse material impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations depending on the available ballast water treatment systems and the extent to which existing vessels must be modified to accommodate such systems.
Environmental laws often impose strict liability for remediation of spills and releases of oil and hazardous substances, which could subject us to liability without regard to whether we were negligent or at fault. Under OPA, for example, owners, operators and bareboat charterers are jointly and severally strictly liable for the discharge of oil within the 200-mile exclusive economic zone around the United States.
We are required by various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses, and certificates with respect to our operations, and satisfy insurance and financial responsibility requirements for potential oil (including marine fuel) spills and other pollution incidents. Although we have insurance to cover certain environmental risks, there can be no assurance that such insurance will be sufficient to cover all such risks or that any claims will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition, and our future ability to pay dividends if any, in the future, on our common shares, and interest on our Senior Notes.
Regulations relating to ballast water discharge coming into effect during September 2019 may adversely affect our revenues and profitability.
The IMO has imposed updated guidelines for ballast water management systems specifying the maximum amount of viable organisms allowed to be discharged from a vessel’s ballast water. Depending on the date of the IOPP renewal survey, existing vessels constructed before September 8, 2017 must comply with the updated D-2 standard on or after September 8, 2019. For most vessels, compliance with the D-2 standard will involve installing on-board systems to treat ballast water and eliminate unwanted organisms. Our vessels have been fitted with alternate management systems (“AMS”) (IMO-approved ballast water treatment systems) that comply with the updated guideline and standards, and all but two of these have also been approved by the U.S. Coast Guard. While we believe that our vessels have been fitted with systems that comply with the updated guideline and standards, we cannot be assured that these systems will be approved by the regulatory bodies of every jurisdiction in which we may wish to conduct our business. If they are not approved it could have an adverse material impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations depending on the available ballast water treatment systems and the extent to which existing vessels must be modified to accommodate such systems.
Furthermore, United States regulations are currently changing. Although the 2013 Vessel General Permit (“VGP”) program and U.S. National Invasive Species Act (“NISA”) are currently in effect to regulate ballast discharge, exchange and installation, the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (“VIDA”), which was signed into law on December 4, 2018, requires that the U.S. Coast Guard develop implementation, compliance, and enforcement regulations regarding ballast water within two years. The new regulations could require the installation of new equipment, which may cause us to incur substantial costs.
Sulfur regulations to reduce air pollution from ships are likely to require retrofitting of vessels and may cause us to incur significant costs.
In October 2016, the International Maritime Organization, the United Nations agency for maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by vessels, set January 1, 2020 as the implementation date for vessels to comply with its low sulfur fuel oil requirement, which cuts sulfur levels from 3.5% to 0.5%. The interpretation of "fuel oil used on board" includes use in main engines, auxiliary engines and boilers. Shipowners may comply with this regulation by (i) using 0.5% sulfur fuels on board, which is likely to be available around the world by 2020 but likely at a higher cost; (ii) installing scrubbers for cleaning of the exhaust gas; or (iii) by retrofitting vessels to be powered by liquefied natural gas, which may not be a viable option for shipowners due to the lack of supply network and high costs involved in this process. Costs of compliance with these regulatory changes may be significant and may have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position.
On November 30, 2018, we entered into agreements with third parties to purchase Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems, known as “Scrubbers,” for 18 of our vessels in 2019 and 10 of our vessels in 2020 for an estimated total cost of $41.9 million, or approximately $1.5 million per vessel. The systems that are being fitted are of ‘hybrid ready’ design, which allows them to be upgraded to a ‘closed loop’ configuration at a future date. As part of these agreements, we also have an option to purchase exhaust gas cleaning systems for up to 18 additional vessels in 2020.
An over-supply of drybulk carrier capacity may prolong or further depress the current low charter rates, which may limit our ability to operate our drybulk carriers profitably.
The supply of drybulk vessels has increased significantly since the beginning of 2006. According to SSY, as of December 2016,2018, newbuilding orders have been placed for approximately 9.8%11.2% of the existing fleet capacity. Vessel supply growth has been outpacing vessel demand growth over the past few years causing downward pressure on charter rates. Until the new supply is fully absorbed by the market, charter rates may continue to be under pressure due to vessel supply in the near to medium term.
World events could affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Past terrorist attacks, as well as the threat of future terrorist attacks around the world, continue to cause uncertainty in the world’s financial markets and may affect our business, operating results and financial condition. Continuing conflicts and recent developments in Russia, North Korea, the Middle East, including Iran, Iraq, Syria, Egypt and North Africa, and the presence of U.S. or other armed forces in the Middle East, may lead to additional acts of terrorism and armed conflict around the world, which may contribute to further economic instability in the global financial markets. These uncertainties could also adversely affect our ability to obtain additional financing on terms acceptable to us or at all. In the past, political conflicts have also resulted in attacks on vessels, mining of waterways and other efforts to disrupt international shipping, particularly in the Arabian Gulf region. Acts of terrorism and piracy have also affected vessels trading in regions such as the South China Sea, the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia and West Africa. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on our operating results, revenues and costs.
Negative trends in the global economy that emerged in 2008 continue to adversely affect global economic conditions. In addition, the world economy is currently facing a number of new challenges. Geopolitical events such as the withdrawal of the U.K. from the European Union, or "Brexit," and changes in U.S. trade policies, treaties and tariffs. Brexit, or similar events in other jurisdictions, could impact global markets, including foreign exchange and securities markets; any resulting changes in currency exchange rates, tariffs, treaties and other regulatory matters could in turn adversely impact our business and operations.
Further, governments may turn to trade barriers to protect their domestic industries against foreign imports, thereby depressing shipping demand. In particular, leaders in the United States have indicated the United States may seek to implement more protective trade measures. President Trump was elected on a platform promoting trade protectionism. The results of the presidential election have thus created significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States, China and other exporting countries, including with respect to trade policies, treaties, government regulations and tariffs. For example, on January 23, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order withdrawing the United States from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a global trade agreement intended to include the United States, Canada, Mexico, Peru and a number of Asian countries. In March 2018, President Trump announced tariffs on imported steel and aluminum into the United States that could have a negative impact on international trade generally. Most recently, in January 2019, the United States announced expanded sanctions against Venezuela, which may have an effect on its oil output and in turn affect global oil supply. Protectionist developments, or the perception they may occur, may have a material adverse effect on global economic conditions, and may significantly reduce global trade. Moreover, increasing trade protectionism may cause an increase in (a) the cost of goods exported from regions globally, (b) the length of time required to transport goods and (c) the risks associated with exporting goods. Such increases may significantly affect the quantity of goods to be shipped, shipping time schedules, voyage costs and other associated costs, which could have an adverse impact on our charterers' business, operating results and financial condition and could thereby affect their ability to make timely charter hire payments to us and to renew and increase the number of their time charters with us. This could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and our ability to pay any cash distributions to our shareholders.
Acts of piracy on ocean-going vessels have had and may continue to have an adverse effect on our business.
Acts of piracy have historically affected ocean-going vessels trading in regions of the world such as the South China Sea, the Indian Ocean and in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia. Sea piracy incidents continue to occur particularly in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia, in the Gulf of Guinea and the West Coast of Africa, with drybulk vessels particularly vulnerable to such attacks. If these piracy attacks result in regions in which our vessels are deployed being characterized as “war risk” zones by insurers or Joint War Committee “war and strikes” listed areas, premiums payable for such coverage could increase significantly and such insurance coverage may be more difficult to obtain. In addition, crew costs, including due to employing onboard security guards, could increase in such circumstances. Furthermore, while we believe the charterer remains liable for charter payments
when a vessel is seized by pirates, the charterer may dispute this and withhold charter hire until the vessel is released. A charterer may also claim that a vessel seized by pirates was not “on-hire” for a certain number of days and is therefore entitled to cancel the charter party, a claim that we would dispute. We may not be adequately insured to cover losses from these incidents, which could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, any detention hijacking as a result of an act of piracy against our vessels, or an increase in cost, or unavailability, of insurance for our vessels, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our vessels may call on ports located in countries that are subject to restrictions imposed by the U.S. or other governments, which could adversely affect our reputation and the market for our common shares.
Although we do not expect that our vessels will call on ports located in countries subject to sanctions and embargoes imposed by the U.S. government and other authorities or countries identified by the U.S. government or other authorities as state sponsors of terrorism, such as Iran, Sudan, Syria and Syria,North Korea, from time to time on charterers’ instructions, our vessels may call on ports located in such countries in the future. The U.S. sanctions and embargo laws and regulations vary in their application,
as they do not all apply to the same covered persons or proscribe the same activities, and such sanctions and embargo laws and regulations may be amended or strengthened over time. In 2010, the U.S. enacted the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions Accountability and Divestment Act, or CISADA, which amended the Iran Sanctions Act. Among other things, CISADA introduced limits on the ability of companies and persons to do business or trade with Iran when such activities relate to the investment, supply or export of refined petroleum or petroleum products. In 2012, President Obama signed Executive Order 13608 which prohibits foreign persons from violating or attempting to violate, or causing a violation of any sanctions in effect against Iran or facilitating any deceptive transactions for or on behalf of any person subject to U.S. sanctions. Any persons found to be in violation of Executive Order 13608 will be deemed a foreign sanctions evader and will be banned from all contacts with the United States, including conducting business in U.S. dollars. Also in 2012, President Obama signed into law the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012, or the Iran Threat Reduction Act, which created new sanctions and strengthened existing sanctions. Among other things, the Iran Threat Reduction Act intensifies existing sanctions regarding the provision of goods, services, infrastructure or technology to Iran’s petroleum or petrochemical sector. The Iran Threat Reduction Act also includes a provision requiring the President of the United States to impose five or more sanctions from Section 6(a) of the Iran Sanctions Act, as amended, on a person the President determines is a controlling beneficial owner of, or otherwise owns, operates, or controls or insures a vessel that was used to transport crude oil from Iran to another country and (1) if the person is a controlling beneficial owner of the vessel, the person had actual knowledge the vessel was so used or (2) if the person otherwise owns, operates, or controls, or insures the vessel, the person knew or should have known the vessel was so used. Such a person could be subject to a variety of sanctions, including exclusion from U.S. capital markets, exclusion from financial transactions subject to U.S. jurisdiction, and exclusion of that person’s vessels from U.S. ports for up to two years.
On November 24, 2013, the P5+1 (the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Russia and China) entered into an interim agreement with Iran entitled the “Joint Plan of Action”, or the JPOA. Under the JPOA it was agreed that, in exchange for Iran taking certain voluntary measures to ensure that its nuclear program is used only for peaceful purposes, the U.S. and EU would voluntarily suspend certain sanctions for a period of six months. On January 20, 2014, the U.S. and E.U. indicated that they would begin implementing the temporary relief measures provided for under the JPOA. These measures included, among other things, the suspension of certain sanctions on the Iranian petrochemicals, precious metals, and automotive industries from January 20, 2014 until July 20, 2014. The JPOA was subsequently extended twice.
On July 14, 2015, the P5+1 and the EU announced that they reached a landmark agreement with Iran titled the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action Regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Nuclear Program, or the JCPOA, which is intended to significantly restrict Iran’s ability to develop and produce nuclear weapons for 10 years while simultaneously easing sanctions directed toward non-U.S. persons for conduct involving Iran, but taking place outside of U.S. jurisdiction and does not involve U.S. persons. On January 16, 2016, which we refer to as Implementation Day, the United States joined the EU and the UN in lifting a significant number of their nuclear-related sanctions on Iran following an announcement by the International Atomic Energy Agency, or the IAEA, that Iran had satisfied its respective obligations under the JCPOA.
Although we believe that we are in compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations, and intend to maintain such compliance, there can be no assurance that we will be in compliance in the future, particularly as the scope of certain laws may be unclear and may be subject to changing interpretations. Any such violation could result in fines or other penalties and could severely impact our ability to access U.S. capital markets and conduct our business, and could result in some investors deciding, or being required, to divest their interest, or not to invest, in us. In addition, certain institutional investors may have investment policies or restrictions that prevent them from holding securities of companies that have contracts with countries identified by the U.S. government as state sponsors of terrorism. The determination by these investors not to invest in, or to divest from, our securities may adversely affect the price at which our securities trade. Moreover, our charterers may violate applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations as a result of actions that do not involve us or our vessels, and those violations could
in turn negatively affect our reputation. In addition, our reputation and the market for our securities may be adversely affected if we engage in certain other activities, such as entering into charters with individuals or entities in countries subject to U.S. sanctions and embargo laws that are not controlled by the governments of those countries, or engaging in operations associated with those countries pursuant to contracts with third parties that are unrelated to those countries or entities controlled by their governments. Investor perception of the value of our securities may be adversely affected by the consequences of war, the effects of terrorism, civil unrest and governmental actions in these and surrounding countries.
Our operating results will beare subject to seasonal fluctuations, which could affect our operating results.
We operate our vessels in markets that have historically exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, in charter hire rates. This seasonality may result in volatility in our operating results to the extent that we enter into new charter agreements or renew existing agreements during a time when charter rates are weaker or we operate our vessels on the spot market or index based time charters, which may result in quarter-to-quarter volatility in our operating results. The drybulk sector is typically stronger in the fall and winter months in anticipation of increased consumption of coal and other raw materials in the northern hemisphere. The celebration of Chinese New Year in the first quarter of each year, also results in lower volumes of seaborne trade into China during this period. In addition, unpredictable weather patterns in these months tend to disrupt vessel scheduling and supplies of certain commodities. As a result, our revenues from our drybulk carriers may be weaker during the fiscal quarters ended June 30 and September 30, and, conversely, our revenues from our drybulk carriers may be stronger in fiscal quarters ended December 31 and March 31.
We are subject to international safety regulations and requirements imposed by our classification societies and the failure to comply with these regulations and requirements may subject us to increased liability, may adversely affect our insurance coverage and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.
The operation of our vessels is affected by the requirements set forth in the International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention, or the ISM Code. The ISM Code requires ship owners, ship managers and bareboat charterers to develop and maintain an extensive “Safety Management System” that includes the adoption of a safety and environmental protection policy setting forth instructions and procedures for safe operation of vessels and describing procedures for dealing with emergencies. In addition, vessel classification societies impose significant safety and other requirements on our vessels.
The failure of a shipowner or bareboat charterer to comply with the ISM Code may subject it to increased liability, may invalidate existing insurance or decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports. Each of our vessels are or will beis ISM Code-certified when delivered to us.Code-certified. However, if we are subject to increased liability for non-compliance or if our insurance coverage is adversely impacted as a result of non-compliance, it may negatively affect our ability to pay dividends if any, in the future, on our common shares and interest on our Senior Notes. If any of our vessels are denied access to, or are detained in, certain ports as a result of non-compliance with the ISM Code, our revenues may be adversely impacted.
In addition, the hull and machinery of every commercial vessel must be classed by a classification society authorized by its country of registry. The classification society certifies that a vessel is safe and seaworthy in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the country of registry of the vessel and the Safety of Life at Sea Convention. The cost of maintaining our vessels’ classifications may be substantial. If any vessel does not maintain its class or fails any annual, intermediate or special survey, the vessel will be unable to trade between ports and will be unemployable and uninsurable, which could negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition.
Increased inspection procedures and tighter import and export controls could increase costs and disrupt our business.
International shipping is subject to various security and customs inspection and related procedures in countries of origin and destination and trans-shipment points. Inspection procedures may result in the seizure of contents of our vessels, delays in the loading, offloading, trans-shipment or delivery of cargo, and the levying of customs duties, fines or other penalties against us.
It is possible that changes to inspection procedures could impose additional financial and legal obligations on us. Changes to inspection procedures could also impose additional costs and obligations on our customers and may, in certain cases, render the shipment of certain types of cargo uneconomical or impractical. Any such changes or developments may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Rising fuel, or bunker, prices may adversely affect our profits.
Since we primarily employ our vessels in the spot market or in spot market-oriented pools, we expect that fuel, or bunkers, will be typically the largest expense in our shipping operations for our vessels. While we believe that we will experience a competitive advantage as a result of increased bunker prices due to the greater fuel efficiency of our vessels compared to the average global fleet, changes in the price of fuel may adversely affect our profitability. The price and supply of fuel is unpredictable and fluctuates based on events outside our control, including geopolitical developments, supply and demand for oil and gas, actions by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC, and other oil and gas producers, war and unrest in oil producing countries and regions, regional production patterns and environmental concerns. Further, fuel may become much more expensive in the future, which may reduce our profitability and the competitiveness of our business compared to other forms of transportation.
We operate drybulk vessels worldwide and as a result, our business has inherent operational risks, which may reduce our revenue or increase our expenses, and we may not be adequately covered by insurance.
The international shipping industry is an inherently risky business involving global operations. Our vessels and their cargoes are at risk of being damaged or lost because of events such as marine disasters, bad weather, mechanical failures, human error, environmental accidents, war, terrorism, piracy and other circumstances or events. In addition, transporting cargoes across a wide variety of international jurisdictions creates a risk of business interruptions due to political circumstances in foreign countries, hostilities, labor strikes and boycotts, the potential for changes in tax rates or policies, and the potential for government expropriation of our vessels. Any of these events may result in loss of revenues, increased costs and decreased cash flows to our customers, which could impair their ability to make payments to us under our charters.
Furthermore, thethe operation of certain vessel types, such as drybulk carriers, has certain unique risks. With a drybulk carrier, the cargo itself and its interaction with the vessel can be an operational risk. By their nature, drybulk cargoes are often heavy, dense, easily shifted, and react badly to water exposure. In addition, drybulk carriers are often subjected to battering treatment during unloading operations with grabs, jackhammers (to pry encrusted cargoes out of the hold) and small bulldozers. This treatment may cause damage to the vessel. Vessels damaged due to treatment during unloading procedures may be more susceptible to breach at sea. Hull breaches in drybulk carriers may lead to the flooding of the vessels’ holds. If a drybulk carrier suffers flooding in its forward holds, the bulk cargo may become so dense and waterlogged that its pressure may buckle the vessel’s bulkheads, leading to the loss of a vessel. If we are unable to adequately maintain our vessels, we may be unable to prevent these events. Any of these circumstances or events may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends if any, in the future, on our common shares and interest on our Senior Notes. In addition, the loss of any of our vessels could harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator.
In the event of a casualty to a vessel or other catastrophic event, we will rely on our insurance to pay the insured value of the vessel or the damages incurred. We procure insurance for the vessels in our fleet against those risks that we believe the shipping industry commonly insures against. These insurances include marine hull and machinery insurance, protection and indemnity insurance, which include pollution risks and crew insurances, and war risk insurance. Currently, the amount of coverage for liability for pollution, spillage and leakage available to us on commercially reasonable terms through protection and indemnity associations and providers of excess coverage is $1.0 billion per vessel per occurrence.
We have procured hull and machinery insurance, protection and indemnity insurance, which includes environmental damage and pollution insurance coverage, and war risk insurance for our fleet. We do not maintain for our vessels insurance against loss of hire, which covers business interruptions that result from the loss of use of a vessel. We may not be adequately insured against all risks. We may not be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage for our fleet in the future, and we may not be able to obtain certain insurance coverage. The insurers may not pay particular claims. Our insurance policies may contain deductibles for which we will be responsible and limitations and exclusions which may increase our costs or lower our revenue. Moreover, insurers may default on claims they are required to pay.
We cannot assure you that we will be adequately insured against any or all risks, or that we will be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates for our vesselsfleet in the future. For example, in the past more stringent environmental regulations have led to increased costs for, and in the future may result in the lack of availability of, insurance against risks of environmental damage or pollution. Additionally, our insurers may refuse tonot pay particular claims.claims, or may default on claims they are required to pay. Our insurance policies may contain deductibles for which we will be responsible and limitations and exclusions which may increase our costs or lower our revenue. Moreover, insurers may
default on claims they are required to pay. Any significant loss or liability for which we are not insured could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.
Maritime claimants could arrest or attach one or more of our vessels, which could interrupt our cash flows.
Crew members, suppliers of goods and services to a vessel, shippers of cargo, lenders, and other parties may be entitled to a maritime lien against a vessel for unsatisfied debts, claims or damages. In many jurisdictions, a maritime lien holder may
enforce its lien by arresting or attaching a vessel through foreclosure proceedings. The arrest or attachment of one or more of our vessels could interrupt our cash flows and require us to pay large sums of money to have the arrest or attachment lifted. In addition, in some jurisdictions, such as South Africa, under the “sister ship” theory of liability, a claimant may arrest both the vessel that is subject to the claimant’s maritime lien and any “associated” vessel, which is any vessel owned or controlled by the same owner. Claimants could attempt to assert “sister ship” liability against one vessel in our fleet for claims relating to another of our vessels.
Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency, which could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations, and available cash.
A government could requisition one or more of our vessels for title or for hire. Requisition for title occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and becomes its owner, while requisition for hire occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and effectively becomes its charterer at dictated charter rates. Generally, requisitions occur during periods of war or emergency, although governments may elect to requisition vessels in other circumstances. Although we would be entitled to compensation in the event of a requisition of one or more of our vessels, the amount and timing of payment would be uncertain. Government requisition of one or more of our vessels may negatively impact our revenues.
Failure to comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act could result in fines, criminal penalties, contract terminations and an adverse effect on our business.
We operate in a number of countries throughout the world, including countries known to have a reputation for corruption. We are committed to doing business in accordance with applicable anti-corruption laws and have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics which is consistent and in full compliance with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, or the FCPA. We are subject, however, to the risk that we, our affiliated entities or our or their respective officers, directors, employees and agents may take actions determined to be in violation of such anti-corruption laws, including the FCPA. Any such violation could result in substantial fines, sanctions, civil and/or criminal penalties and curtailment of operations in certain jurisdictions, and might adversely affect our business, results of operations or financial condition. In addition, actual or alleged violations could damage our reputation and ability to do business. Furthermore, detecting, investigating, and resolving actual or alleged violations is expensive and can consume significant time and attention of our senior management.
COMPANY SPECIFIC RISK FACTORS
We are a recently formed company with a limited history of operations.
We were formed in March 2013 and have a limited performance record, operating history and historical financial statements upon which you can evaluate our operations or our ability to implement and achieve our business strategy. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in implementing our business strategy. In addition, while our Chief Executive Officer and the management teams of our commercial and technical managers have experience operating drybulk carriers, other members of our senior management, who have experience operating tanker and other classes of vessels, have limited experience operating drybulk carriers. We believe that the experience of our senior management in the ownership and operation of tanker vessels, which require significant technical expertise to operate and are subject to heightened regulatory oversight and more rigorous vetting procedures from charterers than drybulk carriers, provides our management team with the expertise and qualifications to manage drybulk carriers, however we cannot assure you that they will be able to successfully operate our fleet.
We cannot assure you that we will be able to raise funds sufficient to meet our future capital and operating needs.
We cannot assure you that our available liquidity will be sufficient to meet our ongoing capital and operating needs.
We are exposed to the cyclicality and volatility of spot market charterhirecharter hire rates, which have fluctuated, and may continue to fluctuate, significantly based upon available charters and the supply of and demand for seaborne shipping capacity. If charter rates available in the spot market are insufficient to enable our vessels to operate profitably it could adversely affect our available liquidity, profitability, cash flows, and financial results. Furthermore, a prolonged period of depressed charter rates or a significant decrease in charter rates may negatively impact our liquidity position and may cause our vessel values to decline, which could, among other things, affect our ability to comply with the financial covenants in our loan agreements. Please see “The fair market values of our vessels have declined and may decline further, which could limit the amount of funds that we can borrow, cause us to breach certain financial covenants in our credit facilities, or result in an impairment charge, and we may incur a loss if we sell vessels following a decline in their market value” and “We are leveraged, which could significantly limit our ability to execute our business strategy, and we may be unable to comply with our covenants in our credit facilities that impose operating and financial restrictions on us, which could result in a default under the terms of these agreements.”
The Scorpio Group Pools in which our vessels operate are newly formed and have limited prior operating history. We cannot assure you that these pools will be successful in finding employment for all of our vessels.
The Scorpio Group Pools, which consist of the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool in which our vessels operate, are newly formed and have limited prior operating history. We own a large number of vessels that have entered, or will enter, these pools in a relatively short period of time without having previously secured employment. We cannot assure you that these pools will be successful in finding employment for all such vessels in the volatile spot market or whether any such employment will be at profitable rates. We cannot assure you that our vessels will be profitably operated by such pools. In addition, vessels operated by our affiliates, including members of the Scorpio Group, as well as vessels operated by unaffiliated third-parties, may participate in such pools. Such vessels may not be of the comparable design or quality to our vessels, negatively impacting the profitability of such pools, while diluting our interest in such profits.
Newbuilding projects are subject to risks that could cause delays, cost overruns or cancellation of our newbuilding contracts.
As of the date of this annual report, we are party to a shipbuilding contract with an established shipyard in China for the construction of one newbuilding vessel for an aggregate purchase price of $25.7 million, of which $17.2 million remains to be paid. This vessel is expected to be delivered to us in the first half of 2017. Construction projects are subject to risks of delay or cost overruns inherent in any large construction project from numerous factors, including shortages of equipment, materials or skilled labor, unscheduled delays in the delivery of ordered materials and equipment or shipyard construction, failure of equipment to meet quality and/or performance standards, financial or operating difficulties experienced by equipment vendors or the shipyard, unanticipated actual or purported change orders, inability to obtain required permits or approvals, unanticipated cost increases between order and delivery, design or engineering changes and work stoppages and other labor disputes, adverse weather conditions or any other events of force majeure. Significant cost overruns or delays could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Additionally, failure to complete a project on time may result in the delay of revenue from that vessel.
In addition, in the event the shipyard does not perform under its contract and we are unable to enforce the refund guarantee with a third party bank for any reason, we may lose all or part of our investment, which would have an adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
We are subject to certain risks with respect to our counterparties on contracts, and failure of such counterparties to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or negatively impact our results of operations and cash flows.
We have entered, into, and may enter, into various contracts, including pooling arrangements, time charters, spot voyage charters, bareboat charters, shipbuilding contracts, credit facilities and other agreements. Such agreements subject us to counterparty risks. The ability and willingness of each of our counterparties to perform its obligations under a contract with us will depend on a number of factors that are beyond our control and may include, among other things, general economic conditions, the condition of the maritime and offshore industries, the overall financial condition of the counterparty, and various expenses. Should a counterparty fail to honor its obligations under agreements with us, we could sustain significant losses which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
In addition, in depressed market conditions, our charterers may no longer need a vessel that is then under charter or may be able to obtain a comparable vessel at lower rates. As a result, charterers may seek to renegotiate the terms of their existing charter agreements or avoid their obligations under those contracts. If our charterers fail to meet their obligations to us or attempt to renegotiate our charter agreements, it may be difficult to secure substitute employment for such vessel, and any new charter arrangements we secure in the spot market or on time charters may be at lower rates given currently decreaseddepressed drybulk carrier charter rate levels. As a result, we could sustain significant losses which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, as well as our ability to pay dividends if any, in the future, on our common shares and interest on our Senior Notes, and comply with covenants in our credit facilities.
We are, and expect to continue to be, dependent on spot market-oriented pools and spot charters and currently low spot charter rates, or any further decrease in spot charter rates in the future will result in significant operating losses.
All of our vessels are employed in the Scorpio GroupKamsarmax Pool or the Scorpio Ultramax Pool, which we refer to together as the Scorpio Pools. During the year ended December 31, 2016,2018, we earned 40%approximately 36% and 60%64% of our revenue (including commissions from Scorpio Commercial Management S.A.M., or SCM) from the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool, respectively. The Scorpio Group Pools in which our vessels operate are spot market-oriented commercial pools managed by our commercial manager, which are exposed to fluctuations in spot market charter rates. The spot charter market may fluctuate significantly based upon drybulk carrier supply and demand. The successful operation of our vessels in the competitive spot charter market, including within the Scorpio Group Pools, depends on, among other things, obtaining profitable spot charters and minimizing, to the extent possible, time spent waiting for charters and time spent traveling unladen to pick up cargo. The spot market is very volatile, and, currentlythere have been periods when spot charter rates have declined below the operating cost of vessels. If future spot charter rates do not improve, or decline further, then we may be unable to operate our vessels trading in the spot market profitably, meet our obligations, including payments on indebtedness, or pay dividends in the future. As a result, we have, and may in the future, agree with shipyards to delay taking delivery of certain newbuilding vessels. Furthermore, as charter rates for spot charters are fixed for a single voyage which may last up to several weeks, during periods in which spot charter rates are rising, we will generally experience delays in realizing the benefits from such increases.
Our ability to renew expiring charters or obtain new charters will depend on the prevailing market conditions at the time. If we are not able to obtain new charters in direct continuation with previous charters or for our newbuilding vessels upon their delivery to us, or if new charters are entered into at charter rates substantially below the existing charter rates or on terms otherwise less favorable compared to previous charter terms, our revenues and profitability could be adversely affected.
We cannot assure you that our boardBoard of directorsDirectors will continue to declare dividends.
We currently do not intend to pay dividends to the holders of our common shares. Our board of directors, or our Board of Directors, declared and we paid quarterly cash dividends of $0.02 per share in 2018. However, we cannot assure you that we will continue to assess our dividend policy and maydeclare dividends in the future determine to pay dividends.future. The declaration and payment of dividends, if any, will always be subject to the discretion of our boardBoard of directors,Directors, restrictions contained in our credit facilities and the requirements of Marshall Islands law. The timing and amount of any dividends declared will depend on, among other things, our earnings, financial condition and cash requirements and availability, our ability to obtain debt and equity financing on acceptable terms as contemplated by our growth strategy, the terms of our outstanding indebtedness and the ability of our subsidiaries to distribute funds to us. The international drybulk shipping industry is highly volatile, and we cannot predict with certainty the amount of cash, if any, that will be available for distribution as dividends in any period. Also, there may be a high degree of variability from period to period in the amount of cash that is available for the payment of dividends.
We may incur expenses or liabilities or be subject to other circumstances in the future that reduce or eliminate the amount of cash that we have available for distribution as dividends, including as a result of the risks described herein. Our growth strategy contemplates that we will finance our acquisitions of additional vessels through debt financings or the net proceeds of future equity issuances on terms acceptable to us. If financing is not available to us on acceptable terms, our boardBoard of directorsDirectors may determine to finance or refinance acquisitions with cash from operations, which would reduce the amount of any cash available for the payment of dividends.
In general, under the terms of our credit facilities, we are not permitted to pay dividends if there is a default or a breach of a loan covenant. Please see “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects-B. Liquidity and Capital Resources” for more information relating to restrictions on our ability to pay dividends under the terms of our proposed credit facilities.
The Republic of Marshall Islands laws generally prohibit the payment of dividends other than from surplus (retained earnings and the excess of consideration received for the sale of shares above the par value of the shares) or while a company is insolvent or would be rendered insolvent by the payment of such a dividend. We may not have sufficient surplus in the future to pay dividends and our subsidiaries may not have sufficient funds or surplus to make distributions to us. We can give no assurance that we will continue to declare dividends will be paid at all.on our common shares in the future. Please see “Item 8. Financial Information-A. Consolidated Statements and other Financial Information-Dividend Policy.”
We may have difficulty managing our planned growth properly.
OurAs of the date of this annual report, our operating fleet of 4857 vessels consists of 4756 wholly-owned newbuildingor finance leased drybulk vessels (which were delivered to us beginning in 2015)(including 19 Kamsarmax vessels and 37 Ultramax vessels), and one time chartered-in Ultramax vessel. We also have a contract for the construction of an additional drybulk vessel, which is expected to be delivered to us during the second quarter of 2017. One of our principal strategies is to continue to grow by expanding our operations, and we may, in the future, increase the size of our fleet through timely and selective acquisitions. Our future growth will primarily depend upon a number of factors, some of which may not be within our control. These factors include our ability to:
identify suitable drybulk carriers, including newbuilding slots at shipyards and/or shipping companies for acquisitions at attractive prices;
obtain required financing for our existing and new operations;
identify businesses engaged in managing, operating or owning drybulk carriers for acquisitions or joint ventures;
integrate any acquired drybulk carriers or businesses successfully with our existing operations, including obtaining any approvals and qualifications necessary to operate vessels that we acquire;
hire, train and retain qualified personnel and crew to manage and operate our growing business and fleet;
identify additional new markets;
enhance our customer base; and
improve our operating, financial and accounting systems and controls.
Our failure to effectively identify, acquire, develop and integrate any drybulk carriers or businesses, or our inability to effectively manage the size of our fleet, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. As a result of the prolonged downturn in the drybulk shipping market, we have reduced the size of our fleet over the past two years through the sale of certain of our vessels and construction contracts and the termination of certain time charter-in contracts, and we may continue to reduce the size of our fleet in the future.
Furthermore, the number of employees that perform services for us and our current operating and financial systems may not be adequate as we expand the size of our fleet in the drybulk sector, and we may not be able to effectively hire more employees or adequately improve those systems. In addition, if we further expand our fleet, we will need to recruit suitable additional seafarers and shore side administrative and management personnel. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to hire suitable employees as we expand our fleet. If we or our crewing agent encounters business or financial difficulties, we may not be able to adequately staff our vessels. If we are unable to grow our financial and operating systems or to recruit suitable employees as we expand our fleet, our financial performance may be adversely affected and, among other things, the amount of cash available for distribution as dividends to our shareholders may be reduced. Finally, acquisitions may require additional equity issuances, which may dilute our common shareholders if issued at lower prices than the price at which they acquired their shares, or debt issuances (with amortization payments), both of which could lower our available cash. If any such events occur, our financial condition may be adversely affected.
Additionally, in the event we undertake newbuilding projects, construction projects are subject to risks of delay or cost overruns inherent in any large construction project from numerous factors. Significant cost overruns or delays could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Additionally, failure to complete a project on time may result in the delay of revenue from that vessel.
In addition, in the event the shipyard does not perform under its contract and we are unable to enforce the refund guarantee with a third-party bank for any reason, we may lose all or part of our investment, which would have an adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Growing any business by acquisition presents numerous risks such as undisclosed liabilities and obligations, difficulty in obtaining additional qualified personnel and managing relationships with customers and suppliers and integrating newly acquired operations into existing infrastructures. The expansion of our fleet may impose significant additional responsibilities on our management and staff, and the management and staff of our commercial and technical managers, and may necessitate that we, and they, increase the number of personnel. We cannot give any assurance that we will be successful in executing our growth plans or that we will not incur significant expenses and losses in connection with our future growth.
If we acquire and operate
Operating secondhand vessels we will be exposedexposes us to increased operating costs which couldmay adversely affect our earnings and, as our fleet ages, the risks associated with older vessels could adversely affect our ability to obtain profitable charters.
We have and may continue to acquire and operate secondhand vessels. While we expect that we would typically inspect secondhand vessels prior to acquisition, this does not provide us with the same knowledge about their condition that we would have had if these vessels had been built for and operated exclusively by us. Generally, purchasers of secondhand vessels do not receive the benefit of warranties from the builders for the secondhand vessels that they acquire. A secondhand vessel may have conditions or defects that we were not aware of when we bought the vessel and which may require us to incur costly repairs to the vessel. These repairs may require us to put a vessel into drydock, which would reduce our operating days.
Governmental regulations, safety or other equipment standards related to the age of vessels may require expenditures for alterations, or the addition of new equipment to our vessels and may restrict the type of activities in which the vessels may engage. As our vessels age, market conditions may not justify those expenditures or enable us to operate our vessels profitably during the remainder of their useful lives.
The aging of our fleet may result in increased operating costs in the future, which could adversely affect our earnings.
In general, the cost of maintaining a vessel in good operating condition increases with the age of the vessel. While all of the vessels in our owned fleet are newbuildings, asAs our vessels age typically they will become less fuel-efficient and more costly to maintain than more recently constructed vessels due to improvements in engine technology. Cargo insurance rates increase with the age of a vessel, making older vessels less desirable to charterers. Governmental regulations and safety or other equipment standards related to the age of vessels may also require expenditures for alterations or the addition of new equipment to our vessels and may restrict the type of activities in which our vessels may engage. We cannot assure you that, as our vessels age, market conditions will justify those expenditures or enable us to operate our vessels profitably during the remainder of their useful lives.
Technological innovation could reduce our charter hire income and the value of our vessels.
The charter hire rates and the value and operational life of a vessel are determined by a number of factors including the vessel’s efficiency, operational flexibility and physical life. Efficiency includes speed, fuel economy and the ability to load and discharge cargo quickly. Flexibility includes the ability to enter harbors, utilize related docking facilities and pass through canals and straits. The length of a vessel’s physical life is related to its original design and construction, its maintenance and the impact of the stress of operations. If new drybulk carriers are built that are more efficient or more flexible or have longer physical lives than our vessels, competition from these more technologically advanced vessels could adversely affect the amount of charterhirecharter hire payments we receive for our vessels once their initial charters expire and the resale value of our vessels could significantly decrease. As a result, our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition could be adversely affected.
In the highly competitive international shipping industry, we may not be able to compete for charters with new entrants or established companies with greater resources, and as a result, we may be unable to employ our vessels profitably.
Our vessels are employed in a highly competitive market that is capital intensive and highly fragmented. Competition arises primarily from other vessel owners, some of whom have substantially greater resources than we do. Competition for the transportation of drybulk cargo by sea is intense and depends on price, location, size, age, condition and the acceptability of the vessel and its operators to the charterers. Due in part to the highly fragmented market, competitors with greater resources could enter the drybulk shipping industry and operate larger fleets through consolidations or acquisitions and may be able to offer lower charter rates and higher quality vessels than we are able to offer. If we are unable to successfully compete with other drybulk shipping companies, our results of operations would be adversely impacted.
We may be subject to litigation that, if not resolved in our favor and not sufficiently insured against, could have a material adverse effect on us.
We may be, from time to time, involved in various litigation matters. These matters may include, among other things, contract disputes, personal injury claims, environmental claims or proceedings, asbestos and other toxic tort claims, employment matters, governmental claims for taxes or duties, and other litigation that arises in the ordinary course of our business. Although we intend to defend these matters vigorously, we cannot predict with certainty the outcome or effect of any claim or other litigation matter, and the ultimate outcome of any litigation or the potential costs to resolve them may have a material adverse effect on us. Insurance may not be applicable or sufficient in all cases and/or insurers may not remain solvent which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.
We are a holding company, and we depend on the ability of our subsidiaries to distribute funds to us in order to satisfy our financial obligations and to make dividend payments.
We are a holding company and our subsidiaries conduct all of our operations and own all of our operating assets. We have no significant assets other than the equity interests in our subsidiaries. As a result, our ability to satisfy our financial obligations and to pay dividends to our shareholders depends on our subsidiaries and their ability to distribute funds to us. If we are unable to obtain funds from our subsidiaries, our boardBoard of directorsDirectors may exercise its discretion not to declare or pay dividends.
Our costs of operating as a public company are significant, and our management is required to devote substantial time to complying with public company regulations. We cannot assure you that our internal controls and procedures over financial reporting will be sufficient.
We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and the other rules and regulations of the SEC, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Sarbanes-Oxley. Section 404the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and as such, we will have significant legal, accounting and other expenses. These reporting obligations impose various requirements on public companies, including changes in corporate governance practices, and these requirements may continue to evolve. We and our management personnel, and other personnel, if any, need to devote a substantial amount of time to comply with these requirements. Moreover, these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costly.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain and periodically evaluate our internal control over financial reporting and determinedisclosure controls and procedures. In particular, we need to perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management and our independent registered public accounting firm to report on the effectiveness of our internal controlscontrol over financial reporting.reporting, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. If we have a material weakness in our internal controls over financial reporting, we may not detect errors on a timely basis and our financial statements may be materially misstated. We dedicate a significant amount of time and resources and incur substantial accounting expenses to ensure compliance with these regulatory requirements. We will continue to evaluate areas such as corporate governance, corporate control, internal audit, disclosure controls and procedures and financial reporting and accounting systems. We will make changes in any of these and other areas, including our internal control over financial reporting, which we believe are necessary. However, these and other measures we may take may not be sufficient to allow us to satisfy our obligations as a public company on a timely and reliable basis.
Because we are organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands, it may be difficult to serve us with legal process or enforce judgments against us, our directors or our management.
We are organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands, and substantially all of our assets are located outside of the United States. In addition, the majority of our directors and officers are non-residents of the United States, and all or a substantial portion of the assets of these non-residents are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for
someone to bring an action against us or against these individuals in the United States if they believe that their rights have been infringed under securities laws or otherwise. Even if you are successful in bringing an action of this kind, the laws of the Marshall Islands and of other jurisdictions may prevent or restrict them from enforcing a judgment against our assets or the assets of our directors or officers.
The international nature of our operations may make the outcome of any bankruptcy proceedings difficult to predict.
We are incorporated under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands and we conduct operations in countries around the world. Consequently, in the event of any bankruptcy, insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or similar proceeding involving us or any of our subsidiaries, bankruptcy laws other than those of the United States could apply. If we become a debtor under U.S. bankruptcy law, bankruptcy courts in the United States may seek to assert jurisdiction over all of our assets, wherever located, including property situated in other countries. There can be no assurance, however, that we would become a debtor in the United States, or that a U.S. bankruptcy court would be entitled to, or accept, jurisdiction over such a bankruptcy case, or that courts in other countries that have jurisdiction over us and our operations would recognize a U.S. bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction if any other bankruptcy court would determine it had jurisdiction.
We may have to pay tax on U.S. source income, which would reduce our earnings and cash flow.
Under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, 50% of the gross shipping income of a vessel owning or chartering corporation, such as ourselves and our subsidiaries, that is attributable to transportation that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States is characterized as U.S. source shipping income and such income is
subject to a 4% U.S. federal income tax without allowance for any deductions, unless that corporation qualifies for exemption from tax under Section 883 of the Code and the Treasury regulations promulgated thereunder.
We believe that we qualify for this statutory exemption for our 20162018 taxable year and we expect to so qualify for our subsequent taxable years. However, there are factual circumstances beyond our control that could cause us to lose the benefit of this tax exemption and thereby cause us to become subject to U.S. federal income tax on our U.S. source shipping income. For example, there is a risk that we could no longer qualify for exemption under Section 883 of the Code for a particular taxable year if “non-qualified” shareholders with a five percent or greater interest in our stock were, in combination with each other, to own 50% or more of the outstanding shares of our stock on more than half the days during the taxable year. Due to the factual nature of the issues involved, we can give no assurances on our tax-exempt status or that of any of our subsidiaries.
If we are not entitled to this exemption under Section 883 of the Code for any taxable year, we would be subject for such taxable year to a 4% U.S. federal income tax on our U.S. source shipping income on a gross basis. The imposition of this taxation could have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased earnings and cash available for distribution to our shareholders and to pay amounts due on our Senior Notes.
U.S. tax authorities could treat us as a “passive foreign investment company,” which could have adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences to our U.S. shareholders.
A foreign corporation will be treated as a “passive foreign investment company,” or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes if either (1) at least 75% of its gross income for any taxable year consists of certain types of “passive income” or (2) at least 50% of the average value of the corporation’s assets produce or are held for the production of those types of “passive income,” including cash. For purposes of these tests, “passive income” includes dividends, interest, and gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. For purposes of these tests, income derived from the performance of services to third parties does not constitute “passive income.” U.S. shareholders of a PFIC are subject to a disadvantageous U.S. federal income tax regime with respect to the income derived by the PFIC, the distributions they receive from the PFIC and the gain, if any, they derive from the sale or other disposition of their shares in the PFIC.
It is possible that we may be considered a PFIC for our 2016 taxable year. Whether we are treated as a PFIC will depend, in part, upon whether the deposits that we make on newbuilding contracts are treated as being held for the production of “passive income” and on the amount of “passive income” that we derive for such years.
For our 20172018 taxable year and subsequent taxable years, whether we will be treated as a PFIC will depend upon the nature and extent of our operations. In this regard, we intend to treat the gross income we derive or are deemed to derive from our time chartering activities as services income, rather than rental income. Accordingly, we believe that our income from our time chartering activities does not constitute “passive income,” and the assets that we own and operate in connection with the production of that income do not constitute passive assets. There is, however, no direct legal authority under the PFIC rules addressing our method
of operation. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that the United States Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, or a court of law will accept our position, and there is a risk that the IRS or a court of law could determine that we are a PFIC. Moreover, no assurance can be given that we would not constitute a PFIC for any taxable year if there were to be changes in the nature and extent of our operations.
If we were treated as a PFIC for any taxable year, our U.S. shareholders may face adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences and information reporting obligations. Under the PFIC rules, unless those shareholders made an election available under the Code (which election could itself have adverse consequences for such shareholders), such shareholders would be liable to pay U.S. federal income tax upon excess distributions and upon any gain from the disposition of our common shares at the then prevailing income tax rates applicable to ordinary income plus interest as if the excess distribution or gain had been recognized ratably over the shareholder’s holding period of our common shares. See “Item 10. Additional Information - E. Taxation - U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations - U.S. Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders - Passive Foreign Investment Company Status and Significant Tax Consequences” for a more comprehensive discussion of the U.S. federal income tax consequences to U.S. holders of our common shares if we are or were to be treated as a PFIC.
Risks Related to Our Relationship with the Scorpio Group of Companies (“Scorpio”) and its Affiliates
We are dependent on our managers and their ability to hire and retain key personnel, and there may be conflicts of interest between us and our managers that may not be resolved in our favor.
Our success depends to a significant extent upon the abilities and efforts of our technical manager, Scorpio Ship Management S.A.M., or SSM, our commercial manager, Scorpio Commercial Management, or SCM, and our management team and upon our and our managers’ ability to hire and retain key members of our and their management team.teams, respectively. The loss of any of these individuals could adversely affect our business prospects and financial condition. Difficulty in hiring and retaining personnel could adversely affect our results of operations. We do not maintain “key man” life insurance on any of our officers.
Our technical and commercial managers are affiliates of the Scorpio, Group, which is owned and controlled by the Lolli-Ghetti family, of which our founder,co-founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Emanuele Lauro, and our Vice President, Mr. Filippo Lauro, are members. Conflicts of interest may arise between us, on the one hand, and our commercial and technical managers, on the other hand. These conflicts may arise in connection with the chartering, purchase, sale and operation of the vessels in our fleet versus vessels managed by other companies affiliated with our commercial or technical managers. In particular, as of the date of this annual report, our commercial and technical managers, which are operated by entities affiliated with Messrs. Lauro,Scorpio, provide commercial and technical management services to approximately 200180 and 150145 vessels, respectively, in addition to vessels in our fleet, and our commercial and technical managers may operate additional vessels that will compete with our vessels in the future. Such conflicts may have an adverse effect on our results of operations. In addition, certain members of Scorpio may benefit from economies of scale, all of which may not be passed along to us.
Our Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Vice President General Counsel and Secretary do not devote all of their time to our business, which may hinder our ability to operate successfully.
Our Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Vice President General Counsel and Secretary participate in business activities not associated with us, including servingsome of whom serve as members of the management teamteams of Scorpio Tankers Inc. (NYSE: STNG), or Scorpio Tankers, and Nordic American Offshore Ltd (NYSE: NAO), or NAO, and are not required to work full-time on our affairs. We expect that each of our executive officers will continue to devote a substantial portion of their business time to the management of the Company. Additionally, our Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Operating Officer, Vice President General Counsel and Secretary serve in similar positions in other entities within the Scorpio Group.Scorpio. As a result, such executive officers may devote less time to us than if they were not engaged in other business activities and may owe fiduciary duties to theboth our shareholders of both us as well as shareholders of other companies which they may be affiliated with, including Scorpio Tankers, NAO and Scorpio Group companies.Scorpio. This may create conflicts of interest in matters involving or affecting us and our customers and it is not certain that any of these conflicts of interest will be resolved in our favor. This could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Our commercial and technical managers are each privately held companies and there is little or no publicly available information about them.
Our vessels are commercially managed by SCM and technically managed by SSM. SCM’s and SSM’s ability to render management services will depend in part on their own financial strength. Circumstances beyond our control could impair our commercial manager’s or technical manager’s financial strength, and because each is a privately held company, information about the financial strength of our commercial manager and technical manager is not available. As a result, we and our shareholders might have little advance warning of financial or other problems affecting our commercial manager or technical manager even though their financial or other problems could have a material adverse effect on us.
We rely on our information systems to conduct our business, and failure to protect these systems against security breaches could adversely affect our business and results of operations. Additionally, if these systems fail or become unavailable for any significant period of time, our business could be harmed.
The efficient operation of our business, including processing, transmitting and storing electronic and financial information, is dependent on computer hardware and software systems. Information systems are vulnerable to security breaches by computer hackers and cyber terrorists. We rely on industry accepted security measures and technology to securely maintain confidential and proprietary information maintained on our information systems. However, these measures and technology may not adequately prevent security breaches. In addition, the unavailability of the information systems or the failure of these systems to perform as anticipated for any reason could disrupt our business and could result in decreased performance and increased operating costs, causing our business and results of operations to suffer. Any significant interruption or failure of our information systems or any significant breach of security could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
RISKS RELATED TO OUR INDEBTEDNESS
Servicing our current or future indebtedness limits funds available for other purposes and if we cannot service our debt, we may lose our vessels.
Borrowing under our credit facilities requires us to dedicate a part of our cash flow from operations to paying interest on our indebtedness under such facilities. These payments limit funds available for working capital, capital expenditures and other purposes, including further equity or debt financing in the future. Amounts borrowed under our credit facilities bear interest at variable rates. Increases in prevailing rates could increase the amounts that we would have to pay to our lenders, even though the outstanding principal amount remains the same, and our net income and cash flows would decrease. We expect our earnings and
cash flow to vary from year to year due to the cyclical nature of the drybulk carrier industry. If we do not generate or reserve enough cash flow from operations to satisfy our debt obligations, we may have to undertake alternative financing plans, such as:
seeking to raise additional capital;
refinancing or restructuring our debt;
selling drybulk carriers; or
reducing or delaying capital investments.
However, these alternative financing plans, if necessary, may not be sufficient to allow us to meet our debt obligations. If we are unable to meet our debt obligations or if some other default occurs under our credit facilities, our lenders could elect to declare that debt, together with accrued interest and fees, to be immediately due and payable and proceed against the collateral vessels securing that debt.
We are exposed to volatility in the London Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, and may selectively enterhave entered into derivative contracts, which can result in higher than market interest rates and charges against our income.
The loans under our secured credit facilities are generally advanced at a floating rate based on LIBOR, which has been stable, but was volatile in prior years, which can affect the amount of interest payable on our debt, and which, in turn, could have an adverse effect on our earnings and cash flow. In addition, although in recent yearsRecently, however, there is uncertainty relating to the LIBOR has been at relatively low levels, LIBOR increased during 2016 andcalculation process which may continue to riseresult in the futurephasing out of LIBOR in the future. Indeed, the banks currently reporting information used to set LIBOR will likely stop such reporting after 2021, when their commitment to reporting information ends. The Alternative Reference Rate Committee, or "Committee", a committee convened by the Federal Reserve that includes major market participants, has proposed an alternative rate to replace U.S. Dollar LIBOR: the Secured Overnight Financing Rate, or "SOFR." As a result, lenders have insisted on provisions that entitle the lenders, in their discretion, to replace published LIBOR as the current lowbase for the interest rate environment comescalculation with their cost-of-funds rate. If we are required to agree to such a provision in future loan agreements, our lending costs could increase, which would have an end. Ouradverse effect on our profitability, earnings and cash flow. As a result, our financial condition could be materially adversely affected as we have not entered into interest rate hedging arrangements to hedge our exposure to the interest rates applicable to our credit facilities and may not enter into interest rate hedging arrangements any other financing arrangements we may enter into in the future, including those we enter into to finance a portion of the amounts payable with respect to newbuildings. Moreover, even if weaffected.
We have entered, into interest rate swaps or other derivative instruments for purposes of managing our interest rate exposure, our hedging strategies may not be effective and we may incur substantial losses.
We may enter, into derivative contracts to hedge our overall exposure to interest rate risk exposure. Entering into swaps and derivatives transactions is inherently risky and presents various possibilities for incurring significant expenses. The derivatives strategies that we employ, and may employ, may not be successful or effective, and we could, as a result, incur substantial additional interest costs.
We may be adversely affected by the introduction of new accounting rules for leasing.
In early 2016, the U.S. accounting standard-setting board (the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or the FASB) issued new accounting guidance that would require lessees to record most leases on their balance sheets as lease assets Please see “Item 11. Quantitative and liabilities. Entities would still classify leases, but classification would be based on different criteria and would serve a different purpose than it does today. Lease classification would determine how entities recognize lease-related revenue and expense, as well as what lessors record on the balance sheet. Classification would be based on the portion of the economic benefits of the underlying asset expected to be consumed by the lessee over the lease term. Once adopted, the proposals would be expected generally to have the effect of bringing most off-balance sheet leases onto a lessee’s balance sheet as liabilities, which would also change the income and expense recognition patterns of those items. Financial statement metrics, including non-GAAP financial measures, such as leverage and capital ratios, as well as EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA, may also be affected, even when cash flow and business activity have not changed. This may in turn affect covenant calculations under various contracts (such as loan agreements) unless the affected contracts are modified.Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk - Interest Rate Risk.”
We are leveraged, which could significantly limit our ability to execute our business strategy and we may be unable to comply with our covenants in our credit facilities that impose operating and financial restrictions on us, which could result in a default under the terms of these agreements.
As of December 31, 2016,2018, we had $596.1$841.0 million of outstanding indebtedness under our credit facilities, financing obligation and debt securities.
Our credit facilities impose operating and financial restrictions on us, that limit our ability, or the ability of our subsidiaries party thereto, to:
pay dividends and make capital expenditures if we do not repay amounts drawn under our credit facilities or if there is another default under our credit facilities;
incur additional indebtedness, including the issuance of guarantees;
create liens on our assets;
change the flag, class or management of our vessels or terminate or materially amend the management agreement relating to each vessel;
sell our vessels;
merge or consolidate with, or transfer all or substantially all our assets to, another person; and/or
enter into a new line of business.
Therefore, we may need to seek permission from our lenders in order to engage in some corporate actions. Our lenders’ interests may be different from ours and we may not be able to obtain our lenders’ permission when needed. This may limit our ability to pay dividends on our common shares if we determine to do so in the future, and interest on our Senior Notes, finance our future operations or capital requirements, make acquisitions or pursue business opportunities.
In addition, our secured credit facilities require us to maintain specified financial ratios and satisfy financial covenants, including ratios and covenants based on the market value of the vessels in our fleet. Should our charter rates or vessel values materially decline in the future, we may seek to obtain waivers or amendments from our lenders with respect to such financial ratios and covenants, or we may be required to take action to reduce our debt or to act in a manner contrary to our business objectives to meet any such financial ratios and satisfy any such financial covenants. In 2016, we amended our credit facilities to reduce the minimum liquidity, interest coverage ratio and loan-to-value ratio covenants, as well as to amend the definition of net worth used in the leverage and net worth covenants. There can be no assurances that our lenders will grant any waivers or additional amendments in the future.
Events beyond our control, including changes in the economic and business conditions in the shipping markets in which we operate, may affect our ability to comply with these covenants. We cannot assure you that we will meet these ratios or satisfy these covenants or that our lenders will waive any failure to do so or amend these requirements. A breach of any of the covenants in, or our inability to maintain the required financial ratios under, our credit facilities would prevent us from borrowing additional money under our credit facilities and could result in a default under our credit facilities. If a default occurs under our credit facilities, the lenders could elect to declare the outstanding debt, together with accrued interest and other fees, to be immediately due and payable and foreclose on the collateral securing that debt, which could constitute all or substantially all of our assets. Moreover, in connection with any waivers or amendments to our credit facilities that we may obtain, our lenders may impose additional operating and financial restrictions on us or modify the terms of our existing credit facilities. These restrictions may further restrict our ability to, among other things, pay dividends, repurchase our common shares, make capital expenditures, or incur additional indebtedness.
Furthermore, our debt agreements contain cross-default provisions that may be triggered if we default under the terms of any one of our financing agreements. In the event of default by us under one of our debt agreements, the lenders under our other debt agreements could determine that we are in default under such other financing agreements. Such cross defaults could result in the acceleration of the maturity of such debt under these agreements and the lenders thereunder may foreclose upon any collateral securing that debt, including our vessels, even if we were to subsequently cure such default. In the event of such acceleration or foreclosure, we might not have sufficient funds or other assets to satisfy all of our obligations, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Please see “Item 5. Operating Financial Review and Prospects-B. Liquidity and Capital Resources-Credit Facilities, Finance Lease and Unsecured Notes.”
RISKS RELATING TO OUR COMMON SHARES
We are incorporated in the Marshall Islands, which does not have a well-developed body of corporate law.
Our corporate affairs are governed by our amended and restated articles of incorporation and bylaws and by the Marshall Islands Business Corporations Act, or the BCA. The provisions of the BCA resemble provisions of the corporation laws of a
number of states in the United States. However, there have been few judicial cases in the Marshall Islands interpreting the BCA. The rights and fiduciary responsibilities of directors under the laws of the Marshall Islands are not as clearly established as the rights and fiduciary responsibilities of directors under statutes or judicial precedent in existence in the United States. The rights of shareholders of companies incorporated in the Marshall Islands may differ from the rights of shareholders of companies incorporated in the United States. While the BCA provides that it is to be interpreted according to the laws of the State of Delaware and other states with substantially similar legislative provisions, there have been few, if any, court cases interpreting the BCA in the Marshall Islands and we cannot predict whether Marshall Islands courts would reach the same conclusions as U.S. courts. Thus, you may have more difficulty in protecting your interests in the face of actions by the management, directors or controlling shareholders than would shareholders of a corporation incorporated in a U.S. jurisdiction which has developed a relatively more substantial body of case law.
The market price of our common shares has fluctuated widely and may fluctuate widely in the future, or there may be no continuing public market for you to resell our common shares.
The market price of our common shares has fluctuated widely since our common shares began trading on the NYSE in December 2013, and may continue to do so as a result of many factors such as actual or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly and annual results and those of other public companies in our industry, mergers and strategic alliances in the shipping industry, market conditions in the shipping industry, particularly the drybulk sector, changes in government regulation, shortfalls in our operating results from levels forecast by securities analysts, announcements concerning us or our competitors and the general state of the securities market. Further, there may be no continuing active or liquid public market for our common shares.
If the market price of our common shares falls below $5.00 per share, under NYSE rules, our shareholders will not be able to use such shares as collateral for borrowing in margin accounts. This inability to continue to use our common shares as collateral may lead to sales of such shares creating downward pressure on and increased volatility in the market price of our common shares.
On December 31, 2015, our board of directors effected a one-for-twelve reverse stock split of our common shares, par value $0.01 per share, and a reduction in the total number of authorized common shares to 56,250,000 shares. Our shareholders approved the reverse stock split and change in authorized common shares at a special meeting of shareholders held on December 23, 2015. The reverse stock split reduced the number of outstanding common shares from 344,239,098 shares to 28,686,561 shares. In June 2016, upon receiving shareholder approval, we further amended our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to increase our total number of authorized common shares to 112,500,000.
The shipping industry has been highly unpredictable and volatile. The market for common shares in this industry may be equally volatile. Therefore, we cannot assure you that you will be able to sell any of our common shares you may have purchased at a price greater than or equal to its original purchase price, or that you will be able to sell them at all.
Future sales of our common shares could cause the market price of our common shares to decline.
Our amended and restated articles of incorporation authorize us to issue 112,500,000212.5 million common shares, of which we havehad issued 75,298,676approximately 79.8 million common shares as of December 31, 2016.2018. Sales of a substantial number of common shares in the public market, or the perception that these sales could occur, may depress the market price for our common shares. These sales could also impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of our equity securities in the future. We intend to issue additional common shares in the future. Our shareholders may incur dilution from any future equity offering and upon the issuance of additional common shares upon the exercise of options we may grant to certain of our executive officers, or upon the issuance of additional common shares pursuant to our equity incentive plan.
Anti-takeover provisions in our organizational documents could have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing a merger or acquisition, or could make it difficult for our shareholders to replace or remove our current boardBoard of directors,Directors, which could adversely affect the market price of our common shares.
Several provisions of our amended and restated articles of incorporation and bylaws could make it difficult for our shareholders to change the composition of our boardBoard of directorsDirectors in any one year, preventing them from changing the composition of management. In addition, the same provisions may discourage, delay or prevent a merger or acquisition that shareholders may consider favorable. These provisions include:
authorizing our boardBoard of directorsDirectors to issue “blank check” preferred stock without shareholder approval;
providing for a classified boardBoard of directorsDirectors with staggered, three-year terms;
establishing certain advance notice requirements for nominations for election to our boardBoard of directorsDirectors or for proposing matters that can be acted on by shareholders at shareholder meetings;
prohibiting cumulative voting in the election of directors;
limiting the persons who may call special meetings of shareholders;
authorizing the removal of directors only for cause and only upon the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the outstanding common shares entitled to vote for the directors; and
establishing super majority voting provisions with respect to amendments to certain provisions of our amended and restated articles of incorporation and bylaws.
These anti-takeover provisions could substantially impede the ability of public shareholders to benefit from a change in control and, as a result, may adversely affect the market price of our common shares and yourshareholders’ ability to realize any potential change of control premium.
Our costs of operating as a public company is significant, and our management is required to devote substantial time to complying with public company regulations.
We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and the other rules and regulations of the SEC, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and as such, we will have significant legal, accounting and other expenses. These reporting obligations impose various requirements on public companies, including changes in corporate governance practices, and these requirements may continue to evolve. We and our management personnel, and other personnel, if any, need to devote a substantial amount of time to comply with these requirements. Moreover, these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costly.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain and periodically evaluate our internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. In particular, we need to perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management and our independent registered public accounting firm to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Our compliance with Section 404 requires that we incur substantial accounting expenses and expend significant management efforts.
|
| |
| ITEM 4. | INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY |
| |
| A. | History and Development of the Company |
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. is an international shipping company that was incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands pursuant to the BCA on March 20, 2013. In December 2013, we completed our underwritten initial public offering of 2,608,333 common shares at $117.00 per share, and in January 2014, the underwriters in the initial public offering exercised their option to purchase an additional 391,250 common shares. In February 2014, we completed our offer to exchange unregistered common shares that were previously issued in Norwegian equity private placements (other than the common shares owned by affiliates of us) for common shares that were registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, which we refer to as the Exchange Offer. Upon completion of the Exchange Offer, holders of 7,980,565 unregistered common shares validly tendered their shares in exchange for such registered common shares, representing a participation rate of 99.7%. On July 31, 2014, we delisted from the Norwegian Over-the-Counter List, or Norwegian OTC List. Our common shares are listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange, or NYSE, under the symbol “SALT.”
Our principal executive offices are located at 9, Boulevard Charles III, Monaco 98000 and our telephone number at that location is +377-9798-5715. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The address of the SEC's Internet site is http://www.sec.gov. The address of the Company's Internet site is http://www.scorpiobulkers.com/.
We are an international shipping company that owns and operates the latest generation of newbuilding drybulk carriers with fuel-efficient specifications and carrying capacities of greater than 30,000 dwt. All of our owned vessels have carrying capacities of greater than 60,000 dwt. Our vessels transport a broad range of major and minor bulk commodities, including ores, coal, grains, and fertilizers, along worldwide shipping routes, and are employed primarily in the spot market or in spot market-oriented pools of similarly sized vessels. As of the date of this annual report, our operating fleet of 4857 vessels consisted of 4756 wholly-owned or finance leased drybulk vessels and one time chartered-in drybulk vessel, which we refer to collectively as our “Operating Fleet” (see below table for details). We also have a contract for the construction of one newbuilding drybulk vessel, which is expected to be delivered to us in the second quarter of 2017 (see below table for details). Upon delivery of this vessel, ourOur owned and financed leased fleet is expected to havehas a total carrying capacity of approximately 3.43.9 million dwt.
Our Fleet
The following tables set forth certain summary information regarding our Operating Fleet and vessel under construction as of the date of this annual report:
Operating Fleet
| Owned fleet | |
| Owned and Finance Leased fleet ** | | Owned and Finance Leased fleet ** |
| | Vessel Name | | Year Built | | DWT | | Vessel Type | | Year Built | | DWT |
| SBI Cakewalk | | 2014 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | |
| SBI Charleston | | 2014 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | |
| Kamsarmax Vessels | | | |
| SBI Samba | | 2015 | | 84,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2015 | | 84,000 |
|
| SBI Rumba | | 2015 | | 84,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2015 | | 84,000 |
|
| SBI Capoeira | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Electra | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | |
SBI Electra * | | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Carioca | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Conga | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Flamenco | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | |
SBI Flamenco * | | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Bolero | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Sousta | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Rock | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Lambada | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Reggae | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Zumba | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Macarena | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Parapara | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Mazurka | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Swing | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Jive | | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
|
| SBI Lynx | | | 2018 | | 82,000 |
|
| Total Kamsarmax | | 1,562,000 |
| | | 1,562,000 |
|
| | | | | |
| Ultramax Vessels | | | |
| SBI Antares | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Athena | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Bravo | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Leo | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Echo | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Lyra | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Tango | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Maia | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Hydra | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Subaru | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Pegasus | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Ursa | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Thalia | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Cronos | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Orion | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Achilles | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Hercules | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Perseus | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Hermes | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Zeus | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Hera | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Hyperion | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Tethys | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| SBI Phoebe | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax | |
| | | Vessel Name | | Year Built | | DWT | | Vessel Type | | Year Built | | DWT |
| SBI Subaru | | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Pegasus | | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Ursa | | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Thalia | | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Cronos | | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Orion | | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Achilles | | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Hercules | | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Perseus | | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Hermes | | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Zeus | | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
|
| SBI Hera | | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
|
| SBI Hyperion | | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Tethys | | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
|
| SBI Phoebe | | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Poseidon | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
|
| SBI Apollo | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
|
| SBI Samson | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Phoenix | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Gemini | | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Libra | | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Puma | | | 2014 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Jaguar | | | 2014 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Cougar | | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Aries | | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Taurus | | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Pisces | | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
|
| SBI Virgo | | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
|
| Total Ultramax | | 1,731,800 |
| | | 2,307,800 |
|
| Aggregate Owned DWT | | 3,293,800 |
| | |
| Aggregate Owned and Financed Leased DWT | | Aggregate Owned and Financed Leased DWT | | 3,869,800 |
|
* During the first quarter of 2019, we agreed to sell the SBI Electra and SBI Flamenco. The vessels are expected to be delivered to the buyer in June 2019.
