fv1za
As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 18, 2009
Registration No. 333-161961
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Amendment No. 3
to
Form F-1
REGISTRATION
STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF
1933
SEANERGY MARITIME HOLDINGS
CORP.
(Exact name of Registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
|
|
Republic of the Marshall Islands
|
|
4412
|
|
Not Applicable
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
|
1-3 Patriarchou Grigoriou
166 74 Glyfada
Athens, Greece
Tel: +30 210 9638461
(Address, including zip code,
and telephone number, including area code, of Registrants
principal executive offices)
Georgios Koutsolioutsos, Chairman of the Board of
Directors
Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp.
1-3 Patriarchou Grigoriou
166 74 Glyfada
Athens, Greece
Tel: +30 210 9638461
(Address, including zip code,
and telephone number, including area code, of agent for
service)
With copies to:
|
|
|
A. Jeffry Robinson, Esq.
Broad and Cassel
2 South Biscayne Blvd., 21st Floor
Miami, Florida 33131
Office: (305) 373-9400
Fax: (305) 373-9443
|
|
Andrew J. Pitts, Esq.
Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
Worldwide Plaza
825 Eighth Avenue
New York, New York 10019
Office: 212-474-1000
Fax: 212-474-3700
|
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public: As soon as practicable after the
effective date of this registration statement.
If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be
offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the
following
box. o
If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
please check the following box and list the Securities Act
registration statement number of the earlier effective
registration statement for the same
offering. o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
The Registrant hereby amends this to Registration Statement
on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this Registration Statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the Registration
Statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission,
acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.
The
information in this prospectus is not complete and may be
changed. We may not sell these securities until the registration
statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is
effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these
securities and is not soliciting an offer to buy these
securities in any state where the offer or sale is not
permitted.
|
SUBJECT TO COMPLETION, DATED
NOVEMBER 18, 2009
PRELIMINARY PROSPECTUS
Seanergy Maritime Holdings
Corp.
Common Stock
$
We are selling up to $ of shares
of common stock. We have granted the underwriters an option to
purchase up to $ of additional
shares of common stock to cover over-allotments. Victor Restis,
one of our significant shareholders, has committed to purchase
directly from us at the public offering price
$ of shares of common stock
concurrently with the closing of this transaction. We refer to
this transaction as the concurrent sale. The shares sold in the
concurrent sale will not be subject to any underwriting
discounts or commissions. Please read the section in this
prospectus entitled Underwriting for more
information.
Our common stock is currently quoted on the NASDAQ Global Market
under the symbol SHIP. On November 17, 2009,
the closing price of our common stock was $3.99 per share.
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk.
See Risk Factors beginning on page 12.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state
securities commission has approved or disapproved of these
securities or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this
prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
Total
|
|
Public offering price
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Underwriting discounts
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Proceeds to us, before expenses, from this offering to the public
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Proceeds to us, before expenses, from the concurrent sale
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Total proceeds to us, before expenses
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
The underwriters expect to deliver the shares to purchasers on
or
about ,
2009, through the book-entry facilities of the Depository Trust
Company.
|
|
Citi |
Dahlman Rose & Company |
,
2009
You should rely only on the information contained or
incorporated by reference in this prospectus. We have not
authorized anyone to provide you with different information. We
are not making an offer of these securities in any jurisdiction
where the offer is not permitted. You should not assume that the
information contained in this prospectus is accurate as of any
date other than the date on the front of this prospectus.
We obtained statistical data, market data and other industry
data and forecasts used throughout this prospectus from publicly
available information. While we believe that the statistical
data, industry data, forecasts and market research are reliable,
we have not independently verified the data, and we do not make
any representation as to the accuracy of the information.
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
i
ENFORCEABILITY
OF CIVIL LIABILITIES
Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp. is a Marshall Islands company
and our executive offices are located outside of the United
States in Athens, Greece. All of our directors, officers and
some of the experts named in this prospectus reside outside the
United States. In addition, a substantial portion of our assets
and the assets of our directors, officers and experts 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 the United States, judgments you
may obtain in 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.
Furthermore, there is substantial doubt that the courts of the
Marshall Islands or Greece would enter judgments in original
actions brought in those courts predicated on U.S. federal
or state securities laws.
ii
Prospectus
Summary
This summary highlights certain information appearing
elsewhere in this prospectus. For a more complete understanding
of this offering, you should read the entire prospectus
carefully, including the risk factors and the financial
statements.
We use the term deadweight tons, or dwt, in
describing the capacity of our dry bulk carriers. Dwt, expressed
in metric tons, each of which is equivalent to 1,000 kilograms,
refers to the maximum weight of cargo and supplies that a vessel
can carry. Dry bulk carriers are categorized as Handysize,
Handymax/Supramax, Panamax and Capesize. The carrying capacity
of a Handysize dry bulk carrier generally ranges from 10,000 to
30,000 dwt and that of a Handymax dry bulk carrier generally
ranges from 30,000 to 60,000 dwt. Supramax is a
sub-category
of the Handymax category and typically has a cargo capacity of
between 50,000 and 60,000 dwt. By comparison, the carrying
capacity of a Panamax dry bulk carrier generally ranges from
60,000 to 100,000 dwt and the carrying capacity of a Capesize
dry bulk carrier is generally 100,000 dwt and above.
References in this prospectus to Seanergy,
we, us or our company refer
to Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp. and our subsidiaries, but,
if the context otherwise requires, may refer only to Seanergy
Maritime Holdings Corp. References in this prospectus to
Seanergy Maritime refer to our predecessor, Seanergy
Maritime Corp. References in this prospectus to BET
refer to Bulk Energy Transport (Holdings) Limited and its wholly
owned subsidiaries. We acquired a 50% controlling interest in
BET in August 2009 through our right to appoint a majority of
the BET board of directors as provided in the shareholders
agreement.
The
Company
We are an international company providing worldwide
transportation of dry bulk commodities through our vessel-owning
subsidiaries and Bulk Energy Transport (Holdings) Limited, or
BET. Our existing fleet, including BETs vessels, consists
of one Handysize vessel, one Handymax vessel, two Supramax
vessels, three Panamax vessels and four Capesize vessels. Our
fleet carries a variety of dry bulk commodities, including coal,
iron ore, and grains, as well as bauxite, phosphate, fertilizer
and steel products.
We acquired our initial fleet of six dry bulk carriers on
August 28, 2008 from the Restis family, one of our major
shareholders. Less than one year later, we expanded our fleet by
acquiring a controlling interest in BET, a joint venture to own
and operate five dry bulk vessels established between
Constellation Bulk Energy Holdings, Inc., or Constellation, and
Mineral Transport Holdings, Inc., a company controlled by
members of the Restis family, one of our major shareholders. We
entered into a shareholders agreement with Mineral
Transport Holdings, Inc., or Mineral Transport, that allows us,
among other things to appoint a majority of the members of the
board of directors of BET. As a result, we control BET.
BETs fleet consists of four Capesize vessels and one
Panamax vessel. See Our Business BET.
Our acquisitions demonstrate both our ability to successfully
grow through acquisition and our strategy to grow quickly and
achieve critical mass. By acquiring dry bulk carriers of various
sizes, we are also able to serve a variety of needs of a variety
of charterers. Finally, by capitalizing on our relationship with
the Restis family and its affiliates, which have a proven track
record of more than 40 years in dry bulk shipping, we are able
to take advantage of economies of scale and efficiencies
resulting from the use of Restis affiliates for the technical
and commercial management of our fleet. See Our
Business Management of the Fleet.
1
Our
Fleet
We control and operate, through our vessel-owning subsidiaries
and BET, 11 dry bulk carriers, including two newly built
vessels, that transport a variety of dry bulk commodities. The
following table provides summary information about our fleet and
its current employment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daily Time
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Terms of Time
|
|
Charter
|
|
|
Vessel/Flag
|
|
Type
|
|
Dwt
|
|
Built
|
|
Charter Period
|
|
Hire Rate
|
|
Charterer
|
|
African Oryx/Bahamas
|
|
Handysize
|
|
24,110
|
|
1997
|
|
Expiring August 2011
|
|
$7,000 plus a 50% profit share calculated on the average spot
Time Charter Routes derived from the Baltic Supramax Index
|
|
MUR Shipping B.V.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
African Zebra/Bahamas
|
|
Handymax
|
|
38,623
|
|
1985
|
|
Expiring August 2011
|
|
$7,500 plus a 50% profit share calculated on the average spot
Time Charter Routes derived from the Baltic Supramax Index
|
|
MUR Shipping B.V.
|
Bremen Max/Isle of Man
|
|
Panamax
|
|
73,503
|
|
1993
|
|
Expiring August 2010
|
|
$15,500
|
|
SAMC
|
Hamburg Max/Isle of Man
|
|
Panamax
|
|
72,338
|
|
1994
|
|
Expiring September 2010
|
|
$15,500
|
|
SAMC
|
Davakis G./Bahamas(1)(4)
|
|
Supramax
|
|
54,051
|
|
2008
|
|
SPOT
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
Delos Ranger/Bahamas(1)(4)
|
|
Supramax
|
|
54,051
|
|
2008
|
|
SPOT
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
BET Commander/Isle of Man(2)
|
|
Capesize
|
|
149,507
|
|
1991
|
|
December 2009(3)
|
|
$22,000
|
|
Swiss Marine Services SA
|
BET Fighter/St. Vincent and the Grenadines(2)
|
|
Capesize
|
|
173,149
|
|
1992
|
|
Expiring in September 2011
|
|
$25,000
|
|
SAMC
|
BET Prince/Isle of Man(2)
|
|
Capesize
|
|
163,554
|
|
1995
|
|
Expiring in November 2009(3)
|
|
$23,000
|
|
Swiss Marine Services SA
|
BET Scouter/Isle of Man(2)
|
|
Capesize
|
|
171,175
|
|
1995
|
|
Expiring in October 2011
|
|
$26,000
|
|
SAMC
|
BET Intruder/Isle of Man(2)
|
|
Panamax
|
|
69,235
|
|
1993
|
|
Expiring in September 2011
|
|
$15,500
|
|
SAMC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
1,043,296
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The vessels are employed in the spot market. |
|
(2) |
|
Vessels owned by BET. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
We have secured new time charters with SAMC for each of the BET
Commander and BET Prince commencing upon the expiration of the
existing time charters at daily charter rates of $24,000 and
$25,000, respectively, through February 2012 and January
2012, respectively. |
The global dry bulk carrier fleet is divided into four
categories based on a vessels carrying capacity. These
categories are:
|
|
|
|
|
Capesize. Capesize vessels have a carrying
capacity of 100,000-199,999 dwt. Only the largest ports around
the world possess the infrastructure to accommodate vessels of
this size. Capesize vessels are primarily used to transport iron
ore or coal and, to a much lesser extent, grains, primarily on
long-haul routes.
|
|
|
|
Panamax. Panamax vessels have a carrying
capacity of between 60,000 and 100,000 dwt. These vessels are
designed to meet the physical restrictions of the Panama Canal
locks (hence their name Panamax the
largest vessels able to transit the Panama Canal, making them
more versatile than larger vessels). These vessels carry coal,
grains, and, to a lesser extent, minerals such as
bauxite/alumina and phosphate rock. As the availability of
Capesize vessels has dwindled, Panamaxes have also been used to
haul iron ore cargoes.
|
|
|
|
Handymax/Supramax. Handymax vessels have a
carrying capacity of between 30,000 and 60,000 dwt. These
vessels operate on a large number of geographically dispersed
global trade routes, carrying primarily grains and minor bulks.
The standard vessels are usually built with
25-30 ton
cargo gear,
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
enabling them to discharge cargo where grabs are required
(particularly industrial minerals), and to conduct cargo
operations in countries and ports with limited infrastructure.
This type of vessel offers good trading flexibility and can
therefore be used in a wide variety of bulk and neobulk trades,
such as steel products. Supramax are a
sub-category
of this category typically having a cargo carrying capacity of
between 50,000 and 60,000 dwt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Handysize. Handysize vessels have a carrying
capacity of up to 30,000 dwt. These vessels are almost
exclusively carrying minor bulk cargo. Increasingly, vessels of
this type operate on regional trading routes, and may serve as
trans-shipment feeders for larger vessels. Handysize vessels are
well suited for small ports with length and draft restrictions.
Their cargo gear enables them to service ports lacking the
infrastructure for cargo loading and unloading.
|
Management
of our Fleet
We currently have two executive officers, Mr. Dale
Ploughman, our chief executive officer, and Ms. Christina
Anagnostara, our chief financial officer. In addition, we employ
Ms. Theodora Mitropetrou, our general counsel, and a
support staff of seven employees. In the future, we intend to
employ such number of additional shore-based executives and
employees as may be necessary to ensure the efficient
performance of our activities.
We outsource the commercial brokerage and management of our
fleet to companies that are affiliated with members of the
Restis family. The commercial brokerage of our initial fleet of
six vessels has been contracted out to Safbulk Pty Ltd., or
Safbulk Pty, and the commercial brokerage of the BET fleet has
been contracted to Safbulk Maritime S.A., or Safbulk Maritime.
Safbulk Pty and Safbulk Maritime are sometimes collectively
referred to throughout this prospectus as Safbulk. The
management of our fleet and the BET fleet has been contracted
out to Enterprises Shipping and Trading, S.A., or EST. All three
of these entities are controlled by members of the Restis family.
Restis
Background and Relationship
The Restis family has been engaged in the international shipping
industry for more than 40 years, including the ownership
and operation of more than 60 vessels in various segments
of the shipping industry, with both operating and chartering
interests. The family entered the dry bulk sector through its
acquisition of South African Marine Corporation in 1999, and
today Restis-controlled entities collectively represent one of
the largest independent shipowning and management groups in the
shipping industry. The Restis family additionally has strategic
minority holdings in companies that operate more than 100
additional vessels.
The entities controlled by the Restis family presently do
business with over 100 customers, the majority of which have
been customers since inception.
The groups main objective is to ensure responsible and
ethical management of services and processes from the point of
view of health, safety and environmental aspects. Towards this
end it has increased its self regulation by adopting various
models (EFQM, EBEN) standards (ISO 9001, ISO 14001, and OHSAS
18001) and codes (ISM Code).
EST has earned a market reputation for excellence in the
provision of services that is evident from the many awards and
certifications earned over the years including International
Safety Management Certificate (1993), ISO 9001 Certification for
Quality Management (1995), ISO 14001 Certification for
Environmental Management System (2002), US Coast Guard AMVER
Certification, EFQM Committed to Excellence (2004),
Recognized for Excellence Certification
(2005) and Recognized for Excellence-4 stars
Certification (2006), OHSAS 18001:1999 for Health and Safety
(2007) and EBEN (European Business Ethics Network silver
(2008) and gold (2009) awards.
3
The Restis family companies and affiliated companies include:
|
|
|
|
|
South African Marine Corporation, S.A., or SAMC, one of our
charterers established in 1999 as the chartering arm
of the Restis group of companies; presently charters-in 16
vessels from Restis-affiliated entities and charters these
vessels out to third parties; it has never defaulted on its
charter obligations to us;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Safbulk, our commercial broker has been in business
for over 10 years and provides brokerage services for all
of the dry bulk vessels controlled by Restis entities;
|
|
|
|
|
|
EST, our technical manager has been in business over
34 years and presently manages approximately 95 dry bulk and
tanker vessels;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Waterfront, S.A., or Waterfront, the sublessor of our executive
offices;
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Financial Corp., the holding company for the Restis family
dry cargo operations; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
Golden Energy Marine Corp., a privately held transporter of dry
bulk goods, crude oil, and petroleum products.
|
As of November 17, 2009, without giving effect to this
offering, the total beneficial ownership of our shares by the
Restis family and its affiliates, including shares actually
owned, shares issuable upon exercise of warrants exercisable
within 60 days and shares governed by the voting agreement
described elsewhere in the prospectus but excluding shares
earned as a result of achieving the September 30, 2009,
EBITDA target, totaled 81.40%.
We believe we benefit from the extensive industry experience and
established relationships of our vessel manager and broker,
which are separate businesses controlled by members of the
Restis family. We believe that Safbulk has achieved a strong
reputation in the international shipping industry for efficiency
and reliability that should create new employment opportunities
for us with a variety of well-known charterers.
Our
Corporate History
Incorporation
of Seanergy and Seanergy Maritime
We were incorporated under the laws of the Republic of the
Marshall Islands pursuant to the Marshall Islands Business
Corporation Act, or the BCA, on January 4, 2008, originally
under the name Seanergy Merger Corp., as a wholly owned
subsidiary of Seanergy Maritime Corp., a Marshall Islands
corporation, or Seanergy Maritime. We changed our name to
Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp. on July 11, 2008.
Seanergy Maritime was incorporated in the Marshall Islands on
August 15, 2006 as a blank check company formed to acquire,
through a merger, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition or
other similar business combination, one or more businesses in
the maritime shipping industry or related industries. Seanergy
Maritime, up to the date of the business combination, had not
commenced any business operations and was considered a
development stage enterprise. Seanergy Maritime is our
predecessor. See Dissolution and
Liquidation.
Initial
Public Offering of Seanergy Maritime
On September 28, 2007, Seanergy Maritime consummated its
initial public offering of 23,100,000 units, including
1,100,000 units issued upon the partial exercise of the
underwriters over-allotment option, with each unit
consisting of one share of its common stock and one warrant.
Each warrant entitled the holder to purchase one share of
Seanergy Maritime common stock at an exercise price of $6.50 per
share. The units sold in Seanergy Maritimes initial public
offering were sold at an offering price of $10.00 per unit,
generating gross proceeds of $231,000,000. This resulted in a
total of $227,071,000 in net proceeds, after deducting certain
deferred offering costs that were held in a trust account
maintained by Continental Stock Transfer &
Trust Company, which we refer to as the Seanergy Maritime
Trust Account.
