Use these links to rapidly review the document
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
FORM 20-F
o |
REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR 12(g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
OR |
||
ý |
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010 |
|
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 001-33060
DANAOS CORPORATION (Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter) |
Not Applicable (Translation of Registrant's name into English) |
Republic of The Marshall Islands (Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
c/o Danaos Shipping Co. Ltd 14 Akti Kondyli 185 45 Piraeus Greece (Address of principal executive offices) |
Dimitri J. Andritsoyiannis c/o Danaos Shipping Co. Ltd 14 Akti Kondyli 185 45 Piraeus Greece Telephone: +30 210 419 6480 Facsimile: +30 210 419 6489 (Name, Address, Telephone Number and Facsimile Number of Company Contact Person) |
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class | Name of each exchange on which registered | |
---|---|---|
Common stock, $0.01 par value per share | New York Stock Exchange | |
Preferred stock purchase rights | New York Stock Exchange |
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None.
Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act:
None.
As of December 31, 2010, there were 108,610,921 shares of the registrant's common stock outstanding.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes o No ý
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.
Yes o No ý
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.
Yes ý No o
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).
Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of "accelerated filer and large accelerated filer" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
o Large accelerated filer | o Accelerated filer | ý Non-accelerated filer |
Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:
ý U.S. GAAP | o International Financial Reporting Standards | o 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.
o Item 17 o Item 18
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).
Yes o No ý
This annual report contains forward-looking statements based on beliefs of our management. Any statements contained in this annual report that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements as defined in Section 27A of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We have based these forward-looking statements on our current expectations and projections about future events, including:
The words "anticipate," "believe," "estimate," "expect," "forecast," "intend," "potential," "may," "plan," "project," "predict," and "should" and similar expressions as they relate to us are intended to identify such forward-looking statements, but are not the exclusive means of identifying such statements. We may also from time to time make forward-looking statements in our periodic reports that we file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") other information sent to our security holders, and other written materials. Such statements reflect our current views and assumptions and all forward-looking statements are subject to various risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations. The factors that could affect our future financial results are discussed more fully in "Item 3. Key InformationRisk Factors" and in our other filings with the SEC. We caution readers of this annual report not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of their dates. We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements.
i
Danaos Corporation is a corporation domesticated in the Republic of The Marshall Islands that is referred to in this Annual Report on Form 20-F, together with its subsidiaries, as "Danaos Corporation," "the Company," "we," "us," or "our." This report should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes thereto, which are included in Item 18 to this annual report.
We use the term "Panamax" to refer to vessels capable of transiting the Panama Canal and "Post-Panamax" to refer to vessels with a beam of more than 32.31 meters that cannot transit the Panama Canal. We use the term "twenty foot equivalent unit," or "TEU," the international standard measure of containers, in describing the capacity of our containerships. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to currency amounts in this annual report are in U.S. dollars.
Item 1. Identity of Directors, Senior Management and Advisers
Not Applicable.
Item 2. Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable
Not Applicable.
Selected Financial Data
The following table presents selected consolidated financial and other data of Danaos Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries for each of the five years in the five year period ended December 31, 2010, reflecting the discontinued operations of the drybulk carriers owned by subsidiaries of Danaos Corporation between 2006 and 2007 as discontinued operations. The table should be read together with "Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects." The selected consolidated financial data of Danaos Corporation is derived from our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or "U.S. GAAP", and have been audited for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007 and 2006 by PricewaterhouseCoopers S.A., an independent registered public accounting firm.
Our audited consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, and the consolidated balance sheets at December 31, 2010
and 2009, together with the notes thereto, are included in "Item 18. Financial Statements" and should be read in their entirety.
|
Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | |||||||||||||
|
In thousands, except per share amounts |
|||||||||||||||||
STATEMENT OF INCOME |
||||||||||||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 359,677 | $ | 319,511 | $ | 298,905 | $ | 258,845 | $ | 205,177 | ||||||||
Voyage expenses |
(7,928 | ) | (7,346 | ) | (7,476 | ) | (7,498 | ) | (5,423 | ) | ||||||||
Vessel operating expenses |
(88,271 | ) | (92,327 | ) | (89,246 | ) | (65,676 | ) | (52,991 | ) | ||||||||
Depreciation |
(77,045 | ) | (60,906 | ) | (51,025 | ) | (40,622 | ) | (27,304 | ) | ||||||||
Amortization of deferred drydocking and special survey costs |
(7,426 | ) | (8,295 | ) | (7,301 | ) | (6,113 | ) | (4,127 | ) | ||||||||
Impairment loss |
(71,509 | ) | | | | | ||||||||||||
Bad debt expense |
| | (181 | ) | (1 | ) | (145 | ) | ||||||||||
General and administrative expenses |
(23,255 | ) | (14,541 | ) | (11,617 | ) | (9,955 | ) | (6,413 | ) | ||||||||
Gain/(loss) on sale of vessels |
1,916 | | 16,901 | (286 | ) | | ||||||||||||
Income from operations |
86,159 | 136,096 | 148,960 | 128,694 | 108,774 | |||||||||||||
Interest income |
964 | 2,428 | 6,544 | 4,861 | 3,605 | |||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(41,158 | ) | (36,208 | ) | (34,740 | ) | (22,421 | ) | (23,905 | ) | ||||||||
Other finance (expenses)/income, net |
(6,055 | ) | (2,290 | ) | (2,047 | ) | (2,779 | ) | 2,049 | |||||||||
Other (expenses)/income, net |
(5,070 | ) | (336 | ) | (1,060 | ) | 14,560 | (18,476 | ) | |||||||||
(Loss)/gain on fair value of derivatives |
(137,181 | ) | (63,601 | ) | (597 | ) | 183 | (6,628 | ) | |||||||||
Total other expenses, net |
(188,500 | ) | (100,007 | ) | (31,900 | ) | (5,596 | ) | (43,355 | ) | ||||||||
Net (loss)/income from continuing operations |
$ | (102,341 | ) | $ | 36,089 | $ | 117,060 | $ | 123,098 | $ | 65,419 | |||||||
Net (loss)/income from discontinued operations |
$ | | $ | | $ | (1,822 | ) | $ | 92,166 | $ | 35,663 | |||||||
Net (loss)/income |
$ | (102,341 | ) | $ | 36,089 | $ | 115,238 | $ | 215,264 | $ | 101,082 | |||||||
PER SHARE DATA(i)(ii) |
||||||||||||||||||
Basic and diluted net (loss)/ income per share of common stock from continuing operations |
$ | (1.36 | ) | $ | 0.66 | $ | 2.15 | $ | 2.26 | $ | 1.40 | |||||||
Basic and diluted net (loss)/income per share of common stock from discontinued operations |
$ | | $ | | $ | (0.04 | ) | $ | 1.69 | $ | 0.76 | |||||||
Basic and diluted net income per share of common stock |
$ | (1.36 | ) | $ | 0.66 | $ | 2.11 | $ | 3.95 | $ | 2.16 | |||||||
Basic and diluted weighted average number of shares |
75,436 | 54,550 | 54,557 | 54,558 | 46,751 | |||||||||||||
CASH FLOW DATA |
||||||||||||||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
$ | 78,792 | $ | 93,166 | $ | 135,489 | $ | 158,270 | $ | 151,578 | ||||||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(587,748 | ) | (372,909 | ) | (511,986 | ) | (687,592 | ) | (330,099 | ) | ||||||||
Net cash provided by financing activities |
616,741 | 281,073 | 433,722 | 549,742 | 183,596 | |||||||||||||
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents |
107,785 | 1,330 | 57,225 | 20,420 | 5,075 | |||||||||||||
BALANCE SHEET DATA (at period end) |
||||||||||||||||||
Total current assets |
$ | 266,830 | $ | 300,504 | $ | 250,194 | $ | 92,038 | $ | 59,700 | ||||||||
Total assets |
3,489,130 | 3,142,711 | 2,828,464 | 2,071,791 | 1,297,190 | |||||||||||||
Total current liabilities, including current portion of long term debt |
246,497 | 2,518,007 | 122,215 | 51,113 | 45,714 | |||||||||||||
Current portion of long-term debt |
21,619 | 2,331,678 | 42,219 | 25,619 | 22,760 | |||||||||||||
Long-term debt, net of current portion |
2,543,907 | | 2,054,635 | 1,330,927 | 639,556 | |||||||||||||
Total stockholders' equity |
392,412 | 405,591 | 219,034 | 624,904 | 565,852 | |||||||||||||
Common stock(i)(ii) |
108,611 | 54,551 | 54,543 | 54,558 | 54,558 | |||||||||||||
Share capital(i) |
1,086 | 546 | 546 | 546 | 546 |
2
As a privately held company, we paid aggregate dividends of $244.6 million in 2005. We paid no dividends in 2006. We paid our first quarterly dividend since becoming a public company in October 2006, of $0.44 per share, on February 14, 2007, and subsequent dividends of $0.44 per share, $0.44 per share, $0.465 per share and $0.465 per share on May 18, 2007, August 17, 2007, November 16, 2007 and February 14, 2008. In addition, we paid a dividend of $0.465 per share on May 14, 2008, August 20, 2008 and November 19, 2008, respectively. In the first quarter of 2009, our board of directors decided to suspend the payment of further cash dividends as a result of market conditions in the international shipping industry. Our payment of dividends is subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors. Our loan agreements and the provisions of Marshall Islands law also contain restrictions that affect our ability to pay dividends and we generally will not be permitted to pay cash dividends under the terms of the bank agreement ("Bank Agreement") and new financing agreements for which we have entered into definitive agreements in 2011. See "Item 3. Key InformationRisk FactorsRisks Inherent in Our BusinessWe are generally not permitted to pay cash dividends under our financing arrangements." See "Item 8. Financial InformationDividend Policy."
Capitalization and Indebtedness
Not Applicable.
Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds
Not Applicable.
Risk Factors
Risks Inherent in Our Business
Our business, and an investment in our securities, involves a high degree of risk, including risks relating to the downturn in the container shipping market, which continues to adversely affect the major liner companies which charter our vessels and has had and may continue to have an adverse effect on our earnings and affect our compliance with our loan covenants and could result in us having to restructure our obligations.
The abrupt and dramatic downturn in the containership market, from which we derive all of our revenues, has severely affected the container shipping industry, particularly the large liner companies to which we charter our vessels, and has adversely affected our business. The average daily charter rate of a 4,400 TEU containership, which represents the approximate average TEU capacity of our vessels, decreased from $36,000 in May 2008 to $26,000 in January 2011, after reaching a low of $6,400 in December 2009. The decline in charter rates is due to various factors, including the reduced availability of trade financing for purchases of containerized cargo carried by sea, which resulted in a significant decline in the volume of cargo shipments, and the level of global trade, including exports from China to Europe and the United States. The decline in the containership market has affected the major liner companies which charter our vessels, some of which have announced efforts to obtain third party aid and restructure their obligations. It also affects the value of our vessels, which follow the trends of freight rates and containership charter rates, and the earnings on our charters, and similarly, affects our cash flows and liquidity. Before the covenant levels in our financing arrangements were reset at levels at which we are now in compliance in the first quarter of 2011, we had to obtain waivers from the lenders under all but one of our credit facilities because we had not been in compliance with the covenants contained in our loan agreements. The decline in the containership charter market has had and may continue to have additional adverse consequences for our industry including limited financing for vessel acquisitions and newbuildings, a less active secondhand market for the sale of vessels, charterers not performing under, or requesting modifications of, existing time charters and widespread loan covenant defaults in the container shipping industry. This significant downturn in the container
3
shipping industry could adversely affect our ability to service our debt and other obligations and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
The current low containership charter rates and containership vessel values and any future declines in these rates and values will affect our ability to comply with various covenants in our credit facilities.
Our credit facilities, which are secured by mortgages on our vessels, require us to maintain specified collateral coverage ratios and satisfy financial covenants, including requirements based on the market value of our containerships and our net worth. The market value of containerships is sensitive to, among other things, changes in the charter markets with vessel values deteriorating in times when charter rates are falling and improving when charter rates are anticipated to rise. The depressed state of the containership charter market coupled with the prevailing difficulty in obtaining financing for vessel purchases has adversely affected containership values since the middle of 2008. These conditions have led to a significant decline in the fair market values of our vessels and the extremely low prevailing interest rates have led to significant declines in the fair value of our interest rate swap agreements. As a result, we had to obtain waivers of breaches of covenants in certain of our loan agreements. Under the Bank Agreement we entered into in the first quarter of 2011 for the restructuring of our existing credit facilities and new credit facilities, the financial covenants in our financing arrangements were reset to levels, with which we currently comply, that gradually tighten over the period through the maturity of these financing arrangements in 2018.
If we are unable to comply with the financial and other covenants under our other credit facilities, our lenders could accelerate our indebtedness and foreclose on the vessels in our fleet, which would impair our ability to continue to conduct our business. Any such acceleration, because of the cross-default provisions in our loan agreements, could in turn lead to additional defaults under our other loan agreements and the consequent acceleration of the indebtedness thereunder and the commencement of similar foreclosure proceedings by our other lenders. If our indebtedness were 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 if our lenders foreclose upon their liens, which would adversely affect our ability to continue our business.
We are dependent on the ability and willingness of our charterers to honor their commitments to us for all of our revenues and the failure of our counterparties to meet their obligations under our time charter agreements, or under our shipbuilding contracts, could cause us to suffer losses or otherwise adversely affect our business.
We derive all of our revenues from the payment of charter hire by our charterers. Our 52 containerships are currently employed under time charters with 14 liner companies, with 89% of our revenues in 2010 generated from six such companies. We have also arranged long-term time charters for each of our 13 contracted newbuilding containerships as of March 31, 2011. We could lose a charterer or the benefits of a time charter if:
A number of major liner companies, including some of our charterers, have announced efforts to obtain third party aid and restructure their obligations and request charter modifications, as well as an
4
intention to reduce the number of vessels they charter-in, which circumstances may increase the likelihood of losing a charterer or the benefits of a time charter.
If we lose a time charter, we may be unable to re-deploy the related vessel on terms as favorable to us or at all. We would not receive any revenues from such a vessel while it remained unchartered, but we may be required to pay expenses necessary to maintain the vessel in proper operating condition, insure it and service any indebtedness secured by such vessel.
The time charters on which we deploy our containerships generally provide for charter rates that are significantly above current market rates. The ability and willingness of each of our counterparties to perform its obligations under their time charters 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 container shipping industry, which has experienced severe declines since the second half of 2008, and the overall financial condition of the counterparty. Furthermore, the combination of a reduction in cash flow resulting from declines in world trade, a reduction in borrowing bases under credit facilities and the reduced availability of debt and equity financing may result in a significant reduction in the ability of our charterers to make charter payments to us, with a number of large liner companies announcing efforts to obtain third party aid and restructure their obligations. For example, Senator Lines, the charterer of one of our vessels defaulted on its charter due to its insolvency in the first quarter of 2009 and the replacement charter we were able to arrange was at a reduced rate. The likelihood of a charterer seeking to renegotiate or defaulting on its charter with us may be heightened to the extent such customers are not able to utilize the vessels under charter from us, and instead leave such chartered vessels idle, as was the case with certain of our vessels in 2010 and one vessel in the first quarter of 2011. Should a counterparty fail to honor its obligations under agreements with us, it may be difficult to secure substitute employment for such vessel, and any new charter arrangements we secure may be at lower rates given currently depressed situation in the charter market.
If our charterers fail to meet their obligations to us or attempt to renegotiate our charter agreements, as part of a court-led restructuring or otherwise, we could sustain significant losses which would 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, and comply with the covenants in our credit facilities. In such an event, we could be unable to service our debt and other obligations and could ourselves have to restructure our obligations.
We depend upon a limited number of customers, some of which have acknowledged financial difficulties and announced efforts to restructure their obligations, for a large part of our revenues. The loss of these customers could adversely affect us.
Our customers in the containership sector consist of a limited number of liner operators. The percentage of our revenues derived from these customers has varied in past years. In the past several years, CMA CGM, HMM Korea and Yang Ming have represented substantial amounts of our revenue. In 2010, approximately 89% of our revenues from continuing operations were generated by six customers, China Shipping, CMA CGM, HMM Korea, Maersk, Yang Ming and ZIM, and in 2009 these six customers generated approximately 94% of our revenues from continuing operations. As of the date of this filing, we have charters for 4 of our existing vessels and none of our newbuildings with China Shipping, for 5 of our existing vessels and 5 of our newbuildings with CMA CGM, for 11 of our existing vessels and 5 of our newbuildings with HMM Korea, for 4 of our existing vessels and none of our newbuildings with Maersk, for 7 of our existing vessels and none of our newbuildings with Yang Ming and 6 of our existing vessels with ZIM. We expect that a limited number of liner companies may continue to generate a substantial portion of our revenues, some of which liner companies including CMA CGM and Zim publicly acknowledged the financial difficulties facing them, reported substantial losses in 2009 and announced efforts to obtain third party aid and restructure their obligations, including under charter contracts. Although many liner companies reported substantially improved
5
financial performances in 2010, if any of these liner operators cease doing business or do not fulfill their obligations under their charters for our vessels, due to the financial pressure on these liner companies from the significant decreases in demand for the seaborne transport of containerized cargo or otherwise, our results of operations and cash flows could be adversely affected. Further, if we encounter any difficulties in our relationships with these charterers, our results of operations, cash flows and financial condition could be adversely affected.
Although we have arranged charters for each of our 13 contracted newbuilding vessels, we are dependent on the ability and willingness of the charterers to honor their commitments under such charters as it would be difficult to redeploy such vessels at equivalent rates, or at all, if charter markets continue to experience weakness.
We are dependent on the ability and willingness of the charterers to honor their commitments under the multi-year time charters we have arranged for each of our 13 contracted newbuilding vessels as of March 31, 2011. Despite modest improvements in the containership market in 2010, the combination of a reduction of cash flow resulting from declines in world trade, a reduction in borrowing bases under credit facilities and the reduced availability of debt or equity financing may result in a significant reduction in the ability of our charterers to make charter payments to us. Furthermore, the surplus of containerships available at lower charter rates and lower demand for our customers' liner services could negatively affect our charterers' willingness to perform their obligations under the time charters for our newbuildings, which provide for charter rates significantly above current market rates. The decline in the containership market has affected the major liner companies which charter our vessels, some of which have announced efforts to obtain third party aid and restructure their obligations. The combination of the current surplus of containership capacity, and the expected significant increase in the size of the world containership fleet over the next few years, as the high volume of containerships currently being constructed are delivered, would make it difficult to secure substitute employment for any of our newbuilding vessels if our counterparties failed to perform their obligations under the currently arranged time charters, and any new charter arrangements we were able to secure would be at lower rates given currently depressed charter rates. As a result of the foregoing, we could sustain significant losses which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, as well as our ability to comply with the covenants in our credit facilities. If the charterers do not honor their commitments under these charters, we may have rights for certain claims, subject to the terms and conditions of each charter. However, pursuing these claims may be time consuming, uncertain and ultimately insufficient to compensate us for any failure of the charterers to honor their commitments.
Our profitability and growth depend on the demand for containerships and the recent economic slowdown, and the impact on consumer confidence and consumer spending, resulted in and may continue to result in a decrease in containerized shipping volume, adversely affect charter rates. Charter hire rates for containerships may continue to experience volatility or settle at depressed levels, which would, in turn, adversely affect our profitability.
Demand for our vessels depends on demand for the shipment of cargoes in containers and, in turn, containerships. The ocean-going container shipping industry is both cyclical and volatile in terms of charter hire rates and profitability. Containership charter rates peaked in 2005 and generally stayed strong until the middle of 2008, when the effects of the recent economic crisis began to affect global container trade and in 2008 and 2009, the ocean-going container shipping industry experienced severe declines, with charter rates at significantly lower levels than the historic highs of the prior few years. Despite some improvement in 2010 and the first quarter of 2011, rates remain well below long term averages, and that improvement may not be sustainable and rates could decline again. Variations in containership charter rates result from changes in the supply and demand for ship capacity and changes in the supply and demand for the major products transported by containerships. The factors affecting
6
the supply and demand for containerships and supply and demand for products shipped in containers are outside of our control, and the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions are unpredictable. The recent global economic slowdown and disruptions in the credit markets significantly reduced demand for products shipped in containers and, in turn, containership capacity.
Factors that influence demand for containership capacity include:
Factors that influence the supply of containership capacity include:
Consumer confidence and consumer spending have deteriorated significantly in 2008 and 2009, and have only recovered modestly. Consumer purchases of discretionary items, many of which are transported by sea in containers, generally decline during periods where disposable income is adversely affected or there is economic uncertainty and, as a result, liner company customers may ship fewer containers or may ship containers only at reduced rates. Any such decrease in shipping volume could adversely impact our liner company customers and, in turn, demand for containerships. As a result, charter rates and vessel values in the containership sector have decreased significantly and the counterparty risk associated with the charters for our vessels has increased.
Our ability to recharter our containerships upon the expiration or termination of their current charters and the charter rates payable under any renewal or replacement charters will depend upon, among other things, the prevailing state of the charter market for containerships. The charters for 10 of our existing vessels expire between April and December 2011. If the charter market is depressed, as it has been with only marginal improvement since the second half of 2008, when our vessels' charters expire, we may be forced to recharter the containerships, if we were able to recharter such vessels at all, at sharply reduced rates and possibly at a rate whereby we incur a loss. If we were unable to recharter our vessels on favorable terms, we may potentially scrap certain of such vessels, which may reduce our earnings or make our earnings volatile. The same issues will exist if we acquire additional containerships, if we are able to recharter such vessels at all, and attempt to obtain multi-year charter arrangements as part of an acquisition and financing plan.
7
We may be unable to draw down the full amount of our credit facilities, pursuant to the terms of the Bank Agreement with respect to restructuring our credit facilities, and we may have difficulty obtaining other financing, particularly if the market values of our vessels further decline.
There are restrictions on the amount of cash that can be advanced to us under our credit facilities based on the market value of the vessel or vessels in respect of which the advance is being made, and other customary conditions to such advances. If the market value of our fleet, which has experienced substantial recent declines, declines further, we may not be able to draw down the full amount of certain of our credit facilities, pursuant to the terms of the Bank Agreement with respect to our credit facilities, obtain other financing or incur debt on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. We may also not be able to obtain additional financing and refinance our debt, particularly for our newbuilding vessels which have remaining installment payments well in excess of their current charter-free market value. Any inability for us to draw down the full amount of our credit facilities due to the market value of our vessels or otherwise could prevent us from completing the acquisition of our 13 newbuilding containerships and cause us to forfeit the deposit payments and other capitalized predelivery expenses we have made for such newbuildings, which totaled $0.8 billion as of March 31, 2011 and otherwise materially adversely effect our liquidity and financial condition.
The Bank Agreement in respect of our financing arrangements imposes stringent operating and financial restrictions on us which may, among other things, limit our ability to grow our business.
Under the terms of the Bank Agreement, our credit facilities and financing arrangements impose more stringent operating and financial restrictions on us than those previously contained in our credit facilities. These restrictions, as described in "Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects," generally preclude us from:
As a result we will have reduced discretion in operating our business and may have difficulty growing our business beyond our currently contracted newbuilding vessels. In addition, our respective lenders under these financing arrangements will, at their option, be able to require us to repay in full amounts outstanding under such respective credit facilities, upon a "Change of Control" of our company, which for these purposes and as further described in "Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and ProspectsBank Agreement", includes Dr. Coustas ceasing to be our Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Coustas and members of his family ceasing to collectively own over one-third of the voting
8
interest in our outstanding capital stock or any other person or group controlling more than 20% of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock.
The Bank Agreement and our financing arrangements contain financial covenants requiring us to:
The provisions of our KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facility, which is not covered by the Bank Agreement, have been aligned with the above covenants through June 30, 2012 under the supplemental letter signed on August 12, 2010 and our Sinosure-CEXIM credit facility has similar financial covenants and a collateral coverage covenant of 125% per tranche as described in "Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects." In addition, under our KEXIM credit facility, we must comply with a collateral coverage covenant of 130%.
If we fail to meet our payment or covenant compliance obligations under the terms of the Bank Agreement covering our credit facilities or our other financing arrangements, our lenders could then accelerate our indebtedness and foreclose on the vessels in our fleet securing those credit facilities, which could result in cross-defaults under our other credit facilities, and the consequent acceleration of
9
the indebtedness thereunder and the commencement of similar foreclosure proceedings by other lenders. The loss of any of these vessels would have a material adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.
Substantial debt levels could limit our flexibility to obtain additional financing and pursue other business opportunities.
As of March 31, 2011, we had outstanding indebtedness of $2.6 billion and we expect to incur substantial additional indebtedness, including under our existing credit facilities, in aggregate principal amounts of $0.8 billion, as we finance the $1.0 billion aggregate remaining purchase price for our 13 newbuilding containerships and, as market conditions warrant over the medium to long-term, further grow our fleet. Although we are not scheduled to make repayments of principal until March 31, 2013 under our existing credit facilities, other than our KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facilities and Hyundai Vendor Financing, this level of debt could have important consequences to us, including the following:
Our ability to service our debt will depend upon, among other things, our future financial and operating performance, which will be affected by prevailing economic conditions and financial, business, regulatory and other factors, some of which are beyond our control. Due to the restrictions on the use of cash from operations and other sources for purposes other than the repayment of indebtedness, even if we otherwise generate sufficient cash flow to service our debt, we may still be forced to take actions such as reducing or delaying our business activities, acquisitions, investments or capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring or refinancing our debt or seeking additional equity capital. We may not be able to effect any of these remedies on satisfactory terms, or at all. In addition, restrictions in the Bank Agreement in respect of our credit facilities and a lack of liquidity in the debt and equity markets could hinder our ability to refinance our debt or obtain additional financing on favorable terms in the future.
Disruptions in world financial markets and the resulting governmental action in the United States and in other parts of the world could have a further material adverse impact on our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows, and could cause the market price of our common stock to decline further.
Although showing signs of recovery, the United States and other parts of the world have exhibited weak economic trends and were in a recession in 2008 and 2009. For example, the credit markets in the United States have experienced significant contraction, de-leveraging and reduced liquidity, and the United States federal government and state governments have implemented and are considering a broad variety of governmental action and/or new regulation of the financial markets. Securities and futures markets and the credit markets are subject to comprehensive statutes, regulations and other
10
requirements. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, other regulators, self-regulatory organizations and securities 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 were severely disrupted and volatile in 2008 and 2009. Credit markets and the debt and equity capital markets have been exceedingly distressed. These issues, along with the re-pricing of credit risk and the difficulties being experienced by financial institutions have made, and will likely continue to make, it difficult to obtain financing. As a result of the disruptions in the credit markets, the cost of obtaining bank financing has increased as many lenders have increased interest rates, enacted tighter lending standards, required more restrictive terms, including higher collateral ratios for advances, shorter maturities and smaller loan amounts, refused to refinance existing debt at maturity at all or on terms similar to our current debt. Furthermore, certain banks that have historically been significant lenders to the shipping industry have announced an intention to reduce or cease lending activities in the shipping industry. Although we have not experienced any difficulties drawing on committed facilities to date, we may be unable to fully draw on the available capacity under our existing credit facilities in the future if our lenders are unwilling or unable to meet their funding obligations. We cannot be certain that financing will be available on acceptable terms or at all. If financing is not available when needed, or is available only on unfavorable terms, we may be unable to meet our obligations, including under our newbuilding contracts, as they come due. Our failure to obtain the funds for these capital expenditures would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In the absence of available financing, we also may be unable to take advantage of business opportunities or respond to competitive pressures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our revenues and results of operations.
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 the regulatory climate in the United States and worldwide may adversely affect our business or impair our ability to borrow amounts under our credit facilities or any future financial arrangements. We cannot predict how long the current market conditions will last. However, these recent and developing economic and governmental factors, together with the concurrent decline in charter rates and vessel values, may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows, have caused the price of our common stock to decline and could cause the price of our common stock to decline further.
Weak economic conditions throughout the world, particularly in the Asia Pacific region, and including due to the recent European Union sovereign debt default fears, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Negative trends in the global economy emerged in 2008 and continued into 2009, and economic conditions remain relatively weak. In particular, recent concerns regarding the possibility of sovereign debt defaults by European Union member countries, including Greece and Portugal resulted in devaluation of the Euro, disruptions of financial markets throughout the world and have led to concerns regarding consumer demand both in Europe and other parts of the world, including the United States. The deterioration in the global economy has caused, and may continue to cause, a decrease in worldwide demand for certain goods and, thus, container shipping. Continuing economic instability could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In particular, we anticipate a significant number of the port calls made by our vessels will continue to involve the loading or unloading of containers in ports in the Asia Pacific region. As a result, negative changes in economic conditions in any Asia Pacific country, and particularly in China, may exacerbate the effect of the significant downturns in the economies of the United States and the European Union and may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations, as well as our future prospects. In recent years, China has been one of the world's fastest growing
11
economies in terms of gross domestic product, which has had a significant impact on shipping demand. China and other countries in the Asia Pacific region may, however, experience slowed or even negative economic growth in the future. Moreover, the current 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. In particular, the possibility of sovereign debt defaults by European Union member countries, including Greece and Portugal, and any resulting weakness of the Euro, including against the Chinese renminbi, could adversely affect European consumer demand, particularly for goods imported, many of which are shipped in containerized form, from China and elsewhere in Asia, and reduce the availability of trade financing which is vital to the conduct of international shipping. Our business, financial condition, results of operations, ability to pay dividends, if any, as well as our future prospects, will likely be materially and adversely affected by a further economic downturn in any of these countries.
The earthquake and resulting tsunami and nuclear power plant crisis that struck Japan in March 2011 could, in the near term, reduce container volumes to and from areas of Japan, including Tokyo, which could result in reductions in prevailing charter rates.
The March 2011 earthquake in Japan and resulting tsunami have caused several nuclear power plants located in Japan to fail and emit radiation and possibly could result in meltdowns that could have catastrophic effects. Although the full effect of these disasters, both on the Japanese and global economies, is not currently known, a number of liner companies have restricted vessels from calling on ports in Tokyo and Northern Japan. In addition, authorities in other countries, including China and the U.S., have begun screening containerships that have visited Japan or nearby waters for nuclear radiation, causing delays and reduced attractiveness of any contaminated vessels for subsequent employment. These disasters will for some period of time result in reduced container volumes to and from Japan, which has the world's third largest economy, and could potentially result in reduced charter rates. In addition, there can be no assurances that our vessels trading in the Pacific will not be impacted by the possible effects of spreading radiation.
Demand for the seaborne transport of products in containers decreased dramatically in 2008 and 2009, placing significant financial pressure on liner companies and, in turn, decreasing demand for containerships and increasing our charter counterparty risk.
The sharp decline in global economic activity in 2008 and 2009 resulted in a substantial decline in the demand for the seaborne transportation of products in containers, reaching the lowest levels in decades. Consequently, the cargo volumes and freight rates achieved by liner companies, with which all of the existing and contracted newbuilding vessels in our fleet are chartered, have declined sharply, reducing liner company profitability and, at times, failing to cover the costs of liner companies operating vessels on their shipping lines. In response to such reduced cargo volume and freight rates, the number of vessels being actively deployed by liner companies decreased, with almost 12% of the world containership fleet estimated to be out of service at its high point as of December 2009, although the idle capacity of the global containership fleet had decreased to 2.3% of total fleet capacity as of the end of January 2011. Moreover, newbuilding containerships with an aggregate capacity of 0.39 million TEUs, representing approximately 28% of the world's fleet capacity as of January 2011, were under construction, which may exacerbate the surplus of containership capacity further reducing charterhire rates or increasing the number of unemployed vessels. Although liner companies generally reported improved financial performance in 2010, in 2009 a number of major liner companies, including some of our customers, announced plans to reduce the number of vessels they charter-in as part of efforts to reduce the size of their fleets to better align fleet capacity with the reduced demand for marine transportation of containerized cargo. In some instances, these liner companies have announced efforts to obtain third party aid and restructure their obligations, including obligations under charter contracts.
12
The reduced demand and resulting financial challenges faced by our liner company customers has significantly reduced demand for containerships and may increase the likelihood of one or more of our customers being unable or unwilling to pay us the contracted charterhire rates, which are generally significantly above prevailing charter rates, under the charters for our vessels. We generate all of our revenues from these charters and if our charterers fail to meet their obligations to us, we would sustain significant losses which could materially adversely affect our business and results of operations, as well as our ability to comply with covenants in our credit facilities.
An over-supply of containership capacity may prolong or further depress the current low charter rates and adversely affect our ability to recharter our containerships at profitable rates or at all and, in turn, reduce our profitability.
While the size of the containership order book has declined from historic highs since mid-2008, at the end of January 2011 newbuilding containerships with an aggregate capacity of 0.39 million TEUs, were under construction representing approximately 28% of existing global fleet capacity. The size of the orderbook is large relative to historic levels and, notwithstanding that some orders may be cancelled or delayed, will likely result in a significant increase in the size of the world containership fleet over the next few years. An over-supply of containership capacity, particularly in conjunction with the currently low level of demand for the seaborne transport of containers, could exacerbate the recent decrease in charter rates or prolong the period during which low charter rates prevail. We do not hedge against our exposure to changes in charter rates, due to increased supply of containerships or otherwise. As such, if the current low charter rate environment persists, or a further reduction occurs, during a period when the current charters for our containerships expire or are terminated, we may only be able to recharter those containerships at reduced or unprofitable rates or we may not be able to charter those vessels at all. The charters for 10 of our existing vessels expire between April 2011 and December 2011.
Our profitability and growth depends on our ability to expand relationships with existing charterers and to obtain new time charters, for which we will face substantial competition from established companies with significant resources as well as new entrants.
One of our objectives over the mid- to long-term is, when market conditions warrant, to acquire additional containerships in conjunction with entering into additional multi-year, fixed-rate time charters for these vessels. We employ our vessels in highly competitive markets that are capital intensive and highly fragmented, with a highly competitive process for obtaining new multi-year time charters that generally involves an intensive screening process and competitive bids, and often extends for several months. Generally, we compete for charters based on price, customer relationship, operating expertise, professional reputation and the size, age and condition of our vessels. In recent months, in light of the dramatic downturn in the containership charter market, other containership owners, including many of the KG-model shipping entities, have chartered their vessels to liner companies at extremely low rates, including at unprofitable levels, increasing the price pressure when competing to secure employment for our containerships. Container shipping charters are awarded based upon a variety of factors relating to the vessel operator, including:
13
We face substantial competition from a number of experienced companies, including state-sponsored entities and major shipping companies. Some of these competitors have significantly greater financial resources than we do, and can therefore operate larger fleets and may be able to offer better charter rates. We anticipate that other marine transportation companies may also enter the containership sector, including many with strong reputations and extensive resources and experience. This increased competition may cause greater price competition for time charters and, in stronger market conditions, for secondhand vessels and newbuildings.
In addition, a number of our competitors in the containership sector, including several that are among the largest charter owners of containerships in the world, have been established in the form of a German KG (Kommanditgesellschaft), which provides tax benefits to private investors. Although the German tax law was amended to significantly restrict the tax benefits to taxpayers who invest after November 10, 2005, the tax benefits afforded to all investors in the KG-model shipping entities continue to be significant, and such entities will continue to be attractive investments. Their focus on these tax benefits allows the KG-model shipping entities more flexibility in offering lower charter rates to liner companies. Further, since the charter rate is generally considered to be one of the principal factors in a charterer's decision to charter a vessel, the rates offered by these sizeable competitors can have a depressing effect throughout the charter market.
As a result of these factors, we may be unable to compete successfully with established companies with greater resources or new entrants for charters at a profitable level, or at all, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
We may have more difficulty entering into multi-year, fixed-rate time charters if a more active short-term or spot container shipping market develops.
One of our principal strategies is to enter into multi-year, fixed-rate containership time charters particularly in strong charter rate environments, although in weaker charter rate environments, such as the one that currently exists, we would generally expect to target somewhat shorter charter terms of three to six years or even shorter periods. As more vessels become available for the spot or short-term market, we may have difficulty entering into additional multi-year, fixed-rate time charters for our containerships due to the increased supply of containerships and the possibility of lower rates in the spot market and, as a result, our cash flows may be subject to instability in the long-term. A more active short-term or spot market may require us to enter into charters based on changing market rates, as opposed to contracts based on a fixed rate, which could result in a decrease in our cash flows and net income in periods when the market for container shipping is depressed, as it is currently, or insufficient funds are available to cover our financing costs for related containerships.
Delays in deliveries of our additional 13 contracted newbuilding vessels could harm our business.
The 13 contracted newbuilding vessels in our contracted fleet as of March 31, 2011 are expected to be delivered to us at various times between April 2011 and June 2012. Delays in the delivery of these vessels, or any other newbuilding containerships we may order or any secondhand vessels we may agree to acquire, would delay our receipt of revenues under the arranged time charters and could result in the cancellation of those time charters or other liabilities under such charters, and therefore adversely affect our anticipated results of operations. In 2009, we reached agreements to delay the delivery of
14
most of our containership newbuildings for periods of up to one year and on May 25, 2010, we signed a cancellation agreement with Hanjin Heavy Industries & Construction Co. Ltd. to cancel three 6,500 TEU newbuilding containerships, the HN N-216, the HN N-217 and the HN N-218, and recorded an impairment loss of $71.5 million. As of March 31, 2011, we expect to take delivery of eight newbuilding vessels in the remainder of 2011 and five in 2012. The remaining capital expenditure installments for these vessels were approximately $558.1 million for the remainder of 2011 and $450.8 million for 2012. Delivery delays, such as those arranged in 2009, delay our funding requirements for the installment payments to purchase these vessels, however, they also delay our receipt of contracted revenues under the charters for such vessels.
The delivery of the newbuilding containerships could also be delayed because of, among other things:
The shipbuilders with which we have contracted for our 13 newbuildings, as of March 31, 2011, may be affected by the ongoing instability of the financial markets and other market conditions, including with respect to the fluctuating price of commodities and currency exchange rates. In addition, the refund guarantors under our newbuilding contracts, which are banks, financial institutions and other credit agencies, may also be affected by financial market conditions in the same manner as our lenders and, as a result, may be unable or unwilling to meet their obligations under their refund guarantees. If our shipbuilders or refund guarantors are unable or unwilling to meet their obligations to us, this will impact our acquisition of vessels and may materially and adversely affect our operations and our obligations under our credit facilities.