** Our vessels are flagged in the Republic of the Marshall Islands or Liberia.
Time chartered-in vessel
| | | Vessel Type | | Year Built | | DWT | | Where Built | | Daily Base Rate | | Earliest Expiry | | Year Built | | DWT | | Where Built | | Daily Base Rate | | Earliest Expiry |
| Kamsarmax | | 2012 | | 82,000 |
| | South Korea | | $ | 15,500 |
| | 30-Jul-17 | | (1) | |
| Ultramax | | | 2017 | | 62,100 |
| | Japan | | $ | 10,125 |
| | 30-Sep-19 | | (1) |
| Aggregate Time Chartered-in DWT | Aggregate Time Chartered-in DWT | 82,000 |
| | | | |
| | | | Aggregate Time Chartered-in DWT | 62,100 |
| | | | |
| | | |
| |
(1) | This vessel has been time chartered-in for 3922 to 4424 months at the Company’sour option at $15,500$10,125 per day. The Company hasWe have the option to extend this time charter for one year at $16,300$10,885 per day. The vessel was delivered on April 23, 2014. |
In addition, we have a profit and loss sharing agreement in place as of December 31, 2016 for a Panamax vessel that we previously chartered in, pursuant to which we have agreed to split all the vessel’s profits and losses for a two year period.
Vessel Under Construction
|
| | | | | |
| Kamsarmax Vessel | | | |
| | Vessel Name | Expected
Delivery | DWT | Shipyard |
| 1 | Hull S1233 - TBN SBI Jive | Q2-17 | 82,000 |
| Hudong-Zhonghua Shipbuilding (Group) Co., Inc. |
| | Aggregate Kamsarmax Newbuilding DWT
| 82,000 |
| |
Employment of Our Fleet
We typically operate our vessels in spot market-oriented commercial pools, in the spot market or, under certain circumstances, on time charters.
Spot Market-Oriented Commercial Pools
To increase vessel utilization and thereby revenues, we participate in commercial pools with other shipowners with similar modern, well-maintained vessels. By operating a large number of vessels as an integrated transportation system, commercial pools offer customers greater flexibility and a higher level of service while achieving scheduling efficiencies. Pools employ experienced commercial managers and operators who have close working relationships with customers and brokers, while technical management
is performed by each shipowner. The managers of the pools negotiate charters with customers primarily in the spot market but may also arrange time charter agreements. The size and scope of these pools enable them to enhance vessel utilization rates for pool vessels by securing backhaul voyages, which is when cargo is transported on the return leg of a journey, and contracts of affreightment, or COAs, thus generating higher effective time charter equivalent, or TCE, revenues than otherwise might be obtainable in the spot market, while providing a higher level of service offerings to customers.
As of the date of this annual report, all of the vessels in our Operating Fleet are employed in aone of the Scorpio Pools, which are spot market-oriented commercial poolpools managed by our commercial manager, or a Scorpio Group Pool, which exposes us to fluctuations in spot market charter rates. In addition, we expect that the drybulk vessel that is currently under construction will be employed in a Scorpio Group Pool following its delivery to us. Our vessels participate in the Scorpio Group Pools under the same contractual terms and conditions as the third party vessels in the pool. Each pool aggregates the revenues and expenses of all of the pool participants and distributes the net earnings calculated on (i) the number of pool points for the vessel, which are based on vessel attributes such as cargo carrying capacity, fuel consumption, and construction characteristics, and (ii) the number of days the vessel operated in the period. SCM, a Monaco corporation controlled by the Lolli-Ghetti family of which our co-founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer is a member, as is our Vice President, is responsible for the administration of the pool and the commercial
management of the participating vessels, including marketing the pool, negotiating charters, including voyage charters, short duration time charters and COAs, conducting pool operations, including the distribution of pool cash earnings, and managing bunker (fuel oil) purchases, port charges and administrative services for the vessels. SCM, as operator of the Scorpio Group Pools, charges $300 a day for each vessel, whether owned by us or chartered-in, plus a 1.75% commission on the gross revenues per charter fixture. See “-Management of our Business” below.
The pool participants remain responsible for all other costs including the financing, insurance, manning and technical management of their vessels. The earnings of all of the vessels are aggregated and divided according to the relative performance capabilities of the vessel and the actual earning days each vessel is available.
Spot Market
A spot market voyage charter is generally a contract to carry a specific cargo from a load port to a discharge port for an agreed freight per ton of cargo or a specified total amount. Under spot market voyage charters, we pay specific voyage expenses such as port, canal and bunker costs. Spot charter rates are volatile and fluctuate on a seasonal and year-to-year basis.
Fluctuations derive from imbalances in the availability of cargoes for shipment and the number of vessels available at any given time to transport these cargoes. Vessels operating in the spot market generate revenue that is less predictable than those under time charters, but may enable us to capture increased profit margins during periods of improvements in drybulk vessel charter rates. Downturns in the drybulk industry would result in a reduction in profit margins.
Time Charters
Time charters give us a fixed and stable cash flow for a known period of time. Time charters also mitigate in part the volatility and seasonality of the spot market business, which is generally weaker in the second and third quarters of the year. We opportunistically employ vessels under time charter contracts. We may also enter into time charter contracts with profit sharing agreements, which enable us to benefit when the spot market rates increase.
Management of Our Business
On September 29,In 2016, we agreed to amend our master agreement, or the Master Agreement, with SCM and SSM, and our administrative services agreement, or the Administrative Services Agreement, with Scorpio Services Holding Limited, or SSH, under a deed of amendment, or the Deed of Amendment. Pursuant to the terms of the Deed of Amendment, on December 9, 2016, we entered into definitive documentation to memorialize the agreed amendments to the Master Agreement, or the Amended and Restated Master Agreement. The Amended and Restated Master Agreement and the Administrative Services Agreement as amended by the Deed of Amendment, or the Amended Administrative Services Agreement, are effective as from September 29, 2016.
PursuantIn December 2017, we agreed to amend the Amended and Restated Master Agreement to amend and restate the technical management agreement thereunder subject to bank consents being obtained (where required), which were subsequently obtained. On February 22, 2018, we entered into definitive documentation to memorialize the agreed amendments to the Amended and Restated Master Agreement under a deed of amendment, or the Amendment Agreement. The Amended and Restated Master Agreement as amended by the Amendment Agreement, or the Revised Master Agreement, is effective beginning on the fifth day within any 20 trading day period that the closing price of our common shares on the NYSE is equal to or greater than $5.00, the commission payable for commercial management would be reinstated to 1.75% of all monies earned by a vesselas from 1%. As of close of trading on the NYSE on November 18, 2016, the condition was met and the commission payable for commercial management was reinstated to 1.75% of all monies earned by a vessel, effective November 19, 2016.January 1, 2018.
Set forth below is a description of the other material terms of the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement and the Amended Administrative Services Agreement. Please also see Note 13,15, Related Party Transactions, to the Consolidated Financial Statements included herein for additional information.
Commercial and Technical Management - Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement
Our vessels are commercially managed by SCM and technically managed by SSM pursuant to the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement, which may be terminated by either party upon 24 months’ notice, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the provisions of the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement. In the event of the sale of one or more vessels, a notice period of three months’ and a payment equal to three months of management fees will apply, provided that the termination does not amount to a change of control, including a sale of substantially all vessels, in which case a payment equal to 24 months of management fees will apply. SCM and SSM are companies affiliated with us. The vessel we charter-in is also commercially managed by SCM. We expect that additionalAdditional vessels that we may charter-in or acquire in the future and the drybulk vessel that isare expected to be delivered to us during the second quarter of 2017, will also be managed under the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement or on substantially similar terms.terms as the Revised Master Agreement.
SCM’s commercial management services include securing employment for our vessels in the spot market or on time charters. SCM also manages the Scorpio Group Pools (spot market-oriented vessel pools) including the Scorpio Ultramax Pool, the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the currently inactive Scorpio Capesize Pool in which our owned, finance leased and time chartered-in vessels are employed.employed and from which a significant portion of our revenue is generated. For commercial management of any of our vessels that does not
operate in one of these pools, we pay SCM a daily fee of $300 per vessel, plus a 1.75% commission on the gross revenues per charter fixture. The Scorpio GroupUltramax Pool and Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool participants, including us and third-party owners are each expected toof similar vessels, pay SCM a pool management fee of $300 per vessel per day, plus a 1.75% commission on the gross revenues per charter fixture.
SSM’s technical management services include providing technical support, such as arranging the hiring of qualified officers and crew, supervising the maintenance and performance of vessels, purchasing supplies, spare parts and new equipment, arranging and supervising drydocking and repairs, and monitoring regulatory and classification society compliance and customer standards. We pay SSM an annual fee of $200,000$160,000 plus charges for certain itemized services per vessel to provide technical management services for each of our owned or finance leased vessels. In addition, representatives of SSM, including certain subcontractors, providepreviously provided us with construction supervisory services while our vessels arewere being constructed in shipyards. For these services, we compensatecompensated SSM for its direct expenses, which can varyvaried between $200,000 and $500,000 per vessel. Please see “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions—B. Related Party Transactions—Commercial and Technical Management Agreements” for additional information.
Amended Administrative Services Agreement
We haveIn 2016, we entered into anthe Amended Administrative Services Agreement with SSH for the provision of administrative staff, office space and accounting, legal compliance, financial and information technology services.services for which we reimburse SSH is a company affiliated with us.for the reasonable direct and indirect expenses incurred while providing such services. The services provided to us by SSH may be sub-contracted to other entities within the Scorpio Group. Pursuant to the Amended Administrative Services Agreement,Scorpio.
SSH also arranges vessel sales and purchases for us, for which we reimburse SSH for the reasonable direct or indirect expenses it incurs in providing us with the administrative services described above.
We alsopreviously paid SSH a fee, payable in our common shares, for arranging vessel acquisitions, including newbuildings. The amount of common shares payable was determined by dividing $250,000 by the market value of our common shares based on the volume weighted average price of our common shares over the 30 trading day period immediately preceding the contract date of a definitive agreement to acquire any vessel. As of the date of this annual report, we issued an aggregate of 178,580180,716 common shares to SSH in connection with the deliveries of our newbuilding vessels, and expect to issue an additional 2,136 common shares to SSH upon the delivery of the remaining drybulk vessel under construction.vessels. In November 2014, SSH agreed to waive its fee on vessel acquisitions contracted after November 20, 2014, for so long as the closing price of our common shares remained below a specified threshold. Effective September 29, 2016, pursuant to the terms of the Amended Administrative Services Agreement, we agreed with SSH to eliminate this fee was eliminated on all future acquisitions.
In addition, SSH has agreed with us not to own any drybulk carriers greater than 30,000 dwt for so long as the Amended Administrative Services Agreement is in full force and effect. This agreement may be terminated by SSH after the third anniversary of our initial public offering upon 12 months’ prior written notice or by us with 24 months’ notice.
Recent and Other Developments
Fleet Updates
During the period from January 1, 2017 through February 28, 2017, we took delivery of the following newbuilding vessels:
SBI Samson, an Ultramax vessel, was delivered from Chengxi Shipyard Co. Ltd.
SBI Parapara, a Kamsarmax vessel, was delivered from Hudong-Zhonghua (Group) Co., Ltd.
SBI Swing, a Kamsarmax vessel, was delivered from Hudong-Zhonghua (Group) Co., Ltd.
SBI Phoenix, an Ultramax vessel, was delivered from Chengxi Shipyard Co. Ltd.
SBI Mazurka, a Kamsarmax vessel, was delivered from Hudong-Zhonghua (Group) Co., Ltd.
As of December 31, 2016, we had a profit and loss sharing agreement in place for a Panamax vessel that we previously chartered in, pursuant to which we have agreed to split all of the vessel’s profits and losses for a two-year period.
Credit Facility AmendmentsShare Repurchase Program
During the fourth quarter of 2016,2018, we agreedrepurchased a total of approximately 4.5 million shares of our common stock under the then existing share repurchase programs at an aggregate cost of approximately $27.0 million, or an average cost of $6.05 per share, which was funded from available cash resources. As of January 25, 2019, $24.8 million remained available under the then existing share repurchase program.
On January 25, 2019, our Board of Directors authorized a new share repurchase program to purchase up to an aggregate of $50.0 million of our common shares. This new share repurchase program replaced our previous share repurchase program that
was authorized in October 2018 and that was terminated in conjunction with our lenders to amend the interest coverage ratio requirement in eachauthorization of the applicable credit facilities, as such term is defined in each such credit facility, such thatnew share repurchase program. The specific timing and amounts of the interest coverage ratiorepurchases will be waived untilin the first quartersole discretion of 2019, at which point we will be requiredmanagement and may vary based on market conditions and other factors. We are not obligated under the terms of the program to maintain an interest coverage ratiorepurchase any of at least 1.00 to 1.00 (calculated on a year to date basis) for the quarters ending March 31, 2019 and June 30, 2019, 2.50 to 1.00 for the quarter ending September 30, 2019 (calculated on a year-to-date basis) and 2.50 to 1.00 for each quarter thereafter (calculated on a trailing four quarter basis).our common shares. The authorization has no expiration date.
DuringDividend
In the fourth quarter of 2016,2018, our Board of Directors declared and we paid a quarterly cash dividend of $0.02 per share totaling approximately $1.5 million.
On January 25, 2019, our Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.02 per share, payable on or about March 15, 2019, to all shareholders of record as of February 15, 2019. As of February 15, 2019, 71,217,258 shares were outstanding.
Investment in Scorpio Tankers Inc.
On October 12, 2018, we invested $100.0 million in a related party, Scorpio Tankers Inc. (NYSE:STNG), or Scorpio Tankers, for approximately 54.1 million common shares of Scorpio Tankers, representing approximately 10.9% of its then issued and outstanding common shares. The investment was part of a larger $337.0 million equity raise through a public offering of common shares by Scorpio Tankers.
We measure our investment in Scorpio Tankers based on the quoted market price of Scorpio Tankers’ common stock, discounted for a temporary lack of marketability as at December 31, 2018 pursuant to the terms of a lock-up agreement we entered into at the time of the investment. The lock-up agreement expired on January 7, 2019. At December 31, 2018, we recorded a $7.7 million non-cash loss and $0.5 million cash dividend related income from our investment in Scorpio Tankers, which were recorded in Income (loss) from equity investment, on our Consolidated Statement of Operations.
On January 18, 2019, Scorpio Tankers effected a one-for-ten reverse stock split and as such we now own approximately 5.4 million common shares of Scorpio Tankers.
IMO 2020
In November 2018, we entered into agreements with third parties to purchase exhaust gas cleanings systems, or scrubbers, for 18 of our vessels in 2019 and for 10 of our vessels in 2020. The total value of these agreements is estimated to be $41.9 million. The systems that are being fitted are of ‘hybrid ready’ design, which allows them to be upgraded to a ‘closed loop’ configuration at a future date. As part of these agreements, we also agreed withhave an option to purchase exhaust gas cleaning systems for up to 18 additional vessels in 2020.
As of March 15, 2019, our projected scrubber installation schedule and estimated payments for such installation on all the lenders under certainvessels in our owned or finance leased fleet is as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Number of Vessels by Type | | Estimated Payments (1) | |
| | | Ultramax | | Kamsarmax | | |
| Q1 2019 | | — |
| | — |
| | $ | 4,904 |
| |
| Q2 2019 | | — |
| | 3 |
| | 11,547 |
| |
| Q3 2019 | | 9 |
| | 1 |
| | 19,365 |
| |
| Q4 2019 | | 1 |
| | 4 |
| | 24,578 |
| |
| Q1 2020 | | 11 |
| | 1 |
| | 26,783 |
| |
| Q2 2020 | | 9 |
| | 4 |
| | 24,666 |
| |
| Q3 2020 | | 4 |
| | 4 |
| | 13,823 |
| |
| Q4 2020 | | 3 |
| | — |
| | 5,580 |
| |
| Q1 2021 | | — |
| | — |
| | 859 |
| |
| Total | | 37 |
| | 17 |
| | $ | 132,105 |
| |
(1) Includes estimated cash payments for scrubbers that are due in advance of our credit facilitiesthe scheduled service and may be scheduled to amend the covenants thereunder relatedoccur in quarters prior to the "leverage ratio" and "consolidated net worth" to exclude from such calculations $100.0 million of historical non-operating losses (which is inactual installation. In addition to other exclusions that our lenders previously agreed to, for certain non-these installment payments, these amounts also include estimates
operating items, including impairments). Certain of our lendersthe installation costs of such systems. The timing of the payments set forth are estimates only and may vary as the timing of the related installations finalize.
$21.4 Million Lease Financing - SBI Samba
In February 2019, we entered into a financing transaction with an unaffiliated third party involving the sale and leaseback of the SBI Samba, a 2015 Japanese built Kamsarmax vessel, for consideration of $21.4 million. As part of the transaction, we have agreed to amendmake payments of $6,850 per day under a five-year bareboat charter agreement with the above-mentioned definitionsbuyer.
The transaction also provides us with the option to repurchase the vessel beginning on the third anniversary of the sale until the end of the bareboat charter agreement. This transaction is expected to increase our liquidity by approximately $6.9 million after repayment of outstanding debt under the credit facility under which the vessels were previously financed.
CMBFL Lease Financing
In March 2019, we agreed to sell and leaseback three Ultramax vessels (SBI Pegasus, SBI Subaru and SBI Ursa) and four Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Lambada, SBI Macarena, SBI Carioca and SBI Capoeira) to CMB Financial Leasing Co., Ltd. Upon completion, which is estimated to take place in the second quarter of 20162019, our liquidity is expected to exclude all historical incurred losses/write downs on assets sold, all historical incurred losses on terminationincrease by $57.2 million in aggregate ($45.4 million upon closing after the repayment of shipbuilding contractsoutstanding debt and certain future non-operating items including impairments.
Furthermore, during the fourth quarteran additional tranche of 2016, we agreed with certainup to $11.8 million for installation of our lenders to add four, seven or eight quarterly installment payments, dependingscrubbers on the vessel, toseven vessels). As part of the respective balloon payments in exchange for advance principal repayments. As a result of these agreements, we will not havebareboat charter-in the vessels for a period of seven years. In addition, the Company has purchase options beginning after the end of the third year of each agreement. There is also a purchase option for each vessel upon the expiration of each agreement.
Vessel Sales
In March 2019, we entered into agreements with unaffiliated third parties to makesell the next eight, fourteen or sixteen scheduled quarterly installment payments, depending onSBI Electra and SBI Flamenco, two 2015 Chinese built Kamsarmax vessels, for approximately $48.0 million in aggregate. Delivery of the vessel.
Lastly, we agreed withvessels is estimated to take place in the lender under our $39.6 Million Credit Facility to extend the maturity date from June 2019 to September 2020, subject to our satisfaction of certain conditions on or before June 2019, during the fourthsecond quarter of 2016.2019. It is estimated that our liquidity will increase by approximately $18.6 million after the repayment of the vessels’ outstanding debt under the credit facility under which the vessels were previously financed.
For additional information regarding our credit facilities and other debt arrangements, please see “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Credit Facilities and Unsecured Notes.”
Our Customers
We believe that developing strong relationships with the end users of our services allowallows us to better satisfy their needs with appropriate and capable vessels. All of our vessels are employed in Scorpio Group Pools, which are spot market-oriented commercial pools managed by our commercial manager, SCM. A prospective charterer’s financial condition, creditworthiness, reliability and reliability track record are important factors in negotiating our vessels’ employment, which SCM evaluates on our behalf. We earned 36% and 64% of our revenue from the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool, respectively, during the year ended December 31, 2018, 42% and 58% of our revenue from the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool, respectively, during the year ended December 31, 2017, and 40% and 60% of our revenue (including commissions from SCM) from the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool, respectively, during the year ended December 31, 2016, 41%, 43%, and 8% of our revenue (including commissions from SCM) from the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool, the Scorpio Ultramax Pool and the Scorpio Capesize Pool, respectively, during the year ended December 31, 2015, and 71% and 21% of our revenue (including commissions from SCM) from the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool, respectively, during the year ended December 31, 2014.2016.
Seasonality
We operate our vessels in markets that have historically exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, in charter hire rates. This seasonality may result in quarter to quarter volatility in our operating results. The drybulk carrier market is typically stronger in the fall and winter months in anticipation of increased consumption of coal and other raw materials in the northern hemisphere during the winter months. In addition, unpredictable weather patterns in these months may disrupt vessel scheduling and supplies of certain commodities. As a result, revenues of drybulk carrier operators in general have historically been weaker during the fiscal quarters ended June 30 and September 30, and, conversely, been stronger in fiscal quarters ended December 31 and March 31. This seasonality may materially affect our operating results and cash available for the payment of dividends.
Competition
We operate in markets that are highly competitive and based primarily on supply and demand. We compete for charters on the basis of price, vessel location, size, age and condition of the vessel, as well as on our reputation and that of our commercial manager. We compete primarily with other independent and state-owned drybulk vessel-owners. Our competitors may have more resources than us and may operate vessels that are newer, and therefore more attractive to charterers, than our vessels. Ownership of drybulk vessels is highly fragmented and is divided among publicly listed companies, state-controlled owners and private shipowners.
Industry and Market Conditions
The Drybulk Shipping Industry
Except as otherwise indicated, the statistical information and industry and market data contained in this section is based on or derived from statistical information and industry and market data collated and prepared by SSY Consultancy & Research Ltd or SSY.(“SSY”). The data is based on SSY's review of such statistical information and market data available at the time (including internal surveys and sources, independent financial information, independent external industry publications, reports or other publicly available information). Due to the incomplete nature of the statistical information and market data available, SSY has had to make some estimates where necessary when preparing the data. The data is subject to change and may differ from similar assessments obtained from other analysts of shipping markets. WhilstWhile reasonable care has been taken in the preparation of the data, SSY has not undertaken any independent verification of the information and market data obtained from published sources.
Industry Overview
Drybulk shipping mainly comprises the shipment of minerals, such as iron ore and coal, other industrial raw materials and various agricultural products. Of these, the major cargoes are iron ore, coal and grain. The remaining minor bulk cargoes include steel products, bauxite/alumina, nickel ore, cement, petroleum coke, forest products, fertilizers and non-grain agricultural products, such as sugar.
Charterers in the drybulk shipping industry range from cargo owners (such as mining companies and grain houses) to end-users (such as steel producers and power utilities) and also include a number of different trading companies and ship operators.
Total international seaborne drybulk trade is provisionally estimated to have reached a new annual record of approximately 4.34.65 billion tonnes in 2016.2018. This represents an increase of an estimated 2.6% from the 20152017 level and an estimated 21.4%15.0% from the 2011 level.2013 level, which was close to the compound annual average growth rate, or CAGR, for the period 2013 to 2018. With the exception of 2009, when the global economy was in recession, seaborne drybulk trade has recorded positive annual growth in every year since 1998. While the 20162018 trade estimates set out in the table below will be subject to revision, as final trade statistics become available, our current estimates outlinedindicate a third consecutive year in the table below indicate that last year’s increasewhich annual growth in total seaborne trade volumes exceeded 100 million tonnes, albeit that this growth was unevenly distributed between the various dry bulk cargo types and below the compound annual average growth rate, or CAGR, for the period from 2011 to 2016.types.
World Seaborne Drybulk Trade
(million tonnes)
| | | Cargo/Year | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2011-16% Growth | CAGR | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2013-18 % Growth | CAGR |
| Major Bulks | 2,468 | 2,610 | 2,824 | 2,996 | 2,990 | 3,076 | 25% | 5% | 2,825 | 3,000 | 2,992 | 3,088 | 3,192 | 3,238 | 15% | 3% |
| Iron Ore | 1,107 | 1,138 | 1,256 | 1,391 | 1,414 | 1,484 | 34% | 6% | 1,256 | 1,391 | 1,414 | 1,484 | 1,532 | 1,524 | 21% | 4% |
| Coal | 1,023 | 1,119 | 1,199 | 1,182 | 1,126 | 1,118 | 9% | 2% | 1,200 | 1,186 | 1,128 | 1,130 | 1,155 | 1,201 | —% |
| Grains | 338 | 353 | 369 | 423 | 450 | 475 | 41% | 7% | 369 | 423 | 450 | 474 | 505 | 513 | 39% | 7% |
| Minor Bulks | 1,078 | 1,119 | 1,179 | 1,192 | 1,204 | 1,228 | 14% | 2% | 1,222 | 1,242 | 1,264 | 1,293 | 1,347 | 1,417 | 16% | 3% |
| Total | 3,546 | 3,729 | 4,001 | 4,188 | 4,194 | 4,304 | 21% | 4% | 4,047 | 4,242 | 4,256 | 4,381 | 4,539 | 4,655 | 15% | 3% |
Totals may not add due to rounding
Cargo Types
Iron ore:The key raw material for steelmaking, and single largest seaborne drybulk cargo, iron ore trade surgedexpanded more than three-fold between 2002 and 2017 on the back of unprecedented Chinese import demand to bedemand. Preliminary estimates for 2018 do however indicate the single largest seaborne drybulk cargo,first annual decrease for 17 years, but only marginally with annual volumes expanding more than three-fold since 2000 to an estimated 1,484decline of 0.5% to 1,524 million tonnes, or Mt,Mt. By comparison, the CAGR was approximately 4% for the five years since 2013. Last year’s decline in 2016. Last year saw the sequence of annual increases extended to 15 years with volumes up by an estimated 4.9% from 2015 and 34.0% from 2011. Thistrade was much faster than the correspondingdespite positive growth in world steel production in 2018, which rose by less than 1%an estimated 4.6% to a new all-time high, led by increases in 2016 and by approximately 5.9% between 2011 and 2016.China. In addition to China which, as described elsewhere in this section, has become the dominant importer accounting for over two-thirds of seaborne imports in 2016,2018, the main import markets for iron ore are Japan, Western Europe and South Korea. South and Southeast Asia generated positive import growth in 2018. Exports are dominated by Australia and Brazil, which together accountaccounted for over 80%an estimated 83% of the seaborne market in 2018 with a large majority of their cargoes carried by Capesize vessels given the favorable unit economies. This market share has increased from 71%75% in 2011,2013, mainly due to the introduction of additional
Australian export capacity, with both countries recording new annual export records in 2016.2018. Other iron ore exporters include South Africa, Canada, India, South AfricaSweden, Ukraine and West Africa.
Coal: At an estimated 1,118 million tonnes1,201 Mt in 2016,2018, global seaborne coal trade declinedincreased by an estimated 0.8%4.0% from its 20152017 level and represented a third consecutiveonly the second year of decline. This contrasted withpositive annual growth since 2013 against a background of improved overall energy demand. By comparison, the CAGR of 2%was close to zero percent for the entire five-year period from 20112013 to 2016.2018. Coal trade is comprised of two main categories: (1) steam coal (which is chiefly used for electricity generation, but also by industrial users, such as the cement industry) and (2) coking coal (a key input for blast furnace steelmaking). Both categories have experienced lower trade volumes sincebetween 2013 and 2016, but in 2016 cokingsteam coal trade in 2018 is estimated to have increased marginally.risen above the previous annual all-time high level in 2013 for the first time.
Although the import market for coal was historically dominated by import demand from Japan and Western Europe, the last decade10 to 15 years has seen China and India emerge as key importers of both categories of coal. The leading exporter of coking coal is Australia, followed by the United States and Canada. Indonesia is the largest exporter of steam coal, ahead of Australia, the former Soviet Union, Colombia, South Africa and the United States.
Between 2005 and 2013, China transformed from a major steam coal exporting nation to the single largest importer, representing the strength of the country’s domestic demand for power generation. InHowever, imports represent a very small share (i.e. less than 10%) of coal consumption in China (which is the world’s largest coal producer) and, as a result, imports have been subject to major fluctuations in response to changes in domestic market conditions. For example, in 2014 however, China recorded its firsta sharp annual decline in steam coal imports, since 2008, against the backgroundin light of an oversupplied domestic coal market and government intervention to restrict imports. The rate of decline quickened in 2015, reducing the country’s steam coal imports to a six-year low, butbefore the downward trend was reversed in 2016 with both coking and steam coal imports increasing, mainly as a result of
government-driven cuts in domestic coal production. Further Chinese government interventions aimed at managing the domestic coal market since 2017 contributed to some significant monthly variations in import volumes, but the combined annual total for coking and steam coal imports in 2018 was only 1.2% below the corresponding level in 2017.
India remained the world’s single largest coal importer in 2016, even though2018, with strong gains in both steam and coking coal volumes, which are estimated to have pushed the aggregate annual volume above its annual volumes experienced a second consecutive year of net decline which,previous peak in direct contrast to China, was2014. Annual growth in Indian imports had been dampened between 2014 and 2017, mainly due to rising domestic coal production. Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, together with Western Europe, remain major import markets, while South East Asia and Latin America have grown in importance as coal import generators. Although investments in new port facilities enabled the participation of Capesize vessels in the Asia-led coal trade growth during the period from 2010 to 2013, itmore recent changes in coal trade patterns (in particular, the rising share of exports from Indonesia, Russia and the US) has chiefly benefitted demand for Panamax and Handymax vessels.
Grains: Seaborne grain trade is comprised of wheat, coarse grains (corn, barley, oats, rye and sorghum) and soybeans/meal, which together totaled an estimated new record of 475513 Mt in 2016,2018, according to preliminary trade data. This was up by an estimated 5.4%1.6% from 20152017 and compares with a CAGR of 7.1%approximately 7.0% for the period from 20112013 to 2016.2018, which is the highest of the major bulk cargoes. In addition, the grain trades remain an important source of freight market volatility due to both the seasonality of export flows, and year-on-year variations in crop surpluses and deficits.deficits and, latterly, by import tariffs.
Soy is the largest of the three main categories of grain trade with Brazil, the United States and Argentina as the leading export countries. The principal markets are in Europe and Far East Asia with China being the world’s single largest soybean importer. Shipments are dominated by Panamax and Handymax vessels. The introduction of import tariffs by China on U.S. soybeans in 2018 boosted soybean volumes from Brazil to China at the expense of the U.S. suppliers, leading U.S. suppliers to seek alternative markets. This contributed to slower, yet still positive, world soybean and meal trade growth of 2.7% in 2018. Wheat and coarse grains are also primarily carried by mid-size vessels with the United States, Canada, Russia, Ukraine, Argentina, Brazil, Australia and the European Union asbeing the main exporting regions. In addition to Far East Asia and Europe, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America are all significant import markets.
Minor Bulks:A diversity of cargo types are covered under this heading with different sets of demand drivers. Nevertheless, together at approximately 1.21.4 billion tonnes per annum these trades represent a major source of employment for the smaller Handysize and Handymax vessels.
In recent years growth in aggregatethe pattern of minor bulk trade volumes has been hamperedaltered by (1) government restrictions on the export of key industrial ores in South East Asia and (2) moves by key importing regions to protect domestic steel markets against imports. The formerAsia. This was led by an Indonesian ban on the export of unprocessed mineral ores beginning in January 2014, which reduced the country’s combined exports of bauxite and nickel ore from 121 Mt in 2013 to zero in 2015 and 2016. Bauxite trade did benefit from a sharp increase in exports from Malaysia in 2015, but in early 2016 the Malaysian government announced a temporary suspension of domestic bauxite mining, which has since been extended.was subsequently extended into the first quarter of 2019. This turned
the focus of importers in China (the world’s biggest bauxite market) to longer haul supplies, particularly from West Africa. Further interventionsAfrica (where fronthaul cargoes are now predominantly carried by South East Asian governments have followed inCapesize vessels). Since the early weeksbeginning of 2017; first, in January 2017 the Indonesian government announced reducedhas moved to partially relax its ban on unprocessed mineral ore exports with limited volumes re-entering the international market and in February 2019 it was reported that bauxite mining in Malaysia can resume from April (albeit under strict conditions). However, uncertainties continue to surround the availability of South East Asian mineral ores with, for example, reported mining restrictions on bauxite andimposed by the government of the Philippines potentially constraining nickel ore exports, second it was subsequently announced in the Philippines that a number of the country’s nickel ore mines are to be closed or suspended.
exports.
Despite these constraints, total minor bulk trade is estimated to have achieved a new annual record in 2016.2018. The estimated CAGR for minor bulk trade volumes for the period from 20112013 to 20162018 was 2%3.0%.
Demand for Drybulk Shipping
Drybulk trade is a function of levels of (a) economic activity, (b) the industrialization/urbanization of developing countries, (c) population growth (plus changes in dietary habits) and (d) regional shifts in cargo supply/demand balances, which can occur, for example, due to the development of new export/import capacity or depletion/development of mineral reserves. The distances shipped chiefly reflect regional commodity surpluses and deficits. Generally, the more concentrated the sources of cargo supply, the greater the average distance shipped.
Ship demand is determined by the overall volumes of cargo moved and the distance that these are shipped, or tonne-mile demand, as well as changes in vessel efficiency. These changes may be caused by such factors as (1) vessel speed (which will change in response to movements in fuel costs and freight market earnings); (2) port delays (which have been a common occurrence in the last 15 years as inland and port logistics in several key export areas struggled to meet surging global demand) and (3) laden to ballast ratios, or how much time vessels spend sailing empty on re-positioning voyages. Ballasting has also been on the increase over the last 10 to 15 years due to the widening imbalance in cargo flows between the Atlantic and Pacific Basins.
World seaborne drybulk trade followed a steady underlying upward trend during the 1980s and 1990s. CAGR in the major drybulk cargoes over this period was an estimated 2.5%, before accelerating sharply to 6.3% during the period from 2000 to 2009 and being sustained at an estimated 5.5%4.9% between 2010 and 2016.
2018.
The growth in drybulk trade volumes since 2000 has been primarily due to the rapid industrialization and urbanization of China. From approximately 130 Mt in 2000, Chinese drybulk imports have increased more than ten-fold,thirteen-fold, as illustrated in the
chart below. Such an expansion was facilitated by investments in new mining and port facilities in key exporting areas around the world initially in response to Chinese-driven rises in commodity prices from 2004 to 2011.
2011 and subsequently reflecting movements in the commodity price cycle.
The table below provides a more detailed comparison of China’s drybulk imports from 20112013 to 2016 and2018, which shows that, following its firsta new annual decline in 17 years in 2015, positive growth resumed in 2016record last year with annualpreliminary data indicating an increase in aggregate volumes of approximately 111.029 Mt last year. Chineseto approximately 1,763 Mt in 2018. This was despite an annual decline in imports of iron ore, rosewhich had made the greatest contribution to a new annual record in 2016 and, after successive years of decline in 2014 and 2015, coal imports rose by more than 50 Mt in 2016. Total grain imports are estimated to have fallen by 9.0 Mt last year despite a new high for soybeans.
Iron ore has been the leading source ofChina’s drybulk import growth in Chinese drybulk imports over the last five years. The 338247 Mt estimated increase in iron ore imports between 20112013 and 20162018 reflects not only increases in domestic steel production (and, therefore, iron ore consumption) to meet the needs of an industrializing and urbanizing economy as well as historically high exports of steel products, but also the substitution of higher-quality imported iron ore for lower-quality domestic supplies.supplies and increases in port stocks. Consequently, iron ore imports have growngrew more rapidly than Chinese steel production overbetween 2013 and 2017.
However, the last five yearsrelationship between domestic steel production and now account for a large majorityiron ore consumption changed in 2018, as the net fall in iron ore imports was accompanied by record levels of Chinese steel production. This was partly due to the government-enforced removal of scrap steel-consuming induction furnace capacity in 2017 (which had hitherto been excluded from official Chinese steel production statistics) for environmental reasons. This move not only inflated steel production growth in 2018 official data, but also constrained iron ore consumption.consumption growth due to the abundance of steel scrap previously used in induction furnaces. In addition, winter curtailment measures introduced by the government to combat pollution by heavy industry restricted iron ore sintering to the detriment of imported iron ore fines. There was also some destocking at China’s iron ore ports in 2018.
With grains impacted by tariffs, coal and, especially, the minor bulks drove Chinese drybulk import growth in 2018. Bauxite (the main raw material for the aluminium industry) was the single largest category of minor bulk cargo imported by China in 2018, at an estimated 86.6 Mt, which was 26% above the annual total in 2017 and the highest year on record. This growth was dominated by Guinea, the biggest bauxite supplier to China, followed by Australia. There was continued resumption in imports from Indonesia in 2018, which had been the leading source of Chinese bauxite imports prior to 2014, but volumes remained modest by historical standards. The re-emergence of some Indonesian supplies helped lift China’s total annual nickel ore imports from 35.0 Mt in 2017 to an estimated 45.3 Mt in 2018.
Chinese Drybulk Imports (Million Tonnes)
|
| | | | |
| | 2013 | 2017 | 2018 | CAGR |
| Iron Ore | 820.3 | 1,075.4 | 1,064.8 | 5% |
| Coal* | 327.2 | 271.1 | 280.8 | (2)% |
| Bauxite/Alumina | 75.4 | 71.6 | 88.0 | 3% |
| Grains | 78.0 | 121.2 | 108.6 | 7% |
| Other** | 204.9 | 195.4 | 221.2 | 1% |
| Total of above | 1,505.8 | 1,734.7 | 1,763.4 | 3% |
* Includes lignite, which is excluded from SSY’s estimates for seaborne coal trade and categorized as a minor bulk.
** Includes mineral ores (such as nickel), pulp/wood chip/logs and petroleum coke.
Source: Chinese Customs
Growth in China’s iron ore trades over the last 15 years has mainly been to the benefit of Capesize vessels, hauling cargoes from West Australia and Brazil. Australia and Indonesia are the primary sources of Chinese coal imports, while in the grain trades increased Chinese demand for soybeans from Latin America and the United States has boosted tonne-mile demand for Panamax and Supramax vessels.
Indonesia was the dominant supplier of bauxite and nickel ore to China until January 2014’s export restrictions. With Chinese buyers struggling to find alternative supplies from elsewhere, the country’s annual nickel ore imports fell to an annual total of 31.9 Mt in 2016 from a peak of 71.2 Mt in 2013. By contrast, after declining from 71.6 Mt in 2013 to 36.5 Mt in 2014, China’s bauxite imports partially rebounded to 56.1 Mt in 2015 and 52.1 Mt in 2016. The 2016 level includes included record imports from the Atlantic, where Guinea and Brazil were the prominent sources of supply.
Chinese Drybulk Imports (Million Tonnes)
|
| | | | |
| | 2011 | 2015 | 2016 | CAGR |
| Iron Ore | 686.8 | 953.3 | 1,024.7 | +8% |
| Coal* | 222.2 | 204.2 | 255.7 | +3% |
| Bauxite/Alumina | 47.1 | 60.8 | 55.1 | +3% |
| Grains | 58.0 | 114.4 | 105.1 | +13% |
| Other** | 164.3 | 168.5 | 172.2 | +1% |
| Total of above | 1,178.4 | 1,501.2 | 1,612.8 | +7% |
* Includes lignite, which is excluded from SSY’s estimates for seaborne coal trade and categorized as a minor bulk.
** Includes mineral ores (such as nickel), pulp/wood chip/logs and petroleum coke.
Source: Chinese Customs
Outside of China, most of the additional growth in drybulk cargo import demand during the past five years has been generated by other Asian economies. For example, and despite setbacks in 2015 and 2016,since 2014, Indian coal imports in 20162018 were estimated to be more than 7045 Mt higher than their corresponding level in 2011,2013, reflecting the strength of demand from electricity generators and the cement and steel industries. Although India has added several Capesize coal import terminals in recent years, a majority of the coal cargoes arriving in the country are shipped by Supramax, Panamax and Kamsarmax vessels. More established Asian import markets, such as Japan and South Korea, have also contributed to the region’s import growth with theirits combined imports of coal and iron ore increasing by an estimated 3032 Mt between 20112013 and 2016.
2018.
In contrast, European mineral imports have staged only a partial recovery from their cyclical lows in 2009 and have remained below their 2007 totals, partlybefore trending lower in 2014. This is due in part to persistently slow economic growth in the Eurozone, but also policy drivenin part to policy-driven changes in the region’s energy mix away from coal. Consequently, Far East Asia’s share of world seaborne major bulk imports is estimated to have climbed above 75%to approximately 79% from approximately 60% in the middle of the last decade and 50%53% to 55%54% in 2000.
As a result, the fastest drybulk trade growth has been seen within the Pacific Basin, which has been supplemented by increases in front-haul trade from the Atlantic to the Pacific (chiefly iron ore on Capesize vessels and grains on Panamaxes and Supramaxes)Supramaxes, but also U.S. coal).
Drybulk Global Fleet
The cargoes outlined above are predominantly carried by drybulk carriers of more than 10,000 dwt. Drybulk carriers are single-decked ships that transport dry cargoes in “bulk” form, that is loose within cargo holds, rather than in bags, crates or on pallets.
As of the end of December 2016,2018, the total fleet of 10,000+ dwt drybulk carriers numbered approximately 10,44010,920 vessels of 783.2830.6 million deadweight tonnes, or Mdwt.
This fleet is divided into four principal size segments: Handysize (10,000-39,999 dwt), Handymax (40,000-64,999 dwt), Panamax (65,000-99,999 dwt) and Capesize (100,000+dwt). Aside from size, the main distinction between drybulk vessel types is whether they are geared (that is, equipped with cranes for loading/discharge) or gearless. The main characteristics of these four vessel types are summarized below, while the table below summarizes the current structure of the fleet by age and size. It shows that in terms of deadweight capacity, the Capesize sector is the largest with 40.3%40.4% of the end-of-December 20162018 total, followed by Panamaxes at 25.0%24.9%, Handymaxes at 23.5%23.6% and Handysizes at 11.2%11.1%.
Handysize (10,000-39,999dwt)(10,000-39,999 dwt): These ships carry the widest range of cargoes of any drybulk size segment and are the most dependent on the minor bulks for employment. They are usually equipped with cargo-handling gear (cranes or derricks) and are widely used on routes to and from draft-restricted ports that (a) cannot receive larger ships and (b) often lack their own land-based cargo-handling equipment. Many such loading or discharge facilities are located in the developing nations. Due to the limited economies of scale that these vessels offer, compared to larger tonnage vessels, many of these ships are extensively employed on intra-regional, shorter-haul trades. Special designs of shipships are associated with the carriage of such cargoes as steel products and logs, or open-hatch and log-fitted vessels; while some variants also exist in terms of cargo-handling equipment, such as grab-fitted tonnage possessing scoops that facilitate unloading of certain cargo types.
Handymax (40,000-64,999dwt)(40,000-64,999 dwt): This segment of the drybulk carrier fleet contains three distinct sub-categories - the traditional Handymax size (40,000-49,999dwt)(40,000-49,999 dwt), the Supramax size (50,000-59,999dwt)(50,000-59,999 dwt) and the Ultramax size (60,000-64,999 dwt). There are some Ultramax newbuilding designs of above 65,000 dwt, but as these are much fewer in number than existing gearless vessels of 65-69.9 kdwt, they currently fall in SSY’s Panamax size range. Despite their increased size, these vessels retain a high degree of trading flexibility as their cargo gear enables them to load and/or discharge at ports with limited facilities. They are more widely deployed on longer-haul routes than are Handysizes (due to the greater scale economies that they offer). Whereas the traditional Handymax types have gained market share from the sub-40,000 dwt fleet of Handysizes over the past 20 years, the new generation of Supramax and Ultramax vessels are also competing for business on Panamax routes (such as grains from Latin America).routes.
Panamax (65,000-99,999 dwt): The strict definition of a Panamax bulk carrier is a ship able to transit the Panama Canal fully laden. However, in recent years this definition has become blurred as (1) only a minority of the vessels in this size range pass
through the Panama Canal in any 12-month period and (2) the opening of an additional trade lane with a new set of locks in mid-2016 expanded the Panama Canal’s dimensions to enable the transit of ships of maximum beam, or extreme vessel breadth, of 49 metres, maximum length overall, or LOA, of 366m and maximum draft of 15.2m tropical fresh water, or TFW. This compares with the pre-existing, and still operational, locks which can accommodate ships to a maximum of 32.3m beam, 294.1m LOA and 12m TFW draft. For these reasons our fleet definition stretches from 65,000 to 99,999 dwt, encompassing three main sub-types: traditional Panamaxes (70,000-79,999 dwt), Kamsarmaxes (82,000-83,000 dwt, which prior to the enlargement were the largest bulk carrier to transit the Panama Canal fully laden) and post-Panamaxes (85,000-99,999 dwt). The base load demand for these vessel types is provided by coal and grain cargoes, although they also participate in a number of other trades (including iron ore, bauxite and fertilizers). Only a small minority of vessels in this size range are equipped with cargo gear as most of the ports served have well developed cargo loading or discharge terminals.
Capesize (100,000+dwt): These ships are almost exclusively deployed in the iron ore and coal trades, which benefit most from their scale economies. There are three main sub-types: small Capes (100,000-119,999 dwt), standard Capes (160,000-209,999 dwt, which are mainly concentrated between 170,000 dwt and 180,000 dwt, but also include Newcastlemaxes of 200,000-209,999 dwt) and Very Large Ore Carriers (220,000 dwt and above). In recent years the average size of these Very Large Ore Carriers has been increasing, through the serial ordering of 400,000 dwt and 325,000 dwt designs.
Drybulk Carrier Fleet by Size/Age (Million Dwt):
As of December 31, 20162018
|
| | | | | |
| Built/Dwt | 10-39,999 | 40-64,999 | 65-99,999 | 100,000+ | Total |
| Pre-1992 | 5.2 | 4.1 | 2.8 | 3.1 | 15.2 |
| 1992-96 | 5.1 | 7.7 | 7.0 | 18.7 | 38.5 |
| 1997-01 | 7.9 | 14.1 | 22.8 | 14.5 | 59.3 |
| 2002-06 | 8.3 | 22.5 | 27.7 | 35.1 | 93.7 |
| 2007-11 | 29.5 | 61.9 | 55.8 | 124.4 | 271.6 |
| 2012-16 | 32.1 | 73.4 | 79.8 | 119.6 | 304.9 |
| Total Fleet | 88.1 | 183.8 | 196.1 | 315.3 | 783.2 |
| Average Age | 10 Yrs | 8 Yrs | 8 Yrs | 7 Yrs | 8 Yrs |
|
| | | | | |
| Built/Dwt | 10-39,999 | 40-64,999 | 65-99,999 | 100,000+ | Total |
| Pre-1994 | 3.9 | 2.9 | 2.9 | 7.2 | 17.0 |
| 1994-98 | 7.5 | 11.0 | 10.1 | 10.1 | 38.7 |
| 1999-03 | 7.3 | 16.0 | 21.6 | 18.5 | 63.3 |
| 2004-08 | 10.5 | 26.6 | 34.0 | 45.5 | 116.5 |
| 2009-13 | 40.9 | 84.5 | 90.3 | 169.2 | 384.8 |
| 2014-18 | 22.3 | 55.2 | 48.0 | 85.0 | 210.4 |
| Total Fleet | 92.4 | 196.2 | 206.9 | 335.5 | 830.7 |
| Average Age | 10 Yrs | 9 Yrs | 9 Yrs | 8 Yrs | 9 Yrs |
Totals may not add due to rounding
Ownership
Unlike other specialist areas of the world shipping fleet, ownership in the drybulk segment is highly fragmented, with SSY’s database showing approximately 2,000 different owners. The largest 50 owners account for approximately 34% of the fleet in terms of deadweight carrying capacity, but this includes a large number of Chinese-flagged vessels that will trade on domestic as well as international routes.
While such analysis will tend to understate levels of market concentration, due to the operation of vessel pools and chartered in fleets, the drybulk segment is sufficiently competitive to ensure that vessel spot market earnings are extremely responsive to fluctuations in the supply/demand balance globally and regionally.
Supply of Drybulk Shipping
The supply of drybulk carriers is fundamentally determined by the delivery of new vessels from the world’s shipbuilding industry and the removal of older vessels, mainly through demolition.
Newbuilding deliveries not only reflect the demand from ship owners for new tonnage, but also available shipyard capacity. Following a sharp upswing in demand for new vessels in all of the main sectors of the commercial shipping industry during the last decade, and an accompanying rise in shipbuilding prices to record levels in 2007 to 2008, there was a massive China-led expansion in world shipbuilding capacity. In the case of the drybulk sector, annual newbuilding deliveries surged from 24.4 Mdwt in 2008 (and an average of 19.1 Mdwt p.a. between 2000 and 2007, inclusive) to 44.3 Mdwt in 2009, 79.779.8 Mdwt in 2010 and a peak of 100.0100.6 Mdwt in 2012.
The resulting impact on freight market balances and vessel earnings, as described elsewhere in this section, led to sharply-reduced levels of drybulk carrier ordering in 2011 and 2012, which led to a slower pace of newbuilding deliveries in 2013 at an estimated 61.661.7 Mdwt followed by a further slowdown to 47.747.8 Mdwt in 2014.
There was however, a revivalan increase in drybulk carrier newbuilding investments during 2013, which continued into 2014 and reversed the downward trend in the newbuilding orderbook. These orders were focused on new, more fuel-efficient ship designs, for which shipyard descriptions offer significantly lower fuel consumption compared with existing vessels through a combination of new technology main engines and refinements of hull forms.
The rising costs of bunker fuels between 2004 and 2012 are illustrated in the chart below, which is based on the 52,45458,238 dwt Supramax vessel specifications used by the Baltic Exchange (that is, 30in constructing its daily Supramax Index. Using estimated bunker prices in Singapore, our calculations assume that at a speed of 14.0 knots the vessel consumes 33 tonnes of 380cst fuel oil per day at 14.0 knots laden/14.5 knots ballast)laden and estimated bunker prices in Singapore. This shows an increase at sea, at full speed, from approximately $5,40032 tonnes per day in 2004 to approximately $20,000 per day in 2012. Reflecting the general decline in world oil prices, there was a sharp reduction in bunker fuel costs between September 2014 and the first quarter of 2016. In the case of our Supramax example, the annual average fell from approximately $16,800/day in 2014 to approximately $7,000 per day in 2016.ballast. However, the subsequent rebound in global oil prices during 2016, and into the early weeks of 2017, lifted estimated Supramax bunkering costs to a monthly average of approximately $10,000/day in January 2017. SSY stresses that (1) there is a wide variance in individual vessel fuel consumptions, even within the same size segments, and (2) as described earlier in this section, many vessels have been operating at slower speeds in order to lower their daily fuel consumption and costs.
Our calculations show an increase at sea, at full speed, from approximately $5,600 per day in 2004 to approximately $21,700 per day in 2012. Reflecting the general decline in world oil prices, annual average bunker fuel costs for our Supramax example fell from approximately $18,200 per day in 2014 to approximately $7,500 per day in 2016. A partial rebound in global oil prices from the lows of early 2016 lifted estimated Supramax bunkering costs to an average of approximately $10,600 per day in 2017 and a four-year high of approximately $14,000/day in 2018. Last year’s average did, however, cover a wide range of daily bunkering costs from a high of approximately $17,100/day to a low of approximately $10,700/day, reflecting volatility in world oil markets.
Although bunkering costs fell towards the end of 2018, this remains a key area of attention for the shipping industry due to the International Maritime Organization’s mandated requirement for a lowering of the global limit for sulphur in marine fuel from the current 3.5% to 0.5% from January 1, 2020. In order to comply, shipowners will have to either switch to alternative bunker fuels or invest in the installation of scrubbers to allow the continued use of existing bunker fuels.
Reflecting the increased ordering of more fuel-efficient vessels, there was a small net rise in drybulk carrier newbuilding deliveries in 2015 to 48.748.9 Mdwt, but the downward trend resumed in 2016 and continued in 2017 and 2018 with the estimatedlast year’s annual newbuilding delivery total of 47.028.2 Mdwt the lowest since 2009.2008.
Since 2014, there has beenAfter a generalsharp reduction in new drybulk carrier ordering in 2015 and 2016, in response to the deterioration in freight market conditions, which is reflectedthere was some revival in a sharply declining newbuilding orderbook.
the contracting of new vessels in 2017 and 2018 as vessel earnings firmed. At an estimated 95.3 Mdwt, the total tonnage on order at the end of December 2018 represented approximately 11.5% of the existing fleet, compared with 10.1% at the end of December 2017. To provide some longer-term perspective, the corresponding end-year shares were 56.1% in 2007, 57.3% in 2009 and 67.6% in 2008, as illustrated in the chart below.
The table below summarizes the confirmed drybulk carrier orderbook as of the end of December 2016,2018, by vessel size and scheduled year of delivery. These delivery dates can be subject to delay with actual deliveries in recent years significantly lagging scheduled totals.delay. For example, 20162018 deliveries were an estimated 47%15% below the scheduled total as of January 1, 2016,2018, which compared with a corresponding average rate of slippage from scheduled delivery dates in the previous five years of approximately 31.7%34.6%. At an estimated 77.1 Mdwt, the total tonnage on order as of the end of December 2016 represented approximately 9.8% of the existing fleet. This is the lowest end-year share since 2002 and compares with an estimated 15.7% as of the end of 2015 and year-end highs of 56.5% in 2007, 57.2% in 2009 and 67.3% in 2008, as illustrated in the chart below.
Drybulk Carrier Newbuilding Orderbook by Size Range (Million Dwt):
As of December 201631, 2018
| | | Delivery | 10-39,999 | 40-64,999 | 65-99,999 | 100,000+ | Total | 10-39,999 | 40-64,999 | 65-99,999 | 100,000+ | Total |
| 2017 | 5.3 | 14.6 | 12.9 | 20.6 | 53.4 | |
| 2018 | 1.6 | 2.7 | 2.5 | 8.1 | 14.9 | |
| 2019 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 7.1 | 8.4 | 3.5 | 9.6 | 14.3 | 21.9 | 49.3 |
| 2020+ | 0.1 | 0.4 | |
| 2020 | | 1.5 | 5.8 | 10.2 | 20.8 | 38.3 |
| 2021 | | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 5.5 | 7.2 |
| 2022+ | | — | 0.7 |
| Total | 7.4 | 18.0 | 15.7 | 36.0 | 77.1 | 5.3 | 16.3 | 25 | 48.9 | 95.5 |
| % of Fleet | 8.4% | 9.8% | 8.0% | 11.4% | 9.8% | 5.7% | 8.3% | 12.1% | 14.5% | 11.5% |
Totals may not add due to rounding
Typically, drybulk carriers are scrapped between the ages of 25 and 30 years, but the removal of 20-24 year-old vessels of 20-24 years areis common during periods of freight market weakness, and there have also been examples of scrapping of 15-19 year-old vessels (especially in the larger-sized vessels). In 2016,2018, against the background of a generally firmer freight market, the average age of Handysize and Handymax vessels scrapped was 29over 30 years, for Handymax it was 23 years,whereas for Panamax it was 21 years and for Capesize vessels it was 2024-25 years. However, demolition is not simply a function of the fleet’s age profile. Several factors will influence an owner’s decision on whether to scrap older vessels, notably (1) actual and anticipated returns from the charter market, (2) the relative running costs and fuel-efficiency of the vessel, (3) prospective expenditure at classification society surveys (which, as well as general costs of repair and maintenance can be impacted by new regulations, such as the International Maritime Organization’s convention on Ballast Water Management, which is currently due to enter forcewhere effective implementation for existing vessels is now scheduled to enter into force in September 2017)2019) and (4) the second-hand re-sale value (that is, whether it provides a premium to scrap). For much of the period from 2000 to 2009, returns from the drybulk charter markets supported continued investment in vessel life extension, and scrapping volumes fell to minimal levels. This, however, ensured an accumulation of older tonnage in the fleet and, as a result, demolition proved extremely responsive to a deterioration in freight market conditions. For instance, deletions from the drybulk fleet rose from 3.6 Mdwt in 2008 to 14.7 Mdwt in 2009 and reached a new annual record of 35.4 Mdwt in 2012. Deletions subsequently droppedOver the last five years, scrapping
volumes have remained very reactive to 15.8changes in vessel earnings with, for example, deletions dropping to a 10-year low of 4.8 Mdwt in 2014, before2018 from approximately 30.0 Mdwt p.a. in both 2015 broughtand 2016.
The low levels of demolition in 2018 helped to ensure a sharp reboundnet rise in the pool of drybulk tonnage aged over 15 years. At the end of December 2018, there were approximately 17.0 Mdwt of ships aged 25 years or older in the drybulk carrier demolition activityfleet, with total annual deletionsan additional 38.7 Mdwt aged 20 to 24 years and 63.3 Mdwt aged 15 to 19 years. The highest concentration of 29.8 Mdwt. A similar 29.7 Mdwtvessels 20+ years old was removed in 2016, according to our current estimates.
the Handysize sector, accounting for 12.3% of dwt capacity in this size range as of the end of December 2018, compared with 7.1% of Handymaxes, 6.3% of Panamaxes and 5.2% of Capesizes.
As the chart below illustrates, historically high levels of ship demolition contributed to a marked slowdown in the rate of drybulk carrier net fleet growth over the past two yearsin 2015 and 2016 with the estimated 2.3%2.2% rise in 2016 representing the lowest annual percentage increase since the 1990s. This comparesThere was some re-acceleration in fleet supply growth in 2017 with 2.5%an estimated net rise in 2015, 4.5% in 2014total drybulk tonnage of 3.0%, before edging lower to an estimated 2.9% between 1 January and 31 December 2018, despite the limited scrapping activity. However, this remained well below the rapid rates of expansion over the five-year period from 2009 to 2013 when the total drybulk fleet grew at an annual average of 11.3% p.a.
All of the four main segments of the drybulk fleet grew at a similar rate in 2018, ranging from an estimated 2.3% for Handysizes to 3.4% for Capesizes. A greater contrast is apparent when reviewing fleet developments over the five year period from 2009 to 2013.
Demolition has also contributed to the uneven development of drybulk carrier fleet supply over the past five years. In particular, the removal of elderly Handysize vessels, combined with the relatively modest newbuilding program in this sector compared with the other sizes, ensured thatbetween 2013 and 2018, when the 10,000-39,999 dwt Handysize fleet grew at an estimated CAGR of 1.2% between 2011 and 2016,1.8%, compared with 6.1%4.5% for 40,000-64,999 dwt Handymaxes, 6.6%2.7% for 65,000-99,999 dwt Panamaxes and 4.9%2.7% for 100,000+ dwt Capes. As a result,Reflecting its faster than average growth, the HandysizeHandymax sector’s share of total dwt capacity fellhas risen from 22.0% at the end of 2013 to an estimated 13.6%23.6% as of the end of 2011 to 11.2% as of the end of 2016.December 2018. By contrast,comparison, the same five-year period saw an increaseda decreased share of the fleet accounted for by 65,000-99,999 dwtHandysizes, falling from 11.8% to 11.1%, Panamaxes, rising from 23.3%25.3% to 25.0%,24.9% and 40,000-64,999 dwt Handymaxes,Capesizes, from 22.4%41.0% to 23.5%. The 100,000+ dwt Capesize sector recorded a modest net decline, from 40.7% to 40.3%40.4%.
Despite the increased levels of demolition in recent years, there remained approximately 15.3 Mdwt of ships aged 25 years or older in the drybulk carrier fleet as of the end of December 2016, with an additional 38.5 Mdwt aged 20 to 24 years and 59.3 Mdwt aged 15 to 20 years. The highest concentration of vessels 20+ years old was in the Handysize sector, accounting for 11.7% of dwt capacity in this size range as of the end of December 2016, compared with 6.5% of Handymaxes, 5.0% of Panamaxes and 6.9% of Capesizes.
Charter Market & Freight Rates
The chartering of drybulk vessels can take several different forms, the most typical of which are summarized below.
| |
(a) | (a) Single voyage (“spot”) charter |
This involves the hire of a vessel for just one stipulated voyage, carrying a designated quantity of a named commodity. For most such charters, an individual ship is specified that will carry out the voyage to be undertaken. The terms of the agreement between the charterer and vessel owner usually define the port (or ports) of cargo loading and discharge, the dates between which the cargo is to be loaded, and the cargo-handling terms. The vessel owner will receive from the charterer a mutually agreed-upon payment (normally quoted as a US$ per ton freight rate). In return, the ship owner pays all voyage expenses (such as the costs of fuel consumed on the voyage, plus port expenses), all operating costs (such as insurance and crewing of the vessel), and capital expenses (such as the servicing of any mortgage debt on the ship).
| |
(b) | Contract of affreightment, or COA |
(b) Contract of affreightment, or COA
Under a COA, the vessel owner and charterer agree to terms for the carriage of a designated volume of a given commodity on a specified route (or routes), with such shipments being carried out on a regular basis. The agreement does not normally identify an individual ship that will be used to fulfill its terms, but includes more general specifications on the vessels to be used (such as maximum age). Under the terms of a COA, freight is normally paid on a mutually agreed-upon US$ per ton basis, with the vessel owner then meeting all voyage, operating and capital costs incurred in the execution of such a charter.
(c) Time charter
Under a time charter, the charterer takes the ship on hire for either (1) a trip between designated delivery and re-delivery positions or (2) for a designated period (for example, 12 months). The freight rate agreed upon between the ship owner and charterer is in terms of a daily hire rate (in USU.S. dollars), rather than as a US$ per ton figure. For longer term period charters, this may escalate at a rate mutually agreed upon between vessel owner and charterer. Under the terms of such charters, the vessel owner meets the ship’s operating and capital costs, with the charterer paying all variable voyage expenses (mainly fuel costs, plus port and canal dues). In addition, and unless otherwise stipulated in the charter agreement, the period charterer is able to trade the vessel to and from whichever loading and discharge ports that it may choose, carrying whichever cargoes they prefer.
(d) Bareboat charter
Under a bareboat charter, the vessel owner effectively relinquishes control of its ship to the charterer (usually for a period of several years). The ship owner receives an agreed-upon level of remuneration (which may again escalate at a mutually agreed-upon rate) for the duration of the charter, and remains responsible for the vessel’s capital costs. In return, the charterer assumes
total control of the vessel, thereby becoming responsible for operating the ship and meeting all costs of such operation (such as crewing, repairs and maintenance), as well as the direct voyage expenses incurred (such as fuel costs and port expenses) when it is trading.
Freight Rates
Freight rates are determined by the balance of tonnage demand and tonnage supply. Primarily as the result of record newbuilding deliveries, fleet utilization rates have dropped sharply from the peak levels of 2007, as illustrated by movements in key freight market indicators.
Given the diversity of routes and cargoes traded by the drybulk fleet, freight market measures tend to focus on average worldwide spot earnings (expressed in US$ per day). The most recognized of these measures are published on a daily basis by the Baltic Exchange in London. In addition to global averages for standard designs of Handysize (28,000 dwt), Supramax (52,454(58,328 dwt), Panamax (74,000 dwt) and Capesize (180,000 dwt) vessels, together with a number of component routes, the Baltic Exchange also publishes a daily composite Index for the entire drybulk market (the BDI or Baltic Exchange Dry Index).
From its all-time high of almost 12,000 points in May 2008, just prior to the global financial crisis, the BDI fell to below 700 points in December of the same year. After partial recovery in 2009, negative pressure on freight markets returned under the weight of sustained fleet supply growth. At 920 points in 2012, the BDI’s annual average was a 26-year low. The corresponding 2013 level was 1,206 points and included the highest quarterly average for two years in the fourth quarterA combination of 2013 (1,854 points) against the background of sharply-reducedsharply reduced fleet supply, growthgenerally slower vessel speeds and new peaks for drybulk trade.
Volatility remained a feature of drybulk spot markets in 2014 withdry bulk trade lifted the BDI ranging between 2,113 and 723 points, but its2013 annual average of the BDI to 1,206 points. Yet, despite continued spot market volatility, the corresponding 2014 level slipped to 1,105 points was below the corresponding 2013 level. Spotand spot market weakness intensified in 2015, chiefly due to thea sharp slowdown in drybulk trade growth, with the BDI’s annual average falling to 718 points. This was followed by new daily, (290 points)monthly and monthly (307 points)quarterly lows in Februarythe first quarter of 2016, when weak global steel production, disruptions to cargo availability and lower bunker prices, together with negative seasonal factors, all contributed to the further weakening in the freight market. From these record lows,Despite a partial rebound over the BDI did rebound to 1,257rest of the year, the BDI’s annual average in 2016 of 673 points during November and averaged 994 points in the fourth quarter of 2016, which was the highest quarterly average since the fourth quarter of 2014. However, this could not prevent 2016 from recording the BDI’s lowest annual average since its inception in 1985 at 6731985.
However, 2017 did see the first rise in the BDI’s annual average for four years, to 1,145 points, and this was followed by further gains in 2018, when the annual average of 1,353 points was a 7-year high. Volatility remained a feature of drybulk spot markets in 2018 with the BDI fluctuating between a low of 948 points and a high of 1,774 points.
August proved to be the strongest month of the year for the BDI for only the second time since its inception (but the second time in three years) with a monthly average of 1,710 points, before slipping towards the end of 2018. Further falls in freight rates were recorded in the early weeks of 2019, as dry bulk trade was impacted by a combination of negative seasonal, exceptional and cyclical factors. As a result, the BDI slipped to its lowest levels since 2016 with a monthly average of 629 points in February 2019.
The first of the charts below traces developments in representative 12-month charter rates for the four main vessel sizes from January 20022003 to the end of December 2016,late February 2019, encompassing the all-time highs in vessel earnings and the subsequent slump in rates.
The second chart looks in more detail at developments since the beginning of 2010.2013. It shows the Capesize-led rebound from mid-2013 to the first quarter of 2014 and subsequent slide to the depressed levels in the first quarter of 2016 before the commencement of a partial revival during the second half of 2016. This was followed by further increases in 2017 and 2018, which saw period rates rise to their highest levels since 2014 before some softening towards the end of last year and into early 2019. These assessments are based on existing modern (that is, under 10 years of age) vessels. Within these individual size ranges, period rates will vary according to such factors as vessel age, size, fuel consumption and yard of build.
Although both charts show the extent to which vessel earnings in the different size ranges move broadly in tandem, they also highlight that the sharpness of market rises and falls vary in degree. Those size groups that carry the narrowest range of cargoes, or those employed on the least number of routes, tend to experience the greatest variations in charter rates. Hence, in the drybulk shipping sector, earnings of Capesizes have been prone to fluctuate to a far greater degree than those of smaller vessels (with their greater trading versatility, assisted by the cargo gear on these vessel types).
Asset Values
In addition to the global balance between the demand for new vessels and available shipbuilding capacity, newbuilding prices are also influenced by changes in vessel construction costs, due to such factors as movements in steel plate prices or exchange rates against the U.S. dollar in key shipbuilding nations (principally China, Japan and South Korea).
Panamax bulk carrier newbuilding prices in Japan peaked at $56 million in the third quarter of 2008 and subsequently fell to $29 million in the final quarter of 2012. By the end of 2013 Japanese prices had climbed to a 38-month high of $35 million, chiefly as the result of recovering newbuilding demand, and remained at similar levels through much of 2014. However, prices
entered a downward trend in 2015 which continued into 2016 and, by the final quarter of lastthat year, Japanese Panamax newbuilding prices reached their lowest level since 2003 at an estimated $23.5 million.
From these lows there was a sharp rebound in Japanese prices to an estimated $33.0 million during the second half of 2018, which was the highest level in four years and has been sustained into the first quarter of 2019.