4
Business
Combination
We acquired our initial fleet of six dry bulk carriers from the
Restis family for an aggregate purchase price of
(i) $367,030,750 in cash, (ii) $28,250,000 (face
value) in the form of a convertible promissory note, or the
Note, and (iii) an aggregate of 4,308,075 shares of
our common stock, subject to us meeting an Earnings Before
Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, or EBITDA,
target of $72 million to be earned between October 1,
2008 and September 30, 2009, which target was achieved and
the additional consideration was recorded as an increase in
goodwill of $17,275. This acquisition was made pursuant to the
terms and conditions of a Master Agreement dated May 20,
2008 by and among us, Seanergy Maritime, our former parent, the
several sellers parties who are affiliated with members of the
Restis family, and the several investors parties who are
affiliated with members of the Restis family, and six separate
memoranda of agreement, which we collectively refer to as the
MOAs, between our vessel-owning subsidiaries and
each seller, each dated as of May 20, 2008. The acquisition
was completed with funds from the Seanergy Maritime
Trust Account and with financing provided by Marfin Egnatia
Bank S.A. of Greece, or Marfin.
On August 28, 2008, we completed our business combination
and took delivery, through our designated nominees (which are
wholly owned subsidiaries) of three of the six dry bulk vessels,
which included two 2008-built Supramax vessels and one
1997-built Handysize vessel. On that date, we took delivery of
the
M/V Davakis
G, the M/V Delos Ranger and the M/V African Oryx. On
September 11, 2008, we took delivery, through our
designated nominee, of the fourth vessel, the M/V Bremen Max, a
1993-built Panamax vessel. On September 25, 2008, we took
delivery, through our designated nominees, of the final two
vessels, the
M/V Hamburg
Max, a 1994-built Panamax vessel, and the M/V African Zebra, a
1985-built Handymax vessel. The purchase price paid does not
include any amounts that would result from the earn-out of the
4,308,075 shares of our common stock.
Dissolution
and Liquidation
On August 26, 2008, shareholders of Seanergy Maritime also
approved a proposal for the dissolution and liquidation of
Seanergy Maritime (the dissolution and liquidation,
which was originally filed with the SEC on June 17, 2008,
subsequently amended on July 31, 2008 and supplemented on
August 22, 2008). Seanergy Maritime proposed the
dissolution and liquidation because following the vessel
acquisition, Seanergy Maritime was no longer needed and its
elimination is expected to save substantial accounting, legal
and compliance costs related to the U.S. federal income tax
filings necessary because of Seanergy Maritimes status as
a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
In connection with the dissolution and liquidation of Seanergy
Maritime, on January 27, 2009, Seanergy Maritime filed
Articles of Dissolution with the Registrar of Corporations of
the Marshall Islands in accordance with Marshall Islands law and
distributed to each holder of shares of common stock of Seanergy
Maritime one share of our common stock for each share of
Seanergy Maritime common stock owned by such shareholders. All
outstanding warrants and the underwriters unit purchase
option of Seanergy Maritime concurrently become our obligations
and became exercisable to purchase our common stock. Following
the dissolution and liquidation of Seanergy Maritime, our common
stock and warrants began trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market on
January 28, 2009. For purposes of this prospectus all share
data and financial information for the period prior to
January 27, 2009 is that of Seanergy Maritime.
Purchase
of Controlling Interest in BET
We recently expanded the size of our fleet through the
acquisition of a 50% controlling interest in BET from
Constellation Bulk Energy Holdings, Inc. BETs other equity
owner is Mineral Transport, which is an affiliate of members of
the Restis family, one of our major shareholders. We entered
into a shareholders agreement with Mineral Transport that
allows us, among other things, to appoint a majority of the
members of the board of directors of BET. BETs fleet
consists of four Capesize vessels and one Panamax vessel. See
Our Business BET.
5
Executive
Offices
Our executive offices are located at 1-3 Patriarchou Grigoriou,
166 74 Glyfada, Athens, Greece and our telephone number is
+30-210-963-8461.
Distinguishing
Factors and Business Strategy
The international dry bulk shipping industry is highly
fragmented and is comprised of approximately 6,300 ocean-going
vessels of tonnage size greater than 10,000 dwt which are owned
by approximately 1,500 companies. Seanergy competes with
other owners of dry bulk carriers, some of which may have a
different mix of vessel sizes in their fleet. It has, however,
identified the following factors that distinguish it in the dry
bulk shipping industry.
|
|
|
|
|
Extensive Industry Visibility. Our management
and directors have extensive shipping and public company
experience as well as relationships in the shipping industry and
with charterers in the coal, steel and iron ore industries. We
capitalize on these relationships and contacts to gain market
intelligence, source sale and purchase opportunities and
identify chartering opportunities with leading charterers in
these core commodities industries, many of whom consider the
reputation of a vessel owner and operator when entering into
time charters.
|
|
|
|
Established Customer Relationships. We believe
that our directors and management team have established
relationships with leading charterers and a number of
chartering, sales and purchase brokerage houses around the
world. We believe that our directors and management team have
maintained relationships with, and have achieved acceptance by,
major national and private industrial users, commodity producers
and traders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Experienced and Dedicated Management Team. We
believe that our management team, equipped with extensive
shipping experience, has developed strong industry relationships
with leading charterers, shipbuilders, insurance underwriters,
protection and indemnity associations and financial
institutions. Management has continued to take actions over the
course of the past year to allow us to operate profitably in
2009 after the net loss of $32 million we recorded for our
initial period of operations through December 31, 2008.
This net loss resulted primarily from a one-time non-cash charge
in the 2008 period of $49.3 million for goodwill and vessel
impairment losses related to the downturn in the worldwide
economy and the resulting deteriorating vessel market values.
The measures that our management team has taken, both to
minimize the ongoing impact of the worldwide recession and to
improve our results of operations, include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
We secured charter agreements for our initial fleet prior to the
market decline in May 2008 with SAMC, which honored its
contractual obligations, providing us with a secure cash flow
throughout the terms of the charters. As a result, for the nine
months ended September 30, 2009, we earned
$70.7 million of net vessel revenue and net income of
$33.3 million. Our cash reserves were $64 million as
of September 30, 2009, which reflected the
$36.4 million in cash from operations we generated during
the period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In August 2009, we completed the acquisition of a 50% ownership
interest in BET. We acquired a 50% interest of net assets of
$13.6 million for cash consideration of $1. As a result of
this transaction, we almost doubled our fleet to 11 vessels
and increased the dwt of our fleet by 229%, while also
positioning us in the Capesize sector. The acquisition is
immediately earnings accretive, improving our margins and cash
flow, based on the charters currently in place for the vessels
acquired as described above under Our Fleet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have also secured time charter agreements of various
durations, with our longest time charter expiring on
February 24, 2012. Time charters cover 76% of
2010 days and 50% of 2011 days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We also received, during the same period, a waiver on the
loan-to-value covenant from our lender.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In August 2009, we negotiated the conversion of a
$28.25 million convertible promissory note due to an
affiliate August 2010, plus all fees and interest due on such
note, in exchange for
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
6,585,868 shares of our common stock. With this conversion,
we reduced our debt, and the resulting debt service obligations,
without depleting our cash reserves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the twelve months ended September 30, 2009, we achieved
the EBITDA target agreed to in connection with our August 2008
acquisition of our initial fleet from the Restis family.
Recently, the majority of our charters have been rechartered at
prevailing market rates. For 2010, we expect our average daily
operating expenses per vessel to be approximately $5,500, and we
expect our average daily general and administrative expenses to
be approximately $1,000. Our expectations regarding 2010
operating expenses and general and administrative statements are
forward-looking statements. Our actual results could vary. See
Risk Factors for information regarding factors, many
of which are outside of our control, that could cause our actual
expenses to differ from expectations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Highly Efficient Operations and High Quality
Fleet. We believe that our directors and
executive officers long experience in third-party
technical management of dry bulk carriers enable us to maintain
cost-efficient operations. We actively monitor and control
vessel operating expenses while maintaining the high quality of
our fleet through regular inspections, comprehensive planned
maintenance systems and preventive maintenance programs and by
retaining and training qualified crew members. We believe that
our ability to maintain and increase our customer base depends
largely on the quality and performance of our fleet. We believe
that owning a high quality fleet reduces operating costs,
improves safety and provides us with a competitive advantage in
obtaining employment for our vessels. Our vessels were built and
are maintained at reputable shipyards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balanced Chartering Strategies. Nine of our
vessels are under medium-term charters with terms of 11 to 13
and 22 to 26 months and provide for fixed payments in
advance. We believe that these charters will provide us with
high fleet utilization and stable revenues. Two of our vessels
operate in the spot market. We may in the future pursue other
market opportunities for our vessels to capitalize on favorable
market conditions, including entering into short-term time and
voyage charters, pool arrangements or bareboat charters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Broad Fleet Profile. We focus on the dry bulk
sector including Capesize, Panamax, Handymax/Supramax and
Handysize dry bulk carriers. Our broad fleet profile enables us
to serve our customers in both major and minor bulk trades. Our
vessels are able to trade worldwide in a multitude of trade
routes carrying a wide range of cargoes for a number of
industries. Our dry bulk carriers can carry coal and iron ore
for energy and steel production as well as grain and steel
products, fertilizers, minerals, forest products, ores, bauxite,
alumina, cement and other cargoes. Our fleet includes sister
ships. Operating sister and similar ships provides us with
operational and scheduling flexibility, efficiencies in employee
training and lower inventory and maintenance expenses. We
believe that operating sister ships allows us to maintain lower
operating costs and streamline its operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet Growth Potential. We intend to acquire
additional dry bulk carriers or enter into new contracts through
timely and selective acquisitions of vessels in a manner that we
determine will be accretive to cash flow. We expect to fund the
acquisition of the additional vessels primarily from the
proceeds of this offering and any future acquisition of
additional vessels using amounts borrowed under our credit
facility, future borrowings under other agreements as well as
with proceeds from the exercise of the Warrants, if any, or
through other sources of debt and equity. However, there can be
no assurance that we will be successful in obtaining future
funding or that any or all of the warrants will be exercised.
|
7
The
Offering
|
|
|
Common stock offered by us to the public |
|
Up to $ of shares of
our common stock. |
|
|
|
Underwriters over-allotment option |
|
Up to $ of shares of
our common stock. |
|
|
|
Concurrent sale |
|
Victor Restis, one of our significant shareholders, has
committed to purchase directly from us at the public offering
price of $ of shares of our common
stock concurrently with the closing of this transaction. We
refer to this transaction as the concurrent sale. |
|
|
|
Common stock outstanding after this offering and the concurrent
sale(1) |
|
shares. |
|
|
|
Use of proceeds |
|
We estimate that we will receive net proceeds of approximately
$ from this offering after
deducting underwriting discounts and commissions, and offering
expenses, and assuming the underwriters over-allotment
option is not exercised. |
|
|
|
|
|
We intend to use the proceeds of this offering for the purchase
of additional vessels and for general working capital purposes.
See Use of Proceeds. |
|
|
|
NASDAQ Global Market symbols |
|
Common stock SHIP
Warrants SHIP.W |
|
Risk factors |
|
Investing in our common stock involves substantial risk. You
should carefully consider all the information in this prospectus
prior to investing in our common stock. In particular, we urge
you to consider carefully the factors set forth in the section
of this prospectus entitled Risk Factors beginning
on page 12. |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The number of shares of common stock outstanding after this
offering is based
on shares
of our common stock outstanding on November ,
2009 and excludes the following: |
A. 38,984,667 shares of common stock reserved for
issuance upon the exercise of outstanding warrants, which
warrants have an exercise price of $6.50 per share and expire on
September 24, 2011;
B. 2,000,000 shares of common stock reserved for
issuance upon the exercise of the unit purchase option sold to
the lead underwriter in the initial public offering of our
predecessor, which unit purchase option expires
September 24, 2012 as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
1,000,000 shares of common stock included in the
1,000,000 units issuable upon exercise of the option at an
exercise price of $12.50 per unit;
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,000,000 shares of common stock issuable for $6.50 per
share upon exercise of the warrants underlying the units
issuable upon exercise of the option; and
|
C. shares that may be issued pursuant to the
underwriters over-allotment option.
8
Summary
Historical Financial Information and Other Data
The following selected historical statement of operations and
balance sheet data were derived from the audited financial
statements and accompanying notes for the years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2007 and for the period from
August 15, 2006 (Inception) to December 31, 2006 and
the unaudited financial statements and accompanying notes for
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and
2008, included elsewhere in this prospectus. The information is
only a summary and should be read in conjunction with the
financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in
this prospectus and the sections entitled, Risk
Factors and Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations for
Seanergy Maritime and Seanergy. The historical data
included below and elsewhere in this prospectus is not
necessarily indicative of our future performance.
Since our vessel operations began upon the consummation of our
business combination on August 28, 2008, we cannot provide
a meaningful comparison of our results of operations for the
year ended December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2007 or
for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and
September 30, 2008. During the period from our inception to
the date of our business combination, we were a development
stage enterprise.
All amounts in the tables below are in thousands of
U.S. dollars, except for share data, fleet data and average
daily results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inception
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(August 15,
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
2006) to
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel revenue related party, net
|
|
|
20,485
|
|
|
|
6,122
|
|
|
|
68,795
|
|
|
|
6,122
|
|
|
|
34,453
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel revenue, net
|
|
|
1,867
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,867
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct voyage expenses
|
|
|
(42
|
)
|
|
|
(143
|
)
|
|
|
(480
|
)
|
|
|
(143
|
)
|
|
|
(151
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel operating expense
|
|
|
(3,935
|
)
|
|
|
(719
|
)
|
|
|
(9,756
|
)
|
|
|
(719
|
)
|
|
|
(3,180
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voyage expenses related party
|
|
|
(222
|
)
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
|
|
(841
|
)
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
|
|
(440
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management fees related party
|
|
|
(462
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
(1,078
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
(388
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administration expenses
|
|
|
(1,014
|
)
|
|
|
(208
|
)
|
|
|
(3,083
|
)
|
|
|
(805
|
)
|
|
|
(1,840
|
)
|
|
|
(445
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
General and administration expenses related party
|
|
|
(459
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
(1,553
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
(430
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of dry-docking cost
|
|
|
(387
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(397
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
(5,286
|
)
|
|
|
(1,488
|
)
|
|
|
(20,716
|
)
|
|
|
(1,488
|
)
|
|
|
(9,929
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain from acquisition
|
|
|
6,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill impairment loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44,795
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessels impairment loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,530
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income money market fund
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
644
|
|
|
|
363
|
|
|
|
3,257
|
|
|
|
3,361
|
|
|
|
1,948
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Interest and finance costs
|
|
|
(3,525
|
)
|
|
|
(730
|
)
|
|
|
(6,656
|
)
|
|
|
(730
|
)
|
|
|
(4,077
|
)
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency exchange (losses), net
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(80
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(39
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
13,916
|
|
|
|
3,270
|
|
|
|
33,198
|
|
|
|
5,286
|
|
|
|
(31,985
|
)
|
|
|
1,445
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Seanergy Maritime
|
|
|
13,983
|
|
|
|
3,270
|
|
|
|
33,265
|
|
|
|
5,286
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
70,986
|
|
|
|
29,814
|
|
|
|
235,213
|
|
|
|
376
|
|
Vessels, net
|
|
|
450,920
|
|
|
|
345,622
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
547,140
|
|
|
|
378,202
|
|
|
|
235,213
|
|
|
|
632
|
|
Total current liabilities, including current portion of
long-term debt
|
|
|
37,651
|
|
|
|
32,999
|
|
|
|
5,995
|
|
|
|
611
|
|
Long-term debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
274,489
|
|
|
|
213,638
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity
|
|
|
228,448
|
|
|
|
131,565
|
|
|
|
148,369
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
Performance
Indicators
The figures shown below are non-GAAP statistical ratios used by
management to measure performance of our vessels and are not
included in financial statements prepared under United States
generally accepted accounting principles, or US GAAP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2009
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
Fleet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of vessels(1)
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
Ownership days(2)
|
|
|
797
|
|
|
|
1,883
|
|
|
|
686
|
|
Available days(3)
|
|
|
739
|
|
|
|
1,654
|
|
|
|
686
|
|
Operating days(4)
|
|
|
735
|
|
|
|
1,646
|
|
|
|
678
|
|
Fleet utilization(5)
|
|
|
92.2
|
%
|
|
|
87.4
|
%
|
|
|
98.9
|
%
|
Average Daily Results:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel TCE rate(6)
|
|
|
30,052
|
|
|
|
42,127
|
|
|
|
49,362
|
|
Vessel operating expenses(7)
|
|
|
4,937
|
|
|
|
5,181
|
|
|
|
4,636
|
|
Management fees(8)
|
|
|
580
|
|
|
|
572
|
|
|
|
566
|
|
Total vessel operating expenses
|
|
|
5,517
|
|
|
|
5,753
|
|
|
|
5,202
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Average number of vessels is the number of vessels that
constituted our fleet for the relevant period, as measured by
the sum of the number of days each vessel was a part of our
fleet during the relevant period divided by the number of
calendar days in the relevant period. |
|
(2) |
|
Ownership days are the total number of days in a period during
which the vessels in a fleet have been owned. Ownership days are
an indicator of the size of our fleet over a period and affect
both the amount of revenues and the amount of expenses that we
recorded during a period. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Available days are the number of ownership days less the
aggregate number of days that vessels are
off-hire due
to major repairs, dry-dockings or special or intermediate
surveys. The shipping industry uses available days to measure
the number of ownership days in a period during which vessels
should be capable of generating revenues. During the three
months ended September 30, 2009, we incurred 58 off-hire
days for scheduled vessel dry-docking. During the nine months
ended September 30, 2009, we incurred
229 off-hire
days for scheduled vessel dry-docking. |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Operating days are the number of available days in a period less
the aggregate number of days that vessels are off-hire due to
any reason, including unforeseen circumstances. The shipping
industry uses operating days to measure the aggregate number of
days in a period during which vessels actually generate revenues. |
|
(5) |
|
Fleet utilization is the percentage of time that our vessels
were generating revenue, and is determined by dividing operating
days by ownership days for the relevant period. |
10
|
|
|
(6) |
|
Time charter equivalent, or TCE, rates are defined as our time
charter revenues less voyage expenses during a period divided by
the number of our operating days during the period, which is
consistent with industry standards. Voyage expenses include port
charges, bunker (fuel oil and diesel oil) expenses, canal
charges and commissions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
(In thousands of U.S. dollars, except operating days)
|
|
Net revenues from vessels
|
|
|
22,352
|
|
|
|
70,662
|
|
|
|
34,453
|
|
Voyage expenses
|
|
|
(42
|
)
|
|
|
(480
|
)
|
|
|
(151
|
)
|
Voyage expenses related party
|
|
|
(222
|
)
|
|
|
(841
|
)
|
|
|
(440
|
)
|
Net operating revenues
|
|
|
22,088
|
|
|
|
69,341
|
|
|
|
33,862
|
|
Operating days
|
|
|
735
|
|
|
|
1,646
|
|
|
|
686
|
|
Time charter equivalent rate
|
|
|
30,052
|
|
|
|
42,127
|
|
|
|
49,362
|
|
|
|
|
(7) |
|
Average daily vessel operating expenses, which includes crew
costs, provisions, deck and engine stores, lubricating oil,
insurance, maintenance and repairs, are calculated by dividing
vessel operating expenses by ownership days for the relevant
time periods: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
(In thousands of U.S. dollars, except ownership days)
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
3,935
|
|
|
|
9,756
|
|
|
|
3,180
|
|
Ownership days
|
|
|
797
|
|
|
|
1,883
|
|
|
|
686
|
|
Daily vessel operating expenses
|
|
|
4,937
|
|
|
|
5,181
|
|
|
|
4,636
|
|
|
|
|
(8) |
|
Daily management fees are calculated by dividing total
management fees by ownership days for the relevant time period. |
11
RISK
FACTORS
An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of
risk. You should consider carefully all of the material risks
described below, together with the other information contained
in this prospectus before making a decision to invest in our
common stock. References in this prospectus to
Seanergy, we, us, or
our company refer to Seanergy Maritime Holdings
Corp. and our subsidiaries, but, if the context otherwise
requires, may refer only to Seanergy Maritime Holdings Corp.