The delivery of any secondhand containership we may agree to acquire could be delayed because of, among other things, hostilities or political disturbances, non-performance of the purchase agreement with respect to the vessels by the seller, our inability to obtain requisite permits, approvals or financing or damage to or destruction of the vessels while being operated by the seller prior to the delivery date.
15
Certain of the containerships in our contracted fleet are subject to purchase options held by the charterers of the respective vessels, which, if exercised, could reduce the size of our containership fleet and reduce our future revenues.
The chartering arrangements with respect to the CMA-CGM Moliere, the CMA-CGM Musset, the CMA-CGM Nerval, the CMA CGM Rabelais and the CMA CGM Racine include options for the charterer, CMA-CGM, to purchase the vessels eight years after the commencement of their respective charters, which, based on the respective expected delivery dates for these vessels, is expected to fall in September 2017, March 2018, May 2018, July 2018 and August 2018, respectively, each for $78.0 million. The option exercise prices with respect to these vessels reflect an estimate of market prices, which are in excess of the vessels' book values net of depreciation, at the time the options become exercisable. If CMA-CGM were to exercise these options with respect to any or all of these vessels, the expected size of our combined containership fleet would be reduced and, if there were a scarcity of secondhand containerships available for acquisition at such time and because of the delay in delivery associated with commissioning newbuilding containerships, we could be unable to replace these vessels with other comparable vessels, or any other vessels, quickly or, if containership values were higher than currently anticipated at the time we were required to sell these vessels, at a cost equal to the purchase price paid by CMA-CGM. Consequently, if these purchase options were to be exercised, the expected size of our combined containership fleet would be reduced, and as a result our anticipated level of revenues would be reduced.
Containership values have recently decreased significantly, and may remain at these depressed levels, or decrease further, and over time may fluctuate substantially. If these values are low at a time when we are attempting to dispose of a vessel, we could incur a loss.
Due to the sharp decline in world trade and containership charter rates, the market values of the containerships in our fleet are currently significantly lower than prior to the downturn in the second half of 2008. Containership values may remain at current low, or lower, levels for a prolonged period of time and can fluctuate substantially over time due to a number of different factors, including:
In the future, if the market values of our vessels experience further deterioration or we lose the benefits of the existing charter arrangements for any of our vessels and can not replace such arrangements with charters at comparable rates, we may be required to record an impairment charge in our financial statements, which could adversely affect our results of operations. If a charter expires or is terminated, we may be unable to re-charter the vessel at an acceptable rate and, rather than continue to incur costs to maintain and finance the vessel, may seek to dispose of it. Our inability to dispose of the containership at a reasonable price could result in a loss on its sale and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
We are generally not permitted to pay cash dividends under our financing arrangements.
Prior to 2009, we paid regular cash dividends on a quarterly basis. In the first quarter of 2009, our board of directors suspended the payment of cash dividends as a result of market conditions in the
16
international shipping industry and in particular the sharp decline in charter rates and vessel values in the containership sector. Until such market conditions significantly improve, it is unlikely that we will reinstate the payment of dividends and if reinstated, it is likely that any dividend payments would be at reduced levels. The Bank Agreement, which restructures our credit facilities and provides new financing arrangements, does not permit us to pay cash dividends or repurchase shares of our common stock until the termination of such agreements in 2018, absent a significant decrease in our leverage.
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.
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 pay our contractual obligations and, if permitted by our lenders and reinstated, to make any dividend payments in the future depends on our subsidiaries and their ability to distribute funds to us. The ability of a subsidiary to make these distributions could be affected by a claim or other action by a third party, including a creditor, or by the law of their respective jurisdictions of incorporation which regulates the payment of dividends by companies. If we are unable to obtain funds from our subsidiaries, even if our lenders agreed to allow dividend payments, our board of directors may exercise its discretion not to declare or pay dividends. If we reinstate dividend payments in the future, we do not intend to seek to obtain funds from other sources to make such dividend payments, if any.
If we are unable to fund our capital expenditures, we may not be able to continue to operate some of our vessels or grow our fleet, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
We must make substantial capital expenditures to maintain the operating capacity of our fleet and to grow our fleet. Maintenance capital expenditures include capital expenditures associated with drydocking a vessel, modifying an existing vessel or acquiring a new vessel to the extent these expenditures are incurred to maintain the operating capacity of our fleet. These expenditures could increase as a result of changes in the cost of labor and materials; customer requirements; increases in our fleet size or the cost of replacement vessels; governmental regulations and maritime self-regulatory organization standards relating to safety, security or the environment; and competitive standards.
In order to fund our capital expenditures, other than installment payments for our currently contracted newbuilding vessels which we expect to fund with existing cash resources, cash from operations and borrowings under our existing financing arrangements, we generally plan to use equity financing given the restrictions that are contained in our restructured credit facilities and new financing arrangements on the use of cash from our operations, debt financings and asset sales for purposes other than debt repayment. Our ability to access the capital markets through future offerings may be limited by our financial condition at the time of any such offering as well as by adverse market conditions resulting from, among other things, general economic conditions and contingencies and uncertainties that are beyond our control. Moreover, only a portion of the proceeds from any equity financings that we are able to complete will be permitted to be used for purposes other than debt repayment under our restructured and new financing arrangements. Our failure to obtain the funds for necessary future capital expenditures could limit our ability to continue to operate some of our vessels or grow our fleet or impair the values of our vessels and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
17
The derivative contracts we have entered into to hedge our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates could result in higher than market interest rates and reductions in our stockholders' equity, as well as charges against our income.
We have entered into interest rate swaps, in an aggregate notional amount of $3.9 billion as of December 31, 2010 (of which $0.4 billion related to forward starting arrangements), generally for purposes of managing our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates applicable to indebtedness under our credit facilities, which were advanced at floating rates based on LIBOR, as well as two interest rate swap agreements, in an aggregate notional amount of $0.1 million as of December 31, 2010, converting fixed interest rate exposure under our credit facilities advanced at a fixed rate of interest to floating rates based on LIBOR. Our hedging strategies, however, may not be effective and we may again incur substantial losses, as we did in 2010 and 2009, if interest rates move materially differently from our expectations.
To the extent our existing interest rate swaps do not, and future derivative contracts may not, qualify for treatment as hedges for accounting purposes we would recognize fluctuations in the fair value of such contracts in our consolidated statements of income. If our estimates of the forecasted incurrence of debt change, as they did as of December 31, 2010 due to the deferred delivery dates arranged for certain of our newbuildings and as a result of the modified amortization of our existing credit facilities under the terms of the restructuring agreement, our interest rate swap arrangements may cease to be effective as hedges and, therefore, cease to qualify for treatment as hedges for accounting purposes. In addition, changes in the fair value of our derivative contracts, even those that qualify for treatment as hedges for accounting and financial reporting purposes, are recognized in "Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss" on our consolidated balance sheet in relation to the effective portion of our cash flow hedges and in our consolidated income statement in relation to the ineffective portion, and can affect compliance with the net worth covenant requirements in our credit facilities.
Our financial condition could also be materially adversely affected to the extent we do not hedge our exposure to interest rate fluctuations under our financing arrangements under which loans have been advanced at a floating rate based on LIBOR. Any hedging activities we engage in may not effectively manage our interest rate exposure or have the desired impact on our financial conditions or results of operations.
Because we generate all of our revenues in United States dollars but incur a significant portion of our expenses in other currencies, exchange rate fluctuations could hurt our results of operations.
We generate all of our revenues in United States dollars and for the year ended December 31, 2010, we incurred approximately 37% of our vessels' expenses in currencies other than United States dollars. This difference could lead to fluctuations in net income due to changes in the value of the United States dollar relative to the other currencies, in particular the Euro. Expenses incurred in foreign currencies against which the United States dollar falls in value could increase, thereby decreasing our net income. We have not hedged our currency exposure and, as a result, our U.S. dollar-denominated results of operations and financial condition could suffer.
Due to our lack of diversification following the sale of our drybulk carriers, adverse developments in the containership transportation business could reduce our ability to meet our payment obligations and our profitability.
In August 2006, we agreed to sell the six drybulk carriers in our fleet, with an aggregate capacity of 342,158 deadweight tons, or dwt, for an aggregate of $143.5 million. In the first quarter of 2007, we delivered five of these vessels to the purchaser, which is not affiliated with us, for an aggregate of $118.0 million and the remaining vessel to the purchaser for $25.5 million when its charter expired in
18
the second quarter of 2007. We rely exclusively on the cash flows generated from charters for our vessels that operate in the containership sector of the shipping industry. Due to our lack of diversification, adverse developments in the container shipping industry have a significantly greater impact on our financial condition and results of operations than if we maintained more diverse assets or lines of business.
We may have difficulty properly managing our growth through acquisitions of additional vessels and we may not realize the expected benefits from these acquisitions, which may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and performance.
To the extent market conditions warrant and we are able to obtain sufficient financing for such purposes in compliance with the restrictions in our financing arrangements, we intend to grow our business over the medium to long-term by ordering newbuilding containerships and through selective acquisitions of additional vessels. Future growth will primarily depend on:
Although charter rates and vessel values have recently declined significantly, along with the availability of debt to finance vessel acquisitions, during periods in which charter rates are high, vessel values generally are high as well, and it may be difficult to acquire vessels at favorable prices. Moreover, our financing arrangements impose significant restrictions in our ability to use debt financing, or cash from operations, asset sales or equity financing, for purposes, such as vessel acquisitions, other than debt repayment without the consent of our lenders. In addition, growing any business by acquisition presents numerous risks, such as managing relationships with customers and integrating newly acquired assets into existing infrastructure. 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 efforts.
Under the terms of a plea agreement, our manager pled to one count of negligent discharge of oil from the Henry (ex CMA CGM Passiflore) and one count of obstruction of justice, based on a charge of attempted concealment of the source of the discharge. Any violation of the terms of the plea agreement, or any penalties or heightened environmental compliance plan requirements imposed as a result of any alleged discharge from any other vessel in our fleet calling at U.S. ports could negatively affect our operations and business.
In the summer of 2001, one of our vessels, the Henry (ex CMA CGM Passiflore), experienced engine damage at sea that resulted in an accumulation of oil and oily water in the vessel's engine room. The U.S. Coast Guard found oil in the overboard discharge pipe from the vessel's oily water separator. Subsequently, on July 2, 2001, when the vessel was at anchor in Long Beach, California, representatives of our manager notified authorities of the presence of oil on the water on the starboard side of the vessel. On July 3, 2001, oil was found in an opening through which seawater is taken in to cool the vessel's engines. In connection with these events, our manager entered into a plea agreement with the U.S. Attorney, on behalf of the government, which was filed with the U.S. District Court on June 20,
19
2006, pursuant to which our manager agreed to plead guilty to one count of negligent discharge of oil and one count of obstruction of justice, based on a charge of attempted concealment of the source of the discharge. Our manager also agreed to a probation period of three years and to pay an aggregate of $500,000 in penalties in connection with the charges of negligent discharge and obstruction of justice, with half of the penalties to be applied to community service projects that would benefit, restore or preserve the environment and ecosystems in the central California area. Consistent with the government's practice in similar cases, our manager agreed to develop and implement an approved third-party consultant monitored environmental compliance plan, designate an internal corporate compliance manager, and arrange for, fund and complete a series of audits of its fleet management offices and of waste streams of the vessels it manages, including all of the vessels in our fleet that call at U.S. ports, as well as an independent, third-party focused environmental compliance plan audit. On August 14, 2006, the court accepted our manager's guilty plea to the two counts and, on December 4, 2006, sentenced our manager in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement. Our manager has developed and is implementing the environmental compliance plan. Any violation of this environmental compliance plan or of the terms of our manager's probation or any penalties, restitution or heightened environmental compliance plan requirements that are imposed relating to alleged discharges in any other action involving our fleet or our manager could negatively affect our operations and business.
We are subject to regulation and liability under environmental laws that could require significant expenditures and affect our cash flows and net income.
Our business and the operation of our vessels are materially affected by environmental regulation in the form of international, national, state and local laws, regulations, conventions and standards in force in international waters and the jurisdictions in which our vessels operate, as well as in the country or countries of their registration, including those governing the management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, the cleanup of oil spills and other contamination, air emissions, wastewater discharges and ballast water management. Because such conventions, laws, and regulations are often revised, we cannot predict the ultimate cost of complying with such requirements or their impact on the resale price or useful life of our vessels. We are required by various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses, certificates and financial assurances with respect to our operations. Many environmental requirements are designed to reduce the risk of pollution, such as oil spills, and our compliance with these requirements can be costly. Additional conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted that could limit our ability to do business or increase the cost of doing business and which may materially and adversely affect our operations.
Environmental requirements can also affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels, could require a reduction in cargo capacity, ship modifications or operational changes or restrictions, could lead to decreased availability of insurance coverage for environmental matters or could result in the denial of access to certain jurisdictional waters or ports or detention in certain ports. Under local, national and foreign laws, as well as international treaties and conventions, we could incur material liabilities, including cleanup obligations and natural resource damages liability, in the event that there is a release of petroleum or other hazardous material from our vessels or otherwise in connection with our operations. 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. The 2010 explosion of the Deepwater Horizon and the subsequent release of oil into the Gulf of Mexico may result in further regulation of the shipping industry, including modifications to liability schemes. We could also become subject to personal injury or property damage claims relating to the release of hazardous substances associated with our existing or historic operations. Violations of, or liabilities under, environmental requirements can result in substantial penalties, fines and other sanctions, including, in certain instances, seizure or detention of our vessels.
20
The operation of our vessels is also affected by the requirements set forth in the International Maritime Organization's, or IMO's, International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and Pollution Prevention, or the ISM Code. The ISM Code requires shipowners 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 and describing procedures for dealing with emergencies. Failure to comply with the ISM Code may subject us to increased liability, may decrease available insurance coverage for the affected ships, and may result in denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.
Increased inspection procedures, tighter import and export controls and new security regulations could cause disruption of our containership business.
International container shipping is subject to security and customs inspection and related procedures in countries of origin, destination, and certain trans-shipment points. These inspection procedures can result in cargo seizure, delays in the loading, offloading, trans-shipment, or delivery of containers, and the levying of customs duties, fines or other penalties against exporters or importers and, in some cases, charterers and charter owners.
Since the events of September 11, 2001, U.S. authorities have more than doubled container inspection rates to over 5% of all imported containers. Government investment in non-intrusive container scanning technology has grown and there is interest in electronic monitoring technology, including so-called "e-seals" and "smart" containers, that would enable remote, centralized monitoring of containers during shipment to identify tampering with or opening of the containers, along with potentially measuring other characteristics such as temperature, air pressure, motion, chemicals, biological agents and radiation. Also, as a response to the events of September 11, 2001, additional vessel security requirements have been imposed including the installation of security alert and automatic information systems on board vessels.
It is further unclear what changes, if any, to the existing inspection and security procedures will ultimately be proposed or implemented, or how any such changes will affect the industry. It is possible that such changes could impose additional financial and legal obligations, including additional responsibility for inspecting and recording the contents of containers and complying with additional security procedures on board vessels, such as those imposed under the ISPS Code. Changes to the inspection and security procedures and container security could result in additional costs and obligations on carriers and may, in certain cases, render the shipment of certain types of goods by container uneconomical or impractical. Additional costs that may arise from current inspection or security procedures or future proposals that may not be fully recoverable from customers through higher rates or security surcharges.
Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency, resulting in loss of earnings.
A government of a ship's registry could requisition for title or seize our vessels. Requisition for title occurs when a government takes control of a ship and becomes the owner. Also, a government could requisition our containerships for hire. Requisition for hire occurs when a government takes control of a ship and effectively becomes the charterer at dictated charter rates. Generally, requisitions occur during a period of war or emergency. Government requisition of one or more of our vessels may negatively impact our revenues and results of operations.
Terrorist attacks and international hostilities could affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Terrorist attacks such as the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001 and more recent attacks in other parts of the world, and the continuing response of the United States and other countries to these attacks, as well as the threat of future terrorist attacks, continue to cause uncertainty
21
in the world financial markets and may affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. Events in the Middle East and North Africa, including Egypt and Libya, and the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan may lead to additional acts of terrorism, regional conflict and other armed conflicts 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.
Terrorist attacks targeted at sea vessels, such as the October 2002 attack in Yemen on the VLCC Limburg, a ship not related to us, may in the future also negatively affect our operations and financial condition and directly impact our containerships or our customers. Future terrorist attacks could result in increased volatility of the financial markets in the United States and globally and could result in an economic recession affecting the United States or the entire world. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on our operating results, revenue and costs.
Changing economic, political and governmental conditions in the countries where we are engaged in business or where our vessels are registered could affect us. In addition, future hostilities or other political instability in regions where our vessels trade could also affect our trade patterns and adversely affect our operations and performance.
Acts of piracy on ocean-going vessels have recently increased in frequency, which could adversely affect our business.
Acts of piracy have historically affected ocean-going vessels trading in regions of the world such as the South China Sea and in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia. Since 2008, the frequency of piracy incidents has increased significantly, particularly in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia. For example, in January 2010, the Maran Centaurus, a tanker vessel not affiliated with us, was captured by pirates in the Indian Ocean while carrying crude oil estimated to be worth $20 million, and was released in January 2010 upon a ransom payment of over $5 million. In addition, crew costs, including costs due to employing onboard security guards, could increase in such circumstances. 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 or 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, results of operations and ability to pay dividends.
Risks inherent in the operation of ocean-going vessels could affect our business and reputation, which could adversely affect our expenses, net income and stock price.
The operation of ocean-going vessels carries inherent risks. These risks include the possibility of:
Such occurrences could result in death or injury to persons, loss of property or environmental damage, delays in the delivery of cargo, loss of revenues from or termination of charter contracts,
22
governmental fines, penalties or restrictions on conducting business, higher insurance rates, and damage to our reputation and customer relationships generally. Any of these circumstances or events could increase our costs or lower our revenues, which could result in reduction in the market price of our shares of common stock. The involvement of our vessels in an environmental disaster may harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator.
Our insurance may be insufficient to cover losses that may occur to our property or result from our operations due to the inherent operational risks of the shipping industry.
The operation of any vessel includes risks such as mechanical failure, collision, fire, contact with floating objects, property loss, cargo loss or damage and business interruption due to political circumstances in foreign countries, hostilities and labor strikes. In addition, there is always an inherent possibility of a marine disaster, including oil spills and other environmental mishaps. There are also liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade. We procure insurance for our fleet against risks commonly insured against by vessel owners and operators. Our current insurance includes (i) hull and machinery insurance covering damage to our vessels' hull and machinery from, among other things, contact with free and floating objects, (ii) war risks insurance covering losses associated with the outbreak or escalation of hostilities and (iii) protection and indemnity insurance (which includes environmental damage and pollution insurance) covering third-party and crew liabilities such as expenses resulting from the injury or death of crew members, passengers and other third parties, the loss or damage to cargo, third-party 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 and loss of hire insurance for the CSCL Europe, the CSCL America (ex MSC Baltic), the CSCL Pusan (ex HN 1559) and the CSCL Le Havre (ex HN 1561).
We can give no assurance that we are adequately insured against all risks or that our insurers will pay a particular claim. Even if our insurance coverage is adequate to cover our losses, we may not be able to obtain a timely replacement vessel in the event of a loss. Under the terms of our credit facilities, we will be subject to restrictions on the use of any proceeds we may receive from claims under our insurance policies. Furthermore, in the future, we may not be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates for our fleet. We may also be subject to calls, or premiums, in amounts based not only on our own claim records but also the claim records of all other members of the protection and indemnity associations through which we receive indemnity insurance coverage for tort liability. Our insurance policies also contain deductibles, limitations and exclusions which, although we believe are standard in the shipping industry, may nevertheless increase our costs.
In addition, we do not carry loss of hire insurance (other than for the CSCL Europe, the CSCL America (ex MSC Baltic), the CSCL Pusan (ex HN 1559) and the CSCL Le Havre (ex HN 1561) to satisfy our loan agreement requirements). Loss of hire insurance covers the loss of revenue during extended vessel off-hire periods, such as those that occur during an unscheduled drydocking due to damage to the vessel from accidents. Accordingly, any loss of a vessel or any extended period of vessel off-hire, due to an accident or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders.
Maritime claimants could arrest our vessels, which could interrupt our cash flows.
Crew members, suppliers of goods and services to a vessel, shippers of cargo and other parties may be entitled to a maritime lien against that vessel for unsatisfied debts, claims or damages. In many jurisdictions, a maritime lien holder may enforce its lien by arresting 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 lifted.
23
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 try to assert "sister ship" liability against one vessel in our fleet for claims relating to another of our ships.
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. As our fleet ages, we may incur increased costs. Older vessels are typically less fuel efficient and more costly to maintain than more recently constructed vessels due to improvements in engine technology. Cargo insurance rates also 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 a vessel 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. Although our current fleet of 52 containerships had an average age (weighted by TEU capacity) of approximately 8.25 years as of March 31, 2011, we cannot assure you that, as our vessels age, market conditions will justify such expenditures or will enable us to profitably operate our vessels during the remainder of their expected useful lives.
Compliance with safety and other requirements imposed by classification societies may be very costly and may adversely affect our business.
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, and all vessels must be awarded ISM certification.
A vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys 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. Each of the vessels in our fleet is on a special survey cycle for hull inspection and a continuous survey cycle for machinery inspection.
If any vessel does not maintain its class or fails any annual, intermediate or special survey, and/or loses its certification, the vessel will be unable to trade between ports and will be unemployable, and we could be in violation of certain covenants in our loan agreements. This would negatively impact our operating results and financial condition.
Our business depends upon certain employees who may not necessarily continue to work for us.
Our future success depends to a significant extent upon our chief executive officer, Dr. John Coustas, and certain members of our senior management and that of our manager. Dr. Coustas has substantial experience in the container shipping industry and has worked with us and our manager for many years. He and others employed by us and our manager are crucial to the execution of our business strategies and to the growth and development of our business. In addition, under the terms of the Bank Agreement in respect of restructuring our existing credit facilities and the new financing arrangements for which we have reached agreements in principle, Dr. Coustas ceasing to serve as our Chief Executive Officer, absent a successor acceptable to our lenders, would constitute an event of default under these agreements. If these certain individuals were no longer to be affiliated with us or our manager, or if we were to otherwise cease to receive advisory services from them, we may be unable to recruit other employees with equivalent talent and experience, and our business and financial condition may suffer as a result.
24
The provisions in our employment arrangements with our chief executive officer restricting his ability to compete with us, like restrictive covenants generally, may not be enforceable.
In connection with his employment agreement with us, Dr. Coustas, our chief executive officer, has entered into a restrictive covenant agreement with us under which he is precluded during the term of his employment and for one year thereafter from owning and operating drybulk ships or containerships larger than 2,500 TEUs and from acquiring or investing in a business that owns or operates such vessels. Courts generally do not favor the enforcement of such restrictions, particularly when they involve individuals and could be construed as infringing on their ability to be employed or to earn a livelihood. Our ability to enforce these restrictions, should it ever become necessary, will depend upon the circumstances that exist at the time enforcement is sought. We cannot be assured that a court would enforce the restrictions as written by way of an injunction or that we could necessarily establish a case for damages as a result of a violation of the restrictive covenants.
We depend on our manager to operate our business.
Pursuant to the management agreement and the individual ship management agreements, our manager and its affiliates may provide us with certain of our officers and will provide us with technical, administrative and certain commercial services (including vessel maintenance, crewing, purchasing, shipyard supervision, insurance, assistance with regulatory compliance and financial services). Our operational success will depend significantly upon our manager's satisfactory performance of these services. Our business would be harmed if our manager failed to perform these services satisfactorily. In addition, if the management agreement were to be terminated or if its terms were to be altered, our business could be adversely affected, as we may not be able to immediately replace such services, and even if replacement services were immediately available, the terms offered could be less favorable than the ones currently offered by our manager. Our management agreement with any new manager may not be as favorable.
Our ability to compete for and enter into new time charters and to expand our relationships with our existing charterers depends largely on our relationship with our manager and its reputation and relationships in the shipping industry. If our manager suffers material damage to its reputation or relationships, it may harm our ability to:
If our ability to do any of the things described above is impaired, it could have a material adverse effect on our business and affect our profitability.
Our manager is a privately held company and there is little or no publicly available information about it.
The ability of our manager to continue providing services for our benefit will depend in part on its own financial strength. Circumstances beyond our control could impair our manager's financial strength, and because it is a privately held company, information about its financial strength is not available. As a result, our stockholders might have little advance warning of problems affecting our manager, even though these problems could have a material adverse effect on us. As part of our
25
reporting obligations as a public company, we will disclose information regarding our manager that has a material impact on us to the extent that we become aware of such information.
We are a Marshall Islands corporation, and the Marshall Islands does not have a well developed body of corporate law.
Our corporate affairs are governed by our articles of incorporation and bylaws and by the Marshall Islands Business Corporations Act, or BCA. The provisions of the BCA are similar to provisions of the corporation laws of a number of states in the United States. However, there have been few judicial cases in the Republic of The Marshall Islands interpreting the BCA. The rights and fiduciary responsibilities of directors under the law of the Republic 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 certain U.S. jurisdictions. Stockholder rights may differ as well. While the BCA does specifically incorporate the non-statutory law, or judicial case law, of the State of Delaware and other states with substantially similar legislative provisions, our public stockholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests in the face of actions by the management, directors or controlling stockholders than would stockholders of a corporation incorporated in a U.S. jurisdiction.
It may be difficult to enforce service of process and enforcement of judgments against us and our officers and directors.
We are a Marshall Islands corporation, and our registered office is located outside of the United States in the Marshall Islands. A majority of our directors and officers reside outside of the United States, and a substantial portion of our assets and the assets of our officers and directors are located outside of the United States. As a result, you may have difficulty serving legal process within the United States upon us or any of these persons. You may also have difficulty enforcing, both in and outside of the United States, judgments you may obtain in the U.S. courts against us or these persons in any action, including actions based upon the civil liability provisions of U.S. federal or state securities laws.
There is also substantial doubt that the courts of the Marshall Islands would enter judgments in original actions brought in those courts predicated on U.S. federal or state securities laws. Even if you were successful in bringing an action of this kind, the laws of the Marshall Islands may prevent or restrict you from enforcing a judgment against our assets or our directors and officers.
We maintain cash with a limited number of financial institutions including financial institutions that may be located in Greece, which will subject us to credit risk.
We maintain all of our cash with a limited number of financial institutions, including institutions that are located in Greece. These financial institutions located in Greece may be subsidiaries of international banks or Greek financial institutions. Economic conditions in Greece have been, and continue to be, severely disrupted and volatile, and as a result of sovereign weakness, Moody's Investor Services Inc. has recently downgraded the bank financial strength ratings, as well as the deposit and debt ratings, of several Greek banks to reflect their weakening stand-alone financial strength and the anticipated additional pressures stemming from the country's challenged economic prospects.
We do not expect that any of our balances held with Greek financial institutions will be covered by insurance in the event of default by these financial institutions. The occurrence of such a default could therefore have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. If we are unable to fund our capital expenditures, we may not be able to continue to operate some of our vessels, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could diminish our ability to pay dividends.
26
Risks Relating to Our Common Stock
The market price of our common stock has fluctuated widely and the market price of our common stock may fluctuate in the future.
The market price of our common stock has fluctuated widely since our initial public offering in October 2006, reaching a high of $40.26 per share in 2007 and a low of $2.72 per share in the third quarter of 2009, and may continue to do so as a result of many factors, including our actual results of operations and perceived prospects, the prospects of our competition and of the shipping industry in general and in particular the containership sector, differences between our actual financial and operating results and those expected by investors and analysts, changes in analysts' recommendations or projections, changes in general valuations for companies in the shipping industry, particularly the containership sector, changes in general economic or market conditions and broad market fluctuations.
If the market price of our common stock again drops below $5.00 per share, under stock exchange rules, our stockholders will not be able to use such shares as collateral for borrowing in margin accounts. This inability to use shares of our common stock as collateral may depress demand as certain institutional investors are restricted from investing in shares priced below $5.00 and lead to sales of such shares creating downward pressure on and increased volatility in the market price of our common stock.
In addition, under the rules of The New York Stock Exchange, listed companies are required to maintain a share price of at least $1.00 per share and if the share price declines below $1.00 for a period of 30 consecutive business days, then the listed company would have a cure period of 180 days to regain compliance with the $1.00 per share minimum. In the event that our share price declines below $1.00, we may be required to take action, such as a reverse stock split, in order to comply with the New York Stock Exchange rules that may be in effect at the time in order to avoid delisting of our common stock and the associated decrease in liquidity in the market for our common stock.
Future issuances of equity, including upon exercise of outstanding warrants, or equity- linked securities, or future sales of our common stock by existing stockholders, may result in significant dilution and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
We have or will issue 15 million warrants, for no additional consideration, to our existing lenders participating in the Bank Agreement covering our then existing credit facilities and certain new credit facilities, entitling such lenders to purchase, solely on a cash-less exercise basis, additional shares of our common stock, at an initial exercise price of $7.00 per share. We have also agreed to register the warrants and underlying common stock for resale under the Securities Act.
We may have to attempt to sell additional shares in the future to satisfy our capital and operating needs. In addition, lenders may be unwilling to provide future financing or may provide future financing only on unfavorable terms. In light of the restrictions on our use of cash from operations, debt financings and asset sales contained in our Bank Agreement governing our credit facilities, to finance further growth beyond our contracted newbuildings we would likely have to issue additional shares of common stock or other equity securities. If we sell shares in the future, the prices at which we sell these future shares will vary, and these variations may be significant. If made at currently prevailing prices, these sales would be significantly dilutive of existing stockholders. We granted the investors in our $200 million August 2010 equity transaction certain rights, in connection with any subsequent underwritten public offering that is effected at any time prior to the fifth anniversary of the registration rights agreements, to purchase from us, at the same price per share paid by investors who purchase common stock in any such offering, up to a specified portion of such common stock being issued.
27
Subsequent resales of substantial numbers of such shares in the public market, moreover, could adversely affect the market price of our shares. We filed with the SEC shelf registration statements on Form F-3 registering under the Securities Act an aggregate of 63,645,305 shares of our common stock for resale on behalf of selling stockholders, including our executive officers, in addition to securities issuable by us, and granted registration rights in respect of additional shares of our common stock held by our largest stockholder and certain other investors in our August 2010 equity offering. In the aggregate these 63,645,305 registered shares represent approximately 58.6% of our outstanding shares of common stock as of March 31, 2011. These shares may be sold in registered transactions and may also be resold subject to the holding period, volume, manner of sale and notice requirements of Rule 144 under the Securities Act. Sales or the possibility of sales of substantial amounts of our common stock by these shareholders in the public markets could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
We cannot predict the effect that future sales of our common stock or other equity related securities would have on the market price of our common stock.
The Coustas Family Trust, our principal existing stockholder, controls the outcome of matters on which our stockholders are entitled to vote and its interests may be different from yours.
The Coustas Family Trust, under which our chief executive officer is both a beneficiary, together with other members of the Coustas Family, and the protector (which is analogous to a trustee), through Danaos Investments Limited, a corporation wholly-owned by Dr. Coustas, owned, directly or indirectly, approximately 62.3% of our outstanding common stock as of March 31, 2011. This stockholder is able to control the outcome of matters on which our stockholders are entitled to vote, including the election of our entire board of directors and other significant corporate actions. The interests of this stockholder may be different from yours. Under the terms of the Bank Agreement governing our credit facilities, Dr. Coustas, together with the Coustas Family Trust and his family, ceasing to own over one-third of our outstanding common stock will constitute an event of default in certain circumstances.
We are a "controlled company" under the New York Stock Exchange rules, and as such we are entitled to exemptions from certain New York Stock Exchange corporate governance standards, and you may not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to all of the New York Stock Exchange corporate governance requirements.
We are a "controlled company" within the meaning of the New York Stock Exchange corporate governance standards. Under the New York Stock Exchange rules, a company of which more than 50% of the voting power is held by another company or group is a "controlled company" and may elect not to comply with certain New York Stock Exchange corporate governance requirements, including (1) the requirement that a majority of the board of directors consist of independent directors, (2) the requirement that the nominating committee be composed entirely of independent directors and have a written charter addressing the committee's purpose and responsibilities, (3) the requirement that the compensation committee be composed entirely of independent directors and have a written charter addressing the committee's purpose and responsibilities and (4) the requirement of an annual performance evaluation of the nominating and corporate governance and compensation committees. We may utilize these exemptions, and currently a non-independent director serves on our compensation committee and on our nominating and corporate governance committees. As a result, non-independent directors, including members of our management who also serve on our board of directors, may serve on the compensation or the nominating and corporate governance committees of our board of directors which, among other things, fix the compensation of our management, make stock and option awards and resolve governance issues regarding us. Accordingly, you may not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to all of the New York Stock Exchange corporate governance requirements.
28
Anti-takeover provisions in our organizational documents could make it difficult for our stockholders to replace or remove our current board of directors or could have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing a merger or acquisition, which could adversely affect the market price of the shares of our common stock.
Several provisions of our articles of incorporation and bylaws could make it difficult for our stockholders to change the composition of our board of directors in any one year, preventing them from changing the composition of our management. In addition, the same provisions may discourage, delay or prevent a merger or acquisition that stockholders may consider favorable.
These provisions:
We have adopted a stockholder rights plan pursuant to which our board of directors may cause the substantial dilution of the holdings of any person that attempts to acquire us without the approval of our board of directors. In addition, our respective lenders under our existing credit facilities covered by the Bank Agreement for the restructuring thereof and the new credit facilities will be entitled to require us to repay in full amounts outstanding under such credit facilities, if Dr. Coustas ceases to be our Chief Executive Officer or, together with members of his family and trusts for the benefit thereof, ceases to collectively own over one-third of the voting interest in our outstanding capital stock or any other person or group controls more than 20.0% of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock.
These anti-takeover provisions, including the provisions of our stockholder rights plan, could substantially impede the ability of public stockholders to benefit from a change in control and, as a result, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and your ability to realize any potential change of control premium.
We may have to pay tax on U.S.-source income, which would reduce our earnings.
Under the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, 50% of the gross shipping income of a ship owning or chartering corporation, such as ourselves, 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 as such is subject to a 4% U.S. federal income tax without allowance for deduction, unless that corporation qualifies for exemption from tax under Section 883 of the Code and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder.
Other than with respect to four of our vessel-owning subsidiaries, as to which we are uncertain whether they qualify for this statutory tax exemption, we believe that we and our subsidiaries currently qualify for this statutory tax exemption and we currently intend to take that position for U.S. federal
29
income tax reporting purposes. However, there are factual circumstances beyond our control that could cause us or our subsidiaries to fail to qualify for the benefit of this tax exemption and thus to be subject to U.S. federal income tax on U.S.-source shipping income. There can be no assurance that we or any of our subsidiaries will qualify for this tax exemption for any year. For example, even assuming, as we expect will be the case, that our shares are regularly and primarily traded on an established securities market in the United States, if shareholders each of whom owns, actually or under applicable attribution rules, 5% or more of our shares own, in the aggregate, 50% or more of our shares, then we and our subsidiaries will generally not be eligible for the Section 883 exemption unless we can establish, in accordance with specified ownership certification procedures, either (i) that a sufficient number of the shares in the closely-held block are owned, directly or under the applicable attribution rules, by "qualified shareholders" (generally, individuals resident in certain non-U.S. jurisdictions) so that the shares in the closely-held block that are not so owned could not constitute 50% or more of our shares for more than half of the days in the relevant tax year or (ii) that qualified shareholders owned more than 50% of our shares for at least half of the days in the relevant taxable year. There can be no assurance that we will be able to establish such ownership by qualified shareholders for any tax year. In connection with the four vessel-owning subsidiaries referred to above, we note that qualification under Section 883 will depend in part upon the ownership, directly or under the applicable attribution rules, of preferred shares issued by such subsidiaries as to which we are not the direct or indirect owner of record.
If we or our subsidiaries are not entitled to the exemption under Section 883 for any taxable year, we or our subsidiaries would be subject for those years to a 4% U.S. federal income tax on our gross U.S. source shipping income. The imposition of this taxation could have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased earnings available for distribution to our stockholders. A number of our charters contain provisions that obligate the charterers to reimburse us for the 4% gross basis tax on our U.S. source shipping income.
If we were treated as a "passive foreign investment company," certain adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences could result to U.S. stockholders.
A foreign corporation will be treated as a "passive foreign investment company," or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes if at least 75% of its gross income for any taxable year consists of certain types of "passive income," or 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." 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 that 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 does not constitute "passive income." In general, U.S. stockholders of a PFIC are subject to a disadvantageous U.S. federal income tax regime with respect to 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. If we are treated as a PFIC for any taxable year, we will provide information to U.S. stockholders to enable them to make certain elections to alleviate certain of the adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences that would arise as a result of holding an interest in a PFIC.
While there are legal uncertainties involved in this determination, including as a result of a recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Tidewater Inc. and Subsidiaries v. United States, 565 F.3d 299 (5th Cir. 2009) which held that income derived from certain time chartering activities should be treated as rental income rather than services income for purposes of the foreign sales corporation rules under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, we believe we should not be treated as a PFIC for the taxable year ended December 31, 2010. However, if the principles of the Tidewater decision were applicable to our time charters, we would likely be treated as a PFIC.
30
Moreover, there is no assurance that the nature of our assets, income and operations will not change or that we can avoid being treated as a PFIC for subsequent years.
The enactment of proposed legislation could affect whether dividends paid by us constitute qualified dividend income eligible for the preferential rate.
Legislation has been introduced that would deny the preferential rate of federal income tax currently imposed on qualified dividend income with respect to dividends received from a non-U.S. corporation, unless the non-U.S. corporation either is eligible for benefits of a comprehensive income tax treaty with the United States or is created or organized under the laws of a foreign country which has a comprehensive income tax system. Because the Marshall Islands has not entered into a comprehensive income tax treaty with the United States and imposes only limited taxes on corporations organized under its laws, it is unlikely that we could satisfy either of these requirements. It is not possible at this time to predict with certainty whether or in what form the proposed legislation will be enacted.
If the regulations regarding the exemption from Liberian taxation for non-resident corporations issued by the Liberian Ministry of Finance were found to be invalid, the net income and cash flows of our Liberian subsidiaries and therefore our net income and cash flows, would be materially reduced.