Second-hand values are primarily shaped by actual and anticipated earnings, newbuilding replacement costs (which are relevant for modern vessels) and residual scrap value (more relevant for older units). To an extent, prices are also influenced by the availability and cost of ship financing, as this will help to determine whether investors are able to realize their demand for new or second-hand vessels.
The charts below compare the development of representative newbuilding, five-year old and ten-year old second-hand prices for Handysize, Handymax, Panamax and Capesize vessels since 2002.2003. Individual vessel prices vary according to such factors as specific size, age, cargo gear, yard of build and fuel consumption. Following the pattern of the charter markets, prices peaked between mid-2007 and mid-2008. Such was the shortage of shipbuilding capacity during that period, with a lengthening lead time between contracting and delivery, that demand for existing vessels with prompt delivery briefly created the unusual situation where second-hand vessels were priced at a premium to newbuildings.
Consequently, the percentage decline in second-hand prices between 2008 and 2012 was more severe than for newbuildings. Prices showed a firmer trend from the beginning of 2013 to March 2014, when five-year old values rose by an average of approximately 50%, led by a 60-70% increase in Capesize prices. The onset of generally weaker spot and period charter rates began to erode second-hand values during the latter months of 2014, and downward pressure intensified during 2015 and into 2016, sharply reducing prices. By the end of February 2016, Panamax five-year old prices of approximately $11.0 million were at their lowest since the 1980s. However, from these lows, second-hand prices have shown somea significant improvement, with Panamax five-year old values reaching approximately $14.0$20.5 million at the end of 2016.2017 and approximately $22.5 million in June 2018, before ending the year at approximately $21.0 million. There were largersimilar percentage risesmovements in Supramax and Handysize five-year old prices over the same 10-month period, while Capesize values are estimated to have shown a smaller, but still substantial, percentage increase.
Environmental and Other Regulations in the Shipping Industry
Government regulation and laws significantly affectsaffect the ownership and operation of our fleet. We are subject to international conventions and treaties, and national, state and local laws and regulations relating to safety and health and environmental protection in force in the countries in which our vessels may operate or are registered. These regulations include requirementsregistered relating to safety and health and environmental protection including the storage, handling, emission, transportation and discharge of hazardous and non-hazardous materials, and the remediation of contamination and liability for damage to natural resources. Compliance with such laws, regulations and other requirements may entailentails significant expense, including vessel modifications and implementation of certain operating procedures.
A variety of government quasi-governmental and private organizationsentities subject our vessels to both scheduled and unscheduled inspections. These entities include the local port authorities (applicable national authorities such as the United States Coast Guard or USCG,(“USCG”), harbor master or equivalent), classification societies;societies, flag state administrations (countries of registry) and charterers, particularly terminal operators. Certain of these entities require us to obtain permits, licenses, certificates and other authorizations for the operation of our vessels. Failure to maintain necessary permits or approvals could require us to incur substantial costs or result in the temporary suspension of the operation of one or more of our vessels being temporarily suspended.vessels.
We believe that the heightened level of environmental and quality concerns among insurance underwriters, regulators and charterers is leading to greater inspection and safety requirements on all vessels and may accelerate the scrapping of older vessels throughout the industry. Increasing environmental concerns have created a demand for vessels that conform to the stricter environmental standards. We are required to maintain operating standards for all of our vessels that emphasize operational safety, quality maintenance, continuous training of our officers and crews and compliance with United States and international regulations. We believe that the operation of our vessels will beis in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and that our vessels will have all material permits, licenses, certificates or other authorizations necessary for the conduct of our operations. However, because such laws and regulations are frequently changedchange and may impose increasingly stricter requirements, we cannot predict the ultimate cost of complying with these requirements, or the impact of these requirements on the resale value or useful lives of our vessels. In addition, a future serious marine incident that causes significant adverse environmental impact such as the 2010 BP plc Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, could result in additional legislation or regulationsregulation that could negatively affect our profitability.
International Maritime Organization
The International Maritime Organization, the United Nations agency for maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by ships, or the IMO,vessels (the “IMO”), has adopted the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by
the related Protocol of 1978 relating thereto, collectively referred to as MARPOL 73/78 and updated through various amendments (collectively, “MARPOL”herein as “MARPOL,” adopted the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974 (“SOLAS Convention”), and the International Convention on Load Lines of 1966 (the “LL Convention”). MARPOL entered into force on October 2, 1983. It has been adopted by over 150 nations, including manyestablishes environmental standards relating to oil leakage or spilling, garbage management, sewage, air emissions, handling and disposal of noxious liquids and the jurisdictionshandling of harmful substances in which ourpackaged forms. MARPOL is applicable to drybulk, tanker and LNG carriers, among other vessels, will operate.
MARPOLand is broken into six Annexes, each
of which regulates a different source of pollution. Annex I relates to oil leakage or spilling; Annexes II and III relate to harmful substances carried in bulk in liquid or in packaged form, respectively; Annexes IV and V relate to sewage and garbage management, respectively; and Annex VI, lastly, relates to air emissions. Annex VI was separately adopted by the IMO in September of 1997.
In 2012,2013, the IMO’s Marine EnvironmentEnvironmental Protection Committee, or MEPC,the “MEPC,” adopted bya resolution amendments to the international code for the construction and equipment of ships carrying dangerous chemicals in bulk,amending MARPOL Annex I Condition Assessment Scheme, or the IBC Code. The provisions of the IBC Code are mandatory under MARPOL and SOLAS.“CAS.” These amendments became effective on October 1, 2014, and require compliance with the 2011 International Code on the Enhanced Programme of Inspections during Surveys of Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers, or “ESP Code,” which entered into force in June 2014, pertain to revised international certificates of fitnessprovides for the carriage of dangerous chemicals in bulk and identifying new products that fall under the IBC Code.enhanced inspection programs. We may need to make certain financial expenditures to comply with these amendments.
In 2013June 2015 the MEPCIMO formally adopted by resolutionthe International Code of Safety for Ships using Gases or Low flashpoint Fuels, or the IGF Code, which is designed to minimize the risks involved with ships using low flashpoint fuels- including LNG. The IGF Code will be mandatory under SOLAS through the adopted amendments. The IGF Code and the amendments to the MARPOL Annex I Condition Assessment Scheme, CAS. These amendmentsSOLAS became effective on OctoberJanuary 1, 2014 and pertain to revising references to the inspections of bulk carriers and tankers after the 2011 ESP Code, which enhances the programs of inspections, becomes mandatory. We may need to make certain financial expenditures to comply with these amendments.2017.
Air Emissions
In September of 1997, the IMO adopted Annex VI to MARPOL to address air pollution.pollution from vessels. Effective May 2005, Annex VI setsets limits on sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from ships whose diesel engines were constructed (or underwent major conversions) on or after January 1, 2000. It alsoall commercial vessel exhausts and prohibits “deliberate emissions” of “ozoneozone depleting substances” defined to include certain (such as halons and chlorofluorocarbons. “Deliberate emissions” are not limitedchlorofluorocarbons), emissions of volatile compounds from cargo tanks, and the shipboard incineration of specific substances. Annex VI also includes a global cap on the sulfur content of fuel oil and allows for special areas to times when the ship is at sea; they can for example include discharges occurring in the course of the ship’s repair and maintenance.be established with more stringent controls on sulfur emissions, as explained below. Emissions of “volatile organic compounds” from certain vessels, and the shipboard incineration (from incinerators installed after January 1, 2000) of certain substances (such as polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs) are also prohibited. Annex VI also includes a global cap on the sulfur content of fuel oil and allows for special areas to be establishedWe believe that all our vessels are currently compliant in all material respects with more stringent controls of sulfur emissions known as “Emission Control Areas,” or ECAs (see below).these regulations.
The MEPC, adopted amendments to Annex VI on October 10, 2008,regarding emissions of sulfur oxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter and ozone depleting substances, which entered into force on July 1, 2010. The amended Annex VI seeks to further reduce air pollution by, among other things, implementing a progressive reduction of the amount of sulfur contained in any fuel oil used on board ships. As of January 1, 2012, the amended Annex VI required that fuel oil contain no more than 3.50% sulfur (from the previous cap of 4.50%). On October 27, 2016, at its 70th70th session, the MEPC 70, MEPC announced its decision concerningagreed to implement a global 0.5% m/m sulfur oxide emissions limit (reduced from 3.50%) starting from January 1, 2020. This limitation can be met by using low-sulfur complaint fuel oil, alternative fuels, or certain exhaust gas cleaning systems. Once the implementation of regulations mandating a reduction in sulfur emissions from the current 3.5% to 0.5% as of the beginning of 2020 rather than pushing the deadline back to 2025. By 2020cap becomes effective, ships will now havebe required to either reduce sulfurobtain bunker delivery notes and International Air Pollution Prevention (“IAPP”) Certificates from emissions through the installation and use of emission scrubbers or buy fuel with lowertheir flag states that specify sulfur content. Consequently, complying withAdditionally, at MEPC 70 could result in a significant capital expenditure or a significant increase in73, amendments to Annex VI to prohibit the costcarriage of bunkers. The Company is currently reviewing alternativesbunkers above 0.5% Sulphur on ships were adopted and will take effect March 1, 2020. These regulations subject ocean-going vessels to comply with MEPC 70 when it enters into force.stringent emissions controls, and may cause us to incur substantial costs.
Sulfur content standards are even stricter within certain ECAs.“Emission Control Areas,” or (“ECAs”). As of January 1, 2015, ships operating within an ECA maywere not permitted to use fuel with sulfur content in excess of 0.10%0.1%. Amended Annex VI establishedestablishes procedures for designating new ECAs. TheCurrently, the IMO has designated four ECAs, including specified portions of the Baltic andSea area, North Seas, certain coastal areas ofSea area, North AmericaAmerican area and the United States Caribbean Sea are all within designated ECAs.area. Ocean-going vessels in these areas arewill be subject to stringent emission controls whichand may cause us to incur additional costs. If other ECAs are approved by the IMO, or other new or more stringent requirements relating to emissions from marine diesel engines or port operations by vessels are adopted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the EPA,(“EPA”) or the states where we operate, compliance with these regulations could entail significant capital expenditures operational changes, or otherwise increase the costs of our operations. For example, the amended
Amended Annex VI also establishes new tiers of stringent nitrogen oxide emissions standards for new marine diesel engines, depending on their date of installation. At the MEPC meeting held from March to April 2014, amendments to Annex VI were adopted which address the date on which Tier III Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) standards in ECAs will go into effect. Under the amendments, Tier III NOx standards apply to ships that operate in the North American and U.S. Caribbean Sea ECAs designed for the control of NOx with a marine diesel engine installed and constructed on or after January 1, 2016. Tier III requirements could apply to areas that will be designated for Tier III NOx in the future. At MEPC 70 and MEPC 71, the MEPC approved the North Sea and Baltic Sea as ECAs for nitrogen oxide for ships built after January 1, 2021. The EPA promulgated equivalent (and in some senses stricter) emissions standards in late 2009. AtAs a result of these designations or similar future designations, we may be required to incur additional operating or other costs.
As determined at the MEPC 70, MEPC approved the North Seanew Regulation 22A of MARPOL Annex VI is effective as of March 1, 2018 and Baltic Sea as ECAs for nitrogen oxides, effectiverequires ships above 5,000 gross tonnage to collect and report annual data on fuel oil consumption to an IMO database, with the first year of data collection commencing on January 1, 2021. It is expected that these areas will be formally designated after2019. The IMO intends to use such data as the draft amendments are presented at MEPC’s next session.first step in its roadmap (through 2023) for developing its strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships, as discussed further below.
As of January 1, 2013, MARPOL made mandatory certain measures relating to energy efficiency for ships. All ships are now required to develop and implement Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plans (“SEEMPS”), and new ships must be designed in compliance with minimum energy efficiency levels per capacity mile as defined by the Energy Efficiency Design Index (“EEDI”). Under these measures, by 2025, all new ships built will be 30% more energy efficient than those built in 2014.This included the requirement that all new ships utilize the Energy Efficiency Design Index, or EEDI, and all ships develop and implement Ship Energy Management Plans, or SEEMPs.
2014.
We believe that all our vessels will be compliant in all material respectsmay incur costs to comply with these regulations.revised standards. Additional or new conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted that could require the installation of expensive emission control systems and could adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.
Ballast Water Management
The IMO adopted the BWM Convention, in February 2004. The BWM Convention’s implementing regulations call for a phased introduction of mandatory ballast water exchange requirements, to be replaced in time with mandatory concentration limits. All ships will also have to carry a ballast water record book and an International Ballast Water Management Certificate. The BWM Convention enters into force 12 months after it has been adopted by 30 states, the combined merchant fleets of which represent not less than 35% of the gross tonnage of the world’s merchant shipping. On September 8, 2016, this threshold was met (with 52 contracting parties making up 35.14%). Thus, the BWM Convention will enter into force on September 8, 2017. Many of the implementation dates in the BWM Convention have already passed, so that once the BWM Convention enters into force, the period of installation of mandatory ballast water exchange requirements would be extremely short, with several thousand ships a year needing to install ballast water management systems, or BWMS. For this reason, on December 4, 2013, the IMO Assembly passed a resolution revising the application dates of the BWM Convention so that they are triggered by the entry into force date and not the dates originally in the BWM Convention. This, in effect, makes all vessels constructed before the entry into force date “existing vessels” and allows for the installation of a BWMS on such vessels at the first renewal survey following entry into force of the convention. At MEPC 70, MEPC adopted updated “guidelines for approval of ballast water managements systems (G8).” G8 updates previous guidelines concerning procedures to approve BWMS. Once mid-ocean ballast exchange or ballast water treatment requirements become mandatory, the cost of compliance could increase for ocean carriers and the costs of ballast water treatments may be material. However, many countries already regulate the discharge of ballast water carried by vessels from country to country to prevent the introduction of invasive and harmful species via such discharges. The United States for example, requires vessels entering its waters from another country to conduct mid-ocean ballast exchange, or undertake some alternate measure, and to comply with certain reporting requirements. Although we do not believe that the costs of such compliance would be material, it is difficult to predict the overall impact of such a requirement on our operations.
Safety Management System Requirements
The IMO has also adopted SOLAS andConvention was amended to address the LL Convention, which impose a variety of standards that regulate the design and operational features of ships. The IMO periodically revises the SOLAS and LL Convention standards. Amendments to SOLAS relating to safe manning of vessels that were adopted in May 2012 entered in force on January 1, 2014.and emergency training drills. The Convention onof Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims LLMC, was recently amended and the amendments went into effect on June 8, 2015. The amendments alter the limits(the “LLMC”) sets limitations of liability for a loss of life or personal injury claims andclaim or a property claimsclaim against ship owners. We believe that all our vessels will beare in substantial compliance with SOLAS and LL Convention standards.
OurUnder Chapter IX of the SOLAS Convention, or the International Safety Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (the “ISM Code”), our operations are also subject to environmental standards and requirements under Chapter IX of SOLAS set forth in the ISM Code.requirements. The ISM Code requires the owner of a vessel, or any person who has taken responsibility for operationparty with operational control of a vessel to develop an extensive safety management system that includes, among other things, the adoption of a safety and environmental protection policy setting forth instructions and procedures for operating its vessels safely and describing procedures for responding to emergencies. We rely upon the safety management system that we and our technical managermanagement team have developed for compliance with the ISM Code. The failure of a shipvessel owner or bareboat charterer to comply with the ISM Code may subject such party to increased liability, may decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.
The ISM Code requires that vessel operators obtain a safety management certificate for each vessel they operate. This certificate evidences compliance by a vessel’s management with the ISM Code requirements for a safety management system. No vessel can obtain a safety management certificate under the ISM Code unless its manager has been awarded a document of compliance, issued by classification societieseach flag state, under the authority of each flag state. SSM has or will obtainISM Code. We have obtained applicable documents of compliance for theirour offices and will obtain safety management certificates for all of our vessels for which the certificates are required by the IMO. The document of compliance and safety management certificate are renewed every five years, butas required.
Regulation II-1/3-10 of the documentSOLAS Convention governs ship construction and stipulates that ships over 150 meters in length must have adequate strength, integrity and stability to minimize risk of loss or pollution. Goal-based standards amendments in SOLAS regulation II-1/3-10 entered into force in 2012, with July 1, 2016 set for application to new oil tankers and bulk carriers. The SOLAS Convention regulation II-1/3-10 on goal-based ship construction standards for bulk carriers and oil tankers, which entered into force on January 1, 2012, requires that all oil tankers and bulk carriers of 150 meters in length and above, for which the building contract is placed on or after July 1, 2016, satisfy applicable structural requirements conforming to the functional requirements of the International Goal-based Ship Construction Standards for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers (GBS Standards).
Amendments to the SOLAS Convention Chapter VII apply to vessels transporting dangerous goods and require those vessels be in compliance with the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (“IMDG Code”). Effective January 1, 2018, the IMDG Code includes (1) updates to the provisions for radioactive material, reflecting the latest provisions from the International Atomic Energy Agency, (2) new marking, packing and classification requirements for dangerous goods, and (3) new mandatory training requirements.
The IMO has also adopted the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (“STCW”). As of February 2017, all seafarers are required to meet the STCW standards and be in possession of a valid STCW certificate. Flag states that have ratified SOLAS and STCW generally employ the classification societies, which have incorporated SOLAS and STCW requirements into their class rules, to undertake surveys to confirm compliance.
The IMO's Maritime Safety Committee and MEPC, respectively, each adopted relevant parts of the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Water (the “Polar Code”). The Polar Code, which entered into force on January 1, 2017, covers design, construction, equipment, operational, training, search and rescue as well as environmental protection matters relevant to ships operating in the waters surrounding the two poles. It also includes mandatory measures regarding safety and pollution prevention as well as recommendatory provisions. The Polar Code applies to new ships constructed after January 1, 2017, and after January 1, 2018, ships constructed before January 1, 2017 are required to meet the relevant requirements by the earlier of their first intermediate or renewal survey.
Furthermore, recent action by the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee and United States agencies indicate that cybersecurity regulations for the maritime industry are likely to be further developed in the near future in an attempt to combat cybersecurity threats. For example, cyber-risk management systems must be incorporated by ship-owners and managers by 2021. This might cause companies to create additional procedures for monitoring cybersecurity, which could require additional expenses and/or capital expenditures. The impact of such regulations is hard to predict at this time.
Pollution Control and Liability Requirements
The IMO has negotiated international conventions that impose liability for pollution in international waters and the territorial waters of the signatories to such conventions. For example, the IMO adopted an International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (the “BWM Convention”) in 2004. The BWM Convention entered into force on September 9, 2017. The BWM Convention requires ships to manage their ballast water to remove, render harmless, or avoid the uptake or discharge of new or invasive aquatic organisms and pathogens within ballast water and sediments. The BWM Convention’s implementing regulations call for a phased introduction of mandatory ballast water exchange requirements, to be replaced in time with mandatory concentration limits, and require all ships to carry a ballast water record book and an international ballast Water management certificate.
On December 4, 2013, the IMO Assembly passed a resolution revising the application dates of BWM Convention so that the dates are triggered by the entry into force date and not the dates originally in the BWM Convention. This, in effect, makes all vessels delivered before the entry into force date “existing vessels” and allows for the installation of ballast water management systems on such vessels at the first International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP) renewal survey following entry into force of the convention. The MEPC adopted updated guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8) at MEPC 70. At MEPC 71, the schedule regarding the BWM Convention’s implementation dates was also discussed and amendments were introduced to extend the date existing vessels are subject to certain ballast water standards. Ships over 400 gross tons generally must comply with a “D-1 standard,” requiring the exchange of ballast water only in open seas and away from coastal waters. The “D-2 standard” specifies the maximum amount of viable organisms allowed to be discharged, and compliance dates vary depending on the IOPP renewal dates. Depending on the date of the IOPP renewal survey, existing vessels must comply with the D-2 standard on or after September 8, 2019. For most ships, compliance with the D-2 standard will involve installing on-board systems to treat ballast water and eliminate unwanted organisms. Ballast Water Management systems, which include systems that make use of chemical, biocides, organisms or biological mechanisms, or which alter the chemical or physical characteristics of the Ballast Water, must be approved in accordance with IMO Guidelines (Regulation D-3). Costs of compliance is subjectwith these regulations may be substantial.
Once mid-ocean ballast exchange ballast water treatment requirements become mandatory under the BWM Convention, the cost of compliance could increase for ocean carriers and may have a material effect on our operations. However, many countries already regulate the discharge of ballast water carried by vessels from country to audit verification annuallycountry to prevent the introduction of invasive and the safety management certificate at least every 2.5 years.harmful species via such discharges. The U.S., for example, requires vessels entering its waters from another country to conduct mid-ocean ballast exchange, or undertake some alternate measure, and to comply with certain reporting requirements.
The flag state,IMO also adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (the “Bunker Convention”) to impose strict liability on ship owners (including the registered owner, bareboat charterer, manager or operator) for pollution damage in jurisdictional waters of ratifying states caused by discharges of bunker fuel. The Bunker Convention requires registered owners of ships over 1,000 gross tons to maintain insurance for pollution damage in an amount equal to the limits of liability under the applicable national or international limitation regime (but not exceeding the amount calculated in accordance with the LLMC). With respect to non-ratifying states, liability for spills or releases of oil carried as definedfuel in ship’s bunkers typically is determined by the national or other domestic laws in the jurisdiction where the events or damages occur.
Ships are required to maintain a certificate attesting that they maintain adequate insurance to cover an incident. In jurisdictions, such as the United NationsStates where the Bunker Convention has not been adopted, various legislative schemes or common law govern, and liability is imposed either on the basis of fault or on a strict-liability basis.
Anti‑Fouling Requirements
In 2001, the IMO adopted the International Convention on Lawthe Control of Harmful Anti‑fouling Systems on Ships, or the Sea, has overall responsibility“Anti‑fouling Convention.” The Anti‑fouling Convention, which entered into force on September 17, 2008, prohibits the use of organotin compound coatings to prevent the attachment of mollusks and other sea life to the hulls of vessels. Vessels of over 400 gross tons engaged in international voyages will also be required to undergo an initial survey before the vessel is put into service or before an International Anti‑fouling System Certificate is issued for implementingthe first time; and enforcing a broad range of international maritime regulations with respect tosubsequent surveys when the anti‑fouling systems are altered or replaced. We have obtained Anti‑fouling System Certificates for all ships granted the right to fly its flag. The “Shipping Industry Flag State Performance Table” published annually by the International Chamber of Shipping evaluates and reports on flag states based on factors such as ratification, implementation, and enforcement of principal international maritime treaties and regulations, supervision of statutory ship surveys, and participation at IMO and ILO meetings. All of our vessels will be flagged inthat are subject to the Marshall Islands. Marshall Islands flagged vessels have historically received a good assessment in the shipping industry. We recognize the importance of a credible flag state and do not intend to use flags of convenience or flag states withAnti‑fouling Convention.
poor performance indicators. Compliance Enforcement
Noncompliance with the ISM Code or other IMO regulations may subject the ship owner or bareboat charterer to increased liability, may lead to decreases in available insurance coverage for affected vessels and may result in the denial of access to, or detention in, some ports. The USCG and European Union authorities have indicated that vessels not in compliance with the ISM Code by the applicable deadlines will be prohibited from trading in U.S. and European Union ports, respectively. EachAs of the date of this report, each of our vessels will beis ISM Code certified. However, there can be no assurance that such certificatecertificates will be maintained.
Noncompliance with the ISM Code and other IMO regulations may subject the shipowner or bareboat charterer to increased liability, may lead to decreases in, or invalidation of, available insurance coverage for affected vessels and may resultmaintained in the denial of access to, or detention in, some ports.
Pollution Control and Liability Requirements
The IMO has negotiated international conventions that impose liability for oil pollution in international waters and the territorial waters of the signatory to such conventions. Many countries have ratified and follow the liability plan adopted by the IMO and set out in the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969, as amended by different Protocol in 1976, 1984, and 1992, and amended in 2000, or the CLC. Under this convention, and depending on whether the country in which the damage results is a party to the 1992 Protocol to the CLC, a vessel’s registered owner is strictly liable for pollution damage caused in the territorial waters of a contracting state by discharge of persistent oil, subject to certain exceptions. The 1992 Protocol changed certain limits on liability, expressed using the International Monetary Fund currency unit of Special Drawing Rights. The limits on liability have since been amended so that the compensation limits on liability were raised. The right to limit liability is forfeited under the CLC where the spill is caused by the ship owner’s actual fault and under the 1992 Protocol where the spill is caused by the ship owner’s intentional or reckless act or omission where the ship owner knew pollution damage would probably result. The CLC requires ships covered by it to maintain insurance covering the liability of the owner in a sum equivalent to an owner’s liability for a single incident. We believe that our protection and indemnity insurance will cover the liability under the plan adopted by the IMO.
The IMO adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, or the Bunker Convention, to impose strict liability on ship owners for pollution damage in jurisdictional waters of ratifying states caused by discharges of bunker fuel. The Bunker Convention requires registered owners of ships over 1,000 gross tons to maintain insurance for pollution damage in an amount equal to the limits of liability under the applicable national or international limitation regime (but not exceeding the amount calculated in accordance with the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims of 1976, as amended)future. With respect to non-ratifying states, liability for spills or releases of oil carried as fuel in ship’s bunkers typically is determined by the national or other domestic laws in the jurisdiction where the events or damages occur.
IMO regulations also require owners and operators of vessels to adopt shipboard oil pollution emergency plans and/or shipboard marine pollution emergency plans for noxious liquid substances in accordance with the guidelines developed by the IMO.
The IMO continues to review and introduce new regulations. It is impossible to predict what additional regulations, if any, may be passed by the IMO and what effect, if any, such regulations maymight have on our operations.
United States Regulations
The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 or OPA,(“OPA”) established an extensive regulatory and liability regime for the protection and cleanup of the environment from oil spills. OPA affects all “owners and operators” whose vessels trade inor operate within the United States,U.S., its territories and possessions or whose vessels operate in United StatesU.S. waters, which includes the United States’U.S.’s territorial sea and its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone.zone around the U.S. The United StatesU.S. has also enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act or CERCLA,(“CERCLA”), which applies to the discharge of hazardous substances other than oil, except in limited circumstances, whether on land or at sea. OPA and CERCLA both define “owner and operator” in the case of a vessel as any person owning, operating or chartering by demise, the vessel. Both OPA applies to oil tankers (which are not operated by us), as well as non-tanker ships that carry fuel oil, or bunkers, to power such ships.and CERCLA also applies toimpact our operations.
Under OPA, vessel owners and operators are “responsible parties” and are jointly, severally and strictly liable (unless the spill results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war) for all containment and clean-up costs and other damages arising from discharges or threatened discharges of oil from their vessels.vessels, including bunkers (fuel). OPA defines these other damages broadly to include:
•(i) injury to, destruction or loss of, or loss of use of, natural resources and the costs ofrelated assessment thereof;costs;
•(ii) injury to, or economic losses resulting from, the destruction of real and personal property;
•(iv) loss of subsistence use of natural resources that are injured, destroyed or lost;
(iii) net loss of taxes, royalties, rents, fees or net profit revenues resulting from injury, destruction or loss of real or personal property, or natural resources;
•loss of subsistence use of natural resources that are injured, destroyed or lost;
•(v) lost profits or impairment of earning capacity due to injury, destruction or loss of real or personal property or natural resources; and
•(vi) net cost of increased or additional public services necessitated by removal activities following a discharge of oil, such as protection from fire, safety or health hazards.hazards, and loss of subsistence use of natural resources.
OPA contains statutory caps on liability and damages; such caps do not apply to direct cleanup costs. Effective December 21, 2015, the USCG adjusted the limits of OPA liability for non-tank vessels, edible oil tank vessels, and any oil spill response vessels, to the greater of $1,100 per gross ton or $939,800 (subject to periodic adjustment for inflation). These limits of liability do not apply if an incident was proximately caused by the violation of an applicable U.S. federal safety, construction or operating regulation by a responsible party (or its agent, employee or a person acting pursuant to a contractual relationship), or a responsible party’sparty's gross negligence or willful misconduct. The limitation on liability similarly does not apply if the responsible party fails or refuses to (i) report the incident where the responsible party knows or has reason to know of the incident; (ii) reasonably cooperate and assist as requested in connection with oil removal activities; or (iii) without sufficient cause, comply with an order issued under the Federal Water Pollution Act (Section 311 (c), (e)) or the Intervention on the High Seas Act.
CERCLA contains a similar liability regime whereby owners and operators of vessels are liable for cleanup, removal and remedial costs, as well as damagedamages for injury to, or destruction or loss of, natural resources, including the reasonable costs associated with assessing same, and health assessments or health effects studies. There is no liability if the discharge of a hazardous substance results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war. Liability under CERCLA is limited to the greater of $300 per gross ton or $5$5.0 million for vessels carrying a hazardous substance as cargo and the greater of $300 per gross ton or $500,000 for any other vessel. These limits do not apply (rendering the responsible person liable for the total cost of response and damages) if the release or threat of release of a hazardous substance resulted from willful misconduct or negligence, or the primary cause of the release was a violation of applicable safety, construction or operating standards or regulations. The limitation
on liability also does not apply if the responsible person fails or refused to provide all reasonable cooperation and assistance as requested in connection with response activities where the vessel is subject to OPA.
OPA and CERCLA each preserve the right to recover damages under existing law, including maritime tort law. OPA and CERCLA both require owners and operators of vessels to establish and maintain with the USCG evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to meet the maximum amount of liability to which the particular responsible person may be subject. Vessel owners and operators may satisfy their financial responsibility obligations by providing a proof of insurance, a surety bond, qualification as a self-insurer or a guarantee. We plan to comply with the USCG’s financial responsibility regulations by providing applicable certificates of financial responsibility.
The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in additional regulatory initiatives or statutes, including higher liability caps under OPA, new regulations regarding offshore oil and gas drilling, and a certificatepilot inspection program for offshore facilities. However, several of responsibility evidencing sufficient self-insurance.these initiatives and regulations have been or may be revised. For example, the U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement’s (“BSEE”) revised Production Safety Systems Rule (“PSSR”), effective December 27, 2018, modified and relaxed certain environmental and safety protections under the 2016 PSSR. Additionally, the BSEE released proposed changes to the Well Control Rule, which could roll back certain reforms regarding the safety of drilling operations, and the U.S. President proposed leasing new sections of U.S. waters to oil and gas companies for offshore drilling, expanding the U.S. waters that are available for such activity over the next five years. The effects of these proposals are currently unknown. Compliance with any new requirements of OPA and future legislation or regulations applicable to the operation of our vessels could impact the cost of our operations and adversely affect our business.
OPA specifically permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to oil pollution incidents occurring within their boundaries, provided they accept, at a minimum, the levels of liability established under OPA and some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for oil spills. Many U.S. states that border a navigable waterway have enacted environmental pollution laws that impose strict liability on a person for removal costs and damages resulting from a discharge of oil or a release of a hazardous substance. These laws may be more stringent than U.S. federal law. Moreover, some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for discharge of pollutants within their waters, although in some cases, states which have enacted this type of legislation have not yet issued implementing regulations defining vessel owners’ responsibilities under these laws. We intend to comply with all applicable state regulations in the ports where the our vessels call.
We currently maintain pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1.0 billion per incident for each of our vessels. If the damages from a catastrophic spill were to exceed our insurance coverage, it could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
OPA specifically permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to oil pollution incidents occurring within their boundaries, provided they accept, at a minimum, the levels of liability established under OPA. Some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for oil spills. In some cases, states, which have enacted such legislation have not yet issued implementing regulations defining vessels owners’ responsibilities under these laws. We intend to comply with all existing and future applicable state regulations in the ports where our vessels call.
The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico may also result in additional legislative or regulatory initiatives, including the raising of liability caps under OPA or more stringent operational requirements. We cannot predict what additional requirements, if any, may be enacted and what effect, if any, such requirements may have on our operations.operation.
Other United States Environmental Initiatives
The CWAU.S. Clean Air Act of 1970 (including its amendments of 1977 and 1990) (“CAA”) requires the EPA to promulgate standards applicable to emissions of volatile organic compounds and other air contaminants. The CAA requires states to adopt State Implementation Plans, or SIPs, some of which regulate emissions resulting from vessel loading and unloading operations which may affect our vessels.
The U.S. Clean Water Act (“CWA”) prohibits the discharge of oil, or otherhazardous substances and ballast water in U.S. navigable waters unless authorized by a duly-issued permit or exemption, and imposes strict liability in the form of penalties for any unauthorized discharges. The CWA also imposes substantial liability for the costs of removal, remediation and damages and complements the remedies available under OPA and CERCLA. In addition, many U.S. states that border a navigable waterway have enacted environmental pollution laws that impose
strict liability on a person for removal costs and damages resulting from a discharge2015, the EPA expanded the definition of oil or a release“waters of a hazardous substance. These laws may be more stringent than U.S.the United States” (“WOTUS”), thereby expanding federal law.
The EPA regulates the discharge of ballast water and other substances in U.S. watersauthority under the CWA. EPA regulations require vessels 79 feet in length or longer (other than commercial fishing and recreational vessels) to comply with a Vessel General Permit, or VGP, that authorizes ballast water discharges and other discharges incidental to the operation of vessels. For a new vessel delivered to an owner or operator after September 19, 2009 to be covered by the VGP, the owner must submit a Notice of Intent, or NOI, at least 30 days before the vessel operates in U.S. waters. The VGP imposes technology and water-quality based effluent limits for certain types of discharges and establishes specific inspection, monitoring, record keeping and reporting requirements to ensure the effluent limits are met. The EPA renewed and revised the VGP, effective December 19, 2013. The VGP now contains numeric ballast water discharge limits for most vessels to reduce the risk of invasive species in U.S. waters and more stringent requirements for exhaust gas scrubbers and requires the use of environmentally acceptable lubricants.
The USCG, regulations adopted under the U.S. National Invasive Species Act, or NISA, also impose mandatory ballast water management practices for all vessels equipped with ballast water tanks entering or operating in U.S. waters. As of June 21, 2012, the USCG adopted revised ballast water management regulations that established standards for allowable concentrations of living organisms in ballast water discharged from ships in U.S. waters. The USCG must approve any technology before it is placed on a vessel, but has not yet approved the technology necessary for vessels to meet the foregoing standards.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, as of January 1, 2014, vessels are technically subject to the phasing-in of these standards. As a result, the USCG has provided waivers to vessels which cannot install the as-yet unapproved technology. The EPA,Following litigation on the other hand, has taken a different approach to enforcing ballast discharge standards under the VGP. Onrevised WOTUS rule, in December 27, 2013,2018, the EPA issued an enforcement response policy in connection with the new VGP in which the EPA indicated that it would take into account the reasons why vessels do not have the requisite technology installed, but will not grant any waivers.
It should also be noted that in October 2015, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling that directed the EPA to redraft the sectionsand Department of the 2013 VGP that address ballast water. However,Army proposed a revised, limited definition of “waters of the Second Circuit stated that 2013 VGP will remains inUnited States.” The effect until the EPA issues a new VGP. of this proposal on U.S. environmental regulations is still unknown.
Compliance with theThe EPA and the USCG regulations could requirehave also enacted rules relating to ballast water discharge, compliance with which requires the installation of equipment on our vessels to treat ballast water before it is discharged or the implementation of other port facility disposal arrangements or procedures at potentially substantial costs, and/or otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. Waters. The EPA will regulate these ballast water discharges and other discharges incidental to the normal operation of certain vessels within United States waters pursuant to the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (“VIDA”), which was signed into law on December 4, 2018 and will replace the 2013 Vessel General Permit (“VGP”) program (which authorizes discharges incidental to operations of commercial vessels and contains numeric ballast water discharge limits for most vessels to reduce the risk of invasive species in U.S. waters, stringent requirements for scrubbers, and requirements for the use of environmentally acceptable lubricants) and current Coast Guard ballast water management regulations adopted under the U.S. National Invasive Species Act (“NISA”), such as mid-ocean ballast exchange programs and installation of approved USCG technology. VIDA establishes a new framework for the regulation of vessel incidental discharges under Clean Water Act (CWA), requires the EPA to develop performance standards
for those discharges within two years of enactment, and requires the U.S. Coast Guard to develop implementation, compliance, and enforcement regulations within two years of EPA’s promulgation of standards. Under VIDA, all provisions of the 2013 VPG and USCG regulations regarding ballast water treatment remain in force and effect until the EPA and U.S. Coast Guard regulations are finalized. Non-military, non-recreational vessels greater than 79 feet in length must continue to comply with the requirements of the VGP, including submission of a Notice of Intent (“NOI”) or retention of a PARI form and submission of annual reports. We have submitted NOIs for our vessels where required. Compliance with the EPA, U.S. Coast Guard and state regulations could require the installation of ballast water treatment equipment on our vessels or the implementation of other port facility disposal procedures at potentially substantial cost, or may otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. waters. While we believe that our vessels have been fitted with systems that will comply with the standards, those systems may not be approved. If they are not approved it could have an adverse material impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations depending on the available ballast water treatment systems and the extent to which existing vessels must be modified to accommodate such systems. In addition, certain states have enacted more stringent discharge standards as conditions to their required certification of the VGP. It presently remains unclear how the ballast water requirements set forth by the EPA, the USCG, and IMO BWM Convention, some of which are in effect and some which are pending, will co-exist.
The U.S. Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 and 1990, or the CAA, requires the EPA to promulgate standards applicable to emissions of volatile organic compounds and other air contaminants. Our vessels will be subject to vapor control and recovery requirements for certain cargoes when loading, unloading, ballasting, cleaning and conducting other operations in regulated port areas. Our vessels that operate in such port areas with restricted cargoes will be equipped with vapor recovery systems that satisfy these requirements. The CAA also requires states to adopt State Implementation Plans, or SIPs, designed to attain national health-based air quality standards in primarily major metropolitan and/or industrial areas. Several SIPs regulate emissions resulting from vessel loading and unloading operations by requiring the installation of vapor control equipment. As indicated above, our vessels operating in covered port areas will be equipped with vapor recovery systems that satisfy these existing requirements.
European Union Regulations
In October 2009, the European Union amended a directive to impose criminal sanctions for illicit ship-source discharges of polluting substances, including minor discharges, if committed with intent, recklessly or with serious negligence and the discharges individually or in the aggregate result in deterioration of the quality of water. Aiding and abetting the discharge of a polluting substance may also lead to criminal penalties. Member States were required to enact laws or regulations to comply with the directive by the end of 2010. Criminal liability for pollution may result in substantial penalties or fines and increased civil liability claims. The directive applies to all types of vessels, irrespective of their flag, but certain exceptions apply to warships or where human safety or that of the ship is in danger.
Criminal liability for pollution may result in substantial penalties or fines and increased civil liability claims. Regulation (EU) 2015/757 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 (amending EU Directive 2009/16/EC) governs the monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide emissions from maritime transport, and, subject to some exclusions, requires companies with ships over 5,000 gross tonnage to monitor and report carbon dioxide emissions annually starting on January 1, 2018, which may cause us to incur additional expenses.
The European Union has adopted several regulations and directives requiring, among other things, more frequent inspections of high-risk ships, as determined by type, age, and flag andas well as the number of times the ship has been detained. The European Union also adopted and then extended a ban on substandard ships and enacted a minimum ban period and a definitive ban for repeated offenses. The regulation also provided the European Union with greater authority and control over classification societies, by imposing more requirements on classification societies and providing for fines or penalty payments for organizations that failed to comply. Furthermore, the EU has implemented regulations requiring vessels to use reduced sulfur content fuel for their main and auxiliary engines. The EU Directive 2005/33/EC (amending Directive 1999/32/EC) introduced requirements parallel to those in Annex VI relating to the sulfur content of marine fuels. In addition, the EU imposed a 0.1% maximum sulfur requirement for fuel used by ships at berth in EU ports.
Greenhouse Gas Regulation
Currently, the emissions of greenhouse gases from international shipping are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which entered into force in 2005 and pursuant to which adopting countries have been required to implement national programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with targets extended through 2020. International negotiations are continuing with respect to a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, and restrictions on shipping emissions may be included in any new treaty. In December 2009, more than 27 nations, including the U.S. and China, signed the Copenhagen Accord, which includes a non-binding commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The 2015 United Nations Convention on Climate Change Conference in Paris resulted in the Paris Agreement, which entered into force on November 4, 2016. The Paris Agreement2016 and does not directly limit greenhouse gas emissions from ships. AsOn June 1, 2017, the U.S. President announced that the United States intends to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. The timing and effect of January 1, 2013, ships were requiredsuch action has yet to comply with newbe determined, but the Paris Agreement provides for a four-year exit process.
At MEPC mandatory requirements to address70 and MEPC 71, a draft outline of the structure of the initial strategy for developing a comprehensive IMO strategy on reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from ships (as discussed above). For 2020,was approved. In accordance with this roadmap, in April 2018, nations at the MEPC 72 adopted an initial strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. The initial strategy identifies “levels of ambition” to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, including (1) decreasing the carbon intensity from ships through implementation of further phases of the EEDI for new ships; (2) reducing carbon dioxide emissions per transport work, as an average across international shipping, by at least 40% by 2030, pursuing efforts towards 70% by 2050, compared to 2008; and (3) reducing the total annual greenhouse emissions by at least 50% by 2050 compared to 2008 while pursuing efforts towards phasing them out entirely. The initial strategy notes that technological innovation, alternative fuels and/or energy sources for international shipping will be integral to achieve the overall ambition. These regulations could cause us to incur additional substantial expenses.
The EU made a unilateral commitment to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions from its member states from 20% of 1990 levels.levels by 2020. The EU also committed to reduce its emissions by 20% under the Kyoto Protocol’s second period from 2013 to 2020. In April 2015, a regulation was adopted requiring thatStarting in January 2018, large ships (over 5,000 gross tons) calling at EU ports from January 2018are required to collect and publish data on carbon dioxide emissions and other information.
In the United States, the EPA has issued a finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public health and safety, has adopted regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from certain mobile sources, and has proposed regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from large stationary sources. AlthoughHowever, in March 2017, the mobile source emissions regulations do not applyU.S. President signed an executive order to review and possibly eliminate the EPA’s plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions from vessels, theemissions. The EPA has received petitions from the California Attorney General and environmental groups to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from ocean-going vessels. Furthermore, in the United Statesor individual U.S. states can alsocould enact environmental regulations. For example, California has introduced caps for greenhouse gas emission and, in the end of 2016, signaled it might take additional actions regarding climate change.regulations that would affect our operations.
Any passage of climate control legislation or other regulatory initiatives by the IMO, European Union,the EU, the U.S. or other countries where we operate, or any treaty adopted at the international level to succeed the Kyoto Protocol or Paris Agreement, that restrictrestricts emissions of greenhouse gases could require us to make significant financial expenditures which we cannot predict with certainty at this time. Even in the absence of climate control legislation, our business may be indirectly affected to the extent that climate change may result in sea level changes or more intensecertain weather events.
International Labour Organization
The International LabourLabor Organization (ILO)(the “ILO”) is a specialized agency of the UN with headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. The ILOthat has adopted the Maritime Labor Convention 2006 or (“MLC 2006.2006”). A Maritime Labor Certificate and a Declaration of Maritime Labor Compliance will beis required to ensure compliance with the MLC 2006 for all ships above 500 gross tons in international trade. The MLC 2006 came into force on August 20, 2013. Amendments to MLC were adopted in 2014 and 2016. We believe that all our vessels are in substantial compliance with and are certified to meet MLC 2006.
Vessel Security Regulations
Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States, there have been a variety of initiatives intended to enhance vessel security. On November 25,security such as the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 the MTSA came into effect.(“MTSA”). To implement certain portions of the MTSA, in July 2003, the USCG issued regulations requiring the implementation of certain security requirements aboard vessels operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The regulations also impose requirements onStates and at certain ports and facilities, some of which are regulated by the EPA.
Similarly, in December 2002, amendments to SOLAS created a new chapterChapter XI-2 of the convention dealing specifically with maritime security. The new Chapter XI-2 became effective in July 2004 andSOLAS Convention imposes various detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities and mandates compliance with the International Ship and Port FacilityFacilities Security Code or (“the ISPS Code.Code”). The ISPS Code is designed to enhance the security of ports and ships against terrorism. After July 1, 2004, toTo trade internationally, a vessel must attain an International Ship Security Certificate or ISSC,(“ISSC”) from a recognized security organization approved by the vessel’s flag state. Ships operating without a valid certificate may be detained, expelled from, or refused entry at port until they obtain an ISSC. The following are among the various requirements, some of which are found in SOLAS:
the SOLAS Convention, include, for example, on-board installation of automatic identification systems to provide a means for the automatic transmission of safety-related information from among similarly equipped ships and shore stations, including information on a ship’s identity, position, course, speed and navigational status;
on-board installation of ship security alert systems, which do not sound on the vessel but only alert the authorities on shore;
the development of a shipvessel security plan;
plans; ship identification number to be permanently marked on a vessel’s hull;
a continuous synopsis record kept onboard showing a vessel’svessel's history including the name of the ship, the state whose flag the ship is entitled to fly, the date on which the ship was registered with that state, the ship’sship's identification number, the port at which the ship is registered and the name of the registered owner(s) and their registered address; and
compliance with flag state security certification requirements.
Any vessel operating without a valid certificate may be detained at port until it obtains an ISSC, or it may be expelled from port, or refused entry at port.
The USCG regulations, intended to align with international maritime security standards, exempt non-U.S. vessels from MTSA vessel security measures, non-U.S. vessels provided such vessels have on board a valid ISSC that attests to the vessel’s compliance with the SOLAS Convention security requirements and the ISPS Code. Our managersFuture security measures could have a significant financial impact on us. We intend to implementcomply with the various security measures addressed by MTSA, the SOLAS Convention and the ISPS Code, and we intend that our fleet will comply with applicable security requirements.Code.
Inspection by Classification Societies
Every oceangoingThe hull and machinery of every commercial vessel must be “classed”classed by a classification society.society authorized by its country of registry. The classification society certifies that thea vessel is “in class”, signifying that the vessel has been builtsafe and maintainedseaworthy in accordance with the rules of the classification society and complies with applicable rules and regulations of the vessel’s country of registry and the international conventions of which that country is a member. In addition, where surveys are required by international conventions and corresponding laws and ordinances of a flag state, the classification society will undertake them on application or by official order, acting on behalf of the authorities concerned.
The classification society also undertakes on request other surveys and checks that are required by regulations and requirements of the flag state. These surveys are subject to agreements made in each individual case and/or to the regulations of the country concerned.
For maintenance of the class certification, regular and extraordinary surveys of hull, machinery, including the electrical plant, and any special equipment classed are required to be performed as follows:
Annual Surveys. For seagoing ships, annual surveys are conducted for the hull and the machinery, including the electrical plant and where applicable for special equipment classed, at intervals of 12 months from the date of commencement of the class period indicated in the certificate.
Intermediate Surveys. Extended annual surveys are referred to as intermediate surveys and typically are conducted two and one-half years after commissioning and each class renewal. Intermediate surveys may be carried out on the occasion of the second or third annual survey.
Class Renewal Surveys. Class renewal surveys, also known as special surveys, are carried out for the ship’s hull, machinery, including the electrical plant, and for any special equipment classed, at the intervals indicated by the character of classification for the hull. At the special survey the vessel is thoroughly examined, including audio-gauging to determine the thickness of the steel structures. Should the thickness be found to be less than class requirements, the classification society would prescribe steel renewals. The classification society may grant a one-year grace period for completion of the special survey. Substantial amounts of money may have to be spent for steel renewals to pass a special survey if the vessel experiences excessive wear and tear. In lieu of the special survey every four or five years, depending on whether a grace period was granted, a ship owner has the option of arranging with the classification society for the vessel’s hull or machinery to be on a continuous survey cycle, in which every part of the vessel would be surveyed within a five-year cycle. Upon a ship owner’s request, the surveys required for class renewal may be split according to an agreed schedule to extend over the entire period of class. This process is referred to as continuous class renewal.
All areas subject to survey as defined by the classification society are required to be surveyed at least once per class period, unless shorter intervals between surveys are prescribed elsewhere. The period between two subsequent surveys of each
area must not exceed five years. Vessels under five years of age can waive drydocking in order to increase available days and decrease capital expenditures, provided the vessel is inspected underwater.
Most vessels are also drydocked every 30 to 36 months for inspection of the underwater parts and for repairs related to inspections. If any defects are found, the classification surveyor will issue a “recommendation” which must be rectified by the ship owner within prescribed time limits.
SOLAS. Most insurance underwriters make it a condition for insurance coverage and lending that a vessel be certified as “in class” by a classification society which is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies, or the IACS. In 2012, theThe IACS issued drafthas adopted harmonized Common Structural Rules, that align withor the IMO goals standards,Rules, which apply to oil tankers and were adopted in winter 2013.bulk carriers constructed on or after July 1, 2015. The Rules attempt to create a level of consistency between IACS Societies. All our vessels will be certified as being “in class” by the American Bureau of Shipping, or ABS, and Det Norske Veritas, or DNV, major classification societies. All new and secondhand vessels that we acquire must be certified prior to their delivery under our standard purchase contracts and memorandum of agreement. If the vessel is not certified on the date of closing, we have no obligation to take delivery of the vessel.
A vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys, drydockings and special surveys. In lieu of a special survey, a vessel’s machinery may be on a continuous survey cycle, under which the machinery would be surveyed periodically over a five-year period. Every vessel is also required to be drydocked every 30 to 36 months for inspection of the underwater parts of the vessel. If any vessel does not maintain its class and/or fails any annual survey, intermediate survey, drydocking or special survey, the vessel will be unable to carry cargo between ports and will be unemployable and uninsurable which could cause us to be in violation of certain covenants in our loan agreements. Any such inability to carry cargo or be employed, or any such violation of covenants, could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.
Risk of Loss and Liability Insurance
General
The operation of any drybulkcargo vessel includes risks such as mechanical and structural failure, hullphysical damage, collision, property loss, cargo loss or damage and business interruption due to political circumstances in foreign countries, piracy incidents, hostilities and labor strikes. In addition, there is always an inherent possibility of marine disaster, including oil spills and other environmental incidents,mishaps, and the liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade. OPA, which imposes virtuallynear unlimited liability upon owners,shipowners, operators and demisebareboat charterers of vesselsany vessel trading in the United States exclusive economic zone of the United States for certain oil pollution accidents in the United States, has made liability insurance more expensive for ship ownersshipowners and operators trading in the United States market.
We maintain hull and machinery insurance, war risks insurance, protection and indemnity cover, and freight, demurrage and defense cover for our fleet in amounts that we believe to be prudent to cover normal risks in our operations. However, we may not be able to achieve or maintain this level of coverage throughout a vessel’s useful life. In addition, while we believe that thecarry insurance coverage that we have obtained is adequate,as customary in the shipping industry. However, not all risks can be insured, specific claims may be rejected, and there canwe might not be no guarantee that any specific claim will be paid, or that we will always be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates.
Hull &and Machinery and War Risks Insurance
We maintain marine hull and machinery and war risks insurance, which will include the risk of partial, actual or constructive total loss, for all of our vessels. Each of our vessels is covered up to at least fair market value with deductibles of $100,000-$150,000 per vessel per incident. We also maintain increased value coverage for most of our vessels. Under this increased value coverage, in the event of total loss of a vessel, we will be able to recover the sum insured under the increased value policy in addition to the sum insured under the hull and machinery policy. Increased value insurance also covers excess liabilities which are not recoverable under our hull and machinery policy by reason of under insurance. Under our war risks coverage a total loss would also be paid in the event a vessel were confiscated or detained by unauthorized persons. We generally do not maintain insurance against loss of hire (except for certain charters for which we consider it appropriate), which covers business interruptions that result in the loss of use of a vessel.
Protection and Indemnity Insurance
Protection and indemnity insurance is provided by mutual protection and indemnity associations, or P&I Associations, which insureand covers our third-party liabilities to third parties in connection with our shipping activities. This includes third-party liability and other related expenses resulting from theof injury or death of crew, passengers and other third parties, the loss or damage to cargo, claims arising from collisions with other vessels, damage to other third-party property, pollution arising from oil or other substances, and salvage, towing and other related costs, including wreck removal. Our P&I coverage will be subject to and in accordance with the rules of the P&I Association in which the vessel is entered. Protection and indemnity insurance is a form of mutual indemnity insurance, extended by protection and indemnity mutual associations, or “clubs.” Our coverage is limited to approximately $6.5$8.0 billion, except for pollution which is limited to $1$1.0 billion. If pollution liability costs are greater than $1.0 billion, the International Oil Pollution Funds would be expected to be utilized.
Our current protection and indemnity insurance coverage for pollution will beis $1 billion per vessel per incident. The thirteen13 P&I Associations that comprise the International Group insure approximately 90% of the world’s commercial tonnage and have entered into a pooling agreement to reinsure each association’s liabilities. Each P&I Association has capped its exposureThe International Group’s website states that the Pool provides a mechanism for sharing all claims in excess of $10 million up to, this pooling agreement at $6.5currently, approximately US$ 8.2 billion. As a member of a P&I Association, which is a member of the International Group, we are subject to calls payable to the associations based on the group’sour claim records as well as the claim records of all other members of the individual associations and members of the shipping pool of P&I Associations comprising the International Group.
Permits and Authorizations
We are required by various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses and certificates with respect to our vessels. The kinds of permits, licenses and certificates required depend upon several factors, including the commodity transported, the waters in which the vessel operates, the nationality of the vessel’s crew and the age of a vessel. We believe that we have obtained all permits, licenses and certificates currently required to permit our vessels to operate. Additional
laws and regulations, environmental or otherwise, may be adopted which could limit our ability to do business or increase the cost of us doing business.
| |
| C. | Organizational Structure |
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. is a company incorporated under the laws of the Marshall Islands. We own our vessels through separate wholly-owned subsidiaries that are incorporated in the Marshall Islands or Cayman Islands. Please see Exhibit 8.1 to this annual report for a list of our current subsidiaries.
| |
| D. | Property, Plants and Equipment |
We do not own any material real property. We lease office space in Monaco and in New York, New York. Our only material physical assets consist of our vessels (including our contract for the construction of a new vessel) which are owned through our separate wholly owned subsidiaries.
For a description of our fleet, see “Item 4. Information on the Company—A. History and Development of the Company” and “Item 4. Information on the Company—B. Business Overview—Our Fleet.”
|
| |
| ITEM 4A. | UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS |
None.
|
| |
| ITEM 5. | OPERATING AND FINANCIAL REVIEW AND PROSPECTS |
The following presentation of management’s discussion and analysis of results of operations and financial condition should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements, accompanyingincluding the notes theretothereto.
Overview
We are an international shipping company that owns and otheroperates the latest generation of newbuilding drybulk carriers with fuel-efficient specifications and carrying capacities of greater than 30,000 dwt. All of our owned vessels have carrying capacities of greater than 60,000 dwt. Our vessels transport a broad range of major and minor bulk commodities, including ores, coal, grains, and fertilizers, along worldwide shipping routes, and are employed primarily in the spot market or in spot market-oriented pools of similarly sized vessels.
We are organized by vessel type into two operating segments:
Ultramax Operations: includes vessels ranging from approximately 60,200 dwt to 64,000 dwt.
Kamsarmax Operations: includes vessels ranging from approximately 82,000 dwt to 84,000 dwt.
Certain of the corporate general and administrative and financial information appearingexpenses incurred by us are not attributable to any specific segment. Accordingly, these costs are not allocated to any of our segments and are included in “Item 18. Financial Statements.” You should also carefully read the following discussion with the sections of this annual report entitled “Item 3. Key Information- D. Risk Factors” and “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” Our consolidated financial statementsresults below as of December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Our consolidated financial statements are presented in U.S. dollars ($) unless otherwise indicated. Any amounts converted from another non-U.S. currency to U.S. dollars in this annual report are at the rate applicable at the relevant date, or the average rate during the applicable period.“Corporate.”
We generate revenues by charging customers for the transportation of their drybulk cargoes using our vessels. Historically, these services generally have been provided under the following basic types of contractual relationships:
Commercial Pools, whereby we participate with other shipowners to operate a large number of vessels as an integrated transportation system, which offers customers greater flexibility and a higher level of service while achieving scheduling efficiencies. Pools negotiate charters primarily in the spot market but may also arrange time charter agreements. The size and scope of these pools enable them to enhance utilization rates for pool vessels by securing backhaul voyages and COAs (described below), thus generating higher effective TCE revenues than otherwise might be obtainable in the spot market.
Voyage charters, which are charters for short intervals that are priced on current, or “spot,” market rates.
Time charters, which are chartered to customers for a fixed period of time at rates that are generally fixed, but may contain a variable component based on inflation, interest rates, or current market rates.
For all types of our vessels in contractual relationships, we are responsible for crewing and other vessel operating costs for our owned or finance leased vessels and the charterhire expense for vessels that we time charter-in.
The table below illustrates the primary distinctions among these different employment arrangements: |
| | | | | |
| | Voyage Charter | | Time Charter | | Commercial Pool |
| Typical contract length | Single voyage | | One year or more | | Varies |
Hire rate basis(1) | Varies | | Daily | | Varies |
Voyage expenses(2) | We pay | | Customer pays | | Pool pays |
Vessel operating costs for owned vessels(2) | We pay | | We pay | | We pay |
Charterhire expense for vessels chartered-in(2) | We pay | | We pay | | We pay |
Off-hire(3) | Customer does not pay | | Customer does not pay | | Pool does not pay |
| |
(1) | “Hire rate” refers to the basic payment from the charterer for the use of the vessel. |
| |
(2) | See “Important Financial and Operational Terms and Concepts” below.
|
| |
(3) | “Off-hire” refers to the time a vessel is not available for service due primarily to scheduled and unscheduled repairs or drydockings. For time chartered-in vessels, we do not pay the charterhire expense when the vessel is off-hire. |
AsDuring 2018, and as of the date of this annual report, all of our owned, finance leased and time chartered-in vessels wereare operating in the Scorpio Group Pools.
Important Financial and Operational Terms and Concepts
We use a variety of financial and operational terms and concepts. These include the following:
Hire rate. The basic payment from the charterer for the use of the vessel.
Vessel revenues. Vessel revenues primarily include revenues from time charters, pool revenues and voyage charters. Vessel revenues are affected by hire rates and the number of days a vessel operates. Vessel revenues are also affected by the mix of business between vessels on time charter, vessels in pools and vessels operating on voyage charter. Revenues from vessels in pools and on voyage charter are more volatile, as they are typically tied to prevailing market rates.
Voyage charters. Voyage charters or spot voyages are charters under which the customer pays a transportation charge for the movement of a specific cargo between two or more specified ports. We pay all of the voyage expenses.
Voyage expenses. Voyage expenses primarily include bunkers, port charges, canal tolls, cargo handling operations and brokerage commissions paid by us under voyage charters, as well as brokerage commissions and miscellaneous voyage expenses that we are unable to collect under time charter and pool arrangements. These expenses are subtracted from voyage charter revenues to calculate TCE revenues.
Vessel operating costs. For our owned vessels, we are responsible for vessel operating costs, which include crewing, repairs and maintenance, insurance, stores, lube oils, communication expenses, and technical management fees.
Technical management fees are paid to SSM, which is controlled by the Lolli-Ghetti family. Pursuant to our Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement, SSM provides us with technical services, and we provide themit with the ability to subcontract technical management of our vessels with our approval.vessels.
Charterhire. Charterhire is the amount we pay the owner for time chartered-in vessels. The amount is usually for a fixed period of time at rates that are generally fixed, but may contain a variable component based on inflation, interest rates, or current market rates. The vessel’s owner is responsible for crewing and other vessel operating costs.
Drydocking. We periodically drydock each of our owned vessels for inspection, repairs and maintenance and any modifications to comply with industry certification or governmental requirements. Generally, each vessel is drydocked every 30 months to 60 months. We capitalize a substantial portion of the costs incurred during drydocking and amortize those costs on a straight-line basis from the completion of a drydocking to the estimated completion of the next drydocking. We immediately expense costs for routine repairs and maintenance performed during drydocking that do not improve or extend the useful lives of
the assets. The number of drydockings undertaken in a given period and the nature of the work performed determine the level of drydocking expenditures.
Depreciation. Depreciation expense typically consists of:
charges related to the depreciation of the historical cost of our owned vessels (less an estimated residual value) over the estimated useful lives of the vessels; and
charges related to the amortization of drydocking expenditures over the estimated number of years to the next scheduled drydocking.drydocking; and
amortization of assets under finance lease.
Time charter equivalent (TCE) revenue or rates. We report TCE revenues, a non-GAAP financial measure, because (i) we believe it provides additional meaningful information in conjunction with voyage revenues and voyage expenses, the most directly comparable U.S.-GAAP measure, (ii) it assists our management in making decisions regarding the deployment and use of our vessels and in evaluating their financial performance, (iii) it is a standard shipping industry performance measure used primarily to compare period-to-period changes in a shipping company’s performance irrespective of changes in the mix of charter types (i.e., spot charters, time charters and bareboat charters) under which the vessels may be employed between the periods, and (iv) we believe that it presents useful information to investors. TCE revenue is vessel revenue less voyage expenses, including bunkers and port charges. The TCE rate achieved on a given voyage is expressed in U.S. dollars/day and is generally calculated by taking TCE revenue and dividing that figure by the number of revenue days in the period. For a reconciliation of TCE revenue, deduct voyage expenses from revenue on our Statement of Operations. Please also see “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Revenue days. Revenue days are the total number of calendar days our vessels were in our possession during a period, less the total number of off-hire days during the period associated with repairs or drydockings. Consequently, revenue days represent the total number of days available for the vessel to earn revenue. Idle days, which are days when a vessel is available to earn revenue, yet is not employed, are included in revenue days. We use revenue days to show changes in net vessel revenues between periods.
Contract of affreightment. A contract of affreightment, or COA, relates to the carriage of specific quantities of cargo with multiple voyages over the same route and over a specific period of time which usually spans a number of years. A COA does not designate the specific vessels or voyage schedules that will transport the cargo, thereby providing both the charterer and shipowner greater operating flexibility than with voyage charters alone. The charterer has the flexibility to determine the individual voyage scheduling at a future date while the shipowner may use different vessels to perform these individual voyages. As a result, COAs are mostly entered into by large fleet operators, such as pools or shipowners with large fleets of the same vessel type. We pay the voyage expenses while the freight rate normally is agreed on a per cargo ton basis.
Commercial pools. To increase vessel utilization and revenues, we participate in commercial pools with other shipowners and operators of similar modern, well-maintained vessels. By operating a large number of vessels as an integrated transportation system, commercial pools offer customers greater flexibility and a higher level of service while achieving scheduling efficiencies. Pools employ experienced commercial charterers and operators who have close working relationships with customers and brokers, while technical management is performed by each shipowner. Pools negotiate charters with customers primarily in the spot market. The size and scope of these pools enable them to enhance utilization rates for pool vessels by securing backhaul voyages and COAs, thus generating higher effective TCE revenues than otherwise might be obtainable in the spot market while providing a higher level of service offerings to customers.
Operating days. Operating days are the total number of available days in a period with respect to the owned vessels, before deducting available days due to off-hire days and days in drydock. Operating days is a measurement that is only applicable to our owned vessels, not our chartered-in vessels.
Off-hire. Time a vessel is not available for service due primarily to scheduled and unscheduled repairs or drydockings. For time chartered-in vessels, we do not pay the charterhire expense when the vessel is off-hire.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
To supplement our financial information presented in accordance with U.S.accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP, management uses certain "non-GAAP“non-GAAP financial measures"measures” as such term is defined in SEC Regulation G to clarify and enhance understanding of past performance and prospects forpromulgated by the future.SEC. Generally, a non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of a company'scompany’s operating performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts that are included in, or excluded from, the most directly
comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with U.S. GAAP. For example, non-GAAPManagement believes the presentation of these measures provides investors with greater transparency and supplemental data relating to our financial condition and results of operations, and therefore a more complete understanding of factors affecting our business than GAAP measures alone. In addition, management believes the presentation of these matters is useful to investors for period-to-period comparison of results as the items may exclude the impact ofreflect certain unique and/or non-operating items such as acquisitions, divestitures, restructuring charges, largeasset sales, write-offs, contract termination costs or items outside of management'smanagement’s control. Management believes that the following non-GAAP financial measures described below provide investors
Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and analysts useful insight into our financial position and operating performance.
Adjustedamortization, or EBITDA, adjusted net loss withand related per share amounts, as well as adjusted EBITDA and TCE revenue are non-GAAP financial measures that we believe are useful to assistprovide investors in gaining anwith a means of evaluating and understanding of the trends andhow our management evaluates our operating results for our core business.performance. These non-GAAP financial measures should not be viewedconsidered in additionisolation from, as substitutes for, nor superior to and notfinancial measures prepared in lieu of, results reported under U.S.accordance with GAAP.
Reconciliations of adjusted net lossEBITDA, and related per share amountsTCE revenue as determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP for the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, 2015as well as reconciliations of adjusted net loss and 2014related per share amounts and adjusted EBITDA in accordance with U.S. GAAP for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 are provided below (dollars in thousands, except per share data).below.
EBITDA
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the years ended December 31, |
| | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| | Amount | | Per share | | Amount | | Per share | | Amount | | Per share |
| Net loss | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | (2.22 | ) | | $ | (510,789 | ) | | $ | (23.86 | ) | | $ | (116,565 | ) | | $ | (10.17 | ) |
| Adjustments: | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | 12,433 |
| | 0.22 |
| | 422,937 |
| | 19.75 |
| | 55,487 |
| | 4.84 |
|
| Write down of deferred financing cost | 2,456 |
| | 0.04 |
| | 16,085 |
| | 0.75 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Charterhire contract termination | 10,000 |
| | 0.18 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Total adjustments | 24,889 |
| | 0.44 |
| | 439,022 |
| | 20.50 |
| | 55,487 |
| | 4.84 |
|
| Adjusted net loss | $ | (99,946 | ) | | $ | (1.78 | ) | | $ | (71,767 | ) | | $ | (3.36 | ) | | $ | (61,078 | ) | | $ | (5.33 | ) |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | For the Year Ended December 31, |
| In thousands | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Net loss | | $ | (12,698 | ) | | $ | (59,726 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) |
| Add Back: | | | | | | |
| Net interest expense | | 39,180 |
| | 27,307 |
| | 16,326 |
|
Depreciation and amortization (1) | | 74,070 |
| | 67,710 |
| | 62,835 |
|
| EBITDA | | $ | 100,552 |
| | $ | 35,291 |
| | $ | (45,674 | ) |
(1) Includes depreciation, amortization of deferred financing costs and restricted stock amortization.