References in this prospectus to BET refer to Bulk
Energy Transport (Holdings) Limited and its wholly owned
subsidiaries. We acquired a controlling interest in BET in
August 2009 through our right to appoint a majority of the BET
board of directors as provided in the shareholders agreement.
Risk
Factors Relating to Seanergy
We are
currently in compliance with the terms of our loan with Marfin
only because we have received waivers and/or amendments to the
Marfin loan agreement waiving our compliance with a certain
covenant for certain periods of time. The waivers and/or
amendments impose additional operating and financial
restrictions on us and modify the application of the terms of
our existing loan agreement. Any extensions of these waivers, if
needed, could contain additional restrictions and might not be
granted at all.
Our loan agreement with Marfin requires that we maintain certain
financial and other covenants. The current low dry bulk charter
rates and dry bulk vessel values have affected our ability to
comply with the loan to vessel value covenant. A violation of
this covenant constitutes an event of default under our credit
facility and would provide Marfin with various remedies. In
exercising these remedies Marfin may require us to post
additional collateral, enhance our equity and liquidity,
continue to withhold payment of dividends, increase our interest
payments, pay down our indebtedness to a level where we are in
compliance with this loan covenant, or sell vessels in our
fleet. Marfin could also accelerate our indebtedness and
foreclose its liens on our vessels. The exercise of any of these
remedies could materially adversely impair our ability to
continue to conduct our business. Moreover, Marfin may require
the payment of additional fees, require prepayment of a portion
of our indebtedness to it, accelerate the amortization schedule
for our indebtedness and increase the interest rates they charge
us on our outstanding indebtedness.
As of December 31, 2008, we would not have been in
compliance with the loan covenant related to the value of our
vessels compared to the amounts of our loans, had we not later
obtained a certain retroactive waiver from Marfin. Although we
did not obtain appraisals for our vessels in connection with
evaluating our compliance with the loan-to-value covenant, as
brokers were not providing such, we believe that as of
December 31, 2008, the appraised value of our vessels would
have been significantly below the amount necessary to satisfy
the covenant. During the first quarter of 2009, we obtained a
waiver from Marfin of our compliance with this covenant, which
waiver was effective as of December 31, 2008. This waiver
expired in July 2009, when the first of our original charters
was replaced. On September 9, 2009 and on November 13,
2009, we executed addenda no. 1 and no. 2,
respectively, to the loan agreement with Marfin and obtained a
waiver of this loan covenant through January 1, 2011. In
connection with the amendment and waiver, Marfin made certain
changes to our loan agreement including increasing the interest
payable during the waiver period from LIBOR plus 1.75% to LIBOR
plus 3.00% in respect of the term loans and LIBOR plus 3.50% in
respect of the revolving advances, accelerating the due dates of
certain principal installments and limiting our ability to pay
dividends without their prior consent. As a result of this
waiver, we are not currently in default under our Marfin loan
agreement. For more information, see Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations for Seanergy Maritime and Seanergy Recent
Developments. If conditions in the dry bulk charter market
remain depressed or worsen, we may need to request additional
extensions of this waiver. There can be no assurance that Marfin
will provide such extensions, and Marfins willingness to
provide any such extensions may be limited by its financial
condition, business strategy and outlook for the shipping
industry at the time of any such request, all of which are
outside of our control. If we require extensions to the waivers
and are unable to obtain them, as described above, we would be
in default under our Marfin loan agreement and your investment
in our shares could lose most or all of its value.
12
As a result of these waivers, Marfin imposed operating and
financial restrictions on us. These restrictions limit our
ability to pay dividends without Marfins prior consent. If
we need to extend this covenant waiver, Marfin may impose
additional restrictions. In addition to the above restrictions,
Marfin may require the payment of additional fees, require
prepayment of a portion of our indebtedness to it, accelerate
the amortization schedule for our indebtedness, and increase the
interest rates it charges us on our outstanding indebtedness. We
might also be required to use a significant portion of the net
proceeds from this offering to repay a portion of our
outstanding indebtedness. These potential restrictions and
requirements may further limit our ability to pay dividends to
you, finance our future operations, make acquisitions or pursue
business opportunities.
Our
debt financing contains restrictive covenants that may limit our
liquidity and corporate activities.
The Marfin loan agreement, the BET loan agreement, and any
future loan agreements we or our subsidiaries may execute may
impose, operating and financial restrictions on us or our
subsidiaries. These restrictions may, subject to certain
exceptions, limit our or our subsidiaries ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
incur additional indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
create liens on our or our subsidiaries assets;
|
|
|
|
sell capital stock of our subsidiaries;
|
|
|
|
engage in any business other than the operation of the vessels;
|
|
|
|
pay dividends;
|
|
|
|
change or terminate the management of the vessels or terminate
or materially amend the management agreement relating to each
vessel; and
|
|
|
|
sell the vessels.
|
The restrictions included in the Marfin loan agreement include
minimum financial standards we must comply with including:
|
|
|
|
|
The ratio of total liabilities to total assets;
|
|
|
|
The ratio of total net debt owed to LTM (last twelve months)
EBITDA;
|
|
|
|
The ratio of LTM EBITDA to net interest expense;
|
|
|
|
The ratio of cash deposits held to total debt; and
|
|
|
|
A security margin, or the Security Margin Clause, whereby the
aggregate market value of the vessels and the value of any
additional security is required to be at least 135% of the
aggregate of the debt financing and any amount available for
drawing under the revolving facility, less the aggregate amount
of all deposits maintained. A waiver from Marfin has been
received with respect to this clause.
|
The financial ratios are required to be tested by us on a
quarterly basis on a last-twelve-months basis.
Under the BET loan agreement, the BET subsidiaries are subject
to operating and financial covenants that may affect BETs
business. These restrictions may, subject to certain exceptions,
limit the BET subsidiaries ability to engage in many of
the activities listed above. Furthermore, the BET subsidiaries
must assure the lenders that the aggregate market value of the
BET vessels is not less than 125% of the outstanding amount of
the BET loan. If the market value of the vessels is less than
this amount, the BET subsidiaries must prepay an amount that
will result in the market value of the vessels meeting this
requirement or offer additional security to the lenders and a
portion of the debt may be required to be classified as current.
Therefore, we may need to seek permission from our lenders in
order to engage in some important corporate actions. Also, any
further decline in vessel values may cause BET to fail to meet
the market value covenants in its loan agreement and entitle the
lenders to assert certain rights. Our current and any future
13
lenders interests may be different from our interests, and
we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain such
lenders permission when needed. This may prevent us from
taking actions that are in our best interest.
On September 30, 2009, BET entered into a supplemental
agreement with Citibank International PLC (as agent for the
syndicate of banks and financial institutions set forth in the
loan agreement) in connection with the $222,000,000 loan
obtained by the six wholly owned subsidiaries of BET, which
financed the acquisition of their respective vessels. The
material terms of the supplemental agreement with Citibank
International PLC are as follows:
(1) the applicable margin for the period between
July 1, 2009 and ending on June 30, 2010 (the
amendment period) shall be increased to two per cent (2%) per
annum;
(2) the borrowers to pay a part of the loan in the amount
of $20,000,000; and
(3) the borrowers and the corporate guarantor have
requested and the creditors consented to:
(a) the temporary reduction of the security requirement
during the amendment period from 125% to 100%; and
(b) the temporary reduction of the minimum equity ratio
requirement of the principal corporate guarantee to be amended
from 0.30: 1.0 to 0.175:1.0 during the amendment period at the
end of the accounting periods ending on December 31, 2009
and June 30, 2010.
If conditions in the dry bulk market remain depressed or worsen,
BET may need to request additional extensions of the temporary
reductions in the security requirement and minimum equity
requirement described above. There can be no assurance that the
lenders will provide such extensions, and any lenders
willingness to provide any such extensions may be limited by its
financial condition, business strategy and outlook for the
shipping industry at the time of any such request, all of which
are outside of our control.
The
value of our vessels has fluctuated, and may continue to
fluctuate significantly, due in large part to the sharp decline
in the world economy and the charter market. A significant
decline in vessel values could result in losses when we sell our
vessels or could result in a requirement that we write down
their carrying value, which would adversely affect our earnings.
In addition, a decline in vessel values could adversely impact
our ability to raise additional capital and would likely cause
us to violate certain covenants in our loan agreements that
relate to vessel value.
The market value of our vessels can and have fluctuated
significantly based on general economic and market conditions
affecting the shipping industry and prevailing charter hire
rates. Since the end of 2008, the market value of our vessels
has dropped significantly due to, among other things, the
substantial decline in charter rates. During the year ended
December 31, 2008, we recorded an impairment charge of
$4,530,000 on our vessels. There can be no assurance as to how
long charter rates and vessel values will remain at the current
low levels or whether they will improve to any significant
degree. Consequently we may have to record further impairments
of our vessels.
The market value of our vessels may increase or decrease in the
future depending on the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
economic and market conditions affecting the shipping industry
in general;
|
|
|
|
supply of dry bulk vessels, including newbuildings;
|
|
|
|
demand for dry bulk vessels;
|
|
|
|
types and sizes of vessels;
|
|
|
|
other modes of transportation;
|
|
|
|
cost of newbuildings;
|
|
|
|
new regulatory requirements from governments or self-regulated
organizations; and
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
prevailing level of charter rates.
|
Because the market value of our vessels may fluctuate
significantly, we may incur losses when we sell vessels, which
may adversely affect our earnings. In addition, on a quarterly
basis, we test the carrying value of our vessels in our
financial statements, based upon their earning capacity and
remaining useful lives. Earning capacity is measured by the
vessels expected earnings under their charters. If we
determine that our vessels carrying values should be
reduced, we would recognize an impairment charge on our
financial statements that would result in a potentially
significant charge against our earnings and a reduction in our
shareholders equity. Such impairment adjustment could also
hinder our ability to raise capital. If for any reason we sell
our vessels at a time when prices have fallen, the sale proceeds
may be less than that vessels carrying amount on our
financial statements, and we would incur a loss and a reduction
in earnings. Finally, a decline in vessel values would likely
cause us to violate certain covenants in our loan agreement that
require vessel values to equal or exceed a stated percentage of
the amount of our loans. Such violations could result in our
default under our loan agreements.
If we
fail to manage our growth properly, we may not be able to manage
our recently expanded fleet successfully, and we may not be able
to expand our fleet further if we desire to do so, adversely
affecting our overall financial position.
On August 12, 2009, we completed our acquisition of a 50%
controlling ownership interest in BET, pursuant to which we
acquired an additional five vessels. Concurrently with the
closing of the acquisition, BET entered into a technical
management agreement with EST and a commercial brokerage
agreement with Safbulk at terms similar to those that our
existing fleet has with these entities. Each of EST and Safbulk
are affiliated with members of the Restis family and are the
technical manager and commercial broker, respectively, of our
current fleet.
We may continue to expand our fleet in the future if desirable
opportunities arise. Our further growth will depend on:
|
|
|
|
|
locating and acquiring suitable vessels at competitive prices;
|
|
|
|
identifying and consummating acquisitions or joint ventures;
|
|
|
|
integrating any acquired vessels successfully with our existing
operations;
|
|
|
|
enhancing our customer base;
|
|
|
|
managing our expansion; and
|
|
|
|
obtaining required financing, which could include debt, equity
or combinations thereof.
|
Growing any business by acquisition presents numerous risks such
as undisclosed liabilities and obligations, difficulty
experienced in obtaining additional qualified personnel,
managing relationships with customers and suppliers, integrating
newly acquired operations into existing infrastructures,
identifying new and profitable charter opportunities for
vessels, and complying with new loan covenants. We have not
identified further expansion opportunities at this time, and the
nature and timing of any such expansion is uncertain. We may not
be successful in growing further and may incur significant
expenses and losses.
Our
charterers may terminate or default on their charters, which
could adversely affect our results of operations and cash
flow.
The ability and the willingness of each of our charterers to
perform its obligations under a charter will depend on a number
of factors that are beyond our control. These factors may
include general economic conditions, the condition of the dry
bulk shipping industry, the charter rates received for specific
types of vessels, hedging arrangements, the ability of
charterers to obtain letters of credit from their customers,
cash reserves, cash flow considerations and various operating
expenses. Many of these factors impact the financial viability
of our charterers. Given the downturn in world markets and the
factors described above, it is possible that some of our
charterers could declare bankruptcy or otherwise seek to evade
their obligations to us under
15
the charters, and as a consequence, default on their obligations
to us. The costs and delays associated with the termination of a
charter or the default by a charterer of a vessel may be
considerable and may adversely affect our business, results of
operations, cash flows and financial condition.
Servicing
debt will limit funds available for other purposes, including
capital expenditures and payment of dividends.
Marfin has extended to us a term loan of $165,000,000 and a
revolving facility in an amount equal to the lesser of
$72,000,000 and an amount in dollars which when aggregated with
the amount already drawn down under the term loan does not
exceed 70% of the aggregate market value of our vessels. We have
currently drawn down the full amount of the term loan and
$54,845,000 of the revolving facility. The term loan is
repayable by twenty-eight consecutive quarterly principal
installments out of which the first four principal installments
will be equal to $7,500,000 each, the next four principal
installments will be equal to $5,250,000 each and the final
twenty principal installments equal to $3,200,000 each, with a
balloon payment equal to $50,000,000 due concurrently with the
twenty-eighth principal installment.
The revolving facility is payable at maturity of the term loan.
BET financed the acquisition of its vessels with the proceeds of
a loan from Citibank International PLC, as agent for a syndicate
of banks and financial institutions. The outstanding principal
amount as of December 31, 2008 was $150,725,000. The amount
of the loan for each vessel was less than or equal to 70% of the
contractual purchase price for the applicable vessel. The loan
is repayable in semi-annual installments of principal in the
amount of $8,286,500 followed by a balloon payment due on
maturity in the amount of $51,289,000 as these installment
amounts were revised after the BET Performer sale. As of
September 30, 2009, the outstanding loan facility was
$123,100,000. Following BETs supplemental agreement dated
September 30, 2009 and prepayment of $20 million, the
semi-annual
installments of principal and the balloon payment amount to
$7,128,158 and $44,062,262, respectively. Interest is due and
payable quarterly based on interest periods selected by BET.
We are required to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash
flow from operations to pay the principal and interest on the
Marfin and BET debt. These payments limit funds otherwise
available for capital expenditures and other purposes, including
payment of dividends. We have not yet determined whether we will
incur debt in the near future in connection with any additional
vessel acquisitions. If we are unable to service our respective
debt, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition and results of operations.
Credit
market volatility may affect our ability to refinance our
existing debt, borrow funds under our revolving credit facility
or incur additional debt.
The credit markets have recently experienced extreme volatility
and disruption, which has limited credit capacity for certain
issuers, and lenders have requested shorter terms and lower loan
to value ratios. The market for new debt financing is extremely
limited and in some cases not available at all. If current
levels of market disruption and volatility continue or worsen,
we may not be able to refinance our existing debt, draw upon our
revolving credit facility or incur additional debt, which may
require us to seek other funding sources to meet our liquidity
needs or to fund planned expansion. For example, our existing
term loan and revolving credit facility from Marfin are tied to
the market value of the vessels whereby the aggregate market
values of the vessels and the value of any additional security
should be at least 135% of the aggregate of the debt financing
and any amount available for drawing under the revolving
facility less the aggregate amount of all deposits maintained.
If the percentage is below 135%, then a prepayment of the loans
may be required or additional security may be requested. On
September 9, 2009 and November 13, 2009, we executed
addenda no. 1 and no. 2, respectively, to the loan
agreement with Marfin and received a waiver with respect to this
clause through January 1, 2011. In connection with the
amendment and waiver, Marfin made certain changes to our loan
agreement including increasing the interest payable during the
waiver period, accelerating the due dates of certain principal
installments and limiting our ability to pay dividends without
their prior consent. The BET supplemental agreement dated
September 30, 2009 contains a similar covenant. If the
market value of the BET vessels is less than 100% of the
outstanding amount of the BET loan, the BET subsidiaries must
16
prepay an amount that will result in the market value of the
vessels meeting this requirement or offer additional security to
the lenders. Hence, we may need to seek permission from our
lenders in order to make further use of our Marfin revolving
credit facility or avoid prepayment obligations under either the
Marfin or BET loans, depending on the aggregate market value of
our vessels. We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain
debt or other financing on reasonable terms, or at all.