A number of our subsidiaries are incorporated under the laws of the Republic of Liberia. The Republic of Liberia enacted a new income tax act effective as of January 1, 2001 (the "New Act") which does not distinguish between the taxation of "non-resident" Liberian corporations, such as our Liberian subsidiaries, which conduct no business in Liberia and were wholly exempt from taxation under the income tax law previously in effect since 1977, and "resident" Liberian corporations which conduct business in Liberia and are, and were under the prior law, subject to taxation.
In 2004, the Liberian Ministry of Finance issued regulations exempting non-resident corporations engaged in international shipping, such as our Liberian subsidiaries, from Liberian taxation under the New Act retroactive to January 1, 2001. It is unclear whether these regulations, which ostensibly conflict with the express terms of the New Act adopted by the Liberian legislature, are valid. However, the Liberian Ministry of Justice issued an opinion that the new regulations are a valid exercise of the regulatory authority of the Ministry of Finance. The Liberian Ministry of Finance has not at any time since January 1, 2001 sought to collect taxes from any of our Liberian subsidiaries.
If our Liberian subsidiaries were subject to Liberian income tax under the New Act, they would be subject to tax at a rate of 35% on their worldwide income. As a result, their, and subsequently our, net income and cash flows would be materially reduced. In addition, as the ultimate stockholder of the Liberian subsidiaries, we would be subject to Liberian withholding tax on dividends paid by our Liberian subsidiaries at rates ranging from 15% to 20%, which would limit our access to funds generated by the operations of our subsidiaries and further reduce our income and cash flows.
Item 4. Information on the Company
History and Development of the Company
Danaos Corporation is an international owner of containerships, chartering its vessels to many of the world's largest liner companies. We are a corporation domesticated in the Republic of The Marshall Islands on October 7, 2005, under the Marshall Islands Business Corporations Act, after having been incorporated as a Liberian company in 1998 in connection with the consolidation of our assets under Danaos Holdings Limited. In connection with our domestication in the Marshall Islands we changed our name from Danaos Holdings Limited to Danaos Corporation. Our manager, Danaos Shipping Company Limited, or Danaos Shipping, was founded by Dimitris Coustas in 1972 and since that time it has continuously provided seaborne transportation services under the management of the
31
Coustas family. Dr. John Coustas, our chief executive officer, assumed responsibility for our management in 1987. Dr. Coustas has focused our business on chartering containerships to liner companies and has overseen the expansion of our fleet from three multi-purpose vessels in 1987 to the 52 containerships comprising our fleet as of March 31, 2011. In October 2006, we completed an initial public offering of our common stock in the United States and our common stock began trading on the New York Stock Exchange. In August 2010, we completed a common stock sale of 54,054,055 shares for $200 million and in March 2011 we agreed to issue 15 million warrants to purchase shares of our common stock, of which 14,925,130 had been issued as of the date of this annual report with the remaining 74,870 warrants expected to be issued later in 2011. Our principal executive offices are c/o Danaos Shipping Co. Ltd., 14 Akti Kondyli, 185 45 Piraeus, Greece. Our telephone number at that address is +30 210 419 6480.
Our company operates through a number of subsidiaries incorporated in Liberia and Cyprus, all of which are wholly-owned by us and either directly or indirectly owns the vessels in our fleet. A list of our active subsidiaries as of March 31, 2011, and their jurisdictions of incorporation, is set forth in Exhibit 8 to this annual report on Form 20-F.
Business Overview
We are an international owner of containerships, chartering our vessels to many of the world's largest liner companies. As of March 31, 2011, we had a fleet of 52 containerships aggregating 233,429 TEUs, making us among the largest containership charter owners in the world, based on total TEU capacity. Our strategy is to charter our containerships under multi-year, fixed-rate period charters to a diverse group of liner companies, including many of the largest such companies globally, as measured by TEU capacity. As of March 31, 2011, these customers included China Shipping, CMA-CGM, Hanjin, Hyundai, Maersk, MISC, MSC, SCI, The Containership Company ("TCC"), TS Lines, Yang Ming and ZIM Israel Integrated Shipping Services. We believe our containerships provide us with contracted stable cash flows as they are deployed under multi-year, fixed-rate charters that range from less than one to 18 years for vessels in our current fleet and our contracted newbuilding vessels.
Our Fleet
General
We deploy our containership fleet principally under multi-year charters with major liner companies that operate regularly scheduled routes between large commercial ports. As of March 31, 2011, our containership fleet was comprised of 52 containerships deployed on time charters. The average age (weighted by TEU) of the 52 vessels in our containership fleet was approximately 8.25 years as of March 31, 2011 and, upon delivery of all of our contracted vessels as of the end of the second quarter of 2012, the average age (weighted by TEU) of the 65 vessels in our containership fleet (assuming no other acquisitions or dispositions) will be approximately 6.3 years. As of March 31, 2011, the average remaining duration of the charters for our containership fleet, including our 13 contracted newbuilding vessels for each of which we have arranged charters, was 10.9 years (weighted by aggregate contracted charter hire).
32
Characteristics
The table below provides additional information about our fleet of 52 cellular containerships as of March 31, 2011.
Vessel Name
|
Year Built | Vessel Size (TEU) | Time Charter Term(1) | Expiration of Charter(1) | Charterer | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Post-Panamax |
|||||||||||||
Hanjin Germany |
2011 | 10,100 | 12 years | March 2023 | Hanjin | ||||||||
CSCL Le Havre |
2006 | 9,580 | 12 years | September 2018 | China Shipping | ||||||||
CSCL Pusan |
2006 | 9,580 | 12 years | July 2018 | China Shipping | ||||||||
CSCL America (ex MSC Baltic)(2) |
2004 | 8,468 | 12 years | September 2016 | China Shipping | ||||||||
CSCL Europe |
2004 | 8,468 | 12 years | June 2016 | China Shipping | ||||||||
CMA CGM Moliere(3) |
2009 | 6,500 | 12 years | August 2021 | CMA-CGM | ||||||||
CMA CGM Musset(3) |
2010 | 6,500 | 12 years | February 2022 | CMA-CGM | ||||||||
CMA CGM Nerval(3) |
2010 | 6,500 | 12 years | April 2022 | CMA-CGM | ||||||||
CMA CGM Rabelais(3) |
2010 | 6,500 | 12 years | June 2022 | CMA-CGM | ||||||||
CMA CGM Racine(3) |
2010 | 6,500 | 12 years | July 2022 | CMA-CGM | ||||||||
Hyundai Commodore (ex MOL Affinity)(4) |
1992 | 4,651 | 10 years | March 2013 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Hyundai Duke |
1992 | 4,651 | 10 years | February 2013 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Hyundai Federal (ex APL Confidence)(5) |
1994 | 4,651 | 6.5 years | September 2012 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Panamax |
|||||||||||||
Marathonas (ex MSC Marathon)(6) |
1991 | 4,814 | 5 years | September 2011 | Maersk | ||||||||
Maersk Messologi |
1991 | 4,814 | 5 years | September 2011 | Maersk | ||||||||
Maersk Mytilini |
1991 | 4,814 | 5 years | September 2011 | Maersk | ||||||||
YM Colombo (ex Norasia Integra)(7) |
2004 | 4,300 | 12 years | March 2019 | Yang Ming | ||||||||
YM Singapore (ex Norasia Atria)(8) |
2004 | 4,300 | 12 years | October 2019 | Yang Ming | ||||||||
YM Seattle |
2007 | 4,253 | 12 years | July 2019 | Yang Ming | ||||||||
YM Vancouver |
2007 | 4,253 | 12 years | September 2019 | Yang Ming | ||||||||
ZIM Rio Grande |
2008 | 4,253 | 12 years | May 2020 | ZIM | ||||||||
ZIM Sao Paolo |
2008 | 4,253 | 12 years | August 2020 | ZIM | ||||||||
ZIM Kingston |
2008 | 4,253 | 12 years | September 2020 | ZIM | ||||||||
ZIM Monaco |
2009 | 4,253 | 12 years | November 2020 | ZIM | ||||||||
ZIM Dalian |
2009 | 4,253 | 12 years | February 2021 | ZIM | ||||||||
ZIM Luanda |
2009 | 4,253 | 12 years | May 2021 | ZIM | ||||||||
Bunga Raya Tiga (ex Maersk Derby)(9) |
2004 | 4,253 | 2 years | February 2014 | MISC | ||||||||
Deva (ex Bunga Raya Tujuh)(10) |
2004 | 4,253 | 9 years | December 2013 | Maersk | ||||||||
M/V Honour (ex Al Rayyan)(11) |
1989 | 3,908 | 1 year | January 2012 | MSC | ||||||||
YM Yantian |
1989 | 3,908 | 5 years | July 2011 | Yang Ming | ||||||||
Hanjin Buenos Aires |
2010 | 3,400 | 10 years | March 2020 | Hanjin | ||||||||
SCI Pride (ex YM Milano)(17) |
1988 | 3,129 | 2 years | July 2012 | SCI | ||||||||
Lotus (ex CMA CGM Lotus)(12) |
1988 | 3,098 | 1 year | June 2011 | MSC | ||||||||
Independence (ex CMA CGM Vanille)(13) |
1986 | 3,045 | 1 year | October 2011 | MSC | ||||||||
Henry (ex CMA CGM Passiflore)(14) |
1986 | 3,039 | 1 year | July 2011 | TSL | ||||||||
Jiangsu Dragon(ex CMA CGM Elbe)(18) |
1991 | 2,917 | 1 year | June 2011 | TCC | ||||||||
California Dragon (ex CMA CGM Kalamata)(19) |
1991 | 2,917 | 1 year | June 2011 | TCC | ||||||||
Shenzhen Dragon (ex CMA CGM Komodo)(20) |
1991 | 2,917 | 1 year | June 2011 | TCC | ||||||||
Hyundai Advance |
1997 | 2,200 | 10 years | June 2017 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Hyundai Future |
1997 | 2,200 | 10 years | August 2017 | Hyundai |
33
Vessel Name
|
Year Built | Vessel Size (TEU) | Time Charter Term(1) | Expiration of Charter(1) | Charterer | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hyundai Sprinter |
1997 | 2,200 | 10 years | August 2017 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Hyundai Stride |
1997 | 2,200 | 10 years | July 2017 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Hyundai Progress |
1998 | 2,200 | 10 years | December 2017 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Hyundai Bridge |
1998 | 2,200 | 10 years | January 2018 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Hyundai Highway |
1998 | 2,200 | 10 years | January 2018 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Hyundai Vladivostok |
1997 | 2,200 | 10 years | May 2017 | Hyundai | ||||||||
Hanjin Montreal (ex Montreal Senator)(15) |
1984 | 2,130 | 4 years | March 2012 | Hanjin | ||||||||
Hanjin Santos |
2010 | 3,400 | 10 years | May 2020 | Hanjin | ||||||||
Hanjin Versailles |
2010 | 3,400 | 10 years | August 2020 | Hanjin | ||||||||
Hanjin Algeciras |
2011 | 3,400 | 10 years | November 2020 | Hanjin | ||||||||
Bareboat Charter Term(1) |
|||||||||||||
YM Mandate |
2010 | 6,500 | 18 years | January 2028 | Yang Ming | ||||||||
YM Maturity |
2010 | 6,500 | 18 years | April 2028 | Yang Ming |
34
Our contracted vessels are being built based upon designs from Hyundai Samho Heavy Industries Co. Limited ("Hyundai Samho"), Hanjin and Shanghai Jiangnan Changxing Heavy Industry Company Limited ("Shanghai Jiangnan"). In some cases designs are enhanced by us and our manager, Danaos Shipping, in consultation with the charterers of the vessels and two classification societies, Det Norske Veritas and the Lloyds Register of Shipping. These designs, which include certain technological advances and customized modifications, make the containerships efficient with respect to both voyage speed and loading capability when compared to many vessels operating in the containership sector.
The specifications of our 13 contracted vessels under construction as of March 31, 2011 are as follows:
Name
|
Year Built |
Vessel Size (TEU) |
Shipyard | Expected Delivery Period |
Time Charter Term(1) |
Charterer | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hull No. S-462(3) |
2011 | 10,100 | Hyundai Samho | 2nd Quarter 2011 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
Hull No. S-463 |
2011 | 10,100 | Hyundai Samho | 2nd Quarter 2011 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
HN N-223 |
2011 | 3,400 | Hanjin | 2nd Quarter 2011 | 10 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
HN Z00001 |
2011 | 8,530 | Shanghai Jiangnan | 2nd Quarter 2011 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
HN Z00002 |
2011 | 8,530 | Shanghai Jiangnan | 3rd Quarter 2011 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
HN Z00003 |
2011 | 8,530 | Shanghai Jiangnan | 3rd Quarter 2011 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
HN Z00004 |
2011 | 8,530 | Shanghai Jiangnan | 3rd Quarter 2011 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
HULL 1022A |
2011 | 8,530 | Shanghai Jiangnan | 4th Quarter 2011 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
Hull No. S-456 |
2012 | 12,600 | Hyundai Samho | 1st Quarter 2012 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
Hull No. S-457 |
2012 | 12,600 | Hyundai Samho | 1st Quarter 2012 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
Hull No. S-458 |
2012 | 12,600 | Hyundai Samho | 2nd Quarter 2012 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
Hull No. S-459 |
2012 | 12,600 | Hyundai Samho | 2nd Quarter 2012 | 12 years | n/a | (2) | |||||||||
Hull No. S-460 |
2012 | 12,600 | Hyundai Samho | 2nd Quarter 2012 | 12 years | n/a | (2) |
35
Charterers
As the container shipping industry has grown, the major liner companies have increasingly contracted for containership capacity. As of March 31, 2011, our diverse group of customers in the containership sector included China Shipping, CMA-CGM, Hanjin, Hyundai, Maersk, MISC, MSC, SCI, The Containership Company ("TCC"), TS Lines, Yang Ming and ZIM Israel Integrated Shipping Services. In addition, we have arranged time charters ranging from 10 to 12 years with CMA-CGM and two other accredited charterers for our contracted vessels.
The containerships in our combined containership fleet are or, upon their delivery to us, will be deployed under multi-year, fixed-rate time charters having initial terms that range from less than one to 18 years. These charters expire at staggered dates ranging from the second quarter of 2011 to the second quarter of 2028, with no more than 12 scheduled to expire in any 12-month period. The staggered expiration of the multi-year, fixed-rate charters for our vessels is both a strategy pursued by our management and a result of the growth in our fleet over the past several years. Under our time charters, the charterer pays voyage expenses such as port, canal and fuel costs, other than brokerage and address commissions paid by us, and we pay for vessel operating expenses, which include crew costs, provisions, deck and engine stores, lubricating oil, insurance, maintenance and repairs. We are also responsible for each vessel's intermediate and special survey costs.
Under the time charters, when a vessel is "off-hire" or not available for service, the charterer is generally not required to pay the hire rate, and we are responsible for all costs. A vessel generally will be deemed to be off-hire if there is an occurrence preventing the full working of the vessel due to, among other things, operational deficiencies, drydockings for repairs, maintenance or inspection, equipment breakdown, delays due to accidents, crewing strikes, labor boycotts, noncompliance with government water pollution regulations or alleged oil spills, arrests or seizures by creditors or our failure to maintain the vessel in compliance with required specifications and standards. In addition, under our time charters, if any vessel is off-hire for more than a certain amount of time (generally between 10-20 days), the charterer has a right to terminate the charter agreement for that vessel. Charterers also have the right to terminate the time charters in various other circumstances, including but not limited to, outbreaks of war or a change in ownership of the vessel's owner or manager without the charterer's approval.
Leasing ArrangementsCSCL Europe, CSCL America (ex MSC Baltic), Bunga Raya Tiga (ex Maersk Derby), Deva (ex Bunga Raya Tujuh), CSCL Pusan (ex HN 1559) and CSCL Le Havre (ex HN 1561)
On March 7, 2008, we exercised our right to have our wholly-owned subsidiaries replace a subsidiary of Lloyds Bank as direct owners of the CSCL Europe, the CSCL America (ex MSC Baltic), the Bunga Raya Tiga (ex Maersk Derby), the Deva (ex Bunga Raya Tujuh) , the CSCL Pusan (ex HN 1559) and the CSCL Le Havre (ex HN 1561) pursuant to the terms of the leasing arrangements, as restructured on October 5, 2007, we had in place with such subsidiaries of Lloyds Bank, Allco Finance Limited, a U.K.-based financing company, and Allco Finance UK Limited, a U.K.-based financing company. We had during the course of these leasing arrangements and continue to have full operational control over these vessels and we consider each of these vessels to be an asset for our financial reporting purposes and each vessel is reflected as such in our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere herein.
On July 19, 2006, legislation was enacted in the United Kingdom that would have resulted in a claw-back or recapture of certain of the benefits that were expected to be available to the counterparties to the original leasing transactions at their inception. Accordingly, the put option price that was part of the original leasing arrangements would have been increased to compensate the counterparties for the loss of these benefits. In 2006 we recognized an expense of $12.8 million, which
36
is the amount by which we expected the increase in the put price to exceed the cash benefits we had expected to receive, and had expected to retain, from these transactions. The October 5, 2007 restructuring of these leasing arrangements eliminated this put option and the $12.8 million expense recorded in 2006, was reversed and recognized in earnings in the fourth quarter of 2007.
Purchase Options
The charters with respect to the CMA CGM Moliere, the CMA CGM Musset, the CMA CGM Nerval, the HN CMA CGM Rabelais and the CMA CGM Racine include an option for the charterer, CMA-CGM, to purchase the vessels eight years after the commencement of the respective charters, which, based on the respective expected delivery dates for these vessels, are expected to fall in September 2017, March 2018, May 2018, July 2018 and August 2018, respectively, each for $78.0 million. In each case, the option to purchase the vessel must be exercised 15 months prior to the acquisition dates described in the preceding sentence. The $78.0 million option prices reflect an estimate of the fair market value of the vessels at the time we would be required to sell the vessels upon exercise of the options. If CMA-CGM were to exercise these options with respect to any or all of these vessels, the expected size of our combined containership fleet would be reduced, and as a result our anticipated level of revenues after such sale would be reduced.
Pursuant to the exercises of similar options, contained in the respective charters, to purchase the APL England, the APL Scotland, the APL Holland and the APL Belgium, we delivered such vessels to their charterer, APL-NOL, on March 7, 2007, June 22, 2007, August 3, 2007 and January 15, 2008, respectively, each for $44.5 million.
Discontinued Drybulk Operations
In August 2006, we agreed to sell the six drybulk carriers in our fleet, with an aggregate capacity of 342,158 dwt, for an aggregate of $143.5 million. In the first quarter of 2007, we delivered five of these vessels to the purchaser, which is not affiliated with us, for an aggregate of $118.0 million and the remaining vessel to the purchaser for $25.5 million when its charter expired in the second quarter of 2007.
Management of Our Fleet
Our chief executive officer, chief operating officer, chief financial officer, deputy chief financial officer and deputy chief operating officer provide strategic management for our company while these officers also supervise, in conjunction with our board of directors, the management of these operations by Danaos Shipping, our manager. We have a management agreement pursuant to which our manager and its affiliates provide us and our subsidiaries with technical, administrative and certain commercial services for an initial term that expired on December 31, 2008, with automatic one year renewals for an additional 12 years at our option. On February 12, 2009, we signed an addendum to the management contract changing the management fees we pay, effective January 1, 2009 and, on February 8, 2010, we signed an addendum to the management contract adjusting the management fees, effective January 1, 2010. Our manager reports to us and our board of directors through our chief executive officer, chief operating officer and chief financial officer.
Our manager is regarded as an innovator in operational and technological aspects in the international shipping community. Danaos Shipping's strong technological capabilities derive from employing highly educated professionals, its participation and assumption of a leading role in European Community research projects related to shipping, and its close affiliation to Danaos Management Consultants, a leading ship-management software and services company. Danaos Management Consultants provides software services to two of our charterers, CMA-CGM and Maersk.
37
Danaos Shipping achieved early ISM certification of its container fleet in 1995, well ahead of the deadline, and was the first Greek company to receive such certification from Det Norske Veritas, a leading classification society. In 2004, Danaos Shipping received the Lloyd's List Technical Innovation Award for advances in internet-based telecommunication methods for vessels. Danaos Shipping maintains the quality of its service by controlling directly the selection and employment of seafarers through its crewing offices in Piraeus, Greece as well as in Odessa and Mariupol in the Ukraine. Investments in new facilities in Greece by Danaos Shipping enable enhanced training of seafarers and highly reliable infrastructure and services to the vessels.
Historically, Danaos Shipping only infrequently managed vessels other than those in our fleet and currently it does not actively manage any other company's vessels other than providing certain management services to Castella Shipping Inc., in which our chief executive officer has an investment. Danaos Shipping also does not arrange the employment of other vessels and has agreed that, during the term of our management agreement, it will not provide any management services to any other entity without our prior written approval, other than with respect to Castella Shipping Inc. and other entities controlled by Dr. Coustas, our chief executive officer, which do not operate within the containership (larger than 2,500 TEUs) or drybulk sectors of the shipping industry or in the circumstances described below. Other than Castella Shipping Inc., Dr. Coustas does not currently control any such vessel-owning entity. We believe we will derive significant benefits from our exclusive relationship with Danaos Shipping.
Dr. Coustas has also personally agreed to the same restrictions on the provision, directly or indirectly, of management services during the term of our management agreement. In addition, our chief executive officer (other than in his capacities with us) and our manager have separately agreed not, during the term of our management agreement and for one year thereafter, to engage, directly or indirectly, in (i) the ownership or operation of containerships of larger than 2,500 TEUs or (ii) the ownership or operation of any drybulk carriers or (iii) the acquisition of or investment in any business involved in the ownership or operation of containerships of larger than 2,500 TEUs or any drybulk carriers. Notwithstanding these restrictions, if our independent directors decline the opportunity to acquire any such containerships or to acquire or invest in any such business, our chief executive officer will have the right to make, directly or indirectly, any such acquisition or investment during the four-month period following such decision by our independent directors, so long as such acquisition or investment is made on terms no more favorable than those offered to us. In this case, our chief executive officer and our manager will be permitted to provide management services to such vessels.
Danaos Shipping manages our fleet under a management agreement whose initial term expired at the end of 2008. The management agreement automatically renews for a one-year periods if we do not provide 12 months' notice of termination. During the initial term of the management agreement, for providing its commercial, chartering and administrative services our manager received a fee of $500 per day and for its technical management of our ships, our manager received a management fee of $250 per vessel per day for vessels on bareboat charter and $500 per vessel per day for the remaining vessels in our fleet, each pro rated for the number of calendar days we own each vessel. These fees are now adjusted annually by agreement between us and our manager. For its chartering services rendered to us by its Hamburg-based office, our manager also receives a commission of 0.75% on all freight, charter hire, ballast bonus and demurrage for each vessel. Further, our manager receives a commission of 0.5% based on the contract price of any vessel bought or sold by it on our behalf, excluding newbuilding contracts. We also paid our manager a flat fee of $400,000 per newbuilding vessel, which we capitalized, for the on premises supervision of our newbuilding contracts by selected engineers and others of its staff.
On February 12, 2009, we signed an addendum to the management contract adjusting the management fees, effective January 1, 2009, to a fee of $575 per day for commercial, chartering and administrative services, a fee of $290 per vessel per day for vessels on bareboat charter and $575 per
38
vessel per day for vessels on time charter and a flat fee of $725,000 per newbuilding vessel for the supervision of newbuilding contracts. All commissions to the manager remained unchanged.
On February 8, 2010, we signed an addendum to the management contract adjusting the management fees, effective January 1, 2010, to a fee of $675 per day for commercial, chartering and administrative services, a fee of $340 per vessel per day for vessels on bareboat charter and $675 per vessel per day for vessels on time charter. All commissions to the manager remained unchanged.
Competition
We operate in markets that are highly competitive and based primarily on supply and demand. Generally, we compete for charters based upon price, customer relationships, operating expertise, professional reputation and size, age and condition of the vessel. Competition for providing containership services comes from a number of experienced shipping companies. In the containership sector, these companies include Zodiac Maritime, Seaspan Corporation and Costamare Inc. A number of our competitors in the containership sector have been financed by the German KG (Kommanditgesellschaft) system, which was based on tax benefits provided to private investors. While the German tax law has been amended to significantly restrict the tax benefits available to taxpayers who invest after November 10, 2005, the tax benefits afforded to all investors in the KG-financed entities will continue to be significant and such entities will continue to be attractive investments. These tax benefits allow these KG-financed entities to be more flexible in offering lower charter rates to liner companies.
The containership sector of the international shipping industry is characterized by the significant time necessary to develop the operating expertise and professional reputation necessary to obtain and retain customers and, in the past a relative scarcity of secondhand containerships, which necessitated reliance on newbuildings which can take a number of years to complete. We focus on larger TEU capacity containerships, which we believe have fared better than smaller vessels during global downturns in the containership sector. We believe larger containerships, even older containerships if well maintained, provide us with increased flexibility and more stable cash flows than smaller TEU capacity containerships.
Crewing and Employees
We have four shore-based employees, our chief executive officer, our chief financial officer, our chief operating officer and our deputy chief financial officer, and have a services agreement with our deputy chief operating officer. As of December 31, 2010, 1,099 people served on board the vessels in our fleet and Danaos Shipping, our manager, employed approximately 125 people, all of whom were shore-based. In addition, our manager is responsible for recruiting, either directly or through a crewing agent, the senior officers and all other crew members for our vessels and is reimbursed by us for all crew wages and other crew relating expenses. We believe the streamlining of crewing arrangements through our manager ensures that all of our vessels will be crewed with experienced crews that have the qualifications and licenses required by international regulations and shipping conventions.
Permits and Authorizations
We are required by various governmental and other agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses and certificates with respect to our vessels. The kinds of permits, licenses and certificates required by governmental and other agencies depend upon several factors, including the commodity being transported, the waters in which the vessel operates, the nationality of the vessel's crew and the age of a vessel. All permits, licenses and certificates currently required to permit our vessels to operate have been obtained. Additional laws and regulations, environmental or otherwise, may be adopted which could limit our ability to do business or increase the cost of doing business.
39
Inspection by Classification Societies
Every seagoing vessel must be "classed" by a classification society. The classification society certifies that the vessel is "in class," signifying that the vessel has been built and maintained 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, regular and extraordinary surveys of hull and 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, on 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 on the ship's hull and machinery, including the electrical plant, and on any special equipment classed at the intervals indicated by the character of classification for the hull. During 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 funds 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 is granted, a shipowner 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. At an owner's application, 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.
The following table lists the next drydockings and special surveys scheduled for the vessels in our current containership fleet:
Vessel Name
|
Next Survey | Next Drydocking | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Hanjin Montreal | June 2012 | April 2011 | ||
Maersk Mytilini | March 2013 | April 2011 | ||
Hyundai Commodore | June 2012 | July 2011 | ||
Jiangsu Dragon | August 2011 | August 2011 | ||
Shenzhen Dragon | August 2011 | August 2011 | ||
CSCL Pusan | November 2011 | September 2011 | ||
CSCL Le Havre | November 2011 | November 2011 | ||
Marathonas | June 2012 | April 2012 | ||
Hyundai Vladivostok | July 2012 | July 2012 | ||
Hyundai Federal | July 2012 | July 2012 | ||
Hyundai Advance | October 2012 | July 2012 |
40
Vessel Name
|
Next Survey | Next Drydocking | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Hyundai Stride | September 2012 | September 2012 | ||
YM Seattle | September 2012 | September 2012 | ||
Hyundai Future | September 2012 | September 2012 | ||
YM Vancouver | November 2012 | November 2012 | ||
Hyundai Sprinter | December 2012 | December 2012 | ||
Hyundai Progress | May 2011 | February 2013 | ||
Hyundai Highway | June 2011 | March 2013 | ||
Hyundai Bridge | March 2013 | March 2013 | ||
Zim Rio Grande | October 2011 | July 2013 | ||
California Dragon | June 2013 | July 2013 | ||
Lotus | April 2014 | July 2013 | ||
SCI Pride | August 2013 | August 2013 | ||
Henry | October 2011 | August 2013 | ||
Zim Sao Paolo | December 2011 | September 2013 | ||
Independence | March 2014 | October 2013 | ||
Hyundai Duke | October 2012 | October 2013 | ||
Zim Kingston | February 2012 | November 2013 | ||
Zim Monaco | April 2012 | January 2014 | ||
CSCL Europe | November 2011 | February 2014 | ||
Deva | June 2012 | February 2014 | ||
Honour | February 2012 | February 2014 | ||
YM Yantian | October 2012 | February 2014 | ||
YM Colombo | June 2012 | March 2014 | ||
Zim Dalian | June 2012 | March 2014 | ||
Bunga Raya Tiga | July 2012 | April 2014 | ||
Zim Luanda | September 2012 | June 2014 | ||
CSCL America | February 2012 | August 2014 | ||
CMA CGM Moliere | December 2012 | September 2014 | ||
YM Singapore | December 2012 | September 2014 | ||
CMA CGM Musset | June 2013 | March 2015 | ||
CMA CGM Nerval | August 2013 | May 2015 | ||
Hanjin Buenos Aires | August 2013 | May 2015 | ||
CMA CGM Rabelais | October 2013 | July 2015 | ||
Hanjin Santos | October 2013 | July 2015 | ||
CMA CGM Racine | November 2013 | August 2015 | ||
Hanjin Versailles | January 2014 | October 2015 | ||
Hanjin Algeciras | April 2014 | January 2016 | ||
Maersk Messologi | February 2014 | February 2016 | ||
Hanjin Germany | June 2014 | March 2016 |
All areas subject to surveys as defined by the classification society are required to be surveyed at least once per class period, unless shorter intervals between surveys are otherwise prescribed. The period between two subsequent surveys of each area must not exceed five years. Vessels under bareboat charter, such as the YM Mandate, and YM Maturity, are drydocked by their charterers.
Most vessels are also drydocked every 30 to 36 months for inspection of their underwater parts and for repairs related to such 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.
Most insurance underwriters make it a condition for insurance coverage that a vessel be certified as "in class" by a classification society which is a member of the International Association of
41
Classification Societies. All of our vessels are certified as being "in class" by Lloyds Register of Shipping, Bureau Veritas, NKK, Det Norske Veritas, the American Bureau of Shipping or RINA SpA.
Risk of Loss and Liability Insurance
General
The operation of any vessel includes risks such as mechanical failure, collision, property loss, cargo loss or damage and business interruption due to political circumstances in foreign countries, hostilities and labor strikes. In addition, there is always an inherent possibility of marine disaster, including oil spills and other environmental mishaps, and the liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade. The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, which imposes virtually unlimited liability upon owners, operators and demise charterers of vessels trading in the United States exclusive economic zone for certain oil pollution accidents in the United States, has made liability insurance more expensive for shipowners and operators trading in the United States market.
While we maintain hull and machinery insurance, war risks insurance, protection and indemnity coverage for our containership fleet in amounts that we believe to be prudent to cover normal risks in our operations, we may not be able to maintain this level of coverage throughout a vessel's useful life. Furthermore, while we believe that our insurance coverage will be adequate, not all risks can be insured, and there can 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.
Dr. John Coustas, our chief executive officer, is a member of the Board of Directors of The Swedish Club, our primary provider of insurance, including a substantial portion of our hull & machinery, war risk and protection and indemnity insurance.
Hull & Machinery, Loss of Hire and War Risks Insurance
We maintain marine hull and machinery and war risks insurance, which covers the risk of particular average, general average, 4/4ths collision liability, contact with fixed and floating objects (FFO) and actual or constructive total loss in accordance with Swedish conditions for all of our vessels. Our vessels will each be covered up to at least their fair market value after meeting certain deductibles per incident per vessel.
We carry a minimum loss of hire coverage only with respect to the CSCL America (ex MSC Baltic), the CSCL Europe, the CSCL Pusan (ex HN 1559) and the CSCL Le Havre (ex HN 1561) to cover standard requirements of KEXIM, the bank providing financing for our acquisition of these vessels. We do not and will not obtain loss of hire insurance covering the loss of revenue during extended off-hire periods for the other vessels in our fleet because we believe that this type of coverage is not economical and is of limited value to us, in part because historically our fleet has had a very limited number of off-hire days.
Protection and Indemnity Insurance
Protection and indemnity ("P&I") insurance covers our third-party and crew liabilities in connection with our shipping activities. This includes third-party liability, crew liability and other related expenses resulting from the injury or death of crew, passengers and other third parties, the loss or damage to cargo, third-party 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 protection and indemnity insurance, other than our 4/4ths collision and FFO insurance (which is covered under our hull insurance policy), is provided by mutual protection and indemnity associations, or P&I associations. Insurance provided by P&I associations is a form of mutual indemnity insurance. Unless otherwise provided by the international conventions that
42
limit the liability of shipowners and subject to the "capping" discussed below, our coverage under insurance provided by the P&I associations, except for pollution, will be unlimited.
Our protection and indemnity insurance coverage in accordance with the International Group of P&I Club Agreement for pollution will be $1.0 billion per vessel per incident. Our P&I Excess war risk coverage limit is $500.0 million and in respect of certain war and terrorist risks the liabilities arising from Bio-Chem etc, the limit is $30.0 million, with a sub-limit of $2.0 billion for passenger claims only. The fourteen P&I associations that comprise the International Group insure approximately 90% of the world's commercial blue-water tonnage and have entered into a pooling agreement to reinsure each association's liabilities. As a member of a P&I association that is a member of the International Group, we will be subject to calls payable to the associations based on the International Group's claim records as well as the claim records of all other members of the individual associations.
Environmental and Other Regulations
Government regulation significantly affects the ownership and operation of our vessels. They are subject to international conventions, national, state and local laws, regulations and standards in force in international waters and the countries in which our vessels may operate or are registered, including those governing the management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, the cleanup of oil spills and other contamination, air emissions, wastewater discharges and ballast water management. These laws and regulations include the U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), the U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the U.S. Clean Water Act, the International Convention for Prevention of Pollution from Ships, regulations adopted by the IMO and the European Union, various volatile organic compound air emission requirements and various Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) amendments, as well as other regulations described below. Compliance with these laws, regulations and other requirements entails significant expense, including vessel modifications and implementation of certain operating procedures.
A variety of governmental and private entities subject our vessels to both scheduled and unscheduled inspections. These entities include the local port authorities (U.S. Coast Guard, harbor master or equivalent), classification societies, flag state administration (country of registry), charterers and, particularly, terminal operators. Certain of these entities require us to obtain permits, licenses, certificates and financial assurances 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 operation of one or more of our 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 will emphasize operational safety, quality maintenance, continuous training of our officers and crews and compliance with U.S. and international regulations. We believe that the operation of our vessels is in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations. However, because such laws and regulations are frequently changed and may impose increasingly stricter requirements, such future requirements may limit our ability to do business, increase our operating costs, force the early retirement of our vessels, and/or affect their resale value, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, a future serious marine incident that causes significant adverse environmental impact, such as the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, could result in additional legislation or regulation that could negatively affect our profitability.
43
Environmental RegulationInternational Maritime Organization ("IMO")
Our vessels are subject to standards imposed by the IMO (the United Nations agency for maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by ships). The IMO has adopted regulations that are designed to reduce pollution in international waters, both from accidents and from routine operations. These regulations address oil discharges, ballasting and unloading operations, sewage, garbage, and air emissions. For example, Annex III of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, or MARPOL, regulates the transportation of marine pollutants, and imposes standards on packing, marking, labeling, documentation, stowage, quantity limitations and pollution prevention. These requirements have been expanded by the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code, which imposes additional standards for all aspects of the transportation of dangerous goods and marine pollutants by sea.
In September 1997, the IMO adopted Annex VI to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships to address air pollution from vessels. Annex VI, which came into effect on May 19, 2005, sets limits on sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from vessel exhausts and prohibits deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances, such as chlorofluorocarbons. Annex VI also includes a global cap on the sulfur content of fuel oil and allows for special areas to be established with more stringent controls on sulfur emissions. Annex VI has been ratified by some, but not all IMO member states, including the Marshall Islands. Pursuant to a Marine Notice issued by the Marshall Islands Maritime Administrator as revised in March 2005, vessels flagged by the Marshall Islands that are subject to Annex VI must, if built before the effective date, obtain an International Air Pollution Prevention Certificate evidencing compliance with Annex VI by the first dry docking after May 19, 2005, but no later than May 19, 2008. All vessels subject to Annex VI and built after May 19, 2005 must also have this Certificate. We have obtained International Air Pollution Prevention certificates for all of our vessels. Amendments to Annex VI regarding particulate matter, nitrogen oxides and sulfur oxide emission standards entered into force in July 2010. The amendments provide for a progressive reduction in sulfur oxide (SOx) emissions from ships, with the global sulfur cap reduced initially to 3.50% (from the current 4.50%), effective from 1 January 2012; then progressively to 0.50%, effective from 1 January 2020, subject to a feasibility review to be completed no later than 2018. The Annex VI amendments also establish tiers of stringent nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions standards for new marine engines, depending on their dates of installation. The United States ratified the amendments, and all vessels subject to Annex VI must comply with the amended requirements when entering U.S. ports or operating in U.S. waters. Additionally, more stringent emission standards apply in coastal areas designated by MEPC as Emission Control Areas (ECAs), such as the recently designated area extending 200 nautical miles from the Atlantic/Gulf and Pacific Coasts of the United States and Canada, the Hawaiian Islands, and the French territories of St. Pierre and Miquelon. We may incur costs to install control equipment on our engines in order to comply with the new requirements. Other ECAs may be designated, and the jurisdictions in which our vessels operate may adopt more stringent emission standards independent of IMO.
The operation of our vessels is also affected by the requirements set forth in the IMO's International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and Pollution Prevention, or the ISM Code, which was adopted in July 1998. The ISM Code requires shipowners 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 and describing procedures for dealing with emergencies. 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 code requirements for a Safety Management System. No vessel can obtain a certificate unless its operator has been awarded a document of compliance, issued by each flag state, under the ISM Code. The failure of a shipowner or bareboat charterer to comply with the ISM Code may subject such party to increased liability, decrease available insurance coverage
44
for the affected vessels and result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports. Currently, each of the vessels in our fleet is ISM code-certified. However, there can be no assurance that such certifications will be maintained indefinitely.
In 2001, the IMO adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, or the Bunker Convention, which imposes strict liability on ship owners for pollution damage in jurisdictional waters of ratifying states caused by discharges of bunker oil. The Bunker Convention also requires registered owners of ships over a certain size 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). The Bunker Convention entered into force on November 21, 2008. Our entire fleet has been issued a certificate attesting that insurance is in force in accordance with the insurance provisions of the Convention.