Adjusted net loss
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, |
| | 2017 | | 2016 | |
| In thousands, except per share amounts | Amount | | Per share | | Amount | | Per share | |
| Net loss | $ | (59,726 | ) | | $ | (0.83 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | (2.22 | ) | |
| Adjustments: | | | | | | | | |
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | 17,701 |
| | 0.25 |
| | 12,433 |
| | 0.22 |
| |
| Write down of deferred financing cost | 470 |
| | 0.01 |
| | 2,456 |
| | 0.05 |
| |
| Charterhire contract termination | — |
| | — |
| | 10,000 |
| | 0.18 |
| |
| Total adjustments | 18,171 |
| | 0.26 |
| | 24,889 |
| | 0.45 |
| |
| Adjusted net loss | $ | (41,555 | ) | | $ | (0.57 | ) | | $ | (99,946 | ) | | $ | (1.77 | ) | |
Adjusted EBITDA
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | For the Year Ended December 31, |
| In thousands | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Net loss | | $ | (59,726 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) |
Impact of Adjustments (1) | | 18,171 |
| | 24,889 |
|
| Adjusted net loss | | (41,555 | ) | | (99,946 | ) |
| Add Back: | | | | |
| Net interest expense | | 27,307 |
| | 16,326 |
|
Depreciation and amortization (2) | | 67,710 |
| | 62,835 |
|
| Adjusted EBITDA | | $ | 53,462 |
| | $ | (20,785 | ) |
(1) Includes loss/write down on assets held for sale of $17.7 million and a write off of deferred financing costs of $0.5 million for 2017 and loss/write down on assets held for sale of $12.4 million, a write off of deferred financing costs of $2.5 million and charterhire contract termination charges of $10.0 million for 2016.
(2) Includes depreciation, amortization of deferred financing costs and restricted stock amortization.
TCE Revenue
Time Charter Equivalent, (TCE)or TCE, revenue is defined as voyage revenues less voyage expenses. Such TCE revenue, divided by the number of our available days during the period, or revenue days, is TCE per revenue day, which we believe is consistent with industry standards. TCE per revenue day is a common shipping industry performance measure used primarily to compare daily earnings generated by vessels on time charters with daily earnings generated by vessels on voyage charters, because charter hire rates for vessels on voyage charters are generally not expressed in per-day amounts while charter hire rates for vessels on time charters generally are expressed in such amounts.
Our results |
| | | | | | | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, | |
| In thousands | 2018 | | 2017 | |
| Vessel Revenues | $ | 242,502 |
| | $ | 162,205 |
| |
| Less: | | | | |
| Voyage expenses | (549 | ) | | (429 | ) | |
| TCE revenue | $ | 241,953 |
| | $ | 161,776 |
| |
Executive Summary for the year endedYear Ended December 31, 2016 reflect the weakness in the drybulk market experienced since the start of 2014 and the actions we have taken to enhance our liquidity position and balance sheet. The BDI continued to exhibit volatility in 2016, ranging 290 (the lowest level it has ever reached) to 1,257. Because our vessels were primarily chartered at rates tied to the spot market our revenues were adversely impacted.2018
For the year ended December 31, 2016, we had a2018, our GAAP net loss $124.8was $12.7 million or $2.22$0.18 loss per diluted share. Our adjustedshare compared to a GAAP net loss forof $59.7 million, or $0.83 loss per diluted share in the same period was $99.9in 2017. Results for the year ended December 31, 2018 include a non-cash loss of $7.7 million and a cash dividend of $0.5 million, or $1.78$0.10 loss per diluted share. The adjusted netshare from our equity investment in Scorpio Tankers and a write-off of deferred financing costs of $3.8 million, or $0.05 loss excluded aper diluted share, related to the refinancing of existing debt. EBITDA for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 were $100.6 million and $35.3 million, respectively (see Non-GAAP Financial Measures). Excluding the loss/write offwrite-off of vessels and assets held for sale of $12.4$17.7 million and the related write offwrite-off of deferred financing costs on the credit facilities that will no longer be usedfacility related to those specific vessels of $2.5$0.5 million, as a result of the classifying these assets as held for sale and a charterhire contract termination fee of $10.0 million. These adjustments total a $0.44our adjusted net loss per diluted share (see Non-GAAP Financial Measures).
For comparison, for the year ended December 31, 2015, we had a net loss of $510.82017 was $41.6 million, or $23.86$0.57 adjusted loss per diluted share. Ourshare, and adjusted EBITDA was $53.5 million (see Non-GAAP Financial Measures below). There were no such non-GAAP adjustments to our net lossincome for the year ended December 31, 2018.
Total vessel revenues for the year ended December 31, 2018 were $242.5 million, an increase of 50% from $162.2 million for the same period in 2017. Our TCE revenue (see Non-GAAP Financial Measures) for the year ended December 31, 2018 was $71.8$242.0 million or $3.36 adjusted loss per diluted share.compared to $161.8 million for the same period in 2017. The adjusted net loss excludedrates earned in 2018 by both our Ultramax and Kamsarmax Operations were driven by a write down ondecrease in the supply of tonnage and the United States and China trade war which resulted in longer voyages as Chinese imports from the United States were replaced with imports from South America.
Total operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2018 were $199.2 million compared to $187.8 million for the same period in 2017. The year over year increase relates to increases in vessel operating costs and depreciation resulting from the increase in the size of our fleet, offset in part by the loss/write-off of vessels and assets held for sale of $422.9$17.7 million andrecorded in 2017.
During 2018, we repurchased 7.1 million shares under the related write offBoard of deferred financing costs on credit facilities that will no longer be usedDirectors authorized stock repurchase program at a cost of $16.1approximately $45.7 million, or $20.50 lossat an average cost of $6.44 per shareshare. We also maintained our $0.02 quarterly dividend, paying out approximately $6.0 million in cash in aggregate.
During 2018, we also invested $100.0 million in Scorpio Tankers for approximately 54.1 million, or 10.9% (as of October 12, 2018), of Scorpio Tankers’ issued and outstanding common shares. The investment was part of a larger $337.0 million equity raise through a public offering of common shares by Scorpio Tankers. On January 18, 2019, Scorpio Tankers effected a one-for-ten reverse stock split and as such we now own approximately 5.4 million common shares of Scorpio Tankers.
Results for the Year Ended December 31, 2018 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2017
Ultramax Operations
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, | | | | |
| | 2018 | | 2017 | | Change | | % Change |
| TCE Revenue: | | | | | | | |
| Vessel revenue | $ | 155,197 |
| | $ | 94,380 |
| | $ | 60,817 |
| | 64 |
| Voyage expenses | 330 |
| | 129 |
| | 201 |
| | 156 |
| TCE Revenue | $ | 154,867 |
| | $ | 94,251 |
| | $ | 60,616 |
| | 64 |
| Operating expenses: | | | | | | | |
| Vessel operating costs | 71,220 |
| | 51,445 |
| | 19,775 |
| | 38 |
| Charterhire expense | 3,754 |
| | 975 |
| | 2,779 |
| | 285 |
| Vessel depreciation | 37,287 |
| | 29,797 |
| | 7,490 |
| | 25 |
| General and administrative expense | 4,344 |
| | 3,389 |
| | 955 |
| | 28 |
| Total operating expenses | $ | 116,605 |
| | $ | 85,606 |
| | $ | 30,999 |
| | 36 |
| Operating income | $ | 38,262 |
| | $ | 8,645 |
| | $ | 29,617 |
| | 343 |
Vessel revenue for our Ultramax Operations increased to $155.2 million in 2018 from $94.4 million in 2017. Despite tariffs and sanctions disrupting 2018, rates earned by our Ultramax Operations increased by 23% compared to 2017 due to lower levels of tonnage supply, grain exports from the South American and Black Sea markets and petcoke and coal cargoes out of the United States Gulf.
TCE revenue (see Non-GAAP Financial Measures). for our Ultramax Operations was $154.9 million for 2018 and was associated with a day-weighted average of 37 vessels owned and one vessel time chartered-in, compared to $94.3 million for the prior year, which was associated with a day-weighted average of 29 vessels owned. TCE revenue per day was $11,226 and $9,159 for 2018 and 2017, respectively.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, | | | | |
| Ultramax Operations: | 2018 | | 2017 | | Change | | % Change |
| TCE Revenue | $ | 154,867 |
| | $ | 94,251 |
| | $ | 60,616 |
| | 64 |
| TCE Revenue / Day | $ | 11,226 |
| | $ | 9,159 |
| | $ | 2,067 |
| | 23 |
| Revenue Days | 13,795 |
| | 10,291 |
| | 3,504 |
| | 34 |
Our Ultramax Operations vessel operating costs were $71.2 million in 2018, relating to 37 vessels owned on average during the period and included approximately $4.2 million of takeover and contingency costs. Vessel operating costs for the prior year were $51.4 million and related to 29 vessels owned on average during the period. Daily operating costs excluding takeover costs, contingency expenses and other non-operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 were $4,962 and $4,842, respectively. The increase is due to an increase of purchases of spares and stores, as well as freight and forwarding expense.
Charterhire expense for our Ultramax Operations was approximately $3.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2018, and relates to the vessel we have time chartered-in at $10,125 per day since the end of the third quarter of 2017.
Ultramax Operations depreciation increased to $37.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 from $29.8 million in the prior year reflecting the increase in our weighted average vessels owned to 37 from 29.
General and administrative expense for our Ultramax Operations was $4.3 million for 2018 and $3.4 million in the prior year period. General and administrative expenses consist primarily of administrative service fees, which are incurred on a per vessel per day basis, and bank charges, which are incurred based on the number of transactions. The increase versus the prior year reflects the growth of the fleet.
Kamsarmax Operations
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, | | | | |
| | 2018 | | 2017 | | Change | | % Change |
| TCE Revenue: | | | | | | | |
| Vessel revenue | $ | 87,305 |
| | $ | 67,825 |
| | $ | 19,480 |
| | 29 |
|
| Voyage expenses | 219 |
| | 300 |
| | (81 | ) | | (27 | ) |
| TCE Revenue | $ | 87,086 |
| | $ | 67,525 |
| | $ | 19,561 |
| | 29 |
|
| Operating expenses: | | | | | | | |
| Vessel operating costs | 34,255 |
| | 35,336 |
| | (1,081 | ) | | (3 | ) |
| Charterhire expense | 422 |
| | 4,417 |
| | (3,995 | ) | | (90 | ) |
| Vessel depreciation | 19,320 |
| | 18,713 |
| | 607 |
| | 3 |
|
| General and administrative expense | 2,069 |
| | 1,916 |
| | 153 |
| | 8 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | — |
| | 17,701 |
| | (17,701 | ) | | (100 | ) |
| Total operating expenses | $ | 56,066 |
| | $ | 78,083 |
| | $ | (22,017 | ) | | (28 | ) |
| Operating loss | $ | 31,020 |
| | $ | (10,558 | ) | | $ | 41,578 |
| | 394 |
|
Vessel revenue for our Kamsarmax Operations increased to $87.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 from $67.8 million in the prior year. Rates earned by our Kamsarmax Operations during the year ended December 31, 2018 increased 31% compared to 2017, as supply was down due to a lack of new deliveries, as well as increased ton per mile utilization due to an increase in voyages from the east coast of South America to China resulting from the United States and China trade wars.
TCE revenue (see Non-GAAP Financial Measures) for our Kamsarmax Operations was $87.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 associated with a day-weighted average of 19 vessels owned, compared to $67.5 million for the prior year, associated with a day-weighted average of 18 vessels owned and one vessel time chartered-in. TCE revenue per day was $13,127 and $10,051 for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, | | | | |
| Kamsarmax Operations: | 2018 | | 2017 | | Change | | % Change |
| TCE Revenue | $ | 87,086 |
| | $ | 67,525 |
| | $ | 19,561 |
| | 29 |
|
| TCE Revenue / Day | $ | 13,127 |
| | $ | 10,051 |
| | $ | 3,076 |
| | 31 |
|
| Revenue Days | 6,634 |
| | 6,718 |
| | (84 | ) | | (1 | ) |
Kamsarmax Operations vessel operating costs were $34.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2018, which related to the 19 vessels owned on average during the period and included approximately $1.1 million of takeover costs and contingency expenses. Vessel operating costs for the prior year were $35.3 million and related to the 18 vessels owned on average during the period. Daily operating costs excluding takeover costs, contingency expenses and other non-operating expenses for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 were $4,940 and $5,028, respectively.
While we do not time charter-in any Kamsarmax vessels, we have a profit and loss sharing agreement relating to one Kamsarmax vessel with a third party and during the year ended December 31, 2018, our share of the loss on that vessel was $0.4 million compared to $0.8 million in the prior year period. During the prior year period, a Kamsarmax vessel was time chartered-in through August 2017 at a cost of $3.6 million.
Kamsarmax Operations depreciation increased to $19.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 from $18.7 million in the prior year period. Our weighted average vessels owned was 19 and 18 for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
General and administrative expense for the Kamsarmax Operations was $2.1 million and $1.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The expense consists primarily of administrative services fees, which are incurred on a per vessel per day basis, and bank charges, which are incurred based on the number of transactions.
During the year ended December 31, 2016,2017, we took deliveryrecorded a write-down on assets held for sale of 17 newbuilding vessels. As$17.7 million related to the sale of two Kamsarmax vessels to an unaffiliated third party.
Corporate
Certain general and administrative expenses we incur as well as all of our financial expenses and income or losses from an equity investment are not attributable to a specific segment. Accordingly, these costs are not allocated to our segments. These general and administrative expenses, including compensation, audit, legal and other professional fees, as well as the costs of being a public company, such as director fees, increased slightly year over year totaling $25.9 million and $23.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, we had 42 owned vessels2018 and 2017, respectively.
We recorded a non cash loss of $7.7 million for the fourth quarter of 2018 and a cash dividend of $0.5 million on our equity investment in operationScorpio Tankers.
Financial expenses, net increased to $49.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2018 from $35.0 million in the prior year period due to an increase in the LIBOR rate and six vessels under construction that were scheduledhigher levels of debt related to be deliveredthe increase in overall fleet size and debt refinancing, as well as the write-off of $3.8 million of deferred financing costs related to us in 2017 (of which five vessels have since been delivered to us).such refinancing.
Results for the Year Ended December 31, 20162017 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 20152016
Ultramax Operations
| | | | Year Ended December 31, 2016 | | Year Ended December 31, 2015 | For the Year Ended December 31, | | | | |
| | Capesize | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | Total | | Capesize | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | Total | 2017 | | 2016 | | Change | | % Change |
| TCE Revenue: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Vessel revenue | $ | — |
| | $ | 31,685 |
| | $ | 46,717 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 78,402 |
| | $ | 9,038 |
| | $ | 26,712 |
| | $ | 26,771 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 62,521 |
| $ | 94,380 |
| | $ | 46,718 |
| | 47,662 |
| | 102 |
|
| Voyage expenses | — |
| | (81 | ) | | 36 |
| | — |
| (45 | ) | | 280 |
| | 331 |
| | 176 |
| | — |
| 787 |
| 129 |
| | 36 |
| | 93 |
| | 258 |
|
| TCE Revenue | $ | — |
| | $ | 31,766 |
| | $ | 46,681 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 78,447 |
| | $ | 8,758 |
| | $ | 26,381 |
| | $ | 26,595 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 61,734 |
| $ | 94,251 |
| | $ | 46,682 |
| | $ | 47,569 |
| | 102 |
|
| Operating expenses: | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | |
| |
|
| Vessel operating costs | — |
| | 27,083 |
| | 41,749 |
| | — |
| 68,832 |
| | 5,089 |
| | 9,986 |
| | 14,297 |
| | — |
| 29,372 |
| 51,445 |
| | 41,749 |
| | 9,696 |
| | 23 |
|
| Charterhire expense | — |
| | 12,323 |
| | 5,033 |
| | | 17,356 |
| | — |
| | 29,509 |
| | 21,880 |
| | — |
| 51,389 |
| 975 |
| | 5,033 |
| | (4,058 | ) | | (81 | ) |
| Charterhire termination | — |
| | 2,500 |
| | 7,500 |
| | — |
| 10,000 |
| | | | | | | | | — |
| — |
| | 7,500 |
| | (7,500 | ) | | (100 | ) |
| Vessel depreciation | — |
| | 14,522 |
| | 22,040 |
| | — |
| 36,562 |
| | 3,623 |
| | 4,536 |
| | 6,104 |
| | — |
| 14,263 |
| 29,797 |
| | 22,040 |
| | 7,757 |
| | 35 |
|
| General and administrative expense | 380 |
| | 1,718 |
| | 2,725 |
| | 29,172 |
| 33,995 |
| | 275 |
| | 498 |
| | 713 |
| | 33,896 |
| 35,382 |
| 3,389 |
| | 2,725 |
| | 664 |
| | 24 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | 1,006 |
| | 11,557 |
| | (130 | ) | | — |
| 12,433 |
| | 408,318 |
| | 8,997 |
| | 5,622 |
| | — |
| 422,937 |
| — |
| | (130 | ) | | 130 |
| | 100 |
|
| Total operating expenses | $ | 1,386 |
| | $ | 69,703 |
| | $ | 78,917 |
| | $ | 29,172 |
| $ | 179,178 |
| | $ | 417,305 |
| | $ | 53,526 |
| | $ | 48,616 |
| | $ | 33,896 |
| $ | 553,343 |
| $ | 85,606 |
| | $ | 78,917 |
| | $ | 6,689 |
| | 8 |
|
| Operating loss | $ | (1,386 | ) | | $ | (37,937 | ) | | $ | (32,236 | ) | | $ | (29,172 | ) | $ | (100,731 | ) | | $ | (408,547 | ) | | $ | (27,145 | ) | | $ | (22,021 | ) | | $ | (33,896 | ) | $ | (491,609 | ) | $ | 8,645 |
| | $ | (32,235 | ) | | $ | 40,880 |
| | 127 |
|
| Other expense (income): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interest income | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (933 | ) | (933 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (4 | ) | | (352 | ) | (356 | ) | |
| Foreign exchange gain (loss) | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 116 |
| 116 |
| | 4 |
| | 10 |
| | 27 |
| | (29 | ) | 12 |
| |
| Financial expense, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 24,921 |
| 24,921 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 19,524 |
| 19,524 |
| |
| Total other expense | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 24,104 |
| 24,104 |
| | 4 |
| | 10 |
| | 23 |
| | 19,143 |
| 19,180 |
| |
| Net loss | $ | (1,386 | ) | | $ | (37,937 | ) | | $ | (32,236 | ) | | $ | (53,276 | ) | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | (408,551 | ) |
| $ | (27,155 | ) |
| $ | (22,044 | ) |
| $ | (53,039 | ) | $ | (510,789 | ) | |
Vessel revenue for our Ultramax Operations increased significantly to $78.4$94.4 million in 2017 from $46.7 million in 2016 from $62.5 million in 2015 due to the increasesignificant increases in both rates and revenue days, the latter of which is associated with the growth of our fleet.
TCE revenue (see Non-GAAP Financial Measures) for our Ultramax Operations was $78.4$94.3 million for 20162017 and was associated with a day-weighted average of 3628 vessels owned, and three vessels time chartered-in, compared to $61.7$46.7 million for the prior year,2016, which was associated with a day-weighted average of 1622 vessels owned and 12 vesselsone vessel time chartered-in. TCE revenue per day was $5,789$9,159 and $7,173$5,896 for 2017 and 2016, respectively. Increased worldwide demand across all bulk sectors, regions and 2015, respectively. The decreasecommodities, as well as a reduction in TCE revenue per day was due to the depressed market in which we operated for most of the year. Overall TCE revenues increased versus the prior year despite the lower rates due tosupply drove the increase in revenue days associated with the growthrates for both of our fleet.vessel types.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, | | | | |
| Ultramax Operations: | 2017 | | 2016 | | Change | | % Change |
| TCE Revenue | $ | 94,251 |
| | $ | 46,682 |
| | $ | 47,569 |
| | 102 |
| TCE Revenue / Day | $ | 9,159 |
| | $ | 5,896 |
| | $ | 3,263 |
| | 55 |
| Revenue Days | 10,291 |
| | 7,917 |
| | 2,374 |
| | 30 |
Our Ultramax Operations vessel operating costs were $68.8$51.4 million in 2017, including approximately $2.8$1.2 million of takeover costs associated with new deliveries and $2.2$0.6 million of other non-operating expenses and related to 3628 vessels owned, on average during the period. Takeover costs will no longer be incurred after the delivery of the final vessel under construction, which is expected to occur in the second quarter of 2017. Vessel operating costs for the prior year2016 were $29.4$41.7 million and related to 1622 vessels owned, on average during the period. Daily operating costs excluding takeover and other non-operating expenses for 20162017 were $5,129.
$4,842.
Charterhire expense for our Ultramax Operations decreased to $17.4$1.0 million in 20162017 from $51.4$5.0 million in 2016. We did not time charter-in any Ultramax vessels until the prior year reflectingend of the reduction in the numberthird quarter of vessels time chartered-in.2017, when we chartered-in one Ultramax vessel at $10,125 per day. During 2016, we recorded a $10.0$7.5 million charge to terminate fourthree time charter-in contracts. Terminating these contracts reduced our cash outflow and had a positive impact on our future operating results as the contracts were at above current market rates. As of December 31, 2016, we had two remaining time chartered-in vessels. Of these two time chartered-in vessels, one was redelivered in the first quarter of 2017, and the other is expected to be redelivered during the third quarter of 2017.
DepreciationUltramax Operations vessel depreciation increased to $36.6$29.8 million in 20162017 from $14.3$22.0 million in the prior year2016, reflecting the increase in our weighted average vessels owned to 3628 from 16.22.
General and administrative expense for our Ultramax Operations was $34.0$3.4 million for 20162017 and $35.4$2.7 million for 2015 and included $18.6 million and $24.6 million of restricted stock amortization, respectively. Such amounts were generally not attributable to our operating segments and were therefore considered corporate.2016. The decrease in restricted stock amortizationincrease was due to prior year grants, with higher fair values than current grants, vesting and being fully expensed as well as the reversal of expense related to canceled awards. This decrease was offset by an increase in commercial managementadministrative services fees, reflecting the growth of our fleet.
During 2016, we recorded a reversal of loss/write off of vessels and assets held for sale related to Ultramax vessels held for sale at December 31, 2015, due to accrual adjustments and other cost true ups.
Kamsarmax Operations
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, | | | | |
| | 2017 | | 2016 | | Change | | % Change |
| TCE Revenue: | | | | | | | |
| Vessel revenue | $ | 67,825 |
| | $ | 31,684 |
| | $ | 36,141 |
| | 114 |
|
| Voyage expenses | 300 |
| | (81 | ) | | 381 |
| | 470 |
|
| TCE Revenue | $ | 67,525 |
| | $ | 31,765 |
| | $ | 35,760 |
| | 113 |
|
| Operating expenses: | | | | |
| |
|
| Vessel operating costs | 35,336 |
| | 27,083 |
| | 8,253 |
| | 30 |
|
| Charterhire expense | 4,417 |
| | 12,323 |
| | (7,906 | ) | | (64 | ) |
| Charterhire termination | — |
| | 2,500 |
| | (2,500 | ) | | (100 | ) |
| Vessel depreciation | 18,713 |
| | 14,522 |
| | 4,191 |
| | 29 |
|
| General and administrative expense | 1,916 |
| | 1,718 |
| | 198 |
| | 12 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | 17,701 |
| | 11,557 |
| | 6,144 |
| | 53 |
|
| Total operating expenses | $ | 78,083 |
| | $ | 69,703 |
| | $ | 8,380 |
| | 12 |
|
| Operating loss | $ | (10,558 | ) | | $ | (37,938 | ) | | $ | 27,380 |
| | 72 |
|
Vessel revenue for our Kamsarmax Operations increased to $67.8 million in 2017 from $31.7 million in 2016 due to significant increases in both rates and revenue days, the latter of $12.4which is associated with the growth of our fleet.
TCE revenue (see Non-GAAP Financial Measures) for our Kamsarmax Operations was $67.5 million for 2017 and was associated with a day-weighted average of 18 vessels owned and one vessel time chartered-in, compared to $31.8 million for 2016, which was associated with a day-weighted average of 14 vessels owned and two vessels time chartered-in. TCE revenue per day was $10,051 and $5,639 for 2017 and 2016, respectively. Increased worldwide demand across all bulk sectors, regions and commodities, as well as a reduction in supply drove the increase in rates for both of our vessel types.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, | | | | |
| Kamsarmax Operations: | 2017 | | 2016 | | Change | | % Change |
| TCE Revenue | $ | 67,525 |
| | $ | 31,765 |
| | $ | 35,760 |
| | 113 |
| TCE Revenue / Day | $ | 10,051 |
| | $ | 5,639 |
| | $ | 4,412 |
| | 78 |
| Revenue Days | 6,718 |
| | 5,633 |
| | 1,085 |
| | 19 |
Kamsarmax Operations vessel operating costs were $35.3 million in 2017, including approximately $1.4 million of which $11.6takeover costs associated with new deliveries and $1.0 million of other non-operating expenses and related to 18 vessels owned, on average during the period. Vessel operating costs for 2016 were $27.1 million and related to 14 vessels owned, on average during the period. Daily operating costs excluding takeover and other non-operating expenses for 2017 were $5,028.
Charterhire expense for our Kamsarmax Operations decreased to $4.4 million in 2017 from $12.3 million in 2016 reflecting the reduction in the number of vessels time chartered-in from four at the start of 2016 to none at the end of 2017. During 2016, we recorded a $2.5 million charge to terminate one time charter-in contract.
Kamsarmax Operations vessel depreciation increased to $18.7 million in 2017 from $14.5 million in 2016 reflecting the increase in our weighted average vessels owned to 18 from 14.
General and administrative expense for our Kamsarmax Operations was $1.9 million and $1.7 million for 2017 and 2016, respectively. The increase was due to an increase in administrative services fees, reflecting the growth of our fleet.
During 2017, we recorded a write down on assets held for sale related to the sale of two Kamsarmax vessels to an unaffiliated third party and in 2016, we recorded a write down of vessels and assets held for sale related to the cancellation of a shipbuilding contract for a Kamsarmax bulk carriervessel.
Corporate
Corporate general and $0.8administrative and financial expenses increased from $53.3 million in additional2016 to $57.9 million in 2017, as increases in financial expenses relateddue to vessels held for sale at December 31, 2015, including accrual adjustmentsincreasing LIBOR rates, higher levels of debt and other cost true ups. The loss recordedreduced capitalization of interest outweighed decreases in therestricted stock amortization as prior year was associatedgrants, with writing down 24 vesselshigher fair values than current grants, vested and construction contracts that were sold or classified as held for sale during 2015, as well as incremental write-downs of certain construction contracts that were classified as held for sale at December 31, 2014.fully expensed.
During 20162017 and 2015,2016, we wrote off $2.5$0.5 million and $16.1$2.5 million, respectively, of deferred financing costs accumulated on credit facilities for which the related vessels were sold or the commitments were reduced pursuant to the removal from the facilities of certain vessels that have been sold or classified as held for sale or for which the construction contract was cancelled. otherwise reduced.
Recent accounting pronouncements
In addition, duringFebruary 2016, the Company agreedFinancial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2016-02, “Leases”, which was intended to reduceimprove financial reporting of leasing transactions. The ASU requires organizations that lease assets, or lessees, to recognize on the aggregate available loan amounts by $45.2 million resulting inbalance sheet the write off of approximately $1.3 million of deferred financing costs.
Please see Note 14, Segments, to the consolidated financial statements included herein for more information on our segment results.
Resultsassets and liabilities for the Year Endedrights and obligations created by those leases with terms of more than twelve months. The accounting for lease arrangements by the lessors will remain largely unchanged from current U.S. GAAP. The ASU also requires additional quantitative and qualitative disclosures to help financial statement users better understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The ASU is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 31, 2015 Compared15, 2018 although early adoption is permitted. The ASU requires reporting organizations to the Year Ended 12/31/2014take a modified retrospective transition approach.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, 2015 | | Year ended December 31, 2014 |
| | Capesize | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | Total | | Capesize | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | Total |
| TCE Revenue: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Vessel revenue | $ | 9,038 |
| | $ | 26,712 |
| | $ | 26,771 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 62,521 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 38,770 |
| | $ | 10,217 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 48,987 |
|
| Voyage expenses | 280 |
| | 331 |
| | 176 |
| | — |
| 787 |
| | — |
| | 3,653 |
| | 74 |
| | — |
| 3,727 |
|
| TCE Revenue | $ | 8,758 |
| | $ | 26,381 |
| | $ | 26,595 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 61,734 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 35,117 |
| | $ | 10,143 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 45,260 |
|
| Operating expenses: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Vessel operating costs | 5,089 |
| | 9,986 |
| | 14,297 |
| | — |
| 29,372 |
| | — |
| | 1,600 |
| | — |
| | — |
| 1,600 |
|
| Charterhire expense | — |
| | 29,509 |
| | 21,880 |
| | — |
| 51,389 |
| | — |
| | 57,909 |
| | 15,305 |
| | — |
| 73,214 |
|
| Vessel depreciation | 3,623 |
| | 4,536 |
| | 6,104 |
| | — |
| 14,263 |
| | — |
| | 686 |
| | — |
| | — |
| 686 |
|
| General and administrative expense | 275 |
| | 498 |
| | 713 |
| | 33,896 |
| 35,382 |
| | 39 |
| | 103 |
| | 26 |
| | 31,593 |
| 31,761 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | 408,318 |
| | 8,997 |
| | 5,622 |
| | — |
| 422,937 |
| | 52,553 |
| | 2,934 |
| | — |
| | — |
| 55,487 |
|
| Total operating expenses | $ | 417,305 |
| | $ | 53,526 |
| | $ | 48,616 |
| | $ | 33,896 |
| $ | 553,343 |
| | $ | 52,592 |
| | $ | 63,232 |
| | $ | 15,331 |
| | $ | 31,593 |
| $ | 162,748 |
|
| Operating loss | $ | (408,547 | ) | | $ | (27,145 | ) | | $ | (22,021 | ) | | $ | (33,896 | ) | $ | (491,609 | ) | | $ | (52,592 | ) | | $ | (28,115 | ) | | $ | (5,188 | ) | | $ | (31,593 | ) | $ | (117,488 | ) |
| Other expense (income): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interest income | — |
| | — |
| | (4 | ) | | (352 | ) | (356 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (1,052 | ) | (1,052 | ) |
| Foreign exchange loss (gain) | 4 |
| | 10 |
| | 27 |
| | (29 | ) | 12 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (43 | ) | (43 | ) |
| Financial expense, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 19,524 |
| 19,524 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 172 |
| 172 |
|
| Total other expense (income) | 4 |
| | 10 |
| | 23 |
| | 19,143 |
| 19,180 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (923 | ) | (923 | ) |
| Net loss | $ | (408,551 | ) | | $ | (27,155 | ) | | $ | (22,044 | ) | | $ | (53,039 | ) | $ | (510,789 | ) | | $ | (52,592 | ) | | $ | (28,115 | ) | | $ | (5,188 | ) |
| $ | (30,670 | ) | $ | (116,565 | ) |
Vessel revenue increased significantly to $62.5 million in 2015 from $49.0 million in 2014 despite a decrease in rates due to the increase in revenue days associated with the growthIn our review of our fleet.
TCE revenue (see Non-GAAP Financial Measures)was $61.7 million for 2015, associatedcontracts to assess the overall impact of the guidance, we determined that the existing pool arrangements meet the definition of leases under ASU 2016-02. As lessor, we lease our vessels to pools, which manage the vessels in order to enter into transportation contracts with 20 time chartered-in vesselstheir customers and 30 owned vessels, compared to TCE revenue of $45.3 million during 2014, associated with 24 time chartered-in vessels and two owned vessels. TCE revenue per day was $7,173 and $7,931 forenjoy the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. While our newly built fuel-efficient fleet consistently outperformedeconomic benefits derived from such arrangements. Furthermore, the market as compared topools can direct the BDI, the decrease in TCE revenue per day was due to the weakness in the drybulk market across all vessel classes, as reflected by the BDI which hit then record lows in 2015. The increase in TCE revenue during 2015 compared to the prior year was attributable to the increase in the number of revenue days associated with the increase in vessels.
Voyage expenses for 2015 were $0.8 million, compared to $3.7 million for 2014. The costs incurred in 2015 are primarily comprised of brokerage commissions on vessels we time charter-out and miscellaneous costs that we are unable to recoup under time charter and pool arrangements. Voyage expenses in 2014 relate primarily to voyage charters for certain vessels we time chartered-in prior to their joining the Scorpio Group Pools.
Vessel operating costs for 2015 were $29.4 million related to 30 owned vessels. Vessel operating costs for the year ended 2014 were $1.6 million related to two owned vessels. Vessel operating costs include expenses incurred upon the deliveryuse of a vessel (takeover costs)(subject to certain limitations in the pool or charter agreement) throughout the period of use. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-11, “Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements”, which includeamended FASB Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 842, “Leases”, to (i) provide a practical expedient for lessors regarding the crew’s travel costsseparation of the lease and non-lease components of a contract and (ii) add an optional transition method that would permit entities to apply the new requirements by recognizing a cumulative-effect adjustment to the shipyardopening balance of retained earnings in the year of the adoption. In our assessment, we concluded that the criteria for not separating the lease and training.
Charterhire expense was $51.4 millionnon-lease components of our arrangements are met since: (a) the timing and $73.2 millionpattern of transfer are the same for 2015both the lease and 2014, respectively. This decrease was due to fewer vessels chartered-in during 2015 compared tonon-lease components, (b) the prior year.
Depreciationlease component of the contracts, if accounted for 2015 was $14.3 million related to 30 owned vessels. Depreciation for 2014 was $0.7 million related to two owned vessels.
General and administrative expense was $35.4 million and $31.8 million for 2015 and 2014, respectively. Such amounts were primarily not attributable to our operating segments and were therefore considered corporate. These included $24.6 million and $23.9 million of noncash restricted stock amortization in 2015 and 2014, respectively, with the balance primarily related to payroll, directors’ fees, professional fees and insurance in both periods.
During 2015, we recorded a loss of $422.9 million associated with writing down 24 vessels and construction contracts that we sold orseparately, would be classified as heldan operating lease, and (c) the lease component is the predominant component in the arrangement. Therefore, we will account for sale during 2015,the combined component as wellan operating lease in accordance with ASC 842. As a result, an entity’s reporting for the comparative periods presented in the financial statements in which it adopts the new lease standard will continue to be in accordance with current GAAP. We adopted this new standard on January 1, 2019, applying the optional transition option, with no restatement of comparative figures for prior periods. We do not expect this standard to impact the accounting for our vessels operating within the pools or under time chartered-out arrangements.
The standard will result in the recognition of right-of-use assets and corresponding liabilities, on the basis of the discounted remaining future minimum lease payments, for chartered-in vessel commitments of over 12 months only, which have historically been reported as incremental write downsoperating leases and recognized solely in the income statement on a straight-line basis. The impact of certain construction contracts forthis standard as it pertains to time or bareboat chartered-in vessels that were classifiedwill not have an impact upon first time adoption, as held for salethe Company’s operating fleet includes only one chartered-in vessel at December 31, 2014. During 2014 we recorded2018, which has a losslease term of $55.5 million associated with writing down seven construction contracts for vessels that were classified as held for sale at December 31, 2014.
In addition, during 2015, we recorded financial expense, net of $19.5 million, which consisted primarily of a $16.1 million loss associated with writing off a portion of deferred financing costs accumulatedless than 12 months and does not require recognition on five credit facilities for which the commitments were reduced pursuant to the removal from the facility of certain vessels that have been classified as held for sale. In addition, during 2015, we recorded interest expense of $1.0 million. During 2014, we incurred no write offs and all of our interest expense was capitalized.
Please see Note 14, Segments, to the consolidated financial statements included herein for more information on our segment results.Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Critical Accounting Estimates
Our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes are prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. In many instances, the application of such principles requires management to make estimates or to apply subjective principles to particular facts and circumstances. A change in the estimates or a variance in the application, or interpretation of U.S. GAAP could yield a materially different accounting result. A summary of our critical accounting estimates where we believe that the estimations, judgments or interpretations that we made, if different, would have yielded the most significant differences in our consolidated financial statements, can be found in the notes to the consolidated financial statements. In addition, for a summary of all of our significant accounting policies see Note 1, General informationOrganization and significant accounting policiesBasis of Presentation, in the notes to the consolidated financial statements.
Vessels and depreciation
We record the value of our vessels at their cost (which includes acquisition costs directly attributable to the vessel including capitalized interest and expenditures made to prepare the vessel for its initial voyage) less accumulated depreciation. We depreciate our vessels on a straight-line basis to their residual value over their estimated useful lives of 25 years from the date the vessel is ready for its first voyage. The estimated useful life of 25 years is management’s best estimate and is also consistent with industry practice for similar vessels. The residual value is estimated as the lightweight tonnage of each vessel multiplied by an estimated scrap value per ton. The scrap value per ton is estimated taking into consideration the historical four years average scrap market rates at the balance sheet date.
An increase in the useful life of thea vessel or in its residual value would have the effect of decreasing the annual depreciation charge and extending it into later periods. A decrease in the useful life of thea vessel or in its residual value would have the effect of increasing the annual depreciation charge.
When regulations place limitations over the ability of a vessel to trade on a worldwide basis, or when the cost of complying with such regulations is not expected to be recovered, we will adjust the vessel’s useful life to end at the date such regulations preclude such vessel’s further commercial use.
The carrying value of the Company’sour vessels does not represent the fair market value of such vessels or the amount itwe could obtain if itwe were to sell any of itsour vessels, which could be more or less. Under U.S. GAAP, the Companywe would not record
a loss if the fair market value of a vessel (excluding its charter) is below ourits carrying value unless and until it determineswe determine to sell that vessel or the vessel is impaired as discussed below under “Impairment of long-lived assets held for use.”
Pursuant to our bank credit facilities, prior to drawdown of loans under the credit facilities we submit to the lenders valuations of the vessels collateralizing the relevant facility. Thereafter, we will regularly submit to the lenders valuations of our vessels on an individual charter free basis in order to evidence our compliance with the collateral maintenance covenants under our bank credit facilities. Such a valuation is not necessarily the same as the amount any vessel may bring upon sale, which may be more or less, and should not be relied upon as such. We have received valuations on each vessel in our fleet as of December 31, 2016.2018. If we were to apply those valuations to the carrying value of our vessels as of December 31, 2016, that2018, the aggregate carrying value would exceed theirthe aggregate fair valuesvalue of our vessels by an aggregate of $410.4 million, ranging from $5.3 million per vessel to $11.8 million per vessel.approximately $135.7 million. The fair values of our vessels can fluctuate depending on the shipyards and the dates of delivery. These assumptions have not been taken into account in the amounts disclosed above.
Impairment of long-lived assets held for use
We follow Accounting Standards Codification orIn accordance with ASC Subtopicsubtopic 360-10, Property, Plant and Equipment, or ASC 360-10, which requires impairment losses long-lived assets to be recorded on long-lived assetsheld and used in operations when indicators of impairment are present and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than their carrying amounts. If indicators of impairment are present, we perform an analysis of the anticipated undiscounted future net cash flows of the related long-lived assets.
The current economic and market conditions, including the significant disruptions in the global credit markets, are having broad effects on participants in a wide variety of industries. Since mid-August 2008, the charter rates in the drybulk charter market have declined to historical lows, and drybulk vessel values have also declined as a result of both a slowdown in the availability of global credit and the significant deterioration in charter rates.
When indicators of impairment are present and our estimate of undiscounted future cash flows for any vessel is lower than the vessel’s carrying value, the carrying value is written down, by recording a charge to operations, to the vessel’s fair market value if the fair market value is lower than the vessel’s carrying value.
Our vessels are assessed annuallyreviewed for impairment in the fourth quarter and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of our vessels and vessels under constructionsuch assets may not be recoverable. Determination of recoverability is based on an estimate of undiscounted future cash flows resulting from the use of the asset or asset group and its eventual disposition.
For purposes of recognition and measurement of an impairment loss, long-lived assets are grouped with other assets at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows of other assets, which is generally at the vessel pool level for vessels operating within pools. In performing our impairment review, we perform a recoverability test comparing an estimate of undiscounted cash flows to carrying value to determine if the asset group is impaired. In developing itsour estimates of undiscounted cash flows, we make significant assumptions and estimates about vessels’ future performance, with the most significant assumptions relating to (i) charter rates on expiry of existing charters, which are based on the current fixing applicable to five-year time charter rates and thereafter, a reversion to the ten-year historical average for each category of vessel (ii) off-hire days, which are based on actual off-hire statistics for our fleet (iii) operating costs, based on current levels escalated over time based on long term trends (iv) dry dockingdrydocking frequency, duration and cost, (v) estimated useful life which is assessed as a total of 25 years and (vi) estimated scrap values. Specifically,
An impairment loss is recognized when the carrying amount of the asset group is greater than both the undiscounted cash flows and its fair value. In instances where the carrying value of an asset group is not recoverable, measurement of the impairment loss is based upon the amount by which the collective fair values of the vessels in the asset group exceed their collective carrying values. The fair values are determined based upon available market data as well as third party valuations performed on each individual vessel.
During our fourth quarter 2018 assessment, we utilizedetermined that the rates currently in effect for the duration ofundiscounted future income streams expected to be generated by each asset group, over their current time charters, without assuming any profit sharing. For periods of time whereremaining operating lives exceeded and therefore would be sufficient to recover their
respective carrying values and, accordingly, we confirmed that our vessels arewere not fixed on time charters, we utilize an estimated daily TCE for our vessels’ unfixed days using the five year time charter average in effect asimpaired under U.S. GAAP. As of December 31, 2016 for2018 we owned 56 vessels with an average remaining useful life of 22 years.
During the next five yearsyear ended December 31, 2017, there were no changes in circumstances or events that indicated that the carrying amount of our vessel pools or vessels under construction may not be recoverable and the ten year historical average for the remaindertherefore, an assessment of the vessels��� useful lives, which is common practice for the industry. Actual equivalent drybulk shipping rates are currently significantly lower than the estimated rate. We further assume a utilization rate of 95% for our vessels and doimpairment was not apply any inflation to the estimated rates used. We apply a 1% inflation rate to vessel operating costs.performed.
During our fourth quarter 2016 assessment, we determined that the undiscounted future income streams expected to be generated by our vessels, including vessels under construction which are carried at balances that approximate their fair values,each asset group, over their remaining operating lives on an undiscounted basisexceeded and therefore would be sufficient to recover their respective carrying values and, accordingly, itwe confirmed that our vessels were not impaired under U.S. GAAP. Our estimated future undiscounted cash flows exceeded each of our vessels’ carrying values, as well as the expected carrying values of vessels under construction upon their delivery to us by the shipyards, by a considerable margin (approximately 150% - 192% of carrying value). As of December 31, 2016 we owned 42 vessels with an average remaining useful life of 23.924 years.
Our vessels remain fully utilized and have a long average remaining useful life in which to generate sufficient cash flows on an undiscounted basis to recover their carrying values as of December 31, 2016.
During our fourth quarter 2015 assessment, we determined that the future income streams expected to be generated by our vessels, including vessels under construction and excluding assets held for sale which are carried at balances that approximate their fair values, over their remaining operating lives on an undiscounted basis would be sufficient to recover their carrying values and, accordingly, it confirmed that our vessels were not impaired under U.S. GAAP. Our estimated future undiscounted cash
flows exceeded each of our vessels’ carrying values, as well as the expected carrying values of vessels under construction upon their delivery to us by the shipyards, by a considerable margin (approximately 68% - 118% of carrying value). As of December 31, 2015, we owned 25 vessels, excluding those classified as held for sale, which had an average remaining useful life of 24.6 years.
During our fourth quarter 2014 assessment, we determined that the future income streams expected to be generated by our vessels, including vessels under construction and excluding assets held for sale which are carried at balances that approximate their fair values, over their remaining operating lives on an undiscounted basis would be sufficient to recover their carrying values and, accordingly, it confirmed that our vessels were not impaired under U.S. GAAP. Our estimated future undiscounted cash flows exceeded each of our vessels’ carrying values, as well as the expected carrying values of vessels under construction upon their delivery to us by the shipyards, by a considerable margin (approximately 116% - 289% of carrying value). Our vessels remained fully utilized and had a relatively long average remaining useful life in which to recover sufficient cash flows on an undiscounted basis to recover their carrying values as of December 31, 2014. As of December 31, 2014, all but two of our vessels under construction had remaining lives of 25 years, and the two Kamsarmax vessels we owned as of December 31, 2014 had an average remaining useful life of 24.7 years.
In our impairment testing, we also examinedexamine the sensitivity of the future income streams expected to be earned by our vessels by reviewing other scenarios relative to the initial assumptions we used to see if the resulting impact would have resulted in a different conclusion. Accordingly, we performedperform sensitivity analyses based on more conservative charter rates and expected useful lives for our vessels. In the first sensitivity analysis, we lowered charter rate assumptions to 70%96% of the long-term averages of Kamsarmax and Ultramax vessels, respectively (holding all other critical assumptions constant), while in our second sensitivity analysis; we decreased our vessels’ estimated useful lives by approximately 50%9% for each vessel class (holding all other critical assumptions constant). We then evaluated the outcomes of the sensitivity analysisanalyses performed to assess their impact on our conclusions. In both analyses, we found that there would bewas no impairment of any of our vessels.assets or asset groups.
Although we believe that the assumptions used to evaluate potential impairment are reasonable and appropriate, such assumptions are highly subjective. There can be no assurance as to how long charter rates and vessel values will remain at their currently low levels or whether they will improve by any significant degree. Charter rates may remain at depressed levels for some time,decrease, which could adversely affect our revenue and profitability, and any future assessments of vessel impairment.
Management will continue to monitor developments in charter rates in the markets in which it participates with respect to the expectation of future rates over an extended period of time that are utilized in the analyses.
Valuation of equity investment
On October 12, 2018, we invested $100.0 million in a related party, Scorpio Tankers, through participation in a public offering on a basis equivalent to other investors. We use the fair value option in accounting for our investment in Scorpio Tankers based upon the quoted market price of Scorpio Tankers common stock discounted for a lack of marketability due to our inability to sell the common stock until January 7, 2019. In calculating the lack of marketability discount, we relied on the Finnerty Model, an alternative option-based approach that estimates a discount as an average strike put option, effectively assuming that if the stock were freely tradable, the holder could sell evenly over the restriction period. Inputs to this model included expected option life, risk-free interest rate and expected volatility.
| |
| B. | Liquidity and Capital Resources |
We are an international shipping company that ownsOur primary source of funds for our short-term and operateslong-term liquidity needs will be the latest generation of newbuilding drybulk carriers with fuel-efficient specifications and carrying capacities of greater than 30,000 dwt.
During the period followingcash flows generated from our inception, we contracted for the construction of up to 80 drybulk vessels with established shipyards in Japan, China, South Korea and Romania, which we agreed to acquire for an aggregate purchase price of $3,102.8 million, including 29 Ultramax vessels, 23 Kamsarmax vessels and 28 Capesize vessels, which we refer to generally as our “Newbuilding Program.” Due to the declineprimarily operate in the drybulk market, we have since reduced the expected fleet size through a series of sales or cancellation of newbuilding construction contracts. At December 31, 2016, we owned 42 drybulk vessels (16 Kamsarmax vessels and 26 Ultramax vessels) and had contracts for the construction of another six vessels (four Kamsarmax vessels and two Ultramax vessels), for an aggregate purchase price of $161.9 million of which $18.6 million remained to be paid. An installment payment of $1.4 million was madeScorpio Pools, in the first quarter of 2017 and an installment payment of $17.2 million is scheduled for the second quarter of 2017, the latter of which will occur upon the delivery of the vessel. Of the six vessels under construction as of December 31, 2016, five vessels have since been delivered to us and the remaining vessel is expected to be delivered to us during the second quarter of 2017.
spot market or on time charter. We believe that the reduction inScorpio Pools reduce volatility because (i) they aggregate the sizerevenues and expenses of our expected fleet throughall pool participants and distribute net earnings to the sale or cancellation of 32 vesselsparticipants based on an agreed upon formula and contracts for the construction of vessels preserved liquidity in that such sales generated cash proceeds and effectively relieved us of the requirement to make the remaining unpaid installments under the contracts. A tabular summary of our newbuilding vessel construction contracts through December 31, 2016 is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Capesize | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | LR2 | | LR1 | | Total |
| Total vessels contracted for | 28 |
| | 23 |
| | 29 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 80 |
|
| Delivered from shipyards in 2014 | — |
| | (2 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2 | ) |
| Committed to convert into tankers in 2014 | (6 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | 6 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Classified as assets held for sale in 2014 | — |
| | (1 | ) | | — |
| | (6 | ) | | — |
| | (7 | ) |
| Vessels under construction as of December 31, 2014 | 22 |
| | 20 |
| | 29 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 71 |
|
| Delivered from shipyards in 2015 | (5 | ) | | (8 | ) | | (15 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (28 | ) |
| Committed to convert into tankers in 2015 | (3 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3 |
| | — |
|
| Classified as assets held for sale in 2015 | (14 | ) | | (1 | ) | | (1 | ) | | — |
| | (3 | ) | | (19 | ) |
| Vessels under construction as of December 31, 2015 | — |
| | 11 |
| | 13 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 24 |
|
| Delivered from shipyards in 2016 | — |
| | (6 | ) | | (11 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (17 | ) |
| Contracts canceled | — |
| | (1 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (1 | ) |
| Vessels under construction as of December 31, 2016 | — |
| | 4 |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 6 |
|
As of December 31, 2016 there were six drybulk vessels in our Newbuilding Program (four Kamsarmax vessels and two Ultramax vessels), which have an aggregate purchase price of $161.9 million. Of this, $17.2 million remains to be paid on one(ii) some of the vessels under construction as ofin the date of this filing.pool are on time charter. Furthermore, spot charters provide flexibility and allow us to fix vessels at prevailing rates.
At December 31, 2018, cash and cash equivalents totaled $67.5 million. We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents balance and operating cash flows, our ability to sell or refinance certain vessels or to sell our investment in Scorpio Tankers, as well as operating cash flows, available borrowings under our access to credit facilities, including our credit facilities described below, and potential issuances of debt and equity securitiesmarkets will be sufficient to meet our short-term and long-term liquidity needs for the next 12 months from the date of this annual report.report, which are primarily comprised of debt repayment obligations and contractual payments for exhaust gas cleaning systems (see Liquidity Risk section of Note 1, Organization and Basis of Presentation, to the consolidated financial statements).
Equity Issuances
On May 30, 2018, our shareholders approved an amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to increase our total number of authorized shares to 262.5 million, consisting of 212.5 million common shares and 50.0 million preferred shares at the annual general meeting of shareholders.
In November 2017, in connection with the purchase of three Ultramax vessels, we issued warrants to purchase approximately 1.6 million common shares at an exercise price of $8.10 per share to an unaffiliated third party as part of the total consideration paid. The warrants were exercised and we issued the shares in January 2018.
In connection with the purchase of one Ultramax vessel, we issued approximately 0.9 million common shares to the parent of the seller of the vessel on December 29, 2017, upon delivery of such vessel.
During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, we made total yard paymentsissued 12,946 common shares and paid other construction costs in51,679 common shares, respectively, both with a fair value of $0.1 million, to SSH pursuant to the amount of $408.3 million. As of December 31, 2016, we had remaining yard installments in the amount of $18.6 million before we take delivery of the final vessel inAmended Administrative Services Agreement, relating to our Newbuilding Program, of which $17.2 million remains unpaid.
Equity IssuancesProgram.
On June 20, 2016, we issued 23.0 million common shares, par value $0.01 per share, at $3.05 per share in an underwritten public offering. SSH purchased an aggregate of approximately 5.3 million common shares at the public offering price. We received approximately $67.5 million of net proceeds from the issuance.
On June 1, 2016, our shareholders approved an amendment to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to increase our total number of authorized shares to 162.5 million, consisting of 112.5 million common shares to 112.5and 50.0 million preferred shares at the annual general meeting of shareholders.
On March 22, 2016, we issued 21.0 million common shares, par value $0.01 per share, at $3.00 per share in an underwritten public offering. SSH and certain of our directors purchased an aggregate of approximately 5.0 million5,030,000 common shares at the public offering price. We received approximately $60.6 million of net proceeds from the issuance.
On December 31, 2015, our boardFor a description of directors effected a one-for-twelve reverse stock split of our common shares, par value $0.01 per share, and a reduction in the total number of authorized common shares to approximately 56.3 million shares. Our shareholders approved the reverse stock split and change in authorized common shares at a special meeting of shareholders held on December 23, 2015. The reverse stock split reduced the number of outstanding common shares from approximately 344.2 million shares to approximately 28.7 million shares.
On June 23, 2015, underwriters exercised their option to purchase an additional approximately 1.7 million additional common shares in connection with the offering. The sale of these common shares resulted in net proceeds to us of approximately $28.4 million, after deducting underwriters’ discounts and commissions.
On June 16, 2015, we issued approximately 11.1 million common shares, par value $0.01 per share at $18.00 per share in an underwritten public offering. SSH and certain of our executive officers purchased an aggregate of 0.8 million common shares at the public offering price. We received $190.2 million of proceeds from the issuance.
On November 20, 2014, we issued and sold an aggregate of 3.3 million common shares, par value $0.01 per share, to certain institutional investors, certain of our executive officers and SSH, in a private offering exempt from registration under the Securities Act, pursuant to a Securities Purchase Agreement, for gross proceeds of $150.0 million. In connection with this transaction, we have also entered into a Registration Rights Agreement with the purchasers in the offering, pursuant to which we have filed a registration statement under the Securities Act covering the resaleissuances of common shares held by the investors.pursuant to our Equity Incentive Plan, please see “Item 6. Directors, Senior Management and Employees - B. Compensation - Equity Incentive Plan.”
Cash Flow
Operating Activities
The table below summarizes the effect of the major components of operating cash flow.
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | For the Year Ended December 31, |
| (in thousands) | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Net loss | | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | (510,789 | ) | | (116,565 | ) | | $ | (12,698 | ) | | $ | (59,726 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) |
| Non-cash items included in net loss | | 73,644 |
| | 479,872 |
| | 80,192 |
| |
| Adjustment to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities: | | | 81,247 |
| | 84,181 |
| | 73,644 |
|
| Related party balances | | 5,656 |
| | (4,878 | ) | | (15,170 | ) | | (195 | ) | | (7,568 | ) | | 5,656 |
|
| Effect of changes in other working capital and operating assets and liabilities | | (6,661 | ) | | 653 |
| | 1,203 |
| | 2,092 |
| | 2,695 |
| | (6,661 | ) |
| Net cash used in operating activities | | $ | (52,196 | ) | | $ | (35,142 | ) | | $ | (50,340 | ) | | $ | 70,446 |
| | $ | 19,582 |
| | $ | (52,196 | ) |
The cash flow used inprovided by operating activities for 2018 reflects the year ended December 31, 2016 was driven by our recorded net loss. Operating cash flow decreased from 2015 to 2016 due to an increase in time charter rates earned during the amountperiod. Our non-cash items include vessel depreciation, amortization of working capital injected into the pools as vessels were delivered to such pools.restricted stock and deferred financing costs, and a non-cash loss on our investment in Scorpio Tankers.
Investing Activities
Net cash used in investing activities of $122.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2018 reflects the equity investment we made in Scorpio Tankers, and installments paid to the shipyard, as well as new equipment purchases and building supervision costs for the newly constructed SBI Lynx. We also made our fleet, offset by any proceeds received fromfirst payment pursuant to the salecontract for the purchase and installation of vessels.exhaust gas cleaning systems.
Financing Activities
Net cash provided by financing activities of $189.0$51.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2018 reflects our issuancethe net proceeds of stock and proceeds$110.4 million from long-termincreased debt borrowings,financing, partially offset by repayments of long-term debt.
During 2016, we issued 44.0 million common shares in aggregate in two public offerings for combined proceeds of $128.1 million.
In December of 2016, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $20.0$45.7 million of share repurchases (7.1 million shares at an average price of $6.44 per share) and the Company's outstanding 7.5% Senior Notes duepayment of quarterly cash dividends totaling $0.08 per share, or an aggregate of $6.0 million in 2019, or Senior Notes in open market or privately negotiated transactions. The specific timing and amounts of the repurchases, which will be funded by available cash, will be in the sole discretion of management and vary based on market conditions and other factors. This authorization has no expiration date. As of the date of this annual report, the entire $20.0 million remains available.2018.
Credit Facilities, Finance Lease and Unsecured Notes
$39.6 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility
On June 27, 2014, we entered into a $39.6 million senior secured credit facility with NIBC Bank N.V. to finance a portion of the market value of two of the vessels then in our Newbuilding Program which secure this facility. This facility bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.925%. The term of this facility was originally five years, expiring in June 2019, which was subsequently extended to September 2020 should we meet certain conditions. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first priority mortgage on two of the Kamsarmax vessels then in our Newbuilding Program and guaranteed by each of the collateral vessel owning subsidiaries. As of December 31, 2016, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $20.1 million.
$330.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility
On July 29, 2014, we entered into a $330.0 million senior secured credit facility, or the $330.0 Million Credit Facility, with Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank and Deutsche Bank AG London to finance a portion of the purchase price of 22 of the vessels then in our Newbuilding Program, which was subsequently reduced by $15.0 million due to ourthe sale of one of the vessels that was to collateralize this facility. This facility bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.925% and has a term of seven years. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred cross-collateralized mortgage on each of 2113 of ourthe vessels financed by this loan (consisting of 15nine Ultramax drybulk carriersvessels and sixfour Kamsarmax drybulk carriers)vessels) and guaranteed by each of the collateral vessel owning subsidiaries.
During 2018, we repaid approximately $84.8 million of our $330.0 Million Credit Facility as two of the Kamsarmax vessels and six of the Ultramax vessels previously financed by this loan are now financed under the $34.0 Million Credit Facility and the $90.0 Million Credit Facility, respectively.
As of December 31, 2016, we drew down $255.82018, approximately $140.7 million relating to 14 Ultramax vessels (including one vessel under construction) and four Kamsarmax vessels. As of December 31, 2016, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $225.8 million.
Of the remaining four vessels (including one vessel under construction), three were delivered in January 2017 and we drew down amounts not exceeding the lesser of 60% of the fair market value of such vessel or a stated drawdown amount. The last vessel is scheduled to be delivered in the second quarter of 2017 at which time we expect that we will draw under this facility upon the delivery of each collateral vessel in an amount not to exceed the lesser of 60% of the fair market value of such vessel or a stated drawdown amount.
During 2016, we also reduced the available loan amount by approximately $16.8 million, for which $0.6 million of deferred financing costs were written off.outstanding.
$67.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility
On July 30, 2014, we entered into a $67.5 million credit facility, or the $67.5 Million Credit Facility, with a leading European financial institution. The proceeds of this facility have beenwere used to fund a portion of the purchase price of four of the vessels then in our Newbuilding Program that secure this facility. This facility hashad a seven year term from the date of delivery of each such vessel securing the loan, with customary financial and restrictive covenants. This facility bearsbore interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.95%. The $67.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility iswas secured by, among other things, a first priority mortgage on four of the vessels then in our Newbuilding Program (two Ultramax and two Kamsarmax vessels), and a parent company guarantee.
As of December 31, 2016, we borrowed $53.8 million associated with drawdowns on two Kamsarmax vessels and two Ultramax vessels that were delivered. We also reduced the available loan amount by approximately $4.4 million. As of December 31, 2016, the outstanding balance on2018, this facility was approximately $40.5 million.has been fully repaid and terminated.
$409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility
On December 30, 2014, we entered into a $409.0 million senior secured credit facility, or the $409.0 Million Credit Facility, with Nordea Bank Finland PLC, New York Branch, and Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ) to partially finance a portion of ourthe acquisition of 20 of the vessels then in our Newbuilding Program (six Ultramax, nine Kamsarmax, and five Capesize vessels). This credit facility was subsequently (i) reduced by $136.0 million due to the sale of five Capesize vessels and the addition of one Ultramax vessel to the security package under the facility, and(ii) further reduced by an additional $14.6 million due to the cancellation of a shipbuilding contract for a Kamsarmax bulk carriervessel that was servingwould serve as partial security under the facility.facility, and (iii) further reduced by approximately $22.5 million due to the drop in vessel values. As amended, this credit facility iswas used to finance a portion of the purchase price of 15 vessels (seven Ultramax and eight Kamsarmax vessels). As of December 31, 2016, we drew down $207.6 million on 14 vessels (including one vessel under construction). We also reduced the available loan amount by approximately $22.5 million during 2016. As of December 31, 2016, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $167.8 million. The remaining drawdown took place upon delivery of the final Kamsarmax vessel in January 2017. This facility bearsbore interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 3.00% and hashad a term of six years. This facility iswas secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on each of the 15 vessels.
As of December 31, 2018, this facility has been fully repaid and terminated.
$42.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility
On January 30, 2015, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $42.0 million, or the $42.0 Million Credit Facility, with a leading European financial institution to finance a portion of the purchase price of two Kamsarmax vessels which were delivered to us, and subsequently upsized by $10.8 million to finance a portion of the purchase price of one Ultramax vessel. Each tranche for the Kamsarmax vessels has a final maturity of six years from the drawdown date of the respective vessel, and the tranche for the Ultramax vessel matures on September 21, 2021. This facility bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.97%. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the three vessels and guaranteed by each of the collateral vessel owning subsidiaries.
During 2018, we repaid approximately $8.2 million of the $42.0 Million Credit Facility upon the completion of the $19.0 Million Lease Financing - SBI Tango transaction. As of December 31, 2016,2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $38.5$14.1 million.
$12.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility
On December 22, 2015, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $12.5 million, or the $12.5 Million Credit Facility, which was used to finance a portion of the purchase price of one Ultramax vessel which was delivered to us. The facility has a maturity date of December 22, 2020. This facility bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 3.00%. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the Ultramax newbuilding vessel and guaranteed by the collateral vessel owning subsidiary.
As of December 31, 2016,2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $10.4$9.4 million.
$27.3 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility
On December 22, 2015, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $27.3 million, or the $27.3 Million Credit Facility, which was used to finance a portion of the purchase price of two Ultramax vessels then in our Newbuilding Program. Each trancheDuring 2018, we repaid approximately $8.8 million of the $27.3 Million Credit Facility upon the completion of the $20.5 Million Lease Financing - SBI Hermes transaction and refinanced the SBI Hermes. This facility has a maturity of five years from the drawdown date. This facilitydate and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.95%. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the two Ultramax newbuilding vesselsvessel and guaranteed by each of the collateral vessel owning subsidiaries. subsidiary.
As of December 31, 2016,2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $19.4$9.0 million.
$85.5 Million Credit Facility
On December 5, 2017, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $85.5 million, or the $85.5 Million Credit Facility, which was used to finance a portion of the purchase price of six Ultramax vessels we acquired in the fourth quarter of 2017. The facility has a maturity date of February 15, 2023 and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.85%. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the six Ultramax vessels and guaranteed by each vessel owning subsidiary.
As of December 31, 2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $79.0 million.
$38.7 Million Credit Facility
On December 13, 2017, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $38.7 million, or the $38.7 Million Credit Facility, which was used to finance a portion of the purchase price of three Ultramax vessels we acquired in the fourth quarter of 2017. The facility has a maturity date of December 13, 2022 and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.85%. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the three Ultramax vessels and guaranteed by each vessel owning subsidiary.
As of December 31, 2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $35.1 million.
$12.8 Million Credit Facility
On June 21, 2018, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $12.8 million, or the $12.8 Million Credit Facility. The loan facility was used to finance up to 50% of the fair market value of the SBI Lynx. The facility has a final maturity date of June 15, 2023 and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.40% per annum. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the vessel and guaranteed by the vessel owning subsidiary.
As of December 31, 2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $12.3 million.
$60.0 Million Credit Facility
On September 11, 2018, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $60.0 million, or the $60.0 Million Credit Facility. The loan facility was used to finance up to 60% of the fair market value of two Ultramax vessels (SBI Perseus and SBI Phoebe) and two Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Electra and SBI Flamenco). The facility has a final maturity date of five years from drawdown date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.25% per annum. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the four vessels and guaranteed by each of the vessel owning subsidiaries.
As of December 31, 2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $58.8 million.
$30.0 Million Credit Facility
On September 13, 2018, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $30.0 million, or the $30.0 Million Credit Facility, with ING Bank N.V. to refinance two Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Zumba and SBI Parapara). The facility has a final maturity date of five years from drawdown date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.20% per annum. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the two Kamsarmax vessels and guaranteed by each of the vessel owning subsidiaries.
As of December 31, 2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $29.4 million.
$184.0 Million Credit Facility
On September 21, 2018, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $184.0 million, or the $184.0 Million Credit Facility, with Nordea Bank AB (publ), acting through its New York branch, and Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ) to refinance up to 60% of the fair market value of six Ultramax vessels (SBI Athena, SBI Thalia, SBI Zeus, SBI Hera, SBI Poseidon and SBI Apollo) and six Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Conga, SBI Bolero, SBI Sousta, SBI Rock, SBI Reggae and SBI Mazurka). The facility, which is comprised of a term loan of up to $104.0 million and a revolver of up to $80.0 million, has a final maturity date of five years from signing date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.40% per annum. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the 12 vessels and guaranteed by each of the vessel owning subsidiaries.
As of December 31, 2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $180.2 million.
$34.0 Million Credit Facility
On October 3, 2018, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $34.0 million, or the $34.0 Million Credit Facility, with Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank to refinance up to 62.5% of the fair market value of two Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Jive and SBI Swing). The loan facility, which is comprised of a term loan up to $17.0 million and a revolver up to $17.0 million, has a final maturity date of seven years from signing date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.35% per annum. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the two vessels and guaranteed by each of the vessel owning subsidiaries.
As of December 31, 2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $34.0 million.
$90.0 Million Credit Facility
On November 8, 2018, we entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $90.0 million, or the $90.0 Million Credit Facility, with Nordea Bank Abp, acting through its New York branch, and DVB Bank SE. The loan facility, which has a final maturity date of five years from signing date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.35% per annum, was used to finance up to 60% of the fair market value of six Ultramax vessels (SBI Orion, SBI Hyperion, SBI Tethys, SBI Hercules, SBI Samson and SBI Phoenix). This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the six vessels and is guaranteed by each of the vessel owning subsidiaries.
As of December 31, 2018, the outstanding balance on this facility was approximately $90.0 million.
$19.6 Million Lease Financing - SBI Rumba
In October 2017, we entered into a financing transaction with unaffiliated third parties involving the sale and leaseback of the SBI Rumba, a 2015 Japanese built Kamsarmax vessel, for consideration of approximately $19.6 million. As part of the transaction, we have agreed to make monthly payments of $164,250 under a nine and a half year bareboat charter agreement with the buyers, which we have the option to extend for a further six months. The cost of the financing is equivalent to an implied fixed interest rate of 4.23% for 10 years. If converted to floating interest rates, based on the expected weighted average life of the transaction, the equivalent margin at the then prevailing swap rates would be LIBOR plus 2.07%. The agreement also provides us with the option to repurchase the vessel beginning on the fifth anniversary of the sale and until the end of the agreement.