Increases
in interest rates could increase interest payable under our
variable rate indebtedness.
We are subject to interest rate risk in connection with our
Marfin and BET loans. Changes in interest rates could increase
the amount of our interest payments and thus negatively impact
our future earnings and cash flows. Fluctuations in interest
rates could be exacerbated in future periods as a result of the
current worldwide instability in the banking and credit markets.
Although neither party currently has hedging arrangements for
our variable rate indebtedness, we both expect to hedge interest
rate exposure at the appropriate time. However, these
arrangements may prove inadequate or ineffective.
In the
highly competitive international dry bulk shipping industry, we
may not be able to compete for charters with new entrants or
established companies with greater resources, which may
adversely affect our results of operations.
We employ our fleet in a highly competitive market that is
capital intensive and highly fragmented. Competition arises
primarily from other vessel owners, some of whom have
substantially greater resources than ours. Competition for the
transportation of dry bulk cargoes can be intense and depends on
price, location, size, age, condition and the acceptability of
the vessel and its managers to the charterers. Due in part to
the highly fragmented market, competitors with greater resources
could operate larger fleets through consolidations or
acquisitions that may be able to offer better prices and fleets.
We may
not be able to take advantage of favorable opportunities in the
current spot market, if any, with respect to the majority of our
vessels, nine of which are employed on 11 to 13 and 22 to
26 months time charters.
Nine vessels in our fleet are employed under medium-term time
charters, with expiration dates ranging from 11 to
13 months and 22 to 26 months from the time of
delivery, expiring between November 2009 and February 2012.
Although medium-term time charters provide relatively steady
streams of revenue, vessels committed to medium-term charters
may not be available for spot voyages during periods of
increasing charter hire rates, when spot voyages might be more
profitable.
When
our charters expire, we may not be able to replace such charters
promptly or with profitable charters, which may adversely affect
our earnings.
We will generally attempt to recharter our vessels at favorable
rates with reputable charterers as our existing charters expire.
If the dry bulk shipping market is in a period of depression
when our vessels charters expire, it is likely that we may
be forced to re-charter them at substantially reduced rates, if
at all. If rates are significantly lower or if we are unable to
recharter our vessels, our earnings may be adversely affected.
We may
not be able to attract and retain key management personnel and
other employees in the shipping industry, which may negatively
affect the effectiveness of our management and our results of
operations.
Our success will depend to a significant extent upon the
abilities and efforts of our management team. We currently have
two executive officers, our chief executive officer and our
chief financial officer, and one general counsel and a support
staff. Our success will depend upon our ability to retain key
members of our management team and the ability of our management
to recruit and hire suitable employees. The loss of any of these
individuals could adversely affect our business prospects and
financial condition. Difficulty in hiring and retaining
personnel could adversely affect our results of operations.
17
Purchasing
and operating second hand vessels may result in increased
operating costs and vessel off-hire, which could adversely
affect our earnings.
We have inspected the second hand vessels that we acquired from
the Restis sellers and in the acquisition of BET and considered
the age and condition of the vessels in budgeting for operating,
insurance and maintenance costs. If we acquire additional second
hand vessels in the future, we may encounter higher operating
and maintenance costs due to the age and condition of those
additional vessels.
However, our inspection of second hand vessels prior to purchase
does not provide us with the same knowledge about their
condition and cost of any required or anticipated repairs that
we would have had if these vessels had been built for and
operated exclusively by us. We will have the benefit of
warranties on newly constructed vessels, we will not receive the
benefit of warranties on second hand vessels.
In general, the costs to maintain a dry bulk carrier in good
operating condition increase with the age of the vessel. The
average age of our fleet, including the BET vessels, is
approximately 14 years, out of the expected useful life of
30 years. Older vessels, however, are typically less
fuel-efficient and more costly to maintain than more recently
constructed dry bulk carriers due to improvements in engine
technology. Cargo insurance rates increase with the age of a
vessel, making older vessels less desirable to charterers.
Governmental regulations, safety or other equipment standards
related to the age of vessels may require expenditures for
alterations, or the addition of new equipment, to our vessels
and may restrict the type of activities in which the vessels may
engage. As our vessels age, market conditions may not justify
those expenditures or enable us to operate our vessels
profitably during the remainder of their useful lives.
We may
not have adequate insurance to compensate us if we lose our
vessels, which may have a material adverse effect on our
financial condition and results of operations.
We have procured hull and machinery insurance and protection and
indemnity insurance, which includes environmental damage and
pollution insurance coverage and war risk insurance for our
fleet. We do not expect to maintain for all of our vessels
insurance against loss of hire, which covers business
interruptions that result from the loss of use of a vessel. We
may not be adequately insured against all risks. We may not be
able to obtain adequate insurance coverage for our fleet in the
future. The insurers may not pay particular claims. Our
insurance policies may contain deductibles for which we will be
responsible and limitations and exclusions which may increase
our costs or lower our revenue. Moreover, insurers may default
on claims they are required to pay. Furthermore, in the future,
we may not be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at
reasonable rates for our vessels. If our insurance is not enough
to cover claims that may arise, the deficiency may have a
material adverse effect on our financial condition and results
of operations.
Risk
Factors Relating to Conflicts of Interest
We are
dependent on each of EST and Safbulk for the management and
commercial brokerage of our fleet.
We subcontract the management and commercial brokerage of our
fleet, including crewing, maintenance and repair, to each of EST
and Safbulk, both affiliates of members of the Restis family.
The loss of services of, or the failure to perform by, either of
these entities could materially and adversely affect our results
of operations. Although we may have rights against either of
these entities if they default on their obligations to us, you
will have no recourse directly against them. Further, we expect
that we will need to seek approval from our lenders to change
our manager.
EST
and Safbulk are privately held companies and there is little or
no publicly available information about them.
The ability of EST and Safbulk to continue providing services
for our benefit will depend in part on their respective
financial strength. Circumstances beyond our control could
impair their financial strength, and because they are privately
held, it is unlikely that information about their financial
strength would become public unless any of these entities began
to default on their respective obligations. As a result, our
shareholders
18
might have little advance warning of problems affecting EST or
Safbulk, even though these problems could have a material
adverse effect on us.
We
outsource, and expect to outsource, the management and
commercial brokerage of our fleet to companies that are
affiliated with members of the Restis family, which may create
conflicts of interest.
We outsource, and expect to outsource, the management and
commercial brokerage of our fleet to EST and Safbulk, companies
that are affiliated with members of the Restis family. Companies
affiliated with members of the Restis family own and may acquire
vessels that compete with our fleet. Both EST and Safbulk have
responsibilities and relationships to owners other than us which
could create conflicts of interest between us, on the one hand,
and EST or Safbulk, on the other hand. These conflicts may arise
in connection with the chartering of the vessels in our fleet
versus dry bulk carriers managed by other companies affiliated
with members of the Restis family. There can be no assurance
that they will resolve conflicts in our favor.
Because
SAMC is the sole counterparty on the time charters for seven of
our vessels, the failure of this counterparty to meet its
obligations could cause us to suffer losses, thereby decreasing
our revenues, operating results and cash flows.
Two of our six initial vessels and all five BET vessels are, or
will be, chartered to SAMC, a company affiliated with members of
the Restis family. Therefore we are dependent on performance by
our charterer. Our charters may terminate earlier than the dates
indicated in this prospectus. Under our charter agreements, the
events or occurrences that will cause a charter to terminate or
give the charterer the option to terminate the charter generally
include a total or constructive total loss of the related
vessel, the requisition for hire of the related vessel or the
failure of the related vessel to meet specified performance
criteria. In addition, the ability of our charterer to perform
its obligations under a charter will depend on a number of
factors that are beyond our control. These factors may include
general economic conditions, the condition of the dry bulk
shipping industry, the charter rates received for specific types
of vessels, the ability of the charterer to obtain letters of
credit from its customers and various operating expenses. It is
our understanding that SAMC operates some of the vessels on
period charters and some of the vessels in the spot market. The
spot market is highly competitive and spot rates fluctuate
significantly. Vessels operating in the spot market generate
revenues that are less predictable than those on period time
charters. Therefore, SAMC may be exposed to the risk of
fluctuating spot dry bulk charter rates, which may have an
adverse impact on its financial performance and its obligations.
The cost and delays associated with the default by a charterer
of a vessel may be considerable and may adversely affect our
business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition
and our ability to pay dividends.
The
Restis affiliate shareholders hold
approximately % of our outstanding
common stock and the founding shareholders of Seanergy Maritime
hold approximately % of our
outstanding common stock. This may limit your ability to
influence our actions.
As of November , 2009, the total ownership of
the Restis family, not including shares issuable upon exercise
of warrants exercisable within 60 days in Seanergy
was %
(or % after giving effect to the
issuance of shares in the offering but assuming the underwriters
do not exercise their overallotment option).
The Restis affiliate shareholders own
approximately %
(or % after giving effect to the
issuance of shares in the offering and the concurrent sale but
assuming the underwriters do not exercise their overallotment
option) of our outstanding common stock (including
70,000 shares of common stock owned by Argonaut SPC, a fund
whose investment manager is an affiliate of members of the
Restis family), or approximately %
(or % after giving effect to the
issuance of shares in the offering and the concurrent sale but
assuming the underwriters do not exercise their overallotment
option) of our outstanding capital stock on a fully diluted
basis, assuming exercise of all outstanding warrants. The
founding shareholders of Seanergy Maritime own
approximately %
(or % after giving effect to the
issuance of shares in the offering and the concurrent sale but
assuming the underwriters do not exercise their overallotment
option) of our outstanding common stock,
or %
(or % after giving effect to the
issuance of shares in the offering but assuming the underwriters
do not exercise their overallotment option) of our outstanding
capital stock on a
19
fully diluted basis, assuming exercise of all outstanding
warrants. In addition, we have entered into the Voting Agreement
with the Restis affiliate shareholders and the founding
shareholders of Seanergy Maritime whereby the Restis affiliate
shareholders and founding shareholders jointly nominate our
board of directors. As a result of these arrangements, public
shareholders are effectively precluded from nominating
candidates for our board of directors. Collectively, the parties
to the Voting Agreement own %
(or % after giving effect to the
issuance of shares in the offering and the concurrent sale but
assuming the underwriters do not exercise their overallotment
option) of our outstanding common stock, or
approximately %
(or % after giving effect to the
issuance of shares in the offering and the concurrent sale but
assuming the underwriters do not exercise their overallotment
option) on a fully diluted basis, assuming exercise of all
outstanding warrants and issuance of the earn-out shares. Our
major shareholders have the power to exert considerable
influence over our actions and matters which require shareholder
approval, which limits your ability to influence our actions.
The
majority of the members of our shipping committee and our
nominees to the BET board of directors are appointees nominated
by affiliates of members of the Restis family, which could
create conflicts of interest detrimental to us.
Our board of directors has created a shipping committee, which
has been delegated exclusive authority to consider and vote upon
all matters involving shipping and vessel finance, subject to
certain limitations. The same people serve as our appointees to
the BET board of directors. Affiliates of members of the Restis
family have the right to appoint two of the three members of the
shipping committee and as a result such affiliates will
effectively control all decisions with respect to our shipping
operations that do not involve a transaction with a Restis
affiliate. Messrs. Dale Ploughman, Kostas Koutsoubelis and
Elias Culucundis currently serve on our shipping committee and
as our BET director appointees. Each of Messrs. Ploughman
and Koutsoubelis also will continue to serve as officers
and/or
directors of other entities affiliated with members of the
Restis family that operate in the dry bulk sector of the
shipping industry. The dual responsibilities of members of the
shipping committee in exercising their fiduciary duties to us
and other entities in the shipping industry could create
conflicts of interest. Although Messrs. Ploughman and
Koutsoubelis intend to maintain as confidential all information
they learn from one company and not disclose it to the other
entities for whom they serve; in certain instances this could be
impossible given their respective roles with various companies.
There can be no assurance that Messrs. Ploughman and
Koutsoubelis would resolve any conflicts of interest in a manner
beneficial to us.
Industry
Risk Factors Relating to Seanergy
Investment
in a company in the dry bulk shipping industry involves a high
degree of risk.
The abrupt and dramatic downturn in the dry bulk charter market,
from which we have derived substantially all of our revenues,
has severely affected the dry bulk shipping industry and has
harmed our business. The Baltic Dry Index, or BDI, fell 94% from
a peak of 11,793 in May 2008 to a low of 663 in December 2008.
It has since risen to 3,480 as of November 9, 2009. The
decline in charter rates is due to various factors, including
the decrease in available trade financing for purchases of
commodities carried by sea, which has resulted in a significant
decline in cargo shipments. There is no certainty that the dry
bulk charter market will experience any further recovery over
the next several months and the market could decline from its
current level. These circumstances, which result from the
economic dislocation worldwide and the disruption of the credit
markets, have had a number of adverse consequences for dry bulk
shipping, including, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
a decrease in available financing for vessels;
|
|
|
|
no active secondhand market for the sale of vessels;
|
|
|
|
a sharp decline in charter rates, particularly for vessels
employed in the spot market;
|
|
|
|
charterers seeking to renegotiate the rates for existing time
charters;
|
|
|
|
widespread loan covenant defaults in the dry bulk shipping
industry due to the substantial decrease in vessel
values; and
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
declaration of bankruptcy by some operators, charterers and
shipowners.
|
The
dry bulk shipping industry is cyclical and volatile, and this
may lead to reductions and volatility of charter rates, vessel
values and results of operations.
The degree of charter hire rate volatility among different types
of dry bulk carriers has varied widely. If we enter into a
charter when charter hire rates are low, our revenues and
earnings will be adversely affected. In addition, a decline in
charter hire rates likely will cause the value of the vessels
that we own, to decline and we may not be able to successfully
charter our vessels in the future at rates sufficient to allow
us to operate our business profitably or meet our obligations.
The factors affecting the supply and demand for dry bulk
carriers are outside of our control and are unpredictable. The
nature, timing, direction and degree of changes in dry bulk
shipping market conditions are also unpredictable.
Factors that influence demand for seaborne transportation of
cargo include:
|
|
|
|
|
demand for and production of dry bulk products;
|
|
|
|
the distance cargo is to be moved by sea;
|
|
|
|
global and regional economic and political conditions;
|
|
|
|
environmental and other regulatory developments; and
|
|
|
|
changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns, including
changes in the distances over which cargo is transported due to
geographic changes in where commodities are produced and cargoes
are used.
|
The factors that influence the supply of vessel capacity include:
|
|
|
|
|
the number of new vessel deliveries;
|
|
|
|
the scrapping rate of older vessels;
|
|
|
|
vessel casualties;
|
|
|
|
the price of steel;
|
|
|
|
the number of vessels that are out of service;
|
|
|
|
changes in environmental and other regulations that may limit
the useful life of vessels; and
|
|
|
|
port or canal congestion.
|
We anticipate that the future demand for our vessels will be
dependent upon continued economic growth in the worlds
economies, including China and India, seasonal and regional
changes in demand, changes in the capacity of the worlds
dry bulk carrier fleet and the sources and supply of cargo to be
transported by sea. If the global vessel capacity increases in
the dry bulk shipping market, but the demand for vessel capacity
in this market does not increase or increases at a slower rate,
the charter rates could materially decline. Adverse economic,
political, social or other developments could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of
operations and ability to pay dividends.
Future
growth in dry bulk shipping will depend on a return to economic
growth in the world economy that exceeds growth in vessel
capacity. A further decline in charter rates would adversely
affect our revenue stream and could have an adverse effect on
our financial condition and results of operations.
Our vessels are engaged in global seaborne transportation of
commodities, involving the loading or discharging of raw
materials and semi-finished goods around the world. As a result,
significant volatility in the world economy and negative changes
in global economic conditions, may have an adverse effect on our
business, financial position and results of operations, as well
as future prospects. In particular, in recent years China has
been one of the fastest growing economies in terms of gross
domestic product. Given the current global conditions, the
Chinese economy has experienced slowdown and stagnation and
there is no assurance
21
that continuous growth will be sustained or that the Chinese
economy will not experience further contraction or stagnation in
the future. Moreover, any further slowdown in the
U.S. economy, the European Union or certain other Asian
countries may continue to adversely affect world economic
growth. Negative world economic conditions may result in global
production cuts, changes in the supply and demand for the
seaborne transportation of dry bulk goods, downward adjusted
pricings for goods and freights and cancellation of
transactions/orders placed.
Charter rates for dry bulk carriers have been at extremely low
rates recently mainly due to the current global financial
crisis, which is also affecting this industry. We anticipate
that future demand for our vessels, and in turn future charter
rates, will be dependent upon a return to economic growth in the
worlds economy, particularly in China and India, as well
as seasonal and regional changes in demand and changes in the
capacity of the worlds fleet. The worlds dry bulk
carrier fleet increased in 2009 as a result of scheduled
deliveries of newly constructed vessels but it is expected to be
leveled off by higher forecasts for scrapping of existing
vessels as compared to 2008. However, this will vary depending
on vessel size, as the oldest segment of the worldwide dry bulk
fleet is the Handysize segment. A return to economic growth in
the world economy that exceeds growth in vessel capacity will be
necessary to sustain current charter rates. There can be no
assurance that economic growth will not continue to decline or
that vessel scrapping will occur at an even lower rate than
forecasted.
Due to the current volatility in the dry bulk sector, which is
primarily caused by, among other things, a decrease in letters
of credit being provided, a significant drop in demand for goods
being shipped, a reduction in volumes of goods and cancellation
of orders, there is a possibility that one or more of our
charterers could seek to renegotiate the time charter rates
either currently or at the time the charter expires. A decline
in charter rates would adversely affect our revenue stream and
could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations.
An
oversupply of dry bulk carrier capacity may lead to reductions
in charter rates and our profitability.