Environmental RegulationThe U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 ("OPA")
OPA established an extensive regulatory and liability regime for the protection and cleanup of the environment from oil spills. It applies to discharges of any oil from a vessel, including discharges of fuel oil and lubricants. OPA affects all owners and operators whose vessels trade in the United States, its territories and possessions or whose vessels operate in U.S. waters, which include the United States' territorial sea and its two hundred nautical mile exclusive economic zone. While we do not carry oil as cargo, we do carry fuel oil (or bunkers) in our vessels, making our vessels subject to the OPA requirements.
Under OPA, vessel owners, operators and bareboat charterers are "responsible parties" and are jointly, severally and strictly liable (unless the discharge of pollutants 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 pollutants from their vessels. OPA defines these other damages broadly to include:
OPA preserves the right to recover damages under existing law, including maritime tort law.
Effective July 31, 2009, the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) increased the limits of OPA liability to the greater of $1000 per ton or $854,400 for non-tank vessels and established a procedure for adjusting the limits for inflation every three years. These limits of liability do not apply if an incident was directly caused by violation of applicable U.S. federal safety, construction or operating regulations or by a responsible party's gross negligence or willful misconduct, or if the responsible party fails or refuses to report the incident or to cooperate and assist in connection with oil removal activities.
OPA requires owners and operators of vessels to establish and maintain with the USCG evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to meet their potential liabilities under the OPA. Under the regulations, vessel owners and operators may evidence their financial responsibility by showing proof of insurance, surety bond, self-insurance, or guaranty, and an owner or operator of a fleet of vessels is required only to demonstrate evidence of financial responsibility in an amount sufficient to cover the vessels in the fleet having the greatest maximum liability under OPA.
45
The USCG's regulations concerning certificates of financial responsibility provide, in accordance with OPA, that claimants may bring suit directly against an insurer or guarantor that furnishes certificates of financial responsibility. In the event that such insurer or guarantor is sued directly, it is prohibited from asserting any contractual defense that it may have had against the responsible party and is limited to asserting those defenses available to the responsible party and the defense that the incident was caused by the willful misconduct of the responsible party. Certain organizations, which had typically provided certificates of financial responsibility under pre-OPA 90 laws, including the major protection and indemnity organizations have declined to furnish evidence of insurance for vessel owners and operators if they are subject to direct actions or required to waive insurance policy defenses. This requirement may have the effect of limiting the availability of the type of coverage required by the USCG and could increase the costs of obtaining this insurance for us and our competitors.
The USCG's financial responsibility regulations may also be satisfied by evidence of surety bond, guaranty or by self-insurance. Under the self-insurance provisions, the shipowner or operator must have a net worth and working capital, measured in assets located in the United States against liabilities located anywhere in the world, that exceeds the applicable amount of financial responsibility. We have complied with the USCG regulations by providing a financial guaranty evidencing sufficient self-insurance.
OPA specifically permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to oil pollution incidents occurring within their boundaries, and 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 applicable state regulations in the ports where our vessels call.
We currently maintain, for each of our vessels, oil pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1 billion per incident. In addition, we carry hull and machinery and protection and indemnity insurance to cover the risks of fire and explosion. Given the relatively small amount of bunkers our vessels carry, we believe that a spill of oil from the vessels would not be catastrophic. However, under certain circumstances, fire and explosion could result in a catastrophic loss. While we believe that our present insurance coverage is adequate, not all risks can be insured, and there can 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. If the damages from a catastrophic spill exceeded our insurance coverage, it would have a severe effect on us and could possibly result in our insolvency.
Title VII of the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2004, or the CGMTA, amended OPA to require the owner or operator of any non-tank vessel of 400 gross tons or more, that carries oil of any kind as a fuel for main propulsion, including bunkers, to prepare and submit a response plan for each vessel on or before August 8, 2005. Previous law was limited to vessels that carry oil in bulk as cargo. The vessel response plans include detailed information on actions to be taken by vessel personnel to prevent or mitigate any discharge or substantial threat of such a discharge of oil from the vessel due to operational activities or casualties. We have approved response plans for each of our vessels.
Environmental RegulationCERCLA
CERCLA governs spills or releases of hazardous substances other than petroleum or petroleum products. The owner or operator of a ship, vehicle or facility from which there has been a release is liable without regard to fault for the release, and along with other specified parties may be jointly and severally liable for remedial costs. Costs recoverable under CERCLA include cleanup and removal costs, natural resource damages and governmental oversight costs. Liability under CERCLA is generally limited to the greater of $300 per gross ton or $0.5 million per vessel carrying non-hazardous substances ($5.0 million for vessels carrying hazardous substances), unless the incident is caused by
46
gross negligence, willful misconduct or a violation of certain regulations, in which case liability is unlimited. The USCG's financial responsibility regulations under OPA also require vessels to provide evidence of financial responsibility for CERCLA liability in the amount of $300 per gross ton.
Environmental RegulationThe Clean Water Act
The U.S. Clean Water Act, or CWA, prohibits the discharge of oil or hazardous substances in navigable waters 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 the more recent OPA and CERCLA, discussed above. Under U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, regulations that took effect on February 6, 2009, we are required to obtain a CWA permit regulating and authorizing any discharges of ballast water or other wastewaters incidental to our normal vessel operations if we operate within the three-mile territorial waters or inland waters of the United States. The permit, which EPA has designated as the Vessel General Permit for Discharges Incidental to the Normal Operation of Vessels, or VGP, incorporates the current U.S. Coast Guard requirements for ballast water management, as well as supplemental ballast water requirements and limits for 26 other specific discharges. Regulated vessels cannot operate in U.S. waters after September 19, 2009 unless they are covered by the VGP. To do so, vessel owners must submit a Notice of Intent, or NOI, at least 30 days before the vessel operates in U.S. waters. To comply with the VGP vessel owners and operators may have to install equipment on their vessels to treat ballast water before it is discharged or implement port facility disposal arrangements or procedures at potentially substantial cost. The VGP also requires states to certify the permit, and certain states have imposed more stringent discharge standards as a condition of their certification. Many of the VGP requirements have already been addressed in our vessels' current ISM Code SMS Plan. We have submitted NOIs for all of our vessels that operate in U.S. waters. The USCG and EPA recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding regarding enforcement of the VGP, and the USCG adopted guidelines for enforcement of the VGP that will go into effect on March 13, 2011.
Environmental RegulationThe Clean Air Act
The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the EPA to promulgate standards applicable to emissions of volatile organic compounds and other air contaminants. Our vessels are subject to CAA vapor control and recovery standards for cleaning fuel tanks and conducting other operations in regulated port areas and emissions standards for so-called "Category 3 "marine diesel engines operating in U.S. waters. The marine diesel engine emission standards are currently limited to new engines beginning with the 2004 model year. However, on April 30, 2010, EPA adopted more stringent standards for emissions of particulate matter, sulfur oxides, and nitrogen oxides and other related provisions for new Category 3 marine diesel engines installed on vessels registered or flagged in the U.S. We may incur costs to install control equipment on our vessels to comply with the new standards. Several states regulate emissions from vessel vapor control and recovery operations under federally-approved State Implementation Plans. California has adopted limits on particulate matter, sulfur oxides, and nitrogen oxides emissions from the auxiliary diesel engines of ocean-going vessels in waters within approximately 24 miles of the California coast. Compliance is to be achieved through the use of marine diesel oil with a sulfur content not exceeding .1% by weight, or marine gas oil, or through alternative means of emission control, such as the use of shore-side electrical power or exhaust emission controls. These rules were struck down by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in February 2008 on the grounds that they were preempted by the CAA, and in May 2008 California was permanently enjoined from enforcing the rules. However, the state has requested EPA to grant it a waiver under the CAA to enforce its invalidated vessel emission standards, and the Center for Biological Diversity has petitioned EPA to regulate black carbon emissions from vessels and other sources. The California Air Resources Board also adopted fuel content regulations effective July 1, 2009 that apply to all vessels sailing within 24 miles of the California coast and whose itineraries call
47
for them to enter California ports, terminal facilities or estuarine waters. If new or more stringent requirements relating to emissions from marine diesel engines or port operations by vessels are adopted by EPA or the states, compliance with these regulations could entail significant capital expenditures or otherwise increase the costs of our operations.
Environmental RegulationOther Environmental Initiatives
The EU has also adopted legislation that: requires member states to impose criminal sanctions for certain pollution events, such as the unauthorized discharge of tank washings. The European Parliament recently endorsed a European Commission proposal to criminalize certain pollution discharges from ships. If it becomes formal EU law, it will affect the operation of vessels and the liability of owners for oil and other pollutional discharges. It is difficult to predict what legislation, if any, may be promulgated by the European Union or any other country or authority.
The Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (Paris MoU) to which 27 nations are party adopted the "New Inspection Regime" (NIR) to replace the existing Port State Control system, effective January 1, 2011. The NIR is a significant departure from the previous system, as it is a risk based targeting mechanism that will reward quality shipping with a smaller inspection burden and subject high-risk ships to more in-depth and frequent inspections. The inspection record of a vessel, its age and type, the Voluntary IMO Member State Audit Scheme, and the performance of the flag State and recognized organizations are used to develop the risk profile of a vessel.
The U.S. National Invasive Species Act, or NISA, was enacted in 1996 in response to growing reports of harmful organisms being released into U.S. ports through ballast water taken on by ships in foreign ports. Under NISA, the USCG adopted regulations in July 2004 imposing mandatory ballast water management practices for all vessels equipped with ballast water tanks entering U.S. waters. These requirements can be met by performing mid-ocean ballast exchange, by retaining ballast water on board the ship, or by using environmentally sound alternative ballast water management methods approved by the USCG. (However, mid-ocean ballast exchange is mandatory for ships heading to the Great Lakes or Hudson Bay, or vessels engaged in the foreign export of Alaskan North Slope crude oil.) Mid-ocean ballast exchange is the primary method for compliance with the USCG regulations, since holding ballast water can prevent ships from performing cargo operations upon arrival in the United States, and alternative methods are still under development. Vessels that are unable to conduct mid-ocean ballast exchange due to voyage or safety concerns may discharge minimum amounts of ballast water (in areas other than the Great Lakes and the Hudson River), provided that they comply with record keeping requirements and document the reasons they could not follow the required ballast water management requirements. In August 2009 the USCG published proposed amendments to its ballast water management regulations that could ultimately set maximum acceptable discharge limits for various invasive species and/or lead to requirements for active treatment of ballast water. As part of a settlement to a lawsuit challenging the VGP, EPA has recently agreed to propose a new VGP with numerical restrictions on organisms in ballast water discharges by November 2011.
A number of bills relating to ballast water management have been introduced in the U.S. Congress, but we cannot predict which bill, if any, will be enacted into law. In the absence of federal standards, states have enacted legislation or regulations to address invasive species through ballast water and hull cleaning management and permitting requirements. Michigan's ballast water management legislation was upheld by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and California has recently enacted legislation extending its ballast water management program to regulate the management of "hull fouling" organisms attached to vessels and adopted regulations limiting the number of organisms in ballast water discharges. Other states may proceed with the enactment of similar requirements that could increase the costs of operating in state waters.
48
At the international level, the IMO adopted the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, or the BWM Convention, in February 2004. The Convention's implementing regulations call for a phased introduction of mandatory ballast water exchange requirements, to be replaced in time with mandatory concentration limits. The BWM Convention will not enter into force until 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. The Convention has not yet entered into force because a sufficient number of states have failed to adopt it. However, in March 2010 MEPC passed a resolution urging the ratification of the Convention and calling upon those countries that have already ratified it to encourage the installation of ballast water management systems.
If the mid-ocean ballast exchange is made mandatory throughout the United States or at the international level, or if water treatment requirements or options are instituted, the cost of compliance could increase for ocean carriers. Although we do not believe that the costs of compliance with a mandatory mid-ocean ballast exchange would be material, it is difficult to predict the overall impact of such a requirement on the business.
Although the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change requires adopting countries to implement national programs to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, emissions from international shipping are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol. Although there was some expectation that a new climate change treaty would be adopted at the December 2009 United Nations Copenhagen climate change conference, it did not result in any binding commitments. Instead, the participating countries developed an accord regarding a framework for negotiations in 2010 that included emission reduction targets for developed countries and goals for limiting increases in atmospheric temperature. The implementation of the Copenhagen accord could lead to restrictions on the emissions of greenhouse gases from shipping. International or multi-national bodies or individual countries may adopt their own climate change regulatory initiatives. The EU intends to expand its emissions trading scheme to vessels, and the IMO's MEPC is developing technical and operational measures to limit emissions of greenhouse gases from international shipping for consideration by IMO this fall. The U.S. EPA Administrator issued a finding that greenhouse gases threaten the public health and safety and has adopted regulations relating to the control of greenhouse gas emissions from certain mobile and stationary sources. Although the EPA findings and regulations do not extend to vessels and vessel engines, the EPA is separately considering a petition from the California Attorney General and environmental groups to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from ocean-going vessels under the CAA. Any passage of climate control legislation or other regulatory initiatives by the IMO, the EU or individual countries in which we operate could require us to make significant financial expenditures or otherwise limit our operations that we cannot predict with certainty at this time.
Vessel Security Regulations
Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, there have been a variety of initiatives intended to enhance vessel security. On November 25, 2002, the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA) came into effect. To implement certain portions of the MTSA, in July 2003, the U.S. Coast Guard issued regulations requiring the implementation of certain security requirements aboard vessels operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Similarly, in December 2002, amendments to SOLAS created a new chapter of the convention dealing specifically with maritime security. The new chapter went into effect in July 2004, and imposes various detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities, most of which are contained in the newly created International Ship and Port Facilities Security (ISPS) Code.
The ISPS Code is designed to protect ports and international shipping against terrorism. To trade internationally a vessel must obtain an International Ship Security Certificate, or ISSC, from a
49
recognized security organization approved by the vessel's flag state. To obtain an ISSC a vessel must meet certain requirements, including:
In addition, as of January 1, 2009, every company and/or registered owner is required to have an identification number which conforms to the IMO Unique Company and Registered Owner Identification Number Scheme. Our Manager has also complied with this amendment to SOLAS XI-1/3-1.
The U.S. Coast Guard regulations are intended to align with international maritime security standards and exempt non-U.S. vessels that have a valid ISSC attesting to the vessel's compliance with SOLAS security requirements and the ISPS Code from the requirement to have a U.S. Coast Guard approved vessel security plan. We have implemented the various security measures addressed by the MTSA, SOLAS and the ISPS Code and have ensured that our vessels are compliant with all applicable security requirements. Our fleet, as part of our continuous improvement cycle, is reviewing vessels SSPs and is maintaining best Management practices during passage through security risk areas.
Seasonality
Our containerships operate under multi-year charters and therefore are not subject to the effect of seasonal variations in demand.
Properties
We have no freehold or leasehold interest in any real property. We occupy office space at 14 Akti Kondyli, 185 45 Piraeus, Greece that is owned by our manager, Danaos Shipping, and which is provided to us as part of the services we receive under our management agreement.
Item 4A. Unresolved Staff Comments
Not applicable.
Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects
The following discussion of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and the notes to those statements included elsewhere in this annual report. This discussion includes forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. As a result of many factors, such as those set forth under "Item 3. Key InformationRisk Factors" and elsewhere in this annual report, our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements.
50
Overview
Our business is to provide international seaborne transportation services by operating vessels in the containership sector of the shipping industry. Our fleet as of March 31, 2011 consisted of 52 containerships and, as described below, as of that date we had newbuilding contracts for an additional 13 containerships, which we currently expect will be delivered to us by the end of June 2012.
We deploy our containerships on multi-year, fixed-rate charters to take advantage of the stable cash flows and high utilization rates typically associated with multi-year charters. As of March 31, 2011, 50 containerships in our fleet were employed on time charters and two vessels were employed on bareboat charters. Our containerships are generally deployed on multi-year charters to large liner companies that charter-in vessels on a multi-year basis as part of their business strategies.
The average number of containerships in our fleet for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was 45.7, 40.5 and 37.7, respectively.
As of March 31, 2011, we had newbuilding contracts with Hyundai Samho, Hanjin and Shanghai Jiangnan for an additional 13 containerships with an aggregate capacity of 129,250 TEUs, with scheduled deliveries to us from April 2011 through June 2012.
After delivery of these 13 containerships, our containership fleet of 65 vessels will have a total capacity of 362,679 TEUs, assuming we do not acquire any additional vessels or dispose of any of our vessels.
As of March 31, 2011, our diverse group of customers in the containership sector included China Shipping, CMA-CGM, Hanjin, Hyundai, Maersk, MISC, MSC, SCI, The Containership Company ("TCC"), TS Lines, Yang Ming and ZIM Israel Integrated Shipping Services. In addition, we have arranged time charters ranging from 10 to 12 years with CMA-CGM and two other accredited charterers for our 13 contracted vessels as of March 31, 2011.
As described in detail below under "Liquidity and Capital Resources" and "Bank Agreement", in the first quarter of 2011 we entered into a definitive Bank Agreement and other agreements with our lenders to restructure our existing indebtedness, as well as agreements for new financing arrangements. These agreements, among other things, will fund the remaining installment payments under our newbuilding contracts, waive prior covenant breaches under these credit facilities and amend future covenant levels.
As of May 25, 2010, we signed an agreement to cancel newbuilding contracts for three 6,500 TEU containerships which were scheduled to be delivered to us in 2012, in return for the shipyard retaining $64.35 million in previously paid deposits for such vessels and in connection with which we wrote-off interest capitalized and other predelivery capital expenditures of $7.16 million. These were recorded in our consolidated Statement of Income under "Impairment Loss".
As of December 31, 2009 we were in breach of various covenants in our credit facilities, for some of which we had obtained waivers and for others we had not. In addition, under the cross default provisions of our credit facilities the lenders could require immediate repayment of the related outstanding debt. In this respect, we had reclassified our long-term debt of $2.3 billion as of December 31, 2009, as current debt. On January 24, 2011, we entered into the Bank Agreement with our lenders to restructure our existing debt obligations, other than our KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facilities, and obtained approximately $425 million of new debt financing. Under the terms of the Bank Agreement, the lenders under our existing credit facilities, agreed to waive all existing covenant breaches or defaults as of December 31, 2010, under our existing credit facilities, and agreed to amend the covenants levels applicable after the date of the Bank Agreement. Furthermore, on August 12, 2010, we signed a supplemental agreement with KEXIM and ABN Amro, which amended the financial covenants of our KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facility effective June 30, 2010 with which we
51
were in compliance as of December 31, 2010. In addition, we were in compliance with the covenants under our KEXIM credit facility as of December 31, 2010. As of December 31, 2010, we classified our long-term debt of $2.5 billion as long-term liability in accordance with the terms of those agreements.
Purchase Options
The charters with respect to the CMA CGM Moliere, the CMA CGM Musset, the CMA CGM Nerval, the HN CMA CGM Rabelais and the CMA CGM Racine include an option for the charterer, CMA-CGM, to purchase the vessels eight years after the commencement of the respective charters, which, based on the respective expected delivery dates for these vessels, are expected to fall in September 2017, March 2018, May 2018, July 2018 and August 2018, respectively, each for $78.0 million. In each case, the option to purchase the vessel must be exercised 15 months prior to the acquisition dates described in the preceding sentence. The $78.0 million option prices reflect an estimate of the fair market value of the vessels at the time we would be required to sell the vessels upon exercise of the options. If CMA-CGM were to exercise these options with respect to any or all of these vessels, the expected size of our combined containership fleet would be reduced, and as a result our anticipated level of revenues would be reduced.
Our Manager
Our operations are managed by Danaos Shipping, our manager, under the supervision of our officers and our board of directors. We believe our manager has built a strong reputation in the shipping community by providing customized, high-quality operational services in an efficient manner for both new and older vessels. We have a management agreement pursuant to which our manager and its affiliates provide us and our subsidiaries with technical, administrative and certain commercial services. The initial term of this agreement expired on December 31, 2008, and the agreement now renews each year for a one-year term for the next 12 years thereafter unless we give a one-year notice of non-renewal (subject to certain termination rights described in "Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions"). Our manager is ultimately owned by Danaos Investments Limited as Trustee of the 883 Trust, which we refer to as the Coustas Family Trust. Danaos Investments Limited, a corporation wholly-owned by our chief executive officer, is the protector (which is analogous to a trustee) of the Coustas Family Trust, of which Dr. Coustas and other members of the Coustas family are beneficiaries. The Coustas Family Trust is also our largest stockholder.
Factors Affecting Our Results of Operations
Our financial results are largely driven by the following factors:
52
In addition to those factors described above affecting our operating results, our net income is significantly affected by our financing arrangements, including our interest rate swap arrangements, and, accordingly, prevailing interest rates and the interest rates and other financing terms we may obtain in the future.
Operating Revenues
Our operating revenues are driven primarily by the number of vessels in our fleet, the number of operating days during which our vessels generate revenues and the amount of daily charter hire that our vessels earn under time charters which, in turn, are affected by a number of factors, including our decisions relating to vessel acquisitions and dispositions, the amount of time that we spend positioning our vessels, the amount of time that our vessels spend in drydock undergoing repairs, maintenance and upgrade work, the age, condition and specifications of our vessels and the levels of supply and demand in the containership charter market. Vessels operating in the spot market generate revenues that are less predictable but can allow increased profit margins to be captured during periods of improving charter rates.
53
Revenues from multi-year period charters comprised substantially all of our revenues from continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008. The revenues relating to our multi-year charters will be affected by the delivery dates of our contracted containerships and any additional vessels subject to multi-year charters we may acquire in the future, as well as by the disposition of any such vessel in our fleet. Our revenues will also be affected if any of our charterers cancel a multi-year charter. Each of our current vessel construction agreements has a contracted delivery date. A change in the date of delivery of a vessel will impact our revenues and results of operations. In 2009, we arranged, in cooperation with our charterers, delays in the delivery of most of our contracted vessels for periods ranging between two months and one year and, in the first half of 2010, agreed to cancel three of our newbuilding vessels, which delays and cancellations are factored into the below table. Our multi-year charter agreements have been contracted in varying rate environments and expire at different times. Generally, we do not employ our vessels under voyage charters under which a shipowner, in return for a fixed sum, agrees to transport cargo from one or more loading ports to one or more destinations and assumes all vessel operating costs and voyage expenses.
Our expected revenues as of December 31, 2010, based on contracted charter rates, from our charter arrangements for our containerships having initial terms of more than 12 months is shown in the table below. Although these expected revenues are based on contracted charter rates, any contract is subject to performance by the counterparties. If the charterers are unable or unwilling to make charter payments to us, our results of operations and financial condition will be materially adversely affected. See "Item 3. Key InformationRisk FactorsWe are dependent on the ability and willingness of our charterers to honor their commitments to us for all of our revenues and the failure of our counterparties to meet their obligations under our time charter agreements, or under our shipbuilding contracts, could cause us to suffer losses or otherwise adversely affect our business."
Contracted Revenue from Multi-Year Charters as of December 31, 2010(1)
(Amounts in millions of U.S. dollars)
Number of Vessels(2)
|
2011 | 2012 - 2013 | 2014 - 2015 | 2016 - 2020 | 2021 - 2028 | Total | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
65(3) |
$ | 452.8 | $ | 1,128.9 | $ | 1,097.8 | $ | 2,338.1 | (4) | $ | 885.8 | (4) | $ | 5,903.4 |
54
July 2018 and August 2018, respectively, each for $78.0 million. The $78.0 million option prices reflect an estimate of the fair market value of the vessels at the time we would be required to sell the vessels upon exercise of the options.
We generally do not charter our containerships in the spot market. Vessels operating in the spot market generate revenues that are less predictable than vessels on period charters, although this chartering strategy can enable vessel-owners to capture increased profit margins during periods of improvements in charter rates. Deployment of vessels in the spot market creates exposure, however, to the risk of declining charter rates, as spot rates may be higher or lower than those rates at which a vessel could have been time chartered for a longer period.
Voyage Expenses
Voyage expenses include port and canal charges, bunker (fuel) expenses (bunker costs are normally covered by our charterers, except in certain cases such as vessel re-positioning), address commissions and brokerage commissions. Under multi-year time charters and bareboat charters, such as those on which we charter our containerships and under short-term time charters, the charterers bear the voyage expenses other than brokerage and address commissions. As such, voyage expenses represent a relatively small portion of our vessels' overall expenses.
From time to time, in accordance with industry practice and in respect of the charters for our containerships we pay brokerage commissions of approximately 0.5% to 2.5% of the total daily charter hire rate under the charters to unaffiliated ship brokers associated with the charterers, depending on the number of brokers involved with arranging the charter. We also pay address commissions of up to 2.5% to a limited number of our charterers. Our manager will also receive a commission of 0.5% based on the contract price of any vessel bought or sold by it on our behalf, excluding newbuilding contracts. Since July 1, 2005, we have paid and will pay commissions to our manager of 0.75% on all freight, charter hire, ballast bonus and demurrage for each vessel.
Vessel Operating Expenses
Vessel operating expenses include crew wages and related costs, the cost of insurance, expenses for repairs and maintenance, the cost of spares and consumable stores, tonnage taxes and other miscellaneous expenses. Aggregate expenses increase as the size of our fleet increases. Factors beyond our control, some of which may affect the shipping industry in general, including, for instance, developments relating to market premiums for insurance, may also cause these expenses to increase. In addition, a substantial portion of our vessel operating expenses, primarily crew wages, are in currencies other than the U.S. dollar and any gain or loss we incur as a result of the U.S. dollar fluctuating in value against these currencies is included in vessel operating expenses. We fund our manager monthly in advance with amounts it will need to pay our fleet's vessel operating expenses.
Under multi-year time charters, such as those on which we charter the 50 containerships in our current fleet, and under short-term time charters, we pay for vessel operating expenses. Under bareboat charters, such as the one on which we chartered the two of our containerships in our fleet, our charterers bear most vessel operating expenses, including the costs of crewing, insurance, surveys, drydockings, maintenance and repairs.
55
Amortization of Deferred Drydocking and Special Survey Costs
We follow the deferral method of accounting for special survey and drydocking costs, whereby actual costs incurred are deferred and are amortized on a straight-line basis over the period until the next scheduled survey, which is two and a half years. If special survey or drydocking is performed prior to the scheduled date, the remaining unamortized balances are immediately written off. We capitalize the total costs associated with drydockings, special surveys and intermediate surveys and amortize these costs on a straight-line basis over 30 months.
Major overhaul performed during drydocking is differentiated from normal operating repairs and maintenance. The related costs for inspections that are required for the vessel's certification under the requirement of the classification society are categorized as drydock costs. A vessel at drydock performs certain assessments, inspections, refurbishments, replacements and alterations within a safe non-operational environment that allows for complete shutdown of certain machinery and equipment, navigational, ballast (keep the vessel upright) and safety systems, access to major underwater components of vessel (rudder, propeller, thrusters and anti-corrosion systems), which are not accessible during vessel operations, as well as hull treatment and paints. In addition, specialized equipment is required to access and manoeuvre vessel components, which are not available at regular ports.
Repairs and maintenance normally performed during operation either at port or at sea have the purpose of minimizing wear and tear to the vessel caused by a particular incident or normal wear and tear. Repair and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred.
Depreciation
We depreciate our containerships on a straight-line basis over their estimated remaining useful economic lives. As of January 1, 2005, we determined the estimated useful lives of our containerships to be 30 years from the year built. Depreciation is based on cost, less the estimated scrap value of $300 per ton for all vessels.
General and Administrative Expenses
From July 1, 2005 to December 31, 2008, we paid our manager a fee of $500 per day for providing commercial, chartering and administrative services, a management fee of $250 per vessel per day for its technical management of vessels on bareboat charter and $500 per vessel per day for the remaining vessels in our fleet, pro rated for the calendar days we own each vessel. We also paid our manager a flat fee of $400,000 per newbuilding vessel for the on-premises supervision of our newbuilding contracts by selected engineers and others of its staff.
On February 12, 2009, we signed an addendum to the management contract adjusting the management fees, effective January 1, 2009, to a fee of $575 per day for providing commercial, chartering and administrative services, a fee of $290 per vessel per day for vessels on bareboat charter and $575 per vessel per day for the remaining vessels in the fleet and a flat fee of $725,000 per newbuilding vessel for the supervision of newbuilding contracts. All commissions to the manager remained unchanged.
On February 8, 2010, we signed an addendum to the management contract adjusting the management fees, effective January 1, 2010, to a fee of $675 per day for commercial, chartering and administrative services, a fee of $340 per vessel per day for vessels on bareboat charter and $675 per vessel per day for vessels on time charter. All commissions to the manager remained unchanged.
Furthermore, general and administrative expenses include audit fees, legal fees, board remuneration, executive officers compensation, directors & officers insurance, stock exchange fees and other general and administrative expenses.
56
Other Income/(Expense), Net
In the fourth quarter of 2010, we became obligated for various advisory fees directly attributed to the Bank Agreement for the restructuring of our then existing credit facilities and new financing arrangements. In this respect, we recorded an expense of $18.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, which was cash settled up to March 2011. In addition, we recorded income of $12.6 million in relation to an agreement entered into with the charterer of the three newbuildings cancelled on May 25, 2010 in consideration for the termination of the respective charter parties for which we received payment in cash in 2010. These respective items were recorded under "Other income/(expense), net" as they are separately identifiable, generated by the Bank Agreement and are items not connected with the operation of our vessels.
Interest Expense, Interest Income and Other Finance Costs
We incur interest expense on outstanding indebtedness under our credit facilities which we include in interest expenses. We also incurred financing costs in connection with establishing those facilities, which is included in our finance costs. Further, we earn interest on cash deposits in interest bearing accounts and on interest bearing securities, which we include in interest income. We will incur additional interest expense in the future on our outstanding borrowings and under future borrowings. In the first quarter of 2011, we became obligated for, and paid, various fees in connection with the Bank Agreement for the restructuring of our then existing credit facilities and new financing arrangements as described under "Bank Agreement" and "New Credit Facilities."
Loss on Fair Value of Derivatives
The interest rate swap arrangements we enter into are generally based on the forecasted delivery of vessels we contract for and our debt financing needs associated therewith. A portion of these interest rate swap agreements were effective as hedges as of December 31, 2010 under the applicable accounting guidance, while a portion were not. If our estimates of the forecasted timing of the incurrence of such debt change, as they did in past, due to the deferred delivery dates for certain of our newbuildings, which we agreed in 2009, as well as the cancellation of three newbuildings in 2010, which resulted in reduction of the forecasted debt needs, and as we expect will occur as a result of the modified variable amortization of our existing credit facilities under the terms of the bank restructuring agreement, our interest rate swap arrangements may cease to be effective as hedges. Any such resulting hedge ineffectiveness of our swap arrangements is recognized in our consolidated statement of income and may result in the reclassification of unrealized losses or gains from "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" in our consolidated balance sheet to our consolidated statement of income. As of December 31, 2010, the total notional amount of our cash flow interest rate swap arrangements was $3.9 billion ($0.4 billion of which have an effective date starting in future periods).
Discontinued Drybulk Operations
While our focus is on the containership sector, in 2002 we made an investment in the drybulk sector, and from 2002 to 2007, we owned a number of drybulk carriers, chartering them to our customers (the "Drybulk Business") in the spot market, including through pooling arrangements. In the first quarter of 2007, we sold five of the six drybulk vessels in our fleet to an unaffiliated purchaser, for an aggregate of $118.0 million and sold the last drybulk carrier, the MV Achilleas, in our fleet to the same purchaser for $25.5 million, when its charter subsequently expired in 2007. As detailed in Note 26, Discontinued Operations, in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere herein, we have determined that our Drybulk Business should be reflected as discontinued operations. We have included the financial results of the Drybulk Business in discontinued operations for all periods presented and discussed under "Results of Operations." In the future, we may reinvest in the drybulk sector with the acquisition of more recently built drybulk carriers with configurations
57
better suited to employment in the current drybulk charter market, subject to market conditions, including the availability of suitable vessels to purchase.
Results of Operations
The following discussion solely reflects results from continuing operations (containerships), unless otherwise noted. As described in Note 26, Discontinued Operations, in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements certain reclassifications have been made to reflect the discontinued operations treatment of our Drybulk Business.
Year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2009
During the year ended December 31, 2010, we had an average of 45.7 containerships compared to 40.5 containerships for the same period of 2009. During 2010, we took delivery of nine vessels, the CMA CGM Musset, on March 12, 2010, the CMA CGM Nerval, on May 17, 2010, the YM Mandate, on May 19, 2010, the Hanjin Buenos Aires, on May 27, 2010, the CMA CGM Rabelais, on July 2, 2010, the Hanjin Santos, on July 6, 2010, the CMA CGM Racine, on August 16, 2010, the YM Maturity, on August 18, 2010 and the Hanjin Versailles, on October 11, 2010 and we sold the MSC Eagle on January 22, 2010, a vessel over 30 years old.
Operating Revenues
Operating revenue increased 12.6%, or $40.2 million, to $359.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $319.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase was primarily attributed to the addition to our fleet of nine vessels, which collectively contributed revenues of $48.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2010.
Moreover, two 4,253 TEU containerships, the Zim Dalian and the Zim Luanda, which were added to our fleet on March 31, 2009 and June 26, 2009, as well as a 6,500 TEU containership, the CMA CGM Moliere, which was added to our fleet on September 28, 2009, contributed incremental revenues of $15.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to 2009. These revenues were offset in part by the sale of one 1,704 TEU containership, the MSC Eagle, on January 22, 2010, that contributed revenues of $3.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to revenues of $0.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2010.
We also had a further decrease in revenues of $20.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2010, mainly attributed to re-chartering of vessels at reduced charter hire rates, as well as reduced charter hire in relation to vessels laid up by our charterer, representing operating expenses not being incurred during the lay-up period.
Voyage Expenses
Voyage expenses increased 8.2%, or $0.6 million, to $7.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $7.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase was the result of increases in various voyage expenses, such as port charges, commissions and other expenses due to the increased number of vessels in our fleet.
Vessel Operating Expenses
Vessel operating expenses decreased 4.3%, or $4.0 million, to $88.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $92.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The reduction is mainly attributed to reduced costs of certain vessels which were on charterers' directed lay-up for 1,311 days in aggregate during 2010 compared to 307 days in the same period of 2009. Although the average number of vessels in our fleet under time charter increased during the year ended December 31, 2010
58
compared to 2009, the average daily operating cost per vessel (under time charter) was reduced to $5,884 for the year ended December 31, 2010, from $6,373 for the year ended December 31, 2009 (excluding those vessels on lay-up).
Depreciation
Depreciation expense increased 26.4%, or $16.1 million, to $77.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $60.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase in depreciation expense was due to the increased average number of vessels in our fleet during the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to 2009.
Amortization of Deferred Drydocking and Special Survey Costs
Amortization of deferred dry-docking and special survey costs decreased 10.8%, or $0.9 million, to $7.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $8.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The decrease reflects reduced drydocking costs amortized during the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to 2009.
Impairment Loss
On May 25, 2010, we signed an agreement, which forms part of our comprehensive financing plan contemplated by our Bank Agreement described herein, with Hanjin Heavy Industries & Construction Co. Ltd. to cancel three 6,500 TEU newbuilding containerships, the HN N-216, the HN N-217 and the HN N-218, initially expected to be delivered in the first half of 2012, and recorded impairment loss of $71.5 million, which consisted of cash advances of $64.35 million paid to the shipyard and $7.16 million of interest capitalized and other predelivery capital expenditures paid in relation to the construction of the respective newbuildings.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses increased 60.7%, or $8.8 million, to $23.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $14.5 million in 2009. The increase was mainly the result of increased legal and advisory fees of $2.5 million (attributable to fees related to preparing and structuring our comprehensive financing plan contemplated by our Bank Agreement described herein), as well as non-cash stock-based compensation of $1.6 million recorded in 2010 and increased fees of $2.7 million to our Manager in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to 2009, due to the increase in the average number of vessels in our fleet and an increase in the per day fee payable to our Manager since January 1, 2010.
Gain on Sale of Vessels
On January 22, 2010, we sold and delivered the MSC Eagle. The gross sale consideration was $4.6 million. We realized a net gain on this sale of $1.9 million. The MSC Eagle was over 30-years old and was generating revenue under its time charter, which expired in January 2010. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we did not sell any vessels.
Interest Expense, Interest Income, and Other Finance (Expenses) Income, Net
Interest expense increased 13.8%, or $5.0 million, to $41.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $36.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase in interest expense was partially due to the increase in our average debt by $179.8 million to $2,406.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $2,226.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, as well as increased margins over LIBOR following our agreements in connection with covenant waivers obtained during 2009, which was partially offset by the decrease of LIBOR payable under our credit facilities in the
59
year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2009. In addition, the delivery of newbuilt vessels has resulted in reduced interest capitalized by $9.2 million, rather than such interest being recognized as an expense, to $23.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $33.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2009.
Interest income decreased by $1.4 million, to $1.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $2.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The decrease in interest income is attributed to lower average cash balances, as well as reduced interest rates to which our cash balances were subject during the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2009.
Other finance cost, net, increased by $3.8 million, to $6.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $2.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase was the result of $3.8 million of fees related to our comprehensive financing plan contemplated by our Bank Agreement described herein, which were recorded during the year ended December 31, 2010.
Other Income/(Expenses), Net
Other income/(expenses), net, increased by $4.8 million, to an expense of $5.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from an expense of $0.3 million in the same period of 2009. The increase was mainly the result of advisory and legal fees of $18.0 million (attributed to fees related to preparing and structuring our comprehensive financing plan contemplated by our Bank Agreement described herein), which partially offset by an income of $12.6 million in relation to an agreement entered into with the charterer of the three newbuildings cancelled on May 25, 2010 in consideration for the termination of the respective charter parties, recorded during the year ended December 31, 2010.
Loss on Fair Value of Derivatives
Loss on fair value of derivatives, increased by $73.6 million, to a loss of $137.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from a loss of $63.6 million in the same period of 2009. The increased loss is mainly attributed to non-cash changes in fair value of interest rate swaps of $44.7 million loss recorded in our Statement of Income in the year ended December 31, 2010, due to hedge accounting ineffectiveness and changes in forecasted debt, compared to $29.5 million loss in the year ended December 31, 2009, as well as a non-cash loss of $4.2 million in relation to deferred realized loss of cash flow hedges for the newbuildings HN N-216, the HN N-217 and the HN N-218 following their cancellation being reclassified from "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" in the consolidated balance sheet to consolidated statement of income in the year ended December 31, 2010. Furthermore, the increased loss on fair value of derivatives is attributed to realized loss on interest rate swap hedges of $88.3 million recorded in our Statement of Income during the year ended December 31, 2010, due to higher average notional amount of swaps and reduced LIBOR payable on our credit facilities against LIBOR fixed through such swaps, compared to $34.1 million loss in the year ended December 31, 2009.