$19.0 Million Lease Financing - SBI Echo
On July 18, 2018, we closed a financing transaction with an unaffiliated third party involving the sale and leaseback of the SBI Echo, a 2015 Japanese built Ultramax vessel, for consideration of $19.0 million. As part of the transaction, we agreed with the buyer to bareboat charter the vessel for a period of five years at $5,400 per day. If converted to floating interest rates, based on the expected weighted average life of the transaction, the equivalent cost of financing at the then prevailing swap rates would have been LIBOR plus 1.97% per annum. The transaction also provides us with the option to repurchase the vessel beginning on the third anniversary of the sale until the end of the bareboat charter agreement.
$19.0 Million Lease Financing - SBI Tango
On July 18, 2018, we closed a financing transaction with an unaffiliated third party involving the sale and leaseback of the SBI Tango, a 2015 Japanese built Ultramax vessel, for consideration of $19.0 million. As part of the transaction, we agreed to make payments of $5,400 per day under a five-year bareboat charter agreement with the buyer. If converted to floating interest rates, based on the expected weighted average life of the transaction, the equivalent cost of financing at the then prevailing swap rates would have been LIBOR plus 1.65% per annum. The transaction also provides us with the option to repurchase the vessel beginning on the third anniversary of the sale until the end of the bareboat charter agreement.
$20.5 Million Lease Financing - SBI Hermes
On November 16, 2018, we closed a financing transaction with an unaffiliated third party involving the sale and leaseback of the SBI Hermes, a 2016 Japanese built Ultramax vessel, for consideration of $20.5 million. As part of the transaction, we agreed with the buyer to bareboat charter the vessel for a period of five years at $5,850 per day. The transaction also provides us with an option to repurchase the vessel beginning on the third anniversary of the sale until the end of the bareboat charter agreement. If converted to floating interest rates, based on the expected weighted average life of the transaction, the equivalent cost of financing at the then prevailing swap rates would have been LIBOR plus a margin of 1.43% per annum.
As of December 31, 2018, we had $522.4$767.4 million of outstanding borrowings under the credit agreements and lease financings described above as shown in the following table (dollars in thousands):
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | December 31, 2016 | | February 28, 2017 |
| | | Amount outstanding | | Amount outstanding | | Maximum amount available |
| $39.6 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility | | $ | 20,144 |
| | $ | 20,144 |
| | $ | — |
|
| $409 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility | | 167,816 |
| | 179,473 |
| | — |
|
| $330 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility | | 225,759 |
| | 250,959 |
| | 13,200 |
|
| $42 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility | | 38,512 |
| | 38,512 |
| | — |
|
| $67.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility | | 40,461 |
| | 40,461 |
| | — |
|
| $12.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility | | 10,379 |
| | 10,379 |
| | — |
|
| $27.3 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility | | 19,375 |
| | 19,375 |
| | — |
|
| Total | | $ | 522,446 |
| | $ | 559,303 |
| | $ | 13,200 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | December 31, 2018 | | March 20, 2019 |
| | | Amount outstanding | | Amount outstanding | |
| $330 Million Credit Facility | | 140,677 |
| | 140,677 |
| |
| $42 Million Credit Facility | | 14,105 |
| | 14,105 |
| |
| $12.5 Million Credit Facility | | 9,400 |
| | 9,400 |
| |
| $27.3 Million Credit Facility | | 9,008 |
| | 9,008 |
| |
| $85.5 Million Credit Facility | | 78,972 |
| | 78,972 |
| |
| $38.7 Million Credit Facility | | 35,100 |
| | 35,100 |
| |
| $19.6 Million Lease Financing - SBI Rumba | | 18,101 |
| | 17,898 |
| |
| $12.8 Million Credit Facility | | 12,325 |
| | 12,325 |
| |
| $19.0 Million Lease Financing - SBI Tango | | 18,451 |
| | 18,259 |
| |
| $19.0 Million Lease Financing - SBI Echo | | 18,481 |
| | 18,300 |
| |
| $30.0 Million Credit Facility | | 29,420 |
| | 29,420 |
| |
| $34.0 Million Credit Facility | | 34,000 |
| | 34,000 |
| |
| $60.0 Million Credit Facility | | 58,797 |
| | 57,594 |
| |
| $184.0 Million Credit Facility | | 180,229 |
| | 180,229 |
| |
| $20.5 Million Lease Financing - SBI Hermes | | 20,299 |
| | 20,092 |
| |
| $90.0 Million Credit Facility | | 90,000 |
| | 88,025 |
| |
| Total | | $ | 767,365 |
| | $ | 763,404 |
| |
Our secured credit facilities are secured by, among other things: a first priority mortgage over the relevant collateralized vessels; a first priority assignment of earnings, and insurances from the mortgaged vessels for the specific facility; a pledge of the earnings account of the mortgaged vessels for the specific facility; and a pledge of the equity interests of each vessel owning subsidiary under the specific facility.
$21.4 Million Lease Financing - SBI Samba
In February 2019, we entered into a financing transaction with an unaffiliated third party involving the sale and leaseback of the SBI Samba, a 2015 Japanese built Kamsarmax vessel, for a consideration of $21.4 million. As part of the transaction, we agreed to make payments of $6,850 per day under a five-year bareboat charter agreement with the buyer. The transaction also provides us with the option to repurchase the vessel beginning on the third anniversary of the sale until the end of the bareboat charter agreement. This transaction, which is expected to close in the second quarter of 2019, is expected to
increase our liquidity by approximately $6.9 million after repayment of outstanding debt under the $42 Million Credit Facility, under which the SBI Samba was previously financed.
CMBFL Lease Financing
In March 2019, we agreed to sell and leaseback three Ultramax vessels (SBI Pegasus, SBI Subaru and SBI Ursa) and four Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Lambada, SBI Macarena, SBI Carioca and SBI Capoeira) to CMB Financial Leasing Co., Ltd. Upon completion, which is estimated to take place in the second quarter of 2019, our liquidity is expected to increase by $57.2 million in aggregate ($45.4 million upon closing after the repayment of outstanding debt and an additional tranche of up to $11.8 million for installation of scrubbers on the seven vessels). As part of the agreements, we will bareboat charter-in the vessels for a period of seven years. In addition, we have purchase options beginning after the end of the third year of each agreement. There is also a purchase option for each vessel upon the expiration of each agreement.
Vessel Sales
In March 2019, we entered into agreements with unaffiliated third parties to sell the SBI Electra and SBI Flamenco, two 2015 Chinese built Kamsarmax vessels, for approximately $48.0 million in aggregate. Delivery of the vessels is estimated to take place in the second quarter of 2019. It is estimated that our liquidity will increase by approximately $18.6 million after the repayment of outstanding debt under the $38.7 Million Credit Facility under which the vessels were previously financed.
Loan Covenants
Certain of our credit facilities discussed above, have, among other things, the following financial covenants, as amended or waived, the most stringent of which require us to maintain:
The ratio of net debt to total capitalization no greater than 0.60 to 1.00.
Consolidated tangible net worth (adjusted for a minimum amount of $100.0 million in historical non-operating costs and to exclude certain future non-operating items)items, including impairments,impairments), no less than $500.0 million plus (i) 25% of cumulative positive net income (on a consolidated basis) for each fiscal quarter commencing on or after December 31, 2013 and (ii) 50% of the value of any new equity issues occurring on or after December 31, 2013.
The ratio of EBITDA to net interest expense calculated on a year-to-date basis of greater than 1.00 to 1.00 for the quarters ending March 31, 2019 and June 30, 2019, 2.50 to 1.00 for the quarter ending September 30, 2019, calculated on a year-to-date basis and 2.50 to 1.00 for each quarter thereafter, calculated on a trailing four quarter basis.
Minimum liquidity of not less than the greater of $25.0 million or $0.7 million per owned vessel.
Maintain a minimum fair value of the collateral for each credit facility, such that the aggregate fair value of the vessels collateralizing the credit facility is between 140%, except in the case and 150% of our $67.5 Million Credit Facility, for which it is 115% of
the aggregate principal amount outstanding under such credit facility, or, if we do not meet these thresholds to prepay a portion of the loan or provide additional security to eliminate the shortfall.
Our credit facilities discussed above have, among other things, the following restrictive covenants which would restrict our ability to:
incur additional indebtedness;
sell the collateral vessel, if applicable;
make additional investments or acquisitions;
pay dividends; and
effect a change of control of us.
A violation of any of the financial covenants contained in our credit facilities described above may constitute an event of default under all of our credit facilities, which, unless cured within the grace period set forth under the credit facility, if applicable, or waived or modified by our lenders, provides our lenders with the right to, among other things, require us to post additional collateral, enhance our equity and liquidity, increase our interest payments, pay down our indebtedness to a level where we are in compliance with our loan covenants, sell vessels in our fleet, reclassify our indebtedness as current liabilities and accelerate our
indebtedness and foreclose their liens on our vessels and the other assets securing the credit facilities, which would impair our ability to continue to conduct our business.
Furthermore, our credit facilities contain a cross-default provision that may be triggered by a default under one of our other credit facilities. A cross-default provision means that a default on one loan would result in a default on certain of our other loans. Because of the presence of cross-default provisions in certain of our credit facilities, the refusal of any one lender under our credit facilities to grant or extend a waiver could result in certain of our indebtedness being accelerated, even if our other lenders under our credit facilities have waived covenant defaults under the respective credit facilities. If our secured indebtedness is accelerated in full or in part, it would be very difficult in the current financing environment for us to refinance our debt or obtain additional financing and we could lose our vessels and other assets securing our credit facilities if our lenders foreclose their liens, which would adversely affect our ability to conduct our business.
Moreover, in connection with any waivers of or amendments to our credit facilities that we have obtained, or may obtain in the future, our lenders may impose additional operating and financial restrictions on us or modify the terms of our existing credit facilities. These restrictions may further restrict our ability to, among other things, pay dividends, make capital expenditures or incur additional indebtedness, including through the issuance of guarantees. In addition, our lenders may require the payment of additional fees, require prepayment of a portion of our indebtedness to them, accelerate the amortization schedule for our indebtedness and increase the interest rates they charge us on our outstanding indebtedness.
As of December 31, 2016,2018, we were in compliance with all of the financial covenants contained in the credit facilities that we had entered into as of that date.
Please see Note 11, Debt, to our consolidated financial statements for additional information about theseour credit facilities.
Senior Notes due 2019
On September 22, 2014, we issued $65.0 million aggregate principal amount of our 7.50% senior unsecured notes due 2019, or our Senior Notes, in a registered public offering. The Senior Notes will mature on September 15, 2019, and may be redeemed in whole or in part at any time, or from time to time, after September 15, 2016. Interest on the Senior Notes is payable quarterly on each of March 15, June 15, September 15 and December 15, commencing on December 15, 2014. We used the net proceeds we received to fund installment payments due under our Newbuilding Program. On October 16, 2014, we issued an additional $8.625 million aggregate principal amount of our Senior Notes, pursuant to the underwriters’ option to purchase additional Senior Notes. Our 7.50% senior unsecured notesSenior Notes due 2019 commenced trading on the NYSE on September 29, 2014 under the symbol “SLTB.”
The indenture governing our Senior Notes contains certain restrictive covenants, including:
| |
| (a) | Limitation on Borrowings. We are prohibited from letting net borrowings equal or exceed 70% of our total assets, which are calculated as all of our assets of the types presented on our consolidated balance sheet. |
| |
| (b) | Limitation on Minimum Tangible Net Worth. The CompanyWe shall ensure that our net worth always exceeds $500 million. |
| |
| (c) | Reports. Following any cross default, the Companywe shall promptly notify the holders of our Senior Notes of the occurrence of such cross default. |
| |
| (d) | Limitation on Asset Sales. We shall not, and shall not permit any subsidiary to, in the ordinary course of business or otherwise, sell, lease, convey, transfer or otherwise dispose of any of our ofor any such subsidiary’s assets (including capital stock and warrants, options or other rights to acquire capital stock) other than pursuant to a Permitted Asset Sale or a Limited Permitted Asset Sale (as such terms are defined in the indenture governing our Senior Notes and described below), unless (A) the Company receives,we receive, or the relevant subsidiary receives, consideration at the time of such asset sale at least equal to the fair market value (including as to the value of all non-cash consideration), as determined in good faith by the boardour Board of directors of the Company,Directors, of the assets subject to such asset sale, and (B) within 365 days after the receipt of any net proceeds from an asset sale, the Companywe or the relevant subsidiary, as the case may be, shall apply all such net proceeds to certain permitted purposes, including the repayment of secured indebtedness, capital expenditures, repayment of unsecured indebtedness, acquire all or substantially all of the assets or, or the capital stock of, a person primarily engaged in a permitted business; provided, that in the case of the acquisition of capital stock of any person, such person is or becomes a subsidiary of the Company. |
For purposes of this covenant: a Permitted Asset Sale includes certain specified asset sales, certain vessel losses not to exceed 10% of the consolidated aggregate market value of the Company’sour assets and any transaction or series of transactions involving assets disposed of for fair market value and having an aggregate market value in any one fiscal year of up to 25% of the consolidated aggregate market value of the Company’sour assets; and a Limited Permitted Asset Sale includes any
transaction or series of transactions during a single fiscal year, the net proceeds of which are not otherwise applied pursuant to the requirements set forth in this clause (d), that results in net proceeds in excess of 25% of the consolidated aggregate market value of the Company’sour assets.
As of December 31, 2016,2018, we were in compliance with the financial covenants of our Senior Notes.
If a Limited Permitted Asset Sale occurs, the Companywe must make an offer to purchase our Senior Notes having a principal amount equal to the excess proceeds of such Limited Permitted Asset Sale at a purchase price of 101% of the principal amount of our Senior Notes to be purchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest.
In addition, if a Change of Control (as defined in the indenture for the Senior Notes) occurs, holders of our Senior Notes have the right, at their option, to require us to purchase any or all of such holders’ our Senior Notes at a purchase price of 101% of the principal amount of our Senior Notes to be purchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest.
In addition, if an event of default or an event or circumstance which, with the giving of any notice or the lapse of time, would constitute an event of default under our Senior Notes has occurred and is continuing, or we are not in compliance with the covenant described under Limitation on Borrowings or Limitation on Minimum Tangible Net Worth described above, then none of the Company or any subsidiary will be permitted to declare or pay any dividends or return any capital to its equity holders (other than the Company or a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company) or authorize or make any other distribution, payment or delivery of property or cash to its equity holders (other than the Company or a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company), or redeem, retire, purchase or otherwise acquire, directly or indirectly, for value, any interest of any class or series of its equity interests (or acquire any rights, options or warrants relating thereto but not including convertible debt) now or hereafter outstanding and held by persons other than the Company or any wholly-owned subsidiary, or repay any subordinated loans to equity holders (other than the Company or a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company) or set aside any funds for any of the foregoing purposes.
In December 2016, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $20.0 million of the outstanding Senior Notes in open market or privately negotiated transactions. The specific timing and amounts of the repurchases, which will be funded by available cash, will be in the sole discretion of management and vary based on market conditions and other factors. This authorization has no expiration date. As of December 31, 2016,2018, the full $20.0 million remainsremained available for repurchasesrepurchase under this authorization.
| |
C. | Research and Development, Patents and Licenses, Etc. |
C.Research and Development, Patents and Licenses, Etc.
Not applicable.applicable
D.Trend Information
See “Item 4. Information on the Company—Company - B. Business Overview—Overview - Industry and Market Conditions.”
| |
E. | Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements |
E.Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of December 31, 2016,2018, we did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements. Currently,arrangements, however, we arewere committed to make charter-hire payments to a third party for a chartered-in vessel. ThisThat arrangement is accounted for as an operating lease. Please see “Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations” for our other contractual obligations and commitments.
| |
F. | Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations |
F.Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations
The following table sets forth our total contractual obligations at December 31, 2016:2018:
| | | (in millions of U.S. dollars) | | Less than 1 year | | 1 to 3 years | | 3 to 5 years | | More than 5 years | | Total | | Less than 1 year | | 1 to 3 years | | 3 to 5 years | | More than 5 years | | Total |
Vessels under construction (1) | | $ | 18.6 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 18.6 |
| |
Exhaust cleaning systems (1) | | | $ | 32.9 |
| | $ | 7.8 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 40.7 |
|
Time charter-in commitments (2) | | 3.3 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3.3 |
| | 2.8 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2.8 |
|
Senior Notes (3) | | — |
| | 73.6 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 73.6 |
| | 73.6 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 73.6 |
|
Bank loans (4) | | 13.9 |
| | 43.6 |
| | 428.5 |
| | 36.4 |
| | 522.4 |
| | 61.5 |
| | 241.3 |
| | 367.4 |
| | 21.9 |
| | 692.1 |
|
Interest payments (5) | | 26.1 |
| | 48.3 |
| | 23.8 |
| | 1.9 |
| | 100.1 |
| | 40.6 |
| | 58.6 |
| | 29.8 |
| | 1.7 |
| | 130.7 |
|
Commercial management fee (6) | | 2.6 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2.6 |
| |
Technical management fee (7) | | 4.8 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 4.8 |
| |
Financing obligation (6) | | | 8.0 |
| | 16.1 |
| | 53.5 |
| | 12.8 |
| | 90.4 |
|
Commercial management fee (7) | | | 1.5 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1.5 |
|
Technical management fee (8) | | | 2.2 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2.2 |
|
| Total | | $ | 69.3 |
| | $ | 165.5 |
| | $ | 452.3 |
| | $ | 38.3 |
| | $ | 725.4 |
| | $ | 223.1 |
| | $ | 323.8 |
| | $ | 450.7 |
| | $ | 36.4 |
| | $ | 1,034.0 |
|
| |
| (1) | Represents the unpaid installments as of December 31, 20162018 relating to the remaining undelivered newbuilding vessel. Of this amount $17.2 million remains unpaid aspurchase of the date of this filing.exhaust gas cleaning systems. |
| |
| (2) | Represents the amounts expected to be paid by us on the two vesselsvessel that we have time chartered-in as of December 31, 2016,2018, assuming we redeliver the vesselsvessel to their ownersits owner on the earliest redelivery date or actual redelivery date and excluding any option periods which may be exercised by us.date. |
| |
| (3) | Represents the repayment of our Senior Notes which mature in September 2019. |
| |
| (4) | Represents the repayment of installments under the bank loans outstanding as of December 31, 2016.2018. |
| |
| (5) | Represents the interest payments on outstanding balances of our Senior Notes at 7.50% per annum and bank loans for whichat the interest rate used for each facility is based on interest rates in effect as ofat December 31, 2016, which approximate 4% inclusive of margins.2018. |
| |
| (6) | Represents the monthly payments under bareboat charter agreements. |
| |
| (7) | Represents the fixed component of the termination fees we would have to pay our commercial manager, SCM, of $300 per day for a notice period of three months’ and a payment equal to three months of management fees for each vessel that we own and each vessel under construction as of December 31, 2016.2018. Due to the variable nature of the commissions, they have been excluded from the above table. |
| |
(7)(8) | Represents the termination fees we would have to pay our technical manager, SSM, of $0.2 million per vessel per year for a notice period of three months’ and a payment equal to three months of management fees for each vessel that we own and each vessel under construction as of December 31, 2016.2018. |
|
| |
| ITEM 6. | DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEES |
| |
| A. | Directors and Senior Management |
Set forth below are the names, ages and positions of our directors and executive officers. Our boardBoard of directorsDirectors is elected annually on a staggered basis, and each director elected holds office for a three yearthree-year term or until histheir successor shall have been duly elected and qualified, except in the event of histheir death, resignation, removal or the earlier termination of histheir term of office. Our Class A directors will serve for a term expiring at the 2017 annual meeting of shareholders, our Class B directors will serve for a term expiring at the 2018 annual meeting, and our Class C directors will serve for a term expiring at the 2019 annual meeting of shareholders, our Class A directors will serve for a term expiring at the 2020 annual meeting, and our Class B directors will serve for a term expiring at the 2021 annual meeting. Officers are elected from time to time by vote of our boardBoard of directorsDirectors and hold office until a successor is elected. The business address of each of our directors and executive officers listed below is Scorpio Bulkers Inc., 9, Boulevard Charles III, MC 98000 Monaco.
|
| | | | | |
| Name | | Age | | Position |
| Emanuele A. Lauro | | 3840 |
| | Chairman, Class A Director and Chief Executive Officer |
| Robert Bugbee | | 5658 |
| | Class B Director and President |
| Cameron Mackey | | 4850 |
| | Chief Operating Officer |
| Filippo Lauro | | 4042 |
| | Vice President |
| Hugh Baker | | 4951 |
| | Chief Financial Officer |
| Fan Yang | | 30 |
| | Secretary |
| Einar Michael Steimler | | 70 |
| | Class B Director |
| Roberto Giorgi | | 6668 |
| | Class A Director |
Einar Michael Steimler | | 68 |
| | Class B Director |
| Christian M. Gut | | 3739 |
| | Class C Director |
| Thomas Ostrander | | 6668 |
| | Class A Director |
| James B. Nish | | 5860 |
| | Class C Director |
Luca ForgioneBerit Ledel Henriksen | | 4065 |
| | General Counsel |
Anoushka Kachelo | | 36 |
| | SecretaryClass B Director |
On December 4, 2018, Ms. Anoushka Kachelo resigned as Secretary of the Company and Ms. Fan Yang was appointed as Secretary of the Company.
On February 27, 2019, the Company increased the size of its Board of Directors from seven to eight members, and appointed Berit Ledel Henriksen to serve as a Class B Director, effective as of the same date. The Board of Directors has determined that Ms. Henriksen is an “independent director” as such term is defined under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the New York Exchange Listing Manual.
Biographical information concerning the directors and executive officers listed above is set forth below.
Emanuele A. Lauro, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Emanuele A. Lauro, the Company’s co-founder, serves and has served as our Chairman and Class A Director since April 9, 2013 and as our Chief Executive Officer since July 1, 2013. Mr. Lauro has also serves and has served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Scorpio Tankers (NYSE: STNG) since its initial public offering in April 2010, and as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Nordic American Offshore Ltd. (NYSE: NAO) since December 2018. He also served as Director of the Standard Club sincefrom May 2013. He2013 to January 2019. Mr. Lauro joined Scorpio Group in 2003 and has continued to serve there in a senior management position since 2004. Under Mr. Lauro’shis leadership, Scorpio Group has grown from an owner of three vessels in 2003 to become a leading operator and manager of approximately 210more than 230 vessels in 2016.2018. Over the course of the last several years, Mr. Lauro has founded and developed all of the Scorpio Group Pools in addition to several other ventures such as Scorpio Logistics, which owns and operates specialized assets engaged in the transshipment of dry cargo commodities and invests in coastal transportation and port infrastructure developments in Asia and Africa since 2007. Mr. Lauro has a degree in international business from the European Business School, London. Mr. Lauro is the brother of our Vice President, Mr. Filippo Lauro.
Robert Bugbee, President and Director
Robert Bugbee, the Company’s co-founder, serves and has served as our Class B Director since April 9, 2013 and as our President since July 1, 2013. Mr. Bugbee has more than 3034 years of experience in the shipping industry. Mr. Bugbee has also serves and has served as President and Director of Scorpio Tankers since its initial public offering in April 2010.2010 and as President and a Director of Nordic American Offshore Ltd. since December 2018. He joined Scorpio Group in FebruaryMarch 2009 and has continued to serve there in a senior management position. Prior to joining Scorpio, Group, Mr. Bugbee was a partner at Ospraie Management LLP between 2007 and 2008, a company which advises and invests in commodities and basic industry. From 1995 to 2007, Mr. Bugbee was employed at OMI Corporation, or OMI, a NYSE-listed tanker company sold in 2007. While at OMI, Mr. Bugbee served as President from January 2002 until the sale of the company, and before that served as Executive Vice President since January 2001, Chief Operating Officer since March 2000 and Senior Vice President from August 1995 to June 1998. Mr. Bugbee joined OMI in February 1995. Prior to this, he was employed by Gotaas-Larsen Shipping Corporation since 1984. During this time he took a two year sabbatical from 1987 for the M.I.B. Program at the Norwegian School for Economics and Business administrationAdministration in Bergen. He has a B.A. (Honors) from London University.
Cameron Mackey, Chief Operating Officer
Cameron Mackey serves and has served as our Chief Operating Officer since July 1, 2013. Mr. Mackey has also serves and has served as Chief Operating Officer of Scorpio Tankers since its initial public offering in April 2010 and as a Director since May 2013.2013, and as Chief Operating Officer of Nordic American Offshore Ltd. since December 2018. He joined Scorpio Group in March 2009, where he continues to serve in a senior management position. Prior to joining Scorpio, Group, he was an equity and commodity analyst at Ospraie Management LLC from 2007 to 2008. Prior to that, he was Senior Vice President of OMI Marine Services LLC from 2004 to 2007, where he was also in Business Development from 2002 to 2004. He has been employed in the shipping industry since 1994 and, earlier in his career, was employed in unlicensed and licensed positions in the merchant navy, primarily on tankers in the international fleet of Mobil Oil Corporation, where he held the qualification of Master Mariner. He has an M.B.A. from the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a B.S. from the Massachusetts Maritime Academy and a B.A. from Princeton University.
Filippo Lauro, Vice President
Filippo Lauro serves and has served as an executive officer of the Company with the title of Vice President since June 8, 2016. Mr. Filippo Lauro has also serves and has served as Vice President of Scorpio Tankers since May 2015.2015, and as Vice President of Nordic American Offshore Ltd. since December 2018. He joined Scorpio Group in 2010 and has continued to serve there in a senior management position. Prior to joining Scorpio, Group, Mr. Filippo Lauro was the founder of and held senior executive roles in several private companies, primarily active in real estate, golf courses and resorts development. Mr. Filippo Lauro is the brother of our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Emanuele Lauro.
Hugh Baker, Chief Financial Officer
Hugh Baker serves and has served as our Chief Financial Officer since July 1, 2013. Since 2012, Mr. Baker has also been employed by Scorpio Tankers focusing on business development and finance. For three years prior tobefore joining Scorpio, Mr. Baker was a Managing Director in the investment banking team at Evercore Partners in New York, concentrating on the shipping industry. Prior to Evercore, he was the Head of Shipping at HSH Nordbank in New York and was previously a Managing Director in the ship finance team at ING Bank in London. Prior to banking, Mr. Baker worked in commercial roles for Greek-owned shipping companies in London. Mr. Baker has a BA from the London School of Economics and a MSc in Shipping, Trade & Finance from Cass Business School. Mr. Baker is a Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Shipbrokers.
Fan Yang, Secretary
Fan Yang has served as our Secretary since December 2018. Ms. Yang joined Scorpio in February 2018 and also serves as Secretary of Scorpio Tankers. Ms. Yang is admitted as a solicitor of the Supreme Court of England and Wales. Prior to joining Scorpio, Ms. Yang was in private practice in London at Travers Smith LLP and Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP, and led a law reform project at the Law Commission, an independent body that makes recommendations for the reform of the law of England and Wales to Parliament. She has a BA in Law from the University of Cambridge.
Roberto Giorgi, Director
Roberto Giorgi serves and has served as our Class A Director since the closing of our initial public offering in December 2013. Mr. Giorgi has also serves and has served as Executive Chairman of Fraser Yachts since September 2014 and as a committee member of Skuld P&I Club since June 2013. From 2014 to 2015, he served as Honorary President and member of the Group Executive of V.Ships, the world’s largest ship management company. From 1988 to 2014, Mr. Giorgi has held various roles within V.Ships, including President of V.Ships Ship Management, Managing Director of V.Ships New York, head of V.Ships Leisure in the cruise sector, and head of V.Ship’s ship management operation from its Monaco office. From 2008 to 2010, Mr. Giorgi also served as President of InterManager, the international trade association for third-party and in-house ship managers, whose members between them are responsible for approximately 3,700 ships and more than 200,000 crew members. Prior to joining the V.Ships Group, he attended the San Giorgio Nautical College in Genoa (1964 –- 1969) and sailed from Deck Cadet to First Officer with Navigazione Alta Italia, Italian line and Sitmar Cruises. Before joining the merchant marine, he spent one year (1970/71) in the Naval Academy of Leghorn and sailed with the Italian Navy as Lieutenant.
Einar Michael Steimler, Director
Einar Michael Steimler serves and has served as our Class B Director since the closing of our initial public offering in December 2013.2013 and is our lead independent director. Mr. Steimler has also serves and has served as a director of DHT Holdings Inc. (NYSE:DHT), where he is also a member of the Audit and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees, and the Chairman of the Compensation Committee. Mr. Steimler has over 4046 years of experience in the shipping industry. In 2000, he was instrumental in the formation of Tanker (UK) Agencies, the commercial agent to Tankers International. He served as its Chief Executive Officer until the end of 2007,
and subsequently as its Chairman until 2011. From 1998 to 2010, Mr. Steimler served as a Director of Euronav NV (EURN:EN Brussels). He has been involved in both sale and purchase and chartering brokerage in the tanker, gas and chemical sectors and was a founder of Stemoco, a Norwegian ship brokerage firm. He graduated from the Norwegian School of Business Management in 1973 with a degree in Economics.
Christian M. Gut, Director
Christian M. Gut serves and has served as our Class C Director since the closing of our initial public offering in December 2013. Mr. Gut is the founder and manager of P2P Lending Fund, a Luxembourg based fund (SICAV-RAIF) launched in 2018 focused on marketplace consumer lending. He has over twelve15 years of experience in the consulting industry in the Asia Pacific region. Mr. Gut started his professional career at ThyssenKrupp Technologies AG (as it then was) in Essen, Germany in 2002. He later joined Singapore based EABC Pte Ltd., or EABC, in 2003 where he was appointedserved as Director on May 18, 2006.from 2006 to 2018. EABC’s services comprise market intelligence and strategy, sales promotion and support to project management in selected Asia Pacific countries, principally Australia. Furthermore, Mr. Gut isco-founded and was a co-founder and past manager of the Stellar Energy Fund, launched in Singapore in 2006, which invested in energy focused private companies to finance projects and expansion plans in Asia, Middle East and Europe in the following industries: oil trading and bunkering, gas E&P, solar, geothermal and power generating heat plants. Mr. Gut has a Bachelor’s degree in international business from the European Business School in London.
Thomas Ostrander, Director
Thomas Ostrander serves and has served as our Class A director since January 2016. From 2013 to 2015, Mr. Ostrander served as Chief Financial Officer of U.S. Alliance Paper Inc., a privately held business involved in consumer tissue converting
and marketing in the eastern half of the United States. From 2011 to 2013, he served as a Managing Director at GCA Savvian, a global investment bank. From 2006 to 2008, Mr. Ostrander served as a Managing Director and Sector Head in the Industrial Group at Banc of America Securities. From 1989 to 2006, he held various roles within Citigroup (legacy Salomon Brothers), where he was most recently Chairman of the Global Industrial Group for North America. Prior to that, he was Head of the Global Industrial Group for North America and Co-Head of the Global group. From 1976 to 1989, he served in various roles, including as a Managing Director, and he was a member of the Board of Directors of New York based Kidder Peabody & Co., where he also was Co-Founder and Co-Head of Equity Capital Markets. Furthermore, Mr. Ostrander was a Director of Westmoreland Coal Company for over 12 years, where he served as Chairman of the Corporate Governance Committee and was a member of the Audit, Compensation and Benefits, Finance and Nominating Committees. Mr. Ostrander has an MBA from Harvard Business School and an AB from the University of Michigan in Economics and Accounting.
James B. Nish, Director
James B. Nish serves and has served as our Class C director since January 2016. Mr. Nish has 28over 30 years of experience in investment banking, serving clients across a variety of international industrial markets. He also servesSince 2015, he has served as a Board member and Chairman of the Audit Committee of Gibraltar Industries, Inc. (NASDAQ: ROCK), a manufacturer and distributor of products for building markets, a position heand was also appointed as Chairman of its Capital Structure and Asset Management Committee in 2018. Mr. Nish has held since 2015, and hasalso served as a Board member of the CSG Group since 2014, a private company that provides security alarm monitoring and related home automation services to subscribers in the United States. From 2008 to 2012, Mr. Nishhe was Group Head of Middle Corporate Investment Banking at J.P.Morgan.J.P. Morgan. From 1986 to 2008, heMr. Nish served as Co-Chairman of the Investment Banking Commitment Committee and Group Head of the General Industries Group of Bear Stearns & Co. Inc., where he organized and managed investment banking coverage of a diversified group of industrial companies. Mr. Nish is a Certified Public Accountant and Adjunct Professor in both the Undergraduate Business School and MBA Programs at Baruch College, Zicklin School of Business in New York and at Pace University, Lubin School of Business in New York, where he teaches a number of courses in both the Accounting and Finance departments. Mr. Nish has an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania and a BS from the State University of New York at Buffalo in Accounting and Business.
Luca Forgione,Berit Ledel Henriksen, General CounselDirector
Luca Forgione serves and
Berit Ledel Henriksen has served as our General CounselClass B Director since July 1, 2013February 2019. Ms. Henriksen has extensive experience from the banking and finance industries. She serves as a director of Ferd Holding AS, a Norwegian investment company that manages a broad portfolio of privately owned and Nordic listed companies. Furthermore, Ms. Henriksen serves on the board of directors of three privately held companies in Norway and Canada, and on the Nomination Committees of Equinor ASA and Norsk Hydro ASA, two Norwegian listed companies. She is also a member of Norsk Hydro ASA’s Corporate Assembly. From 1985 to 2017, Ms. Henriksen held a range of management positions at DNB, Norway's largest financial services group, where she focused on shipping, energy and other international industries. Ms. Henriksen most recently served as our SecretaryDNB’s Executive Vice President and Global Head of Energy, and was Head of DNB Americas in New York between 1998 and 2004. She also previously held various other bank related board positions. Ms. Henriksen has an MBA from July 1, 2013 to December 18, 2013. Mr. Forgione also serves and has served as General Counsel of Scorpio Tankers since its initial public offering in April 2010 and served as Secretary until December 2013. He joined Scorpio Group in August 2009 where he continues to serve as General Counsel. He is licensed as a lawyer in his native Italy and as a Solicitor of the Supreme Court of England & Wales. Mr. Forgione has more than ten years of shipping industry experience and has worked in the fields of shipping, offshore logistics, commodity trading and energy since the beginning of his in-house career, most recently with Constellation Energy Commodities Group Ltd. in London, now part of Exelon (NYSE: EXC) from 2007 to 2009, and previously with Coeclerici S.p.a. in Milan from 2004 to 2007. He has experience with all aspects of the supply chain of drybulk and energy commodities (upstream and downstream), and has developed considerable understanding of the regulatory and compliance regimes surrounding the trading of physical and financial commodities as well as the owning, managing and chartering of vessels. Mr. Forgione was a Tutor in International Trade Law and Admiralty LawIvey Business School at University College London (U.K.) and more recently a Visiting Lecturer in International Trade Law at King’s College (U.K.). He has a Master’s Degree in Maritime Law from the University of Southampton (U.K.)Western Ontario, and a Law DegreeBSc from the Dalhousie University of Genoa (Italy).
Anoushka Kachelo, Secretary
Anoushka Kachelo serves and has served as our Secretary since December 18, 2013. Mrs. Kachelo also serves as Secretary of Scorpio Tankers. She joined Scorpio Group in September 2010 as Senior Legal Counsel. Mrs. Kachelo is a Solicitor of the Supreme Court of England & Wales and has worked in the fields of commodity trading, energy and asset finance. Prior to joining the Scorpio Group, Mrs. Kachelo was Legal Counsel for the Commodities Team at JPMorgan (London) and prior to that in private practice for the London office of McDermott Will & Emery and Linklaters. She has a BA in Jurisprudence from the University of Oxford (U.K.).Halifax, Canada.
Each of our non-employee directors receive cash compensation in the aggregate amount of $60,000 annually, plus either (i) an additional fee of $10,000 per year for each committee on which a director serves or (ii) an additional fee of $20,000 per year for each committee for which a director serves as Chairman. In addition, our lead independent director receives an additional fee of $20,000 per year. All actual expenses incurred while acting in their capacity as a director are reimbursed. For each board or committee meeting the non-employee director attends, the director receives $2,000. We do not have a retirement planThere are no material post-employment benefits for our executive officers or directors. By law, our employees in Monaco are entitled to a one-time payment of up to two months salary upon retirement if they meet certain minimum service requirements. For the year ended December 31, 2016,2018, we paid an aggregate compensation to our directors and senior management of approximately $4.4$6.3 million.
Executive Officers
We have employment agreements with the majority of our executive officers. These employment agreements remain in effect until terminated in accordance with their terms upon no less than 24 monthsmonths’ prior written notice. Pursuant to the terms of their respective employment agreements, our executive officers are prohibited from disclosing or unlawfully using any of our material confidential information.
Upon a change in control of us, the annual bonus provided under the employment agreement becomes a fixed bonus of between 150% and 250% of the executive’s base salary, depending on the terms of the employment agreement applicable to each executive.
Any such executive may be entitled to receive upon termination an assurance bonus equal to such fixed bonus and an immediate lump-sum payment in an amount equal to up to three times the sum of the executive’s then current base salary and the assurance bonus. If an executive’s employment is terminated for cause or voluntarily by the employee, he shall not be entitled to any salary, benefits or reimbursements beyond those accrued through the date of his termination, unless he voluntarily terminated his employment in connection with certain conditions. Those conditions include a change in control combined with a significant geographic relocation of his office, a material diminution of his duties and responsibilities, and other conditions identified in the employment agreement.
We believe that it is important to align the interests of our directors and management with that of our shareholders. In this regard, we have determined that it will generally be beneficial to us and to our shareholders for our directors and management to have a stake in our long-term performance. We expect to have a meaningful component of our compensation package for our directors and management consist of equity interests in us in order to provide them on an on-going basis with a meaningful percentage of ownership in us.
Equity Incentive Plan
Our boardBoard of directorsDirectors has adopted an equity incentive plan, which we refer to as the Equity Incentive Plan, under which directors, officers and employees of us and our subsidiaries, as well as employees of affiliated companies are eligible to receive incentive stock options and non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units and unrestricted common shares. As of December 31, 2016,2018, we had reserved a total of 3,970,5805,931,962 common shares, for issuance under the Equity Incentive Plan, subject to adjustment for changes in capitalization as provided in the Equity Incentive Plan. Our Equity Incentive Plan is administered by our Compensation Committee.
Under the terms of the Equity Incentive Plan, stock options and stock appreciation rights granted under the Equity Incentive Plan will have an exercise price equal to the fair market value of a common share on the date of grant, unless otherwise determined by the plan administrator, but in no event will the exercise price be less than the fair market value of a common share on the date
of grant. Options and stock appreciation rights will be exercisable at times and under conditions as determined by the plan administrator, but in no event will they be exercisable later than ten years from the date of grant.
The plan administrator may grant shares of restricted stock and awards of restricted stock units subject to vesting, forfeiture and other terms and conditions as determined by the plan administrator.
Adjustments may be made to outstanding awards in the event of a corporate transaction or change in capitalization or other extraordinary event. In the event of a “change in control” (as defined in the plan)Equity Incentive Plan), unless otherwise provided by the plan administrator in an award agreement, awards then outstanding will become fully vested and exercisable in full.
Our boardBoard of directorsDirectors may amend or terminate the Equity Incentive Plan and may amend outstanding awards, provided that no such amendment or termination may be made that would materially impair any rights, or materially increase any obligations, of a grantee under an outstanding award. Shareholder approval of Equity Incentive Plan amendments will be required under certain circumstances. Unless terminated earlier by our boardBoard of directors,Directors, the Equity Incentive Plan will expire ten years from the date the Equity Incentive Plan is adopted.
On June 24, 2015,September 28, 2018, we granted 135,8291,189,350 restricted shares to our officers, members of the board of directors and employees. Of these restricted shares, 7,374 restricted shares vest in three equal installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant and 128,455 restricted shares vest in three equal installments beginning on the second anniversary of the date of grant. Thewith an aggregate fair value of these awards is $2.8 million.
On July 10, 2015, we granted 41,818 restricted shares to certain employees of the Scorpio Group, which vest in three equal installments beginning on June 24, 2017. The aggregate fair value of these awards is $0.8 million.
On September 18, 2015, we granted 626,388 restricted shares$8.6 million to our officers, employees and members of our Board of Directors pursuant to the board of directors. Of these restricted shares, 35,373 restricted shares vest in three equal installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grant and 591,015 restricted shares vest in three equal installments beginning on the second anniversary of the date of grant. The aggregate fair value of these awards is $12.5 million.
On July 28, 2016, we granted 2,265,000 restricted shares to our officers and members of the board of directors.Equity Incentive Plan. Of these restricted shares, 150,000 restricted shares vest in three equal annual installments beginning June 10, 2019 and 1,039,350 restricted shares vest in three equal annual installments beginning on June 10, 2020.
On February 2, 2018, we granted 646,182 restricted shares with an aggregate fair value of $4.8 million to our officers, employees, members of our Board of Directors and SSH employees pursuant to the Equity Incentive Plan. These awards will vest in three equal annual installments beginning on December 9, 2019.
On June 1, 2017, we granted 150,000 restricted shares with an aggregate fair value of $0.9 million to our independent directors pursuant to the Equity Incentive Plan. These awards will vest in three equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary of the date of grantgrant.
On July 28, 2016, we granted 2,582,000 restricted shares to our officers, employees, members of our Board of Directors and 2,115,000SSH employees pursuant to the Equity Incentive Plan. Of these restricted shares, 150,000 restricted shares vest in three equal annual installments beginning June 5, 2017 and 2,432,000 restricted shares vest in three equal annual installments beginning on the second anniversary of the date of grant.June 5, 2018. The aggregate fair value of these awards is $7.4$8.4 million.
Compensation cost is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for each separately vesting portion of the award as if the award was, in-substance, multiple awards. Please see Note 10, Equity Incentive Plan, to our Consolidated Financial Statements included herein for additional information.
Our boardBoard of directorsDirectors currently consists of seveneight directors, fivesix of whom have been determined by our boardBoard of directorsDirectors to be independent under the rules of the NYSE and the rules and regulations of the SEC. Mr. Steimler is our lead independent director. Our boardBoard of Directors has an Audit Committee, a Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and a Compensation Committee. Our Audit Committee is comprised of our five independent directors, who are Messrs. Ostrander, Giorgi, Steimler, GutNish and Nish.Giorgi. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and our Compensation Committee are comprised of Messrs. Steimler, Giorgi and Gut. The Audit Committee, which operates under a charter, among other things, reviews our external financial reporting, engages our external auditors and oversees our internal audit activities, procedures and the adequacy of our internal controls. In addition, provided that no member of the Audit Committee has a material interest in such transaction, the Audit Committee is responsible for reviewing transactions that we may enter into in the future with other members of the Scorpio Group that our boardBoard of Directors believes may present potential conflicts of interests between us and the Scorpio Group.Scorpio. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for recommending to the boardBoard of directorsDirectors nominees for director and directors for appointment to board committees and advising the board with regard to corporate governance practices. Our shareholders may also nominate directors in accordance with procedures set forth in our bylaws. The Compensation Committee oversees our equity incentive plan and recommends director and senior employee compensation. Our shareholders may also nominate directors in accordance with procedures set forth in our bylaws.
For the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015,2018, 2017, and 20142016 we had three, foursix, six, and three employeefull time equivalents (excluding our executive officers), respectively. These employees hold administrative positions in New York, New York.
Our executive officers are employed by us and our support staff is provided by SSH pursuant to the Amended Administrative Services Agreement. Our technical manager, SSM, is responsible for identifying, screening and recruiting, directly or through a crewing agent, the officers and all other crew members for our vessels that are employed by our vessel-owning subsidiaries.
The common shares beneficially owned by our directors and our executive officers are disclosed in “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions—A. Major Shareholders.”
|
| |
| ITEM 7. | MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS. |
The following table sets forth information regarding beneficial ownership of our common shares for (i) owners of more than five percent of our common shares and (ii) our directors and executive officers, of which we are aware as of February 16, 2017.March 15, 2019. All of our shareholders, including the shareholders listed in the table below, are entitled to one vote for each share of our common stock held.
| | | Name | | No. of Shares | | | % Owned (1) | | No. of Shares | | | % Owned (1) |
| Scorpio Services Holding Limited | | 13,160,377 |
| (2 | ) | | 17.5 | % | |
| Scorpio Holdings Limited | | | 13,977,513 |
| (2 | ) | | 19.6 | % |
| GRM Investments Ltd. | | 12,839,328 |
| (3 | ) | | 17.0 | % | | 12,839,328 |
| (3 | ) | | 18.0 | % |
| Raging Capital Management, LLC * | | 9,205,700 |
| (4 | ) | | 12.2 | % | |
| Evermore Global Advisors, LLC * | | 4,351,926 |
| (5 | ) | | 5.8 | % | | 6,248,277 |
| (4 | ) | | 8.8 | % |
| Raging Capital Management LLC | | | 3,538,399 |
| (5 | ) | | 5.0 | % |
| Directors and executive officers as a group | | 4,001,591 |
| | | 5.3 | % | | 4,122,353 |
| | | 5.8 | % |
____________________
| |
| (1) | Calculated based on 75,309,48671,217,258 common shares outstanding as of February 16, 2017.March 15, 2019. |
| |
| (2) | This information is derived from a Schedule 13D/A filed with the SEC on June 23, 2016, adjusted for additional common shares issued to SSH as payment for fees pursuant to the Administrative Service Agreement.February 22, 2019 by Scorpio Holdings Limited, Scorpio Services Holding Limited, Scorpio Assets Holding Limited, Scorpio Assets SALT Limited, and Ms. Annalisa Lolli-Ghetti. Ms. Annalisa Lolli-Ghetti may be deemed to be the ultimate beneficial owner of these shares by virtue of being the majority shareholder of SSH.Scorpio Holdings Limited. Emanuele Lauro, our Director and Chief Executive Officer, Robert Bugbee, our Director and President, and Cameron Mackey, our Chief Operating Officer, own 10%, 10% and 7% of SSH,Scorpio Holdings Limited, respectively. |
| |
| (3) | This information is derived from Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on June 20, 2016.July 25, 2017. |
| |
| (4) | This information is derived from Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 14, 2017.11, 2019. |
| |
| (5) | This information is derived from Schedule 13G13G/A filed with the SEC on January 23, 2017.February 14, 2018. |
* Includes common shares held by funds managed thereby.
As of February 1, 2017,March 15, 2019, we had 3464 shareholders of record, eight15 of which were located in the United States and held an aggregate of 73,744,28267,619,958 shares of our common stock, representing 98%94.9% of our outstanding common shares. However, one of the U.S. shareholders of record is Cede & Co., a nominee of The Depository Trust Company, which held 70,106,17265,545,567 shares of our common stock, as of that date. Accordingly, we believe that the shares held by Cede & Co. include common shares beneficially owned by both holders in the United States and non-U.S. beneficial owners. We are not aware of any arrangements the operation of which may at a subsequent date result in our change of control.
| |
| B. | Related Party Transactions |
Management of Our Fleet
On September 29, 2016, we agreed to amend our master agreement, or the Master Agreement, with SCM and SSM, and our administrative services agreement, or the Administrative Services Agreement, with SSH under a deed of amendment, or Deed of Amendment. Pursuant to the terms of the Deed of Amendment, on December 9, 2016, we entered into definitive documentation to memorialize the agreed amendments to the Master Agreement, or the Amended and Restated Master Agreement. The Amended and Restated Master Agreement and the Administrative Services Agreement as amended by the Deed of Amendment, or the Amended Administrative Services Agreement, are effective as from September 29, 2016.
Pursuant to the Amended and Restated Master Agreement, effective beginning on the fifth day within any 20 trading day period that the closing price of our common shares on the NYSE is equal to or greater than $5.00, the commission payable for commercial management would be reinstated to 1.75% of all monies earned by a vessel from 1%. As of close of trading on the NYSE on November 18, 2016, the condition was met and the commission payable for commercial management was reinstated to 1.75% of all monies earned by a vessel, effective November 19, 2016.
Set forth below is a description of the other material terms of the Amended and Restated Master Agreement and the Amended Administrative Services Agreement. Please also see Note 13, Related Party Transactions, to the Consolidated Financial Statements included herein for additional information.
Commercial and Technical Management Agreements - Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement
Our vessels are commercially managed by SCM and technically managed by SSM pursuant to the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement, which may be terminated by either party upon 24 months’ notice, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the provisions of the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement. In the event of the sale of one or more vessels, a notice period of three months’ and a payment equal to three months of management fees will apply, provided that the termination does not amount to a change of control, including a sale of substantially all vessels, in which case a payment equal to 24 months of management fees will apply. SCM and SSM are companies affiliated with us. The vessel we charter-in is also commercially managed by SCM. We expect that additional vessels that we may charter-in or acquire in the future and the newbuilding drybulk vessel that is expected to be delivered to us during the second quarter of 2017, will also be managed under the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement or on substantially similar terms.
SCM’s services include securing employment for our vessels in the spot market and on time charters. SCM also manages the Scorpio Group Pools in which our vessels are employed. For commercial management of any of our vessels that does not operate in one of these pools, we pay SCM a daily fee of $300 per vessel, plus a 1.75% commission on the gross revenues per charter fixture. The Scorpio Group Pool participants, including us and third-party owners of similar vessels, are each expected to pay SCM a pool management fee of $300 per vessel per day, plus a 1.75% commission on the gross revenues per charter fixture.
SSM’s services include providing technical support, such as arranging the hiring of qualified officers and crew, supervising the maintenance and performance of vessels, purchasing supplies, spare parts and new equipment, arranging and supervising drydocking and repairs, and monitoring regulatory and classification society compliance and customer standards. We pay SSM an annual fee of $200,000$160,000 plus charges for certain itemized services per vessel to provide technical management services for each of our owned vessels. In addition, representatives of SSM, including certain subcontractors, providepreviously provided us with construction supervisory services while our vessels arewere being constructed in shipyards. For these services, we compensatecompensated SSM for its direct expenses, which can varyvaried between $200,000 and $500,000 per vessel.
Amended Administrative Services Agreement
We haveIn 2016, we entered into anthe Amended Administrative Services Agreement with SSH for the provision of administrative staff, office space and accounting, legal compliance, financial and information technology services. SSH is a company affiliated with us. The services provided to us by SSH may be sub-contracted to other entities within the Scorpio Group.Scorpio. Pursuant to the Amended Administrative Services Agreement, we reimburse SSH for the reasonable direct or indirect expenses it incurs in providing us with the administrative services described above.
SSH also arranges vessel sales and purchases for us. We alsopreviously paid SSH a fee, payable in our common shares, for arranging vessel acquisitions, including newbuildings. The amount of common shares payable was determined by dividing $250,000 by the market value of our common shares based on the volume weighted average price of our common shares over the 30 trading day period immediately preceding the contract date of a definitive agreement to acquire any vessel. As of the date of this annual report, we issued an aggregate of 178,580180,716 common shares to SSH in connection with the deliveries of our newbuilding vessels, and expect to issue an additional 2,136 common shares to SSH upon the delivery of the remaining drybulk vessel under construction. In November 2014, SSH agreed to waive its fee on vessel acquisitions contracted after November 20, 2014, for so long as the closing price of our common shares remained below a specified threshold.vessels. Effective September 29, 2016, pursuant to the terms of the Amended Administrative Services Agreement, we agreed with SSH to eliminate this fee was eliminated on all future acquisitions.
SSH has agreed with us not to own any drybulk carriers greater than 30,000 dwt for so long as the Amended Administrative Services Agreement is in full force and effect. This agreement may be terminated by SSH after the third anniversary of our initial public offering upon 12 months’ prior written notice or by us with 24 months’ notice.
The fees and rates charged as vessel operating costs by the related party port agent are based on the prevailing market rates for such services in each respective region.
Other Related Party Transactions
In 2016, an Executive Officer of the Company acquired a minority interest, which in 2018 increased to a majority interest, in an insurance broker which arranges hull and machinery and war risk insurance for certain of our owned and finance leased vessels. This broker has arranged such policies for the Company since 2013 and the extent of the coverage and the manner in which the policies are priced did not change as a result of this transaction. In September 2018 the Executive Officer disposed of their interest in the insurance broker in its entirety to a third party not affiliated with the Company. The amounts recorded reflect the amortization of the policy premiums, which are paid directly to the broker, who then remits the premiums to the underwriters. Such payments, which are made in advance, are classified as prepaid expenses and other current assets on the Consolidated Balance
Sheet until they are expensed at which point they are recorded as vessel operating expenses in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
On October 12, 2018, we invested $100.0 million in Scorpio Tankers, a related party of ours, for approximately 54.1 million shares of Scorpio Tankers, representing approximately 10.9% of Scorpio Tankers’ then issued and outstanding common shares. The investment was part of a larger $337.0 million equity raise through a public offering of common shares by Scorpio Tankers. Scorpio Tankers owns and operates a fleet of tankers transporting petroleum products. Certain of our directors and executive officers serve in similar positions in Scorpio Tankers and in other entities within Scorpio. On January 18, 2019, Scorpio Tankers effected a one-for-ten reverse stock split and as such we now own approximately 5.4 million common shares of Scorpio Tankers.
Please see Note 15, Related Party Transactions, to our consolidated financial statements for additional information about our related party transactions.
Related Party Balances
For the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, we had the following balances with entities controlled by the Lolli-Ghetti family and with Scorpio Tankers (herein referred to as related party affiliates) in the consolidated statement of operations and balance sheet are as follows:
For the year ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, we had the following balances with related parties,“related parties”), which have been included in the consolidated statement of operations (tabular amounts(amounts in thousands of U.S. dollars).thousands):
| | | | For the year ended December 31, | For the year ended December 31, |
| | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Vessel revenue | | | | | | | | | | |
| Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool | $ | 31,319 |
| | $ | 25,151 |
| | $ | 34,986 |
| $ | 87,305 |
| | $ | 67,825 |
| | $ | 31,319 |
|
| Scorpio Ultramax Pool | 46,227 |
| | 26,338 |
| | 10,196 |
| 155,197 |
| | 94,380 |
| | 46,227 |
|
| Scorpio Capesize Pool | — |
| | 4,857 |
| | — |
| |
| SCM | 856 |
| | 718 |
| | 31 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 856 |
|
| Total vessel revenue | $ | 78,402 |
| | $ | 57,064 |
| | $ | 45,213 |
| $ | 242,502 |
| | $ | 162,205 |
| | $ | 78,402 |
|
| Voyage expense | | | | | | | | | | |
| SCM | $ | 319 |
| | $ | 664 |
| | $ | 148 |
| $ | — |
| | $ | 172 |
| | $ | 319 |
|
| Vessel operating cost: | | | | | | |
| Vessel operating cost | | | | | | |
| SSM | $ | 7,191 |
| | $ | 2,765 |
| | $ | 122 |
| $ | 13,361 |
| | $ | 9,379 |
| | $ | 7,191 |
|
| Port agent | | 117 |
| | 13 |
| | — |
|
| Insurance brokerage | | 1,721 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Total vessel operating cost | | $ | 15,199 |
| | $ | 9,392 |
| | $ | 7,191 |
|
| General and administrative expense: | | | | | | | | | | |
| SCM | $ | 43 |
| | $ | 258 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 45 |
| | $ | 108 |
| | $ | 43 |
|
| SSM | — |
| | — |
| | 51 |
| 99 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| SSH | 3,949 |
| | 1,265 |
| | 56 |
| 6,707 |
| | 5,643 |
| | 3,949 |
|
| SUK | 862 |
| | 486 |
| | 717 |
| |
| Scorpio UK Limited | | 1,665 |
| | 971 |
| | 862 |
|
| Total general and administrative expense | $ | 4,854 |
| | $ | 2,009 |
| | $ | 824 |
| $ | 8,516 |
| | $ | 6,722 |
| | $ | 4,854 |
|
| Income (loss) from equity investment | | | | | | |
| Scorpio Tankers Inc. | | $ | (7,178 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
|
| Write down on assets held for sale | | | | | | | | | | |
SCM | $ | 500 |
| | $ | 12,465 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | — |
| | $ | 147 |
| | $ | 500 |
|
| SSM | 500 |
| | 13,000 |
| | — |
| — |
| | 200 |
| | 500 |
|
| Total write down on assets held for sale | $ | 1,000 |
| | $ | 25,465 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | — |
| | $ | 347 |
| | $ | 1,000 |
|
At December 31, 20162018 and 2015,2017, we had the following balances with related parties, which have been included in the consolidated balance sheets (tabular amounts and the notes thereto(amounts in thousands of U.S. dollars except per share and per vessel data)thousands):
| | | | As of December 31, | As of December 31, |
| | 2016 | | 2015 | 2018 | | 2017 |
| Assets | | | | | | |
| Due from related parties-current: | | | | | | |
| Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool | $ | 2,579 |
| | $ | 3,376 |
| $ | 4,017 |
| | $ | 3,977 |
|
| Scorpio Ultramax Pool | 1,661 |
| | 2,129 |
| 3,321 |
| | 2,578 |
|
| Scorpio Capesize Pool | — |
| | 2,268 |
| |
| SCM | — |
| | 424 |
| |
| Total due from related parties-current | $ | 4,240 |
| | $ | 8,197 |
| $ | 7,338 |
| | $ | 6,555 |
|
| Due from related parties non-current: | | | | | | |
| Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool | $ | 4,606 |
| | $ | 4,868 |
| $ | 4,806 |
| | $ | 5,080 |
|
| Scorpio Ultramax Pool | 6,633 |
| | 7,657 |
| 10,542 |
| | 10,741 |
|
| Total due from related parties non-current | $ | 11,239 |
| | $ | 12,525 |
| $ | 15,348 |
| | $ | 15,821 |
|
| Equity investment in Scorpio Tankers Inc. | | $ | 92,281 |
| | $ | — |
|
| Liabilities | | | | | | |
| Due to related parties-current: | | | | | | |
| SCM | $ | 507 |
| | $ | 3,415 |
| $ | 8 |
| | $ | — |
|
| SSM | 209 |
| | 4,274 |
| 116 |
| | 69 |
|
| SSH | 321 |
| | — |
| 357 |
| | 297 |
|
| Less balances due to SCM and SSM included in assets held for sale | — |
| | (7,065 | ) | |
| Total due from related parties-current | $ | 1,037 |
| | $ | 624 |
| $ | 481 |
| | $ | 366 |
|
Please see “Item 3. Key Information - D. Risk Factors - Risks Related to our Relationship with Scorpio and its Affiliates”.
Related Party Share Issuances
On June 20, 2016, we issued 23.0 million common shares, par value $0.01 per share, at $3.05 per share in an underwritten public offering. SSH purchased an aggregate of 5,250,000approximately 5.3 million common shares at the public offering price.
On March 22, 2016, we issued 21.0 million common shares, par value $0.01 per share, at $3.00 per share in an underwritten public offering. SSH and certain of our directors purchased an aggregate of 5,030,000approximately 5.0 million common shares at the public offering price.
On June 16, 2015, we issued 11,083,333 common shares, par value of $0.01 perFor information on additional share at $18.00 per share in an underwritten public offering. SSHissuances under the Equity Incentive Plan see “Item 6. Directors, Senior Management and certain of our executive officers purchased an aggregate of 833,333 common shares at the public offering price. On June 23, 2015, underwriters exercised their option to purchase an additional 1,662,500 additional common shares in connection with the public offering.
In November 2014, certain of our executive officers and SSH purchased an aggregate of 345,500 common shares in our November 2014 Private Placement.Employees - B. Equity Incentive Plan.”
| |
| C. | INTERESTS OF EXPERTS AND COUNSEL |
Not applicable.
|
| |
| ITEM 8. | FINANCIAL INFORMATION |
| |
| A. | Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information |
See “Item 18. Financial Statements.”
Legal Proceedings
To our knowledge, we are not currently a party to any lawsuit that, if adversely determined, would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or liquidity. As such, we do not believe that pending legal proceedings, taken as a whole, should have any significant impact on our financial statements. From time to time in the future we may be subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business, principally personal injury and property casualty claims. While we expect that these claims would be covered by our existing insurance policies, those claims, even if lacking merit, could result in the expenditure of significant financial and managerial resources. We have not been involved in any legal proceedings which may have, or have had, a significant effect on our financial position, results of operations or liquidity, nor are we aware of any proceedings that are pending or threatened which may have a significant effect on our financial position, results of operations or liquidity.
Dividend Policy
While we currently do not intend to payThe declaration and payment of dividends is subject at all times to the holdersdiscretion of our common shares, we continue to invest our available cash in the growthBoard of our fleetDirectors. The timing and developmentamount of our business. We will continue to assess our dividend policy and our board of directors may determine it is in the best interest of the Company to pay dividends, in the future. Any dividends paid by us will be income to a U.S. shareholder. Please see “Item 10. Additional Information - E. Taxation” for additional information relating to the U.S. federal income tax treatment of our dividend payments, if any, are declareddepends on, among other things, our earnings, financial condition, cash requirements and availability, fleet renewal and expansion, restrictions in our loan agreements, the future.provisions of Marshall Islands law affecting the payment of dividends and other factors.
We are a holding company with no material assets other than the equity interests in our wholly-owned subsidiaries. As a result, our ability to pay dividends, if any, depends on our subsidiaries and their ability to distribute funds to us. Our secured credit facilities have restrictions on our ability, and the ability of certain of our subsidiaries, to pay dividends in the event of a default or breach of covenants under the credit facility agreement. Under such circumstances, we or our subsidiaries may not be able to pay dividends so long as we are in default or have breached certain covenants of the credit facility without our lender’s consent or waiver of the default or breach. In addition, Marshall Islands law generally prohibits the payment of dividends (i) other than from surplus (retained earnings and the excess of consideration received for the sale of shares above the par value of the shares) or (ii) when a company is insolvent or (iii) if the payment of the dividend would render the company insolvent.
In addition, we may incur expenses or liabilities, including extraordinary expenses, decreases in revenues, including as a result of unanticipated off-hire days or loss of a vessel, or increased cash needs that could reduce or eliminate the amount of cash that we have available for distribution as dividends.
The declarationDuring 2018, our Board of Directors declared and paymentwe paid a quarterly cash dividends of dividends is subject at$0.02 per share totaling approximately $6.0 million in the aggregate. In January 2019, our Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.02 per share, payable on or about March 15, 2019, to all timesshareholders of record as of February 15, 2019. Please see “Item 10. Additional Information - E. Taxation” for additional information relating to the discretionU.S. federal income tax treatment of our board of directors. The timing and amount of dividends,dividend payments, if any depends on our earnings, financial condition, cash requirements and availability, fleet renewal and expansion, restrictionsare declared in the loan agreements, the provisions of Marshall Islands law affecting the payment of dividends and other factors.future.
There have been no significant changes since the date of the consolidated financial statements included in this annual report.
|
| |
| ITEM 9. | OFFER AND THE LISTING |
| |
| A. | Offer and Listing Details. |
Our common shares have traded onPlease see “Item 9. Offer and the NYSE since December 12, 2013 under the symbol “SALT.” In addition, during the period from July 3, 2013 through July 31, 2014, our common shares minimally traded on the Norwegian OTC under the symbol “SALT.” The following table sets forth the high and low closing prices for our common shares for the periods indicated, as reported by the NYSE.
All share prices have been adjusted to account for the one-for-twelve reverse stock split effected on December 31, 2015.
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | NYSE |
| For the Fiscal Year Ended | | High (U.S.$) | | Low
(U.S.$) |
| December 31, 2016 | | $ | 8.34 |
| | $ | 1.84 |
|
| December 31, 2015 | | 33.12 |
| | 7.20 |
|
| December 31, 2014 | | 126.96 |
| | 22.92 |
|
| December 31, 2013 (beginning December 12, 2013) | | 120.60 |
| | 112.56 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | NYSE |
| For the Quarter Ended | | High
(U.S.$) | | Low
(U.S.$) |
| | | |
| | |
|
| December 31, 2016 | | $ | 5.80 |
| | $ | 3.39 |
|
| September 30, 2016 | | 3.99 |
| | 2.91 |
|
| June 30, 2016 | | 4.20 |
| | 2.65 |
|
| March 31, 2016 | | 8.34 |
| | 1.84 |
|
| December 31, 2015 | | 19.56 |
| | 7.20 |
|
| September 30, 2015 | | 22.80 |
| | 17.04 |
|
| June 30, 2015 | | 32.16 |
| | 19.08 |
|
| March 31, 2015 | | 33.12 |
| | 15.72 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | NYSE |
| For the Month | | High
(U.S.$) | | Low
(U.S.$) |
| | | |
| | |
|
| February 2017 (through and including February 24, 2017) | | $ | 7.90 |
| | $ | 6.80 |
|
| January 2017 | | 7.55 |
| | 5.65 |
|
| December 2016 | | 5.60 |
| | 4.65 |
|
| November 2016 | | 5.80 |
| | 3.50 |
|
| October 2016 | | 3.95 |
| | 3.39 |
|
| September 2016 | | 3.99 |
| | 3.33 |
|
| August 2016 | | 3.49 |
| | 3.04 |
|
Not applicable
Our common shares have traded on the NYSE since December 12, 2013, under the symbol “SALT,” and our 7.50% Senior Notes due 2019 have traded on the NYSE since September 29, 2014 under the symbol “SLTB.” During the period from July 3, 2013 through July 31, 2014, our common shares minimally traded on the Norwegian OTC under the symbol “SALT.”
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
|
| |
| ITEM 10. | ADDITIONAL INFORMATION |
Not applicable.
| |
| B. | Memorandum and Articles of Association. |
Our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation and bylaws have been filed as Exhibit 3.1 and Exhibit 3.2, respectively, to our Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration No. 333-192246), declared effective by the SEC on December 11, 2013, and are hereby incorporated by reference into this annual report. In December 2015, upon receiving shareholder approval, we amended our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to effect a one-for-twelve reverse stock split of our common shares, par value $0.01 per share, and to reduce the total number of authorized common shares to 56,250,000 shares. In June 2016, upon receiving shareholder approval, we amended our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to increase the aggregate number of shares of capital stock that we are authorized to issue to One Hundred and Sixty-Two Million Five Hundred Thousand (162,500,000), consisting of One Hundred and Twelve Million Five Hundred Thousand (112,500,000) common shares, par value $0.01 per share, and Fifty Million (50,000,000) preferred shares, par value $0.01 per share. In June 2018, upon receiving shareholder approval, we amended our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to increase the aggregate number of shares of capital stock that we are authorized to issue to Two Hundred and Sixty-Two Million Five Hundred Thousand (262,500,000), consisting of Two Hundred and Twelve Million Five Hundred Thousand (212,500,000) common shares, par value $0.01 per share, and Fifty Million (50,000,000) preferred shares, par value $0.01 per share. These amendments to our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation are filed as exhibits to this annual report.