Orders for dry bulk carriers, primarily Capesize and Panamax
vessels, are high. Newly constructed vessels were delivered and
are expected to continue in significant numbers starting through
2009. As of August 2009, newly constructed vessels orders had
been placed for an aggregate of approximately 65.2% of the
current global dry bulk fleet, with deliveries expected during
the next 36 months. However, we have noticed order
cancellations by both shipowners and yards. An oversupply of dry
bulk carrier capacity may result in a reduction of our charter
rates. If such a reduction occurs, when our vessels
current charters expire or terminate, we may only be able to
re-charter our vessels at reduced or unprofitable rates or we
may not be able to charter these vessels at all. In turn, this
may result in the need to take impairment charges on one or more
of our vessels.
Changes
in the economic and political environment in China and policies
adopted by the government to regulate its economy may have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
The Chinese economy differs from the economies of most countries
belonging to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development, or OECD, in such respects as structure, government
involvement, level of development, growth rate, capital
reinvestment, allocation of resources, rate of inflation and
balance of payments position. Prior to 1978, the Chinese economy
was a planned economy. Since 1978, increasing emphasis has been
placed on the utilization of market forces in the development of
the Chinese economy. There is an increasing level of freedom and
autonomy in areas such as allocation of resources, production,
pricing and management and a gradual shift in emphasis to a
market economy and enterprise reform. Although
limited price reforms were undertaken, with the result that
prices for certain commodities are principally determined by
market forces, many of the reforms are experimental and may be
subject to change or abolition. We cannot assure you that the
Chinese government will continue to pursue a policy of economic
reform. The level of imports to and exports from China could be
adversely affected by changes to these economic reforms, as well
as by changes in political, economic and social conditions or
other relevant policies
22
of the Chinese government, such as changes in laws, regulations
or export and import restrictions, all of which could, adversely
affect our business, financial condition and operating results.
The
economic slowdown in the Asia Pacific region could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial position and
results of operations.
A significant number of the port calls made by our vessels may
involve the loading or discharging of raw materials and
semi-finished products in ports in the Asia Pacific region. As a
result, a negative change in economic conditions in any Asia
Pacific country, but particularly in China or India, may have an
adverse effect on our future business, financial position and
results of operations, as well as our future prospects. In
recent years, China has been one of the worlds fastest
growing economies in terms of gross domestic product. We cannot
assure you that such growth will be sustained or that the
Chinese economy will not experience contraction in the future.
In particular, during the past year, the demand for dry bulk
goods from emerging markets, such as China and India, has
significantly declined as growth projections for these
nations economies have been adjusted downwards. Moreover,
the slowdown in the economies of the United States, the European
Union or certain Asian countries may adversely affect economic
growth in China and elsewhere. Our ability to re-charter our
ships at favorable rates will likely be materially and adversely
affected by an ongoing economic downturn in any of these
countries.
Risks
involved with operating ocean-going vessels could affect our
business and reputation, which would adversely affect our
revenues.
The operation of an ocean-going vessel carries inherent risks.
These risks include the possibility of:
|
|
|
|
|
crew strikes
and/or
boycotts;
|
|
|
|
marine disaster;
|
|
|
|
piracy;
|
|
|
|
environmental accidents;
|
|
|
|
cargo and property losses or damage; and
|
|
|
|
business interruptions caused by mechanical failure, human
error, war, terrorism, political action in various countries or
adverse weather conditions.
|
Any of these circumstances or events could increase our costs or
lower our revenues.
Our
vessels may suffer damage and we may face unexpected dry-docking
costs, which could adversely affect our cash flow and financial
condition.
If our vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired at a
dry-docking facility. The costs of
dry-dock
repairs are unpredictable and can be substantial, and may be
higher than expected as a result of circumstances beyond our
control, such as delays experienced at the repair yard,
including those due to strikes. We may have to pay dry-docking
costs that our insurance does not cover. The loss of earnings
while these vessels are being repaired and reconditioned may not
be covered by insurance in full and thus these losses, as well
as the actual cost of these repairs, would decrease our earnings.
Turbulence
in the financial services markets and the tightening of credit
may affect the ability of purchasers of dry bulk cargo to obtain
letters of credit to purchase dry bulk goods, resulting in
declines in the demand for vessels.
Turbulence in the financial markets has led many lenders to
reduce, and in some cases cease to provide, credit, including
letters of credit to borrowers. Purchasers of dry bulk cargo
typically pay for cargo with letters of credit. The tightening
of the credit markets has reduced the issuance of letters of
credit and as a result decreased the amount of cargo being
shipped as sellers determine not to sell cargo without a letter
of credit. Reductions in cargo result in less business for
charterers and declines in the demand for vessels. Any material
23
decrease in the demand for vessels may decrease charter rates
and make it more difficult for Seanergy to charter its vessels
in the future at competitive rates. Reduced charter rates would
reduce Seanergys revenues.
Rising
fuel prices may adversely affect our profits.
The cost of fuel is a significant factor in negotiating charter
rates. As a result, an increase in the price of fuel beyond our
expectations may adversely affect our profitability. The price
and supply of fuel is unpredictable and fluctuates based on
events outside our control, including geo-political
developments, supply and demand for oil, actions by members of
the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and other
oil and gas producers, war and unrest in oil producing countries
and regions, regional production patterns and environmental
concerns and regulations.
We may
become dependent on spot charters in the volatile shipping
markets which may have an adverse impact on stable cash flows
and revenues.
We may employ one or more of our vessels on spot charters,
including when time charters on one or more of our vessels
expires. The spot charter market is highly competitive and rates
within this market are subject to volatile fluctuations, while
longer-term period time charters provide income at predetermined
rates over more extended periods of time. If we decide to spot
charter our vessels, there can be no assurance that we will be
successful in keeping all our vessels fully employed in these
short-term markets or that future spot rates will be sufficient
to enable our vessels to be operated profitably. A significant
decrease in charter rates could affect the value of our fleet
and could adversely affect our profitability and cash flows with
the result that our ability to pay debt service to our lenders
could be impaired.
Our
operations are subject to seasonal fluctuations, which could
affect our operating results.
We operate our vessels in markets that have historically
exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, in
charter hire rates. This seasonality may result in volatility in
our operating results. The dry bulk carrier market is typically
stronger in the fall and winter months in anticipation of
increased consumption of coal and other raw materials in the
northern hemisphere during the winter months. In addition,
unpredictable weather patterns in these months tend to disrupt
vessel scheduling and supplies of certain commodities. As a
result, revenues of dry bulk carrier operators in general have
historically been weaker during the fiscal quarters ended June
30 and September 30, and, conversely, been stronger in
fiscal quarters ended December 31 and March 31. This
seasonality may materially affect our operating results.
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 government regulation in the form of international
conventions, national, state and local laws and regulations in
force in 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, water discharges and ballast water
management. Because such conventions, laws, and regulations are
often revised, we cannot predict the ultimate cost of complying
with such conventions, laws and regulations or the impact
thereof on the resale prices or useful lives of our vessels.
Additional conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted that
could limit our ability to do business or increase the cost of
our doing business and which may materially and adversely affect
our operations. We are required by various governmental and
quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses
and certificates 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.
The operation of our vessels is also affected by the
requirements set forth in the United Nations International
Maritime Organizations International Management Code for
the Safe Operation of Ships and Pollution Prevention, or ISM
Code. The ISM Code requires vessel owners, vessel managers and
bareboat charterers to develop and maintain an extensive
Safety Management System that includes the adoption
of a
24
safety and environmental protection policy setting forth
instructions and procedures for safe operation and describing
procedures for dealing with emergencies. The failure of a vessel
owner or bareboat charterer to comply with the ISM Code or other
applicable environmental requirements may subject it to
increased liability, may invalidate existing insurance or
decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels
may require a reduction in cargo capacity, ship modifications or
operational changes or restrictions, may affect the resale value
or useful lives of our vessels, and may result in a denial of
access to, or detention in, certain ports or jurisdictional
waters. Each of our vessels is ISM code-certified but we cannot
assure that such certificate will be maintained indefinitely. In
addition, government regulation of vessels, particularly in the
areas of safety and environmental requirements, can be expected
to become stricter in the future, including more stringent
restrictions on air emissions from our vessels, and could
require us to incur significant capital expenditures to keep our
vessels in compliance, or even to scrap or sell certain vessels
altogether.
Under local, national and foreign laws, as well as international
treaties and conventions, we could incur material liabilities,
including cleanup obligations, natural resource damages
liability and personal injury or property damage claims, in the
event that there is a release of bunker fuel or other hazardous
materials from our vessels or otherwise in connection with our
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. We maintain, for each of our vessels,
pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of
$1 billion per incident. If the damages from a catastrophic
incident exceeded our insurance coverage, it could have a
material adverse effect on our financial condition and results
of operations.
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. Throughout 2008
the frequency of piracy incidents increased significantly,
particularly in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia, with
dry bulk vessels and tankers particularly vulnerable to such
attacks. For example, in November 2008, the Sirius Star, a
tanker vessel not affiliated with us, was captured by pirates in
the Indian Ocean while carrying crude oil estimated to be worth
$100.0 million. If these piracy attacks result in regions
in which our vessels are deployed being characterized as
war risk zones by insurers, as the Gulf of Aden
temporarily was in May 2008, or as war and strikes
listed areas by the Joint War Committee, premiums payable for
such coverage could increase significantly and such insurance
coverage may be more difficult to obtain. In addition, crew
costs, including due to employing onboard security guards, could
increase in such circumstances. We may not be adequately insured
to cover losses from these incidents, which could have a
material adverse effect on us. In addition, detention of any of
our vessels, hijacking as a result of an act of piracy against
our vessels, or an increase in cost, or unavailability, of
insurance for our vessels, could have a material adverse impact
on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Terrorism
and other events outside our control may negatively affect our
operations and financial condition.
Because we operate our vessels worldwide, terrorist attacks such
as the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001,
the bombings in Spain on March 11, 2004 and in London on
July 7, 2005, and the continuing response of the United
States to these attacks, as well as the threat of future
terrorist attacks, continue to cause uncertainty in the world
financial markets and may affect our business, results of
operations and financial condition. The continuing conflict in
Iraq may lead to additional acts of terrorism and armed conflict
around the world, which may contribute to further economic
instability in the global financial markets. These uncertainties
could also have a material adverse effect on our ability to
obtain additional financing on terms acceptable to us or at all.
In the past, political conflicts have also resulted in attacks
on vessels, mining of waterways and other efforts to disrupt
international shipping, particularly in the Arabian Gulf region.
Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on
our operating results, revenues and costs.
Terrorist attacks and armed conflicts may also negatively affect
our operations and financial condition and directly impact our
vessels 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 in
the
25
United States or the world. Any of these occurrences could
have a material adverse impact on our financial condition.
The
operation of dry bulk carriers has particular operational risks
which could affect our earnings and cash flow.
The operation of certain vessel types, such as dry bulk
carriers, has certain particular risks. With a dry bulk carrier,
the cargo itself and its interaction with the vessel can be an
operational risk. By their nature, dry bulk cargoes are often
heavy, dense, easily shifted, and react badly to water exposure.
In addition, dry bulk carriers are often subjected to battering
treatment during unloading operations with grabs, jackhammers
(to pry encrusted cargoes out of the hold) and small bulldozers.
This treatment may cause damage to the vessel. Vessels damaged
due to treatment during unloading procedures may be more
susceptible to breach while at sea. Hull breaches in dry bulk
carriers may lead to the flooding of the vessels holds. If
a dry bulk carrier suffers flooding in its forward holds, the
bulk cargo may become so dense and waterlogged that its pressure
may buckle the vessels bulkheads leading to the loss of a
vessel. If we are unable to adequately maintain our vessels, we
may be unable to prevent these events. Any of these
circumstances or events could result in loss of life, vessel
and/or cargo
and negatively impact our business, financial condition and
results of operations. In addition, the loss of any of our
vessels could harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel
owner and operator.
If any
of our vessels fails to maintain its class certification and/or
fails any annual survey, intermediate survey, or special survey,
or if any scheduled dry-docks take longer or are more expensive
than anticipated, this could have a material adverse impact on
our financial condition and results of operations.
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
International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, or
SOLAS. Our vessels are classed with one or more classification
societies that are members of the International Association of
Classification Societies.
A vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys,
dry-dockings and special surveys. In lieu of a special survey, a
vessels machinery may be on a continuous survey cycle,
under which the machinery would be surveyed periodically over a
five-year period. Our vessels are on special survey cycles for
hull inspection and continuous survey cycles for machinery
inspection. Every vessel is also required to be dry-docked every
two to three years for inspection of the underwater parts of
such vessels. These surveys and dry-dockings can be costly and
can result in delays in returning a vessel to operation, as
occurred with the dry-docking of the African Zebra, which
entered its scheduled dry-dock on February 24, 2009 and was
returned to service on July 20, 2009 as a result of delays
at the repair yard. The cost of our dry-docks in 2009 is
expected to total $4,300,000. The African Onyx is scheduled to
be dry-docked in October 2010 at an estimated cost of $900,000.
If any vessel does not maintain its class
and/or fails
any annual survey, intermediate survey, dry-docking or special
survey, the vessel will be unable to carry cargo between ports
and will be unemployable and uninsurable. Any such inability to
carry cargo or be employed, or any such violation of covenants,
could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition
and results of operations.
Because
our seafaring employees are covered by industry-wide collective
bargaining agreements, failure of industry groups to renew those
agreements may disrupt our operations and adversely affect our
earnings.
Our vessel-owning subsidiaries employ a large number of
seafarers. All of the seafarers employed on the vessels in our
fleet are covered by industry-wide collective bargaining
agreements that set basic standards. We cannot assure you that
these agreements will prevent labor interruptions. Any labor
interruptions could disrupt our operations and harm our
financial performance.
26
Maritime
claimants could arrest our vessels, which could interrupt its
cash flow.
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 arresting or attachment of one or more of our
vessels could interrupt our cash flow and require us to pay
large sums of funds to have the arrest lifted which would have a
material adverse effect on our financial condition and results
of operations.
In addition, in some jurisdictions, such as South Africa, under
the sister ship theory of liability, a claimant may
arrest both the vessel which is subject to the claimants
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 of our vessels for claims relating to another of our vessels.
Governments
could requisition our vessels during a period of war or
emergency, resulting in loss of earnings.
A government could requisition for title or seize our vessels.
Requisition for title occurs when a government takes control of
a vessel and becomes the owner. Also, a government could
requisition our vessels for hire. Requisition for hire occurs
when a government takes control of a vessel 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 could have
a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results
of operations.
Risk
Factors Relating to this Offering
The
market price of our common stock has been and may in the future
be subject to significant fluctuations.
The market price of our common stock has been and may in the
future be subject to significant fluctuations as a result of
many factors, some of which are beyond our control. Among the
factors that have in the past and could in the future affect our
stock price are:
|
|
|
|
|
quarterly variations in our results of operations;
|
|
|
|
our lenders willingness to extend our loan covenant
waivers, if necessary;
|
|
|
|
changes in market valuations of similar companies and stock
market price and volume fluctuations generally;
|
|
|
|
changes in earnings estimates or publication of research reports
by analysts;
|
|
|
|
speculation in the press or investment community about our
business or the shipping industry generally;
|
|
|
|
strategic actions by us or our competitors such as acquisitions
or restructurings;
|
|
|
|
the thin trading market for our common stock, which makes it
somewhat illiquid;
|
|
|
|
the current ineligibility of our common stock to be the subject
of margin loans because of its low current market price;
|
|
|
|
regulatory developments;
|
|
|
|
additions or departures of key personnel;
|
|
|
|
general market conditions; and
|
|
|
|
domestic and international economic, market and currency factors
unrelated to our performance.
|
The stock markets in general, and the markets for dry bulk
shipping and shipping stocks in particular, have experienced
extreme volatility that has sometimes been unrelated to the
operating performance of individual companies. These broad
market fluctuations may adversely affect the trading price of
our common stock.
27
Investors
may experience significant dilution as a result of possible
future offerings.
If we sell all of the
$ ($
if the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in
full) of shares of common stock being offered hereby and in the
concurrent sale, we will
have shares
of common stock outstanding,
( shares
if the underwriter exercise their over-allotment option in
full), which represents in the aggregate an increase
of %
( % if the underwriters exercise
their over-allotment option in full) in our issued and
outstanding shares of common stock. We may sell additional
shares of common stock following the conclusion of this offering
in order to fully implement our business plans. Such sales could
be made at prices below the price at which we sell the shares
offered by this prospectus, in which case, investors who
purchase shares in this offering could experience some dilution
of their investment, which could be significant.
Our
board of directors has suspended the payment of cash dividends
as a result of certain restrictions in waivers we received from
Marfin relating to our loan covenants and prevailing market
conditions in the international shipping industry. Until such
market conditions improve, it is unlikely that we will reinstate
the payment of dividends.
In light of a lower freight environment and a highly challenging
financing environment that has resulted in a substantial decline
in the international shipping industry, our board of directors,
beginning in February 4, 2009, suspended the cash dividend
on our common stock. Our dividend policy will be assessed by our
board of directors from time to time; however, it is unlikely
that we will reinstate the payment of dividends until market
conditions improve. Further, the waiver we have received from
Marfin relating to our loan covenant restricts our ability to
pay dividends. See Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations for
Seanergy Maritime and Seanergy Recent
Developments. Therefore, there can be no assurances that,
if we were to determine to resume paying cash dividends, Marfin
would provide any required consent.
We are
incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, which does
not have a well-developed body of corporate law, which may
negatively affect the ability of shareholders to protect their
interests.
Our corporate affairs are governed by our amended and restated
articles of incorporation and amended and restated by-laws and
by the BCA. The provisions of the BCA resemble provisions of the
corporation laws of a number of states in the United States.
However, there have been few judicial cases in the Republic of
the Marshall Islands interpreting the BCA. The rights and
fiduciary responsibilities of directors under the laws 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. Shareholder 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,
shareholders may have more difficulty in protecting their
interests in the face of actions by the management, directors or
controlling shareholders than would shareholders of a
corporation incorporated in a U.S. jurisdiction.
We are
incorporated under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall
Islands and our directors and officers are
non-U.S.
residents. Although you may bring an original action in the
courts of the Marshall Islands or obtain a judgment against us
or our directors or management based on U.S. laws in the event
you believe your rights as a shareholder have been infringed, it
may be difficult to enforce judgments against us or our
directors or management.