In addition, realized losses on cash flow hedges of $38.5 million and $36.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, were deferred in "Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss", rather than such realized losses being recognized as expenses, and will be reclassified into earnings over the depreciable lives of these vessels under construction, which are financed by loans for which their interest rates have been hedged by our interest rate swap contracts.
60
The table below provides an analysis of the items discussed above which were recorded in the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009:
|
Year ended December 31, |
Year ended December 31, |
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
2010 | 2009 | ||||||
|
(in millions) |
|||||||
Cash Flow interest rate swaps |
||||||||
Unrealized losses |
$ | (45.7 | ) | $ | (31.3 | ) | ||
Amortization of deferred realized losses |
(0.5 | ) | (0.1 | ) | ||||
Impairment of deferred realized losses |
(4.2 | ) | | |||||
Total realized losses |
(129.4 | ) | (72.9 | ) | ||||
Realized losses deferred in Other Comprehensive Loss |
38.5 | 36.3 | ||||||
Realized losses recorded in Statement of Income |
(90.9 | ) | (36.6 | ) | ||||
|
(141.3 | ) | (68.0 | ) | ||||
Fair Value interest rate swaps |
||||||||
Unrealized gains/(losses) on swap asset |
$ | 0.7 | $ | (2.9 | ) | |||
Unrealized gains/(losses) on fair value of hedged debt |
(0.2 | ) | 3.7 | |||||
Amortization fair value of hedged debt |
1.0 | 1.1 | ||||||
Realized gains |
2.6 | 2.5 | ||||||
Loss on interest rate swaps |
$ | (137.2 | ) | $ | (63.6 | ) | ||
Year ended December 31, 2009 compared to the year ended December 31, 2008
During the year ended December 31, 2009, we had an average of 40.5 containerships as compared to 37.7 containerships for 2008. During 2009, we took delivery of four vessels, the Zim Monaco on January 2, 2009, the Zim Dalian on March 31, 2009, the Zim Luanda on June 26, 2009 and the CMA CGM Moliere on September 28, 2009.
Operating Revenues
Operating revenue increased 6.9%, or $20.6 million, to $319.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from $298.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase was primarily attributed to the addition to our fleet of four vessels, which collectively contributed revenues of $22.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2009.
In addition, three 2,200 TEU containerships, the Hyundai Progress, the Hyundai Highway and the Hyundai Bridge, as well as, three 4,253 TEU containerships, the Zim Rio Grande, the Zim Sao Paolo and the ZIM Kingston, which were added to our fleet on February 11, 2008, March 18, 2008 and March 20, 2008, July 4, 2008, September 22, 2008 and November 3, 2008, contributed incremental revenues of $20.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to 2008. These additional contributions to revenue were offset in part by our sale of five vessels in 2008, which vessels, as a result, contributed $12.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2008 compared to no revenues in the year ended December 31, 2009. The balance of $9.4 million is mainly attributable to revenue lost due to off-hire days, as well as re-chartering of two of our vessels at reduced charter rates.
Voyage Expenses
Voyage expenses decreased 2.7%, or $0.2 million, to $7.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from $7.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. Voyage expenses mainly relate to address and brokerage commissions, as well as commissions on gross revenue paid to our manager.
61
Vessel Operating Expenses
Vessel operating expenses increased 3.5%, or $3.1 million, to $92.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from $89.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase was due to the increase in the average number of our vessels in our fleet during the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to the year ended December 31, 2008.
This overall increase was offset in part by the lower average daily operating cost per vessel of $6,241 for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $6,574 for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Amortization of Deferred Drydocking and Special Survey Costs
Amortization of deferred dry-docking and special survey costs increased 13.7%, or $1.0 million, to $8.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from $7.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase reflects higher drydocking costs incurred, which were subject to amortization during the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to 2008.
Depreciation
Depreciation expense increased 19.4%, or $9.9 million, to $60.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from $51.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase in depreciation expense was due to the increased average number of vessels in our fleet during the year ended December 31, 2009, compared to 2008.
General and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses increased 25.0%, or $2.9 million, to $14.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from $11.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase was mainly a result of increased fees of $1.7 million paid to our Manager in the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to the year ended December 31, 2008 due to the increase in the average number of our vessels in our fleet and an increase of the fees paid to our manager since January 1, 2009. Furthermore, various other general and administrative expenses related to legal and other advisory fees increased by $1.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to 2008.
Gain on Sale of Vessels
For the year ended December 31, 2009, we did not sell any vessels. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the gain on sale of vessels reflects the sale of the APL Belgium, the Winterberg, the Maersk Constantia, the Asia Express and the Sederberg for gross sale consideration of $44.5 million, $11.2 million, $15.8 million, $10.2 million and $4.9 million, respectively, resulting in an aggregate net gain of $16.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2008.
Interest Expense, Interest Income, and Other Finance (Expenses) Income, Net
Interest expense increased 4.3%, or $1.5 million, to $36.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from $34.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The change in interest expense was due to the increase in our average debt by $511.2 million to $2,226.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2009 from $1,715.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2008, as well as, the increased margins over LIBOR on which our indebtedness is subject to, following our agreements with our lenders to waive certain covenant breaches as of December 31, 2008 and June 30, 2009, partially offset by decrease of LIBOR payable under our credit facilities in the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to the year ended December 31, 2008. The financing of our extensive newbuilding program resulted in interest capitalization, rather than such interest being recognized as an expense, of
62
$33.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $36.9 million of capitalized interest for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Interest income decreased by $4.1 million, to $2.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from $6.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease in interest income is mainly attributed to lower interest rates on which our cash balances were subject to, partially offset by higher average bank deposits during the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to the year ended December 31, 2008.
Other finance cost, net, increased by $0.3 million, to $2.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from $2.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2008.
Other Income/(Expenses), Net
Other income/(expenses), net, decreased by $0.8 million, to an expense of $0.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from an expense of $1.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease in other income/(expenses) is mainly attributed to a non-recurring expense of $1.6 million recorded in the year ended December 31, 2008 in relation to insurance for the years of 2006 and 2007, reflecting our contribution to our insurer for the exposure of the International Group of Protection & Indemnity Clubs.
Loss on Fair Value of Derivatives
Loss on fair value of derivatives, increased by $63.0 million, to a loss of $63.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2009, from a loss of $0.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase is attributable to non-cash losses due to changes in the fair value of interest rate swaps of $29.5 million recorded in our consolidated statement of income in 2009, due to hedge accounting ineffectiveness, compared to $2.4 million gain in 2008, as well as realized losses on interest rate swap hedges of $34.1 million recorded in our consolidated statement of income during the year ended December 31, 2009, mainly attributed to reduced LIBOR payable on our credit facilities against LIBOR fixed through our interest rate swaps, compared to a $3.0 million loss in the year ended December 31, 2008. In addition, realized losses on cash flow hedges of $36.3 million and $11.6 million in the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, were deferred and recorded in "Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss", rather than such realized losses being recognized as an expense, and will be reclassified into earnings over the depreciable life of these vessels under construction, which are financed by loans for which their interest rate has been hedged by our interest rate swap contracts.
During 2009, we entered into agreements with the shipyards to defer the delivery of certain newbuildings, resulting in a reassessment of the forecasted debt required to build these vessels in relation to the timing of forecasted debt draw downs expected during the construction period of such vessels. The interest rate swaps entered by us in the past, which are accounted for as cash flow hedges, were based on the originally forecasted delivery of vessels and the respective debt needs. As of December 31, 2009, we revised our estimates of the forecasted debt timing, which resulted in hedge ineffectiveness of $(21.4) million recorded in the consolidated statement of income, reclassification of $(18.1) million of unrealized losses from "Accumulated other comprehensive loss" in our consolidated balance sheet to the consolidated statement of income and unrealized gains of $8.2 in relation to fair value changes of interest rate swaps for the fourth quarter of 2009, which were recorded in the consolidated statement of income due to the retrospective effectiveness testing failure of certain swaps. The total fair value change of the interest rate swaps for the period January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009, amounted to $155.3 million.
63
Discontinued Operations
We had no net income/(loss) from discontinued operations in 2009 compared to a loss of $(1.8) million in the year ended December 31, 2008, primarily reflecting an expense of $(1.5) million recorded during 2008 following an unfavorable outcome of a lawsuit regarding the operation of one of the dry bulk vessels (sold in May 2007). As discussed in Note 26 to our Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this annual report, we have determined that our drybulk business should be reflected as discontinued operations.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our principal source of funds has been equity provided by our stockholders, operating cash flows, vessel sales, and long-term bank borrowings, as well as proceeds from our initial public offering in October 2006 and common stock sale in August 2010. Our principal uses of funds have been capital expenditures to establish, grow and maintain our fleet, comply with international shipping standards, environmental laws and regulations and to fund working capital requirements.
Our primary short-term liquidity needs are to fund our vessel operating expenses and loan interest payments. Our medium-term liquidity needs primarily relate to the purchase of the 13 additional containerships for which we have contracted, as of March 31, 2011, and for which we had scheduled future payments through the scheduled delivery of the final contracted vessel during 2012 aggregating approximately $1.0 billion as of March 31, 2011. Our long-term liquidity needs primarily relate to debt repayment and capital expenditures related to any further growth of our fleet. We anticipate that our primary sources of funds will be cash from our new and existing credit facilities and financing arrangements, cash from operations and equity or capital markets debt financings.
On January 24, 2011, we entered into a definitive agreement (the "Bank Agreement"), which became effective on March 4, 2011, in respect of our existing financing arrangements (other than our credit facilities with the Export Import Bank of Korea ("KEXIM") and with KEXIM and ABN Amro), and for new credit facilities (the "New Credit Facilities") from certain of our current lenders aggregating $424.75 million, including $23.75 million under a bridge facility, which had already been advanced to us following the delivery of the CMA CGM Rabelais on July 2, 2010, and will be transferred to one of these New Credit Facilities. The Bank Agreement provides for, among other things, the following under our existing bank debt facilities: the amortization and maturities were rescheduled, the interest rate margin was reduced, and the financial covenants, events of default, and guarantee and security packages were revised and the existing covenant defaults as of December 31, 2010 were waived. We are in compliance with the revised financial covenants under the Bank Agreement. Furthermore, on August 12, 2010, we entered into a supplemental agreement which set the financial covenants in our KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facility at the levels set forth in the Bank Agreement, and contemplated in the commitment letter therefore, effective from June 30, 2010 through June 30, 2012, and the interest rate margin was increased by 0.5 percentage points for the same period. Our KEXIM credit facility contains only a collateral coverage ratio covenant, with which we were in compliance as of December 31, 2010. In addition, on September 27, 2010, we have entered into an agreement with Hyundai Samho Shipyard (the "Hyundai Samho Vendor Financing") to finance 15%, or $190.0 million, of the aggregate purchase price of eight of our newbuilding containerships, and on February 21, 2011, we entered into a bank syndicate agreement, arranged by Citibank and led by the Export-Import Bank of China ("CEXIM") for a new $203.4 million credit facility (the "Sinosure-CEXIM Credit Facility"), in respect of which the China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation (or Sinosure) will cover certain risks, as well as guarantee our obligations in certain circumstances. See "Credit Facilities" below. We believe that compliance with the terms of these agreements will allow us to fund the remaining installment payments under our newbuilding contracts and satisfy our other liquidity needs.
64
On August 6, 2010, we entered into agreements with several investors, including our largest stockholder, under which we sold to them 54,054,055 shares of our Common Stock, at a price of $3.70 per share, for an aggregate purchase price of $200.0 million in cash, which satisfied a condition to the arrangements with our lenders discussed above.
As of May 25, 2010, we signed an agreement to cancel newbuilding contracts for three 6,500 TEU containerships which were scheduled to be delivered to us in 2012, in return for the shipyard retaining $64.35 million in previously paid deposits for such vessels and in connection with which we wrote-off interest capitalized and other predelivery capital expenditures of $7.16 million resulting in an impairment charge of $71.5 million. We also entered into an agreement with the charterer of the cancelled newbuildings and we received an amount of $12.6 million in consideration for the termination of the respective charter parties, which was recorded in our consolidated Statement of Income under "Other Income/(Expense)".
As of March 31, 2011, the remaining capital expenditure installments for our 13 newbuilding vessels were approximately $558.1 million for the remainder of 2011 and $450.8 million for 2012. As of March 31, 2011, we expect to fund the remaining installment payments of approximately $1.0 billion with undrawn borrowing capacity under our existing credit facilities of $93.1 million and with undrawn borrowing capacity under the New Credit Facilities with certain of our existing lenders of $354.5 million, under the Hyundai Samho Vendor Financing of $168.3 million and under the Sinosure-CEXIM credit facility of $203.4 million, as well as with the $200 million of proceeds from the recent equity transaction and available cash and cash equivalents.
Under our existing multi-year charters as of December 31, 2010, we had contracted revenues of $452.8 million for 2011, $558.3 million for 2012 and, thereafter, approximately $4.9 billion, of which amounts $87.4 million, $232.8 million and $2.8 billion, respectively, are associated with charters from our contracted newbuildings. Although these expected revenues are based on contracted charter rates, we are dependent on our charterers' ability and willingness to meet their obligations under these charters. See "Risk Factors."
As of December 31, 2010, we had cash and cash equivalents of $229.8 million and restricted cash of $2.9 million. As of March 31, 2011, we had approximately $819.3 million undrawn under our credit facilities. As of March 31, 2011, we had $2.6 billion of outstanding indebtedness, of which only $21.6 million was payable within the next twelve months as under the Bank Agreement no principal payments are scheduled to be due before March 31, 2013. After that time, however, we are required under the Bank Agreement to apply a substantial portion of our cash from operations to the repayment of principal under our financing arrangements. The Bank Agreement also contains requirements for the application of proceeds from any future vessel sales or financings, as well as other transactions. See "Bank Agreement" and "Credit Facilities" below.
Our board of directors determined in 2009 to suspend the payment of further cash dividends as a result of market conditions in the international shipping industry and in order to conserve cash to be applied toward the financing of our extensive new building program. In addition, under the Bank Agreement relating to our existing credit facilities and various new financing arrangements and the Sinosure-CEXIM credit facility, we would not be permitted to pay cash dividends or repurchase shares of our capital stock unless (i) our consolidated net leverage is below 6:1 for two consecutive quarters (four consecutive quarters under our Sinosure-CEXIM credit faciity) and (ii) the ratio of the aggregate market value of our vessels to our outstanding indebtedness exceeds 125% for four consecutive quarters and provided that an event of default has not occurred and we are not, and after giving effect to the payment of the dividend, in breach of any covenant.
We will not receive any cash upon exercise of the up to 15 million warrants to purchase shares of our common stock issued to our lenders participating in our comprehensive financing plan
65
contemplated by our Bank Agreement described herein, as such warrants are only exercisable on a cash-less basis.
Cash Flows
The discussion of our cash flows below includes cash flows attributable to both our containership fleet and the discontinued operations of the drybulk carriers for all periods discussed, which is consistent with the presentation of our consolidated statement of cash flows included elsewhere in this annual report.
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities
Net cash flows provided by operating activities decreased 15.5%, or $14.4 million, to $78.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to $93.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The decrease was primarily the result of increased interest cost of $61.3 million (including realized losses on our interest rate swaps), which was partially offset by a favorable change in the working capital position and increased cash from operations of $42.8 million (before taking into account interest cost), as well as reduced payments for drydocking of $4.1 million in the years ended December 31, 2010 compared to the years ended December 31, 2009.
Net cash flows provided by operating activities decreased 31.2%, or $42.3 million, to $93.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $135.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease was primarily the result of increased interest cost of $57.2 million (including realized losses on our interest rate swaps), which was partially offset by a favorable change in the working capital position and increased cash from operations of $11.5 million (before taking into account interest cost), as well as reduced payments for drydocking of $3.4 million in the years ended December 31, 2009 compared to the years ended December 31, 2008.
Net Cash Used in Investing Activities
Net cash flows used in investing activities increased 57.6%, or $214.8 million, to $587.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to $372.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The difference between the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 primarily reflects installment payments for newbuildings, as well as interest capitalized and other related capital expenditures of $589.5 million in 2010 as opposed to $374.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2009 and net proceeds from sale of MSC Eagle of $1.8 million in 2010 as opposed to $2.3 million of advances received in 2009 in relation to the sale of MSC Eagle. In December 2009, the Company received an advance payment of 50% of the sale consideration as security for the execution of the agreement.
Net cash flows used in investing activities decreased 27.2%, or $139.1 million, to $372.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $512.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The difference between the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 primarily reflects the funds used to acquire secondhand vessels of $93.4 million in 2008 as opposed to nil in 2009, cash received of $16.9 million on March 7, 2008 in respect of certain lease arrangements as further described in Note 12, Lease Arrangements, in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere herein that partially offset the cash used to acquire vessels, installment payments for newbuildings, as well as interest capitalized and other related capital expenditures of $374.9 million in 2009 as opposed to $518.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2008 and net proceeds from sale of vessels of $83.0 million in 2008 as opposed to $2.3 million of advances received in 2009 in relation to the sale of MSC Eagle in January 2010.
66
Net Cash Provided by Financing Activities
Net cash flows provided by financing activities increased by $335.6 million, to $616.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to $281.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase is primarily due to proceeds from equity issuance of $200.0 million in 2010 and a $195.6 million decrease in restricted cash in 2010 compared to a decrease of $53.1 million in 2009. Net proceeds from long-term debt decreased to $228.6 million in 2010 compared to $234.8 million in 2009. In addition, deferred fees increased to $7.4 million in 2010 (attributed to our debt restructuring plan) compared to $6.8 million in 2009.
Net cash flows provided by financing activities decreased 35.2%, or $152.6 million, to $281.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $433.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease in 2009 is primarily due to the net proceeds from long-term debt of $234.8 million during the year ended December 31, 2009 as opposed to $745.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2008, and dividend payments of $101.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2008 as opposed to nil dividends during the year ended December 31, 2009 and $53.1 million decrease of restricted cash in 2009 as opposed to $205.4 million increase in 2008.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
We report our financial results in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Management believes, however, that certain non-GAAP financial measures used in managing the business may provide users of this financial information additional meaningful comparisons between current results and results in prior operating periods. Management believes that these non-GAAP financial measures can provide additional meaningful reflection of underlying trends of the business because they provide a comparison of historical information that excludes certain items that impact the overall comparability. Management also uses these non-GAAP financial measures in making financial, operating and planning decisions and in evaluating our performance. See the tables below for supplemental financial data and corresponding reconciliations to GAAP financial measures. Non-GAAP financial measures should be viewed in addition to, and not as an alternative for, our reported results prepared in accordance with GAAP.
EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA
EBITDA represents net (loss)/income before interest income and expense, taxes, depreciation and amortization. Adjusted EBITDA represents net (loss)/income before interest income and expense, taxes, depreciation, amortization of deferred drydocking & special survey costs and deferred finance costs (and write-offs), impairment loss, gain/(loss) on sale of vessels, non-cash changes in fair value of derivatives, realized gain/(loss) on derivatives, gain on contract termination and other one-off items in relation to the Company's Comprehensive Financing Plan. We believe that EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA assist investors and analysts in comparing our performance across reporting periods on a consistent basis by excluding items that we do not believe are indicative of our core operating performance and because are used by certain investors to measure a company's ability to service and/or incur indebtedness, pay capital expenditures and meet working capital requirements. EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA are also used: (i) by prospective and current customers as well as potential lenders to evaluate potential transactions; and (ii) to evaluate and price potential acquisition candidates. Our EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA may not be comparable to that reported by other companies due to differences in methods of calculation.
EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA have limitations as analytical tools, and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of our results as reported under U.S. GAAP. Some of these limitations are: (i) EBITDA/Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect changes in, or cash requirements for, working capital needs; and (ii) although depreciation and amortization are non-cash charges, the assets
67
being depreciated and amortized may have to be replaced in the future, and EBITDA/Adjusted EBITDA do not reflect any cash requirements for such capital expenditures. In evaluating Adjusted EBITDA, you should be aware that in the future we may incur expenses that are the same as or similar to some of the adjustments in this presentation. Our presentation of Adjusted EBITDA should not be construed as an inference that our future results will be unaffected by unusual or non-recurring items. Because of these limitations, EBITDA/Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered as principal indicators of our performance.
EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA Reconciliation to Net (Loss)/Income
|
Year ended December 31, |
Year ended December 31, |
|||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
2010 | 2009 | |||||
|
(In thousands) |
||||||
Net (loss)/income |
$ | (102,341 | ) | $ | 36,089 | ||
Depreciation |
77,045 | 60,906 | |||||
Amortization of deferred drydocking & special survey costs |
7,426 | 8,295 | |||||
Interest income |
(964 | ) | (2,428 | ) | |||
Interest expense |
41,158 | 36,208 | |||||
EBITDA |
$ | 22,324 | $ | 139,070 | |||
Impairment loss |
71,509 | | |||||
Gain on sale of vessel |
(1,916 | ) | | ||||
Gain on contract termination(1) |
(12,600 | ) | | ||||
Comprehensive Financing Plan related fees(2) |
24,326 | | |||||
Amortization of deferred finance costs and write-offs |
1,340 | 1,301 | |||||
Stock based compensation |
1,685 | 47 | |||||
Realized loss on derivatives |
88,302 | 34,104 | |||||
Non-cash changes in fair value of derivatives |
48,879 | 29,497 | |||||
Adjusted EBITDA |
$ | 243,849 | $ | 204,019 | |||
68
EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA Reconciliation to Net Cash Provided from Operating Activities
|
Year ended December 31, |
Year ended December 31, |
||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
2010 | 2009 | ||||||
|
(In thousands) |
|||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
$ | 78,792 | $ | 93,166 | ||||
Net increase/(decrease) in current and non-current assets |
19,329 | 4,055 | ||||||
Net (increase)/decrease in current and non-current liabilities |
(35,036 | ) | (4,643 | ) | ||||
Net interest |
40,194 | 33,780 | ||||||
Amortization of finance costs |
(1,340 | ) | (889 | ) | ||||
Written off finance costs |
(1,084 | ) | (412 | ) | ||||
Payments for dry-docking/special survey |
3,122 | 7,259 | ||||||
Gain on sale of vessel |
1,916 | | ||||||
Stock based compensation |
(1,685 | ) | (47 | ) | ||||
Impairment loss |
(71,509 | ) | | |||||
Change in fair value of derivative instruments |
(10,375 | ) | 6,801 | |||||
EBITDA |
$ | 22,324 | $ | 139,070 | ||||
Impairment loss |
71,509 | | ||||||
Gain on sale of vessels |
(1,916 | ) | | |||||
Gain on contract termination(1) |
(12,600 | ) | | |||||
Comprehensive Financing Plan related fees(2) |
24,326 | | ||||||
Amortization of deferred finance costs and write-offs |
1,340 | 1,301 | ||||||
Stock based compensation(3) |
1,685 | 47 | ||||||
Realized loss on derivatives |
88,302 | 34,104 | ||||||
Non-cash changes in fair value of derivatives |
48,879 | 29,497 | ||||||
Adjusted EBITDA |
$ | 243,849 | $ | 204,019 | ||||
EBITDA decreased by $116.8 million, to $22.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $139.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The decrease is mainly attributed to an impairment loss of $71.5 million recorded in the year ended December 31, 2010, increased losses on fair value of derivatives of $73.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2009, increased stock based compensation of $1.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2009 and fees related to our comprehensive financing plan contemplated by our Bank Agreement described herein of $24.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, which were partially offset by a gain on sale of vessel of $1.9 million recorded in the year ended December 31, 2010, a gain on contract termination of $12.6 million recorded in the year ended December 31, 2010 and increased operating revenues of $40.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2009.
69
Adjusted EBITDA increased by $39.8 million, to $243.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2010, from $204.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase is mainly attributable to increased operating revenues of $40.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2009, as well as reduced operating expenses of $4.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2009, which were partially offset by increased general and administrative expenses of $6.3 million (excluding $2.5 million of fees adjusted as discussed in the table above) in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the year ended December 31, 2009.
Bank Agreement
As noted above, on January 24, 2011, we entered into an agreement, which is referred to as the Bank Agreement, that, upon its effectiveness on March 4, 2011, superseded, amended and supplemented the terms of each of our then-existing credit facilities ("Pre-existing Credit Facilities") (other than our credit facilities with KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro which are not covered thereby), and provides for, among other things, revised amortization schedules, maturities, interest rates, financial covenants, events of defaults, guarantee and security packages, and waivers of our covenant violations as of December 31, 2010. As of the date of the agreement, we were in compliance with the revised financial covenants. In accordance with the terms of the Bank Agreement and the intercreditor agreement (the "Intercreditor Agreement"), which we entered into with each of the lenders participating under the Bank Agreement to govern the relationships between the lenders thereunder, under the New Credit Facilities and the Hyundai Samho Vendor Financing, each as described below, the lenders participating thereunder will continue to provide our then-existing credit facilities (with any revolving loans converted to term loans) and waived any existing covenant breaches or defaults under such credit facilities and amended the covenants under such credit facilities.
Interest and Fees
Under the terms of the Bank Agreement, borrowings under each of our Pre-existing Credit Facilities, which excludes the KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facilities which are not covered by the Bank Agreement, will bear interest at an annual interest rate of LIBOR plus a margin of 1.85%.
We were required to pay a so-called margin adjustment fee payment equal to 1.55 percentage points of the applicable balance under our previously existing Aegean Baltic-HSH Nordbank-Piraeus Bank credit facility, calculated for the period from July 1, 2009 to the closing date under the Bank Agreement of March 4, 2011, to the applicable lenders. During the year ended December 31, 2010, $15.8 million of such margin adjustment fees were accrued and recorded as interest expense in the Statement of Income or capitalized into the cost of the vessels under construction. The remaining margin adjustment fees of $1.8 million were incurred in the first quarter of 2011 and the total amount of $17.6 million was cash settled in March 2011. Upon satisfaction of the conditions to the Bank Agreement, we also became obligated to make a waiver adjustment payment, in respect of prior waivers obtained in 2009 and 2010, such that each lender under any of the Pre-existing Credit Facilities would receive cumulative waiver fees during the preceding period of 0.2% of its pre-existing financing commitments. This fee totaled $2.6 million and was paid in January 2011, with the recognition of such amount to be deferred and amortized through our consolidated Statement of Income over the life of the respective facilities.
We are also required to pay an amendment fee equal to 0.50% of the outstanding commitments under each pre-existing financing arrangement, or $12.5 million in the aggregate, of which 20% was paid upon signing the commitment letter for the Bank Agreement in August 2010, 40% became payable, and was paid, in March 2011 upon satisfaction of the conditions to the Bank Agreement and the remaining 40% due on December 31, 2014. Such fees paid will be deferred and amortized over the life of the respective credit facilities for accounting purposes.
70
We were also required to pay a fee of 0.25% of the total committed amount contemplated by the August 6, 2010 commitment letter for the Bank Agreement for the period starting from August 6, 2010 up until March 4, 2011 (the effective date of the agreement) and will be amended to 0.75% thereafter, which is capitalized into cost of vessels under construction as it relates to undrawn committed debt designated for specific newbuildings, and a $4.38 million amendment fee (of which $1.22 million was paid in December 2010 and $3.16 million was paid in January 2011 relating to conditions in respect of the Sinosure-CEXIM credit facility. For accounting purposes this amendment fee will be deferred and amortized over the life of the new debt with the interest rate method. Finally, all reasonable expenses of the lenders, including the fees and expenses of their financial and legal advisors, will also be payable by the Company.
Principal Payments
Under the terms of the Bank Agreement, we are not required to repay any outstanding principal amounts under our existing credit facilities, other than the KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facilities which are not covered by the Bank Agreement, until after March 31, 2013; thereafter we will be required to make quarterly principal payments in fixed amounts, in relation to our total debt commitments from our lenders under the Bank Agreement and New Credit Facilities (see "New Credit Facilities" below), as specified in the table below:
|
February 15, | May 15, | August 15, | November 15, | December 31, | Total | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2013 |
| 19,481,395 | 21,167,103 | 21,482,169 | | 62,130,667 | ||||||||||||||
2014 |
22,722,970 | 21,942,530 | 22,490,232 | 24,654,040 | | 91,809,772 | ||||||||||||||
2015 |
26,736,647 | 27,021,750 | 25,541,180 | 34,059,102 | | 113,358,679 | ||||||||||||||
2016 |
30,972,971 | 36,278,082 | 32,275,598 | 43,852,513 | | 143,379,164 | ||||||||||||||
2017 |
44,938,592 | 36,690,791 | 35,338,304 | 31,872,109 | | 148,839,796 | ||||||||||||||
2018 |
34,152,011 | 37,585,306 | 44,398,658 | 45,333,618 | 65,969,274 | 227,438,867 | ||||||||||||||
Total |
786,956,945 | |||||||||||||||||||
Furthermore, an additional variable payment in such amount that, together with the fixed principal payment (as disclosed above), equals 92.5% of Actual Free Cash Flow for such quarter until the earlier of (x) the date on which our consolidated net leverage is below 6:1 and (y) May 15, 2015; and thereafter through maturity, which will be December 31, 2018 for each covered credit facility, we will be required to make quarterly principal payments in fixed amounts as specified in the Bank Agreement and described above plus an additional payment in such amount that, together with the fixed principal payment, equals 89.5% of Actual Free Cash Flow for such quarter. In addition, any additional amounts of cash and cash equivalents (but during the final principal payment period described above only such additional amounts in excess of the greater of (1) $50 million of accumulated unrestricted cash and cash equivalents and (2) 2% of our consolidated debt), would be applied first to the prepayment of the New Credit Facilities and after the New Credit Facilities are repaid, to the Pre-existing Credit Facilities. Under the Bank Agreement, "Actual Free Cash Flow" with respect to each credit facility covered thereby would be equal to revenue from the vessels collateralizing such facility, less the sum of (a) interest expense under such credit facility, (b) pro-rata portion of payments under our interest rate swap arrangements, (c) interest expense and scheduled amortization under the Hyundai Samho Vendor Financing and (d) per vessel operating expenses and pro rata per vessel allocation of general and administrative expenses (which are not permitted to exceed the relevant budget by more than 20%), plus (e) the pro-rata share of operating cash flow of any Applicable Second Lien Vessel (which will mean, with respect to a Pre-existing Credit facility, a vessel with respect to which the participating lenders under such credit facility have a second lien security interest and the first lien credit facility has
71
been repaid in full). The last payment due on December 31, 2018, will also include the unamortized remaining principal debt balances, as such amounts will be determinable following the fixed and variable amortization.
Under the terms of the Bank Agreement, we will continue to be required to make any mandatory prepayments provided for under the terms of our existing credit facilities and will be required to make additional prepayments as follows
Any equity proceeds retained by us and not used within 12 months for certain specified purposes would be applied for prepayment of the New Credit Facilities and then to the Pre-existing Credit Facilities. We would also be required to prepay the portion of a credit facility attributable to a particular vessel upon the sale or total loss of such vessel; the termination or loss of an existing charter for a vessel, unless replaced within a specified period by a similar charter acceptable to the lenders; or the termination of a newbuilding contract. Our respective lenders under our Pre-existing Credit Facilities covered by the Bank Agreement and the New Credit Facilities may, at their option, require us to repay in full amounts outstanding under such respective credit facilities, upon a "Change of Control" of the Company, which for these purposes is defined as (i) Dr. Coustas ceasing to be our Chief Executive Officer, (ii) our common stock ceasing to be listed on the NYSE (or other recognized stock exchange), (iii) a change in the ultimate beneficial ownership of the capital stock of any of our subsidiaries or ultimate control of the voting rights of those shares, (iv) Dr. Coustas and members of his family ceasing to collectively own over one-third of the voting interest in our outstanding capital stock or (v) any other person or group controlling more than 20% of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock.
Covenants and Events of Defaults
Under the terms of our Pre-existing Credit Facilities, before the effectiveness of the Bank Agreement entered into in January 2011, we were in breach of various covenants in such credit facilities, for which we had not obtained waivers. In addition, although we were in compliance with the covenants in our credit facilities with KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro, under the cross default provisions of our credit facilities the lenders could require immediate repayment of the related outstanding debt. On January 24, 2011, we entered into the Bank Agreement that supersedes, amends and supplements the terms of each of our existing credit facilities (other than under our KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facility which is not covered thereby, but which, respectively, has been aligned with those covenants below through June 30, 2012 under the supplemental letter signed on August 12, 2010 and our KEXIM credit facility, which contains only a collateral coverage covenant) and provides for, among other things, revised financial covenants and waives all covenant breaches or defaults under our existing credit facilities as of December 31, 2010, as well as amends the covenant levels under such existing credit facilities as described below. We were in compliance with these covenants as of the date of filing of this annual report.
72
Under the Bank Agreement, the financial covenants under each of our existing credit facilities (other than under our KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facility which is not covered thereby, but which, respectively, has been aligned with those covenants below through June 30, 2012 under the supplemental letter signed on August 12, 2010 and our KEXIM credit facility, which contains only a collateral coverage covenant of 130%), have been reset to require us to:
For the purpose of these covenants, the market value of our vessels will be calculated, except as otherwise indicated above, on a charter-inclusive basis (using the present value of the "bareboat-equivalent" time charter income from such charter) so long as a vessel's charter has a remaining duration at the time of valuation of more than 12 months plus the present value of the residual value of the relevant vessel (generally equivalent to the charter free value of an equivalent a vessel today at the age such vessel would be at the expiration of the existing time charter). The market value for newbuilding vessels, all of which currently have multi-year charters, would equal the lesser of such amount and the newbuilding vessel's book value.
73
Under the terms of the Bank Agreement, the existing credit facilities also contain customary events of default, including those relating to cross-defaults to other indebtedness, defaults under our swap agreements, non-compliance with security documents, material adverse changes to our business, a Change of Control as described above, a change in our Chief Executive Officer, our common stock ceasing to be listed on the NYSE (or another recognized stock exchange), a change in, or breach of the management agreement by, the manager for the vessels securing the respective credit facilities and cancellation or amendment of the time charters (unless replaced with a similar time charter with a charterer acceptable to the lenders) for the vessels securing the respective credit facilities.
Under the terms of the Bank Agreement, we generally will not be permitted to incur any further financial indebtedness or provide any new liens or security interests, unless such security is provided for the equal and ratable benefit of each of the lenders party to the Intercreditor Agreement, other than security arising by operation of law or in connection with the refinancing of outstanding indebtedness, with the consent, not to be unreasonably withheld, of all lenders with a lien on the security pledged against such outstanding indebtedness. In addition, we would not be permitted to pay cash dividends or repurchase shares of our capital stock unless (i) our consolidated net leverage is below 6:1 for two consecutive quarters and (ii) the ratio of the aggregate market value of our vessels to our outstanding indebtedness exceeds 125% for four consecutive quarters and provided that an event of default has not occurred and we are not, and after giving effect to the payment of the dividend, in breach of any covenant.
Collateral and Guarantees
Each of our Pre-existing Credit Facilities and swap arrangements, to the extent applicable, continue to be secured by their previous collateral on the same basis, and received, to the extent not previously provided, pledges of the shares of our subsidiaries owning the vessels collateralizing the applicable facilities, cross-guarantees from each subsidiary owning the vessels collateralizing such facilities, assignment of the refund guarantees in relation to any newbuildings funded by such facilities and other customary shipping industry collateral.
New Credit Facilities (Aegean Baltic BankHSH NordbankPiraeus Bank, RBS, ABN Amro Club facility, Club Facility and Citi-Eurobank)
On January 24, 2011, we also entered into agreements for the following new credit facilities: (i) a $123.75 million credit facility provided by Aegean BalticHSH NordbankPiraeus Bank, which is secured by Hull No. S459, Hull No. S462 and the CMA CGM Rabelais and customary shipping industry collateral related thereto (the $123.75 million amount includes principal commitment of $23.75 million under the Aegean Baltic BankHSH NordbankPiraeus Bank credit facility already drawn as of December 31, 2010, which was transferred to the new facility upon finalization of the agreement); (ii) a $100.0 million credit facility provided by RBS, which is secured by Hull No. S458 and Hull No. S461 and customary shipping industry collateral related thereto; (iii) a $37.1 million credit facility with ABN Amro and lenders participating under the Bank Agreement which is secured by Hull No. S463 and customary shipping industry collateral related thereto; (iv) a $83.9 million new club credit facility to be provided, on a pro rata basis, by the other existing lenders participating under the Bank Agreement, which is secured by Hull No. S456 and Hull No. S457 and customary shipping industry collateral related thereto; and (v) an $80 million credit facility with Citibank and Eurobank, which is secured by Hull No. S460 and customary shipping industry collateral related thereto ((i)-(v), collectively, the "New Credit Facilities").
Interest and Fees
Borrowings under each of the New Credit Facilities above, which will be available for drawdown until the later of September 30, 2012 and delivery of our last contracted newbuilding vessel
74
collateralizing such facility (so long as such delivery is no more than 240 days after the scheduled delivery date), will bear interest at an annual interest rate of LIBOR plus a margin of 1.85%, subject, on and after January 1, 2013, to increases in the applicable margin to: (i) 2.50% if the outstanding indebtedness thereunder exceeds $276 million, (ii) 3.00% if the outstanding indebtedness thereunder exceeds $326 million and (iii) 3.50% if the outstanding indebtedness thereunder exceeds $376 million.
We are committed to pay an arrangement fee of 2.00%, or $8.5 million in the aggregate, $3.3 million which was paid in August 2010 (date of commitment letter entered into) and was deferred (to be amortized over the life of the respective facilities) and $5.2 million which was contingent upon entering into each of these New Credit Facilities and was paid in January 2011, with the recognition of such amount to be deferred and amortized over the life of the respective facilities.
We are also required to pay a commitment fee of 0.75% per annum payable quarterly in arrears on the committed but undrawn portion of the respective loan. In addition, we will be required to pay an aggregate exit fee of $15.0 million payable on the common maturity date of the New Credit Facilities of December 31, 2018 or such earlier date when all of the New Credit Facilities are repaid in full. We are required to pay an additional $10.0 million if we do not repay at least $150.0 million in the aggregate under the New Credit Facilities with equity proceeds by December 31, 2014. All reasonable expenses of the lenders, including the fees and expenses of their financial and legal advisors, are payable by us.