Information regarding the rights, preferences and restrictions attaching to each class of our shares is described in the section entitled “Description of Capital Stock” in the accompanying prospectus to our Registration Statement on Form F-3 (File No. 333-201354)333-222013) declared effective by the SEC on January 15, 2015,December 27, 2017, provided that since the date of such Registration Statement, our totalauthorized capital stock includes 212.5 million common shares, of which 71.2 million were issued and outstanding common shares has increased to 75,298,676 as of December 31, 2016.
Stockholders Rights Agreement
On January 14, 2016, we entered into the First Amended and Restated Stockholders Rights Agreement, or the Stockholders Rights Agreement, with Computershare Trust Company, N.A., as Rights Agent, which amended and restated in its entirety the Stockholders Rights Agreement dated June 18, 2015. Under the Stockholders Rights Agreement, we declared a dividend payable of one preferred stock purchase right, or Right, for each outstanding share of our common stock, to our stockholders of record at the close of business on June 29, 2015. Each Right entitled the registered holder to purchase from us a unit consisting of one one-thousandth of a share of our Series A Participating Preferred Stock, par value $0.01 per share. The Rights separate from the common stock and become exercisable after the earlier of (1) the 10th calendar day (or such later date as determined by our board of directors) after the public announcement that a person or group of affiliated or associated persons has acquired beneficial ownership of 20% or more of shares of our common stock or (2) the 10th business day (or such later date as determined by our board of directors) after a person or group announces a tender or exchange offer, that would result in ownership by that person or group of 20% or more of shares of our common stock. On the distribution date, each holder of a Right would have been entitled to purchase for $50.00, or the Exercise Price, a fraction (1/1000th) of one share of our Series A Participating Preferred Stock, which has similar economic terms as one share of our common stock.
If an acquiring person, or an Acquiring Person, acquires more than 20% of the shares of our common stock, then each holder of a Right (except that Acquiring Person) would have been entitled to buy at the Exercise Price, a number of shares of our common stock which had a market value of twice the Exercise Price. Any time after the date an Acquiring Person obtained more than 20% of shares of our common stock and before that Acquiring Person acquired more than 50% of outstanding shares of our common stock, we may have exchanged the Rights, in whole or in part, for common shares at an exchange ratio of one common share per Right, and in certain circumstances, we may have elected to exchange the Rights for cash or other securities having a value approximately equal to one common share. The Rights expired on the earliest of (i) June 18, 2016 or (ii) the redemption or exchange of the Rights by us as described above. The rights were not redeemed or exchanged and therefore expired on June 18, 2016. We could have redeemed the Rights at any time on or prior to the earlier of the 10th business day following the public announcement that a person has acquired ownership of 20% or more of shares of our common stock. The terms of the Rights and the Stockholders Rights Agreement may have been amended to make changes that did not adversely affect the rights of the Rights holders (other than the Acquiring Person). The Rights did not have any voting rights. The Rights had the benefit of certain customary anti-dilution protections.
March 15, 2019.
Attached as exhibits to this annual report are the contracts we consider to be both material and outside the ordinary course of business during the two-year period immediately preceding the date of this annual report. We refer you to “Item 4. Information on the Company”, “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects - B. Liquidity and Capital Resources”, “Item 6. Directors, Senior Management and Employees—B. Compensation” and “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions—B. Related Party Transactions” for a discussion of these agreements.
Other than as set forth above, there were no material contracts, other than contracts entered into in the ordinary course of business, to which we were a party during the two yeartwo-year period immediately preceding the date of this annual report.
Under Marshall Islands law, there are currently no restrictions on the export or import of capital, including foreign exchange controls or restrictions that affect the remittance of dividends, interest or other payments to non-resident holders of our common shares.
The following is a discussion of the material Marshall Islands and U.S. federal income tax considerations of the ownership and disposition by a U.S. Holder and a Non-U.S. Holder, each as defined below, with respect to theour common shares. This discussion does not purport to deal with the tax consequences of owning common shares to all categories of investors, some of which, such as dealers in securities or commodities, financial institutions, insurance companies, tax-exempt organizations, U.S. expatriates, persons liable for the alternative minimum tax, persons who hold common shares as part of a straddle, hedge, conversion transaction or integrated investment, U.S. Holders whose functional currency is not the United States dollar, persons required to recognize income no later than when such income is included on an “applicable financial statement” and investors that own, actually or under applicable constructive ownership rules, 10% or more of the Company’sour common shares, may be subject to special rules. This discussion deals only with holders who hold theour common shares as a capital asset. You are encouraged to consult your own tax advisors concerning the overall tax consequences arising in your own particular situation under U.S. federal, state, local or foreign law of the ownership of our common shares.
Marshall Islands Tax Considerations
In the opinion of Seward & Kissel LLP, the following are the material Marshall Islands tax consequences of our activities to us and of our common shares to our shareholders. We are incorporated in the Marshall Islands. Under current Marshall Islands law, we are not subject to tax on income or capital gains, and no Marshall Islands withholding tax will be imposed upon payments of dividends by us to our shareholders.
U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations
In the opinion of Seward & Kissel LLP, our U.S. counsel, the following are the material U.S. federal income tax consequences of our activities to us, and of the ownership of our common shares to U.S. Holders and Non-U.S. Holders, each as defined below. The following discussion of U.S. federal income tax matters is based on the Code, judicial decisions, administrative pronouncements, and existing and proposed regulations issued by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, or the Treasury Regulations, all of which are subject to change, possibly with retroactive effect.
U.S. Federal Income Taxation of Operating Income: In General
We anticipate that we will earn substantially all our income from the hiring or leasing of vessels for use on a spot or time charter basis, from participation in a pool or from the performance of services directly related to those uses, all of which we refer to as “shipping income.”
Unless we qualify from an exemption from U.S. federal income taxation under Section 883 of the Code, or Section 883, as discussed below, a foreign corporation will be subject to U.S. federal income taxation on its “shipping income” that is treated as derived from sources within the United States, to which we refer as “U.S. source shipping income.” For U.S. federal income tax purposes, “U.S. source shipping income” includes 50% of shipping income that is attributable to transportation that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States.
Shipping income attributable to transportation exclusively between non-U.S. ports will be considered to be 100% derived from sources entirely outside the United States. Shipping income derived from sources outside the United States will not be subject to any U.S. federal income tax.
Shipping income attributable to transportation exclusively between U.S. ports is considered to be 100% derived from U.S. sources. However, we are not permitted by U.S. law to engage in the transportation that produces 100% U.S. source shipping income.
In the absence of exemption from tax under Section 883, we anticipate that our gross U.S. source shipping income would be subject to a 4% U.S. federal income tax imposed without allowance for deductions, as described below.
Exemption of Operating Income from U.S. Federal Income Taxation
Under Section 883 and the Treasury Regulations thereunder, a foreign corporation will be exempt from U.S. federal income taxation of its U.S. source shipping income if:
(1) it is organized in a “qualified foreign country,” which is one that grants an “equivalent exemption” from tax to corporations organized in the U.S. in respect of each category of shipping income for which exemption is being claimed under Section 883; and
(2) one of the following tests is met: (A) more than 50% of the value of its shares is beneficially owned, directly or indirectly, by “qualified shareholders,” which as defined includes individuals who are “residents” of a qualified foreign country, to which we refer as the “50% Ownership Test”; or (B) its shares are “primarily and regularly traded on an established securities market” in a qualified foreign country or in the United States, to which we refer as the “Publicly-Traded Test.”
The Republic of the Marshall Islands, the jurisdiction where we are incorporated, has been officially recognized by the IRS as a qualified foreign country that grants the requisite “equivalent exemption” from tax in respect of each category of shipping income we earn and currently expect to earn in the future. Therefore, we will be exempt from U.S. federal income taxation with respect to our U.S. source shipping income if we satisfy either the 50% Ownership Test or the Publicly-Traded Test.
Given the widely held nature of our common shares, we do not currently anticipate circumstances under which we would be able to satisfy the 50% Ownership Test.
Publicly-Traded Test
The Treasury Regulations promulgated under Section 883 provide, in pertinent part, that shares of a foreign corporation will be considered to be “primarily traded” on an established securities market in a country if the number of shares of each class of stock that are traded during any taxable year on all established securities markets in that country exceeds the number of shares in each such class that are traded during that year on established securities markets in any other single country. Our common shares, which constitute our sole class of issued and outstanding stock, are “primarily traded” on the NYSE, which is an established market for these purposes.
Under the Treasury Regulations, our common shares will be considered to be “regularly traded” on an established securities market if one or more classes of our shares representing more than 50% of our outstanding stock, by both total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote and total value, are listed on such market, to which we refer as the “listing threshold.” Our common shares, which constitutes our sole class of issued and outstanding stock, isare listed on the NYSE. Accordingly, we will satisfy the listing threshold.
The Treasury Regulations also require that with respect to each class of stock relied upon to meet the listing threshold, (1) such class of stock is traded on the market, other than in minimal quantities, on at least 60 days during the taxable year or one-sixth of the days in a short taxable year, which we refer to as the “trading frequency test”; and (2) the aggregate number of shares of such class of stock traded on such market during the taxable year must be at least 10% of the average number of shares of such class of stock outstanding during such year or as appropriately adjusted in the case of a short taxable year, which we refer to as the “trading volume” test. Even if this were not the case, the Treasury Regulations provide that the trading frequency and trading volume tests will be deemed satisfied if, as is expected to be the case with our common shares, such class of stock is traded on an established securities market in the United States and such shares are regularly quoted by dealers making a market in such shares.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Treasury Regulations provide, in pertinent part, that a class of shares will not be considered to be “regularly traded” on an established securities market for any taxable year in which 50% or more of the vote and value of the outstanding shares of such class are owned, actually or constructively under specified share attribution rules, on more than half the days during the taxable year by persons who each own 5% or more of the vote and value of such class of outstanding stock, to which we refer as the “5% Override Rule.”
For purposes of being able to determine the persons who actually or constructively own 5% or more of the vote and value of our common shares, or “5% Shareholders,” the Treasury Regulations permit us to rely on those persons that are identified on
Schedule 13G and Schedule 13D filings with the SEC, as owning 5% or more of our common shares. The Treasury Regulations further provide that an investment company that is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, will not be treated as a 5% Shareholder for such purposes.
In the event the 5% Override Rule is triggered, the Treasury Regulations provide that the 5% Override Rule will nevertheless not apply if we can establish that within the group of 5% Shareholders, qualified shareholders (as defined for purposes of Section 883) own sufficient number of shares to preclude non-qualified shareholders in such group from owning 50% or more of our common shares for more than half the number of days during the taxable year.
We believe that we satisfied the Publicly-Traded Test for the 20162018 taxable year and were not subject to the 5% Override Rule, and we intend to take that position on our 20162018 U.S. federal income tax returns.
Taxation in Absence of Section 883 Exemption
If the benefits of Section 883 are unavailable, our U.S. source shipping income would be subject to a 4% tax imposed by Section 887 of the Code on a gross basis, without the benefit of deductions, or the “4% gross basis tax regime,” to the extent that such income is not considered to be “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business, as described below. Since under the sourcing rules described above, no more than 50% of our shipping income would be treated as being U.S. source shipping income, the maximum effective rate of U.S. federal income tax on our shipping income would never exceed 2% (i.e., 50% of 4% gross basis tax regime).
To the extent our U.S. source shipping income is considered to be “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business, as described below, any such “effectively connected” U.S. source shipping income, net of applicable deductions, would be subject to U.S. federal income tax, currently imposed at ratesa rate of up to 35%21%. In addition, we would generally be subject to the 30% “branch profits” tax on earnings effectively connected with the conduct of such trade or business, as determined after allowance for certain adjustments, and on certain interest paid or deemed paid attributable to the conduct of our U.S. trade or business.
Our U.S. source shipping income would be considered “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business only if:
| |
| (1) | we have, or are considered to have, a fixed place of business in the U.S.United States involved in the earning of U.S. source shipping income; and |
| |
| (2) | substantially all of our U.S. source shipping income is attributable to regularly scheduled transportation, such as the operation of a vessel that follows a published schedule with repeated sailings at regular intervals between the same points for voyages that begin or end in the United States. |
We do not intend to have, or permit circumstances that would result in having, any vessel sailing to or from the United States on a regularly scheduled basis. Based on the foregoing and on the expected mode of our shipping operations and other activities, it is anticipated that none of our U.S. source shipping income will be treated as “effectively connected” with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business, which we refer to as ECI.
U.S. Taxation of Gain on Sale of Vessels
Regardless of whether we qualify for exemption under Section 883, we will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax with respect to gain realized on a sale of a vessel, provided the sale is considered to occur outside of the United States under U.S. federal income tax principles. In general, a sale of a vessel will be considered to occur outside of the U.S.United States for this purpose if title to the vessel, and risk of loss with respect to the vessel, pass to the buyer outside of the United States. It is expected that any sale of a vessel by us will be considered to occur outside of the United States.
U.S. Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders
As used herein, the term “U.S. Holder” means a holder that for U.S. federal income tax purposes is a beneficial owner of common shares and is an individual U.S. citizen or resident, a U.S. corporation or other U.S. entity taxable as a corporation, an estate the income of which is subject to U.S. federal income taxation regardless of its source, or a trust if a court within the U.S.United States is able to exercise primary jurisdiction over the administration of the trust and one or more U.S. persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust.
If a partnership holds the common shares, the tax treatment of a partner will generally depend upon the status of the partner and upon the activities of the partnership. If you are a partner in a partnership holding the common shares, you are encouraged to consult your tax advisor.
Distributions
Subject to the discussion of passive foreign investment companies below, any distributions made by us with respect to our common shares to a U.S. Holder will generally constitute dividends to the extent of our current or accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under U.S. federal income tax principles. Distributions in excess of such earnings and profits will be treated first as a nontaxable return of capital to the extent of the U.S. Holder’s tax basis in our common shares and thereafter as capital gain. Because we are not a U.S. corporation, U.S. Holders that are corporations generally will not be entitled to claim a dividends received deduction with respect to any distributions they receive from us. Dividends paid with respect to our common shares will generally be treated as foreign source dividend income and will generally constitute “passive category income” for purposes of computing allowable foreign tax credits for U.S. foreign tax credit purposes.
Dividends paid on our common shares to certain non-corporate U.S. Holders will generally be treated as “qualified dividend income” that is taxable to such U.S. Holders at preferential tax rates provided that (1) the common shares are readily tradable on an established securities market in the U.S.United States (such as the NYSE); (2) we are not a passive foreign investment company for the taxable year during which the dividend is paid or the immediately preceding taxable year (as discussed in detail below); (3) the non-corporate U.S. Holder has owned the common shares for more than 60 days in the 121-day period beginning 60 days before the date on which the common shares become ex-dividend; and (4) certain other conditions are met.
There is no assurance that any dividends paid on our common shares will be eligible for these preferential rates in the hands of such non-corporate U.S. Holders. Any dividends paid by us which are not eligible for these preferential rates will be taxed as ordinary income to a non-corporate U.S. Holder.
Special rules may apply to any “extraordinary dividend”-generally, generally, a dividend in an amount which is equal to or in excess of 10% of a shareholder’s adjusted tax basis in a common share-paid by us. If we pay an “extraordinary dividend” on our common shares that is treated as “qualified dividend income,” then any loss derived by certain non-corporate U.S. Holders from the sale or exchange of such common shares will be treated as long term capital loss to the extent of such dividend.
Sale, Exchange or Other Disposition of Common Shares
Assuming we do not constitute a passive foreign investment company for any taxable year, a U.S. Holder generally will recognize taxable gain or loss upon a sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares in an amount equal to the difference between the amount realized by the U.S. Holder from such sale, exchange or other disposition and the U.S. Holder’s tax basis in such shares. Such gain or loss will be treated as long-term capital gain or loss if the U.S. Holder’s holding period is greater than one year at the time of the sale, exchange or other disposition. Such capital gain or loss will generally be treated as U.S. source income or loss, as applicable, for U.S. foreign tax credit purposes. Long-term capital gains of certain non-corporate U.S. Holders are currently eligible for reduced rates of taxation. A U.S. Holder’s ability to deduct capital losses is subject to certain limitations.
Passive Foreign Investment Company Status and Significant Tax Consequences
Special U.S. federal income tax rules apply to a U.S. Holder that holds shares in a foreign corporation classified as a “passive foreign investment company,” or a PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. In general, we will be treated as a PFIC with respect to a U.S. Holder if, for any taxable year in which such holder holds our common shares, either
| |
| (1) | at least 75% of our gross income for such taxable year consists of passive income (e.g., dividends, interest, capital gains and rents derived other than in the active conduct of a rental business), which we refer to as the income test; or |
| |
| (2) | at least 50% of the average value of our assets during such taxable year produce, or are held for the production of, passive income, which we refer to as the asset test. |
For purposes of determining whether we are a PFIC, cash will be treated as an asset which is held for the production of passive income. In addition, we will be treated as earning and owning our proportionate share of the income and assets, respectively, of any of our subsidiary corporations in which we own at least 25% of the value of the subsidiary’s stock. Income earned, or deemed earned, by us in connection with the performance of services would not constitute passive income. By contrast, rental income would generally constitute “passive income” unless we were treated under specific rules as deriving our rental income in the active conduct of a trade or business.
It is possible that we may be considered a PFIC for our 2016 taxable year. Whether we are treated as a PFIC for our 2016 taxable year will depend, in part, upon whether the deposits that we make on newbuilding contracts are treated as being held for the production of “passive income” and on the amount of “passive income” that we derive in our 2016 taxable year. In making the determination as to whether we are a PFIC, we intend to treat the deposits that we make on our newbuilding contracts as assets which are not held for the production of passive income for purposes of determining whether we are a PFIC. We note that there is no direct authority on this point and it is possible that the IRS may disagree with our position.
For our 20152018 taxable year and subsequent taxable years, whether we will be treated as a PFIC will depend upon the nature and extent of our operations. In making the determination as to whether we are a PFIC, we intend to treat the gross income that we derive or that we are deemed to derive from the spot chartering and time chartering activities of us or any of our subsidiaries as services income, rather than rental income. Correspondingly, such income should not constitute passive income, and the assets that we or our wholly owned subsidiaries own and operate in connection with the production of such income should not constitute passive assets for purposes of determining whether we are a PFIC. We believe that there is substantial legal authority supporting our position consisting of case law and IRS pronouncements concerning the characterization of income derived from time charters and voyage charters as services income for other tax purposes. However, there is also authority which characterizes time charter income as rental income rather than services income for other tax purposes. In the absence of any legal authority specifically relating to the statutory provisions governing PFICs, the IRS or a court could disagree with our position. In addition, although we intend to conduct our affairs in a manner to avoid being classified as a PFIC with respect to any taxable year, we cannot assure you that the nature of our operations will not change in the future.
As discussed more fully below, if we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year, a U.S. Holder would be subject to different taxation rules depending on whether the U.S. Holder makes an election to treat us as a “Qualified Electing Fund,” which election we refer to as a “QEF election.” As an alternative to making a QEF election, a U.S. Holder should be able to make a “mark-to-market” election with respect to our common shares, as discussed below. If we were treated as a PFIC, a U.S. Holder will generally be required to file IRS Form 8621 with respect to its ownership of our common shares, and may be subject to additional U.S. tax or information reporting obligations in connection with the acquisition, holding or disposition of our common shares.
Taxation of U.S. Holders Making a Timely QEF Election
If a U.S. Holder makes a timely QEF election, which U.S. Holder we refer to as an “Electing Holder,” the Electing Holder must report for U.S. federal income tax purposes its pro rata share of our ordinary earnings and net capital gain, if any, for each of our taxable years during which we are a PFIC that ends with or within the taxable year of the Electing Holder, regardless of whether distributions were received from us by the Electing Holder. No portion of any such inclusions of ordinary earnings will be treated as “qualified dividend income.” Net capital gain inclusions of certain non-corporate U.S. Holders may be eligible for preferential capital gains tax rates. The Electing Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the common shares will be increased to reflect any income included under the QEF election. Distributions of previously taxed income will not be subject to tax upon distribution but will decrease the Electing Holder’s tax basis in the common shares. An Electing Holder would not, however, be entitled to a deduction for its pro rata share of any losses that we incur with respect to any taxable year. An Electing Holder would generally recognize capital gain or loss on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares. A U.S. Holder would make a timely QEF election for our common shares by filing IRS Form 8621 with his U.S. federal income tax return for the first year in which he held such shares when we were a PFIC. If we determine that we are a PFIC for any taxable year, we intend to provide each U.S. Holder with information necessary for the U.S. Holder to make the QEF election described above. If we were treated as a PFIC for our 20162018 taxable year, we anticipate that, based on our current projections, we would not have a significant amount of taxable income or gain that would be required to be taken into account by U.S. Holders making a QEF election effective for such taxable year.
Taxation of U.S. Holders Making a “Mark-to-Market” Election
If we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year and, as we anticipate will be the case, our shares are treated as “marketable stock,” a U.S. Holder would be allowed to make a “mark-to-market” election with respect to our common shares, provided the U.S. Holder completes and files IRS Form 8621 in accordance with the relevant instructions and related Treasury Regulations. If that election is made, the U.S. Holder generally would include as ordinary income in each taxable year the excess, if any, of the fair market value of the common shares at the end of the taxable year over such Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the common shares. The U.S. Holder would also be permitted an ordinary loss in respect of the excess, if any, of the U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the common shares over its fair market value at the end of the taxable year, but only to the extent of the net amount previously included in income as a result of the mark-to-market election. A U.S. Holder’s tax basis in our common shares would be adjusted to reflect any such income or loss amount recognized. Any gain realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares would be treated as ordinary income, and any loss realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of
the common shares would be treated as ordinary loss to the extent that such loss does not exceed the net mark-to-market gains previously included by the U.S. Holder.
Taxation of U.S. Holders Not Making a Timely QEF or Mark-to-Market Election
If we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year, a U.S. Holder who does not make either a QEF election or a “mark-to-market” election for that year, which we refer to as a “Non-Electing Holder,” would be subject to special rules with respect to (1) any excess distribution (i.e., the portion of any distributions received by the Non-Electing Holder on the common shares in a taxable year in excess of 125% of the average annual distributions received by the Non-Electing Holder in the three preceding taxable years, or, if shorter, the Non-Electing Holder’s holding period for the common shares), and (2) any gain realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares. Under these special rules:
| |
| (1) | the excess distribution or gain would be allocated ratably over the Non-Electing Holder’s aggregate holding period for the common shares; |
| |
| (2) | the amount allocated to the current taxable year, and any taxable year prior to the first taxable year in which we were a PFIC, would be taxed as ordinary income and would not be “qualified dividend income”; and |
| |
| (3) | the amount allocated to each of the other taxable years would be subject to tax at the highest rate of tax in effect for the applicable class of taxpayer for that year, and an interest charge for the deemed tax deferral benefit would be imposed with respect to the resulting tax attributable to each such other taxable year. |
U.S. Federal Income Taxation of “Non-U.S. Holders”
As used herein, the term “Non-U.S. Holder” means a holder that, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, is a beneficial owner of common shares (other than a partnership) and who is not a U.S. Holder.
If a partnership holds our common shares, the tax treatment of a partner will generally depend upon the status of the partner and upon the activities of the partnership. If you are a partner in a partnership holding our common shares, you are encouraged to consult your tax adviser.
Dividends on Common Shares
A Non-U.S. Holder generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income or withholding tax on dividends received from us with respect to our common shares, unless that income is effectively connected with the Non-U.S. Holder’s conduct of a trade or business in the United States. In general, if the Non-U.S. Holder is entitled to the benefits of an applicable U.S. income tax treaty with respect to those dividends, that income is taxable only if it is attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by the Non-U.S. Holder in the United States.
Sale, Exchange or Other Disposition of Common Shares
A Non-U.S. Holder generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income or withholding tax on any gain realized upon the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common shares, unless:
| |
| (1) | the gain is effectively connected with the Non-U.S. Holder’s conduct of a trade or business in the United States; in general, in the case of a Non-U.S. Holder entitled to the benefits of an applicable U.S. income tax treaty with respect to that gain, that gain is taxable only if it is attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by the Non-U.S. Holder in the United States; or |
| |
| (2) | the Non-U.S. Holder is an individual who is present in the United States for 183 days or more during the taxable year of disposition and who also meets other conditions. |
Income or Gains Effectively Connected with a U.S. Trade or Business
If the Non-U.S. Holder is engaged in a U.S. trade or business for U.S. federal income tax purposes, dividends on the common shares and gains from the sale, exchange or other disposition of the shares, that are effectively connected with the conduct of that trade or business (and, if required by an applicable U.S. income tax treaty, is attributable to a U.S. permanent establishment), will generally be subject to regular U.S. federal income tax in the same manner as discussed in the previous section relating to the taxation of U.S. Holders. In addition, in the case of a corporate Non-U.S. Holder, its earnings and profits that are attributable to the effectively connected income, which are subject to certain adjustments, may be subject to an additional U.S. federal branch profits tax at a rate of 30%, or at a lower rate as may be specified by an applicable U.S. income tax treaty.
Backup Withholding and Information Reporting
In general, dividend payments, or other taxable distributions, and the payment of gross proceeds on a sale or other disposition of our common shares, made within the United States to a non-corporate U.S. Holder will be subject to information reporting. Such payments or distributions may also be subject to backup withholding if the non-corporate U.S. Holder:
| |
| (1) | fails to provide an accurate taxpayer identification number; |
| |
| (2) | is notified by the IRS that it has have failed to report all interest or dividends required to be shown on its U.S. federal income tax returns; or |
| |
| (3) | in certain circumstances, fails to comply with applicable certification requirements. |
Non-U.S. Holders may be required to establish their exemption from information reporting and backup withholding with respect to dividendsdividend payments or other taxable distributiondistributions on our common shares by certifying their status on an applicable IRS Form W-8. If a Non-U.S. Holder sells our common shares to or through a U.S. office of a broker, the payment of the proceeds is subject to both U.S. backup withholding and information reporting unless the Non-U.S. Holder certifies that it is a non-U.S. person, under penalties of perjury, or it otherwise establishestablishes an exemption. If a Non-U.S. Holder sells our common shares through a non-U.S. office of a non-U.S. broker and the sales proceeds are paid outside the U.S.,United States, then information reporting and backup withholding generally will not apply to that payment. However, U.S. information reporting requirements, but not backup withholding, will apply to a payment of sales proceeds, even if that payment is made outside the United States, if a Non-U.S. Holder sells our common shares through a non-U.S. office of a broker that is a U.S. person or has some other contacts with the United States. Such information reporting requirements will not apply, however, if the broker has documentary evidence in its records that the Non-U.S. Holder is not a U.S. person and certain other conditions are met, or the Non-U.S. Holder otherwise establishes an exemption.
Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Rather, a refund may generally be obtained of any amounts withheld under backup withholding rules that exceed the taxpayer’s U.S. federal income tax liability by filing a timely refund claim with the IRS.
Individuals who are U.S. Holders (and to the extent specified in applicable Treasury Regulations, Non-U.S. Holders and certain U.S. entities) who hold “specified foreign financial assets” (as defined in Section 6038D of the Code) are required to file IRS Form 8938 with information relating to the asset for each taxable year in which the aggregate value of all such assets exceeds $75,000 at any time during the taxable year or $50,000 on the last day of the taxable year (or such higher dollar amount as prescribed by applicable Treasury Regulations). Specified foreign financial assets would include, among other assets, our common shares, unless the common shares are held in an account maintained with a U.S. financial institution. Substantial penalties apply to any failure to timely file IRS Form 8938, unless the failure is shown to be due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect. Additionally, in the event an individual U.S. Holder (and to the extent specified in applicable Treasury Regulations, a Non-U.S. Holder or a U.S. entity) that is required to file IRS Form 8938 does not file such form, the statute of limitations on the assessment and collection of U.S. federal income taxes of such holder for the related tax year may not close until three years after the date that the required information is filed. U.S. Holders (including U.S. entities) and Non-U.S. Holders are encouraged to consult their own tax advisors regarding their reporting obligations in respect of our common shares.
| |
| F. | Dividends and paying agents. |
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
We file reports and other information with the SEC. These materials, including this annual report and the accompanying exhibits may be inspected and copied at the public reference facilities maintained by the SEC at 100 F Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20549, orare available from its website http://www.sec.gov. You may obtain information on the operation of the public reference room by calling 1 (800) SEC-0330, and you may obtain copies at prescribed rates.
Shareholders may also request a copy of our filings at no cost, by writing to us at the following address: 9, Boulevard Charles III, Monaco, 98000 or telephoning us at + 377 9798 5716.
5715.
Not applicable.
|
| |
| ITEM 11. | QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK |
Interest Rate Risk
We are exposed to the impact of interest rate changes primarily through our unhedged variable-rate borrowings. Significant increases in interest rates could adversely affect our operating margins, results of operations and our ability to service our debt. As of December 31, 2016,2018, we have variable-rate borrowings totaling $522.4$841.0 million. A one percent increase in LIBOR rates would increase our interest payments by $5.2approximately $8.4 million per year from January 1, 2017.2019. We entered into interest rate cap agreements, in which we receive payments if floating rates rise above a specified cap rate, to help mitigate the interest rate volatility associated with the variable rate interest on the amounts outstanding. Please see Note 12, Derivatives, to our Consolidated Financial Statements included herein for additional information.
Spot Market Rate Risk
The cyclical nature of the tankerdrybulk industry causes significant increases or decreases in the revenue that we earn from our vessels, particularly those vessels that operate in the spot market or participate in pools that are concentrated in the spot market such as the Scorpio Group Pools. Our owned and chartered-in vessels operated for 13,55020,429 days in the spot market or in the Scorpio Group Pools during 2016.2018. Additionally, we have the ability to remove our vessels from the pools on relatively short notice if attractive time charter opportunities arise. A $1,000 per day increase or decrease in spot rates for all of our vessel classes would have increased or decreased our operating lossfleet of 57 vessels would increase or decrease our operating income by $13.6$20.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2016.on an annual basis.
Foreign Exchange Rate Risk
Our primary economic environment is the international shipping market. This market utilizes the U.S. dollar as its functional currency. Consequently, virtually all of our revenues and the majority of our operating expenses will be in U.S. dollars. However, we will incur some of our combined expenses in other currencies, particularly the Euro. The amount and frequency of some of these expenses (such as vessel repairs, supplies and stores) may fluctuate from period to period. Depreciation in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to other currencies will increase the U.S. dollar cost of us paying such expenses. The portion of our business conducted in other currencies could increase in the future, which could expand our exposure to losses arising from currency fluctuations.
There is a risk that currency fluctuations will have a negative effect on our cash flows. We have not entered into any hedging contracts to protect against currency fluctuations. However, we have some ability to shift the purchase of goods and services from one country to another and, thus, from one currency to another, on relatively short notice. We may seek to hedge this currency fluctuation risk in the future.
|
| |
| ITEM 12. | DESCRIPTION OF SECURITIES OTHER THAN EQUITY SECURITIES |
Not applicable.
PART II
|
| |
| ITEM 13. | DEFAULTS, DIVIDEND ARREARAGES AND DELINQUENCIES |
None.
|
| |
| ITEM 14. | MATERIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE RIGHTS OF SECURITY HOLDERS AND USE OF PROCEEDS |
None.
|
| |
| ITEM 15. | CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES |
| |
| A. | Disclosure Controls and Procedures |
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within time periods specified in the SEC’s
rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. Our controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives.
We carried out an evaluation under the supervision, and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15e under the Securities Act) as of December 31, 2016.2018. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 20162018 to provide reasonable assurance that (1) information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and (2) such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures.
There are inherent limitations to the effectiveness of any system of disclosure controls and procedures, including the possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of the controls and procedures. Accordingly, even effective disclosure controls and procedures can only provide reasonable assurance of achieving their control objectives.
| |
| B. | Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. |
In accordance with Rule 13a-15(f) of the Exchange Act, the management of the Company is responsible for the establishment and maintenance of adequate internal controls over financial reporting for the Company. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. The Company’s system of internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements. Management has performed an assessment of the effectiveness of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting as of December 31, 20162018 based on the provisions of Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission or COSO in 2013. Based on our assessment, management determined that the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting were effective as of December 31, 20162018 based on the criteria in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by COSO (2013).
The Company’s internal control over financial reporting, at December 31, 2016,2018, has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit, an independent registered public accounting firm, who also audited the Company’s consolidated financial statements for that year, which are filed as a part of this annual report. PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit has issued an attestation report on management’s assessment of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
C.Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm.
The attestation report of PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit is presented on page F-2 of the Financial Statements filed as part of this annual report.
| |
| D. | Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. |
None
|
| |
| ITEM 16A. | AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL EXPERT |
Our Board of Directors has determined that Mr. James B. Nish, who serves on the Audit Committee, qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” and that he is “independent” according to SEC rules.under the rules of the NYSE and the rules and regulations of the SEC.
We have adopted a Code of Conduct and Ethics that applies to all entities controlled by the Company and itsof our employees, directors, officers and agents. A copy of our Code of Conduct and Ethics, as in effect on the date hereof, has been filed as an exhibit to this annual report and is also available on our website at www.scorpiobulkers.com.report.
Shareholders may also request a copy of our Code of Conduct and Ethics at no cost, by writing to us at 9, Boulevard Charles III, Monaco, 98000 or telephoning us at + 377 9798 5715.
|
| |
| ITEM 16C. | PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES |
Our principal accountant for the years ended December 31, 20162018 and December 31, 20152017 was PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit, and the audit fees for those periods were $283,500approximately $349,000 and $268,000,$417,000 respectively.
During 2016 and 2015, our principal accountant, PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit, provided services related to our public offerings. The fee for these services was approximately $120,100 in 2016 and $45,000 in 2015.None.
None.
None.
| |
| E. | Audit Committee’s Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures |
Our Audit Committee pre-approves all audit, audit-related and non-audit services not prohibited by law to be performed by our independent auditors and associated fees prior to the engagement of the independent auditor with respect to such services.
| |
| F. | Audit Work Performed by Other Than Principal Accountant if Greater Than 50% |
Not applicable.
|
| |
| ITEM 16D. | EXEMPTIONS FROM LISTING STANDARDS FOR AUDIT COMMITTEES |
Not applicable.
|
| |
| ITEM 16E. | PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES BY THE ISSUER AND AFFILIATED PURCHASERS |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Name | | Period | | (a) No. of Common Shares Purchased (1) | | (b) Average Price Paid per Common Share | | (c) Total No. of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs | | (d) Maximum Number of Common Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs |
| Scorpio Services Holding Ltd. | | January 2016 | | 338,436 |
| | $ | 4.64 |
| | N/A | | N/A |
| Scorpio Services Holding Ltd. | | March 2016 | | 620,465 |
| | $ | 3.75 |
| | N/A | | N/A |
| Robert Bugbee | | March 2016 | | 145,000 |
| | $ | 2.98 |
| | N/A | | N/A |
| Robert Bugbee | | October 2016 | | 195,000 |
| | $ | 3.70 |
| | N/A | | N/A |
(1) These |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Period | | Total Number of Common Shares Purchased | | Average Price Paid per Common Share | | Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plan or Program (a) | | Maximum Amount that May Yet Be Expected on Share Repurchases Under the Plan or Program (a) |
| January 2018 | | — |
| | $ | — |
| | — |
| | $ | 39.0 |
|
| February 2018 | | — |
| | $ | — |
| | — |
| | $ | 39.0 |
|
| March 2018 | | 1,169,965 |
| | $ | 7.39 |
| | 1,169,965 |
| | $ | 30.4 |
|
| April 208 | | — |
| | $ | — |
| | — |
| | $ | 30.4 |
|
| May 2018 | | — |
| | $ | — |
| | — |
| | $ | 30.4 |
|
| June 2018 | | — |
| | $ | — |
| | — |
| | $ | 30.4 |
|
| July 2018 | | — |
| | $ | — |
| | — |
| | $ | 30.4 |
|
| August 2018 | | 510,134 |
| | $ | 6.78 |
| | 510,134 |
| | $ | 26.9 |
|
| September 2018 | | 961,380 |
| | $ | 6.87 |
| | 961,380 |
| | $ | 20.3 |
|
| October 2018 | | 1,846,710 |
| | $ | 6.44 |
| | 1,846,710 |
| | $ | 40.0 |
|
| November 2018 | | 2,383,022 |
| | $ | 5.83 |
| | 2,383,022 |
| | $ | 26.1 |
|
| December 2018 | | 231,187 |
| | $ | 5.26 |
| | 231,187 |
| | $ | 24.8 |
|
| | | 7,102,398 |
| | $ | 6.44 |
| | 7,102,398 |
| | |
(a) On October 19, 2018, our Board of Directors authorized a share repurchase program to purchase up to $50.0 million of our common sharesstock in open market or privately negotiated transactions. This share repurchase program replaced the previous $50.0 million share repurchase program authorized in September 2017 and that was terminated in conjunction with the authorization of this new share repurchase program. The specific timing and amounts of the repurchases were purchased in the sole discretion of management and were subject to variation based on market conditions and other factors, but we were not obligated under the terms of the program to repurchase any of our common stock. The authorization had no expiration date.
On January 25, 2019, our Board of Directors authorized a new share repurchase program to purchase up to an aggregate of $50.0 million of our common shares. This new share repurchase program replaced our previous share repurchase program that was authorized in October 2018 and that was terminated in conjunction with the authorization of the new share repurchase program. The specific timing and amounts of the repurchases will be in the sole discretion of management and may vary based on market conditions and other factors. We are not obligated under the terms of the program to repurchase any of our common shares. The authorization has no expiration date.
In 2016, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $20.0 million of our outstanding Senior Notes in open market.market or privately negotiated transactions. As of December 31, 2018, the entire $20.0 million was available.
|
| |
| ITEM 16F. | CHANGE IN REGISTRANT’S CERTIFYING ACCOUNTANT |
None.
|
| |
| ITEM 16G. | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE |
Pursuant to an exception for foreign private issuers, we, as a Marshall Islands company, are not required to comply with the corporate governance practices followed by U.S. companies under the NYSE listing standards. We believe that our established practices in the area of corporate governance are in line with the spirit of the NYSE standards and provide adequate protection to our shareholders. In this respect, we have voluntarily adopted NYSE required practices, such as (i) having a majority of independent directors, (ii) establishing audit, compensation and nominating committees and (iii) adopting a Code of Conduct and Ethics.
There are two significant differences between our corporate governance practices and the practices required by the NYSE. The NYSE requires that non-management directors meet regularly in executive sessions without management. The NYSE also requires that all independent directors meet in an executive session at least once a year. Marshall Islands Lawlaw and our bylaws do not require our non-management directors to regularly hold executive sessions without management. During 20162018 and through the date of this annual report, our non-management directors met in executive session five times. The NYSE requires companies to adopt and disclose corporate governance guidelines. The guidelines must address, among other things: director qualification standards, director responsibilities, director access to management and independent advisers, director compensation, director orientation and continuing education, management succession and an annual performance evaluation. We are not required to adopt such guidelines under Marshall Islands Lawlaw and we have not adopted such guidelines.
|
| |
| ITEM 16H. | MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURE |
Not applicable.
PART III
|
| |
| ITEM 17. | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
See “Item 18. Financial Statements.”
|
| |
| ITEM 18. | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS |
The financial statements, together with the report of PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit thereon, beginning on page F-1, are filed as a part of this annual report.
Separate consolidated financial statements and notes thereto for Scorpio Tankers as of and for the three years ended December 31, 2018 are being provided pursuant to Rule 3-09 of Regulation S-X as Exhibit 99.1.
|
| | | |
| ITEM 19. | EXHIBITS |
| | |
| Number | Description |
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
| 4.4 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Chengxi Shipyard Co. Ltd (1) |
| 4.5 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Dalian COSCO KHI Ship Engineering Co. Ltd. (1) |
| 4.6 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Hudong-Zhongdua Shipbuilding (Group) Co., Inc. (1) |
| 4.7 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Imabari Shipbuilding Co. Ltd. (1) |
| 4.8 |
| | Form |
| 4.9 |
| | Form |
| 4.10 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co. Ltd. (1) |
| 4.11 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Nantong COSCO KHI Ship Engineering Co., Ltd. (1) |
| 4.12 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Jiangsu Yangzijian Shipbuilding Co. Ltd. (1) |
| 4.13 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Shanghai Jiangnan-Changxing Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. (1) |
| 4.14 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Sungdong Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co., Ltd. (2) |
| 4.15 |
| | Form of Shipbuilding Contract of Daehan Shipbuilding Co., Ltd. (2) |
| 4.16 |
| | Registration Rights |
| 4.17 |
| | Share Purchase |
| 4.18 |
| | $67.5 |
| 4.19 |
| | $330.0 |
| 4.20 |
| | $39.6 |
| 4.21 |
| | $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility (6) |
4.22 |
| | $411.3 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility (6) |
4.23 |
| | $42.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility (6) |
4.24 |
| | $26.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility (6) |
4.25 |
| | $19.8 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility (6) |
4.26 |
| | $76.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility (10) |
4.27 |
| | $12.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility (10) |
4.28 |
| | $27.3 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility (10) |
4.29 |
| | First Amended and Restated Stockholders Rights Agreement(9) |
4.30 |
| | Agreement with Institutional Investor(7) |
4.31 |
| | Deed of Amendment |
4.32 |
| | Amended and Restated Master Agreement |
4.33 |
| | |
4.34 |
| | Second Supplemental Agreement to the $67.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated October 23, 2015 |
4.35 |
| | Third Supplemental Agreement to the $67.5$27.3 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated April 5,6, 2016 (7) |
4.364.22 |
| | Fourth |
| 4.23 |
| | |
| 4.24 |
| | |
| 4.25 |
| | |
| 4.26 |
| | |
| 4.27 |
| | |
| 4.28 |
| | |
| 4.29 |
| | |
| 4.30 |
| | |
| 4.31 |
| | |
| 4.32 |
| | |
| 4.33 |
| | |
| 4.34 |
| | |
|
| | | |
Number4.35 | Description
| | |
| 4.36 |
| | |
| 4.37 |
| | Fifth Supplemental |
4.38 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated September 30, 2015, relating to the $67.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.39 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated July 10, 2015, relating to the $330.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.40 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated October 27, 2015, relating to the $330.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.41 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated April 26, 2016, relating to the $330.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.42 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated June 15, 2016, relating to the $330.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.43 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated December 15, 2016, relating to the $330.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.44 |
| | Supplemental Agreement to the $39.6 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated January 14, 2016 |
4.45 |
| | Fourth Supplemental Agreement to the $39.6 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated March 29, 2016 |
4.46 |
| | Fifth Supplemental Agreement to the $39.6 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated June 15, 2016 |
4.47 |
| | Sixth Supplemental Agreement to the $39.6 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated December 22, 2016 |
4.48 |
| | First Amendment to the $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated March 6, 2015 |
4.49 |
| | Second Amendment to the $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated October 21, 2015 |
4.50 |
| | Third Amendment to the $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated December 14, 2015 |
4.51 |
| | Fourth Amendment to the $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated April 7, 2016 |
4.52 |
| | Fifth Amendment to the $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated June 1, 2016 |
4.53 |
| | Sixth Amendment to the $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated August 9, 2016 |
4.54 |
| | Seventh Amendment to the $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated December 14, 2016 |
4.55 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated May 8, 2015, relating to the $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.56 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated January 8, 2016, relating to the $409.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.57 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated May 04, 2016, relating to the $42.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.58 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated June 28, 2016, relating to the $42.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.59 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated January 4, 2017, relating to the $42.0 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.60 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated February 25,2016 relating to the $12.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.61 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated June 14, 2016, relating to the $12.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.62 |
| | Letter Agreement, dated December 16, 2016, relating to the $12.5 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility |
4.63 |
| | First Supplemental Agreement to the $27.3 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated April 6, 2016 |
4.64 |
| | Second Supplemental Agreement to the $27.3 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated June 2, 2016 |
4.65 |
| | Third Supplemental Agreement to the $27.3 Million Senior Secured Credit Facility, dated December 30, 2016 |
| 8.1 |
| | |
| 11.1 |
| | |
| 12.1 |
| | |
| 12.2 |
| | |
| 13.1 |
| | |
| 13.2 |
| | |
| 15.1 |
| | |
| 15.2 |
| | |
| 99.1 |
| | |
| 101. INS |
| | XBRL Instance Document |
| 101. SCH |
| | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema |
| 101. CAL |
| | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Calculation Linkbase |
| 101. DEF |
| | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Definition Linkbase |
| 101. LAB |
| | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Label Linkbase |
| 101. PRE |
| | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Presentation Linkbase |
| |
| (1) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form F-1, which was declared effective by the SEC on December 11, 2013 (File No. 333-192246). |
| |
| (2) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form F-1, which was declared effective by the SEC on September 15, 20152014 (File No. 333-197949). |
| |
| (3) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F, filed with the SEC on April 2, 2014. |
| |
(4) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Report on Form 6-K, filed with the SEC on November 18, 2014. |
| |
(5) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Report on Form 6-K, filed with the SEC on September 25, 2014. |
| |
(6)(4) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F, filed with the SEC on April 2, 2015. |
| |
(7) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Report on Form 6-K, filed with the SEC on December 23, 2015. |
| |
(8)(5) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Report on Form 6-K, filed with the SEC on January 4, 2016. |
| |
(9) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Report on Form 6-K, filed with the SEC on January 15, 2016. |
| |
(10)(6) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F, filed with the SEC on March 1, 2016. |
| |
| (7) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F, filed with the SEC on February 28, 2017. |
| |
| (8) | Incorporated by reference to the Company’s Report on Form 6-K, filed with the SEC on June 1, 2018. |
| |
| (9) | The financial statements as of and for the three years ended December 31, 2018 of Scorpio Tankers Inc., prepared by Scorpio Tankers and audited by its independent registered public accounting firm, are included in this Annual Report pursuant to Rule 3-09 of Regulation S-X. |
SIGNATURES
The registrant hereby certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form 20-F and has duly caused and authorized the undersigned to sign this annual report on its behalf.
|
| |
Dated February 28, 2017March 20, 2019 | |
| | Scorpio Bulkers Inc. |
| | (Registrant) |
| | |
| | /s/ Emanuele Lauro |
| | |
| | Emanuele Lauro |
| | Chief Executive Officer |
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Opinions on the Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and its subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, and the related consolidated statements of operations, of changes in shareholders’ equity and of cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2018, including the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). We also have audited the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2018, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework(2013)issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2018 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2018, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework(2013)issued by the COSO.
Basis for Opinions
The Company's management is responsible for these consolidated financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 15. Our responsibility is to express opinions on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud, and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.
Our audits of the consolidated financial statements included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit
PricewaterhouseCoopers is represented by PricewaterhouseCoopers Audit, 63 rue de Villiers - 92200 Neuilly-sur-Seine, France.
Marseille, France
March 20, 2019
We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2013.
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Dollars in thousands, expectexcept per share data)
| | | | As of December 31, | As of December 31, |
| | 2016 | | 2015 | 2018 | | 2017 |
| Assets | | | | | | |
| Current assets | | | |
| | | |
|
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 101,734 |
| | $ | 200,300 |
| $ | 67,495 |
| | $ | 68,535 |
|
| Due from related parties | 4,240 |
| | 8,197 |
| 7,338 |
| | 6,555 |
|
| Inventories | | 3,595 |
| | 3,674 |
|
| Prepaid expenses and other current assets | 9,506 |
| | 11,247 |
| 5,671 |
| | 3,791 |
|
| Assets held for sale | — |
| | 172,888 |
| |
| Total current assets | 115,480 |
| | 392,632 |
| 84,099 |
| | 82,555 |
|
| Non-current assets | | | |
| | | |
|
| Vessels, net | 1,234,081 |
| | 764,454 |
| 1,507,918 |
| | 1,534,782 |
|
| Equity investment | | 92,281 |
| | — |
|
| Vessels under construction | 180,000 |
| | 288,282 |
| — |
| | 6,710 |
|
| Deferred financing cost, net | 3,307 |
| | 464 |
| 3,706 |
| | 3,068 |
|
| Other assets | 3,050 |
| | 14,736 |
| 474 |
| | 474 |
|
| Due from related parties | 11,239 |
| | 12,525 |
| 15,348 |
| | 15,821 |
|
| Total non-current assets | 1,431,677 |
| | 1,080,461 |
| 1,619,727 |
| | 1,560,855 |
|
| Total assets | $ | 1,547,157 |
| | $ | 1,473,093 |
| $ | 1,703,826 |
| | $ | 1,643,410 |
|
| | | | |
| | | |
|
| Liabilities and shareholders’ equity | | | |
| | | |
|
| Current liabilities | | | |
| | | |
|
| Bank loans, net | $ | 13,480 |
| | $ | 107,739 |
| $ | 60,310 |
| | $ | 46,993 |
|
| Financing obligation | | 4,594 |
| | 1,144 |
|
| Senior Notes, net | | 73,253 |
| | — |
|
| Accounts payable and accrued expenses | 10,033 |
| | 16,214 |
| 13,976 |
| | 10,087 |
|
| Due to related parties | 1,037 |
| | 624 |
| 481 |
| | 366 |
|
| Total current liabilities | 24,550 |
| | 124,577 |
| 152,614 |
| | 58,590 |
|
| Non-current liabilities | | | |
| | | |
|
| Bank loans, net | 493,793 |
| | 342,314 |
| 621,179 |
| | 576,967 |
|
| Financing obligation | | 69,229 |
| | 17,747 |
|
| Senior Notes, net | 72,199 |
| | 71,671 |
| — |
| | 72,726 |
|
| Total non-current liabilities | 565,992 |
| | 413,985 |
| 690,408 |
| | 667,440 |
|
| Total liabilities | 590,542 |
| | 538,562 |
| 843,022 |
| | 726,030 |
|
| Commitment and contingencies (Note 7) |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| Shareholders’ equity | | | |
| | | |
|
| Preferred stock, $0.01 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized; no shares issued or outstanding | — |
| | — |
| |
| Common stock, $0.01 par value per share; authorized 112,500,000 shares; issued and outstanding 75,298,676 and 28,686,561 shares as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively | 753 |
| | 287 |
| |
| Preferred shares, $0.01 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized; no shares issued or outstanding | | — |
| | — |
|
| Common shares, $0.01 par value per share; authorized 212,500,000 and 112,500,000 shares as of December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively; issued and outstanding 71,217,258 and 74,902,364 shares as of December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively | | 796 |
| | 762 |
|
| Paid-in capital | 1,714,358 |
| | 1,567,905 |
| 1,747,648 |
| | 1,745,844 |
|
| Common shares held in treasury, at cost; 8,567,846 and 1,465,448 shares at December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively | | (56,720 | ) | | (11,004 | ) |
| Accumulated deficit | (758,496 | ) | | (633,661 | ) | (830,920 | ) | | (818,222 | ) |
| Total shareholders’ equity | 956,615 |
| | 934,531 |
| 860,804 |
| | 917,380 |
|
| Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 1,547,157 |
| | $ | 1,473,093 |
| |
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
|
| | | | | | | |
| Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 1,703,826 |
| | $ | 1,643,410 |
|
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated StatementStatements of Operations
(Amounts in thousands, except per share data)
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | For the Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Revenue: | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | |
| Vessel revenue | | $ | — |
| | $ | 5,457 |
| | $ | 3,774 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
|
| Vessel revenue-related party pools | | 78,402 |
| | 57,064 |
| | 45,213 |
| | 242,502 |
| | 162,205 |
| | 78,402 |
|
| Total vessel revenue | | 78,402 |
| | 62,521 |
| | 48,987 |
| | 242,502 |
| | 162,205 |
| | 78,402 |
|
| Operating expenses: | | | | |
| | |
| | | | |
| | |
|
| Voyage expenses | | (364 | ) | | 123 |
| | 3,579 |
| | 549 |
| | 257 |
| | (364 | ) |
| Voyage expenses-related party | | 319 |
| | 664 |
| | 148 |
| | — |
| | 172 |
| | 319 |
|
| Vessel operating costs | | 61,641 |
| | 26,607 |
| | 1,478 |
| | 90,276 |
| | 77,272 |
| | 61,641 |
|
| Vessel operating costs-related party | | 7,191 |
| | 2,765 |
| | 122 |
| | 15,199 |
| | 9,392 |
| | 7,191 |
|
| Charterhire expense | | 17,356 |
| | 51,389 |
| | 73,214 |
| | 4,176 |
| | 5,392 |
| | 17,356 |
|
| Charterhire termination | | 10,000 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 10,000 |
|
| Vessel depreciation | | 36,562 |
| | 14,263 |
| | 686 |
| | 56,607 |
| | 48,510 |
| | 36,562 |
|
| General and administrative expenses | | 29,141 |
| | 33,373 |
| | 30,937 |
| | 23,869 |
| | 22,359 |
| | 29,141 |
|
| General and administrative expenses-related party | | 4,854 |
| | 2,009 |
| | 824 |
| | 8,516 |
| | 6,722 |
| | 4,854 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | | 11,433 |
| | 397,472 |
| | 55,487 |
| | — |
| | 17,354 |
| | 11,433 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale-related party | | 1,000 |
| | 25,465 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 347 |
| | 1,000 |
|
| Total operating expenses | | 179,133 |
| | 554,130 |
| | 166,475 |
| | 199,192 |
| | 187,777 |
| | 179,133 |
|
| Operating loss | | (100,731 | ) | | (491,609 | ) | | (117,488 | ) | |
| Operating income (loss) | | | 43,310 |
| | (25,572 | ) | | (100,731 | ) |
| Other income (expense): | | | | |
| | |
| | | | |
| | |
|
| Interest income | | 933 |
| | 356 |
| | 1,052 |
| | 1,107 |
| | 1,100 |
| | 933 |
|
| Income (loss) from equity investment-related party | | | (7,178 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
| Foreign exchange gain (loss) | | (116 | ) | | (12 | ) | | 43 |
| | (68 | ) | | (292 | ) | | (116 | ) |
| Financial expense, net | | (24,921 | ) | | (19,524 | ) | | (172 | ) | | (49,869 | ) | | (34,962 | ) | | (24,921 | ) |
| Total other (loss) income | | (24,104 | ) | | (19,180 | ) | | 923 |
| |
| Total other expense | | | (56,008 | ) | | (34,154 | ) | | (24,104 | ) |
| Net loss | | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | (510,789 | ) | | $ | (116,565 | ) | | $ | (12,698 | ) | | $ | (59,726 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) |
| Weighted-average shares outstanding: | | | | |
| | |
| | | | |
| | |
|
| Basic | | 56,174 |
| | 21,410 |
| | 11,466 |
| | 71,827 |
| | 71,794 |
| | 56,174 |
|
| Diluted | | 56,174 |
| | 21,410 |
| | 11,466 |
| | 71,827 |
| | 71,794 |
| | 56,174 |
|
| Loss per common share: | | | | |
| | |
| | | | |
| | |
|
| Basic | | $ | (2.22 | ) | | $ | (23.86 | ) | | $ | (10.17 | ) | | $ | (0.18 | ) | | $ | (0.83 | ) | | $ | (2.22 | ) |
| Diluted | | $ | (2.22 | ) | | $ | (23.86 | ) | | $ | (10.17 | ) | | $ | (0.18 | ) | | $ | (0.83 | ) | | $ | (2.22 | ) |
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated StatementStatements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity
(Dollars in thousands)
| | | | Number of shares outstanding | | Common stock | | Paid-in capital | | Accumulated deficit | | Total | Number of shares outstanding | | Common stock | | Paid-in capital | | Treasury stock | | Accumulated deficit | | Total |
| Balance as of December 31, 2013 | 11,116,994 |
| | $ | 1,334 |
| | $ | 1,109,185 |
| | $ | (6,307 | ) | | $ | 1,104,212 |
| |
| Net loss | | | | | | | (116,565 | ) | | (116,565 | ) | |
| Net proceeds from common stock offering: | | | | | | | | | | |
| Overallotment of initial public offering | 391,250 |
| | 47 |
| | 42,298 |
| | — |
| | 42,345 |
| |
| Private placement | 3,333,333 |
| | 400 |
| | 145,227 |
| | — |
| | 145,627 |
| |
| Common Stock issued to SSH | 4,366 |
| | 1 |
| | 499 |
| | — |
| | 500 |
| |
| Issuance of shares of restricted stock | 179,031 |
| | 21 |
| | (21 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| |
| Restricted stock amortization | — |
| | — |
| | 23,869 |
| | — |
| | 23,869 |
| |
| Balance as of December 31, 2014 | 15,024,974 |
| | $ | 1,803 |
| | $ | 1,321,057 |
| | $ | (122,872 | ) | | $ | 1,199,988 |
| |
| Net loss | | | | | | | (510,789 | ) | | $ | (510,789 | ) | |
| Net proceeds from common stock offering: | | | | | | | | | | |
| Private placement | — |
| | — |
| | 250 |
| | — |
| | 250 |
| |
| Public offering | 11,083,333 |
| | 1,330 |
| | 188,343 |
| | — |
| | 189,673 |
| |
| Overallotment of public offering | 1,662,500 |
| | 200 |
| | 28,230 |
| | — |
| | 28,430 |
| |
| Reverse stock split | (29 | ) | | (3,155 | ) | | 3,155 |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| Common Stock issued to SSH | 111,725 |
| | 13 |
| | 2,367 |
| | — |
| | 2,380 |
| |
| Issuance of shares of restricted stock | 804,058 |
| | 96 |
| | (96 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| |
| Restricted stock amortization | — |
| | — |
| | 24,599 |
| | — |
| | 24,599 |
| |
| Balance as of December 31, 2015 | 28,686,561 |
| | $ | 287 |
| | $ | 1,567,905 |
| | $ | (633,661 | ) | | $ | 934,531 |
| 28,686,561 |
| | $ | 287 |
| | $ | 1,567,905 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (633,661 | ) | | $ | 934,531 |
|
| Net loss | | | | | | | (124,835 | ) | | (124,835 | ) | | | | | | | | | (124,835 | ) | | (124,835 | ) |
| Net proceeds from common stock offering: | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
|
| Public offering | 44,000,000 |
| | 440 |
| | 127,672 |
| | — |
| | 128,112 |
| 44,000,000 |
| | 440 |
| | 127,672 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 128,112 |
|
| Common stock issued to SSH | 51,679 |
| | — |
| | 198 |
| | — |
| | 198 |
| 51,679 |
| | — |
| | 198 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 198 |
|
| Issuance of shares of restricted stock, net of forfitures | 2,560,436 |
| | 26 |
| | (26 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| |
| Issuance of shares of restricted stock, net of forfeitures | | 2,560,436 |
| | 26 |
| | (26 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Restricted stock amortization | — |
| | — |
| | 18,609 |
| | — |
| | 18,609 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 18,609 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 18,609 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2016 | 75,298,676 |
| | $ | 753 |
| | $ | 1,714,358 |
| | $ | (758,496 | ) | | $ | 956,615 |
| 75,298,676 |
| | $ | 753 |
| | $ | 1,714,358 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (758,496 | ) | | $ | 956,615 |
|
| Net loss | | | | | | | | | | (59,726 | ) | | (59,726 | ) |
| Common stock issued to SSH | | 12,946 |
| | — |
| | 82 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 82 |
|
| Common stock issued purchase of vessels | | 910,802 |
| | 9 |
| | 7,368 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 7,377 |
|
| Warrants issued for vessel purchase | | — |
| | — |
| | 12,900 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 12,900 |
|
| Purchase of common stock for treasury | | (1,465,448 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (11,004 | ) | | — |
| | (11,004 | ) |
| Cash dividends declared on common stock ($0.02 per common share) | | — |
| | — |
| | (1,509 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (1,509 | ) |
| Issuance of restricted stock, net of forfeitures | | 145,388 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Restricted stock amortization | | — |
| | — |
| | 12,645 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 12,645 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2017 | | 74,902,364 |
| | 762 |
| | 1,745,844 |
| | (11,004 | ) | | (818,222 | ) | | 917,380 |
|
| Net loss | | | | | | | | | | (12,698 | ) | | (12,698 | ) |
| Common stock issued | | 1,592,594 |
| | 16 |
| | (16 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Purchase of common stock for treasury | | (7,102,398 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (45,716 | ) | | — |
| | (45,716 | ) |
| Cash dividends declared on common stock ($0.08 per common share) | | | | — |
| | (6,042 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | (6,042 | ) |
| Issuance of restricted stock, net of forfeitures | | 1,824,698 |
| | 18 |
| | (18 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Restricted stock amortization | | | | — |
| | 7,880 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 7,880 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2018 | | 71,217,258 |
| | 796 |
| | 1,747,648 |
| | (56,720 | ) | | (830,920 | ) | | 860,804 |
|
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Dollars in thousands)
| | | | December 31, | December 31, |
| | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Operating activities | | | |
| | | | | |
| | |
| Net loss | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | (510,789 | ) | | $ | (116,565 | ) | $ | (12,698 | ) | | $ | (59,726 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) |
| Adjustment to reconcile net loss to net cash used by operating activities: | | | | | | |
| Adjustment to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities: | | | | | | |
| Restricted stock amortization | 18,609 |
| | 24,599 |
| | 23,869 |
| 7,880 |
| | 12,645 |
| | 18,609 |
|
| Vessel depreciation | 36,562 |
| | 14,263 |
| | 686 |
| 56,607 |
| | 48,510 |
| | 36,562 |
|
| Amortization of deferred financing costs | 4,137 |
| | 1,988 |
| | 150 |
| 9,582 |
| | 6,085 |
| | 4,137 |
|
| Write off of deferred financing costs | 3,781 |
| | 16,085 |
| | — |
| — |
| | 470 |
| | 3,781 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | 10,555 |
| | 397,472 |
| | 55,487 |
| — |
| | 16,471 |
| | 10,555 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale-related party | — |
| | 25,465 |
| | — |
| |
| Net unrealized losses on investments | | 7,719 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Dividend income on equity investment | | (541 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
| Changes in operating assets and liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | |
| Decrease in prepaid expenses and other current assets | (483 | ) | | (4,669 | ) | | (3,811 | ) | |
| (Decrease) increase in accounts payable accrued expenses | (6,178 | ) | | 5,372 |
| | 5,014 |
| |
| Increase (decrease) in related party balances | 5,656 |
| | (4,928 | ) | | (15,170 | ) | |
| Net cash used in operating activities | (52,196 | ) | | (35,142 | ) | | (50,340 | ) | |
| Increase (decrease) in inventories, prepaid expenses and other current assets | | (1,798 | ) | | 1,982 |
| | (483 | ) |
| Decrease (increase) in accounts payable and accrued expenses | | 3,890 |
| | 713 |
| | (6,178 | ) |
| (Decrease) increase in related party balances | | (195 | ) | | (7,568 | ) | | 5,656 |
|
| Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities | | 70,446 |
| | 19,582 |
| | (52,196 | ) |
| Investing activities | | | |
| | | | | |
| | |
| Security deposit refunded (paid) on assets held for sale | — |
| | 31,277 |
| | (31,277 | ) | |
| Equity investment | | (100,000 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
| Dividend income on equity investment | | 541 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Proceeds from sale of assets held for sale | 271,376 |
| | 281,050 |
| | — |
| — |
| | 44,340 |
| | 271,376 |
|
| Payments on assets classified as held for sale | (98,445 | ) | | (92,433 | ) | | — |
| — |
| | — |
| | (98,445 | ) |
| Drydock and scrubber payments | | (1,235 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
| Payments for vessels and vessels under construction | (408,307 | ) | | (875,970 | ) | | (651,505 | ) | (21,799 | ) | | (217,033 | ) | | (408,307 | ) |
| Net cash used by investing activities | (235,376 | ) | | (656,076 | ) | | (682,782 | ) | |
| Net cash used in investing activities | | (122,493 | ) | | (172,693 | ) | | (235,376 | ) |
| Financing activities | | | | | | | | | | |
| Proceeds from issuance of common stock | 128,112 |
| | 217,997 |
| | 187,615 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 128,112 |
|
| Common stock repurchased | | (45,716 | ) | | (11,004 | ) | | — |
|
| Dividends paid | | (6,042 | ) | | (1,509 | ) | | — |
|
| Proceeds from issuance of debt | 247,243 |
| | 489,561 |
| | 33,550 |
| 469,225 |
| | 287,554 |
| | 247,243 |
|
| Repayments of long term debt | (185,239 | ) | | (62,669 | ) | | — |
| (358,858 | ) | | (153,003 | ) | | (185,239 | ) |
| Proceeds from Senior Notes offering | — |
| | — |
| | 73,625 |
| |
| Debt issue cost paid | (1,110 | ) | | (26,044 | ) | | (22,891 | ) | (7,602 | ) | | (2,126 | ) | | (1,110 | ) |
| Net cash provided by financing activities | 189,006 |
| | 618,845 |
| | 271,899 |
| 51,007 |
| | 119,912 |
| | 189,006 |
|
| Decrease in cash and cash equivalents | (98,566 | ) | | (72,373 | ) | | (461,223 | ) | (1,040 | ) | | (33,199 | ) | | (98,566 | ) |
| Cash at cash equivalents, beginning of period | 200,300 |
| | 272,673 |
| | 733,896 |
| |
| Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period | | 68,535 |
| | 101,734 |
| | 200,300 |
|
| Cash and cash equivalents, end of period | $ | 101,734 |
| | $ | 200,300 |
| | $ | 272,673 |
| $ | 67,495 |
| | $ | 68,535 |
| | $ | 101,734 |
|
| Supplemental cash flow information: | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interest paid | $ | 22,647 |
| | $ | 12,874 |
| | $ | 1,273 |
| $ | 39,727 |
| | $ | 27,667 |
| | $ | 22,647 |
|
| Non-cash investing and financing activities | | | | | | | | | | |
| Amounts payable vessels and vessels under construction | $ | 207 |
| | $ | 2,800 |
| | $ | 7,568 |
| $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 207 |
|
| Deferred financing cost payable | — |
| | 85 |
| | 532 |
| |
| Issuance of common stock | 147 |
| | — |
| | 357 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 147 |
|
| Interest capitalized | 6,951 |
| | 11,886 |
| | 1,600 |
| — |
| | 361 |
| | 6,951 |
|
| Issuance of shares and warrants for vessel purchases | | — |
| | 20,268 |
| | — |
|
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Dollars in thousands)
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
| |
| 1. | Organization and Basis of Presentation |
Company
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and its subsidiaries (together “we”, “us”, “our” or the “Company”) is an international shipping company that owns and operates the latest generation newbuilding drybulk carriers with fuel-efficient specifications and carrying capacities of greater than 30,000 dwt in the international shipping markets. Scorpio Bulkers Inc. was incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands on March 20, 2013.