We are incorporated under the laws of the Republic of the
Marshall Islands, and all of our assets are, and will be,
located outside of the United States. Our business is operated
primarily from our offices in Athens, Greece. In addition, our
directors and officers, are non-residents of the United States,
and all or a substantial portion of the assets of these
non-residents are located outside the United States. As a
result, it may be difficult or impossible for you to bring an
action against us, or against these individuals in the United
States if you believe that your rights have been infringed under
securities laws or otherwise. Even if you are successful in
bringing an action of this kind, the laws of the Marshall
Islands and of other jurisdictions may prevent or restrict you
from enforcing a judgment against our assets or the assets of
our directors and officers. Although you may bring an original
action against us or our affiliates in the courts of the
Marshall Islands based on U.S. laws, and the courts of the
Marshall Islands may impose civil liability, including monetary
damages,
28
against us, or our affiliates for a cause of action arising
under Marshall Islands laws, it may impracticable for you to do
so given the geographic location of the Marshall Islands. For
more information regarding the relevant laws of the Marshall
Islands, please read Enforceability of Civil
Liabilities.
Anti-takeover provisions in our amended and restated articles of
incorporation and by-laws, as well as the terms and conditions
of a Voting Agreement, could make it difficult for shareholders
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
our common stock.
Several provisions of our amended and restated articles of
incorporation and by-laws, as well as the terms and conditions
of the Voting Agreement could make it difficult for shareholders
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 shareholders may
consider favorable.
These provisions include those that:
|
|
|
|
|
authorize our board of directors to issue blank
check preferred stock without shareholder approval;
|
|
|
|
provide for a classified board of directors with staggered,
three-year terms;
|
|
|
|
require a super-majority vote in order to amend the provisions
regarding our classified board of directors with staggered,
three-year terms;
|
|
|
|
permit the removal of any director from office at any time, with
or without cause, at the request of the shareholder group
entitled to designate such director;
|
|
|
|
allow vacancies on the board of directors to be filled by the
shareholder group entitled to name the director whose
resignation or removal led to the occurrence of the vacancy;
|
|
|
|
require that our board of directors fill any vacancies on the
shipping committee with the nominees selected by the party that
nominated the person whose resignation or removal has caused
such vacancies; and
|
|
|
|
prevent our board of directors from dissolving the shipping
committee or altering the duties or composition of the shipping
committee without an affirmative vote of not less than 80% of
the board of directors.
|
These anti-takeover provisions could substantially impede the
ability of shareholders 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
be classified as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC,
which could result in adverse U.S. federal income tax
consequences to U.S. holders of our common stock.
We generally will be treated as a PFIC for U.S. federal income
tax purposes for any taxable year in which either (1) at
least 75% of our gross income (looking through certain corporate
subsidiaries) is passive income or (2) at least 50% of the
average value of our assets (looking through certain corporate
subsidiaries) produce, or are held for the production of,
passive income. For purposes of these tests, passive income
generally includes dividends, interest, rents, royalties, and
gains from the disposition of passive assets. If we were a PFIC
for any taxable year during which a U.S. Holder (as such
term is defined in the section entitled
Taxation U.S. Federal Income
Taxation General) held our common stock, the
U.S. Holder may be subject to increased U.S. federal
income tax liability and may be subject to additional reporting
requirements. Based on the current and expected composition of
our and our subsidiaries assets and income, it is not
anticipated that we will be treated as a PFIC. Our actual PFIC
status for any taxable year, however, will not be determinable
until after the end of such taxable year. Accordingly there can
be no assurances regarding our status as a PFIC for the current
taxable year or any future taxable year. See the discussion in
the section entitled Taxation
U.S. Federal Income Taxation
U.S. Holders Passive Foreign Investment Company
29
Rules. We urge U.S. Holders to consult with their own
tax advisors regarding the possible application of the PFIC
rules.
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
vessel owning or chartering corporation, such as our
subsidiaries and us, that is attributable to transportation that
begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the
United States, exclusive of certain U.S. territories and
possessions, may be 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 applicable Treasury Regulations recently
promulgated thereunder.
For the 2008 tax year, we claimed the benefits of the
Section 883 tax exemption for our ship-owning subsidiaries.
We expect that our ship-owning subsidiaries will again claim the
benefits of Section 883 for the 2009 tax year. However,
there are factual circumstances beyond our control that could
cause us or any one of our ship-operating companies to fail to
qualify for this tax exemption and thereby subject us to
U.S. federal income tax on our U.S. source income. For
example, we would fail to qualify for exemption under
Section 883 of the Code for a particular tax year if
shareholders, each of whom owned, actually or under applicable
constructive ownership rules, a 5% or greater interest in the
vote and value of the outstanding shares of our stock, owned in
the aggregate 50% or more of the vote and value of the
outstanding shares of our stock, and qualified
shareholders as defined by the regulations to
Section 883 did not own, directly or under applicable
constructive ownership rules, sufficient shares in our
closely-held block of stock to preclude the shares in the
closely-held block that are not so owned from representing 50%
or more of the value of our stock for more than half of the
number of days during the taxable year. Establishing such
ownership by qualified shareholders will depend upon the status
of certain of our direct or indirect shareholders as residents
of qualifying jurisdictions and whether those shareholders own
their shares through bearer share arrangements and will also
require these shareholders compliance with ownership
certification procedures attesting that they are residents of
qualifying jurisdictions, and each intermediarys or other
persons similar compliance in the chain of ownership
between us and such shareholders.
On August 12, 2009, we closed on the acquisition of a 50%
controlling interest in BET, as further described in the section
Our Business BET, which owns a fleet of
five vessels. Qualification of the BET fleet for U.S. tax
exemption for the 2008 and 2009 tax years has not yet been
achieved and depends on approval from the IRS for BET to make an
election with the IRS to be treated as a disregarded entity for
those tax years. If the IRS does not approve of this election,
then the vessels in the BET fleet will be subject to US taxation
on their US source income for the 2008 and 2009 tax years. We
have entered into an agreement with the parent company of the
former 50% owner of BET to indemnify us for any adverse tax
consequences to us should the IRS decide not to approve of the
election. Further, if the IRS does not approve of this election,
we will not qualify under Section 883 of the Code for a US
tax exemption on any US source income we receive from the BET
vessels for the 2010 tax year onward unless the other 50% owner
of the BET vessels also qualifies for a US tax exemption under
Section 883.
Due to the factual nature of the issues involved, we can give no
assurances on the tax-exempt status of the vessel owning
subsidiaries of the BET fleet, that of any of our other
subsidiaries, or us. If we or our subsidiaries are not entitled
to exemption under Section 883 for any taxable year, we or
our subsidiaries could be subject for those years to an
effective 4% U.S. federal income tax on the shipping income
these companies derive during the year that are attributable to
the transport of cargoes to or from the U.S. The imposition
of this taxation would have a negative effect on our business
and would result in decreased earnings available for
distribution to our shareholders.
We, as
a non-U.S.
company, have elected to comply with the less stringent
reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, as a foreign private
issuer.
We are a Marshall Islands company, and our corporate affairs are
governed by our amended and restated articles of incorporation,
the BCA and the common law of the Republic of the Marshall
Islands. We provide
30
reports under the Exchange Act as a
non-U.S. company
with foreign private issuer status. Some of the differences
between the reporting obligations of a foreign private issuer
and those of a U.S. domestic company are as follows:
Foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual
report on
Form 20-F
until six months after the end of each fiscal year while
U.S. domestic issuers that are accelerated filers are
required to file their annual report of
Form 10-K
within 75 days after the end of each fiscal year. However,
in August 2008, the SEC adopted changes in the content and
timing of disclosure requirements for foreign private issuers,
including requiring foreign private issuers to file their annual
report on
Form 20-F
no later than four months after the end of each fiscal year,
after a three-year transition period. Additionally, other new
disclosure requirements that will be added to
Form 20-F
include disclosure of disagreements with or changes in
certifying accountants, and significant differences in corporate
governance practices as compared to United States issuers. In
addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file
regular quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q
that contain unaudited financial and other specified information.
However, if a foreign private issuer makes interim reports
available to shareholders, the foreign private issuer is
required to submit copies of such reports to the SEC on a
Form 6-K.
Foreign private issuers are also not required to file current
reports on
Form 8-K
upon the occurrence of specified significant events. However,
foreign private issuers are required to file reports on
Form 6-K
disclosing whatever information the foreign private issuer has
made or is required to make public pursuant to its home
countrys laws or distributes to its shareholders and that
is material to the issuer and its subsidiaries. Foreign private
issuers are also exempt from the requirements under the
U.S. proxy rules prescribing the content of proxy
statements and annual reports to shareholders. Although the
Nasdaq Stock Market does require that a listed company prepare
and deliver to shareholders annual reports and proxy statements
in connection with all meeting of shareholders, these documents
will not be required to comply with the detailed content
requirements of the SECs proxy regulations. Officers,
directors and 10% or more shareholders of foreign private
issuers are exempt from requirements to file Forms 3, 4 and
5 to report their beneficial ownership of the issuers
common stock under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act and
are also exempt from the related short-swing profit recapture
rules under Section 16(b) of the Exchange Act. Foreign
private issuers are also not required to comply with the
provisions of Regulation FD aimed at preventing issuers
from making selective disclosures of material information.
In addition, as a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from,
and you may not be provided with the benefits of, some of the
Nasdaq Stock Market corporate governance requirements, including
that:
|
|
|
|
|
a majority of our board of directors must be independent
directors;
|
|
|
|
the compensation of our chief executive officer must be
determined or recommended by a majority of the independent
directors or a compensation committee comprised solely of
independent directors;
|
|
|
|
our director nominees must be selected or recommended by a
majority of the independent directors or a nomination committee
comprised solely of independent directors; and
|
|
|
|
certain issuances of 20% or more of our common stock must be
subject to shareholder approval.
|
As a result, our independent directors may not have as much
influence over our corporate policy as they would if we were not
a foreign private issuer.
As a result of all of the above, our public shareholders may
have more difficulty in protecting their interests in the face
of actions taken by management, members of the board of
directors or controlling shareholders than they would as
shareholders of a U.S. company.
We are
a holding company and will depend on the ability of our
subsidiaries to distribute funds to us in order to satisfy
financial obligations or to make dividend
payments.
We are a holding company and our subsidiaries, all of which are,
or upon their formation will be, wholly owned by us either
directly or indirectly, conduct all of our operations and own
all of our operating assets. We have no significant assets other
than the equity interests in our wholly owned subsidiaries. As a
result, our ability to make dividend payments depends on our
subsidiaries and their ability to distribute funds to us. If we
31
are unable to obtain funds from our subsidiaries, our board of
directors may exercise its discretion not to pay dividends.
We
only own 50% of BET, although we consolidate its results; in
certain circumstances we could be required to sell our interest
in BET or acquire the interest that we do not currently
own.
As described in note 1 to our unaudited financial
statements for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and
2008, since the date of our acquisition of a controlling
interest in BET, we consolidate its results with ours. However,
our equity interest is only 50%, and the other shareholder of
BET is entitled to 50% of BETs assets, earnings and any
dividends paid by BET. Beginning in August 2010, the
shareholders agreement between us and BETs other
shareholder, Mineral Transport, permits us or Mineral Transport
to require the other shareholder to sell all of its BET shares
or buy all of the shares of the offering party at a price set by
the offering party. As a result of these provisions, we could be
forced to sell our shares of BET at a price determined by
Mineral Transport if we were unwilling or unable to purchase
Mineral Transports shares at that price. We cannot assure
you that we would have adequate funds to acquire Mineral
Transports shares at the time any such offer were made.
You
may experience dilution as a result of the exercise of our
warrants.
We have 38,984,667 warrants to purchase shares of our common
stock issued and outstanding at an exercise price of $6.50 per
share. In addition, we have assumed Seanergy Maritimes
obligation to issue 1,000,000 shares of common stock and
warrants to purchase 1,000,000 shares of our common stock
under the unit purchase option it granted the underwriter in its
initial public offering at an exercise price of $12.50 per unit.
As a result, you may experience dilution if our outstanding
warrants, the underwriters unit purchase option or the
warrants underlying the underwriters unit purchase option
are exercised.
32
CAUTIONARY
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This prospectus contains certain forward-looking statements. Our
forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to,
statements regarding our or our managements expectations,
hopes, beliefs, intentions or strategies regarding the future
and other statements other than statements of historical fact.
In addition, any statements that refer to projections, forecasts
or other characterizations of future events or circumstances,
including any underlying assumptions, are forward-looking
statements. The words anticipates,
believe, continue, could,
estimate, expect, intends,
may, might, plan,
possible, potential,
predicts, project, should,
would and similar expressions may identify
forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does
not mean that a statement is not forward-looking.
Forward-looking statements in this prospectus may include, for
example, statements about our:
|
|
|
|
|
our future operating or financial results;
|
|
|
|
our financial condition and liquidity, including our ability to
obtain additional financing in the future to fund capital
expenditures, acquisitions and other general corporate
activities;
|
|
|
|
our ability to pay dividends in the future;
|
|
|
|
dry bulk shipping industry trends, including charter rates and
factors affecting vessel supply and demand;
|
|
|
|
future, pending or recent acquisitions, business strategy, areas
of possible expansion, and expected capital spending or
operating expenses;
|
|
|
|
the useful lives and changes in the value of our vessels and
their impact on our compliance with loan covenants;
|
|
|
|
availability of crew, number of off-hire days, dry-docking
requirements and insurance costs;
|
|
|
|
global and regional economic and political conditions;
|
|
|
|
our ability to leverage Safbulks and ESTs
relationships and reputation in the dry bulk shipping industry;
|
|
|
|
changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns;
|
|
|
|
changes in governmental rules and regulations or actions taken
by regulatory authorities;
|
|
|
|
potential liability from future litigation and incidents
involving our vessels;
|
|
|
|
acts of terrorism and other hostilities; and
|
|
|
|
other factors discussed in the section titled Risk
Factors.
|
The forward-looking statements contained in this prospectus are
based on our current expectations and beliefs concerning future
developments and their potential effects on us. There can be no
assurance that future developments affecting us will be those
that we have anticipated. These forward-looking statements
involve a number of risks, uncertainties (some of which are
beyond our control) or other assumptions that may cause actual
results or performance to be materially different from those
expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. These
risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, those
factors described under the heading Risk Factors.
Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize,
or should any of our assumptions prove incorrect, actual results
may vary in material respects from those projected in these
forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update
or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of
new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be
required under applicable securities laws
and/or if
and when management knows or has a reasonable basis on which to
conclude that previously disclosed projections are no longer
reasonably attainable.
33
PRICE
HISTORY OF OUR COMMON STOCK, WARRANTS AND UNITS
The table below sets forth, for the calendar periods indicated,
the high and low sales prices on the American Stock Exchange or
the Nasdaq Stock Market for our common stock, warrants and
units, as applicable:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
Units*
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Annual highs and lows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
9.67
|
|
|
$
|
9.26
|
|
|
$
|
1.66
|
|
|
$
|
1.13
|
|
|
$
|
10.94
|
|
|
$
|
9.83
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
10.00
|
|
|
$
|
3.15
|
|
|
$
|
2.62
|
|
|
$
|
0.11
|
|
|
$
|
11.90
|
|
|
$
|
6.50
|
|
Quarterly highs and lows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended 12/31/2007
|
|
$
|
9.48
|
|
|
$
|
9.08
|
|
|
$
|
1.66
|
|
|
$
|
1.13
|
|
|
$
|
10.94
|
|
|
$
|
10.17
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended 03/31/2008
|
|
$
|
9.48
|
|
|
$
|
9.01
|
|
|
$
|
1.35
|
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
$
|
10.61
|
|
|
$
|
9.45
|
|
Quarter ended 06/30/2008
|
|
$
|
10.00
|
|
|
$
|
9.15
|
|
|
$
|
2.62
|
|
|
$
|
0.42
|
|
|
$
|
12.31
|
|
|
$
|
9.47
|
|
Quarter ended 09/30/02008
|
|
$
|
10.00
|
|
|
$
|
7.21
|
|
|
$
|
2.50
|
|
|
$
|
0.75
|
|
|
$
|
11.90
|
|
|
$
|
8.70
|
|
Quarter ended 12/31/2008
|
|
$
|
8.55
|
|
|
$
|
3.15
|
|
|
$
|
0.92
|
|
|
$
|
0.11
|
|
|
$
|
9.10
|
|
|
$
|
6.50
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended 3/31/2009**
|
|
$
|
5.35
|
|
|
$
|
3.68
|
|
|
$
|
0.22
|
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Quarter ended 6/30/2009**
|
|
$
|
4.50
|
|
|
$
|
3.25
|
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
|
$
|
0.08
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Quarter ended 9/30/2009**
|
|
$
|
4.94
|
|
|
$
|
3.56
|
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Quarter ended 12/31/2009***
|
|
$
|
4.50
|
|
|
$
|
3.03
|
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Monthly highs and lows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 2009**
|
|
$
|
4.25
|
|
|
$
|
3.49
|
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
0.14
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
June 2009**
|
|
$
|
4.50
|
|
|
$
|
3.41
|
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
July 2009**
|
|
$
|
4.39
|
|
|
$
|
3.56
|
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
|
$
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
August 2009**
|
|
$
|
4.94
|
|
|
$
|
3.98
|
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
September 2009**
|
|
$
|
4.80
|
|
|
$
|
4.01
|
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
October 2009**
|
|
$
|
4.50
|
|
|
$
|
3.69
|
|
|
$
|
0.22
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
November 2009***
|
|
$
|
4.09
|
|
|
$
|
3.03
|
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
0.18
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Seanergy Maritimes common stock, warrants and units were
previously listed on the American Stock Exchange. On
October 15, 2008, Seanergy Maritimes common stock and
warrants commenced trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market. Seanergy
Maritimes units were separated prior to being listed on
the Nasdaq Stock Market and, therefore, were not listed on the
Nasdaq Stock Market. Seanergy Maritimes units stopped
trading on the American Stock Exchange on October 14, 2008
and were not listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market. |
|
** |
|
Following the dissolution of Seanergy Maritime, our common stock
started trading on the Nasdaq Stock Market on January 28,
2009. |
|
|
|
*** |
|
Period ended November 17, 2009. |
Dividend
Policy
Prior to the consummation of our business combination, we paid
quarterly dividends equal to each shareholders pro rata
share of the interest income earned on the Seanergy Maritime
Trust Account. Following the business combination, in light
of a lower freight environment and a highly challenging
financing environment that has resulted in a substantial decline
in the international shipping industry, our board of directors,
beginning in February 4, 2009, suspended the cash dividend
on our common stock. Our dividend
34
policy will be assessed by our board of directors from time to
time; however, it is unlikely that we will reinstate the payment
of dividends until market conditions improve. Further, the
waiver we have received from Marfin relating to our loan
covenant restricts our ability to pay dividends. See
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations for Seanergy Maritime and
Seanergy Recent Developments. Therefore, there
can be no assurance that, if we were to determine to resume
paying cash dividends, Marfin would provide any required consent.