Principal Payments
Under the Bank Agreement, we are not required to repay any outstanding principal amounts under our New Credit Facilities until after March 31, 2013 and thereafter we will be required to make quarterly principal payments in fixed amounts as specified in the Bank Agreement plus an additional quarterly variable amortization payment, all as described above under "Bank AgreementPrincipal Payments."
Covenants, Events of Default and Other Terms
The New Credit Facilities contain substantially the same financial and operating covenants, events of default, dividend restrictions and other terms and conditions as applicable to our Previously-existing Credit Facilities as revised under the Bank Agreement described above.
Collateral and Guarantees
The collateral described above relating to the newbuildings being financed by the respective credit facilities, will be (other than in respect of the CMA CGM Rabelais) subject to a limited participation by Hyundai Samho in any enforcement thereof until repayment of the related Hyundai Samho Vendor Financing described below for such vessels. In addition lenders who participate in the new $83.9 million club credit facility described above received a lien on Hull No. S456 and Hull No. S457 as additional security in respect of the existing credit facilities we have with such lenders. The lenders under the other new credit facilities also received a lien on the respective vessels securing such new credit facilities as additional collateral in respect of our existing credit facilities and interest rate swap arrangements with such lenders and Citibank and Eurobank also received a second lien on Hull No. S460 as collateral in respect of our currently unsecured interest rate arrangements with them.
In addition, Aegean BalticHSH NordbankPiraeus Bank also received a second lien on the Maersk Deva (ex Bunya Raya Tujuh), the CSCL Europe and the CSCL Pusan as collateral in respect of all borrowings under credit facilities with Aegean BalticHSH NordbankPiraeus Bank, and RBS also received a second lien on the Bunya Raya Tiga, the CSCL America (ex MSC Baltic) and the CSCL Le Havre as collateral in respect of all borrrowings from RBS.
75
Our obligations under the New Credit Facilities are guaranteed by our subsidiaries owning the vessels collateralizing the respective credit facilities. Our Manager has also provided an undertaking to continue to provide us with management services and to subordinate our rights to the rights of our lenders, the security trustee and applicable hedge counterparties.
New Sinosure-CEXIM Credit Facility
On February 21, 2011, we entered into an agreement with Citibank, N.A. acting as an agent and the Export-Import Bank of China ("CEXIM") for a senior secured credit facility (the "Sinosure-CEXIM Credit Facility") of up to $203.4 million, in three tranches each in an amount equal to the lesser of $67.8 million and 60.0% of the contract price for the newbuilding vessels, Hull No. Z00002, Hull No. Z00003 and Hull No. Z00004, securing such tranche for post-delivery financing of these vessels. CEXIM will provide the majority of the loan amount and a syndicate of lenders for which Citibank will act as agent. The China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation, or Sinosure, will cover a number of political and commercial risks associated with each tranche of the credit facility.
Principal and Interest Payments
Borrowings under the Sinosure-CEXIM Credit Facility will bear interest at an annual interest rate of LIBOR plus a margin of 2.85% payable semi-annually in arrears. Upon entering into the credit facility, we became committed to pay a commitment fee of 1.14% on undrawn amounts and we have paid an arrangement fee of $4.0 million, as well as a flat fee of $8.8 million to Sinosure for its participation. We will be required to repay principal amounts drawn under each tranche of the Sinosure-CEXIM Credit Facility in consecutive semi-annual installments over a ten-year period commencing after the delivery of the respective newbuilding being financed by such amount through the final maturity date of the respective tranches and repay the respective tranche in full upon the loss of the respective newbuilding.
Covenants, Events of Default and Other Terms
The Sinosure-CEXIM Credit Facility will require us to:
76
For the purpose of these covenants, the market value of our vessels will be calculated, except as otherwise indicated above, on a charter-inclusive basis (using the present value of the "bareboat-equivalent" time charter income from such charter) so long as a vessel's charter has a remaining duration at the time of valuation of more than six months plus the present value of the residual value of the relevant vessel (generally equivalent to the charter free value of such a vessel at the age such vessel would be at the expiration of the existing time charter). The market value for newbuilding vessels, all of which currently have multi-year charters, would equal the lesser of such amount and the newbuilding vessel's book value.
The Sinosure-CEXIM credit facility also contains customary events of default, including those relating to cross-defaults to other indebtedness, defaults under our swap agreements, non-compliance with security documents, material adverse changes to our business, a Change of Control as described above, a change in our Chief Executive Officer, our common stock ceasing to be listed on the NYSE (or Nasdaq or another recognized stock exchange), a change in, or breach of the management agreement by, the manager for the mortgaged vessels and cancellation or amendment of the time charters (unless replaced with a similar time charter with a charterer acceptable to the lenders) for the mortgaged vessels.
We will not be permitted to pay cash dividends or repurchase shares of our capital stock unless (i) our consolidated net leverage is below 6:1 for four consecutive quarters and (ii) the ratio of the aggregate market value of our vessels to our outstanding indebtedness exceeds 125% for four consecutive quarters and provided that an event of default has not occurred and we are not, and after giving effect to the payment of the dividend is not, in breach of any covenant.
Collateral
The Sinosure-CEXIM Credit Facility will be secured by customary pre-delivery and post-delivery shipping industry collateral with respect to the newbuilding vessels, Hull No. Z00002, Hull No. Z00003 and Hull No. Z00004, securing the respective tranche.
Hyundai Samho Vendor Financing
We entered into an agreement with Hyundai Samho Heavy Industries ("Hyundai Samho") for a financing facility of $190.0 million in respect of eight of our newbuilding containerships being built by Hyundai Samho, Hull Nos. S456, S457, S458, S459, S460, S461, S462 and S463, in the form of delayed payment of a portion of the final installment for each such newbuilding. As of December 31, 2010, none of these newbuildings were delivered or required a final installment and, accordingly, we had no borrowings outstanding under this arrangement.
Borrowings under this facility will bear interest at a fixed interest rate of 8.00%. We will be required to repay principal amounts under this financing facility in seven consecutive semi-annual installments commencing one and a half years, in the case of three of the newbuilding vessels being financed, and one year, in the case of the other five newbuilding vessels, after the delivery of the respective newbuilding being financed. This financing facility does not require us to comply with any financial covenants, but contains customary events of default, including those relating to cross-defaults. This financing facility is secured by second priority collateral related to the newbuilding vessels being financed.
77
Warrants
As of April 1, 2011, we had issued an aggregate of 14,925,130 warrants to our lenders under the Bank Agreement and New Credit Facilities to purchase, solely on a cash-less exercise basis, an aggregate of 14,925,130 shares of our common stock, which warrants have an exercise price of $7.00 per share. The exercise price of the 11,213,713 warrants issued on March 17, 2011 was initially $6.00 per share and, on March 29, 2011, increased to $7.00 per share upon the delivery of certain documents, as required by the Sinosure-CEXIM credit facility and related arrangement with Sinosure. We have committed to issuing a total of 15,000,000 warrants, and will issue the remaining 74,870 warrants upon the request of the applicable lender. All warrants issued, or to be issued, will expire on January 31, 2019.
Credit Facilities
We, as borrower, and certain of our subsidiaries, as guarantors, have entered into a number of credit facilities in connection with financing the acquisition of certain vessels in our fleet, which are described in Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements included in this annual report. As described above in "Bank Agreement," under the Bank Agreement our previously existing credit facilities continue to be made available by the respective lenders, in all cases as term loans, but (other than with respect to our KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facilities which are not covered by the Bank Agreement) with revised amortization schedules, interest rates, financial covenants, events of default and other terms and additional collateral under certain of these credit facilities and we obtained new credit facilities. The following summarizes certain terms of our previously existing credit facilities, as amended, as well as the new credit facilities we have entered into in the first quarter of 2011:
Lender
|
Remaining Available Principal Amount (in millions)(1) |
Outstanding Principal Amount (in millions)(1) |
Collateral Vessels(5) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Previously Existing Credit Facilities |
||||||||
The Royal Bank of Scotland(3) |
$ | 47.0 | $ | 639.8 | Mortgages for existing vessels and refund guarantees for newbuildings relating to the Hyundai Progress, the Hyundai Highway, the Hyundai Bridge, the Hyundai Federal (ex APL Confidence), the Zim Monaco, the Hanjin Buenos Aires, the Hanjin Versailles, the Hanjin Algeciras, the CMA CGM Racine and the HN H1022A |
78
Lender
|
Remaining Available Principal Amount (in millions)(1) |
Outstanding Principal Amount (in millions)(1) |
Collateral Vessels(5) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aegean Baltic BankHSH NordbankPiraeus Bank(4)(2) |
$ | | $ | 664.3 | Jiangshu Dragon (ex CMA CGM Elbe), the California Dragon (ex CMA CGM Kalamata, the Shenzhen Dragon (ex CMA CGM Komodo), the Henry (ex CMA CGM Passiflore), the MOL Affinity (ex Hyundai Commodore), the Hyundai Duke, the Independence (ex CMA CGM Vanille), the Marathonas (ex Maersk Marathon), the Maersk Messologi, the Maersk Mytilini, the YM Yantian, the M/V Honour (ex Al Rayyan), the SCI Pride (ex YM Milano), the Lotus (ex CMA CGM Lotus), the Hyundai Vladivostok, the Hyundai Advance, the Hyundai Stride, the Hyundai Future, the Hyundai Sprinter and Hanjin Montreal |
|||
Emporiki Bank of Greece S.A. |
$ |
|
$ |
156.8 |
CMA CGM Moliere and CMA CGM Musset |
|||
Deutsche Bank |
$ |
|
$ |
180.0 |
Zim Rio Grande, the Zim Sao Paolo and Zim Kingston |
|||
Credit Suisse |
$ |
|
$ |
221.1 |
Zim Luanda, CMA CGM Nerval and YM Mandate |
|||
ABN AmroLloyds TSBNational Bank of Greece |
$ |
|
$ |
253.2 |
YM Colombo, YM Seattle, YM Vancouver and YM Singapore |
|||
Deutsche SchiffsbankCredit SuisseEmporiki Bank |
$ |
46.1 |
$ |
252.4 |
ZIM Dalian, Hanjin Santos and YM Maturity and assignment of refund guarantees and newbuilding contracts relating to the HN N-223 and the HN Z0001 |
|||
HSH Nordbank |
$ |
|
$ |
35.0 |
Deva (ex Bunga Raya Tujuh) and the Bunga Raya Tiga (ex Maersk Derby) |
|||
KEXIM |
$ |
|
$ |
57.5 |
CSCL Europe and the CSCL America (ex MSC Baltic) |
|||
KEXIM-ABN Amro |
$ |
|
$ |
96.2 |
CSCL Pusan and the CSCL Le Havre |
|||
New Credit Facilities |
||||||||
Aegean Baltic-HSH Nordbank-Piraeus Bank(5)(6) |
$ | 100.0 | $ | 23.8 | HN S459, HN S462 and the CMA CGM Rabelais | |||
RBS(5) |
$ |
53.5 |
$ |
46.5 |
HN S458 and Hanjin Germany |
|||
ABN Amro Club Facility(5) |
$ |
37.1 |
$ |
|
HN S463 |
|||
Club Facility(5) |
$ |
83.9 |
$ |
|
HNS456 and HN S457 |
|||
Citi- Eurobank(5) |
$ |
80.0 |
$ |
|
HN S460 |
79
Lender
|
Remaining Available Principal Amount (in millions)(1) |
Outstanding Principal Amount (in millions)(1) |
Collateral Vessels(5) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sinosure-CEXIM(7) |
$ | 203.4 | $ | | Hull No. Z00002, Hull No. Z00003 and Hull No. Z00004 |
|||
Hyundai Samho Vendor |
$ |
168.3 |
$ |
21.7 |
Second priority liens on Hulls No. S456, S457, S458, S459, S460, S461, S462 and S463. |
Outstanding indebtedness under our each of our existing credit facilities, other than our KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facilities, bears interest at a rate of LIBOR plus an applicable margin. The weighted average interest rate margin over LIBOR in respect of our existing credit facilities was 2.1% and 2.2% for the year ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. As described above, the interest rate, amortization profile and certain other terms of each of our existing credit facilities were adjusted to provide for consistent terms under each facility pursuant to the terms of the Bank Agreement, other than with respect to our KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facilities which are not covered by the Bank Agreement, but were amended through a separate supplemental agreement signed in 2010. Our KEXIM credit facility, under which outstanding indebtedness bears interest at a fixed rate of 5.0125%, and our KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facility, under which $87.2 million of the outstanding indebtedness, as of March 31, 2011, bears interest at a fixed rate of 5.02% and $9.0 million of the outstanding indebtedness, as of March 31, 2011, bears interest at a rate of LIBOR plus a margin, have maturity dates of November 2016 and October 2018 (in respect of the fixed rate tranche) and January 2019 (in respect of the floating rate tranche), respectively.
Interest Rate Swaps
We have entered into interest rate swap agreements converting floating interest rate exposure into fixed interest rates in order to hedge our exposure to fluctuations in prevailing market interest rates, as well as interest rate swap agreements converting the fixed rate we pay in connection with certain of our credit facilities into floating interest rates in order to economically hedge the fair value of the fixed rate credit facilities against fluctuations in prevailing market interest rates. See "Item 11. Quantitative and
80
Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk." As described above under "Factors Affecting our Results of OperationsLoss on fair value of derivatives," due to the contemplated changes to the amortization profiles and interest rates under our existing credit facilities pursuant to the terms of the Bank Agreement our interest rate swap agreements are expected to have a greater degree of ineffectiveness as hedging instruments with the result that changes in the fair value of such ineffective portion of such swap arrangements would be recognized in our statement of income.
Leasing Arrangements
On March 7, 2008, we exercised our right to have our wholly-owned subsidiaries replace a subsidiary of Lloyds Bank as direct owners of the CSCL Europe, the CSCL America (ex MSC Baltic), the Bunga Raya Tiga (ex Maersk Derby), the Deva (ex Bunga Raya Tujuh), the CSCL Pusan (ex HN 1559) and the CSCL Le Havre (ex HN 1561) pursuant to the terms of the leasing arrangements, as restructured on October 5, 2007, we had in place with such subsidiaries of Lloyds Bank, Allco Finance Limited, a U.K.-based financing company, and Allco Finance UK Limited, a U.K.-based financing company. We had during the course of these leasing arrangements and continue to have full operational control over these vessels and we consider each of these vessels to be an asset for our financial reporting purposes and each vessel is reflected as such in our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere herein.
On July 19, 2006, legislation was enacted in the United Kingdom that was expected to result in a claw-back or recapture of certain of the benefits that were expected to be available to the counterparties to the original leasing transactions at their inception. Accordingly, the put option price that was part of the original leasing arrangements was expected to be increased to compensate the counterparties for the loss of these benefits. In 2006 we recognized an expense of $12.8 million, which is the amount by which we expected the increase in the put price to exceed the cash benefits we had expected to receive, and had expected to retain, from these transactions. The October 5, 2007 restructuring of these leasing arrangements eliminated this put option and the $12.8 million expense recorded in 2006, was reversed and recognized in earnings in the fourth quarter of 2007.
81
Contractual Obligations
Our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2010 were:
|
Payments Due by Period | |||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Total | Less than 1 year (2011) |
1 - 3 years (2012 - 2013) |
3 - 5 years (2014 - 2015) |
More than 5 years (After January 1, 2016) |
|||||||||||
|
in thousands of Dollars |
|||||||||||||||
Long-term debt obligations of contractual fixed debt principal repayments(1) |
$ | 2,560,326 | $ | 21,619 | $ | 87,452 | $ | 151,020 | $ | 2,300,235 | ||||||
Long-term debt obligations including both contractual fixed and estimated variable debt principal repayments(2) |
$ | 2,560,326 | $ | 21,619 | $ | 110,890 | $ | 189,259 | $ | 2,238,558 | ||||||
Interest on long-term debt obligations(3) |
884,036 | 65,056 | 179,490 | 259,615 | 379,875 | |||||||||||
Payments to our manager(4) |
21,936 | 21,936 | | | | |||||||||||
Newbuilding contracts(5) |
1,131,257 | 680,434 | 450,823 | | | |||||||||||
Total |
$ | 4,597,555 | $ | 789,045 | $ | 741,203 | $ | 448,874 | $ | 2,618,433 | ||||||
82
Free Cash Flow each quarter. The calculation of interest is based on outstanding debt balances as of December 31, 2010 amortized by both the contractual fixed and variable amortization payments, with such variable amortization payments based on management estimates as described in footnote 2 to this table above. The interest payments in this table are based on an assumed LIBOR rate of 0.62% in 2011, 1.21% in 2012 and up to a maximum of 5.0% thereafter. The actual variable amortization we pay may differ from management's estimates, which would result in different interest payment obligations. This table, including the interest payments, do not reflect the terms of our interest rate swap agreements which are described in "Item 11. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk."
Research and Development, Patents and Licenses
We incur from time to time expenditures relating to inspections for acquiring new vessels that meet our standards. Such expenditures are insignificant and they are expensed as they are incurred.
Trend Information
Our results of operations depend primarily on the charter hire rates that we are able to realize. Charter hire rates paid for containerships are primarily a function of the underlying balance between vessel supply and demand and respective charter-party details. The demand for containerships is determined by the underlying demand for goods which are transported in containerships.
The year of 2009 was one of the most difficult in the history of container shipping and the liner business. Both demand and supply were severely imbalanced. Consumer demand fell sharply immediately after the third quarter of 2008 and continued to retreat for most of 2009, and, at the same time, the supply of shipping tonnage kept increasing with deliveries of vessels ordered in previous years.
83
Importantly, however, no containerships were added to the newbuilding order-book in 2009, which should help the balance of supply and demand on a going forward basis. In 2009, a number of impacted liner companies successfully restructured their balance sheets. Consequently, charter owners like us which had long term fixed time charters were able to avoid revenue volatility insofar they had little re-chartering exposure. The charter market generally experienced consistent growth over the course of 2010, with charter rates generally increasing from the subsistence levels of 2009, with a brief decline at the start of fourth quarter of 2010 before returning to the upward trend. Some further upward momentum in rates could be provided by the positive global demand/supply balance expected in 2011, although there no be no assurance this will develop and charter rates still remain below historical averages. The "slow-steaming" of services over the course of 2009 and 2010, particularly on longer trade routes, enabled containership operators to both moderate the impact of high bunker costs, while absorbing additional capacity. This has proved to be an effective approach and it currently appears likely that this will remain in place in the coming year.
In general, the container shipping freight market experienced positive momentum in 2010, and freight rates for containers by the end of 2010 were significantly higher than the historically low rates seen in 2009. More specifically, freight rates for boxes peaked in early 2010, after experiencing rapid growth towards the end of 2009. Thereafter, significant reactivation of idle capacity put substantial negative pressure on rates, which generally began to decline in the fourth quarter of 2010, accelerated to some extent by seasonal declines in trade volumes. However, the idle fleet at the start of 2011 stood at just 2.3% of global fleet capacity. In addition, liner companies have been able to significantly increase box rates from their lows reached in 2009. The average daily charter rate of a 4,400 TEU containership, which represents the approximate average TEU capacity of our vessels, decreased from $36,000 in May 2008 to $26,000 in January 2011, after reaching a low of $6,400 in December 2009.
As of March 31, 2011, we did not have any containerships without charter arrangements and we had 10 containerships, aggregating 36,283 TEU in capacity, with charter arrangements expiring within the remainder of 2011.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not have any other transactions, obligations or relationships that could be considered material off-balance sheet arrangements.
Critical Accounting Policies
We prepare our consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, which requires us to make estimates in the application of our accounting policies based on our best assumptions, judgments and opinions. We base these estimates on the information currently available to us and on various other assumptions we believe are reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. Following is a discussion of the accounting policies that involve a high degree of judgment and the methods of their application. For a further description of our material accounting policies, please refer to Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies, to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report.
Purchase of Vessels
Vessels are stated at cost, which consists of the contract purchase price and any material expenses incurred upon acquisition (improvements and delivery expenses), less accumulated depreciation. Subsequent expenditures for conversions and major improvements are also capitalized when they appreciably extend the life, increase the earning capacity or improve the efficiency or safety of the vessels. Otherwise we charge these expenditures to expenses as incurred. Our financing costs incurred during the construction period of the vessels are included in vessels' cost.
84
The vessels that we acquire in the secondhand market are treated as a business combination to the extent that such acquisitions include continuing operations and business characteristics, such as management agreements, employees and customer base, otherwise we treat an acquisition of a secondhand vessel as a purchase of assets. Where we identify any intangible assets or liabilities associated with the acquisition of a vessel purchased on the secondhand market, we record all identified tangible and intangible assets or liabilities at fair value. Fair value is determined by reference to market data and the discounted amount of expected future cash flows. We have in the past acquired certain vessels in the secondhand market. These acquisitions were considered to be acquisitions of assets, which were also recorded at fair value. Certain vessels in our fleet that were purchased in the secondhand market were acquired with existing charters. We determined that the existing charter contracts for these vessels, other than the charter for the MOL Confidence, did not have a material separate fair value and, therefore, we recorded such vessels at their fair value, which equaled the consideration paid. In respect of the existing time charter for the MOL Confidence, we identified a liability of $14.4 million upon its delivery to us in March 2006, which we recorded as unearned revenue in "Current LiabilitiesUnearned Revenue" and "Long-Term LiabilitiesUnearned Revenue, net of current portion" on our consolidated balance sheet for the existing charter, which will be amortized over the remaining period of the time charter.
The determination of the fair value of acquired assets and assumed liabilities requires us to make significant assumptions and estimates of many variables, including market charter rates, expected future charter rates, future vessel operating expenses, the level of utilization of our vessels and our weighted average cost of capital. The use of different assumptions could result in a material change in the fair value of these items, which could have a material impact on our financial position and results of operations.
Lease Arrangements
We considered six of the containerships in our current fleet, which until March 7, 2008 were subject to leasing arrangements, to be owned by us for financial reporting purposes since the vessels were under our operational control and we retained risks associated with ownership. After March 7, 2008, each of these vessels has been directly owned by wholly-owned subsidiaries. Prior to March 7, 2008, we also reflected the indebtedness under which the vessels were mortgaged as a liability on our consolidated balance sheet.
Revenue Recognition
Our revenues and expenses are recognized on the accrual basis. Revenues are generated from bareboat hire and time charters. Bareboat hire revenues are recorded over the term of the hire on a straight-line basis. Time charter revenues are recorded over the term of the charter as service is provided. Unearned revenue includes revenue received in advance, and the amount recorded for an existing time charter acquired in conjunction with an asset purchase.
Special Survey and Drydocking Costs
We follow the deferral method of accounting for special survey and drydocking costs. Actual costs incurred are deferred and are amortized on a straight-line basis over the period until the next scheduled survey, which is two and a half years. If special survey or drydocking is performed prior to the scheduled date, the remaining unamortized balances are immediately written-off.
Major overhauls performed during drydocking are differentiated from normal operating repairs and maintenance. The related costs for inspections that are required for the vessel's certification under the requirement of the classification society are categorized as drydock costs. A vessel at drydock performs certain assessments, inspections, refurbishments, replacements and alterations within a safe
85
non-operational environment that allows for complete shutdown of certain machinery and equipment, navigational, ballast (keep the vessel upright) and safety systems, access to major underwater components of vessel (rudder, propeller, thrusters anti-corrosion systems), which are not accessible during vessel operations, as well as hull treatment and paints. In addition, specialized equipment is required to access and manoeuvre vessel components, which are not available at regular ports.
Vessel Lives and Estimated Scrap Values
Our vessels represent our most significant assets and we state them at our historical cost, which includes capitalized interest during construction and other construction, design, supervision and predelivery costs, less accumulated depreciation. We depreciate our containerships, and for the periods prior to their sale, our drybulk carriers, on a straight-line basis over their estimated remaining useful economic lives. We estimate the useful lives of our containerships to be 30 years in line with the industry practice. Depreciation is based on cost less the estimated scrap value of the vessels. Should certain factors or circumstances cause us to revise our estimate of vessel service lives in the future or of estimated scrap values, depreciation expense could be materially lower or higher. Such factors include, but are not limited to, the extent of cash flows generated from future charter arrangements, changes in international shipping requirements, and other factors many of which are outside of our control.
We have calculated the residual value of the vessels taking into consideration the 10 year average and the five year average of the scrap. We have applied uniformly the scrap value of $300 per ton for all vessels. We believe that $300 per ton is a reasonable estimate of future scrap prices, taking into consideration the cyclicality of the nature of future demand for scrap steel. Although we believes that the assumptions used to determine the scrap rate are reasonable and appropriate, such assumptions are highly subjective, in part, because of the cyclical nature of future demand for scrap steel.
Impairment of Long-lived Assets
We evaluate the net carrying value of our vessels for possible impairment when events or conditions exist that cause us to question whether the carrying value of the vessels will be recovered from future undiscounted net cash flows. An impairment charge would be recognized in a period if the fair value of the vessels was less than their carrying value and the carrying value was not recoverable from future undiscounted cash flows. Considerations in making such an impairment evaluation would include comparison of current carrying value to anticipated future operating cash flows, expectations with respect to future operations, and other relevant factors.
On March 31, 2010, we expected to enter into an agreement with Hanjin Heavy Industries & Construction Co. Ltd. to cancel three 6,500 TEU newbuilding containerships, the HN N-216, the HN N-217 and the HN N-218, initially expected to be delivered in the first half of 2012, and recorded impairment loss of $71.5 million consisted of cash advances of $64.35 million paid to the shipyard and $7.16 million of interest capitalized and other predelivery capital expenditures paid in relation to the construction of the respective newbuildings. On May 25, 2010, we signed the cancellation agreement.
As of December 31, 2010, we concluded that events occurred and circumstances had changed, which may trigger the existence of potential impairment of our long-lived assets. These indicators included a significant decline in our stock price, deterioration in the spot market and the potential impact the current marketplace may have on our future operations. As a result, we performed an impairment assessment of our long-lived assets by comparing the undiscounted projected net operating cash flows for each vessel to their carrying value. Our strategy is to charter any vessels under multi-year, fixed rate period charters that range from one to 18 years for our current and contracted vessels, providing us with contracted stable cash flows. The significant factors and assumptions we used in our undiscounted projected net operating cash flow analysis included operating revenues, off-hire revenues, dry docking costs, operating expenses and management fees estimates. Revenue assumptions
86
were based on contracted time charter rates up to the end of life of the current contract of each vessel as well as the historical average time charter rates for the remaining life of the vessel after the completion of the current contract. In addition, we used annual operating expenses escalation factor and estimations of scheduled and unscheduled off-hire revenues based on historical experience. All estimates used and assumptions made were in accordance with our internal budgets and historical experience of the shipping industry.
Our assessment concluded that step two of the impairment analysis was not required and no impairment of vessels existed as of December 31, 2010, as the undiscounted projected net operating cash flows per vessel exceeded the carrying value of each vessel (other that the impairment loss recognized as of March 31, 2010, following the cancellation of three newbuildings, as discussed above).
An internal analysis, which used a discounted cash flow model utilizing inputs and assumptions based on market observations as of December 31, 2010, and is also in accordance with our vessels market valuation as described in our credit facilities and accepted by our lenders, suggests that five of our 50 vessels may have current market values below their carrying values. However, we believe that, with respect to these five vessels, each of which is currently under time charter, will recover their carrying values through the end of their useful lives, based on their undiscounted cash flows. We currently do not expect to sell any of these vessels, or otherwise dispose of them, significantly before the end of their estimated useful life.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Fair Value
In January 2010, the FASB issued amended standards requiring additional fair value disclosures. The amended standards require disclosures of transfers in and out of Levels 1 and 2 of the fair value hierarchy, as well as requiring gross basis disclosures for purchases, sales, issuances and settlements within the Level 3 reconciliation. Additionally, the update clarifies the requirement to determine the level of disaggregation for fair value measurement disclosures and to disclose valuation techniques and inputs used for both recurring and nonrecurring fair value measurements in either Level 2 or Level 3. The new guidance was effective in the first quarter of 2010, except for the disclosures related to purchases, sales, issuance and settlements, which will be effective for us beginning in the first quarter of 2011. The adoption of the new standards, as applicable, did not have, or are not expected to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Determining the Primary Beneficiary of a Variable Interest Entity
In June 2009, the FASB issued new guidance concerning the determination of the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity ("VIE"). This new guidance amends current U.S. GAAP by: requiring ongoing reassessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a VIE; amending the quantitative approach previously required for determining the primary beneficiary of the VIE; modifying the guidance used to determine whether an entity is a VIE; adding an additional reconsideration event (e.g. troubled debt restructurings) for determining whether an entity is a VIE; and requiring enhanced disclosures regarding an entity's involvement with a VIE.
This new guidance was effective for us beginning in our first quarter of fiscal 2010. The adoption of the new standard did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Transfers of Financial Assets
In June 2009, the FASB issued new guidance concerning the transfer of financial assets. This guidance amends the criteria for a transfer of a financial asset to be accounted for as a sale, creates more stringent conditions for reporting a transfer of a portion of a financial asset as a sale, changes the
87
initial measurement of a transferor's interest in transferred financial assets, eliminates the qualifying special-purpose entity concept and provides for new disclosures. This new guidance was effective for us for transfers of financial assets beginning in our first quarter of fiscal 2010, with earlier adoption prohibited. The adoption of the new standard did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Measuring Liabilities at Fair Value
In August 2009, the FASB released new guidance concerning measuring liabilities at fair value. The new guidance provides clarification that in circumstances in which a quoted price in an active market for the identical liability is not available, a reporting entity is required to measure fair value using certain valuation techniques. Additionally, it clarifies that a reporting entity is not required to adjust the fair value of a liability for the existence of a restriction that prevents the transfer of the liability. This new guidance is effective for the first reporting period after its issuance. The adoption of the new standard did not have an impact on our consolidated financial statements.
Subsequent Events
In February 2010, the FASB issued amended guidance on subsequent events. SEC filers are no longer required to disclose the date through which subsequent events have been evaluated in originally issued and revised financial statements.
Item 6 Directors, Senior Management and Employees
The following table sets forth, as of March 31, 2011, information for each of our directors and executive officers.
Name
|
Age | Position | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Dr. John Coustas |
55 | President and CEO and Class I Director | ||
Iraklis Prokopakis |
60 | Senior Vice President, Chief Operating Officer and Treasurer and Class II Director | ||
Dimitri J. Andritsoyiannis |
46 | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer and Class III Director | ||
Evangelos Chatzis |
38 | Deputy Chief Financial Officer and Secretary | ||
Dimitris Vastarouchas |
43 | Deputy Chief Operating Officer | ||
George Economou |
58 | Class II Director | ||
Andrew B. Fogarty |
66 | Class II Director | ||
Myles R. Itkin |
63 | Class I Director | ||
Miklós Konkoly-Thege |
68 | Class III Director | ||
Robert A. Mundell |
79 | Class I Director |
The term of our Class I directors expires in 2012, the term of our Class II directors expires in 2011 and the term of our Class III directors expires in 2013. Certain biographical information about each of these individuals is set forth below.
Dr. John Coustas is our President, Chief Executive Officer and a member of our board of directors. Dr. Coustas has over 27 years of experience in the shipping industry. Dr. Coustas assumed management of our company in 1987 from his father, Dimitris Coustas, who founded Danaos Shipping in 1972, and has been responsible for our corporate strategy and the management of our affairs since that time. Dr. Coustas is also a member of the board of directors of Danaos Management Consultants, The Swedish Club, the Union of Greek Shipowners and the Cyprus Union of Shipowners and Vice Chairman of HELMEPA (Hellenic Maritime Protection Agency). Dr. Coustas holds a degree in Marine Engineering from National Technical University of Athens as well as a Master's degree in Computer Science and a Ph.D in Computer Controls from Imperial College, London.
88
Iraklis Prokopakis is our Senior Vice President, Treasurer, Chief Operating Officer and a member of our board of directors. Mr. Prokopakis joined us in 1998 and has over 32 years of experience in the shipping industry. Prior to entering the shipping industry, Mr. Prokopakis was a captain in the Hellenic Navy. He holds a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from Portsmouth University in the United Kingdom, a Master's degree in Naval Architecture and a Ship Risk Management Diploma from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the United States and a post-graduate diploma in business studies from the London School of Economics. Mr. Prokopakis also has a Certificate in Operational Audit of Banks from the Management Center Europe in Brussels and a Safety Risk Management Certificate from Det Norske Veritas.
Dimitri J. Andritsoyiannis is our Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and a member of our board of directors. Mr. Andritsoyiannis joined us in September 2005 and has over 15 years of experience in finance and banking. Prior to joining us, Mr. Andritsoyiannis served as director of investment banking and as a member of the board of Alpha Finance, the investment banking arm of Greece's Alpha Bank. During his years with Alpha Finance from the early 1990s until joining us, Mr. Andritsoyiannis led a variety of financings, mergers and acquisitions, restructurings, privatizations and public offerings both in Greece and abroad. Mr. Andritsoyiannis holds a degree in Economics and Political Science from the Economic University of Athens, an MBA in finance from Columbia University as well as a post-graduate diploma in Ship Risk Management from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Evangelos Chatzis is our Deputy Chief Financial Officer and Secretary. Mr. Chatzis joined us in 2005 and has over 15 years of experience in corporate finance and the shipping industry. Prior to joining us, Mr. Chatzis was Chief Financial Officer of Globe Group of Companies, a public company in Greece engaged in a diverse scope of activities including dry bulk shipping, the textile industry, food production & distribution and real estate. Throughout his career he has developed considerable experience in operations, finance, treasury management, risk management and international business structuring. Mr. Chatzis holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Economics from the London School of Economics, a Master's of Science degree in Shipping Trade & Finance from City University Cass Business School, as well as a post-graduate diploma in Shipping Risk Management from IMD Business School.
Dimitris Vastarouchas is our Deputy Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Vastarouchas has been the Technical Manager of our Manager since 2005 and has over 14 years of experience in the shipping industry. Mr. Vastarouchas initially joined our Manager in 1995 and prior to becoming Technical Manager he was the New Buildings Projects and Site Manager, under which capacity he supervised newbuilding projects in Korea for 4,250, 5,500 and 8,500 TEU containerships. He holds a degree in Naval Architecture & Marine Engineering from the National Technical University of Athens, Certificates & Licenses of expertise in the fields of Aerodynamics (C.I.T.), Welding (CSWIP), Marine Coating (FROSIO) and Insurance (North of England P&I). He is also a qualified auditor by Net Norske Veritas.
George Economou has been a member of our board of directors since August 2010. Mr. Economou has over 31 years of experience in the maritime industry and he has served as Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Dryships Inc. since its incorporation in 2004. He successfully took Dryships Inc. public in February 2005 on NASDAQ under the trading symbol: DRYS. Mr. Economou has overseen Dryships' growth into the largest US-listed dry bulk company in fleet size and revenue and the second largest Panamax owner in the world. Between 1986 and 1991 he invested and participated in the formation of numerous individual shipping companies and in 1991 he founded Cardiff Marine Inc. Mr. Economou is a member of ABS Council, Intertanko Hellenic Shipping Forum and Lloyds Register Hellenic Advisory Committee. Mr. Economou is a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and holds both a Bachelor of Science and a Master of Science degree in Naval
89
Architecture and Marine Engineering and a Master of Science in Shipping and Shipbuilding Management.
Andrew B. Fogarty has been a member of our board of directors since October 2006. Mr. Fogarty has over 25 years of experience in the transportation industry. After a career in government, including as Secretary of Transportation for the Commonwealth of Virginia, from 1989 Mr. Fogarty held various executive positions with CSX Corporation or its predecessors, including as Senior Vice PresidentCorporate Services of CSX Corporation from 2001 to 2005, and as Special Assistant to the Chairman of CSX from 2006 to 2009. Previously, Mr. Fogarty also held the positions of President and CEO of CSX World Terminals, and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Sea-Land Service, Inc. CSX is one of the world's leading transportation companies providing rail, intermodal and rail-to-truck transload services. Mr. Fogarty is the former chairman and current member of the board of directors of the National Defense Transportation Association and a fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration. He holds a Bachelor of Arts from Hofstra University, a Master's of Public Administration from the Nelson A. Rockefeller College of Public Affairs & Policy at the State University of New York, and a Ph.D. from Florida State University.
Myles R. Itkin has been a member of our board of directors since October 2006. Mr. Itkin is the Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Overseas Shipholding Group, Inc. ("OSG"), in which capacities he has served, with the exception of a promotion from Senior Vice President to Executive Vice President in 2006, since 1995. Prior to joining OSG in June 1995, Mr. Itkin was employed by Alliance Capital Management L.P. as Senior Vice President of Finance. Prior to that, he was Vice President of Finance at Northwest Airlines, Inc. Mr. Itkin joined the board of directors of the U.K. P&I Club in 2006. Mr. Itkin holds a Bachelor's degree from Cornell University and an MBA from New York University.
Miklós Konkoly-Thege has been a member of our board of directors since October 2006. Mr. Konkoly-Thege began at Det Norske Veritas ("DNV"), a ship classification society, in 1984. From 1984 through 2002, Mr. Konkoly-Thege served in various capacities with DNV including Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Controller, Head of Corporate Management Staff and Head of Business Areas. Mr. Konkoly-Thege became President and Chairman of the Executive Board of DNV in 2002 and served in that capacity until his retirement in May 2006. Mr. Konkoly-Thege is a member of the board of directors of Wilhelmsen Maritime Services Holding AS. Mr. Konkoly-Thege holds a Master of Science degree in civil engineering from Technische Universität Hannover, Germany and an MBA from the University of Minnesota.