As of December 31, 2016,2018, the Company owned 42or finance leased 56 vessels (consisting of 1619 Kamsarmax vessels and 2637 Ultramax vessels) and has six newbuilding drybulk carriers, which it intends to operate, under construction. Five of the newbuilding drybulk carriers are to be delivered in the first quarter of 2017 and the final newbuilding drybulk carrier is expected to be delivered in the second quarter of 2017.time chartered-in one Ultramax vessel.
Our vessels are commercially managed by Scorpio Commercial Management S.A.M., or SCM, which is majority owned by the Lolli-Ghetti family of which Emanuele Lauro, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and Filippo Lauro, our Vice President, are members. SCM’s services include securing employment, in pools, in the spot market, and on time charters.
Our vessels are technically managed by Scorpio Ship Management S.A.M., or SSM, which is majority owned by the Lolli-Ghetti family. SSM facilitates vessel support such as crew, provisions, deck and engine stores, insurance, maintenance and repairs, and other services as necessary to operate the vessels such as drydocks and vetting/inspection under a technical management agreement.
We also have an administrative services agreement with Scorpio Services Holding Limited, or SSH, which is majority owned by the Lolli-Ghetti family. The administrative services provided under this agreement primarily include accounting, legal compliance, financial, information technology services, the provision of administrative staff, and office space. Under the administrative services agreement, we also reimburse SSH for any direct or indirect expenses that they incurit incurs in providing these services.
Basis of accounting
The consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or U.S. GAAP. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments which, in the opinion of management, are necessary for the fair presentation of results. Pursuant to ASU 2015-03, “Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs”, certain reclassifications have been made to prior years’ Deferred financing costs, net, Bank loans, net and Senior Notes, net to conform to current year presentation. See “Recently adopted accounting standards” below for additional information on these reclassifications.
Other comprehensive income is net income and thus not presented separately.
Reverse stock split
On December 31, 2015, the Company effected a one-for-twelve reverse stock split. All share and per share information has been retroactively adjusted to reflect the reverse stock split. The par value was not adjusted as a result of the reverse stock split.
Going concern
The Company’s revenue is primarily derived from pool revenue. The bulker shipping industry is volatile and has been experiencingexperienced a sustained cyclical downturn. Ifdownturn recently. While the downturn continues,outlook has brightened, if the recovery is not sustained, this could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
The fair market values of the Company’s vessels also experience high volatility. The fair market value of the vessels may increase or decrease depending on a number of factors including, but not limited to, the prevailing level of charter rates and day rates, general economic and market conditions affecting the international shipping industry, types, sizes and ages of vessels, supply and demand for vessels, availability of or developments in other modes of transportation, competition from other shipping companies, cost of newbuildings, governmental or other regulations and technological advances. In addition, as vessels grow older they generally decline in value. If the fair market value of vessels declines, the Company may not be in compliance with certain
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
provisions of its credit facilities and it may not be able to refinance its debt. The prepayment of certain credit facilities may be necessary for the Company to maintain compliance with certain covenants in the event that the value of its vessels falls below a certain level. Additionally, if the Company sells one or moreany of its vessels at a time when vessel prices have fallen, the sale price may be less than the vessel’s carrying value on its consolidated financial statements, resulting in a loss on sale or an impairment loss being recognized, ultimately leading to a reduction in earnings. Furthermore, if vessel values fall significantly, this could indicate a decrease in the recoverable amount for the vessel which may result in an impairment adjustment in the carrying value of the vessel.
As described in Note 7, the Company has commitments to pay for its vessels currently under construction that may exceed the amount of financing presently secured for these which could have an adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
These consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the recoverability and classification of recorded assets, nor to the amounts and classification of liabilities
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
that may be necessary should the Company be unable to continue as a going concern.
Significant Accounting Policies
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements represent the consolidation of the accounts of Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and its subsidiaries in conformity with U.S. GAAP. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Investments in unconsolidated companies (generally 20 to 50 percent ownership), in which the Company has the ability to exercise significant influence but neither has a controlling interest nor is the primary beneficiary, are accounted for under the equity method. Investments in entities in which the Company does not have the ability to exercise significant influence are accounted for under the cost method. Under certain criteria indicated in Accounting Standards Codification ("ASC") 810, Consolidation, a partially-owned affiliate would be consolidated as a variable interest entity when it has less than a 50% ownership if the Company was the primary beneficiary of that entity. At the present time, there are no interests in variable interest entities.
Accounting estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses and disclosures of contingent assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses. Actual results could differ from those results.
In addition to the estimates noted above, significant estimates include vessel valuations, useful life of vessels, and residual value of vessels.
Revenue recognition
VesselThe Company adopted ASU 2014-9, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers”, for the reporting period commencing on January 1, 2018 and elected to use the modified retrospective approach. The core principal of the standard is that an entity will recognize revenue at an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for transferring such goods or services to a customer (as defined in the standard). Its adoption primarily changes the method of recognizing revenue for voyage charters from the discharge-to-discharge method to the loading-to-discharge method. Under the discharge-to-discharge method, revenue is measuredrecognized from the discharge of the prior voyage, or contract date of the current voyage if later, until the discharge of the current voyage. Under the load-to-discharge method, revenue is recognized from the load of a voyage until its discharge. The quantitative impact of the adoption of this new guidance did not have any effect on the timing of revenue recognition and therefore required no adjustment to the opening retained earnings as of January 1, 2018 as the Company was not engaged in any voyage charters. At the present time, virtually all of the Company’s revenues are sourced from commercial pools which, along with time charters, fall under the guidance of US GAAP for leases. In commercial pools the Company participates with other shipowners to operate a large number of vessels as an integrated transportation system, which offers customers greater flexibility and a higher level of service while achieving scheduling efficiencies. The operation of the pool enables both pool customers and participants to share the benefits achieved from these efficiencies. Under pooling arrangements, vessels are leased to and placed at the fair valuedisposal and control of the consideration received or receivable and represents amounts receivable for services providedpool during their participation in the normal coursepool. The Pool Manager negotiates and enters into arrangements for the commercial employment and operation of business, netthe pool vessels so as to secure the highest earnings to be shared among the pool participants. All revenues earned by the pool from the operation of discounts, and other sales-related or value added taxes.
Vessel revenuethe pool vessels, after deduction of all costs involved in the operation of the pool, is comprised of eithershared among the pool revenue, time charter revenue and voyage revenue.
Pool revenue for each vessel is determinedparticipants based upon pool points, in accordance with the profit sharing terms specified within each pool agreement. In particular, the pool manager aggregates the revenues and expenses of all of the pool participants and distributes the net earnings to participants based on:
the pool points (vessel attributes such as cargo carrying capacity, fuel consumption, and construction characteristics are taken into consideration); and
the number of days the vessel participated in the pool in the period.
Time charter revenue is recognized ratably as services are performed based on the daily rates specified in the time charter contract. We do not recognize revenue when a vessel is off hire.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Voyage charter agreements are charter hires, where a contract is made in the spot market for the use of a vessel for a specific voyage for a specified charter rate. Revenue from voyage charter agreements is recognized on a pro rata basis based on the relative transit time in each period. The period over which voyage revenues are recognized commences at the time the vessel departs from its last discharge port and ends at the time the discharge of cargo at the next discharge port is completed. We do not begin recognizing revenue until a charter has been agreed to by the customer and us, even if the vessel has discharged its cargo and is sailing to the anticipated load port on its next voyage. Estimated losses on voyages are provided for in full at the time such losses become evident. In the application of this policy, we do not begin recognizing revenue until (i) the amount of revenue can be measured reliably, (ii) it is probable that the economic benefits associated with the transaction will flow to the entity, (iii) the transactions’ stage of completion at the balance sheet date can be measured reliably and (iv) the costs incurred and the costs to complete the transaction can be measured reliably.
We recognize pool revenue when the vessel has participated in a pool during the period and the amount of pool revenue can be estimated reliably. We receive estimated vessel earnings based on the known number of days the vessel has participated in the pool, the contract terms, and the estimated pool revenue.
Voyage expenses
Voyage expenses which primarily include bunkers, port charges, canal tolls, cargo handling operations and brokerage commissions paid by us under voyage charters, brokerage commissions and miscellaneous voyage expenses that the Company is unable to recoup under time charter and pool arrangements, as well as credits for intermediary hold cleaning are expensed as incurred.arrangements.
Charterhire expense
Charterhire expense is the amount we pay the owner for time chartered-in vessels. The amount is usually for a fixed period of time at charter rates that are generally fixed, but may contain a variable component based on drybulk indices, inflation, interest rates, profit sharing,, or current market rates. The vessel’s owner is responsible for crewing and other vessel operating costs. Charterhire expense is recognized ratably over the charterhire period.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Operating leases
Costs in respect of operating leases are charged to the Consolidated Statement of Operations on a straight line basis over the lease term.
Vessel operating costs
Vessel operating costs, which include crewing, repairs and maintenance, insurance, stores, lube oils, communication expenses, and technical management fees, are expensed as incurred.
Technical management fees are paid to SSM (See Note 13)15, Related Party Transactions). Pursuant to an agreement, or the Revised Master Agreement, SSM provides us with technical services, and we provide themit with the ability to subcontract technical management of our vessels with our approval.vessels.
Foreign currencies
The individual financial statements of Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and each of its subsidiaries are presentedmaintained in the currency of the primary economic environment in which we operate (its functional currency), which in all cases is U.S. dollars. For the purpose of the consolidated financial statements, our results and financial position are also expressed in U.S. dollars.
In preparing the consolidated financial statements of Scorpio Bulkers Inc. and each of its subsidiaries, transactions in currencies other than the U.S. dollar are recorded at the rate of exchange prevailing on the dates of the transactions. Any change in exchange rate between the date of recognition and the date of settlement may result in a gain or loss which is included in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. At the end of each reporting period, monetary assets and liabilities denominated in other currencies are retranslated into the functional currency at rates ruling at that date. All resultant exchange differences are included in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents are comprised of cash on hand and demand deposits, and other short-term highly-liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less, and that are readily convertible to a known amount of cash and are subject to an insignificant risk of changes in value.
Inventories
Inventories which are included in prepaid expenses and other current assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheet, consistsconsist mainly of lubricating oils used in the operations of the vessels and are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Cost is determined using the first in first out method.
Assets held for sale
Assets held for sale include vessels and contracts for the construction of vessels and are classified in accordance with ASC 360, Property, Plant, and Equipment. The Company considers such assets to be held for sale when all of the following criteria are met:
management commits to a plan to sell the property;
it is unlikely that the disposal plan will be significantly modified or discontinued;
the property is available for immediate sale in its present condition;
actions required to complete the sale of the property have been initiated;
sale of the property is probable and we expect the completed sale will occur within one year; and
the property is actively being marketed for sale at a price that is reasonable given its current market value.
Upon designation as an asset held for sale, the Company records the asset at the lower of its carrying value or its estimated fair value, less estimated costs to sell, and, if the asset is a vessel, the Company ceases depreciation.
Vessels, net
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Vessels, net is stated at historical cost less accumulated depreciation. Included in vessel costs are acquisition costs directly attributable to the acquisition of a vessel including capitalized interest and expenditures made to prepare the vessel for its initial voyage. Vessels are depreciated to their residual value on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives of 25 years from the date the vessel is ready for its first voyage. The estimated useful life of 25 years is management’s best estimate and is also consistent with industry practice for similar vessels. The residual value is estimated as the lightweight tonnage of each vessel multiplied by aan estimated scrap value per ton. The scrap value per ton is estimated taking into consideration the historical four years average scrap market rates at the balance sheet date.
When regulations place limitations over the ability of a vessel to trade on a worldwide basis, or when the cost of complying with such regulations is not expected to be recovered, we will adjust the vessel’s useful life to end at the date such regulations preclude such vessel’s further commercial use.
The carrying value of the Company’s vessels does not represent the fair market value of such vessels or the amount it could obtain if it were to sell any of its vessels, which could be more or less. Under U.S. GAAP, the Company would not record a loss if the fair market value of a vessel (excluding its charter) is below ourits carrying value unless and until it determines to sell that vessel or the vessel is impaired as discussed below under “Impairment of long-lived assets held for use.”
Vessels under construction
Vessels under construction are measured at cost and include costs incurred that are directly attributable to bringing the asset to the location and condition necessary for it to be capable of operating in the manner intended by management. These costs include installment payments made to the shipyards, capitalized interest, professional fees, and other costs deemed directly attributable to the construction of the asset. Vessels under construction are not depreciated.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Deferred drydocking costs
The vessels are required to undergo planned drydocks or underwater inspections for replacement of certain components, major repairs and maintenance of other components, which cannot be carried out while the vessels are operating, approximately every 30 months or 60 months depending on the nature of work and external requirements. These drydock costs are capitalized and depreciated on a straight-line basis over the estimated period until the next drydock. When the drydock expenditure is incurredoccurs prior to the expiry of the period, the remaining balance is expensed. The Company had no drydocking activity during the three years ended December 31, 2016.2018.
We only include in deferred drydocking those direct costs that are incurred as part of the drydocking to meet regulatory requirements, or are expenditures that add economic life to the vessel, increase the vessel’s earnings capacity or improve the vessel’s efficiency. Direct costs include shipyard costs as well as the costs of placing the vessel in the shipyard; cost of travel, lodging and subsistence of personnel sent to the drydocking site to supervise; and the cost of hiring a third party to oversee the drydocking. Expenditures for normal maintenance and repairs, whether incurred as part of the drydocking or not, are expensed as incurred.
Other assets
Other assets consist primarily of deferred financing costs relating to lines of credit and loan facilities that have not yet been drawn down. As the loan facilities are drawn down, the related portion of costs incurred relating to such facilities will be reflected as a reduction to the related debt. Deferred financing costs relating to both the lines of credit and loan facilities are amortized to expense over the life of the related debt using the effective interest rate method.
Impairment of long-lived assets held for use
In accordance with ASC subtopic 360-10, Property, Plant and Equipment, long-lived assets to be held and used are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of such assets may not be recoverable. Determination of recoverability is based on an estimate of undiscounted future cash flows resulting from the use of the asset or asset group and its eventual disposition. Measurement
For purposes of recognition and measurement of an impairment loss, for long-lived assets that management expects to hold and use is based onare grouped with other assets at the fair valuelowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the asset as estimated using a cash flow model. Long-livedflows of other assets, to be disposed of are reportingwhich is generally at the lower of carrying amount or fair value less costs to sell.
During the fourth quarter of 2016,vessel pool level for vessels operating within pools. In performing its impairment review, the Company performed impairment testsperforms a recoverability test comparing an estimate of the Company’s vessels due to the prevailing conditions in the shipping industry. The Company compared undiscounted cash flows to the carrying values for each of the Company’s vesselsvalue to determine if the assets wereasset group is impaired. In developing its estimates of undiscounted cash flows, the Company makes significant assumptions and estimates about vessels’ future performance, with the most significant assumptions relating to (i) charter rates on expiry of existing charters, which are based on the current fixing applicable to five-year time charter rates and thereafter, the ten-year historical average for each category of vessel (ii) off-hire days, which are based on actual off-hire statistics for the Company’s fleet (iii) operating costs, based on current levels escalated over time based on long term trends (iv) dry dockingdrydocking frequency, duration and cost (v) estimated useful life which is assessed as a total of 25 years and (vi) estimated scrap values. In the case of an indication of impairment, the results of a recoverability test would also be sensitive to the discount rate applied.
The assumptions used involve a considerable degree
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
An impairment loss is recognized when the carrying amount of estimation. Actual conditions may differ significantly from the assumptions and thus actualasset group is greater than both the undiscounted cash flows and its fair value. In instances where the carrying value of an asset group is not recoverable, measurement of the impairment loss is based upon the amount by which the collective fair values of the vessels in the asset group exceed their collective carrying values. The fair values are determined based upon available market data as well as third party valuations performed on each individual vessel.
During our fourth quarter 2018 assessment, we determined that the undiscounted future income streams expected to be generated by each asset group, over their remaining operating lives exceeded and therefore would be sufficient to recover their respective carrying values and, accordingly, we confirmed that our vessels were not impaired under U.S. GAAP. As of December 31, 2018 we owned 56 vessels with an average remaining useful life of 22 years.
During the year ended December 31, 2017, there were no changes in circumstances or events that indicated that the carrying amount of our vessel pools or vessels under construction may not be significantly differentrecoverable and therefore, an assessment of impairment was not performed.
During our fourth quarter 2016 assessment, we determined that the undiscounted future income streams expected to those expected with a material effect on the recoverabilitybe generated by each of each vessel’sour asset groups, over their remaining operating lives exceeded and therefore would be sufficient to recover their respective carrying amount.
No impairment chargesvalues and, accordingly, we confirmed that our vessels were recorded on the Company’s long-lived assets held for use as atnot impaired under U.S. GAAP. As of December 31, 2016 and 2015we owned 42 vessels with an average remaining useful life of 24 years.
In our impairment testing, we also examine the sensitivity of the future income streams expected to be earned by reviewing other scenarios relative to the initial assumptions we used to see if the resulting impact would have resulted in a different conclusion. Accordingly, we perform sensitivity analyses based on more conservative charter rates and expected useful lives for our vessels. In the first sensitivity analysis, we lowered charter rate assumptions to 96% of the long-term averages of Kamsarmax and Ultramax vessels, respectively (holding all other critical assumptions constant), while in our second sensitivity analysis; we decreased our vessels’ estimated useful lives by approximately 9% for each vessel class (holding all other critical assumptions constant). We then evaluated the outcomes of the sensitivity analyses performed to assess their impact on our conclusions. In both analyses, we found that there was no impairment of any of our assets or asset groups.
Although we believe that the assumptions made,used to evaluate potential impairment are reasonable and appropriate, such assumptions are highly subjective. There can be no assurance as to how long charter rates and vessel values will remain at their currently low levels or whether they will improve by any significant degree. Charter rates may decrease, which could adversely affect our revenue and profitability, and any future assessments of vessel impairment.
Management will continue to monitor developments in charter rates in the expected undiscountedmarkets in which it participates with respect to the expectation of future cash flows exceedingrates over an extended period of time that are utilized in the vessels’ carrying amounts.analyses.
Fair value of financial instruments
Substantially all of the Company’s financial instruments are carried at fair value or amounts approximating fair value. Cash and cash equivalents, interest rate caps, amounts due to / from charterers, accounts payable and long-term debt, are carried at market value or estimated fair value.
Please also see “Equity Investments” below.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Deferred financing costs, net
Deferred financing costs, included in other assets or as a reduction to debt balances (as described above), consist of fees, commissions and legal expenses associated with obtaining or modifying loan facilities. These costs are amortized over the life of the related debt using the effective interest rate method and are included in Financial expense, net in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. Amortization was $4.1$9.6 million, $2.0$6.1 million, and $0.2$4.1 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2016, 20152018, 2017 and 2014.2016. Deferred financing costs of $26.1were $37.8 million and $14.9$30.2 million, and accumulated amortization was $6.2$21.7 million and $2.1$12.1 million as of December 31, 20162018 and 2015,2017, respectively. Amortization for the next five years based on balances as of December 31, 20162018 are as follows (in millions):
| | | 2017 | | $ | 5.1 |
| | |
| 2018 | | 4.9 |
| | |
| 2019 | | 4.6 |
| | | $ | 4.5 |
| |
| 2020 | | 4.0 |
| | | 3.7 |
| |
| 2021 | | 1.1 |
| | | 2.8 |
| |
| 2022 | | | 2.1 |
| |
| 2023 | | | 1.3 |
| |
| Total | | 19.7 |
| | | $ | 14.4 |
| |
The Company wrote off $3.8 million and $16.1of deferred financing costs during the year ended December 31, 2018 related to the refinancing of existing debt. The Company wrote off $0.5 million during the yearsyear ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively,2017 associated with the portion of deferred financing costs accumulated on credit facilities for which the commitments were reduced due to the sale of vessels, cancellation of the construction contract or because the amount of the facility exceeded the amounts that we would be able to draw downdue to decreases in vessel values.vessels.
Earnings per share
Basic earnings per share is determined by dividing the net income (loss) by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding, while diluted earnings per share is determined by dividing net income (loss) by the average number of common stock adjusted for the dilutive effect of common stock equivalents by application of the treasury stock method. Common stock equivalents are excluded from the diluted calculation if their effect is anti-dilutive.
Share-based Compensation
We follow ASC Subtopic 718-10, Compensation-Stock Compensation, for restricted stock issued under our equity incentive plans.plan. Share-based compensation expense requires measurement of compensation cost for shared basedshare-based awards at fair value and recognition of compensation cost over the vesting period, net of estimated forfeitures.period. The restricted stock awards granted to our employees and directors have graded vesting schedules and contain only service conditions. The Company recognizes compensation cost on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for each separately vesting portion of the award as if the award was, in-substance,in substance, multiple awards.
The fair value of restricted stock awards is based on the fair value of the Company’s common stock on the grant date.
Income tax
Scorpio Bulkers Inc. is incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and its vessel owning subsidiaries are incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands and the Cayman Islands. In accordance with the income tax laws of the Marshall Islands, and the Cayman Islands, we are not subject to Marshall Islands or Cayman Islands income tax. We are also exempt from income tax in other jurisdictions including the United States of America due to tax treaties or domestic tax laws; therefore, we will not have any tax charges, benefits, or balances.
Concentration of credit risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk are amounts due from charterers and from related parties. With respect to balances due from the Scorpio Ultramax Pool, and the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool (see Note 13)15, Related Party Transactions), the Company, through SCM, limits its credit risk by performing ongoing credit evaluations and, when deemed necessary, requires letters of credit, guarantees or collateral. The Company earned 36%, and 64% of its revenues from two customers during the year ended December 31, 2018. The Company earned 42% and 58% of its revenues, from two customers during the year ended December 31, 2017. During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company earned 40%, and 60% of its revenues (including commissions from SCM) from two customers duringcustomers. Management does not believe significant risk exists in connection with the year endedCompany’s concentrations of credit at December 31, 2016. The Company earned 41% and 43% and 8%2018 due to the number of its revenues (including commissions from SCM), from three customers duringcharterers with which the year ended December 31, 2015. During the year
pools conduct business.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
ended 12/31/2014, the Company earned 71% and 21% of its revenues (including commissions from SCM), respectively from two customers. Management does not believe significant risk exists in connection with the Company’s concentrations of credit at December 31, 2016 due to the number of charterers with which the pools conduct business.
At December 31, 2016,2018, the Company maintains all of its cash and cash equivalents with seven financial institutions. None of the Company’s cash and cash equivalent balances are covered by insurance in the event of default by these financial institutions.
Interest rate risk
The Company is exposed to the impact of interest rate changes primarily through its variable-rate borrowings which consist of borrowings under its secured credit facilities. Significant increases in interest rates could adversely affect our operating margins, results of operationsnet income and our ability to service our debt. The Company has entered into derivative contracts to hedge its overall exposure to interest rate risk exposure (see Derivative financial instruments below for further information).
Liquidity risk
Liquidity risk is the risk that an entity will encounter difficulty in raising funds to meet commitments associated with financial instruments.
We manage liquidity risk by maintaining adequate reserves and borrowing facilities and by continuously monitoring forecast and actual cash flows.
Current economic conditions make forecasting difficult, and there is the possibility that our actual trading performance during the coming year may be materially different from expectations. Additionally, it is also likely that additional, currently uncommitted, sources of financing will be required to meet the financial commitments relating to the scheduled maturities of our Senior Notes due 2019 and to finance the final portion of our investment in exhaust gas cleaning systems (“scrubbers”). We could also pursue other means to raise liquidity, such as through the sale of vessels, to meet these obligations. There can be no assurance that these or other measures will be successful and a deterioration in economic conditions or a failure to refinance our debt that is maturing could cause us to breach our debt covenants and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.
Based on internal forecasts and projections, which assume the refinancing of certain outstanding debt and the financing of the final portion of our investment in scrubbers, and that take into account reasonably possible changes in our trading performance, in addition to our ability to (i) sell or refinance certain vessels or to (ii) sell our investment in Scorpio Tankers Inc. (“Scorpio Tankers”), we believe that we have adequate financial resources to continue in operation and meet our financial commitments (including but not limited to newbuilding installments, debt service obligations, installments relating to the purchase of exhaust gas cleaning systems and charterhire commitments) for a period of at least 12 months from the date of issuance of this annual report. Accordingly, we continue to adopt the going concern basis in preparing our financial statements.
Currency and exchange rate risk
The international shipping industry’s functional currency is the U.S. Dollar. Virtually all of our revenues and most of our operating costs are in U.S. Dollars. We incur certain operating expenses in currencies other than the U.S. Dollar, and the foreign exchange risk associated with these operating expenses is immaterial.
Equity Investments
We account for equity investments under the equity method. Equity investments for which we have the ability to exercise significant influence, but not control over the investee and are not the primary beneficiary of the investee’s activities are accounted for under the equity method. At December 31, 2018, the Company’s equity method investments consist solely of an approximately 10.5% common stock ownership interest in a related party over which it has the ability to exercise significant influence, Scorpio Tankers acquired in October 2018. In accounting for its investment in Scorpio Tankers, the Company has elected to use the fair value option, available under ASC 825 for investments subject to the equity method of accounting, as it more accurately reflects the economic substance of its ownership interest in Scorpio Tankers. The initial election of the fair value option did not have any impact on the Company’s earnings. The Company measures its fair value based upon the quoted market price of Scorpio Tankers common stock. Our share of gains and losses in the fair value of the Scorpio Tankers investment as well as dividend income are recorded in Income (loss) from equity investment - related party in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. At December 31, 2018, the Company did not have any cost method investments.
Derivative financial instruments
The Company uses derivative financial instruments, primarily interest rate caps, to hedge certain interest rate exposure. The Company does not use derivative financial instruments for speculative purposes.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
All derivative financial instruments are carried on the balance sheet at fair value. Fair value of derivatives is determined by reference to observable prices that are based on inputs not quoted on active markets, but corroborated by market data. The accounting for changes in the fair value of a derivative instrument depends on whether the derivative has been designated as and qualifies as part of a hedging relationship. The use of derivative instruments has been limited to interest rate cap agreements. The fair values of derivative instruments are included in Other assets in the accompanying balance sheets. The Company has not elected to designate any of its derivative instruments as hedging instruments under ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and as such the gain or loss on the derivative is recognized in Financial expense, net in current earnings during the period of change.
The valuation of interest rate cap agreements is determined using the Black Model, which considers among other factors, the contractual terms of derivatives, including the period to maturity, and uses observable market-based inputs, including interest rate curves and expected volatility, adjusted for counter-party risk. The Company may enter into derivative contracts that are intended to economically hedge certain of its risks, even though hedge accounting does not apply or we elect not to apply hedge accounting.
Recent accounting pronouncements
In NovemberFebruary 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)(“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU)(“ASU”) 2016-02, “Leases”, which was intended to improve financial reporting of leasing transactions. The ASU requires organizations that lease assets, or lessees, to recognize on the balance sheet the assets and liabilities for the rights and obligations created by those leases with terms of more than twelve months. The accounting for lease arrangements by the lessors will remain largely unchanged from current U.S. GAAP. The ASU also requires additional quantitative and qualitative disclosures to help financial statement users better understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The ASU is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018 although early adoption is permitted. The ASU requires reporting organizations to take a modified retrospective transition approach.
In its review of its contracts to assess the overall impact of the guidance, the Company has determined that the existing pool arrangements meet the definition of leases under ASU 2016-02. As lessor, the Company leases its vessels to pools, which manage the vessels in order to enter into transportation contracts with their customers and enjoy the economic benefits derived from such arrangements. Furthermore, the pools can direct the use of a vessel (subject to certain limitations in the pool or charter agreement) throughout the period of use. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-11, “Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements”, which amended FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 842, “Leases”, to (i) provide a practical expedient for lessors regarding the separation of the lease and non-lease components of a contract and (ii) add an optional transition method that would permit entities to apply the new requirements by recognizing a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the year of the adoption. In its assessment, the Company concluded that the criteria for not separating the lease and non-lease components of its arrangements are met since: (a) the timing and pattern of transfer are the same for both the lease and non-lease components, (b) the lease component of the contracts, if accounted for separately, would be classified as an operating lease, and (c) the lease component is the predominant component in the arrangement. Therefore, the Company will account for the combined component as an operating lease in accordance with ASC 842. As a result, an entity’s reporting for the comparative periods presented in the financial statements in which it adopts the new lease standard will continue to be in accordance with current GAAP. The Company adopted this new standard on January 1, 2019, applying the optional transition option, with no restatement of comparative figures for prior periods. The Company does not expect this standard to impact the accounting for its vessels operating within the pools or under time chartered-out arrangements.
The standard will result in the recognition of right-of-use assets and corresponding liabilities, on the basis of the discounted remaining future minimum lease payments, for chartered-in vessel commitments of over 12 months only, which have historically been reported as operating leases and recognized solely in the income statement on a straight-line basis. The impact of this standard as it pertains to time or bareboat chartered-in vessels will not have an impact upon first time adoption, as the Company’s operating fleet includes only one chartered-in vessel at December 31, 2018, which has a lease term of less than twelve months and does not require recognition on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Recently adopted accounting standards
In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-09, “Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting”, which clarifies when changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment must be accounted for as modifications. Under the new guidance, an entity will not apply modification accounting to a share-based payment award if all of the following are the same immediately before and after the change: (i) the award’s fair value, (ii) the award’s vesting conditions, and (iii) the award’s classification as an equity or liability instrument. The new guidance does not change the accounting for modifications. The guidance is effective for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017 for all entities. The adoption of ASU 2017-09 did not have a significant impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements or financial disclosures.
In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, “Restricted Cash”. When cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents are presented in more than one line item on the balance sheet, the new guidance requires a reconciliation of the totals in the statement of cash flows to the related captions in the balance sheet. This reconciliation can be presented either on the face of the statement of cash flows or in the notes to the financial statements. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, December 2017, and interim periods within those years. EarlyThe adoption in an interim period is permitted, but any adjustments must be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes that interim period. The Company does not expect ASU 2016-018 todid not have a significant impact on itsthe Company’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, “Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments”, which addresses classification issues related to the statement of cash flows. Classification issues relate to (i) debt repayment ofor debt extinguishment costs, (ii) settlement of zero-coupon bonds, (iii) contingent consideration payments made after a business combination, (iv) proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims, (v) proceeds from the settlement of corporate-owned life insurance policies, including bank-owned life insurance policies, (vi) distributions received from equity method investees, (vii) beneficial interests in securitization transactions, and (viii) separately identifiable cash flows and application of the predominance principle. The guidance is effective for annual and interim periods in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017. EarlyThe adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. If an entity early adopts the ASU in an interim period, adjustments should be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes that interim period. An entity that elects early adoption must adopt all of the amendments in the same period. Entities should apply this ASU using a retrospective transition method to each period presented. If it is impracticable for an entity to apply the ASU retrospectively for some of the issues, it may apply the amendments for those issues prospectively as of the earliest date practicable. The Company does not expect ASU 2016-15 todid not have a significant impact on itsthe Company’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting”. The new guidance requires excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies to be recorded on the income statement when the awards vest or are settled. In addition, cash flows related to excess tax benefits will no longer be separately classified as a financing activity on the statement of cash flows. The standard also allows withholding up to the maximum statutory amount for taxes on employee share-based compensation, clarifies that all cash payments made on an employee’s behalf for withheld shares should be presented as a financing activity on the statement of cash flows and provides an accounting policy election to account for forfeitures as they occur. The new standard is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016 with early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect ASU 2016-09 to have a significant impact on its consolidated financial statements.
In February 2016 the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases”, which is intended to improve financial reporting about leasing transactions. The ASU affects all companies that lease assets. The ASU will require organizations that lease assets, or lessees, to recognize on the balance sheet the assets and liabilities for the rights and obligations created by those leases with terms of more than twelve months. The accounting by organizations that own the assets leased by the lessee, the lessor, will remain largely unchanged from current U.S. GAAP. The ASU will also require additional quantitative and qualitative disclosures to help financial statement users better understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The ASU is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2018 although early adoption is permitted. The ASU requires reporting organizations to take a modified retrospective transition approach. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption of the ASU on its consolidated financial statements but could experience a gross up of assets and liabilities should the Company time charter-in a significant number of vessels.
In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers”, which supersedes nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under U.S. GAAP. The core principle is that (Topic 606). This standard requires entities to (i) identify the contract(s) with a company shouldcustomer; (ii) identify the performance obligations in the contract; (iii) determine the transaction price; (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (v) recognize revenue when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in an amount that reflects(or as) the consideration to which an entity expects to be entitledsatisfies a performance obligation. The Company adopted ASU 2014-9 for those goods or services. This update defines a five-step process to achieve this core principle and, in doing so, more judgment and estimates may be required within the revenue recognition process than are required under existing U.S. GAAP. ASU 2014-09 was originally going to be effectivereporting period commencing on January 1, 2017; however,2018 and elected to use the FASB recently issued ASU 2015-14, which deferredmodified retrospective approach. Its adoption primarily changes the effectivemethod of recognizing revenue for voyage charters from the discharge-to-discharge method to the loading-to-discharge method. Under the discharge-to-discharge method, revenue is recognized from the discharge of the prior voyage, or contract date of ASU 2014-09 by one year to January 1, 2018.the current voyage if later, until the discharge of the current voyage. Under the load-to-discharge method, revenue is recognized from the load of a voyage until its discharge. The Company’s quantitative assessment of the effects of the adoption of this standard is not expected to have a materialnew guidance indicated that the financial impact on the revenue recognized for our vessels that operate in pools or on time charter. These arrangements qualify as single performance obligations that meet the criteria to recognize revenue ‘over time’ as the customer (i.e. the pool or the charterer) is simultaneously receiving and consuming the benefits of the vessel. This methodchange in timing of revenue recognition is identicalas outlined above required no adjustment to our current accounting policy for these typesthe opening retained earnings as of employment arrangements. For vessels operatingJanuary 1, 2018 as the Company was not engaged in any voyage charters. At the spot market, we also expect to recognize revenue overpresent time, however, the time period over which revenue is recognized is still being determined.
Recently adopted accounting standards
In April 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2015-03,“Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs”, which changes the presentation of debt issuance costs in financial statements. ASU 2015-03 requires an entity to present such costs in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the related debt liability rather than as an asset. Amortizationvirtually all of the costs will continue to be reported as interest expense. The new standard is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015. We adopted ASU 2015-03 effective January 1, 2016. As a resultCompany’s revenues are sourced from commercial pools which, along with time charters, fall under the guidance of the retrospective adoption, we reclassified unamortized debt issuance costs of $12.3 million and $3.2 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, from Deferred financing costs, net to a reduction in both current and non-current Bank loans, net as well as Senior Notes, net in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Adoption of this standard did not impact results of operations, retained earnings or cash flows in the current or previous interim and annual reporting periods.
In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15, “Presentation of Financial Statements - Going Concern”ASC Topic 842 “Leases”. ASU 2014-15 provides U.S. GAAP guidance on management’s responsibility in evaluating whether there is substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern and on related required footnote disclosures. For each reporting period, management will be required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events that raise substantial doubt about a company’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year from the date the financial statements are issued. ASU 2014-15 is applicable to all entities and is effective for annual reporting periods ending after December 15, 2016 and for annual and interim reporting periods thereafter. Early application is permitted. Adoption of this standard did not impact results of operations, retained earnings or cash flows in the current or previous interim and annual reporting periods.
| |
| 2. | Cash and cash equivalents |
Included in cashCash and cash equivalents as of December 31, 2016 and 2015 is $25.4includes $10.1 million and $20.1$20.2 million respectively, of short-term deposits with original maturities of less than three months.
months, at December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
| |
| 3. | Earnings Per Common Share |
The following is a reconciliation of the basic and diluted earnings per share computations (amounts in thousands, except per share data):
| | | | | For the years ended December 31, | | For the years ended December 31, |
| | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Net loss for basic and diluted earnings per share | | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | (510,789 | ) | | $ | (116,565 | ) | | $ | (12,698 | ) | | $ | (59,726 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Shares of common stock and common stock equivalents: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Weighted average shares basic | | 56,174 |
| | 21,410 |
| | 11,466 |
| | 71,827 |
| | 71,794 |
| | 56,174 |
|
| Effect of dilutive securities | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Weighted average common shares - diluted
| | 56,174 |
| | 21,410 |
| | 11,466 |
| | 71,827 |
| | 71,794 |
| | 56,174 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Loss per share: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Basic | | $ | (2.22 | ) | | $ | (23.86 | ) | | $ | (10.17 | ) | | $ | (0.18 | ) | | $ | (0.83 | ) | | $ | (2.22 | ) |
| Diluted | | $ | (2.22 | ) | | $ | (23.86 | ) | | $ | (10.17 | ) | | $ | (0.18 | ) | | $ | (0.83 | ) | | $ | (2.22 | ) |
The following is a summary of share equivalents not included in the computation of diluted earnings per share because their effectiveseffects would have been anti-dilutive for the years ended December 31, 2016, 20152018, 2017 and 20142016 (in thousands).
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | For the years ended December 31, |
| | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Share equivalents | | 3,600 |
| | 1,248 |
| | 582 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | For the years ended December 31, |
| | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Share equivalents | | 3,754 |
| | 4,734 |
| | 3,600 |
|
At December 31, 20162018, the Company owned 16or financed leased 19 Kamsarmax vessels and 2637 Ultramax vessels. A rollforward of activity within vessels is as follows (in thousands):
| | | Balance December 31, 2014 | $ | 66,633 |
| |
| Balance December 31, 2016 | | $ | 1,234,081 |
|
| Transfer from vessels under construction and other additions | | 203,682 |
|
| Vessel purchases | | 207,000 |
|
| Vessel sales | | (61,471 | ) |
| Depreciation | | (48,510 | ) |
| Balance December 31, 2017 | | $ | 1,534,782 |
|
| Transfer from vessels under construction and other additions | 1,002,912 |
| 29,743 |
|
| Depreciation | (14,263 | ) | (56,607 | ) |
| Transferred to assets held for sale | (290,828 | ) | |
| Balance December 31, 2015 | $ | 764,454 |
| |
| Transfer from vessels under construction and other additions | 506,189 |
| |
| Depreciation | (36,562 | ) | |
| Balance December 31, 2016 | $ | 1,234,081 |
| |
| Balance December 31, 2018 | | $ | 1,507,918 |
|
During 2015, vessels and accumulatedDepreciation includes depreciation were reduced by approximately $294.5 million and $3.6 million, respectively, for vessels that were sold. There were no such reductions during 2016.related to our finance leased vessels. All of our vessels serve as collateral against existing loan facilities.
In November 2018, the Company entered into agreements with third parties to purchase exhaust gas cleanings systems (“scrubbers”) for 18 of its vessels in 2019 and for 10 of its vessels in 2020. The total value of these agreements is estimated to be $41.9 million. The systems that are being fitted are of ‘hybrid ready’ design, which allows them to be upgraded to a ‘closed loop’ configuration at
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
a future date. As part of the agreement, the Company also has an option to purchase exhaust gas cleaning systems for up to 18 additional vessels in 2020.
Vessel Purchases
During 2017, the Company acquired nine Ultramax vessels from two unaffiliated third parties for an aggregate of $207.0 million ($186.7 million in cash and $20.3 million in the Company’s common stock). All of the vessels were built in Chinese shipyards. Two were built in 2014, four were built in 2015, one was built in 2016 and two were built in 2017.
Vessel Sales
During 2017, the Company sold the SBI Charleston and SBI Cakewalk, two 2014 built Kamsarmax vessels, for approximately $22.5 million each, recorded a loss of $17.7 million and wrote off $0.5 million of deferred financing costs. The Company also repaid the related debt of approximately $20.1 million.
Owned or Finance Leased vessels
|
| | | | | | | |
| Vessel Name | | Year Built | | DWT | | Vessel Type |
| SBI Antares | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Athena | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Bravo | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Leo | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Echo | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Lyra | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Tango | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Maia | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hydra | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Subaru | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Pegasus | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Ursa | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Thalia | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Cronos | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Orion | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Achilles | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hercules | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Perseus | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hermes | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Zeus | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hera | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hyperion | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Tethys | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Phoebe | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Poseidon | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Apollo | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax |
| Total Ultramax | | | | 1,603,800 |
| | |
| SBI Cakewalk | | 2014 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Charleston | | 2014 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Samba | | 2015 | | 84,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Rumba | | 2015 | | 84,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Capoeira | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Electra | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Carioca | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Conga | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Flamenco | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Bolero | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Sousta | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Rock | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Lambada | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Reggae | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Zumba | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Macarena | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| Total Kamsarmax | | | | 1,316,000 |
| | |
| Total Owned Vessels DWT | | 2,919,800 |
| | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| Vessel Name | | Year Built | | DWT | | Vessel Type |
| SBI Antares | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Athena | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Bravo | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Leo | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Echo | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Lyra | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Tango | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Maia | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hydra | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Subaru | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Pegasus | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Ursa | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Thalia | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Cronos | | 2015 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Orion | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Achilles | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hercules | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Perseus | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hermes | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Zeus | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hera | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Hyperion | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Tethys | | 2016 | | 61,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Phoebe | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Poseidon | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Apollo | | 2016 | | 60,200 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Samson | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Phoenix | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Aries | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Taurus | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Gemini | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Pisces | | 2016 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Libra | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
SBI Macarena had not reached its port of first load as of December 31, 2016, and therefore the vessel cost remains in vessels under construction. |
| | | | | | | |
| Vessel Name | | Year Built | | DWT | | Vessel Type |
| SBI Virgo | | 2017 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Jaguar | | 2014 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Cougar | | 2015 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| SBI Puma | | 2014 | | 64,000 |
| | Ultramax |
| Total Ultramax | | | | 2,307,800 |
| | |
| SBI Samba | | 2015 | | 84,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Rumba | | 2015 | | 84,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Capoeira | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Electra | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Carioca | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Conga | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Flamenco | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Bolero | | 2015 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Sousta | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Rock | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Lambada | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Reggae | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Zumba | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Macarena | | 2016 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Parapara | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Swing | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Mazurka | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Jive | | 2017 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| SBI Lynx | | 2018 | | 82,000 |
| | Kamsarmax |
| Total Kamsarmax | | | | 1,562,000 |
| | |
| Total Owned or Finance Leased Vessels DWT | | 3,869,800 |
| | |
| |
| 5. | Vessels under construction |
The Company had no vessels under construction at December 31, 2018. Vessels under construction was $180.0 million and $288.3amounted to $6.7 million as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. These balances consist primarily of installments paid to shipyards on our newbuilding contracts.2017.
A rollforward of activity within vessels under construction is as follows (in thousands): | | | Balance December 31, 2014 | $ | 866,844 |
| |
| Balance December 31, 2016 | | $ | 180,000 |
|
| Installment payments and other | 875,970 |
| 29,642 |
|
| Capitalized interest | 11,886 |
| 361 |
|
| Transferred to vessels | (1,001,808 | ) | (203,293 | ) |
| Transferred to assets held for sale | (464,610 | ) | |
| Balance December 31, 2015 | $ | 288,282 |
| |
| Balance December 31, 2017 | | $ | 6,710 |
|
| Installment payments and other | 401,556 |
| 20,366 |
|
| Capitalized interest | 6,951 |
| |
| Transferred to vessels | (506,362 | ) | (27,076 | ) |
| Write off due to contract cancellation | (10,427 | ) | |
| Balance December 31, 2016 | 180,000 |
| |
| Balance December 31, 2018 | | $ | — |
|
All vessels under construction serve as collateralDuring 2017, the Company agreed to acquire one Kamsarmax vessel from an unaffiliated third party for related loan facilities. The estimated cost of these six newbuildings is approximately $161.9$25.5 million. $6.7 million of which wethe contract price was paid $143.2 million through December 31, 2016.
A summary of our vessels under construction as of December 31, 2016 is as follows:
|
| | | | | |
| Ultramax Vessels | | |
| |
| | Vessel Name | Expected
Delivery | DWT | Shipyard |
| 1 | Hull CX0655 - TBN SBI Samson | Q1-17 | 64,000 |
| Chengxi Shipyard Co. Ltd. |
| 2 | Hull CX0656 - TBN SBI Phoenix | Q1-17 | 64,000 |
| Chengxi Shipyard Co. Ltd. |
| | Ultramax NB DWT | | 128,000 |
| |
|
| | | | | |
| Kamsarmax Vessels | | | |
| | Vessel Name | Expected
Delivery | DWT | Shipyard |
| 1 | Hull S1735A - TBN SBI Parapara | Q1-17 | 82,000 |
| Hudong-Zhonghua (Group) Co., Ltd. |
| 2 | Hull S1736A - TBN SBI Mazurka | Q1-17 | 82,000 |
| Hudong-Zhonghua (Group) Co., Ltd. |
| 3 | Hull S1232 - TBN SBI Swing | Q1-17 | 82,000 |
| Hudong-Zhonghua (Group) Co., Ltd. |
| 4 | Hull S1233 - TBN SBI Jive | Q2-17 | 82,000 |
| Hudong-Zhonghua (Group) Co., Ltd. |
| | Kamsarmax NB DWT | 328,000 |
| |
| | Total Newbuild DWT | | 456,000 |
| |
As of December 31, 2016,2017, with the Company did not have any vessels classified as held for sale.
During 2016, the Company sold the eight vessels that were classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2015, for net proceeds of $271.4 million and recorded $0.8 million in additional expenses upon the completionremainder of the sales of those vessels.
contract price paid in full and the vessel delivered from the Chinese shipyard in which it was constructed during 2018.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
During 2015, theThe Company sold 23did not have any vessels for net proceeds of $281.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2015, including seven vessels that were classified as held for sale at December 31, 2014.
2018 or 2017.
During 2014,2017, the Company recorded a write down on assetsentered into agreements with an unaffiliated third party to sell the SBI Charleston and SBI Cakewalk, two 2014 built Kamsarmax vessels, for approximately $22.5 million each. As such, the Company classified these vessels as held for sale aggregating $55.5 million which includes (i)until the amount by which balances in vessels under construction for these contracts exceeded the selling pricescompletion of the contracts netsale, recorded a loss of remaining installments yet to be made under$17.7 million and wrote off $0.5 million of deferred financing costs. The Company also repaid the contracts, including modifications to contract pricesrelated debt of the three LR1 product tanker contracts, and (ii) costs expected to be incurred to suppliers relating to the cancellation of orders for the purchase of components that would have been usedapproximately $20.1 million in the construction of the Capesize vessels prior to their modification. An additional $4.4 million loss was recorded in 2015 related to these contracts for additional costs and adjustments to estimates, the majority of which relates to the two LR2 newbuilding contracts for which Scorpio Tankers Inc., a related party, declined the option to purchase and the contracts were subsequently sold for lower amounts.full.
| |
| 7. | Commitment and Contingencies |
Legal Matters
The Company is periodically involved in litigation and various legal matters that arise in the normal course of business. Such matters are subject to many uncertainties and outcomes thatwhich are not predictable. At the current time, the Company does not believe that any of theselegal matters willcould have a material adverse effect on its financial position or future results of operations and therefore has not recorded any reserves in relation thereto as of December 31, 2016.2018.
Capital Commitments
As ofAt December 31, 2016,2018, the Company had $18.6is a party to an agreement to purchase exhaust gas cleaning systems for 18 of its vessels in 2019 and for 10 of its vessels in 2020. The total value of these agreements is estimated to be $41.9 million, of total contractual obligations scheduledwhich $40.7 million remained unpaid at December 31, 2018. Payments are expected to be paidmade throughout 2019 and 2020 as the scrubber systems are installed on the vessels, with final payments expected to be made in 2017 for onethe first quarter of the six undelivered vessels. As of December 31, 2016, we had a cash balance of $101.7 million and a maximum of $51.6 million available to draw upon under signed credit facility agreements. The amount of debt we can draw upon is dependent upon the fair value of our vessels and if the fair market values of our vessels decline, the amount we may drawdown under our secured credit facilities may be reduced.2021.
Time chartered-in vessels
The Company time charters in vessels,charters-in one vessel, which werewas entered into and operated out of a spot market-oriented commercial poolspool managed by our commercial manager. The Company has agreementsan agreement to charter-in twoone drybulk vessels.vessel. The terms of the time charter-in contractscontract are summarized as follows:
| | | Vessel Type | Year Built | DWT | Where Built | Daily Base Rate | Earliest Expiry | Year Built | DWT | Where Built | Daily Base Rate | Earliest Expiry |
| Kamsarmax | 2012 | 82,000 |
| South Korea | $15,500 | 30-Jul-17 | |
| Panamax | 2004 | 77,500 |
| China | $14,000 | 03-Jan-17 | |
| Ultramax | | 2017 | 62,100 |
| Japan | $10,125 | 30-Sept-19 |
| Aggregate TC DWT | | 159,500 |
| | | 62,100 |
| |
FutureThe future minimum obligationsobligation under non-cancelablethe non-cancellable time charter-in agreementsagreement as of December 31, 20162018 was $3.3$2.8 million.
Debt
See Note 11, Debt, to the consolidated financial statements for a schedule of debt and financing obligation payments atas of December 31, 2016.2018.
Other
The Company also has certain commitments related to the commercial and technical management of its vessels. As of December 31, 2016,2018, we would be obligated to pay termination fees of $7.4$3.8 million to SCM and SSM if we were to cancel our service agreements with them as of December 31, 2016.2018. We are also required to pay SCM for each vessel that we own an amount equal to sixthree months of commissions that SCM would have expected to earn had the contracts not been terminated. Due to the variable nature of the commissions, they have been excluded from these figures.
There are no material post-employment benefits for our executive officers or directors. By law, our employees in Monaco are entitled to a one-time payment of up to two months salary upon retirement if they meet certain minimum service requirements.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
| |
| 8. | Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses |
Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following:
| | | | As of | As of |
| (in thousands) | December 31, 2016 | | December 31, 2015 | December 31, 2018 | | December 31, 2017 |
| Accounts payable | $ | 4,612 |
| | $ | 11,934 |
| $ | 4,948 |
| | $ | 3,907 |
|
| Accrued operating | 2,250 |
| | 2,371 |
| 1,705 |
| | 2,580 |
|
| Accrued administrative | 3,171 |
| | 1,909 |
| 7,323 |
| | 3,600 |
|
| Accounts payable and accrued expenses | $ | 10,033 |
| | $ | 16,214 |
| $ | 13,976 |
| | $ | 10,087 |
|
Accounts payable is primarily consists of obligations to suppliers arising in the normal course of business. Accrued operating relates to obligations arising from operation of the Company’s owned, financed leased and chartered-in vessels, and construction of the Company’s fleet, such as operating costs and installments on vessels under construction.costs. Accrued administrative relates to obligations that are corporate or financing in nature, such as payroll, professional fees, interest and commitment fees.
As of December 31, 2016 we2018 the Company had:
75,298,676Approximately 71.2 million common shares outstanding, the $0.01 par value of which is recorded as common stock of $0.8 million.
Paid-in capital of $1.7 billion which substantially represents the excess net proceeds from common stock issuances over the par value as well as the amount of cumulative restricted stock amortization.
Effective December 31, 2015,Treasury stock of $56.7 million representing the cost at which the Company repurchased approximately 8.6 million shares
Share Repurchase Program
In October 2018, the Company’s Board of Directors or the Board, determinedauthorized a new share repurchase program to effect a one-for-twelve reverse stock splitpurchase up to an aggregate of the Company's common shares, par value $0.01 per share, and a reduction in the total number of authorized common shares to 56,250,000 shares. The Company's shareholders approved the reverse stock split and change in authorized common shares at the Company's special meeting of shareholders held on December 23, 2015. This reduced the number of outstanding common shares from 344,239,098 shares to 28,686,561 shares. On December 17, 2015, the Company received notice from the NYSE that the Company was no longer in compliance with the NYSE's continued listing standards because the average closing share price$50.0 million of its common shares over a consecutive 30 trading-day period ending December 15, 2015 fell below(the “New Share Repurchase Program”). This New Share Repurchase Program replaced the requirement to be at least $1.00 per share.Company’s Share Repurchase Program that was previously authorized in September 2017 and that was terminated in conjunction with the New Share Repurchase Program. The purposespecific timing and amounts of the reverse stock splitrepurchases were in the sole discretion of management and subject to variation based on market conditions and other factors. The Company was to increasenot obligated under the market priceterms of the Company'sprogram to repurchase any of its common shares. The increased market price for our common shares as a resultauthorization had no expiration date. As of implementingDecember 31, 2018, $24.8 million remained available under the reverse stock split cured this deficiency.program. The New Share Repurchase Program was terminated on January 25, 2019; please see Note 18 “Subsequent Events”.
Dividend
During 2018, the Company’s Board of Directors declared and we paid quarterly cash dividends totaling $0.08 per share, or $6.0 million.
Other
In June 2016,2018, upon receiving shareholder approval, wethe Company further amended ourits Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to increase ourthe Company’s total number of authorized shares to 262,500,000, consisting of 212,500,000 common shares and 50,000,000 preferred shares.
In connection with an agreement to 112,500,000.
On June 16, 2015, the Board approved a Shareholders’ Rights Plan, as subsequently amended and restatedpurchase three Ultramax vessels, on January 14, 2016, or the Rights Plan, and authorized and declared a dividend distribution of one right for each outstanding share of common stock ofNovember 5, 2017, the Company to stockholders. Each right entitled the holderissued warrants to purchase from the Company one one-thousandth of a share of preferred stockapproximately 1.6 million common shares at an exercise price of $50.00$8.10 per one one-thousandthshare to an unaffiliated third party as part of a preferred share.
the total consideration paid. The Rights Plan was intended to protect stockholders’ rightswarrants were exercised in the eventfirst quarter of an unsolicited takeover attempt. It was not intended to prevent a takeover of the Company on terms that were favorable and fair to all shareholders and would not have interfered with a merger approved by the Board.
The rights would have generally become exercisable only if a person or group acquired beneficial ownership of 20% or more of the Company’s common stock in a transaction not approved by the Board and the Board did not redeem the rights within ten business days of such an event. If triggered, the right could have entitled the holder to one of the following:
To purchase, for the exercise price, a number of common shares having a then current market value of twice the exercise price,
To purchase, for the exercise price, one-thousandth of a share of preferred stock, or
2018.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
The Board may have exchangedIn connection with an agreement to purchase one Ultramax vessel, on December 4, 2017, the rights, in whole or in part, forCompany issued approximately 0.9 million common shares atto an exchange ratiounaffiliated third party. The shares were issued to the seller of onethe vessel upon delivery of such vessel on December 29, 2017.
During 2017, the Company issued a total of 12,946 shares, with a fair value of $0.1 million to one or for cash or other securities having a value approximately equalSSH pursuant to one share.the Administrative Services Agreement relating to our Newbuilding Program.
The rights expired onIn June 18, 2016.2016, upon receiving shareholder approval, the Company further amended its Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation to increase the Company’s total number of authorized shares to 162,500,000, consisting of 112,500,000 common shares and 50,000,000 preferred shares.
During 2016, the Company issued a total of 51,679 shares, with a fair value of $0.2 million, to SSH pursuant to the Administrative Services Agreement in connection with the deliveries of our newbuilding vessels.
During 2016, the Company issued an aggregate of 44.0 million shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, at $3.00 per share in two separate underwritten public offerings. SSH and certain of the Company's directors purchased an aggregate of $10.3 million common shares at the public offering prices. The Company received approximately $128.1 million of net proceeds from the issuance.
On June 16, 2015, the Company issued 12,745,833 shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share at $18.00 per share in an underwritten public offering. SSH and certain of our executive officers purchased an aggregate of 833,333 common shares at the public offering price. The company received $218.6 million of proceeds from the issuance.
During 2015, the Company issued a total of 111,725 shares to SSH pursuant to the Administrative Services Agreement relating to the delivery of 28 vessels and the sale of 20 vessels. The aggregate value of these shares was $2.4 million.
In 2014, the underwriters in the Company’s initial public offering, which closed on December 17, 2013, exercised in full their option to purchase an additional 391,250 common shares at the public offering price of $117.00 per share. The sale of these common shares resulted in net proceeds to the Company of approximately $42.4 million, after deducting underwriters’ discounts and commissions.
During 2014, the Company issued a total of 4,366 shares to SSH pursuant to the Administrative Services Agreement relating to two newbuilding Kamsarmax vessels delivered to us. The aggregate value of these shares was $0.5 million.
During 2014 the Company issued 3,333,333 Common shares through a Securities Purchase Agreement with certain institutional investors for the private placement of shares of its common stock, par value $0.01 per share for $150.0 million. Of this share issuance, SSH acquired 333,333 shares for $15.0 million.
The Scorpio Bulkers Inc. 2013 Equity Incentive Plan, or the Plan, was approved by the Company’s Board of Directors and became effective on September 30, 2013 and was last amended effective June 29, 2016.to reserve additional common shares for issuance pursuant to the Plan on August 20, 2018. Adjustments may be made to outstanding awards in the event of a corporate transaction or change in capitalization or other extraordinary event. In the event of a “change in control” (as defined in the plan)Plan), unless otherwise provided by the planPlan administrator in an award agreement, awards then outstanding will become fully vested and exercisable in full. The Board of Directors may amend or terminate the Plan and may amend outstanding awards, provided that no such amendment or termination may be made that would materially impair any rights, or materially increase any obligations, of a grantee under an outstanding award. Shareholder approval of planPlan amendments will be required under certain circumstances. As of December 31, 20162018, we had reserved a total of 3,970,5805,931,962 common shares for issuance under the Plan, subject to adjustment for changes in capitalization as provided in the Plan. The Plan is administered by the Company’s Compensation Committee. The Plan will remain in effect until the tenth anniversary of the date on which the Plan was adopted by the Board of Directors, unless terminated, or extended by the Board.Board of Directors. After thisthe termination date, no further awards shall be granted pursuant to the Plan, but previously granted awards will remain outstanding in accordance with their applicable terms and conditions.
Under the Plan, the Company is permitted to grant incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units and unrestricted common shares.
Under the terms of the Plan, stock options and stock appreciation rights granted under the Plan will have an exercise price equal to the fair market value of a common share on the date of grant, unless otherwise determined by the planPlan administrator, but in no event will the exercise price be less than the fair market value of a common share on the date of grant. Options and stock appreciation rights will be exercisable at times and under conditions as determined by the planPlan administrator, but in no event will they be exercisable later than ten years from the date of grant. The Company did not grant any option awards or stock appreciation rights under the Plan during the three years ended December 31, 2016.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
2018.
The planPlan administrator may grant shares of restricted stock and awards of restricted stock units subject to vesting, forfeiture and other terms and conditions as determined by the planPlan administrator. Generally, restricted stock granted under the Plan vests in one of the following manners: (a) annually in three equal installments, if the independent director has continued to serve on the boardBoard of directorsDirectors from the grant date to the applicable vesting date or (b) serial vest on each of the second, third and fourth anniversaries of the date of grant so long as the award recipient is employed on such date. The Company recognizes share-based compensation expense (see Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting Polices) over this three-year period or four-year period, as applicable.
The companyCompany recorded share-based compensation expense of $18.6$7.9 million, $24.6$12.6 million, and $23.9$18.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 20152018, 2017 and 2014,2016, respectively, related to restricted stock awards, which is included in General and administrative expenses in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
A summary of activity for restricted stock awards during the three years ended December 31, 20162018 is as follows:
| | | | Number of Shares | | Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value $ | Number of Shares | | Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value $ |
| Outstanding at December 31, 2013 | 405,156 |
| | 115.97 |
| |
| Granted | 179,014 |
| | 111.71 |
| |
| Vested | (2,499 | ) | | 116.40 |
| |
| Outstanding at December 31, 2014 | 581,671 |
| | 114.66 |
| |
| Granted | 804,035 |
| | 20.03 |
| |
| Vested | (137,543 | ) | | 115.90 |
| |
| Outstanding at December 31, 2015 | 1,248,163 |
| | 53.56 |
| 1,248,163 |
| | 53.56 |
|
| Granted | 2,582,000 |
| | 3.26 |
| 2,582,000 |
| | 3.26 |
|
| Vested | (208,266 | ) | | 107.82 |
| (208,266 | ) | | 107.82 |
|
| Forfeited | (21,564 | ) | | 51.50 |
| (21,564 | ) | | 51.50 |
|
| Outstanding at December 31, 2016 | 3,600,333 |
| | 14.36 |
| 3,600,333 |
| | 14.36 |
|
| Granted | | 150,000 |
| | 6.25 |
|
| Vested | | (604,151 | ) | | 44.80 |
|
| Forfeited | | (4,612 | ) | | 5.33 |
|
| Outstanding at December 31, 2017 | | 3,141,570 |
| | 8.13 |
|
| Granted | | 1,835,532 |
| | 7.33 |
|
| Vested | | (1,212,629 | ) | | 11.79 |
|
| Forfeited | | (10,834 | ) | | 6.57 |
|
| Outstanding at December 31, 2018 | | 3,753,639 |
| | 6.56 |
|
As of December 31, 2016,2018, there was $20.0$13.4 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to restricted stock awards. These costs are expected to be recognized over the weighted average period of approximately 1one year. During 2016,2018, restricted stock with a fair value of approximately $0.6$8.9 million vested.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
During 2016, the Company and its lenders agreed to loan amendments that strengthened the Company’s balance sheet, liquidity position and financial flexibility. The Company’s long-term debt consists of Senior Notes, and bank loans and finance leases, summarized as follows:
| | | | December 31, | December 31, |
| (amounts in thousands) | 2016 | | 2015 | 2018 | | 2017 |
| | | | | | | |
| Senior Notes | $ | 73,625 |
| | $ | 73,625 |
| $ | 73,625 |
| | $ | 73,625 |
|
| | | | | | | |
| Bank Loans: | | | | |
| $39.6 Million Credit Facility | $ | 20,144 |
| | $ | 30,754 |
| |
| Credit Facilities: | | | | |
| $409 Million Credit Facility | 167,816 |
| | 94,473 |
| — |
| | 174,443 |
|
| $330 Million Credit Facility | 225,759 |
| | 173,950 |
| 140,677 |
| | 247,876 |
|
| $42 Million Credit Facility | 38,512 |
| | 36,588 |
| 14,105 |
| | 22,354 |
|
| $67.5 Million Credit Facility | 40,461 |
| | 29,666 |
| — |
| | 40,461 |
|
| $411.3 Million Credit Facility | — |
| | 83,261 |
| |
| $12.5 Million Credit Facility | 10,379 |
| | 11,750 |
| 9,400 |
| | 10,183 |
|
| $27.3 Million Credit Facility | 19,375 |
| | — |
| 9,008 |
| | 18,213 |
|
| | 522,446 |
| | 460,442 |
| |
| $85.5 Million Credit Facility | | 78,972 |
| | 85,500 |
|
| $38.7 Million Credit Facility | | 35,100 |
| | 38,700 |
|
| $19.6 Million Lease Financing - SBI Rumba | | 18,101 |
| | 19,268 |
|
| $12.8 Million Credit Facility | | 12,325 |
| | — |
|
| $19.0 Million Lease Financing - SBI Tango | | 18,451 |
| | — |
|
| $19.0 Million Lease Financing - SBI Echo | | 18,481 |
| | — |
|
| $30.0 Million Credit Facility | | 29,420 |
| | — |
|
| $34.0 Million Credit Facility | | 34,000 |
| | — |
|
| $60.0 Million Credit Facility | | 58,797 |
| | — |
|
| $184.0 Million Credit Facility | | 180,229 |
| | — |
|
| $20.5 Million Lease Financing - SBI Hermes | | 20,299 |
| | — |
|
| $90.0 Million Credit Facility | | 90,000 |
| | — |
|
| Total bank loans and lease financings outstanding | | 767,365 |
| | 656,998 |
|
| Less: Current portion | (13,882 | ) | | (110,226 | ) | (66,156 | ) | | (49,266 | ) |
| | $ | 508,564 |
| | $ | 350,216 |
| $ | 701,209 |
| | $ | 607,732 |
|
| | | | December 31, 2016 | | December 31, 2015 | December 31, 2018 | | December 31, 2017 |
| (amounts in thousands) | Current | | Non-current | | Total | | Current | | Non-current | | Total | Current | | Non-current | | Total | | Current | | Non-current | | Total |
| Total bank loans and senior notes, gross | 13,882 |
| | 582,188 |
| | 596,070 |
| | 110,226 |
| | 423,841 |
| | 534,067 |
| |
| Total bank loans, financing obligations and senior notes, gross | | 139,781 |
| | 701,209 |
| | 840,990 |
| | 49,266 |
| | 681,357 |
| | 730,623 |
|
| Unamortized deferred financing costs | (402 | ) | | (16,196 | ) | | (16,598 | ) | | (2,487 | ) | | (9,856 | ) | | (12,343 | ) | (1,624 | ) | | (10,801 | ) | | (12,425 | ) | | (1,129 | ) | | (13,917 | ) | | (15,046 | ) |
| Total bank loans and senior notes, net | 13,480 |
| | 565,992 |
| | 579,472 |
| | 107,739 |
| | 413,985 |
| | 521,724 |
| |
| Total bank loans, financing obligations and senior notes, net | | 138,157 |
| | 690,408 |
| | 828,565 |
| | 48,137 |
| | 667,440 |
| | 715,577 |
|
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
The future principal and estimated interest payments (based on the interest rates in effect as of December 31, 2016)2018) under the Company’s long-term debt over the next five years on ourthe Company’s Senior Notes, and credit facilities and financing obligations as of December 31, 20162018 is as follows:
| | | (amounts in thousands) | Principal | Interest | Total | Principal on Bank Loans and Senior Notes | Interest on Bank Loans and Senior Notes | Financing Obligations | Total |
| 2017 | 13,883 |
| 26,116 |
| 39,999 |
| |
| 2018 | 21,515 |
| 25,280 |
| 46,795 |
| |
| 2019 | 95,727 |
| 23,032 |
| 118,759 |
| 135,093 |
| 40,586 |
| 8,048 |
| 183,727 |
|
| 2020 | 221,543 |
| 17,880 |
| 239,423 |
| 70,234 |
| 32,807 |
| 8,048 |
| 111,089 |
|
| 2021 | 206,952 |
| 5,915 |
| 212,867 |
| 171,110 |
| 25,782 |
| 8,048 |
| 204,940 |
|
| 2022 | | 62,824 |
| 18,515 |
| 8,048 |
| 89,387 |
|
| 2023 | | 304,540 |
| 11,329 |
| 45,479 |
| 361,348 |
|
| Thereafter | 36,450 |
| 1,903 |
| 38,353 |
| 21,857 |
| 1,700 |
| 12,841 |
| 36,398 |
|
| Total | 596,070 |
| 100,126 |
| 696,196 |
| 765,658 |
| 130,719 |
| 90,512 |
| 986,889 |
|
Unsecured Senior Notes
On September 22, 2014, the Company issued $65.0 million in aggregate principal amount of 7.5% Senior Notes due September 2019, or the Senior Notes, and on October 16, 2014 the Company issued an additional $8.6 million aggregate principal amount
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
of Senior Notes when the underwriters partially exercised their option to purchase additional Senior Notes on the same terms and conditions.