35
USE OF
PROCEEDS
We estimate that we will receive net proceeds of approximately
$ from this offering (including
net proceeds of $ from the
concurrent sale), assuming that the underwriters
over-allotment option is not exercised and after deducting
underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses.
We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering and the
concurrent sale to purchase additional vessels and for general
working capital purposes.
36
CAPITALIZATION
The following table sets forth our capitalization as of
September 30, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
on a historical basis without any adjustment to reflect
subsequent events;
|
|
|
|
|
|
an as adjusted basis for the sale of up to
$ shares to the public and
$ in the current sale net of
underwriters discounts and commissions, offering expenses,
and after receipt and application of net proceeds.
|
Other than as set forth in the As Adjusted column,
there have been no material changes in our capitalization since
September 30, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
|
|
|
|
Historical
|
|
|
Adjusted
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term revolving credit financing (secured)
|
|
$
|
54,845
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Long-term term facility financing (secured), including current
portion of $33,206
|
|
|
252,850
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
$
|
307,695
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value; 1,000,000 shares
authorized; none issued
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.0001 par value; 200,000,000 and 89,000,000
authorized shares as at September 30, 2009 and
December 31, 2008, respectively; 28,947,095 and
22,361,227 shares, issued and outstanding as at
September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
213,232
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(1,533
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
16,746
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity
|
|
$
|
228,448
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capitalization
|
|
$
|
536,143
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37
DILUTION
If you invest in our common stock, your interest will be diluted
to the extent of the difference between the public offering
price per share of our common stock and the pro forma net
tangible book value per share of our common stock after this
offering. Dilution results from the fact that the per-share
offering price of the common stock is greater than the net
tangible book value per share for the common stock outstanding
before this offering.
At September 30, 2009, we had net tangible book value of
$ , or
$ per share. As of
November , 2009, we will issue an aggregate of
4,308,075 shares of our common stock upon achievement of
certain EBITDA targets. As a result of the issuance of such
shares but without giving effect to any other changes in our
total tangible assets and total liabilities, as of
September 30, 2009, we had as adjusted net tangible book
value of $ or
$ per share. After giving effect
to the issuance
of shares
of common stock in this offering at an offering price of
$ per share, the pro forma net
tangible book value and pro forma as adjusted net tangible book
value at September 30, 2009 would have been
$ or
$ , respectively, or
$ per share or
$ per share, respectively. This
represents an immediate appreciation in net tangible book value
and adjusted net tangible book value at September 30, 2009
of $ per share or
$ , respectively, to existing
shareholders and an immediate dilution of the net tangible book
value and adjusted net tangible value of
$ per share or
$ , respectively, to new investors.
The following table illustrates the pro forma per share dilution
and appreciation at September 30, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted as of
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2009(2)
|
|
|
Assumed offering price per share in this offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net tangible book value per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in net tangible book value per share attributable to
new investors in this offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net tangible book value per share after giving effect
to this Offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilution per share to the new investors(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Each $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed public offering
price of $ per share would
increase (decrease) our as adjusted net tangible book value by
$ million, or
$ per share, and increase
(decrease) dilution in net tangible book value per share to
investors in this offering by $
per share, assuming that the number of shares offered by us, as
set forth on the cover page of this prospectus, remains the same
and after deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and
commissions, and offering expenses. The information in the table
above is illustrative only, and following the completion of this
offering, our capitalization will be adjusted based on the
actual public offering price and other terms of this offering
determined at pricing. |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Represents the dilution and appreciation as of
September 30, 2009 after giving effect to the issuance of
4,308,075 shares of our common stock upon achievement of
certain EBITDA targets. |
Net tangible book value per share of our common stock is
determined by dividing our tangible net worth, which consists of
tangible assets less liabilities, by the number of shares of our
common stock outstanding. Dilution is determined by subtracting
the net tangible book value per share of common stock after this
offering from the public offering price per share. Dilution per
share to new investors would be $
if the underwriters exercise in full their over-allotment option.
38
The following table summarizes, on a pro forma basis and on a
pro forma as adjusted basis as of September 30, 2009, the
differences between the number of shares of common stock
acquired from us, the total amount paid and the average price
per share paid by the existing holders of shares of common stock
and by the investors in this offering based upon the price of
$ per share, which was the closing
price of our common stock
on ,
2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Total Consideration
|
|
|
Price per
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
Share
|
|
|
Existing shareholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders of shares issued achievement of EBITDA target
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Each $1.00 increase (decrease) in the assumed public offering
price of $ per share would
increase (decrease) total consideration paid by new investors
and total consideration paid by all shareholders by
$ million, assuming that the
number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page
of this prospectus, remains the same. The information in the
table above is illustrative only, and following the completion
of this offering, will be adjusted based on the actual public
offering price and other terms of this offering determined at
pricing.
If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in
full, the following will occur:
|
|
|
|
|
the pro forma percentage of shares of our common stock held by
existing shareholders will decrease to
approximately % of the total number
of pro forma shares of our common stock outstanding after this
offering; and
|
|
|
|
the number of shares of our common stock held by new investors
will increase
to ,
or approximately % of the total
number of shares of our common stock outstanding after this
offering.
|
The information in the table above excludes (as of
November , 2009):
A. 38,984,667 shares of common stock reserved for
issuance upon the exercise of outstanding warrants.
B. 2,000,000 shares of common stock reserved for
issuance upon the exercise of the unit purchase option sold to
the lead underwriter in the initial public offering of our
predecessor, which unit purchase option expires
September 24, 2012, as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
1,000,000 shares of common stock included in the units
issuable upon exercise of the option at an exercise price of
$12.50 per unit;
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,000,000 shares of common stock issuable for $6.50 per
share upon exercise of the warrants underlying the units
issuable upon exercise of the option; and
|
C. shares that may be issued pursuant to the
underwriters over-allotment option.
39
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
The following selected historical statement of operations and
balance sheet data were derived from the audited financial
statements and accompanying notes for the years ended
December 31, 2008 and 2007 and for the period from
August 15, 2006 (Inception) to December 31, 2006 and
the unaudited financial statements and accompanying notes for
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 and
2008, included elsewhere in this prospectus. The information is
only a summary and should be read in conjunction with the
financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in
this prospectus and the sections entitled, Risk
Factors and Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations For
Seanergy Maritime and Seanergy. The historical data
included below and elsewhere in this prospectus is not
necessarily indicative of our future performance.
Since our vessel operations began upon the consummation of our
business combination we cannot provide a meaningful comparison
of our results of operations for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and September 30, 2008 or for the
year ended December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2007.
During the period from our inception to the date of our business
combination, we were a development stage enterprise.
40
All amounts in the tables below are in thousands of
U.S. dollars, except for share data, fleet data and average
daily results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inception
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(August 15,
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
2006) to
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel revenue related party, net
|
|
|
20,485
|
|
|
|
6,122
|
|
|
|
68,795
|
|
|
|
6,122
|
|
|
|
34,453
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel revenue, net
|
|
|
1,867
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,867
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct voyage expenses
|
|
|
(42
|
)
|
|
|
(143
|
)
|
|
|
(480
|
)
|
|
|
(143
|
)
|
|
|
(151
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel operating expense
|
|
|
(3,935
|
)
|
|
|
(719
|
)
|
|
|
(9,756
|
)
|
|
|
(719
|
)
|
|
|
(3,180
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voyage expenses related party
|
|
|
(222
|
)
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
|
|
(841
|
)
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
|
|
(440
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management fees related party
|
|
|
(462
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
(1,078
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
(388
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administration expenses
|
|
|
(1,014
|
)
|
|
|
(208
|
)
|
|
|
(3,083
|
)
|
|
|
(805
|
)
|
|
|
(1,840
|
)
|
|
|
(445
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
General and administration expenses related party
|
|
|
(459
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
(1,553
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
(430
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of dry-docking costs
|
|
|
(387
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(397
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
(5,286
|
)
|
|
|
(1,488
|
)
|
|
|
(20,716
|
)
|
|
|
(1,488
|
)
|
|
|
(9,929
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain from acquisition
|
|
|
6,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill impairment loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44,795
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessels impairment loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,530
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income money market fund
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
644
|
|
|
|
363
|
|
|
|
3,257
|
|
|
|
3,361
|
|
|
|
1,948
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Interest and finance costs
|
|
|
(3,525
|
)
|
|
|
(730
|
)
|
|
|
(6,656
|
)
|
|
|
(730
|
)
|
|
|
(4,077
|
)
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency exchange (losses), net
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(80
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(39
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
13,916
|
|
|
|
3,270
|
|
|
|
33,198
|
|
|
|
5,286
|
|
|
|
(31,985
|
)
|
|
|
1,445
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Seanergy Maritime
|
|
|
13,983
|
|
|
|
3,270
|
|
|
|
33,265
|
|
|
|
5,286
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic income (loss) per share
|
|
|
0.57
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
|
|
|
1.44
|
|
|
|
0.19
|
|
|
|
(1.21
|
)
|
|
|
0.12
|
|
|
|
(0.00
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted income (loss) per share
|
|
|
0.46
|
|
|
|
0.10
|
|
|
|
1.13
|
|
|
|
0.16
|
|
|
|
(1.21
|
)
|
|
|
0.10
|
|
|
|
(0.00
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic weighted average number of shares
|
|
|
24,580,378
|
|
|
|
26,314,831
|
|
|
|
23,109,073
|
|
|
|
27,829,907
|
|
|
|
26,452,291
|
|
|
|
11,754,095
|
|
|
|
7,264,893
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted weighted average number of shares
|
|
|
30,386,931
|
|
|
|
32,882,906
|
|
|
|
29,420,518
|
|
|
|
34,397,982
|
|
|
|
26,452,291
|
|
|
|
15,036,283
|
|
|
|
7,264,893
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.1842
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
70,986
|
|
|
|
29,814
|
|
|
|
235,213
|
|
|
|
376
|
|
Vessels, net
|
|
|
450,920
|
|
|
|
345,622
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
547,140
|
|
|
|
378,202
|
|
|
|
235,213
|
|
|
|
632
|
|
Total current liabilities, including current portion of
long-term debt
|
|
|
37,651
|
|
|
|
32,999
|
|
|
|
5,995
|
|
|
|
611
|
|
Long-term debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
274,489
|
|
|
|
213,638
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity
|
|
|
228,448
|
|
|
|
131,565
|
|
|
|
148,369
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
42
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR SEANERGY MARITIME AND
SEANERGY
You should read the following discussion and analysis of our
consolidated financial condition and results of operations
together with our consolidated financial statements and notes
thereto that appear elsewhere in this prospectus.
Seanergys consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in conformity with US GAAP. This discussion and
analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks,
uncertainties, and assumptions. Actual results may differ
materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking
statements.
The historical consolidated financial results of Seanergy
described below are presented in United States dollars.
Overview
We are an international provider of dry bulk marine
transportation services that was incorporated in the Marshall
Islands on January 4, 2008. We were initially formed as a
wholly owned subsidiary of Seanergy Maritime Corp., or Seanergy
Maritime, which was incorporated in the Marshall Islands on
August 15, 2006, as a blank check company created to
acquire, through a merger, capital stock exchange, asset
acquisition or other similar business combination, one or more
businesses in the maritime shipping industry or related
industries. Seanergy Maritime began operations on
August 28, 2008 after the closing of our business
combination.
The business combination was accounted for under the purchase
method of accounting and accordingly the assets (vessels)
acquired have been recorded at their fair values. No liabilities
were assumed nor were other tangible assets acquired. The
results of the vessel operations are included in our
consolidated statement of operations from August 28, 2008.
The aggregate acquisition cost, including direct acquisition
costs, amounted to $404,876,000. The fair value of our tangible
assets acquired as of August 28, 2008 amounted to
$360,081,000. The premium (non tax deductible goodwill) over the
fair value of our vessels acquired amounting to $44,795,000
arose resulting from the decline in the market value of the
vessels between the date of entering into the agreements to
purchase the business (May 20, 2008) and the actual
business combination date (August 28, 2008). There were no
other identifiable assets or liabilities.
We performed our annual impairment testing of goodwill as at
December 31, 2008. The current economic and market
conditions, including the significant disruptions in the global
credit markets, are having broad effects on participants in a
wide variety of industries. Since September 2008, the charter
rates in the dry bulk charter market have declined
significantly, and dry bulk vessel values have also declined. A
charge of $44,795,000 was recognized in 2008, as a result of the
impairment tests performed on goodwill at December 31, 2008.
On January 27, 2009, our parent company was liquidated and
dissolved and we became its successor. We distributed to each
holder of common stock of Seanergy Maritime one share of our
common stock for each share of Seanergy Maritime common stock
owned by the holder and all outstanding warrants of Seanergy
Maritime concurrently become our obligation.
Since our vessel operations began upon the consummation of our
business combination in August 2008, we cannot provide a
meaningful comparison of our results of operations for the year
ended December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2007. During
the period from our inception to the date of our business
combination we were a development stage enterprise.
As of September 30, 2009, we controlled and operated a
total fleet of 11 dry bulk carriers vessel, consisting of three
Panamax vessels, one Handymax vessel, one Handysize vessel, two
Supramax vessels and four Capesize vessels. These ships have a
combined carrying capacity of 1,043,296 dwt and an average age
of approximately 14 years, out of an expected useful life
of 30 years.
43
We generate revenues by charging customers for the
transportation of dry bulk cargo using our vessels. Nine of our
vessels are currently employed under time charters. Seven of our
charters are with SAMC, a company affiliated with members of the
Restis family. A time charter is a contract for the use of a
vessel for a specific period of time during which the charterer
pays substantially all of the voyage expenses, but the vessel
owner pays the vessel operating expenses.
Recent
Developments
Vessel
employment and charter rates:
The Baltic Dry Index, a daily average of charter rates in 26
shipping routes measured on a time charter and voyage basis and
covering dry bulk carriers, fell 94.4% from a peak of 11,793 in
May 2008 to a low of 663 in December 2008. It has since risen to
3,480 as of November 9, 2009. The Baltic Handymax Index
fell 92.1% from a peak of 3,407 in May 2008 to a low of 268 in
December 2008. It has since risen 88% as of September 7,
2009. The Baltic Capesize Index fell 95% from a peak of 19,687
in June 2008 to a low of 830 in December 2008. It has since
risen to 5,764 as of November 9, 2009. The steep decline in
charter rates is due to various factors, including the lack of
trade financing for purchases of commodities carried by sea,
which has resulted in a significant decline in cargo shipments,
and the excess supply of iron ore in China, which has resulted
in falling iron ore prices and increased stockpiles in Chinese
ports. While we expect that charter rates will gradually recover
as economic activity improves during the course of the year,
those vessels that are redelivered to us earlier in the year are
expected to receive lower charter rates.
A prolonged period of extremely low charter rates may lead
owners to face difficulties in meeting their cash flow
obligations, and they may seek to find mutual accommodations
with charterers in which charterers may pay lower charter rates
over a longer period of time. Depending on their overall
financial condition, some weaker owners may not be able to
service their debt obligations, which may cause them to cease
operations or seek protection from creditors.
Pursuant to addenda dated July 24, 2009 to the individual
charter party agreements dated May 26, 2008 between SAMC
and each of Martinique Intl. Corp. (vessel Bremen Max) and
Harbour Business Intl. Corp. (vessel Hamburg Max), SAMC agreed
to extend the existing charter parties for the Bremen Max and
the Hamburg Max. Pursuant to the terms of the addendum, each
vessel will be chartered for a period of between
11-13 months,
at the charterers option. The charters commenced on
July 27, 2009 and August 12, 2009, respectively. The
daily gross charter rates paid by SAMC is $15,500 for each of
the Bremen Max and the Hamburg Max, which will generate revenues
of approximately $12.7 million. All charter rates are
inclusive of a commission of 1.25% payable to Safbulk as
commercial broker and 2.5% to SAMC as charterer. SAMC
sub-charters these vessels in the market and takes the risk that
the rate it receives is better than the period rate it is paying
Seanergy.
On July 14, 2009, the African Oryx and the African Zebra
were chartered for a period of 22 to 25 months at charter
rates equal to $7,000 per day and $7,500 per day, respectively.
Seanergy is also entitled to receive a 50% adjusted profit share
calculated on the average spot Time Charter Routes derived from
the Baltic Supramax.
Following the expiration of its charter party agreements in
September 2009, the Davakis G and the Delos Ranger are chartered
in the spot market until such time as we find suitable time
charters for these vessels.
Pursuant to charter party agreements dated August 31, 2006,
each of the BET Prince and the BET Commander were chartered for
daily charter rates of $23,000 and $22,000, respectively, for
charters expiring in November 2009 and December 2009,
respectively. Upon expiration of these charters, pursuant to
charter party agreements dated as of July 7, 2009, the BET
Commander and the BET Prince will be chartered to SAMC at daily
charter rates of $24,000 and $25,000, respectively, for charters
expiring in February 2012 and January 2012, respectively.