Dr. Robert A. Mundell has been a member of our board of directors since October 2006. Dr. Mundell is the University Professor of Economics at Columbia University. Dr. Mundell's principal occupation since 1967 has been as a member of the faculty of Columbia University. Dr. Mundell has served as a member of the board of directors of Olympus Corporation since 2005. Since 2003, Dr. Mundell has also served as Chairman of the Word Executive Institute in Beijing, China. He has been an adviser to a number of international agencies and organizations including the United Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, the Government of Canada, several governments in Latin America and Europe, the Federal Reserve Board and the U.S. Treasury. In 1999 Dr. Mundell received the Nobel Prize in Economics. Dr. Mundell holds a Bachelor's degree from the University of British Columbia, a Master's degree from the University of Washington and a Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Compensation of Directors and Senior Management
Beginning in the fiscal year ending December 31, 2006, non-executive directors received annual fees in the amount of $50,000, plus reimbursement for their out-of-pocket expenses. For the fiscal year ending December 31, 2006, these fees were paid pro rata for the period after our non-executive
90
directors were first elected, which coincided with our becoming a public company in October 2006. As of January 1, 2008, the non-executive directors' annual fee was increased to $62,500, plus reimbursement for their out-of-pocket expenses, which amounts are payable at the election of each non-executive director in cash or stock as described below under "Equity Compensation Plan". We do not have service contracts with any of our directors, other than the employment agreements with our three directors who are also executive officers of our company, as described below under "Employment Agreements."
During the year ended December 31, 2008, we paid our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Office and Chief Financial Officer an aggregate amount of $1.6 million and during the year ended December 31, 2009, we paid these executive officers, as well as our deputy chief financial officer, who as of January 1, 2009 has been directly employed and compensated by us, an aggregate amount of $2.2 million. During the year ended December 31, 2010, we paid these executive officers an aggregate amount of $2.0 million. Pursuant to the employment agreements we have entered into with these officers as described below, from time to time we may pay any bonus component of their compensation in the form of restricted stock, stock options or other awards under our equity compensation plan, which is described below under "Equity Compensation Plan." No equity awards have been granted to these officers as of the date of filing of this Annual Report on Form 20-F. Beginning January 1, 2011, we also directly compensate our Deputy Chief Operating Officer, Dimitris Vastarouchas, with whom we have a services agreement.
Employees
We have four salaried employees, and have a services agreement with Dimitris Vastarouchas. Approximately 1,099 officers and crew members served on board the vessels we own as of December 31, 2010, but are employed by our manager. Crew wages and other related expenses are paid by our manager and our manager is reimbursed by us.
Share Ownership
The common stock beneficially owned by our directors and executive officers and/or companies affiliated with these individuals is disclosed in "Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions" below.
Board of Directors
At December 31, 2010 and March 31, 2011, we had eight members on our board of directors. The board of directors may change the number of directors to not less than two, nor more than 15, by a vote of a majority of the entire board. Each director shall be elected to serve until the third succeeding annual meeting of stockholders and until his or her successor shall have been duly elected and qualified, except in the event of death, resignation or removal. A vacancy on the board created by death, resignation, removal (which may only be for cause), or failure of the stockholders to elect the entire class of directors to be elected at any election of directors or for any other reason, may be filled only by an affirmative vote of a majority of the remaining directors then in office, even if less than a quorum, at any special meeting called for that purpose or at any regular meeting of the board of directors.
Following completion of our $200.0 million equity transaction on August 12, 2010, Mr. Economou was appointed to the Board of Directors of the Company as an independent director in accordance with the terms of the subscription agreement between Sphinx Investments Corp. and us. We have agreed to nominate Mr. Economou or such other person, in each case who shall be acceptable to us, designated by Sphinx Investments Corp., for election by our stockholders to the Board of Directors at each annual meeting of stockholders at which the term of Mr. Economou or such other director so designated expires, so long as such investor beneficially owns a specified minimum amount of our common stock. We have been informed that our largest stockholder, a family trust established by
91
Dr. John Coustas, and Dr. John Coustas have agreed to vote all of the shares of common stock they own, or over which they have voting control, in favor of any such nominee standing for election.
During the year ended December 31, 2010, the board of directors held 13 meetings. Each director attended all of the meetings of the board of directors and of the committees of which the director was a member. Our board of directors has determined that each of Messrs. Fogarty, Economou, Konkoly-Thege and Itkin and Dr. Mundell are independent (within the requirements of the NYSE and SEC).
To promote open discussion among the independent directors, those directors met twice in 2010 in regularly scheduled executive sessions without participation of our company's management and will continue to do so in 2011. Mr. Andrew B. Fogarty has served as the presiding director for purposes of these meetings. Stockholders who wish to send communications on any topic to the board of directors or to the independent directors as a group, or to the presiding director, Mr. Andrew B. Fogarty, may do so by writing to our Secretary, Mr. Evangelos Chatzis, Danaos Corporation, c/o Danaos Shipping Co. Ltd., 14 Akti Kondyli, 185 45 Piraeus, Greece.
Corporate Governance
The board of directors and our company's management has engaged in an ongoing review of our corporate governance practices in order to oversee our compliance with the applicable corporate governance rules of the New York Stock Exchange and the SEC.
We have adopted a number of key documents that are the foundation of its corporate governance, including:
These documents and other important information on our governance, including the board of director's Corporate Governance Guidelines, are posted on the Danaos Corporation website, and may be viewed at http://www.danaos.com. We will also provide a paper copy of any of these documents upon the written request of a stockholder. Stockholders may direct their requests to the attention of our Secretary, Mr. Evangelos Chatzis, Danaos Corporation, c/o Danaos Shipping Co. Ltd., 14 Akti Kondyli, 185 45 Piraeus, Greece.
Committees of the Board of Directors
We are a "controlled company" within the meaning of the New York Stock Exchange corporate governance standards. Pursuant to certain exceptions for foreign private issuers and controlled companies, we are not required to comply with certain of the corporate governance practices followed by U.S. and non-controlled companies under the New York Stock Exchange listing standards. We comply fully with the New York Stock Exchange corporate governance rules applicable to both U.S. and foreign private issuers that are "controlled companies," however, as permitted for controlled companies, one member of each of the compensation committee and nominating and corporate governance committee of our board of directors is a non-independent director and, in accordance with Marshall Islands law, we obtained board of director approval but not shareholder approval for our August 2010 common stock sale. See "Item 16.G. Corporate Governance."
Audit Committee
Our audit committee consists of Myles R. Itkin (chairman), Andrew B. Fogarty and Miklós Konkoly-Thege. Our board of directors has determined that Mr. Itkin qualifies as an audit committee
92
"financial expert," as such term is defined in Regulation S-K. The audit committee is responsible for (1) the hiring, termination and compensation of the independent auditors and approving any non-audit work performed by such auditor, (2) approving the overall scope of the audit, (3) assisting the board in monitoring the integrity of our financial statements, the independent accountant's qualifications and independence, the performance of the independent accountants and our internal audit function and our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, (4) annually reviewing an independent auditors' report describing the auditing firms' internal quality-control procedures, any material issues raised by the most recent internal quality-control review, or peer review, of the auditing firm, (5) discussing the annual audited financial and quarterly statements with management and the independent auditor, (6) discussing earnings press releases, as well as financial information and earning guidance, (7) discussing policies with respect to risk assessment and risk management, (8) meeting separately, periodically, with management, internal auditors and the independent auditor, (9) reviewing with the independent auditor any audit problems or difficulties and management's response, (10) setting clear hiring policies for employees or former employees of the independent auditors, (11) annually reviewing the adequacy of the audit committee's written charter, (12) handling such other matters that are specifically delegated to the audit committee by the board of directors from time to time, (13) reporting regularly to the full board of directors and (14) evaluating the board of directors' performance. During 2010, there were five meetings of the audit committee.
Compensation Committee
Our compensation committee consists of Andrew B. Fogarty (chairman), Miklós Konkoly-Thege and Iraklis Prokopakis. The compensation committee is responsible for (1) reviewing key employee compensation policies, plans and programs, (2) reviewing and approving the compensation of our chief executive officer and other executive officers, (3) developing and recommending to the board of directors compensation for board members, (4) reviewing and approving employment contracts and other similar arrangements between us and our executive officers, (5) reviewing and consulting with the chief executive officer on the selection of officers and evaluation of executive performance and other related matters, (6) administration of stock plans and other incentive compensation plans, (7) overseeing compliance with any applicable compensation reporting requirements of the SEC, (8) retaining consultants to advise the committee on executive compensation practices and policies and (9) handling such other matters that are specifically delegated to the compensation committee by the board of directors from time to time. During 2010, there were two meetings of the compensation committee.
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee
Our nominating and corporate governance committee consists of Dimitri J. Andritsoyiannis, Myles R. Itkin and Robert A. Mundell (chairman). The nominating and corporate governance committee is responsible for (1) developing and recommending criteria for selecting new directors, (2) screening and recommending to the board of directors individuals qualified to become executive officers, (3) overseeing evaluations of the board of directors, its members and committees of the board of directors and (4) handling such other matters that are specifically delegated to the nominating and corporate governance committee by the board of directors from time to time. The nominating and corporate governance committee did not meet during 2010.
Employment Agreements
Employment Agreement with Dr. John Coustas
Our president and chief executive officer, Dr. John Coustas, has entered into an employment agreement with us. The employment agreement provides that Dr. Coustas receives an annual base salary subject to increases at the discretion of the compensation committee of our board of directors. Dr. Coustas is also eligible for annual bonuses as determined by the compensation committee, and the
93
employment agreement provides that any bonus may be paid in whole or in part with awards under our equity compensation plan. Pursuant to the employment agreement, Dr. Coustas is required to devote such time and attention to our business and affairs as is reasonably necessary to the duties of his position, and otherwise may devote a portion of his time and attention to our affiliates and to other ventures he controls or in which he invests in accordance with the terms of the non-competition agreement he has entered into with us as described below. The initial term of the agreement will expire on December 31, 2012, however, unless written notice is provided 120 days prior to a termination date, the agreement will automatically extend for additional successive one-year terms.
The terms of the employment agreement also provide for the payment of severance of two times his annual salary plus bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), as well as continued benefits, if any, for 24 months if we terminate Dr. Coustas without "cause," as defined in the agreement, or he terminates his employment with 30 days' notice for "good reason," as defined in the agreement. In addition, Dr. Coustas will receive a pro rata bonus for the year in which the termination occurs. If such termination without cause or resignation for good reason occurs within two years of a "change of control," as defined in the agreement, Dr. Coustas would be entitled to the greater of (a) $800,000 or (b)(i)(A) the total amount of his salary and bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), plus (B) the value on the date of grant of any equity grants made under our equity compensation plan during that three-year period (which, for stock options, will be the Black-Scholes value), (ii) multiplied by three, as well as continued benefits, if any, for 36 months.
Dr. Coustas has also entered into a non-competition agreement with us that prohibits his direct or indirect ownership or operation of containerships of larger than 2,500 TEUs or drybulk carriers, and the provision, directly or indirectly, of commercial or technical management services to vessels in these sectors of the shipping industry or to entities owning such vessels, other than in limited circumstances. The terms of the employment agreement also prohibit Dr. Coustas from soliciting or attempting to solicit our employees or customers during the two-year period following termination of his employment.
Employment Agreement with Iraklis Prokopakis
Our senior vice president, treasurer and chief operating officer, Iraklis Prokopakis, has entered into an employment agreement with us. The employment agreement provides that Mr. Prokopakis receives an annual base salary subject to increases at the discretion of the compensation committee of our board of directors. Mr. Prokopakis is also eligible for annual bonuses as determined by the compensation committee, and the employment agreement provides that any bonus may be paid in whole or in part with awards under our equity compensation plan. Pursuant to the employment agreement, Mr. Prokopakis is required to devote his full business time and attention to our business and affairs, although he may, as directed by our chief executive officer or board of directors, devote a portion of his time and attention to our affiliates. The initial term of the agreement will expire on December 31, 2012, however, unless written notice is provided 120 days prior to a termination date, the agreement will automatically extend for additional successive one-year terms.
The terms of the employment agreement also provide for the payment of severance of two times his annual salary plus bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), as well as continued benefits, if any, for 24 months if we terminate Mr. Prokopakis without "cause," as defined in the agreement, or he terminates his employment with 30 days' notice for "good reason," as defined in the agreement. In addition, Mr. Prokopakis will receive a pro rata bonus for the year in which the termination occurs. If such termination without cause or resignation for good reason occurs within two years of a "change of control," as defined in the agreement, Mr. Prokopakis would be entitled to the greater of (a) $800,000 or (b)(i)(A) the total amount of his salary and bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), plus (B) the value on the date of grant of any equity grants made under our equity compensation plan during that three-year period (which, for stock options, will be the Black-Scholes value), (ii) multiplied by three, as well as continued benefits, if any, for 36 months.
94
The terms of the employment agreement also prohibit Mr. Prokopakis from soliciting or attempting to solicit our employees or customers during the two-year period following termination of his employment, and from being substantially involved in the management or operation of containerships of larger than 2,500 TEUs or drybulk carriers, if such business is one of our competitors, during the term of the agreement.
Employment Agreement with Dimitri J. Andritsoyiannis
Our vice president and chief financial officer, Dimitri J. Andritsoyiannis, has entered into an employment agreement with us. The employment agreement provides that Mr. Andritsoyiannis receives an annual base salary subject to increases at the discretion of the compensation committee of our board of directors. Mr. Andritsoyiannis is also eligible for annual bonuses as determined by the compensation committee, and the employment agreement provides that any bonus may be paid in whole or in part with awards under our equity compensation plan. Pursuant to the employment agreement, Mr. Andritsoyiannis is required to devote his full business time and attention to our business and affairs, although he may, as directed by our chief executive officer or board of directors, devote a portion of his time and attention to our affiliates. The initial term of the agreement will expire on December 31, 2012, however, unless written notice is provided 120 days prior to a termination date, the agreement will automatically extend for additional successive one-year terms.
The terms of the employment agreement also provide for the payment of severance of two times his annual salary plus bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), as well as continued benefits, if any, for 24 months if we terminate Mr. Andritsoyiannis without "cause," as defined in the agreement, or he terminates his employment with 30 days' notice for "good reason," as defined in the agreement. In addition, Mr. Andritsoyiannis will receive a pro rata bonus for the year in which the termination occurs. If such termination without cause or resignation for good reason occurs within two years of a "change of control," as defined in the agreement, Mr. Andritsoyiannis would be entitled to the greater of (a) $800,000 or (b)(i)(A) the total amount of his salary and bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), plus (B) the value on the date of grant of any equity grants made under our equity compensation plan during that three-year period (which, for stock options, will be the Black-Scholes value), (ii) multiplied by three, as well as continued benefits, if any, for 36 months.
The terms of the employment agreement also prohibit Mr. Andritsoyiannis from soliciting or attempting to solicit our employees or customers during the two-year period following termination of his employment, and from being substantially involved in the management or operation of containerships of larger than 2,500 TEUs or drybulk carriers, if such business is one of our competitors, during the term of the agreement.
Employment Agreement with Evangelos Chatzis
Our deputy chief financial officer and secretary, Evangelos Chatzis, has entered into an employment agreement with us. The employment agreement provides that Mr. Chatzis receives an annual base salary subject to increases at the discretion of the compensation committee of our board of directors. Mr. Chatzis is also eligible for annual bonuses as determined by the compensation committee, and the employment agreement provides that any bonus may be paid in whole or in part with awards under our equity compensation plan. Pursuant to the employment agreement, Mr. Chatzis is required to devote his full business time and attention to our business and affairs, although he may, as directed by our chief executive officer or board of directors, devote a portion of his time and attention to our affiliates. The initial term of the agreement will expire on December 31, 2014, however, unless written notice is provided 120 days prior to a termination date, the agreement will automatically extend for additional successive one-year terms.
95
The terms of the employment agreement also provide for the payment of severance of two times his annual salary plus bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), as well as continued benefits, if any, for 24 months if we terminate Mr. Chatzis without "cause," as defined in the agreement, or he terminates his employment with 30 days' notice for "good reason," as defined in the agreement. In addition, Mr. Chatzis will receive a pro rata bonus for the year in which the termination occurs. If such termination without cause or resignation for good reason occurs within two years of a "change of control," as defined in the agreement, Mr. Chatzis would be entitled to the greater of (a) €600,000 or (b)(i)(A) the total amount of his salary and bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), plus (B) the value on the date of grant of any equity grants made under our equity compensation plan during that three-year period (which, for stock options, will be the Black-Scholes value), (ii) multiplied by three, as well as continued benefits, if any, for 36 months.
The terms of the employment agreement also prohibit Mr. Chatzis from soliciting or attempting to solicit our employees or customers during the two-year period following termination of his employment, and from being substantially involved in the management or operation of containerships of larger than 2,500 TEUs or drybulk carriers, if such business is one of our competitors, during the term of the agreement.
Services Agreement with Dimitris Vastarouchas
On January 1, 2011, we entered into a services agreement with Dimitris Vastarouchas for him to serve as our Deputy Chief Operating Officer. The services agreement provides that Mr. Vastarouchas receives an annual base salary subject to increases at the discretion of our chief executive officer. Mr. Vastarouchas is also eligible for additional fees as determined by our chief executive officer, and the service agreement provides that he may receive awards under our equity compensation plan. The initial term of the agreement will expire on December 31, 2013, however, unless written notice is provided 120 days prior to a termination date, the agreement will automatically extend for additional successive one-year terms.
The terms of the services agreement also provide for the payment of severance of two times his annual salary plus bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), as well as continued benefits, if any, for 24 months if we terminate Mr. Vastarouchas without "cause," as defined in the agreement, or he terminates his employment with 30 days' notice for "good reason," as defined in the agreement. In addition, Mr. Vastarouchas will receive a pro rata bonus for the year in which the termination occurs. If such termination without cause or resignation for good reason occurs within two years of a "change of control," as defined in the agreement, Mr. Vastarouchas would be entitled to the greater of (a) €495,000 or (b)(i)(A) the total amount of his salary and bonus (based on an average of the prior three years), plus (B) the value on the date of grant of any equity grants made under our equity compensation plan during that three-year period (which, for stock options, will be the Black-Scholes value), (ii) multiplied by three, as well as continued benefits, if any, for 36 months.
The terms of the services agreement also prohibit Mr. Vastarouchas from soliciting or attempting to solicit our employees or customers during the two-year period following termination of his employment, and from being substantially involved in the management or operation of containerships of larger than 2,500 TEUs or drybulk carriers, if such business is one of our competitors, during the term of the agreement.
Equity Compensation Plan
We have adopted an equity compensation plan, which we refer to as the Plan. The Plan is generally administered by the compensation committee of our board of directors, except that the full board may act at any time to administer the Plan, and authority to administer any aspect of the Plan may be delegated by our board of directors or by the compensation committee to an executive officer
96
or to any other person. The Plan allows the plan administrator to grant awards of shares of our common stock or the right to receive or purchase shares of our common stock (including options to purchase common stock, restricted stock and stock units, bonus stock, performance stock, and stock appreciation rights) to our employees, directors or other persons or entities providing significant services to us or our subsidiaries, including employees of our manager, and also provides the plan administrator with the authority to reprice outstanding stock options or other awards. The actual terms of an award, including the number of shares of common stock relating to the award, any exercise or purchase price, any vesting, forfeiture or transfer restrictions, the time or times of exercisability for, or delivery of, shares of common stock, will be determined by the plan administrator and set forth in a written award agreement with the participant. Any options granted under the Plan will be accounted for in accordance with accounting guidance for share-based compensation.
The aggregate number of shares of our common stock for which awards may be granted under the Plan cannot exceed 6% of the number of shares of our common stock issued and outstanding at the time any award is granted. Awards made under the Plan that have been forfeited (including our repurchase of shares of common stock subject to an award for the price, if any, paid to us for such shares of common stock, or for their par value) or cancelled or have expired, will not be treated as having been granted for purposes of the preceding sentence.
The Plan requires that the plan administrator make an equitable adjustment to the number, kind and exercise price per share of awards in the event of our recapitalization, reorganization, merger, spin-off, share exchange, dividend of common stock, liquidation, dissolution or other similar transaction or event. In addition, the plan administrator will be permitted to make adjustments to the terms and conditions of any awards in recognition of any unusual or nonrecurring events. Unless otherwise set forth in an award agreement, any awards outstanding under the Plan will vest upon a "change of control," as defined in the Plan. Our board of directors may, at any time, alter, amend, suspend, discontinue or terminate the Plan, except that any amendment will be subject to the approval of our stockholders if required by applicable law, regulation or stock exchange rule and that, without the consent of the affected participant under the Plan, no action may materially impair the rights of such participant under any awards outstanding under the Plan. The Plan will automatically terminate ten years after it has been most recently approved by our stockholders.
As of April 18, 2008, the Board of Directors and the Compensation Committee approved incentive compensation of Manager's employees with its shares from time to time, after specific for each such time, decision by the compensation committee and the Board of Directors in order to provide a means of compensation in the form of free shares to certain employees of the Manager of the Company's common stock. The Plan was effective as of December 31, 2008. Pursuant to the terms of the Plan, employees of the Manager may receive (from time to time) shares of the Company's common stock as additional compensation for their services offered during the preceding period. The stock will have no vesting period and the employee will own the stock immediately after grant. The total amount of stock to be granted to employees of the Manager will be at the Company's Board of Directors' discretion only and there will be no contractual obligation for any stock to be granted as part of the employees' compensation package in future periods. As of December 31, 2008, the Company granted 2,246 shares to certain employees of the Manager and recorded an expense of $15,183 in "General and Administrative Expenses" representing the fair value of the stock granted as at December 31, 2008. The Company distributed shares of its treasury stock to the qualifying employees of the Manager during the first semester of 2009 in settlement of the 2,246 shares granted. As of December 31, 2009, no further shares were granted. During 2010, the Company granted 387,259 shares to all employees of the Manager and recorded an expense of $1.6 million in "General and Administrative Expenses" representing the fair value of the stock granted as at the date of grant. The Company distributed 4,898 shares of its treasury stock to the qualifying employees of the Manager during 2010, in settlement of the shares granted. The remaining shares are expected to be issued early in the second quarter of 2011.
97
Refer to Note 21, Stock Based Compensation, in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere herein.
Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions.
Related Party Transactions
Management Affiliations
Danaos Shipping Co. Ltd., which we refer to as our Manager, is ultimately owned by Danaos Investments Limited as Trustee of the 883 Trust, which we refer to as the Coustas Family Trust. Danaos Investments Limited is the protector (which is analogous to a trustee) of the Coustas Family Trust, of which Dr. Coustas and other members of the Coustas family are beneficiaries. Dr. Coustas has certain powers to remove and replace Danaos Investments Limited as Trustee of the 883 Trust. The Coustas Family Trust is also our largest stockholder, owning approximately 62.3% of our outstanding common stock as of March 31, 2011. Our Manager has provided services to our vessels since 1972 and continues to provide technical, administrative and certain commercial services which support our business, as well as comprehensive ship management services such as technical supervision and commercial management, including chartering our vessels pursuant to a management agreement which was amended and restated as of September 18, 2006 and amended on February 12, 2009 and February 8, 2010.
Management fees in respect of continuing operations under our management agreement amounted to approximately $11.4 million in 2010, $8.7 million in 2009 and $7.0 million in 2008. The related expenses are shown under "General and administrative expenses" on the statement of income. We pay monthly advances in regard to the next month vessels' operating expenses. These prepaid monthly expenses are presented in our consolidated balance sheet under "Due from related parties" and totaled $11.1 million and $8.6 million as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Management Agreement
Under our management agreement, our Manager is responsible for providing us with technical, administrative and certain commercial services, which include the following:
98
reports or financial information that might be requested by us and other non-vessel related administrative services, assistance with office space, providing legal and financial compliance services, overseeing banking services (including the opening, closing, operation and management of all of our accounts including making deposits and withdrawals reasonably necessary for the management of our business and day-to-day operations), arranging general insurance and director and officer liability insurance (at our expense), providing all administrative services required for subsequent debt and equity financings and attending to all other administrative matters necessary to ensure the professional management of our business (our Manager provides these administrative services at its own cost and in return therefore receives the commercial, chartering and administrative services fees); and
Reporting Structure
Our Manager reports to us and our Board of Directors through our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer. Under our management agreement, our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer may direct the Manager to remove and replace any officer or any person who serves as the head of a business unit of our Manager. Furthermore, our Manager will not remove any person serving as an officer or senior manager without the prior written consent of our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer.
Compensation of Our Manager
During the initial term of the management agreement, for providing its commercial, chartering and administrative services our manager received a fee of $500 per day and for its technical management of our ships, our manager received a management fee of $250 per vessel per day for vessels on bareboat charter and $500 per vessel per day for the remaining vessels in our fleet, each pro rated for the number of calendar days we own each vessel. These fees are now adjusted annually by agreement between us and our manager. Should we be unable to agree with our Manager as to the new fees, the rate for the next year will be set at an amount that will maintain our Manager's average profit margin for the immediately preceding three years. For its chartering services rendered to us by its Hamburg- based office, our manager also receives a commission of 0.75% on all freight, charter hire, ballast bonus and demurrage for each vessel. Further, our manager receives a commission of 0.5% based on the contract price of any vessel bought or sold by it on our behalf, excluding newbuilding contracts. We also paid our manager a flat fee of $400,000 per newbuilding vessel, which we capitalized, for the on premises supervision of our newbuilding contracts by selected engineers and others of its staff.
On February 12, 2009, we signed an addendum to the management contract adjusting the management fees, effective January 1, 2009, to a fee of $575 per day for commercial, chartering and administrative services, a fee of $290 per vessel per day for vessels on bareboat charter and $575 per vessel per day for vessels on time charter and a flat fee of $725,000 per newbuilding vessel for the supervision of newbuilding contracts. All commissions to the manager remained unchanged. On February 8, 2010, we signed an addendum to the management contract adjusting the management fees, effective January 1, 2010, to a fee of $675 per day for commercial, chartering and administrative services, a fee of $340 per vessel per day for vessels on bareboat charter and $675 per vessel per day for vessels on time charter. All commissions to the manager remained unchanged. We believe these
99
fees and commissions are no more than the rates we would need to pay an unaffiliated third party to provide us with these management services.
We also advance, on a monthly basis, all technical vessel operating expenses with respect to each vessel in our fleet to enable our Manager to arrange for the payment of such expenses on our behalf. To the extent the amounts advanced are greater or less than the actual vessel operating expenses of our fleet for a quarter, our Manager or us, as the case may be, will pay the other the difference at the end of such quarter, although our Manager may instead choose to credit such amount against future vessel operating expenses to be advanced for future quarters.
Term and Termination Rights
The initial term of the management agreement expired on December 31, 2008. The management agreement now automatically renews for one-year periods and will be extended, unless we give 12-months' written notice of non-renewal and subject to the termination rights described below, in additional one-year increments until December 31, 2020, at which point the agreement will expire.
Our Manager's Termination Rights. Our Manager may terminate the management agreement prior to the end of its term in the two following circumstances:
Our Termination Rights. We may terminate the management agreement prior to the end of its term in the two following circumstances upon providing the respective notice:
We also may terminate the management agreement immediately under any of the following circumstances:
100
In addition, we may terminate any applicable ship management agreement in any of the following circumstances:
Non-competition
Our Manager has agreed that, during the term of the management agreement, it will not provide any management services to any other entity without our prior written approval, other than with respect to entities controlled by Dr. Coustas, our Chief Executive Officer, which do not operate within the containership (larger than 2,500 twenty foot equivalent units, or TEUs) or drybulk sectors of the shipping industry or in the circumstances described below. Dr. Coustas does not currently control any such vessel-owning entity or have an equity interest in any such entity, other than Castella Shipping Inc., owner of one 1,700 TEU vessel. Dr. Coustas has also personally agreed to the same restrictions on the provision, directly or indirectly, of management services during this period. In addition, our Chief Executive Officer (other than in his capacities with us) and our Manager have separately agreed not, during the term of our management agreement and for one year thereafter, to engage, directly or indirectly, in (i) the ownership or operation of containerships of larger than 2,500 TEUs or (ii) the ownership or operation of any drybulk carriers or (iii) the acquisition of or investment in any business involved in the ownership or operation of containerships larger than 2,500 TEUs or drybulk carriers. Notwithstanding these restrictions, if our independent directors decline the opportunity to acquire any such containerships or drybulk carriers or to acquire or invest in any such business, our Chief Executive Officer will have the right to make, directly or indirectly, any such acquisition or investment during the four-month period following such decision by our independent directors, so long as such acquisition or investment is made on terms no more favorable than those offered to us. In this case, our Chief Executive Officer and our Manager will be permitted to provide management services to such vessels.
101
Sale of Our Manager
Our Manager has agreed that it will not transfer, assign, sell or dispose of all or a significant portion of its business that is necessary for the services our Manager performs for us without the prior written consent of our Board of Directors. Furthermore, in the event of any proposed sale of our Manager, we have a right of first refusal to purchase our Manager. This prohibition and right of first refusal is in effect throughout the term of the management agreement and for a period of one year following the expiry or termination of the management agreement. Our Chief Executive Officer, Dr. John Coustas, or any trust established for the Coustas family (under which Dr. Coustas and/or a member of his family is a beneficiary), is required, unless we expressly permit otherwise, to own 80% of our Manager's outstanding capital stock during the term of the management agreement and 80% of the voting power of our Manager's outstanding capital stock. In the event of any breach of these requirements, we would be entitled to purchase the capital stock of our Manager owned by Dr. Coustas or any trust established for the Coustas family (under which Dr. Coustas and/or a member of his family is a beneficiary). Under the terms of certain of our financing agreements, including the Bank Agreement restructuring our existing credit facilities for which we have reached an agreement in principle, the failure of our Manager to continue managing our vessels securing such agreements would constitute an event of default thereunder.
The Swedish Club
Dr. John Coustas, our Chief Executive Officer, is a member of the Board of Directors of The Swedish Club, our primary provider of insurance, including a substantial portion of our hull & machinery, war risk and protection and indemnity insurance. During the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, we paid premiums of $7.3 million, $7.4 million and $4.1 million, respectively, to The Swedish Club under these insurance policies.
Danaos Management Consultants
Our Chief Executive Officer, Dr. John Coustas, co-founded and has a 50.0% ownership interest in Danaos Management Consultants, which provides the ship management software deployed on the vessels in our fleet to our Manager on a complementary basis. Dr. Coustas does not participate in the day-to-day management of Danaos Management Consultants.
Offices
We occupy office space that is owned by our Manager and which is provided to us as part of the services we receive under our management agreement.
Common Stock Sale
On August 6, 2010, we entered into agreements with several investors to sell to them 54,054,055 shares of our common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $200.0 million in cash. The shares were issued at $3.70 per share on August 12, 2010. This equity investment satisfied a condition to the Bank Agreement and approximately $425 million of new debt financing. The purchasers of the common stock included our largest stockholder, Danaos Investments Limited as Trustee of the 883 Trust (23,945,945 shares of common stock), a family trust established by our Chief Executive Officer Dr. John Coustas, and members of his family which together invested over $100.0 million. Additional investors included our Chief Operating Officer (108,109 shares of common stock) and our Chief Financial Officer (270,271 shares of common stock), as well as Sphinx Investments Corp. (11,471,621 shares of common stock), a private company affiliated with George Economou, and other investors.
Following completion of the equity transaction on August 12, 2010, Mr. Economou was appointed to the Board of Directors of the Company as an independent director in accordance with the terms of
102
the subscription agreement between Sphinx Investments Corp. and the Company. We have agreed to nominate Mr. Economou or such other person, in each case who shall be acceptable to us, designated by Sphinx Investments Corp., for election by our stockholders to the Board of Directors at each annual meeting of stockholders at which the term of Mr. Economou or such other director so designated expires, so long as such investor beneficially owns a specified minimum amount of common stock. We have been informed that our largest stockholder, the aforementioned family trust, and Dr. John Coustas have agreed to vote all of the shares of our common stock owned by them, or over which they have voting control, in favor of any such nominee standing for election.
We granted the investors in the equity transaction certain registration rights in respect of the common stock issued in the equity transaction. We also granted the investors in the equity transaction certain rights, in connection with any subsequent underwritten public offering that is effected at any time prior to the fifth anniversary of the registration rights agreements, to purchase from us, at the same price per share paid by investors who purchase common stock in any such offering, up to a specified portion of such common stock being issued. These rights are subject to, among other things, caps on the beneficial ownership of our common stock agreed to by certain investors in connection with the equity transaction.
Major Stockholders
The following table sets forth certain information regarding the beneficial ownership of our outstanding common stock as of March 31, 2011 held by:
Our major stockholders have the same voting rights as our other stockholders. Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC. In general, a person who has voting power or investment power with respect to securities is treated as a beneficial owner of those securities.
Beneficial ownership does not necessarily imply that the named person has the economic or other benefits of ownership. For purposes of this table, shares subject to options, warrants or rights or shares exercisable within 60 days of March 31, 2011 are considered as beneficially owned by the person holding those options, warrants or rights. Each stockholder is entitled to one vote for each share held. The applicable percentage of ownership of each stockholder is based on 108,626,538 shares of common stock outstanding as of March 31, 2011. Information for certain holders is based on their latest filings with the SEC or information delivered to us. Except as noted below, the address of all stockholders,
103
officers and directors identified in the table and accompanying footnotes below is in care of our principal executive offices.
|
Number of Shares of Common Stock Owned |
Percentage of Common Stock |
|||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Executive Officers and Directors: |
|||||||
John Coustas(1) |
67,633,140 | 62.3 | % | ||||
Iraklis Prokopakis |
463,184 | * | |||||
Dimitri J. Andritsoyiannis |
270,271 | * | |||||
Evangelos Chatzis |
| | |||||
Dimitris Vastarouchas |
| | |||||
George Economou(2) |
11,471,621 | 10.6 | % | ||||
Andrew B. Fogarty |
98,029 | * | |||||
Myles R. Itkin |
| | |||||
Miklós Konkoly-Thege |
22,710 | * | |||||
Robert A. Mundell |
| | |||||
5% Beneficial Owners: |
|||||||
Danaos Investments Limited as Trustee of the 883 Trust(3) |
67,633,140 | 62.3 | % | ||||
Sphinx Investments Corp.(2) |
11,471,621 |
10.6 |
% |
||||
Avignon International Corporation(4) |
8,108,109 |
7.5 |
% |
||||
All executive officers and directors as a group (9 persons) |
79,958,955 |
73.6 |
% |
104
members of his family. Dr. Coustas has certain powers to remove and replace Danaos Investments Limited as Trustee of the 883 Trust and, accordingly, he may be deemed to beneficially own these shares of common stock.
As of March 31, 2011, we had approximately 11 stockholders of record, seven of which were located in the United States and held an aggregate of 63,058,972 shares of common stock representing all of our outstanding shares of common stock. However, one of the United States stockholders of record is CEDEFAST, a nominee of The Depository Trust Company, which held 63,050,422 shares of our common stock. Accordingly, we believe that the shares held by CEDEFAST include shares of common stock beneficially owned by both holders in the United States and non-United States beneficial owners, including 44,443,360 shares beneficially owned by our officers and directors resident outside the United States and 98,029 shares beneficially owned by directors resident in the United States as reflected in the above table. We are not aware of any arrangements the operation of which may at a subsequent date result in our change of control.
The Coustas Family Trust, under which our chief executive officer is both a beneficiary, together with other members of the Coustas Family, and the protector (which is analogous to a trustee), through Danaos Investments Limited, a corporation wholly-owned by Dr. Coustas, owns, directly or indirectly, approximately 62.3% of our outstanding common stock. This stockholder is able to control the outcome of matters on which our stockholders are entitled to vote, including the election of our entire board of directors and other significant corporate actions. Our respective lenders under our existing credit facilities covered by the Bank Agreement and the New Credit Facilities will be entitled to require us to repay in full amounts outstanding under such respective credit facilities, if, among other circumstances, Dr. Coustas ceases to be our Chief Executive Officer or, together with members of his family and trusts for the benefit thereof, ceases to collectively own over one-third of the voting interest in our outstanding capital stock or any other person or group controls more than 20.0% of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock.
As of April 1, 2011, we had issued, for no additional consideration, an aggregate of 14,925,130 warrants to our lenders under the Bank Agreement and New Credit Facilities to purchase, solely on a cash-less exercise basis, an aggregate of 14,925,130 shares of our common stock, which warrants have an exercise price of $7.00 per share. We have committed to issuing a total of 15,000,000 warrants, and will issue the remaining 74,870 warrants upon the request of the applicable lender. All warrants issued, or to be issued, will expire on January 31, 2019.
See "Item 18. Financial Statements" below.
Significant Changes. On January 24, 2011, we entered into a definitive agreement (the "Bank Agreement") with our lenders to restructure our then existing debt obligations, other than our KEXIM and KEXIM-ABN Amro credit facilities, and approximately $425 million of new debt financing, for which we had previously entered into a commitment letter on August 6, 2010. The Bank Agreement provides the following under the our existing bank debt facilities: the amortization and maturities were rescheduled, the interest rate margin was reduced, and the financial covenants, events of default, and guarantee and security packages were revised and waived our existing covenant breaches as of December 31, 2010. In addition, on February 21, 2011, we also entered into a definitive agreement for a $203.4 million credit facility with a bank syndicate led by the Export-Import Bank of China
105
("CEXIM") for financing of the newbuilding vessels, Hull No. Z00002, Hull No. Z00003 and Hull No. Z00004. CEXIM will provide the majority of the loan amount, with Citibank (acting as an agent). The China Export & Credit Insurance Corporation, or Sinosure, has agreed to cover a number of political and commercial risks associated with the credit facility (as discussed in detail elsewhere in this annual report).
As of April 1, 2011, we have issued an aggregate of 14,925,130 warrants to our lenders under our New Credit Facilities to purchase, solely on a cash-less exercise basis, an aggregate of 14,925,130 shares of our common stock, which warrants have an exercise price of $7.00 per share. The exercise price of the 11,213,713 warrants issued on March 17, 2011 was initially $6.00 per share and, on March 29, 2011, increased to $7.00 per share upon the delivery of certain documents, as required by the Sinosure-CEXIM credit facility and related arrangement with Sinosure. We have committed to issuing a total of 15,000,000 warrants, and will issue the remaining 74,870 warrants upon the request of the applicable lender. All warrants issued, or to be issued, will expire on January 31, 2019.
No other significant change has occurred since the date of the annual financial statements included in this annual report on Form 20-F.
Legal Proceedings. On November 22, 2010, a purported Company shareholder filed a derivative complaint in the High Court of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The derivative complaint names as defendants seven of the eight members of the Company's board of directors. The derivative complaint challenges the amendments in 2009 and 2010 to the Company's management agreement with Danaos Shipping and certain aspects of the sale of common stock in August 2010. The complaint includes counts for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. On February 11, 2011, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the Complaint. Plaintiff's opposition to the motion is due on May 17, 2011, and the reply brief is due on June 24, 2011.