All terms mentioned are defined in the indenture.indenture governing the Senior Notes.
The Senior Notes will mature on September 15, 2019 and bear interest at a rate of 7.5% per year, payable quarterly on each March 15, June 15, September 15 and December 15. The Senior Notes are redeemable at the Company’s option in whole or in part, at any time on or after September 15, 2016 at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount to be redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the redemption date.
The Senior Notes are our senior unsecured obligations and rank equally with all of our existing and future senior unsecured and unsubordinated debt and are effectively subordinated to our existing and future secured debt, to the extent of the value of the assets securing such debt, and will be structurally subordinated to all existing and future debt and other liabilities of our subsidiaries. No sinking fund is provided for the Senior Notes. The Senior Notes were issued in minimum denominations of $25.00 and integral multiples of $25.00 in excess thereof and are listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “SLTB”. The Senior Notes require us to comply with certain covenants, including financial covenants;covenants, restrictions on consolidations, mergers or sales of assets and prohibitions on paying dividends or returning capital to equity holders if a covenant breach or an event of default has occurred or would occur as a result of such payment. If the Company undergoes a change of control, holders may require us to repurchase for cash all or any portion of their notes at a change of control repurchase price equal to 101% of the principal amount of the notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the change of control purchase date.
The financial covenants include:
Net borrowings shall not equal or exceed 70% of total assets.
Tangible net worth shall always exceed $500.0 million.
As ofThe outstanding balance at December 31, 2016, we were2018 was $73.6 million, which is classified as a current liability and the Company was in compliance with the financial covenants relating to the Senior Notes.Notes as of that date.
In December 2016, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $20.0 million of our outstanding Senior Notes in open market or privately negotiated transactions. The specific timing and amounts of the repurchases, which will be funded by available cash, will be in the sole discretion of management and vary based on market conditions and other factors. This authorization has no expiration date. As of December 31, 2016,2018, the full $20.0 million remainsremained available for repurchasesrepurchase under this authorization.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Secured Credit Facilities
The Company had seven12 credit agreements in place, which are all collateralized by certain of the Company’s vessels. The following is a summary of those credit agreements as of December 31, 2016.2018.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ($000’s) | | $39.6 Million Credit Facility | | $409 Million Credit Facility | | $330 Million Credit Facility | | $42 Million Credit Facility | | $67.5 Million Credit Facility | | $12.5 Million Credit Facility | | $27.3 Million Credit Facility |
| Date of Agreement | | June 27, 2014 | | December 30, 2014 | | July 29, 2014 | | January 30, 2015 | | July 30, 2014 | | December 22, 2015 | | December 22, 2015 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Total Vessels to be Financed | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Kamsarmax | | 2 |
| | 8 |
| | 6 |
| | 2 |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Ultramax | | — |
| | 7 |
| | 15 |
| | 1 |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 2 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interest Rate-LIBOR+ | | 2.925 | % | | 3.000 | % | | 2.925 | % | | 2.970 | % | | 2.950 | % | | 3.000 | % | | 2.950 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Commitment Fee | | 1.170 | % | | 1.200 | % | | 1.170 | % | | 1.120 | % | | 1.250 | % | | — | % | | 1.180 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Maturity Date | | September 28, 2020 | | December 30, 2020 | | July 29, 2021 | | 6 years from each Kamsarmax drawdown and September 21, 2021 on the Ultramax tranche
| | 7 years from each drawdown | | December 22, 2020 | | 5 years from each drawdown |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Amount drawn down (in thousands) | | 33,550 |
| | 207,569 |
| | 255,825 |
| | 48,870 |
| | 53,816 |
| | 11,750 |
| | 23,250 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Amount outstanding (in thousands) | | 20,144 |
| | 167,816 |
| | 225,759 |
| | 38,512 |
| | 40,461 |
| | 10,379 |
| | 19,375 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Carrying Value of Vessels Collateralized (in thousands) | | 62,040 |
| | 404,650 |
| | 487,195 |
| | 97,297 |
| | 116,538 |
| | 30,988 |
| | 63,172 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Amount Available (in thousands) | | — |
| | 13,200 |
| | 38,400 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Remaining Vessels to be Financed | | — |
| | 1 |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
The loan amendments discussed below were accounted for as debt modifications in accordance with ASC 470, Debt. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | $330 Million Credit Facility | | $42 Million Credit Facility | | $12.5 Million Credit Facility | | $27.3 Million Credit Facility | | $85.5 Million Credit Facility | | $38.7 Million Credit Facility | | $12.8 Million Credit Facility | | $30.0 Million Credit Facility | | $60.0 Million Credit Facility | | $184.0 Million Credit Facility | | $34.0 Million Credit Facility | | $90.0 Million Credit Facility |
| Date of Agreement | | July 29, 2014 | | January 30, 2015 | | December 22, 2015 | | December 22, 2015 | | December 5, 2017 | | December 13, 2017 | | June 21, 2018 | | September 13, 2018 | | September 11, 2018 | | September 21, 2018 | | October 3, 2018 | | November 8, 2018 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Total Vessels Financed | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Kamsarmax | | 4 |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | 2 |
| | 2 |
| | 6 |
| | 2 |
| | — |
|
| Ultramax | | 9 |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | 1 |
| | 6 |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2 |
| | 6 |
| | — |
| | 6 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interest Rate-LIBOR+ | | 2.925 | % | | 2.970 | % | | 3.000 | % | | 2.950 | % | | 2.850 | % | | 2.850 | % | | 2.400 | % | | 2.200 | % | | 2.250 | % | | 2.400 | % | | 2.350 | % | | 2.350 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Commitment Fee | | 1.170 | % | | 1.120 | % | | — | % | | 1.180 | % | | 1.140 | % | | 0.998 | % | | 0.960 | % | | 0.880 | % | | 0.900 | % | | 0.960 | % | | 1.175 | % | | 1.000 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Maturity Date | | July 29, 2021 | | 6 years from each drawdown | | December 22, 2020 | | 5 years from each drawdown | | February 15, 2023 | | December 13, 2022 | | June 15, 2023 | | September 18, 2023 | | September 14, 2023 | | September 21, 2023 | | October 3, 2025 | | November 8, 2023 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Amount drawn down (in thousands) | | 294,225 | | 48,870 |
| | 11,750 |
| | 23,250 |
| | 85,500 |
| | 38,700 |
| | 12,750 |
| | 29,975 |
| | 60,000 |
| | 184,000 |
| | 34,000 |
| | 90,000 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Amount outstanding (in thousands) | | 140,677 |
| | 14,105 |
| | 9,400 |
| | 9,008 |
| | 78,972 |
| | 35,100 |
| | 12,325 |
| | 29,420 |
| | 58,797 |
| | 180,229 |
| | 34,000 |
| | 90,000 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Carrying Value of Vessels Collateralized (in thousands) | | 341,875 |
| | 30,507 |
| | 28,723 |
| | 29,463 |
| | 137,819 |
| | 62,314 |
| | 27,188 |
| | 58,584 |
| | 108,364 |
| | 347,736 |
| | 52,822 |
| | 163,961 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
$39.612.8 Million Credit Facility
During 2016,On June 21, 2018, the Company reached agreements withentered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $12.8 million. The loan facility was used to finance up to 50% of the lender to add eight quarterly installment payments tofair market value of the balloon payment in exchange for an advance principal repayment of approximately $4.7 million and to not make the installment payments falling due in the first quarter of 2018 in exchange for an advance principal repayment of approximately $0.5 million. AsSBI Lynx. The facility has a result of these agreements, the Company will not have to make quarterly installment payments until the second quarter of 2020.
The Company also reached an agreement with the lender to extend thefinal maturity date of thisJune 15, 2023 and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.40% per annum. This facility from June 2019 tois secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the vessel and guaranteed by the vessel owning subsidiary.
$60.0 Million Credit Facility
On September 2020 subject to11, 2018, the Company meeting certain conditionsentered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $60.0 million. The loan facility was used to finance up to 60% of the fair market value of two Ultramax vessels (SBI Perseus and SBI Phoebe) and two Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Electra and SBI Flamenco). The facility has a final maturity date of five years from drawdown date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.25% per annum. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on or before June 2019.the four vessels and guaranteed by each of the vessel owning subsidiaries.
$30.0 Million Credit Facility
On September 13, 2018, the Company entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $30.0 million with ING Bank N.V. to refinance two Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Zumba and SBI Parapara). The facility has a final maturity date of five years from drawdown
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.20% per annum. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the two Kamsarmax vessels and guaranteed by each of the vessel owning subsidiaries.
$330.0184.0 Million Credit Facility
During 2016,On September 21, 2018, the Company reached agreements whereby quarterly installment payments on certainentered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $184.0 million with Nordea Bank AB (publ), acting through its New York branch, and Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ) to refinance up to 60% of the existing debt were waived untilfair market value of six Ultramax vessels (SBI Athena, SBI Thalia, SBI Zeus, SBI Hera, SBI Poseidon and SBI Apollo) and six Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Conga, SBI Bolero, SBI Sousta, SBI Rock, SBI Reggae and SBI Mazurka). The facility, which is comprised of a term loan of up to $104.0 million and a revolver of up to $80.0 million, has a final maturity date of five years from signing date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.40% per annum. This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the second quarter of 2017 in exchange for prepayments totaling $23.8 million. Installment payments on certain12 vessels and guaranteed by each of the other existing debt and new debt will be paid as per the original loan agreement. The lenders also agreed to extend the availability period of the credit facility to June 30, 2017 (from December 31, 2016) in order to accommodate delivery delays of certain vessels. The Company also agreed to reduce the available loan amount by approximately $16.8 million, for which $0.6 million of deferred financing costs were written off. This write-off is reflected in financing costs in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.vessel owning subsidiaries.
$67.534.0 Million Credit Facility
During 2015,On October 3, 2018, the Company reached an agreemententered into a senior secured credit facility for up to reduce$34.0 million with Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank to refinance up to 62.5% of the amount drawn downfair market value of two Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Jive and SBI Swing). The loan facility, which is comprised of a term loan up to $17.0 million and a revolver up to $17.0 million, has a final maturity date of seven years from signing date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.35% per annum. This facility is secured by, any quarterly installments that would have been paid through December 31, 2016among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the two vessels and guaranteed by each of the quarterly payments would not begin until 2017. During 2016,vessel owning subsidiaries.
$90.0 Million Credit Facility
On November 8, 2018, the Company entered into a senior secured credit facility for up to $90.0 million with Nordea Bank Abp, acting through its New York branch, and lender further agreedDVB Bank SE. The loan facility, which has a final maturity date of five years from signing date and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.35% per annum, is being used to add eight quarterly installment paymentsfinance up to 60% of the balloon payment in exchangefair market value of six Ultramax vessels (SBI Orion, SBI Hyperion, SBI Tethys, SBI Hercules, SBI Samson and SBI Phoenix). This facility is secured by, among other things, a first preferred mortgage on the six vessels and is guaranteed by each of the vessel owning subsidiaries.
Finance Leases
$19.6 Million Lease Financing - SBI Rumba
In October 2017, the Company entered into a financing transaction with respect to one of its Kamsarmax vessels with unaffiliated third parties involving the sale and leaseback of the SBI Rumba, a 2015 Japanese built Kamsarmax vessel, for an advance principal repaymentconsideration of approximately $8.0$19.6 million. TheAs part of the transaction, the Company also reached anwill make monthly payments of $164,250 under a nine and a half year bareboat charter agreement with the lenderbuyer, which the Company has the option to reduceextend for a further six months. The agreement also provides the available loan amount by approximately $4.4 million, while makingCompany the option to repurchase the vessel beginning on the fifth anniversary of the sale and until the end of the agreement.
$19.0 Million Lease Financing - SBI Echo
On July 18, 2018, the Company entered into a financing transaction with an additional advance principal repaymentunaffiliated third party involving the sale and leaseback of approximately $2.5the SBI Echo, a 2015 Japanese built Ultramax vessel, for consideration of $19.0 million. The Company wrote off approximately $0.2 millionAs part of deferred financing costs, which is included in financing costs in the Consolidated Statement of Operations related to this reduction. As a result of these agreements,transaction, the Company will not havemake payments of $5,400 per day under a five-year bareboat charter agreement with the buyer. The agreement also provides the Company with the option to make quarterly installment paymentsrepurchase the vessel beginning on the third anniversary of the sale until the first quarterend of 2021. the bareboat charter agreement.
$409.019.0 Million Credit FacilityLease Financing - SBI Tango
During 2016,
On July 18, 2018, the Company reached agreementsentered into a financing transaction with an unaffiliated third party involving the lenders to defer between sevensale and eight quarterly installment payments to between the first and fourth quarter of 2020, depending on the vessel, in exchange for an advance principal repayments of approximately $26.8 million (calculated on the basis of loan amounts available for undelivered ships), which was made during 2016 or, where applicable, will be made upon drawdown.
During 2016, the Company also agreed to reduce the available loan amount by approximately $38.6 million for which the Company wrote off $3.0 million of deferred financing costs. This is included in financing costs in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
In addition, the lenders also agreed to extend the availability periodleaseback of the credit facility to February 28, 2017 in order to accommodate delivery delaysSBI Tango, a 2015 Japanese built Ultramax vessel, for consideration of certain vessels.
$42.0 Million Credit Facility
During 2016, the Company signed an amendment with the lender for a $10.9 million upsize to its original $42 million senior secured credit facility. The proceeds$19.0 million. As part of the upsized commitment financed a portion of the purchase price of one Ultramax vessel that was delivered to the Company in the third quarter of 2015.
During 2016, the Company also reached agreements with the lender to add eight quarterly installment payments to the balloon payment in exchange for an advance principal repayment of approximately $6.5 million. In addition, the Company agreed with the lender to not make installment payments due in the first quarter of 2018 in exchange for approximately $0.8 million. As a result of these agreements,transaction, the Company will not have to make quarterly installment payments until the second quarter of 2020.
$12.5 Million Credit Facility
During 2016, the Company reached an$5,400 per day under a five-year bareboat charter agreement with the lender to add four quarterly installment payments to the balloon payment in exchange for an advance principal repayment of approximately $0.8 million. As a result of thisbuyer. The agreement also provides the Company will not havewith the option to make quarterly installment paymentsrepurchase the vessel beginning on the third anniversary of the sale until the fourth quarterend of 2018.
$27.3 Million Credit Facility
During 2016, the Company reached agreements with the lender to add eight quarterly installment payments to the balloon payment in exchange for an advance principal repayment of $3.1 million. In addition the Company agreed with the lender to not make installment payments falling due between and the second and third quarters of 2018 in exchange for approximately $0.8 million. As a result of these agreements, the Company will not have to make quarterly installment payments until the fourth quarter of 2020.
bareboat charter agreement.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
$20.5 Million Lease Financing - SBI Hermes
On November 16, 2018, the Company closed a financing transaction with an unaffiliated third party involving the sale and leaseback of the SBI Hermes, a 2016 Japanese built Ultramax vessel, for consideration of $20.5 million. As part of the transaction, the Company will make payments of $5,850 per day under a five-year bareboat charter agreement with the buyer. The transaction also provides the Company with the option to repurchase the vessel beginning on the third anniversary of the sale until the end of the bareboat charter agreement.
In addition to the credit agreements described above, which are in effect as of December 31, 2018, the Company entered into the following agreements which were repaid in full during the year ended December 31, 2018.
$67.5 Million Credit Facility
On July 30, 2014, we entered into a $67.5 million credit facility which was originally used to finance a portion of the purchase price of two Ultramax and two Kamsarmax vessels. During the third quarter of 2018, the Company fully repaid this loan and terminated the credit facility. The four vessels previously financed by this loan are now financed under the $60.0 million Credit Facility.
$409.0 Million Credit Facility
On December 30, 2014, we entered into a $409.0 million senior secured credit facility with Nordea Bank Finland PLC, New York Branch, and Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB (publ) which was used to partially finance a portion of the purchase price of eight Kamsarmax and seven Ultramax vessels. During the third quarter of 2018, the Company fully repaid this loan and terminated the credit facility. Two of the Kamsarmax vessels previously financed by this loan are now financed under the $30.0 million Credit Facility, 12 vessels previously financed by this loan are now financed under the $184.0 million Credit Facility and the SBI Echo is now financed under the $19.0 million Lease Financing - SBI Echo.
Each of these seventhe Company’s credit agreements, as amended through December 31, 2016,2018, has, among other things, financial covenants with which wethe Company must comply (based on terms defined in the credit agreements), thecomply. The most stringent by facility are as follows:
The ratio of net debt to total capitalization no greater than 0.60 to 1.00.
Consolidated tangible net worth (adjusted for a minimum amount of $100.0 million in historical non-operating costs and to exclude certain future non-operating items, including impairments) no less than $500.0 million plus (i) 25% of cumulative positive net income (on a consolidated basis) for each fiscal quarter commencing on or after December 31, 2013 and (ii) 50% of the value of any new equity issues occurring on or after December 31, 2013.
The ratio of EBITDA to net interest expense calculated on a year to date basis of greater than 1.00 to 1.00 for the quarters ending March 31, 2019 and June 30, 2019, 2.50 to 1.00 for the quarter ending September 30, 2019, calculated on a year-to-date basis and 2.50 to 1.00 for each quarter thereafter, calculated on a trailing four quarter basis.
Minimum liquidity of not less than the greater of $25.0 million or $0.7 million per owned vessel.
Maintain a minimum fair value of the collateral for each credit facility, such that the aggregate fair value of the vessels collateralizing the credit facility is between 140%, except in the case of our $67.5 Million Credit Facility, for which it is 115% and 150% of the aggregate principal amount outstanding under such credit facility, or, if we do not meet these thresholds to prepay a portion of the loan or provide additional security to eliminate the shortfall.
In addition to the credit agreements described above, which are in effect as of December 31, 2016, the Company entered into the following credit agreement which was repaid in full during the year ended December 31, 2016:
On January 15, 2015, the Company signed a loan agreement for up to $411.3 million, or the $411.3 Million Credit Facility, which was originally planned to be used to finance a portion of 12 Capesize vessels. However, all Capesize vessels and Capesize vessels under construction were sold and $83.3 million, which was outstanding under this facility at December 31, 2015 was fully repaid in January 2016 and the credit facility was closed.
OurThe Company’s credit facilities discussed above have, among other things, the following restrictive covenants which wouldcould restrict ourthe Company’s ability to:to, among other things:
incur additional indebtedness;
sell the collateral vessel, if applicable;
make additional investments or acquisitions;
pay dividends; and
effect a change of control of us.the Company.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
In addition, ourthe Company’s credit facilities and finance leases contain customary events of default, including cross-default provisions. As of December 31, 2016, we are2018, the Company was in compliance with all the financial covenants of each of our sevenits credit facilities. We expectfacilities and finance leases. The Company expects to remain in compliance with the financial covenants of each of our sevenits credit facilities and finance leases for the next twelve months.
Interest rates on all of the Company’s secured credit facilities during the year ended December 31, 20162018 ranged from 2.23%4.3% to 6.25%5.8%. The Company records its interest expense all of which was capitalized until the fourth quarter of 2015, as a component of Financial expense, net on its Consolidated Statement of Operations. For the years ended December 31, 2016, 20152018, 2017 and 2014,2016, Financial expense, net consists of:
| | | | Year ended December 31, | Year ended December 31, |
| (in thousands) | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Interest expense | $ | 16,002 |
| | $ | 998 |
| | $ | — |
| $ | 39,855 |
| | $ | 27,719 |
| | $ | 16,002 |
|
| Amortization of deferred financing costs | 4,137 |
| | 1,988 |
| | 150 |
| 9,582 |
| | 6,085 |
| | 4,137 |
|
| Write off | 3,781 |
| | 16,085 |
| | — |
| |
| other, net | 1,001 |
| | 453 |
| | 22 |
| |
| Write off of deferred financing costs | | — |
| | 470 |
| | 3,781 |
|
| Change in the fair value of interest rate caps | | (27 | ) | | 63 |
| | — |
|
| Other, net | | 459 |
| | 625 |
| | 1,001 |
|
| | $ | 24,921 |
| | $ | 19,524 |
| | $ | 172 |
| $ | 49,869 |
| | $ | 34,962 |
| | $ | 24,921 |
|
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
The Company is exposed to, among other things, the impact of changes in interest rates in the normal course of business. The Company manages the exposure to and volatility arising from these risks, and utilizes derivative financial instruments to offset a portion of these risks. The Company uses derivative financial instruments only to the extent necessary to hedge identified business risks and does not enter into such transactions for speculative purposes.
The Company uses variable rate debt as a source of funds for use in the Company's investment activities. These debt obligations expose the Company to variability in interest payments due to changes in interest rates. If interest rates increase, interest expense increases. Interest rate cap agreements are used to manage interest rate risk associated with floating-rate borrowings under the Company’s credit facilities. The interest rate cap agreements utilized by the Company effectively modify the Company’s exposure to interest rate risk by converting a portion of the Company’s floating-rate debt to a fixed-rate basis through December 31, 2020, thereby reducing the impact of interest rate changes on future interest expense.
The Company has not elected to designate any of its derivative instruments as hedging instruments under ASC 815, “Derivatives and Hedging”, and as such the gain or loss on the derivative is recognized in current earnings during the period of change and is included in Financial expense, net on the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
Information pertaining to outstanding interest rate caps is as follows:
|
| | | | | | |
| Aggregate Notional Amount (in millions) | | Start Date | | End Date | | Offsets Variable Rate Debt Attributable to Fluctuations Above: |
| $100 | | November 9, 2017 | | December 31, 2020 | | Three Month LIBOR of 3.5% |
| $100 | | November 9, 2017 | | December 31, 2020 | | Three Month LIBOR of 3.5% |
| $100 | | November 21, 2017 | | December 31, 2020 | | Three Month LIBOR of 3.5% |
The aggregate fair value of these interest rate caps was $0.2 million at December 31, 2018 and 2017, and is included in Other assets on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. During 2018 and 2017, we recorded a reduction of expense of less than $0.1 million and an increase in expense of $0.1 million, respectively, representing the change in the fair value of these caps to Financial expense, net on the Consolidated Statement of Operations. Refer to Note 14, Fair value of Financial Instruments, for related fair value disclosures.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
| |
| 13. | Equity Method Investment |
On October 12, 2018 the Company invested $100.0 million in a related party, Scorpio Tankers, through participation in a public offering on a basis equivalent to other investors. As a result of this investment, the Company became a significant investor in Scorpio Tankers, holding a total of approximately 54.1 million shares of common stock, which was approximately 10.9% of the then issued and outstanding shares of Scorpio Tankers. While the Company was not directly invested in Scorpio Tankers, prior to this investment, it shared a number of shareholders, directors and officers (see Note 15, Related Party Transactions), which along with its investment interest indicated its ability to exercise significant influence. Accordingly, this investment is accounted for under the equity method. The Company uses the fair value option in accounting for its investment in Scorpio Tankers based upon the quoted market price of Scorpio Tankers common stock discounted for a lack of marketability due to our inability to sell the shares until January 7, 2019. As of December 31, 2018, the Company’s share of investee net assets exceeded its carrying value in its equity method investment by approximately $100.8 million.
Below is a table of equity investment activity (in thousands):
|
| | | | |
| | | 2018 |
| Beginning balance | | $ | — |
|
| Investment in Scorpio Tankers | | 100,000 |
|
| Gain (loss) from change in fair value of investment in Scorpio Tankers | | (7,719 | ) |
| Equity Method investments at fair value | | $ | 92,281 |
|
| Dividend income from Scorpio Tankers common stock | | $ | 541 |
|
The following table represents summarized information regarding the Company’s equity investee as of December 31, 2018 (in thousands):
|
| | | | |
| | | December 31, 2018 |
| Total revenues | | $ | 585,047 |
|
| Operating income | | 10,542 |
|
| Net loss | | (190,071 | ) |
| | | |
| Current assets | | $ | 687,341 |
|
| Non-current assets | | 4,096,823 |
|
| Total assets | | $ | 4,784,164 |
|
| Current liabilities | | $ | 447,200 |
|
| Non-current liabilities | | 2,497,952 |
|
| Total liabilities | | $ | 2,945,152 |
|
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
| |
| 14. | Fair value of financial instruments |
The carrying amount and fair value of financial instruments at December 31, 20162018 and 20152017 were as follows (in thousands): | | | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2018 | | 2017 |
| | Carrying value | | Fair Value | | Carrying value | | Fair Value | Level | | Carrying value | | Fair Value | | Carrying value | | Fair Value |
| Financial assets: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 101,734 |
| | $ | 101,734 |
| | $ | 200,300 |
| | $ | 200,300 |
| 1 | | $ | 67,495 |
| | $ | 67,495 |
| | $ | 68,535 |
| | $ | 68,535 |
|
| Other assets - interest rate cap | | 2 | | 219 |
| | 219 |
| | 192 |
| | 192 |
|
| Equity investment - Common stock of Scorpio Tankers Inc. | | 2 | | 92,281 |
| | 92,281 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Financial liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Bank loans | 507,273 |
| | 507,273 |
| | 450,053 |
| | 450,053 |
| |
| Senior Notes | 72,199 |
| | 65,850 |
| | 71,671 |
| | 36,813 |
| |
| Bank loans, net | | 1 | | 681,489 |
| | 681,489 |
| | 623,960 |
| | 623,960 |
|
| Financing obligation | | 1 | | 73,823 |
| | 73,823 |
| | 18,891 |
| | 18,891 |
|
| Senior Notes, net | | 1 | | 73,253 |
| | 74,214 |
| | 72,726 |
| | 74,921 |
|
Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. In determining fair value, various methods are used including market, income and cost approaches. Based on these approaches, certain assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability are used, including assumptions about risk and/or the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, market-corroborated, or generally unobservable firm inputs. Valuation techniques that are used maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. Based on the observability of the inputs used in the valuation techniques, fair value measured financial instruments are categorized according to the fair value hierarchy prescribed by ASC 820, Fair“Fair Value Measurements and DisclosuresDisclosures”. The fair value hierarchy ranks the quality and reliability of the information used to determine fair values. Financial assets and liabilities carried at fair value are classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:
Level 1: Fair value measurements using unadjusted quoted market prices in active markets for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities.
Level 2: Fair value measurements using correlation with (directly or indirectly) observable market-based inputs, unobservable inputs that are corroborated by market data, or quoted prices in markets that are not active.
Level 3: Fair value measurements using inputs that are significant and not readily observable in the market.
Cash and cash equivalents comprise cash on hand and demand deposits, and other short-term highly-liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less, and that are readily convertible to a known amount of cash and are subject to an insignificant risk of changes in value. The carrying value of cash and cash equivalents approximates fair value due to the short-term nature of these instruments.
The interest rate caps were measured at fair value using implied volatility rates of each caplet and the yield curve for the related periods.
At December 31, 2018, the Company held an equity investment consisting of approximately 54.1 million shares of common stock of Scorpio Tankers at an estimated fair value of $92.3 million. Although a quoted market price in active securities markets was available for these shares at December 31, 2018, we were prohibited from selling our shares through January 7, 2019, pursuant to the terms of a lock-up agreement we entered into at the time of the investment. Accordingly, a discount for lack of marketability was included when arriving at the appropriate fair value of the shares, which value was reduced from the quoted market value of $95.1 million at December 31, 2018, to $92.3 million. The discount for marketability was calculated using the Finnerty Model, an option-based approach that takes into account the remaining term until the end of the restriction, the risk free rate and expected volatility. Unrealized gains and losses are included in Income (loss) from equity investment in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
The carrying value of our secured bank loans are measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method. The Company believes the carrying amounts of its bank loans at December 31, 20162018 and December 31, 20152017 approximate fair value because the interest rates on these instruments change with, or approximate, market interest rates. These amounts are shown net of $15.2$10.5 million and $10.4$13.8 million of unamortized deferred financing fees on ourthe Company’s consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 20162018 and December 31, 2015,2017, respectively.
The Senior Notes are publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange and are considered a level 1 item. The carrying values shown in the table are the face value of the notes net of $1.4$0.4 million and $2.0$0.9 million of unamortized deferred financing fees as of December 31, 20162018 and December 31, 2015,2017, respectively.
Certain of the Company’s assets and liabilities are carried at contracted amounts that approximate fair value. Assets and liabilities that are recorded at contracted amounts approximating fair value consist primarily of balances with related parties, prepaid expenses and other current assets, accounts payable and accrued expenses.
| |
| 15. | Related Party Transactions |
The Company’s Co-Founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Emanuele Lauro, is a member of the Lolli-Ghetti family, which is the majority owner and controls the Scorpio group of companies (“Scorpio”), including SSM, which provides the Company with vessel technical management services, SCM, which provides the Company with vessel commercial management services, SSH, which provides the Company and other related entities with administrative services and services related to the acquisition of vessels and Scorpio UK Limited (“SUK”) which provides the Company with vessel chartering services. SSH also has a majority equity interest in a port agent that provides supply and logistical services for the Company’s vessels operating in its regions. In 2009, the Lolli-Ghetti family founded Scorpio Tankers Inc. (“Scorpio Tankers”) (NYSE: “STNG”), a large international shipping company engaged in seaborne transportation of refined petroleum products, of which Mr. Emanuele Lauro is currently the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. The Company’s Co-Founder, President and Director, Mr. Robert Bugbee, is also the President and a Director of Scorpio Tankers and has a senior management position at Scorpio. The Company’s Vice President, Mr. Filippo Lauro is also the Vice President of Scorpio Tankers and has a senior management position at Scorpio.
In 2016, we agreed to amend our master agreement, or the Master Agreement, with SCM and SSM, and our administrative services agreement. or the Administrative Services Agreement, with SSH, under a deed of amendment, or the Deed of Amendment. Pursuant to the terms of the Deed of Amendment, on December 9, 2016, we entered into definitive documentation to memorialize the agreed amendments to the Master Agreement, or the Amended and Restated Master Agreement. The Amended and Restated Master Agreement and the Administrative Services Agreement as amended by the Deed of Amendment, or the Amended Administrative Services Agreement, were effective as from September 29, 2016.
In December 2017, we agreed to amend the Amended and Restated Master Agreement to amend and restate the technical management agreement thereunder subject to bank consents being obtained (where required), which were subsequently obtained. On February 22, 2018, we entered into definitive documentation to memorialize the agreed amendments to the Amended and Restated Master Agreement under a deed of amendment, or the Amendment Agreement. The Amended and Restated Master Agreement as amended by the Amendment Agreement, or the Revised Master Agreement is effective as from January 1, 2018.
Amended Administrative Services Agreement
The Company believesentered into the carrying amountsAmended Administrative Services Agreement with SSH for the provision of administrative staff, office space and accounting, legal compliance, financial and information technology services for which the Company reimburses SSH for the reasonable direct and indirect expenses incurred while providing such services. Such costs are classified as general and administrative expenses in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
SSH also arranges vessel sales and purchases for the Company, for which it previously paid SSH a fee, payable in its common shares, for arranging vessel acquisitions, including newbuildings. The amount of common shares payable was determined by dividing $250,000 by the market value of the Company’s common shares based on the volume weighted average price of its bank loans atcommon shares over the 30 trading day period immediately preceding the contract date of a definitive agreement to acquire any vessel. During the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Company issued 12,946 and December 31, 2015 approximate fair value because the interest rates on these instruments change with, or approximate, market interest rates.
51,679, respectively, of its common shares to SSH.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Certain items are measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis. The table below details the portion of those items that we re-measured at fair value during 2015 and the resultant loss recorded.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Fair Value Using |
| December 31, 2015 | Total | | Level 1 | | Level 2 | | Level 3 | | Total Losses |
| Assets held for sale | $ | 338,048 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 338,048 |
| | $ | 418,521 |
|
| Total | $ | 338,048 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 338,048 |
| | $ | 418,521 |
|
Assets Held for Sale
The fair value of assets held for sale (see Note 6) was determined based on the selling price, net of estimated costs to sell, of such assets based on negotiated contracts, and are considered to be Level 3 items. During 2015, assets held for sale was with a carrying value of $756.6 million was written down to its implied fair value of $338.0 million, resulting in a charge of $418.5 million.
| |
13. | Related Party Transactions |
Our Co-Founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Emanuele Lauro, is a member of the Lolli-Ghetti family, which in 2009 founded Scorpio Tankers Inc. (NYSE: “STNG”), or Scorpio Tankers, a large international shipping company engaged in seaborne transportation of refined petroleum products, of which Mr. Lauro is currently the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. The Lolli-Ghetti family also owns and controls the Scorpio Group, including Scorpio Ship Management S.A.M., or SSM, which provides us with vessel technical management services, Scorpio Commercial Management S.A.M., or SCM, which provides us with vessel commercial management services, Scorpio Services Holding Limited, or SSH, which provides us and other related entities with administrative services and services related to the acquisition of vessels and Scorpio UK Limited, or SUK which provides us with chartering services. In addition, our Vice President, Mr. Filippo Lauro is the brother of Mr. Emanuele Lauro and a member of the Lolli-Ghetti family. Our Co-Founder, President and Director, Mr. Robert Bugbee is also the President and a Director of Scorpio Tankers and has a senior management position at the Scorpio Group.
We entered into an Administrative Services Agreement, as amended from time to time, with SSH, a party related to us, for the provision of administrative staff, office space and accounting, legal compliance, financial and information technology services for which we reimburse SSH for the reasonable direct and indirect expenses it incurs in providing us with such services. Such costs are classified as general and administrative in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
SSH also arranges vessel sales and purchases for us. We pay SSH a fee, payable in the Company’s common shares, for arranging vessel acquisitions, including newbuildings. The amount of common shares payable was determined by dividing $250,000 by the market value of our common shares based on the volume weighted average price of our common shares over the 30 trading day period immediately preceding the contract date of a definitive agreement to acquire any vessel. During 2016 we issued 51,679 shares, of our common shares to SSH. During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 we issued 111,725 and 4,366 shares, respectively, of our common shares to SSH. We will deliver an additional 12,946 shares upon delivery of six vessels currently under construction. In addition, SSH has agreed with usthe Company not to own any drybulk carriers greater than 30,000 dwt for so long as the Amended Administrative Services Agreement is in full force and effect. This agreement may be terminated by SSH after the third anniversary of our initial public offering upon 12 months’ notice or by us withthe Company upon 24 months’ notice.
In November 2014, SSH agreed to waive its fee on vessel acquisitions contracted after November 20, 2014, for so long as the closing price of our common shares remained below a specified threshold. Effective September 29, 2016, the Company amended the terms of its Administrative Services Agreement with SSH and this fee was eliminated on all future acquisitions.
The services provided to usthe Company by SSH may be sub-contracted to other entities within the Scorpio Group.Scorpio.
During November 2014, weThe Company issued 5,000,000 and sold 333,3335,250,000 shares to SSH for $15.0 million and $16.0 million, respectively, as part of a private placement transaction.two separate public offerings occurring in March and June 2016.
During June 2015, we issued and sold 833,333 shares to SSH for $15.0 million as part of a public offering.
During March 2016, we issued 5,000,000 shares to SSH for $15.0 million as part of a public offering.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
Revised Master Agreement
During June 2016, we issued 5,250,000 shares to SSH for $16.0 million as part of a public offering.
OurThe Company’s vessels are commercially managed by SCM and technically managed by SSM pursuant to a Master Agreement, as amended and restated from time to time, or the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement, which may be terminated by either party upon 24 months’months notice, unless terminated earlier in accordance with the provisions of the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement. In the event of a sale of one or moreany vessels, a notice period of three months’months and a payment equal to three months of management fees will apply, provided that the termination does not amount to a change of control, including a sale of substantially all vessels, in which case a payment equal to 24 months of management fees will apply. Additional vessels that the Company may acquire in the future will alsoare expected to be managed under the Amended and RestatedRevised Master Agreement or on substantially similar terms.terms as the Revised Master Agreement.
SCM’s commercial management services include securing employment for ourthe Company’s vessels in the spot market and on time charters. SCM also manages the Scorpio Group Pools (spot market-oriented vessel pools) including the Scorpio Ultramax Pool, the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the currently inactive Scorpio Capesize Pool in which ourthe Company’s owned, finance leased and time chartered-in vessels are employed and from which we generate a significant portion of our revenue.its revenue is generated. The Scorpio Ultramax Pool and the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Capesize Pool participants, including usthe Company and third-party owners of similar vessels, pay SCM a pool management fee of $300 per vessel per day, plus a 1.75% commission on the gross revenues per charter fixture. WeThe Company typically havehas balances due from these pools, consisting primarily of working capital, undistributed earnings and reimbursable costs. These receivables are either classified as current or non-current assets within the Consolidated Balance Sheet depending upon whether the associated vessel is expected to exit the pool within the next 12 months. We areThe Company is also allocated general and administrative expenses from SCM. The Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool were significant customers for the year ended December 31, 2018, accounting for 36% and 64% of the Company’s total vessel revenue, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2017, the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool accounted for 42% and 58% of the Company’s total vessel revenue, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool accounted for 40% and 60% of the Company’s total vessel revenue (including commissions from SCM), respectively.
For the commercial management of any of ourthe Company’s vessels that do not operate in one of these pools, we payit pays SCM a daily fee of $300 per vessel, plus a 1.75% commission on the gross revenues per charter fixture, which are classified as voyage expenses in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
Effective November 20, 2014, SCM agreed to reduce, with respect to our vessels, the 1.75% commission to 1.00% until the first day when the closing price of the Company’s common shares was not less than $117 per share, adjusted to include all equity restructuring and authorized dividends paid on the Company’s share capital, at which time the commission would revert to 1.75%. The reduction in commission expense is classified as vessel revenues in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
Effective September 29, 2016, pursuant to the terms of the Amended and Restated Master Agreement, effective beginning on the fifth day within any 20 trading day period that the closing price of the Company's common shares on the New York Stock Exchange is equal to or greater than $5.00, the commission payable for commercial management to SCM will be reinstated to 1.75% of all monies earned by a vessel from 1.00%. As of close of trading on the NYSE on November 18, 2016, the condition was met and the commission payable for commercial management was reinstated to 1.75% of all monies earned by a vessel, effective November 19, 2016.
The Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool were significant customers for the year ended December 31, 2016, accounting for 40% and 60% of our total vessel revenue (including commissions from SCM), respectively. During year ended December 31, 2015, the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool, the Scorpio Ultramax Pool and the Scorpio Capesize Pool accounted for 41% and 43% and 8% of our total vessel revenue (including commissions from SCM), respectively. During year ended 12/31/2014, the Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool and the Scorpio Ultramax Pool accounted for 71% and 21% of our total vessel revenue (including commissions from SCM), respectively.
Prior to the amendment to the Amended and Restated Master Agreement oneffective as from September 29, 2016, contracts for the construction of vessels that were sold or cancelled prior to the Company taking delivery of the vessels resulted in a termination fee of $0.5 million per vessel and the termination fee for a vessel which was under SCM management was two years of daily fees of $300, or $0.2 million per vessel plus 1.00% of the estimated revenue SCM would have generated for the vessel over the next two years. This fee iswas classified as a loss/write off of vessels and assets held for sale in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
Following the amendment to the Amended and Restated Master Agreement on September 29, 2016, the fees due for a termination of the commercial management arrangements in the event of the sale of one or more vessels, provided it does not amount to a change of control of the Company, including a sale of substantially all vessels, have beenwas reduced to a three month notice period and payment equal to three months of management fees.
Effective January 1, 2018, pursuant to the Revised Master Agreement, the fixed annual technical management fee was reduced from $200,000 to $160,000, and certain services previously provided as part of the fixed fee are itemized. The aggregate cost, including the costs that are now itemized, for the services provided under the technical management agreement do not materially differ from the annual management fee charged prior to the amendment.
SSM’s technical management services include providing technical support, such as arranging the hiring of qualified officers and crew, supervising the maintenance and performance of vessels, purchasing supplies, spare parts and new equipment, arranging and supervising drydocking and repairs, and monitoring regulatory and classification society compliance and customer standards.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
We payThe Company pays SSM an annual fee of $0.2 million$160,000 plus charges for certain itemized services per vessel to provide technical management services for each of ourits owned or finance leased vessels, upon delivery, which is a component of vessel operating cost in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
In addition, representatives of SSM, provide usincluding certain subcontractors, previously provided the Company with construction supervisory services while ourits vessels arewere being constructed in shipyards. In addition to the supervisory fee, we will compensateFor these services, SSM was compensated for its direct expenses, in assisting with the supervision, which can varyvaried between $0.2 million and $0.5 million per vessel.
Prior to the amendment to the Amended and Restated Master Agreement oneffective as from September 29, 2016, contracts for the construction of vessels that were sold or canceled prior to the Company taking delivery of the vessels resulted in a termination fee of $0.5 million per vessel and the termination fee for a vessel which was under SSM management was two years of annual fees of $0.2 million per vessel, or $0.4 million per vessel. This fee is classified as awas included in loss/write off of vessels and assets held for sale in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
Following the amendment to the Amended and Restated Master Agreement oneffective as from September 29, 2016, the fees due for a termination of the technical management arrangements in the event of the sale of one or moreany vessels, provided it does not amount to a change of control of the Company, including a sale of substantially all vessels, have been reduced to a notice period of three months and a payment equal to three months of management fees.
SUK will allocateallocates salaries of certain SUK employees to the Company for services performed for the Company.
The fees and rates charged as vessel operating costs by the related party port agent are based on the prevailing market rates for such services in each respective region.
In 2016, an Executive Officer of the Company acquired a minority interest, which in 2018 increased to a majority interest, in an insurance broker which arranges hull and machinery and war risk insurance for certain of our owned and finance leased vessels. This broker has arranged such policies for the Company since 2013 and the extent of the coverage and the manner in which the policies are priced did not change as a result of this transaction. In September 2018 the Executive Officer disposed of their interest in the insurance broker in its entirety to a third party not affiliated with the Company. The amounts recorded reflect the amortization of the policy premiums, which are paid directly to the broker, who then remits the premiums to the underwriters. Such payments, which are made in advance, are classified as prepaid expenses and other current assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheet until they are expensed at which point they are recorded as vessel operating expenses in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.
In October 2018, the Company invested $100.0 million in Scorpio Tankers for approximately 54.1 million, or 10.9% (as of October 12, 2018),of Scorpio Tankers’ issued and outstanding common shares. The investment was part of a larger $337.0 million equity raise through a public offering of common shares by Scorpio Tankers. Scorpio Tankers is a large international shipping company incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands engaged in seaborne transportation of refined petroleum products. The Company and Scorpio Tankers have a number of common shareholders. They also share a number of directors and officers, including Mr. Emanuele Lauro who serves as the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of both companies, Mr. Robert Bugbee, who serves as President and a Director of both companies, Mr. Cameron Mackey, who serves as Chief Operating Officer of both companies, and Mr. Filippo Lauro, who serves as the Vice President of both companies. There are no other significant transactions between the Company and Scorpio Tankers. As discussed in Note 1, Organization and Basis of Presentation, this investment is accounted for under the equity method.
Transactions with entities controlled by the Lolli-Ghetti family and with Scorpio Tankers (herein referred to as related party affiliates) in the Consolidated Statement of Operations and Consolidated Balance Sheet are summarized in the following tables (in thousands).
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Vessel revenue | | | | | | |
| Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool | | $ | 31,319 |
| | $ | 25,151 |
| | $ | 34,986 |
|
| Scorpio Ultramax Pool | | 46,227 |
| | 26,338 |
| | 10,196 |
|
| Scorpio Capesize Pool | | — |
| | 4,857 |
| | — |
|
| SCM | | 856 |
| | 718 |
| | 31 |
|
| Total vessel revenue | | $ | 78,402 |
| | $ | 57,064 |
| | $ | 45,213 |
|
| Voyage expense: | | | | | | |
| SCM | | $ | 319 |
| | $ | 664 |
| | $ | 148 |
|
| Vessel operating cost: | | | | | | |
| SSM | | $ | 7,191 |
| | $ | 2,765 |
| | 122 |
|
| General and administrative expense: | | | | | | |
| SCM | | $ | 43 |
| | $ | 258 |
| | $ | — |
|
| SSM | | — |
| | — |
| | 51 |
|
| SSH | | 3,949 |
| | 1,265 |
| | 56 |
|
| SUK | | 862 |
| | 486 |
| | 717 |
|
| Total general and administrative expense | | $ | 4,854 |
| | $ | 2,009 |
| | $ | 824 |
|
| Write down on assets held for sale | | | | | | |
| SCM | | $ | 500 |
| | $ | 12,465 |
| | $ | — |
|
| SSM | | 500 |
| | 13,000 |
| | — |
|
| Total write down on assets held for sale | | $ | 1,000 |
| | $ | 25,465 |
| | $ | — |
|
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | For the Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 |
| Vessel revenue | | | | | | |
| Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool | | $ | 87,305 |
| | $ | 67,825 |
| | $ | 31,319 |
|
| Scorpio Ultramax Pool | | 155,197 |
| | 94,380 |
| | 46,227 |
|
| SCM | | — |
| | — |
| | 856 |
|
| Total vessel revenue | | $ | 242,502 |
| | $ | 162,205 |
| | $ | 78,402 |
|
| Voyage expense: | | | | | | |
| SCM | | $ | — |
| | $ | 172 |
| | $ | 319 |
|
| Vessel operating cost: | | | | | | |
| SSM | | $ | 13,361 |
| | $ | 9,379 |
| | 7,191 |
|
| Port agent | | 117 |
| | 13 |
| | — |
|
| Insurance brokerage | | 1,721 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Total vessel operating cost | | $ | 15,199 |
| | $ | 9,392 |
| | $ | 7,191 |
|
| General and administrative expense: | | | | | | |
| SCM | | $ | 45 |
| | $ | 108 |
| | $ | 43 |
|
| SSM | | 99 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| SSH | | 6,707 |
| | 5,643 |
| | 3,949 |
|
| SUK | | 1,665 |
| | 971 |
| | 862 |
|
| Total general and administrative expense | | $ | 8,516 |
| | $ | 6,722 |
| | $ | 4,854 |
|
| Income (loss) from equity investment | | | | | | |
| Scorpio Tankers Inc. | | $ | (7,178 | ) | | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
|
| Write down on assets held for sale | | | | | | |
| SCM | | $ | — |
| | $ | 147 |
| | $ | 500 |
|
| SSM | | — |
| | 200 |
| | 500 |
|
| Total write down on assets held for sale | | $ | — |
| | $ | 347 |
| | $ | 1,000 |
|
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
At December 31, 20162018 and December 31, 2015,2017, we had the following balances with related parties, which have been included in the Consolidated Balance Sheet: | | | | December 31, | December 31, |
| | 2016 | | 2015 | 2018 | | 2017 |
| Assets | | | | | | |
| Due from related parties-current: | | | | | | |
| Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool | $ | 2,579 |
| | $ | 3,376 |
| $ | 4,017 |
| | $ | 3,977 |
|
| Scorpio Ultramax Pool | 1,661 |
| | 2,129 |
| 3,321 |
| | 2,578 |
|
| Scorpio Capesize Pool | — |
| | 2,268 |
| |
| SCM | — |
| | 424 |
| |
| Total due from related parties-current | $ | 4,240 |
| | $ | 8,197 |
| $ | 7,338 |
| | $ | 6,555 |
|
| Due from related parties non-current: | | | | | | |
| Scorpio Kamsarmax Pool | $ | 4,606 |
| | $ | 4,868 |
| $ | 4,806 |
| | $ | 5,080 |
|
| Scorpio Ultramax Pool | 6,633 |
| | 7,657 |
| 10,542 |
| | 10,741 |
|
| Total due from related parties non-current | $ | 11,239 |
| | $ | 12,525 |
| $ | 15,348 |
| | $ | 15,821 |
|
| Equity investment in Scorpio Tankers Inc. | | $ | 92,281 |
| | $ | — |
|
| Liabilities | | | | | | |
| Due to related parties-current : | | | | | | |
| SCM | $ | 507 |
| | $ | 3,415 |
| $ | 8 |
| | $ | — |
|
| SSM | 209 |
| | 4,274 |
| 116 |
| | 69 |
|
| SSH | 321 |
| | — |
| 357 |
| | 297 |
|
| Less balances due to SCM and SSM included in assets held for sale | — |
| | (7,065 | ) | |
| Total due to related parties-current | $ | 1,037 |
| | $ | 624 |
| $ | 481 |
| | $ | 366 |
|
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
| |
14.16. | SegmentsSegment Reporting |
As of December 31,Effective January 1, 2016, the Company is organized by vessel type into two operating segments through which the Company’s chief operating decision maker manages the Company’s business. The Kamsarmax and Ultramax Operations segments include the following:
Kamsarmax - includes vessels ranging from approximately 77,50082,000 DWT to 98,70084,000 DWT
Ultramax - includes vessels ranging from approximately 60,200 DWT to 64,000 DWT
Prior to 2016, the Company was organized into three operating segments: Kamsarmax, Ultramax and Capesize, which included vessels of approximately 180,000 DWT. However, the Company sold (or agreed to sell) all of its Capesize vessels and Capesize newbuilding vessels by the end of 2015.
Although each vessel within its respective class qualifies as an operating segment under U.S. GAAP, each vessel also exhibits similar long-term financial performance and similar economic characteristics to the other vessels within the respective vessel class, thereby meeting the aggregation criteria in U.S. GAAP. We have therefore chosen to present our segment information by vessel class using the aggregated information from the individual vessels.
The Company’s vessels regularly move between countries in international waters, over dozens of trade routes and, as a result, the disclosure of financial information about geographic areas is impracticable.
Certain of the corporate general and administrative expenses incurred by the Company are not attributable to any specific segment. Accordingly, these costs are not allocated to any of the Company’s Kamsarmax or Ultramax segments and are included in the results below as “Corporate”.
The following schedule presents segment information about the Company’s operations and identifiable assets for the years ended December 31, 2016, 20152018, 2017 and 20142016 (in thousands).
| | | December 31, 2016 | Capesize | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | | Total | |
| December 31, 2018 | | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | | Total |
| Vessel revenue | $ | — |
| | $ | 31,685 |
| | $ | 46,717 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 78,402 |
| | $ | 87,305 |
| | $ | 155,197 |
| |
|
| | $ | 242,502 |
|
| Voyage expenses | — |
| | (81 | ) | | 36 |
| | — |
| | (45 | ) | | 219 |
| | 330 |
| |
|
| | 549 |
|
| Vessel operating cost | — |
| | 27,083 |
| | 41,749 |
| | — |
| | 68,832 |
| | 34,255 |
| | 71,220 |
| |
|
| | 105,475 |
|
| Charterhire expense | — |
| | 12,323 |
| | 5,033 |
| | — |
| | 17,356 |
| | 422 |
| | 3,754 |
| |
|
| | 4,176 |
|
| Charterhire termination | — |
| | 2,500 |
| | 7,500 |
| | — |
| | 10,000 |
| |
| Vessel depreciation | — |
| | 14,522 |
| | 22,040 |
| | — |
| | 36,562 |
| | 19,320 |
| | 37,287 |
| |
|
| | 56,607 |
|
| General and administrative expenses | 380 |
| | 1,718 |
| | 2,725 |
| | 29,172 |
| | 33,995 |
| | 2,069 |
| | 4,344 |
| | 25,972 |
| | 32,385 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | 1,006 |
| | 11,557 |
| | (130 | ) | | — |
| | 12,433 |
| |
| Interest income | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (933 | ) | | (933 | ) | |
|
| |
|
| | 1,107 |
| | 1,107 |
|
| Foreign exchange gain | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 116 |
| | 116 |
| |
| Income (loss) from equity investment | | |
|
| |
|
| | (7,178 | ) | | (7,178 | ) |
| Foreign exchange gain (loss) | | |
|
| |
|
| | (68 | ) | | (68 | ) |
| Financial expense, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 24,921 |
| | 24,921 |
| |
|
| |
|
| | (49,869 | ) | | (49,869 | ) |
| Segment loss | $ | (1,386 | ) | | $ | (37,937 | ) | | $ | (32,236 | ) | | $ | (53,276 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) | | $ | 31,020 |
| | $ | 38,262 |
| | $ | (81,980 | ) | | $ | (12,698 | ) |
During 2016, we recorded a $10.0 million charge to terminate four time charter-in contracts. Terminating these contracts reduced our cash outflow and had a positive impact on our future operating results as the contracts were at above current market rates.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
| | | December 31, 2015 | Capesize | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | | Total | |
| December 31, 2017 | | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | | Total |
| Vessel revenue | $ | 9,038 |
| | $ | 26,712 |
| | $ | 26,771 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 62,521 |
| | $ | 67,825 |
| | $ | 94,380 |
| |
|
| | $ | 162,205 |
|
| Voyage expenses | 280 |
| | 331 |
| | 176 |
| | — |
| | 787 |
| | 300 |
| | 129 |
| |
|
| | 429 |
|
| Vessel operating cost | 5,089 |
| | 9,986 |
| | 14,297 |
| | — |
| | 29,372 |
| | 35,336 |
| | 51,445 |
| | (117 | ) | | 86,664 |
|
| Charterhire expense | — |
| | 29,509 |
| | 21,880 |
| | — |
| | 51,389 |
| | 4,417 |
| | 975 |
| |
|
| | 5,392 |
|
| Vessel depreciation | 3,623 |
| | 4,536 |
| | 6,104 |
| | — |
| | 14,263 |
| | 18,713 |
| | 29,797 |
| |
|
| | 48,510 |
|
| General and administrative expenses | 275 |
| | 498 |
| | 713 |
| | 33,896 |
| | 35,382 |
| | 1,916 |
| | 3,389 |
| | 23,776 |
| | 29,081 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | 408,318 |
| | 8,997 |
| | 5,622 |
| | — |
| | 422,937 |
| | 17,701 |
| |
|
| |
|
| | 17,701 |
|
| Interest income | — |
| | — |
| | (4 | ) | | (352 | ) | | (356 | ) | |
|
| |
|
| | 1,100 |
| | 1,100 |
|
| Foreign exchange gain | 4 |
| | 10 |
| | 27 |
| | (29 | ) | | 12 |
| |
| Foreign exchange gain (loss) | | |
|
| |
|
| | (292 | ) | | (292 | ) |
| Financial expense, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 19,524 |
| | 19,524 |
| |
|
| |
|
| | (34,962 | ) | | (34,962 | ) |
| Segment loss | $ | (408,551 | ) | | $ | (27,155 | ) | | $ | (22,044 | ) | | $ | (53,039 | ) | | $ | (510,789 | ) | | $ | (10,558 | ) | | $ | 8,645 |
| | $ | (57,813 | ) | | $ | (59,726 | ) |
| | | December 31, 2014 | Capesize | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | | Total | |
| December 31, 2016 | | | Kamsarmax | | Ultramax | | Corporate | | Total |
| Vessel revenue | $ | — |
| | $ | 38,770 |
| | $ | 10,217 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 48,987 |
| | $ | 31,684 |
| | $ | 46,718 |
| |
|
| | $ | 78,402 |
|
| Voyage expenses | — |
| | 3,653 |
| | 74 |
| | — |
| | 3,727 |
| | (81 | ) | | 36 |
| |
|
| | (45 | ) |
| Vessel operating cost | — |
| | 1,600 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,600 |
| | 27,083 |
| | 41,749 |
| |
|
| | 68,832 |
|
| Charterhire expense | — |
| | 57,909 |
| | 15,305 |
| | — |
| | 73,214 |
| | 12,323 |
| | 5,033 |
| |
|
| | 17,356 |
|
| Charterhire termination | | | 2,500 |
| | 7,500 |
| |
|
| | 10,000 |
|
| Vessel depreciation | — |
| | 686 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 686 |
| | 14,522 |
| | 22,040 |
| |
|
| | 36,562 |
|
| General and administrative expenses | 39 |
| | 103 |
| | 26 |
| | 31,593 |
| | 31,761 |
| | 1,718 |
| | 2,725 |
| | 29,552 |
| | 33,995 |
|
| Loss / write down on assets held for sale | 52,553 |
| | 2,934 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 55,487 |
| | 11,557 |
| | (130 | ) | | 1,006 |
| | 12,433 |
|
| Interest income | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (1,052 | ) | | (1,052 | ) | |
|
| |
|
| | 933 |
| | 933 |
|
| Foreign exchange loss | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (43 | ) | | (43 | ) | |
|
| |
|
| | (116 | ) | | (116 | ) |
| Financial expense, net | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 172 |
| | 172 |
| |
|
| |
|
| | (24,921 | ) | | (24,921 | ) |
| Segment loss | $ | (52,592 | ) | | $ | (28,115 | ) | | $ | (5,188 | ) | | $ | (30,670 | ) | | $ | (116,565 | ) | | $ | (37,938 | ) | | $ | (32,235 | ) | | $ | (54,662 | ) | | $ | (124,835 | ) |
Identifiable assets, classified by the segment by which the Company operates, are as follows:
| | | Identifiable assets | | | | | | | | |
| | | December 31, 2016 | | December 31, 2015 | | December 31, 2018 | | December 31, 2017 |
| Held by vessel owning subsidiaries or allocated to segments: | | | | | | | | |
| Capesize | | $ | 643 |
| | $ | 180,850 |
| |
| Kamsarmax | | 600,578 |
| | 468,875 |
| | $ | 553,790 |
| | $ | 549,444 |
|
| Ultramax | | 847,016 |
| | 626,304 |
| | 994,812 |
| | 1,028,798 |
|
| Held by parent and other subsidiaries, not allocated to segments: | | | | | | | | |
| Cash and cash equivalents | | 88,311 |
| | 178,103 |
| | 55,884 |
| | 59,278 |
|
| Other | | 10,609 |
| | 18,961 |
| | 99,340 |
| | 5,890 |
|
| Total identifiable assets | | $ | 1,547,157 |
| | $ | 1,473,093 |
| | $ | 1,703,826 |
| | $ | 1,643,410 |
|
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
| |
15.17. | Unaudited Quarterly Results of Operations |
The following tables set forth certain unaudited financial data for the Company's quarterly operations in 20162018 and 2015.2017. The following information has been prepared on the same basis as the annual information presented elsewhere in this report and, in the opinion of management, includes all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of the information for the quarterly periods presented. The operating results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of results for any future period.
| | | (amounts in thousands) | (Unaudited) 2016 Quarter Ended | | (Unaudited) 2015 Quarter Ended | (Unaudited) 2018 Quarter Ended | | (Unaudited) 2017 Quarter Ended |
| | First Quarter(1) | | Second Quarter | | Third Quarter | | Fourth Quarter | | First Quarter(2) | | Second Quarter(2) | | Third Quarter(2) | | Fourth Quarter(2) | First Quarter | | Second Quarter | | Third Quarter | | Fourth Quarter | | First Quarter(1) | | Second Quarter | | Third Quarter | | Fourth Quarter |
| Revenues | $ | 10,244 |
| | $ | 17,374 |
| | $ | 23,938 |
| | $ | 26,846 |
| | $ | 12,270 |
| | $ | 12,781 |
| | $ | 15,182 |
| | $ | 22,017 |
| $ | 54,253 |
| | $ | 60,614 |
| | $ | 62,464 |
| | $ | 65,171 |
| | $ | 37,428 |
| | $ | 37,742 |
| | $ | 38,608 |
| | $ | 51,127 |
|
Operating loss (2) | (51,192 | ) | | (19,204 | ) | | (16,244 | ) | | (14,091 | ) | | (48,399 | ) | | (135,856 | ) | | (16,255 | ) | | (291,137 | ) | 4,468 |
| | 12,049 |
| | 12,987 |
| | 13,806 |
| | (26,173 | ) | | (4,734 | ) | | (2,555 | ) | | 7,891 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Net loss | (58,260 | ) | | (24,748 | ) | | (21,273 | ) | | (20,557 | ) | | (52,065 | ) | | (138,645 | ) | | (18,052 | ) | | (302,036 | ) | (5,772 | ) | | 800 |
| | (353 | ) | | (7,373 | ) | | (34,564 | ) | | (13,418 | ) | | (10,674 | ) | | (1,068 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Basic loss per share | $ | (1.96 | ) | | $ | (0.48 | ) | | $ | (0.30 | ) | | $ | (0.29 | ) | | $ | (3.60 | ) | | $ | (8.50 | ) | | $ | (0.66 | ) | | $ | (11.02 | ) | |
| Basic earnings (loss) per share | | $ | (0.08 | ) | | $ | 0.01 |
| | $ | (0.01 | ) | | $ | (0.11 | ) | | $ | (0.48 | ) | | $ | (0.19 | ) | | $ | (0.15 | ) | | $ | (0.01 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Diluted loss per share | $ | (1.96 | ) | | $ | (0.48 | ) | | $ | (0.30 | ) | | $ | (0.29 | ) | | $ | (3.60 | ) | | $ | (8.50 | ) | | $ | (0.66 | ) | | $ | (11.02 | ) | |
| Diluted earnings (loss) per share | | $ | (0.08 | ) | | $ | 0.01 |
| | $ | (0.01 | ) | | $ | (0.11 | ) | | $ | (0.48 | ) | | $ | (0.19 | ) | | $ | (0.15 | ) | | $ | (0.01 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Basic weighted average common shares outstanding | 29,794 |
| | 51,305 |
| | 71,575 |
| | 71,672 |
| | 14,455 |
| | 16,303 |
| | 27,277 |
| | 27,399 |
| 72,702 |
| | 72,494 |
| | 72,749 |
| | 69,387 |
| | 71,735 |
| | 71,804 |
| | 71,936 |
| | 71,702 |
|
| Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding | 29,794 |
| | 51,305 |
| | 71,575 |
| | 71,672 |
| | 14,455 |
| | 16,303 |
| | 27,277 |
| | 27,399 |
| 72,702 |
| | 74,718 |
| | 72,749 |
| | 69,387 |
| | 71,735 |
| | 71,804 |
| | 71,936 |
| | 71,702 |
|
Earnings per share for quarterly periods are based on the weighted average common shares outstanding in individual quarters; thus, the sum of earnings per share of the quarters may not equal the amounts reported for the full year.
| |
(1) | First quarter 20162017 results include a loss / write down on assets held for sale of $12.4$17.7 million. |
| |
(2)
| First, second, third and fourth quarters of 2015 include losses / write downs on assets held for sale of $31.8 million, $119.6 million, $0.3 million and $261.8 million, respectively. |
DeliveryInvestment in Scorpio Tankers Inc.
On January 18, 2019, Scorpio Tankers effected a one-for-ten reverse stock split and as such the Company now owns approximately 5.4 million common shares of vessels from shipyardsScorpio Tankers.
During
Dividend
On January 25, 2019, the period fromCompany’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.02 per share, payable on or about March 15, 2019, to all shareholders of record as of February 15, 2019.
Share Repurchase Program
On January 1, 201725, 2019, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized a new share repurchase program to February 28, 2017, we took deliverypurchase up to an aggregate of $50.0 million of the following five vesselsCompany’s common shares. This new share repurchase program replaced the Company’s previous share repurchase program that werewas authorized in October 2018 and that was terminated in conjunction with the authorization of the new share repurchase program. The specific timing and amounts of the repurchases will be in the sole discretion of management and may vary based on market conditions and other factors. The Company is not obligated under construction asthe terms of December 31, 2016 (see Note 5):
SBI Samson, a Ultramax vessel
SBI Parapara, a Kamsarmax vessel
SBI Phoenix, a Ultramax vessel
SBI Swing, a Kamsarmax vessel
SBI Mazurka, a Kamsarmax vessel
Borrowings and repayments under secured credit facilities
During the period from January 1, 2017program to February 28, 2017, we borrowed an aggregate amountrepurchase any of $38.4 million under our secured credit facilities.
its common shares. The authorization has no expiration date.
SCORPIO BULKERS INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
(Dollars in thousands, except per share, per day and per vessel data)
During the period from January 1, 2017 to
$21.4 Million Lease Financing - SBI Samba
In February 28, 2017, we made a prepayment of $1.5 million on our secured credit facilities, which was made simultaneously to loan drawdowns. A summary of our outstanding borrowing under our credit facilities as of February 28, 2017 is as follows (dollars in thousands):
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | February 28, 2017 |
| | | Amount outstanding | | Amount available |
| $39.6 Million Credit Facility | | $ | 20,144 |
| | $ | — |
|
| $409 Million Credit Facility | | 179,473 |
| | — |
|
| $330 Million Credit Facility | | 250,959 |
| | 13,200 |
|
| $42 Million Credit Facility | | 38,512 |
| | — |
|
| $67.5 Million Credit Facility | | 40,461 |
| | — |
|
| $12.5 Million Credit Facility | | 10,379 |
| | — |
|
| $27.3 Million Credit Facility | | 19,375 |
| | — |
|
| Total | | $ | 559,303 |
| | $ | 13,200 |
|
Credit facility amendments
$42.0 Million Credit Facility
In January 2017,2019, the Company reachedentered into a financing transaction with an unaffiliated third party involving the sale and leaseback of the SBI Samba, a 2015 Japanese built Kamsarmax vessel, for a consideration of $21.4 million. As part of the transaction, the Company will make payments of $6,850 per day under a five-year bareboat charter agreement with the lender that (i) allows usbuyer. The transaction also provides the Company with the option to defer 4 quartersrepurchase the vessel beginning on the third anniversary of debt repaymentthe sale until the end of the bareboat charter agreement.
Vessel Sales
In March 2019, the Company entered into agreements with unaffiliated third parties to sell the balloon amountSBI Electra and SBI Flamenco, two 2015 Chinese built Kamsarmax vessels, for approximately $48.0 million in exchangeaggregate. Delivery of the vessels is estimated to take place in the second quarter of 2019. The Company expects to take a charge of approximately $8.0 million, including the write off of deferred finance charges costs, in the first quarter of 2019.
CMBFL Lease Financing
In March 2019, the Company agreed to sell and leaseback three Ultramax vessels (SBI Pegasus, SBI Subaru and SBI Ursa) and four Kamsarmax vessels (SBI Lambada, SBI Macarena, SBI Carioca and SBI Capoeira) to CMB Financial Leasing Co., Ltd. As part of the agreements, the Company will bareboat charter-in the vessels for a prepayment equal to 4 quartersperiod of scheduled repayments, which was made in Q4 2016 and (ii) waivesseven years . In addition, the interest coverage covenantCompany has purchase options beginning after the end of the third year of each agreement. There is also a purchase option for 2018, and amendseach vessel upon the level to 1.0 to 1.0 for 1Q 2019 and 2Q 2019 (both calculated on a year to date basis), 2.5 to 1.0 for 3Q 2019 (calculated on a year to date basis) and 2.5 to 1.0 for 4Q 2019 and thereafter (calculated on a trailing four quarters basis).expiration of each agreement.