In the summer of 2001, one of our vessels, the Henry (ex CMA CGM Passiflore), experienced engine damage at sea that resulted in an accumulation of oil and oily water in the vessel's engine room. The Coast Guard found oil in the overboard discharge pipe from the vessel's oily water separator. On July 2, 2001, when the vessel was at anchor in Long Beach, California, representatives of our manager notified authorities of the presence of oil on the water on the starboard side of the vessel and, on July 3, 2001, divers retained by our manager found oil in the vessel's starboard sea chest (an opening through which sea water is taken in to cool the engines).
In connection with these events, our manager entered into a plea agreement with the U.S. Attorney, on behalf of the government, which was filed with the U.S. District Court on June 20, 2006, pursuant to which our manager agreed to plead guilty to one count of negligent discharge of oil and one count of obstruction of justice, based on a charge of attempted concealment of the source of the discharge. Consistent with the government's practice in similar cases, our manager agreed to develop and implement a third-party consultant monitored environmental compliance plan and to designate an internal corporate compliance manager. This compliance plan would require our manager to prepare an environmental compliance plan manual for approval by such third-party environmental consultant and the U.S. government. The program would also require our manager to arrange for, fund and complete a series of audits of its fleet management offices and of waste streams of the vessels it manages, including all of the vessels in our fleet that call at U.S. ports, as well as an independent, third-party focused environmental compliance plan audit. Our manager also agreed to a probation period of three years under the plea agreement. Our manager further agreed to pay an aggregate of $500,000 in penalties in connection with the charges of negligent discharge and obstruction of justice under the plea agreement, with half of the penalties to be applied to community service projects that will benefit, restore or preserve the environment and ecosystems in the central California area. On August 14, 2006, the court accepted our manager's guilty plea to the two counts and, on December 4, 2006, sentenced our manager in accordance with the terms of the plea agreement.
106
In the more than nine years since the detention of the Henry (ex CMA CGM Passiflore), our vessels have not been subject to any other detentions or enforcement proceedings involving alleged releases of oil. Our manager began preparation of a proactive management program designed to prevent future non-compliance.
We have not been involved in any legal proceedings that we believe would have a significant effect on our business, financial position, results of operations or liquidity, and we are not aware of any proceedings that are pending or threatened that may have a material effect on our business, financial position, results of operations or liquidity. From time to time, we may be subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business, principally personal injury and property casualty claims. We expect that these claims would be covered by insurance, subject to customary deductibles. However, those claims, even if lacking merit, could result in the expenditure of significant financial and managerial resources.
Dividend Policy. Our board of directors has determined to suspend the payment of cash dividends as a result of market conditions in the international shipping industry. Declaration and payment of any future dividend is subject to the discretion of our board of directors. In addition, under the Bank Agreement relating to our existing credit facilities and various new financing arrangements, we generally will not be permitted to pay cash dividends or repurchase shares of our capital stock through December 31, 2018, absent a substantial reduction in our leverage. 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 any dividend payments. See "Item 3. Key InformationRisk FactorsRisks Inherent in Our Business" for a discussion of the risks related to dividend payments, if any.
After our initial public offering, we paid regular quarterly dividends from February 2007 to November 19, 2008. We paid no dividends in 2006 and, prior to our initial public offering, in 2005 we paid dividends of $244.6 million to our stockholders from our retained earnings.
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "DAC."
107
Trading on the New York Stock Exchange
Since our initial public offering in the United States in October 2006, our common stock has been listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "DAC." The following table shows the high and low sales prices for our common stock during the indicated periods.
|
|
High | Low | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2006 | (Annual)(1) | $ | 24.10 | $ | 19.61 | ||||
2007 | (Annual) | $ | 40.26 | $ | 21.55 | ||||
First Quarter | 26.95 | 21.55 | |||||||
Second Quarter | 33.55 | 26.11 | |||||||
Third Quarter | 40.26 | 29.02 | |||||||
Fourth Quarter | 37.50 | 26.35 | |||||||
2008 | (Annual) | $ | 29.96 | $ | 3.18 | ||||
First Quarter | 29.96 | 23.23 | |||||||
Second Quarter | 27.18 | 21.98 | |||||||
Third Quarter | 24.94 | 14.84 | |||||||
Fourth Quarter | 14.05 | 3.18 | |||||||
2009 | (Annual) | $ | 10.50 | $ | 2.72 | ||||
First Quarter | 10.50 | 3.00 | |||||||
Second Quarter | 5.34 | 2.91 | |||||||
Third Quarter | 6.99 | 2.72 | |||||||
Fourth Quarter | 5.25 | 3.82 | |||||||
2010. | (Annual) | $ | 5.25 | $ | 3.50 | ||||
First Quarter | 5.00 | 3.82 | |||||||
Second Quarter | 5.25 | 3.60 | |||||||
Third Quarter | 4.56 | 3.50 | |||||||
Fourth Quarter | 4.75 | 3.71 | |||||||
October 2010 | 4.75 | 4.25 | |||||||
November 2010 | 4.59 | 3.78 | |||||||
December 2010 | 4.05 | 3.71 | |||||||
2011. | First Quarter | $ | 6.78 | $ | 3.73 | ||||
January 2011 | 4.92 | 3.73 | |||||||
February 2011 | 5.16 | 4.34 | |||||||
March 2011 | 6.78 | 4.55 |
Item 10. Additional Information
Share Capital
Under our articles of incorporation, our authorized capital stock consists of 750,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.01 par value per share, of which, as of December 31, 2010, 108,610,921 shares and 108,611,555 shares, respectively, were issued and outstanding and fully paid, and 100,000,000 shares of blank check preferred stock, $0.01 par value per share, of which, as of December 31, 2010 and March 31, 2011, no shares were issued and outstanding and fully paid. As of March 31, 2011, we had agreed to issue, with such issuance expected to occur early in the second quarter of 2011, an additional 382,261 shares of common stock to the employees of our Manager and directors of the Company, and as of March 31, 2011, we had 108,626,538 shares of common stock issued, outstanding and fully paid. One million shares of the blank check preferred stock have been designated Series A Participating
108
Preferred Stock in connection with our adoption of a stockholder rights plan as described below under "Stockholder Rights Plan." All of our shares of stock are in registered form.
Warrants
As of April 1, 2011, we issued an aggregate of 14,925,130 warrants to our lenders under the Bank Agreement and New Credit Facilities to purchase, solely on a cash-less exercise basis, an aggregate of 14,925,130 shares of our common stock, which warrants have an exercise price of $7.00 per share. The exercise price of the 11,213,713 warrants issued on March 17, 2011 was initially $6.00 per share and, on March 29, 2011, increased to $7.00 per share upon the delivery of certain documents, as required by the Sinosure-CEXIM credit facility and related arrangement with Sinosure. We have committed to issuing a total of 15,000,000 warrants, and will issue the remaining 74,870 warrants upon the request of the applicable lender. All warrants issued, or to be issued, will expire on January 31, 2019.
As a result of the warrants being exercisable solely on a cash-less basis, the number of shares of common stock that would be issuable upon such an exercise will generally be reduced. For instance, in the event 100 warrants were exercised at the current exercise price of $7.00 per share at a time when the applicable fair market value (defined in the warrant agreement to be, generally, the average of the closing price of our common stock over the preceding five trading days) of our common stock was $10.00 per share, 30 shares of our common stock would be issuable rather than 100 shares of our common stock. We will not receive any cash proceeds upon the exercise of warrants.
Common Stock
Each outstanding share of common stock entitles the holder to one vote on all matters submitted to a vote of stockholders. Subject to preferences that may be applicable to any outstanding shares of preferred stock, holders of shares of common stock are entitled to receive ratably all dividends, if any, declared by our board of directors out of funds legally available for dividends. Holders of common stock do not have conversion, redemption or preemptive rights to subscribe to any of our securities. All outstanding shares of common stock are fully paid and nonassessable. The rights, preferences and privileges of holders of shares of common stock are subject to the rights of the holders of any shares of preferred stock which we may issue in the future.
There were 500 shares of common stock outstanding on October 7, 2005, the date our company was domesticated in the Republic of The Marshall Islands. On September 18, 2006 we effected an 88,615-for-1 stock split. On October 6, 2006, we completed our initial public offering and listing of the common stock on the New York Stock Exchange. In this respect 10,250,000 shares of common stock, with par value of $0.01 per share, were issued.
On August 6, 2010, we entered into agreements with several investors, including our largest stockholder, under which we sold to them 54,054,055 shares of our common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $200.0 million in cash, which satisfied a condition under the Bank Agreement with our existing lenders as discussed above. The shares were issued at $3.70 per share on August 12, 2010.
Blank Check Preferred Stock
Under the terms of our articles of incorporation, our board of directors has authority, without any further vote or action by our stockholders, to issue up to 100,000,000 shares of blank check preferred stock, of which 1,000,000 shares have been designated Series A Participating Preferred Stock in connection with our adoption of a stockholder rights plan as described below under "Stockholder Rights Plan." Our board of directors may issue shares of preferred stock on terms calculated to discourage, delay or prevent a change of control of our company or the removal of our management.
109
Stockholder Rights Plan
General
Each share of our common stock includes a right that entitles the holder to purchase from us a unit consisting of one-thousandth of a share of our Series A participating preferred stock at a purchase price of $25.00 per unit, subject to specified adjustments. The rights are issued pursuant to a rights agreement between us and American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, as rights agent. Until a right is exercised, the holder of a right will have no rights to vote or receive dividends or any other stockholder rights.
The rights may have anti-takeover effects. The rights will cause substantial dilution to any person or group that attempts to acquire us without the approval of our board of directors. As a result, the overall effect of the rights may be to render more difficult or discourage any attempt to acquire us. Because our board of directors can approve a redemption of the rights or a permitted offer, the rights should not interfere with a merger or other business combination approved by our board of directors. The adoption of the rights agreement was approved by our stockholders prior to our initial public offering.
We have summarized the material terms and conditions of the rights agreement and the rights below. For a complete description of the rights, we encourage you to read the rights agreement, which is an exhibit to this annual report.
Detachment of the Rights
The rights are attached to all shares of our outstanding common stock and will attach to all common stock that we issue prior to the rights distribution date that we describe below. The rights are not exercisable until after the rights distribution date and will expire at the close of business on the tenth anniversary date of the adoption of the rights plan, unless we redeem or exchange them earlier as described below. The rights will separate from the common stock and a rights distribution date will occur, subject to specified exceptions, on the earlier of the following two dates:
Existing stockholders prior to our initial public offering and their affiliates, as well as any person who would otherwise be an "acquiring person" solely as a result of acquiring shares of common stock pursuant to a subscription agreement with us dated as of August 6, 2010, are excluded from the definition of "acquiring person" for purposes of the rights, and therefore their ownership or future share acquisitions cannot trigger the rights. Specified "inadvertent" owners that would otherwise become an acquiring person, including those who would have this designation as a result of repurchases of common stock by us, will not become acquiring persons as a result of those transactions.
Our board of directors may defer the rights distribution date in some circumstances, and some inadvertent acquisitions will not result in a person becoming an acquiring person if the person promptly divests itself of a sufficient number of shares of common stock.
Until the rights distribution date:
110
As soon as practicable after the rights distribution date, the rights agent will mail certificates representing the rights to holders of record of common stock at the close of business on that date. After the rights distribution date, only separate rights certificates will represent the rights.
We will not issue rights with any shares of common stock we issue after the rights distribution date, except as our board of directors may otherwise determine.
Flip-In Event
A "flip-in event" will occur under the rights agreement when a person becomes an acquiring person. If a flip-in event occurs and we do not redeem the rights as described under the heading "Redemption of Rights" below, each right, other than any right that has become void, as described below, will become exercisable at the time it is no longer redeemable for the number of shares of common stock, or, in some cases, cash, property or other of our securities, having a current market price equal to two times the exercise price of such right.
If a flip-in event occurs, all rights that then are, or in some circumstances that were, beneficially owned by or transferred to an acquiring person or specified related parties will become void in the circumstances the rights agreement specifies.
Flip-Over Event
A "flip-over event" will occur under the rights agreement when, at any time after a person has become an acquiring person:
If a flip-over event occurs, each holder of a right, other than any right that has become void as we describe under the heading "Flip-In Event" above, will have the right to receive the number of shares of common stock of the acquiring company having a current market price equal to two times the exercise price of such right.
Antidilution
The number of outstanding rights associated with our common stock is subject to adjustment for any stock split, stock dividend or subdivision, combination or reclassification of our common stock occurring prior to the rights distribution date. With some exceptions, the rights agreement does not require us to adjust the exercise price of the rights until cumulative adjustments amount to at least 1% of the exercise price. It also does not require us to issue fractional shares of our preferred stock that are not integral multiples of one one-hundredth of a share, and, instead we may make a cash adjustment based on the market price of the common stock on the last trading date prior to the date of exercise. The rights agreement reserves us the right to require, prior to the occurrence of any flip-in event or flip-over event that, on any exercise of rights, that a number of rights must be exercised so that we will issue only whole shares of stock.
Redemption of Rights
At any time until 10 days after the date on which the occurrence of a flip-in event is first publicly announced, we may redeem the rights in whole, but not in part, at a redemption price of $0.01 per right. The redemption price is subject to adjustment for any stock split, stock dividend or similar transaction occurring before the date of redemption. At our option, we may pay that redemption price
111
in cash, shares of common stock or any other consideration our board of directors may select. The rights are not exercisable after a flip-in event until they are no longer redeemable. If our board of directors timely orders the redemption of the rights, the rights will terminate on the effectiveness of that action.
Exchange of Rights
We may, at our option, exchange the rights (other than rights owned by an acquiring person or an affiliate or an associate of an acquiring person, which have become void), in whole or in part. The exchange must be at an exchange ratio of one share of common stock per right, subject to specified adjustments at any time after the occurrence of a flip-in event and prior to:
Amendment of Terms of Rights
While the rights are outstanding, we may amend the provisions of the rights agreement only as follows:
At any time when no rights are outstanding, we may amend any of the provisions of the rights agreement, other than decreasing the redemption price.
Memorandum and Articles of Association
Our purpose is to engage in any lawful act or activity relating to the business of chartering, rechartering or operating containerships, drybulk carriers or other vessels or any other lawful act or activity customarily conducted in conjunction with shipping, and any other lawful act or activity approved by the board of directors. Our articles of incorporation and bylaws do not impose any limitations on the ownership rights of our stockholders.
Under our bylaws, annual stockholder meetings will be held at a time and place selected by our board of directors. The meetings may be held in or outside of the Marshall Islands. Special meetings may be called by the board of directors or, at the request of the holders of a majority of our issued and outstanding stock entitled to vote on the matters proposed to be considered at such meeting, or by our secretary. Our board of directors may set a record date between 15 and 60 days before the date of any meeting to determine the stockholders that will be eligible to receive notice and vote at the meeting.
Directors
Our directors are elected by a plurality of the votes cast at each annual meeting of the stockholders by the holders of shares entitled to vote in the election. There is no provision for cumulative voting.
112
The board of directors may change the number of directors to not less than two, nor more than 15, by a vote of a majority of the entire board. Each director shall be elected to serve until the third succeeding annual meeting of stockholders and until his or her successor shall have been duly elected and qualified, except in the event of death, resignation or removal. A vacancy on the board created by death, resignation, removal (which may only be for cause), or failure of the stockholders to elect the entire class of directors to be elected at any election of directors or for any other reason, may be filled only by an affirmative vote of a majority of the remaining directors then in office, even if less than a quorum, at any special meeting called for that purpose or at any regular meeting of the board of directors. The board of directors has the authority to fix the amounts which shall be payable to the members of our board of directors for attendance at any meeting or for services rendered to us.
Dissenters' Rights of Appraisal and Payment
Under the Marshall Islands Business Corporations Act, or the BCA, our stockholders have the right to dissent from various corporate actions, including any merger or sale of all or substantially all of our assets not made in the usual course of our business, and to receive payment of the fair value of their shares. In the event of any further amendment of our articles of incorporation, a stockholder also has the right to dissent and receive payment for his or her shares if the amendment alters certain rights in respect of those shares. The dissenting stockholder must follow the procedures set forth in the BCA to receive payment. In the event that we and any dissenting stockholder fail to agree on a price for the shares, the BCA procedures involve, among other things, the institution of proceedings in the high court of the Republic of The Marshall Islands in which our Marshall Islands office is situated or in any appropriate jurisdiction outside the Marshall Islands in which our shares are primarily traded on a local or national securities exchange. The value of the shares of the dissenting stockholder is fixed by the court after reference, if the court so elects, to the recommendations of a court-appointed appraiser.
Stockholders' Derivative Actions
Under the BCA, any of our stockholders may bring an action in our name to procure a judgment in our favor, also known as a derivative action, provided that the stockholder bringing the action is a holder of common stock both at the time the derivative action is commenced and at the time of the transaction to which the action relates.
Anti-takeover Provisions of our Charter Documents
Several provisions of our articles of incorporation and bylaws may have anti-takeover effects. These provisions are intended to avoid costly takeover battles, lessen our vulnerability to a hostile change of control and enhance the ability of our board of directors to maximize stockholder value in connection with any unsolicited offer to acquire us. However, these anti-takeover provisions, which are summarized below, could also discourage, delay or prevent (1) the merger or acquisition of our company by means of a tender offer, a proxy contest or otherwise, that a stockholder may consider in its best interest and (2) the removal of incumbent officers and directors.
Blank Check Preferred Stock
Under the terms of our articles of incorporation, our board of directors has authority, without any further vote or action by our stockholders, to issue up to 5,000,000 shares of blank check preferred stock, of which 1,000,000 shares have been designated Series A Participating Preferred Stock in connection with our adoption of a stockholder rights plan as described above under "Stockholder Rights Plan." Our board of directors may issue shares of preferred stock on terms calculated to discourage, delay or prevent a change of control of our company or the removal of our management.
113
Classified Board of Directors
Our articles of incorporation provide for a board of directors serving staggered, three-year terms. Approximately one-third of our board of directors will be elected each year. This classified board provision could discourage a third party from making a tender offer for our shares or attempting to obtain control of our company. It could also delay stockholders who do not agree with the policies of the board of directors from removing a majority of the board of directors for two years.
Election and Removal of Directors
Our articles of incorporation and bylaws prohibit cumulative voting in the election of directors. Our bylaws require parties other than the board of directors to give advance written notice of nominations for the election of directors. Our bylaws also provide that our directors may be removed only for cause and only upon the affirmative vote of the holders of at least 662/3% of the outstanding shares of our capital stock entitled to vote for those directors. These provisions may discourage, delay or prevent the removal of incumbent officers and directors.
Calling of Special Meetings of Stockholders
Our bylaws provide that special meetings of our stockholders may be called by our board of directors or, at the request of holders of a majority of the common stock entitled to vote at such meeting, by our secretary.
Advance Notice Requirements for Stockholder Proposals and Director Nominations
Our bylaws provide that stockholders seeking to nominate candidates for election as directors or to bring business before an annual meeting of stockholders must provide timely notice of their proposal in writing to the corporate secretary.
Generally, to be timely, a stockholder's notice must be received at our principal executive offices not less than 90 days or more than 120 days prior to the first anniversary date of the previous year's annual meeting. Our bylaws also specify requirements as to the form and content of a stockholder's notice. These provisions may impede stockholders' ability to bring matters before an annual meeting of stockholders or to make nominations for directors at an annual meeting of stockholders.
Business Combinations
Although the BCA does not contain specific provisions regarding "business combinations" between companies organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands and "interested stockholders," we have included these provisions in our articles of incorporation. Specifically, our articles of incorporation prohibit us from engaging in a "business combination" with certain persons for three years following the date the person becomes an interested stockholder. Interested stockholders generally include:
Subject to certain exceptions, a business combination includes, among other things:
114
aggregate market value of all assets of us, determined on a consolidated basis, or the aggregate value of all the outstanding stock of us;
These provisions of our articles of incorporation do not apply to a business combination if:
115
than to any direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiary or to our company) having an aggregate market value equal to 50% or more of either that aggregate market value of all of the assets of our company determined on a consolidated basis or the aggregate market value of all the outstanding shares; or
Material Contracts
For a summary of the following agreements, please see the specified section of this Annual Report on Form 20-F. Such summaries are not intended to be complete and reference is made to the contracts themselves, which are exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 20-F.
For a description of the Amended and Restated Management Agreement, dated September 18, 2006, between Danaos Shipping Company Limited and Danaos Corporation., as amended February 12, 2009 and February 8, 2010, we signed an addendum to the Management Agreement amending the management fees, effective January 1, 2010, please see "Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party TransactionsManagement Agreement."
For a description of the Restrictive Covenant Agreement, dated October 11, 2006, between Danaos Corporation and Dr. John Coustas, please see "Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party TransactionsNon-competition."
For a description of the Stockholder Rights Agreement, dated September 18, 2006, between Danaos Corporation and American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, as Rights Agent, as amended, please see "Item 10. Additional InformationShare CapitalStockholder Rights Plan."
For a description of the Restructuring Agreement, dated January 24, 2011, between the Company, its subsidiaries and its lenders and swap-counterparties and lenders and the Company's credit facilities and financing arrangements, please see "Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and ProspectsBank Agreement." For additional information regarding our existing credit facilities, including the financial covenants contained therein, see Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report.
For a description of the Subscription Agreements, dated August 6, 2010, between the Company and certain investors, please see "Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions-Related Party Transactions-Common Stock Sale."
Exchange Controls and Other Limitations Affecting Stockholders
Under Marshall Islands and Greek 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 stock.
We are not aware of any limitations on the rights to own our common stock, including rights of non-resident or foreign stockholders to hold or exercise voting rights on our common stock, imposed by foreign law or by our articles of incorporation or bylaws.
Tax Considerations
Marshall Islands Tax Considerations
We are a Marshall Islands corporation. Because we do not, and we do not expect that we will, conduct business or operations in the Marshall Islands, under current Marshall Islands law we are not subject to tax on income or capital gains and our stockholders will not be subject to Marshall Islands taxation or withholding on dividends and other distributions, including upon a return of capital, we
116
make to our stockholders. In addition, our stockholders, who do not reside in, maintain offices in or engage in business in the Marshall Islands, will not be subject to Marshall Islands stamp, capital gains or other taxes on the purchase, ownership or disposition of common stock, and such stockholders will not be required by the Republic of The Marshall Islands to file a tax return relating to the common stock.
Each stockholder is urged to consult their tax counsel or other advisor with regard to the legal and tax consequences, under the laws of pertinent jurisdictions, including the Marshall Islands, of their investment in us. Further, it is the responsibility of each stockholder to file all state, local and non-U.S., as well as U.S. federal tax returns that may be required of them.
Liberian Tax Considerations
The Republic of Liberia enacted a new income tax act effective as of January 1, 2001 (the "New Act"). In contrast to the income tax law previously in effect since 1977, the New Act does not distinguish between the taxation of "non-resident" Liberian corporations, such as our Liberian subsidiaries, which conduct no business in Liberia and were wholly exempt from taxation under the prior law, and "resident" Liberian corporations which conduct business in Liberia and are (and were under the prior law) subject to taxation.
In 2004, the Liberian Ministry of Finance issued regulations exempting non-resident corporations engaged in international shipping, such as our Liberian subsidiaries, from Liberian taxation under the New Act retroactive to January 1, 2001. It is unclear whether these regulations, which ostensibly conflict with the provisions of the New Act, are a valid exercise of the regulatory authority of the Liberian Ministry of Finance such that the regulations can be considered unquestionably enforceable. However, an opinion dated December 23, 2004 addressed by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Republic of Liberia to The LISCR Trust Company stated that the regulations are a valid exercise of the regulatory authority of the Ministry of Finance. The Liberian Ministry of Finance has not at any time since January 1, 2001 sought to collect taxes from any of our Liberian subsidiaries.
If, however, our Liberian subsidiaries were subject to Liberian income tax under the New Act, they would be subject to tax at a rate of 35% on their worldwide income. As a result, their, and subsequently our, net income and cash flow would be materially reduced. In addition, as the ultimate shareholder of the Liberian subsidiaries we would be subject to Liberian withholding tax on dividends paid by our Liberian subsidiaries at rates ranging from 15% to 20%.
United States Federal Income Tax Considerations
The following discussion of United States federal income tax matters is based on the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or the Code, judicial decisions, administrative pronouncements, and existing and proposed regulations issued by the United States Department of the Treasury, all of which are in effect and available and subject to change, possibly with retroactive effect. Except as otherwise noted, this discussion is based on the assumption that we will not maintain an office or other fixed place of business within the United States. We have no current intention of maintaining such an office. References in this discussion to "we" and "us" are to Danaos Corporation and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis, unless the context otherwise requires.
United States Federal Income Taxation of Our Company
Taxation of Operating Income: In General
Unless exempt from United States federal income taxation under the rules discussed below, a foreign corporation is subject to United States federal income taxation in respect of any income that is derived from the use of vessels, from the hiring or leasing of vessels for use on a time, operating or
117
bareboat charter basis, from the participation in a pool, partnership, strategic alliance, joint operating agreement or other joint venture it directly or indirectly owns or participates in that generates such income, or from the performance of services directly related to those uses, which we refer to as "shipping income," to the extent that the shipping income is derived from sources within the United States. For these purposes, 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 constitutes income from sources within the United States, which we refer to as "United States-source shipping income."
Shipping income attributable to transportation that both begins and ends in the United States is generally considered to be 100% from sources within the United States. We do not expect to engage in transportation that produces income which is considered to be 100% from sources within the United States.
Shipping income attributable to transportation exclusively between non-United States ports is generally considered to be 100% derived from sources outside the United States. Shipping income derived from sources outside the United States will not be subject to any United States federal income tax.
In the absence of exemption from tax under Section 883 of the Code, our gross United States-source shipping income and that of our vessel-owning or vessel-operating subsidiaries, unless determined to be effectively connected with the conduct of a United States trade or business, as described below, would be subject to a 4% tax imposed without allowance for deductions as described below.
Exemption of Operating Income from United States Federal Income Taxation
Other than with respect to four of our vessel-owning subsidiaries which are discussed in greater detail below, under Section 883 of the Code, we and our vessel-owning or vessel-operating subsidiaries will be exempt from United States federal income taxation on United States-source shipping income if:
We believe, based on Revenue Ruling 2008-17, 2008-12 IRB 626, and, in the case of the Marshall Islands, an exchange of notes between the United States and the Marshall Islands, 1990-2 C.B. 321, in the case of Liberia, an exchange of notes between the United States and Liberia, 1988-1 C.B. 463, in the case of Cyprus, an exchange of notes between the United States and Cyprus, 1989-2 C.B. 332 and, in the case of Singapore, an exchange of notes between the United States and Singapore, 1990-2 C.B. 323, (each an "Exchange of Notes") that the Marshall Islands, Liberia, Cyprus and Singapore, the jurisdictions in which we and our vessel-owning and vessel-operating subsidiaries are incorporated, grant an "equivalent exemption" to United States corporations. Therefore, we believe that we and our vessel-owning and vessel-operating subsidiaries other than four vessel-owning subsidiaries discussed below will be exempt from United States federal income taxation with respect to United States-source
118
shipping income if either the 50% Ownership Test or the Publicly-Traded Test is met. While we believe that we currently satisfy the 50% Ownership Test, we expect that, if the 883 Trust were to come to own 50% or less of our shares, it may be difficult for us to satisfy the 50% Ownership Test due to the public trading of our stock. Our ability to satisfy the Publicly-Traded Test is discussed below.
The Section 883 regulations provide, in pertinent part, that stock of a foreign corporation will be considered to be "primarily traded" on an established securities market in a particular 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. For 2010, our common stock, which is the sole class of our issued and outstanding stock, was "primarily traded" on the New York Stock Exchange and we anticipate that that will also be the case for subsequent taxable years.
Under the regulations, our common stock will be considered to be "regularly traded" on an established securities market if one or more classes of our stock representing more than 50% of our outstanding shares, by total combined voting power of all classes of stock entitled to vote and total value, is listed on the market. We refer to this as the "listing threshold". Since our common stock is our sole class of stock we satisfied the listing threshold for 2010 and expect to continue to do so for subsequent taxable years.
It is further required that with respect to each class of stock relied upon to meet the listing threshold (i) such class of the stock is traded on the market, other than in minimal quantities, on at least 60 days during the taxable year or 1/6 of the days in a short taxable year; and (ii) the aggregate number of shares of such class of stock traded on such market is 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. We believe that we satisfied the trading frequency and trading volume tests years for 2010 and we expect to continue to satisfy these requirements for subsequent taxable years. Even if this were not the case, the regulations provide that the trading frequency and trading volume tests will be deemed satisfied if, as was the case for 2010 and we expect to be the case with our common stock for subsequent taxable years, such class of stock is traded on an established market in the United States and such stock is regularly quoted by dealers making a market in such stock.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the regulations provide, in pertinent part, that a class of our stock will not be considered to be "regularly traded" on an established securities market for any taxable year in which 50% or more of such class of our outstanding shares of the stock is owned, actually or constructively under specified stock attribution rules, on more than half the days during the taxable year by persons who each own 5% or more of the value of such class of our outstanding stock, which we refer to as the "5 Percent Override Rule."
For purposes of being able to determine the persons who own 5% or more of our stock, or "5% Stockholders," the regulations permit us to rely on those persons that are identified on Schedule 13G and Schedule 13D filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, or the "SEC," as having a 5% or more beneficial interest in our common stock. The regulations further provide that an investment company which is registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, will not be treated as a 5% Stockholder for such purposes.
More than 50% of our shares of common stock are currently owned by 5% stockholders. Thus, we will be subject to the 5% Override Rule unless we can establish that among the shares included in the closely-held block of our shares of common stock there are a sufficient number of shares of common stock that are owned or treated as owned by "qualified stockholders" such that the shares of common stock included in such block that are not so treated could not constitute 50% or more of the shares of our common stock for more than half the number of days during the taxable year. In order to establish this, such qualified stockholders would have to comply with certain documentation and certification requirements designed to substantiate their identity as qualified stockholders. For these purposes, a
119
"qualified stockholder" includes (i) an individual that owns or is treated as owning shares of our common stock and is a resident of a jurisdiction that provides an exemption that is equivalent to that provided by Section 883 of the Code and (ii) certain other persons. There can be no assurance that we will not be subject to the 5 Percent Override Rule with respect to any taxable year.
Approximately 62.3% of our shares will be treated, under applicable attribution rules, as owned by the 883 Trust whose ownership of our shares will be attributed, during his lifetime, to John Coustas, our chief executive officer, for purposes of Section 883. Dr. Coustas has entered into an agreement with us regarding his compliance, and the compliance of certain entities that he controls and through which he owns our shares, with the certification requirements designed to substantiate status as qualified stockholders. In certain circumstances, including circumstances where Dr. Coustas ceases to be a "qualified stockholder" or where the 883 Trust transfers some or all of our shares that it holds, Dr Coustas' compliance, and the compliance of certain entities that he controls or through which he owns our shares, with the terms of the agreement with us will not enable us to satisfy the requirements for the benefits of Section 883. Following Dr. Coustas' death, there can be no assurance that our shares that are treated, under applicable attribution rules, as owned by the 883 Trust will be treated as owned by a "qualified stockholder" or that any "qualified stockholder" to whom ownership of all or a portion of such ownership is attributed will comply with the ownership certification requirements under Section 883. As to the four vessel-owning subsidiaries referred to above, we believe that their qualification for the benefits of Section 883 for any taxable year will depend upon whether preferred shares issued by such subsidiaries, as to which we are not the direct or indirect shareholder of record, are owned, directly or under applicable ownership attribution rules, by "qualified shareholders" who comply with specified ownership certification procedures. There can be no assurance that such preferred shares will be treated as so owned with respect to any taxable year.
Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we or any of our vessel-owning or vessel-operating subsidiaries will qualify for the benefits of Section 883 for any taxable year.
To the extent the benefits of Section 883 are unavailable, our U.S.-source shipping income, to the extent not considered to be "effectively connected" with the conduct of a United States trade or business, as described below, would be subject to a 4% tax imposed by Section 887 of the Code on a gross basis, without the benefit of deductions. Since, under the sourcing rules described above, we expect that no more than 50% of our shipping income would be treated as being derived from United States sources, we expect that the maximum effective rate of United States federal income tax on our gross shipping income would never exceed 2% under the 4% gross basis tax regime. Many of our charters contain provisions obligating the charter to reimburse us for amounts paid in respect of the 4% tax with respect to the activities of the vessel subject to the charter.
To the extent the benefits of the Section 883 exemption are unavailable and our United States-source shipping income is considered to be "effectively connected" with the conduct of a United States trade or business, as described below, any such "effectively connected" U.S.-source shipping income, net of applicable deductions, would be subject to the United States federal corporate income tax currently imposed at rates of up to 35%. In addition, we may be subject to the 30% "branch profits" taxes 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 United States trade or business.
Our U.S.-source shipping income, other than leasing income, will be considered "effectively connected" with the conduct of a United States trade or business only if:
120
Our U.S.-source shipping income from leasing will be considered "effectively connected" with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business only if:
For these purposes, leasing income is treated as attributable to a fixed place of business where such place of business is a material factor in the realization of such income and such income is realized in the ordinary course of business carried on through such fixed place of business. Based on the foregoing and on the expected mode of our shipping operations and other activities, we believe that none of our U.S.-source shipping income will be "effectively connected" with the conduct of a U.S. trade or business.
United States Taxation of Gain on Sale of Vessels
Regardless of whether we qualify for exemption under Section 883, we will not be subject to United States federal income taxation with respect to gain realized on a sale of a vessel, provided the sale is considered to occur outside of the United States under United States federal income tax principles. In general, a sale of a vessel will be considered to occur outside of the 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 will be so structured that it will be considered to occur outside of the United States unless any gain from such sale is expected to qualify for exemption under Section 883.
United States Federal Income Taxation of United States Holders
As used herein, the term "United States Holder" means a beneficial owner of common stock or warrants that is a United States citizen or resident, United States corporation or other United States entity taxable as a corporation, an estate the income of which is subject to United States federal income taxation regardless of its source, or a trust if a court within the United States is able to exercise primary jurisdiction over the administration of the trust and one or more United States persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust. The discussion that follows deals only with common stock or warrants that are held by a United States Holder as capital assets, and does not address the treatment of United States Holders that are subject to special tax rules, including a United States Holder, if any, that has received our warrants as compensation for services.
If a partnership holds our common stock or warrants, the tax treatment of a partner will generally depend upon the status of the partner and upon the activities of the partnership. Partners in a partnership holding our common stock or warrants are encouraged to consult their tax advisor.
Distributions with Respect to Common Stock
Subject to the discussion of passive foreign investment companies, or PFICs, below, any distributions made by us with respect to our common stock to a United States Holder will generally constitute dividends, which may be taxable as ordinary income or "qualified dividend income" as described in more detail below, to the extent of our current or accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under United States federal income tax principles. Distributions in excess of our earnings
121
and profits will be treated first as a nontaxable return of capital to the extent of the United States Holder's tax basis in his common stock on a dollar for dollar basis and thereafter as capital gain. Because we are not a United States corporation, United States Holders that are corporations 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 stock will generally be treated as passive category income or, in the case of certain types of United States Holders, general category income for purposes of computing allowable foreign tax credits for United States foreign tax credit purposes.
Dividends paid on our common stock to a United States Holder who is an individual, trust or estate (a "United States Individual Holder") should be treated as "qualified dividend income" that is taxable to such United States Individual Holders at preferential tax rates (through 2012) provided that (1) the common stock is readily tradable on an established securities market in the United States (such as the New York Stock Exchange); (2) we are not a PFIC for the taxable year during which the dividend is paid or the immediately preceding taxable year (see the discussion below under "PFIC Status and Material U.S. Federal Tax Consequences"); and (3) the United States Individual Holder owns the common stock for more than 60 days in the 121-day period beginning 60 days before the date on which the common stock becomes ex-dividend. Special rules may apply to any "extraordinary dividend". Generally, an extraordinary dividend is a dividend in an amount which is equal to or in excess of ten percent of a stockholder's adjusted basis (or fair market value in certain circumstances) in a share of common stock paid by us. If we pay an "extraordinary dividend" on our common stock that is treated as "qualified dividend income," then any loss derived by a United States Individual Holder from the sale or exchange of such common stock will be treated as long-term capital loss to the extent of such dividend.
There is no assurance that any dividends paid on our common stock will be eligible for these preferential rates in the hands of a United States Individual Holder. Moreover, it is unclear whether these preferential tax rates on dividends will be extended on or before December 31, 2012 or, in the alternative, whether they will expire on such date. Any dividends paid by us which are not eligible for these preferential rates will be taxed to a United States Individual Holder at the standard ordinary income rates.
Legislation has been introduced that would deny the preferential rate of federal income tax currently imposed on qualified dividend income with respect to dividends received from a non-U.S. corporation, unless the non-U.S. corporation either is eligible for the benefits of a comprehensive income tax treaty with the United States or is created or organized under the laws of a foreign country which has a comprehensive income tax system. Because the Marshall Islands has not entered into a comprehensive income tax treaty with the United States and imposes only limited taxes on corporations organized under its laws, it is unlikely that we could satisfy either of these requirements. Consequently, if this legislation were enacted in its current form the preferential rate of federal income tax described above may no longer be applicable to dividends received from us. As of the date hereof, it is not possible to predict with certainty whether or in what form the proposed legislation will be enacted.
The exercise price of our warrants, and the amount of common stock to be issued upon exercise, are subject to adjustment under certain circumstances. If such an adjustment increases a proportionate interest of a United States Holder of a warrant in the fully diluted common stock, or increases a proportionate interest of a United States Holder of common stock in the fully diluted common stock, the United States Holder of the warrants, or common stock, whose proportionate interest increased may be treated as having received a constructive distribution, which may be taxable to such United States Holder as a dividend. The warrants by their terms permit us to increase the amount of common stock issuable on an exercise of the warrants to prevent deemed dividend treatment with respect to holders of our common stock.
122
Sale, Exchange or other Disposition of Common Stock or Warrants
Assuming we do not constitute a PFIC for any taxable year, a United States Holder generally will recognize taxable gain or loss upon a sale, exchange or other disposition of our common stock or warrants in an amount equal to the difference between the amount realized by the United States Holder from such sale, exchange or other disposition and the United States Holder's tax basis in such stock or warrants. Such gain or loss will be treated as long-term capital gain or loss if the United States 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 United States-source income or loss, as applicable, for United States foreign tax credit purposes. A United States Holder's ability to deduct capital losses is subject to certain limitations.
Exercis