44
Pursuant to charter party agreements dated as of July 7,
2009, each of the BET Fighter, BET Scouter and the BET Intruder
were chartered to SAMC at daily charter rates of $25,000,
$26,000, and $15,500, respectively, for charters expiring in
September 2011, October 2011, and September 2011, respectively.
All charter rates for the BET fleet are inclusive of a
commission of 1.25% payable to Safbulk as commercial broker and
2.5% to SAMC as charterer. SAMC sub-charters these vessels in
the market and takes the risk that the rates it receives are
better than the period rates it is paying BET.
We cannot predict whether our charterers will, upon the
expiration of their charters, re-charter our vessels on
favorable terms or at all. This decision is likely to depend
upon prevailing charter rates in the months prior to charter
expiration. If our charterers decide not to re-charter our
vessels, we may not be able to re-charter them on similar terms.
In the future, we may employ vessels in the spot market, which
is subject to greater rate fluctuation than the time charter
market. If we receive lower charter rates under replacement
charters or are unable to re-charter all of our vessels, our net
revenue will decrease.
Despite the recent economic crisis, we are currently able to
meet our working capital needs and debt obligations. The current
decline in charter rates should not affect our revenue as we
have charters locked in for 11 to 13 and 22 to 26 months
periods including BET vessels (expiring between November 2009
and February 2012). We have contractually secured time charter
agreements with our longest time charter expiring
February 24, 2012. Time charters cover 76% of
2010 days and 50% of 2011 days. For the calculation of
contract coverage, we are using the latest expiration date of
our vessels time charters as presented in the
Our Fleet table on page 2. For
2010, we expect our average daily operating expenses per vessel
to be approximately $5,500, and we expect our average daily
general and administrative expenses to be approximately $1,000.
Our expectations regarding 2010 operating expenses and general
and administrative statements are forward-looking statements.
Our actual results could vary. See Risk Factors for
information regarding factors, many of which are outside of our
control, that could cause our actual expenses to differ from
expectations. We will have to make use of our cash flows not
committed to the repayment of the term loan, revolving facility
and BET loan to meet our financial obligations and put our
expansion plans on hold unless new capital is raised from the
capital markets, including this offering, or the warrants are
exercised in which case we will use capital generated from the
capital markets and the warrants for expansion purposes. We make
no assurances that funds will be raised through the capital
markets or that the warrants will be exercised, or if exercised,
the quantity which will be exercised or the period in which they
will be exercised. Exercise of the warrants is currently not
likely considering current market prices.
BET
acquisition:
On August 12, 2009, we closed on the acquisition of a 50%
interest in BET from Constellation Bulk Energy Holdings, Inc.,
which we refer to as the BET acquisition. We control
BET through our right to appoint a majority of the BET board of
directors. The purchase price was $1.00. The stock purchase was
accounted for under the purchase method of accounting and
accordingly the assets (vessels) owned by BET have been recorded
at their fair values. In addition to the vessels, the other
assets acquired include $37.75 million in cash and
$3.57 million in current receivables. The consolidated
financial statements for BET for 2006, 2007 and 2008 appear
elsewhere in this prospectus. The fair value of the vessels as
of the closing of the acquisition was $126 million and BET
owed $143.099 million under its credit facility as of such
date. The results of operations of BET are included in our
consolidated statement of operations commencing on
August 12, 2009. The financial impact of BET on our results
of operations is reflected in the pro forma financial
information included in this prospectus. See Seanergy and
BET Unaudited Pro Forma Financial Statements. The tax
considerations related to the BET acquisition are reflected in
the Taxation section in this prospectus. Our
acquisition of an interest in BET was approved by BETs
lenders.
Amendment
and conversion of Note:
On August 19, 2009, we amended the Note in the principal
amount of $28,250,000 issued to certain Restis affiliate
shareholders as nominees for the sellers of the vessels we
acquired in our business combination in August 2008. The Note
was amended to reduce the conversion price of such note to
$4.45598 per share,
45
which is equal to the average closing price of our common stock
for the
five-day
period commencing on the date of the amendment. As a condition
to such amendment, the holders agreed to convert the Note
immediately. As a result of such conversion, we issued an
aggregate of 6,585,868 shares of common stock to the
holders and the Note was cancelled.
Increase
in authorized stock:
On July 16, 2009, our shareholders approved an amendment to
our amended and restated articles of incorporation to increase
our authorized common stock to 200,000,000 shares, par
value $0.0001 per share. This should provide us additional
flexibility to raise equity capital to achieve our business plan.
Loan
covenant waivers:
Seanergys revolving credit facility is tied to the market
value of the vessels and not to the prevailing (spot) market
rates. For example, our existing term and revolving credit
facilities require that the aggregate market value of the
vessels and the value of any additional security must be at
least 135% of the aggregate of the outstanding debt financing
and any amount available for drawing under the revolving
facility less the aggregate amount of all deposits maintained.
If the percentage is below 135% then a prepayment of the loans
may be required or additional security may be requested. A
waiver from Marfin has been received with respect to this clause
through January 1, 2011.
Upon lenders request, BET must assure its lenders that the
aggregate market value of the BET vessels is not less than 125%
of the outstanding amount of the BET loan. If the market value
of the vessels is less than this amount, the BET subsidiaries
may be requested to prepay an amount that will result in the
market value of the vessels meeting this requirement or offer
additional security to the lenders.
On September 30, 2009, BET entered into a supplemental
agreement with Citibank International PLC (as agent for the
syndicate of banks and financial institutions set forth in the
loan agreement) in connection with the $222,000,000 amortized
loan obtained by the six wholly owned subsidiaries of BET, which
financed the acquisition of their respective vessels. The
material terms of the supplemental agreement with Citibank
International PLC are as follows:
(1) the applicable margin for the period between
July 1, 2009 and ending on June 30, 2010 (the
amendment period) shall be increased to two per cent (2%) per
annum;
(2) the borrowers to pay to the agent a restructuring fee
of $286,198.91 and a part of the loan in the amount of
$20,000,000; and
(3) the borrowers and the corporate guarantor have
requested and the creditors consented to:
(a) the temporary reduction of the security requirement
during the amendment period from 125% to 100%; and
(b) the temporary reduction of the minimum equity ratio
requirement of the principal corporate guarantee to be amended
from 0.30: 1.0 to 0.175:1.0 during the amendment period at the
end of the accounting periods ending on December 31, 2009
and June 30, 2010.
Dry-dock
of vessels:
On February 24, 2009, the African Zebra commenced its
scheduled dry-docking, which was completed on July 20, 2009
at a cost of $3.2 million. The delay was due to labor
strikes in the repairing yard and other unforeseen events. The
Hamburg Max commenced its scheduled dry-docking on May 17,
2009, which was completed on June 23, 2009 at a cost of
$1.1 million. The cost of our dry-docks in 2009 are
expected to total $4.3 million. The African Oryx is
scheduled to be dry-docked in October 2010 at an estimated cost
of $900,000.
46
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the
FASB) issued new guidance concerning the
organization of authoritative guidance under US GAAP. This new
guidance created the FASB Accounting Standards Codification
(Codification). The Codification has become the
source of authoritative US GAAP recognized by the FASB to be
applied by nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive
releases of the SEC under authority of federal securities laws
are also sources of authoritative US GAAP for SEC
registrants. The Codification became effective for us in the
third quarter of fiscal 2009. As the Codification is not
intended to change or alter existing US GAAP, it did not
have any impact on our consolidated financial statements. On its
effective date, the Codification superseded all then-existing
non-SEC accounting and reporting standards. All other
nongrandfathered non-SEC accounting literature not included in
the Codification has become nonauthoritative.
In May 2009, the FASB established principles and requirements
for disclosure of events that occur after the balance sheet date
but before financial statements are issued or are available to
be issued. This statement introduces the concept of when
financial statements are considered issued or are available to
be issued. The statement is effective for interim or annual
financial periods ending after June 15, 2009, and shall be
applied prospectively. The adoption of this statement did not
have an impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued guidance regarding the
accounting for business combinations and noncontrolling
interests. Such guidance requires most identifiable assets,
liabilities, noncontrolling interests, and goodwill acquired in
a business combination to be recorded at full fair
value and requires noncontrolling interests (previously
referred to as minority interests) to be reported as a component
of equity, which changes the accounting for transactions with
noncontrolling interest holders. Such guidance affects our
acquisitions consummated after January 1, 2009, which have
been accounted for under the new standard.
In March 2008, the FASB issued accounting guidance regarding
disclosures about derivative instruments and hedging activities.
The new guidance provides users of financial statements with an
enhanced understanding of how and why an entity uses derivative
instruments, how derivative instruments and related hedged items
are accounted for and how derivative instruments and related
hedged items affect an entitys financial position,
financial performance, and cash flows. The adoption of this
guidance in 2009 did not have any impact on our financial
statement presentation or disclosures.
In June 2009, the FASB issued guidance regarding the
consolidation of variable-interest entities, or VIE. Such
guidance: (1) eliminates the existing exemption from VIEs
for qualifying special purpose entities, (2) provides a new
approach for determining who should consolidate a VIE, and
(3) changes when it is necessary to reassess who should
consolidate a VIE. Calendar year-end companies will have to
apply the new rules as of January 1, 2010. We are in the
process of evaluating the effect of this guidance in our
financial statements.
In June 2008, the FASB issued guidance regarding the
determination of whether a financial instrument (or an embedded
feature) is indexed to an entitys own stock. Such guidance
is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2008, and interim periods within those fiscal years. We have
determined that our warrants are indexed to our own stock and
equity classified and therefore, the adoption of this standard
did not have an effect on our financial statements.
In May 2008, the FASB issued guidance that requires issuers of
convertible debt that may be settled wholly or partly in cash
upon conversion to account for the debt and equity components
separately. Such guidance is effective for financial statements
issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008
and interim periods within those years and must be applied
retrospectively to all periods presented. Application of the new
guidance did not have any effect on our financial statements.
In April 2009, the FASB issued guidance to clarify the
application of fair-value measurements in the current economic
environment, modify the recognition of
other-than-temporary
impairments of debt securities, and require companies to
disclose the fair values of financial instruments in interim
periods. The application of such guidance did not have a
material effect on our financial statements.
47
In addition, the FASB issued accounting guidance that requires
public companies to disclose the fair value of financial
instruments in interim financial statements, adding to the
current annual disclosure requirements, except with respect to
concentration of credit risks of all financial instruments. It
also adds a requirement for discussion of changes, if any, in
the method used and significant assumptions made during the
period.
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
Critical accounting policies are those that reflect significant
judgments or uncertainties and potentially result in materially
different results under different assumptions and conditions. We
have described below what we believe are our most critical
accounting policies, because they generally involve a
comparatively higher degree of judgment in their application.
Business
combination allocation of the purchase price in a
business combination
On August 28, 2008, we completed our business combination
of our initial fleet from the Restis family. The acquisition was
accounted for under the purchase method of accounting and
accordingly, the assets acquired have been recorded at their
fair values. No liabilities were assumed or other tangible
assets acquired. The results of operations are included in the
consolidated statement of operations from August 28, 2008.
The consideration paid for the business combination has been
recorded at fair value at the date of acquisition and forms part
of the cost of the acquisition. Total consideration for the
business combination was $404,876,000, including direct
transaction costs of $8,802,000, and excluding the contingent
earn-out component.
The allocation of the purchase price to the assets acquired on
the date of the business combination is a critical area due to
the subjectivity involved in identifying and allocating the
purchase price to intangible assets acquired. As at the date of
the business combination, the fair value of the vessels was
determined to be $360,081,000. No additional identifiable
intangibles were identified and the difference of $44,795,000
was assigned to goodwill. Areas of subjectivity included whether
there were any values associated with intangible assets such as
customer relationships, right of first refusal agreements and
charter agreements.
On August 12, 2009, we completed our business acquisition
of 50% of BET. The acquisition was accounted for under the
purchase method of accounting and accordingly, the assets and
liabilities acquired have been recorded at their fair values.
The results of operations are included in the pro forma
consolidated statement of operations as if the acquisition had
occurred at January 1, 2008. The consideration paid for the
business acquisition has been recorded at fair value at the date
of acquisition and forms part of the cost of the acquisition.
As at the date of the business combination, we have
preliminarily estimated that the fair value of the vessels is
$126 million while the fair value of total assets acquired
amounted to $168.1 million and liabilities assumed to
$154.5 million.
Impairment
of long-lived assets
We apply FASB guidance for the impairment and disposal of
long-lived assets, which addresses financial accounting and
reporting for the impairment or disposal of long-lived assets.
Vessels are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes
in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be
recoverable. An impairment loss is recognized when the carrying
amount of the long-lived asset is not recoverable and exceeds
its fair value. The carrying amount of the long-lived asset is
not recoverable if it exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash
flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition
of the asset. Any impairment loss is measured as the amount by
which the carrying amount of the long-lived asset exceeds its
fair value and is recorded as a reduction in the carrying value
of the related asset and a charge to operating results. Once an
impairment results in a reduction in the carrying value, the
carrying value of such an asset cannot thereafter be increased.
Fair value is determined based on current market values received
from independent appraisers, when available, or from other
acceptable valuation techniques such as discounted cash flows
models. We recorded an impairment loss of $4,530,000 in 2008. It
is considered reasonably possible that
48
continued declines in volumes, charter rates and availability of
letters of credit for customers resulting from global economic
conditions could significantly impact our future impairment
estimates.
Goodwill
impairment
Goodwill represents the excess of the aggregate purchase price
over the fair value of the net identifiable assets acquired in
business combinations accounted for under the purchase method.
Goodwill is reviewed for impairment at least annually on
December 31 in accordance with the FASB guidance for impairment
of intangible assets. The goodwill impairment test is a two-step
process. Under the first step, the fair value of the reporting
unit is compared to the carrying value of the reporting unit
(including goodwill). If the fair value of the reporting unit is
less than the carrying value of the reporting unit, goodwill
impairment may exist, and the second step of the test is
performed. Under the second step, the implied fair value of the
goodwill is compared to the carrying value of the goodwill and
an impairment loss is recognized to the extent that the carrying
value of goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of goodwill.
The implied fair value of goodwill is determined by allocating
the fair value of the reporting unit in a manner similar to a
purchase price allocation. The residual fair value after this
allocation is the implied fair value of the reporting unit
goodwill. Fair value of the reporting unit is determined using a
discounted cash flow analysis. If the fair value of the
reporting unit exceeds it carrying value, step two does not have
to be performed. We recorded a goodwill impairment loss of
$44,795,000 in 2008. It is considered at least reasonably
possible in the near term that any amounts recorded upon
achievement of the earn-out in 2009 may be impaired based
upon current market conditions.
Vessel
depreciation
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the
estimated useful lives of the vessels, after considering the
estimated salvage value. We estimate salvage value by taking the
cost of steel times the vessels lightweight. Through
June 30, 2009, management estimated the useful life of our
vessels at 25 years from the date of their delivery from
the shipyard. In July 2009, we successfully executed a time
charter contract for one of our vessels that expires on its
26th
anniversary, and based on the projected necessary dry-docking
costs and understanding of the charterers needs, we
believe that the vessel will complete the next dry-docking
following the expiration of such charter and that we will be
able to charter the vessel up to its
30th
anniversary. Based on this event as well as considering that it
is not uncommon for vessels to be operable to their
30th
anniversary, effective July 1, 2009, we have changed
the estimated useful life of our fleet to 30 years.
The estimated salvage value at December 31, 2008 was $270
per light weight ton.
The above four policies are considered to be critical accounting
policies because assessments need to be made due to the shipping
industry being highly cyclical experiencing volatility in
profitability, and changes in vessel value and fluctuations in
charter rates resulting from changes in the supply and demand
for shipping capacity. At present, the dry bulk market is
affected by the current international financial crisis which has
slowed down world trade and caused drops in charter rates. The
lack of financing, global steel production cuts and outstanding
agreements between iron ore producers and Chinese industrial
customers have temporarily brought the market to a stagnation.
In addition, there are significant assumptions used in applying
these policies such as possible future new charters, future
charter rates, future on-hire days, future market values and the
time value of money. Consequently, actual results could differ
from these estimates and assumptions used and we may need to
review such estimates and assumptions in future periods as
underlying conditions, prices and other mentioned variables
change. Our results of operations and financial position in
future periods could be significantly affected upon revision of
these estimates and assumptions or upon occurrence of events.
Due to the different scenarios under which such changes could
occur, it is not practical to quantify the range and possible
effects of such future changes in our financial statements.
Dry-docking
costs
There are two methods that are used by the shipping industry to
account for dry-dockings; first, the deferral method, whereby
specific costs associated with a dry-docking are capitalized
when incurred and
49
amortized on a straight-line basis over the period to the next
scheduled dry-dock; and second, the direct expensing method,
whereby dry-docking costs are expensed in the period incurred.
We use the deferral method of accounting for dry-dock expenses.
Under the deferral method, dry-dock expenses are capitalized and
amortized on a straight-line basis until the date that the
vessel is expected to undergo its next dry-dock. We believe the
deferral method better matches costs with revenue. We use
judgment when estimating the period between dry-docks performed,
which can result in adjustments to the estimated amortization of
dry-dock expense, the duration of which depends on the age of
the vessel and the nature of dry-docking repairs the vessel will
undergo. We expect that our vessels will be required to be
dry-docked approximately every 2.5 years in accordance with
class requirements for major repairs and maintenance. Costs
capitalized as part of the dry-docking include actual costs
incurred at the dry-dock yard and parts and supplies used in
undertaking the work necessary to meet class requirements.
Variable
interest entities
We evaluate our relationships with other entities to identify
whether they are variable interest entities and to assess
whether we are the primary beneficiary of such entities. If it
is determined that we are the primary beneficiary, that entity
is included in our consolidated financial statements. We did not
participate in any variable interest entity.
Important
Measures for Analyzing Results of Operations Following the
Vessel Acquisition
We believe that the important non-GAAP measures and definitions
for analyzing our results of operations consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Ownership days. Ownership days are the total
number of calendar days in a period during which we owned each
vessel in our fleet. Ownership days are an indicator of the size
of the fleet over a period and affect both the amount of
revenues and the amount of expenses recorded during that period.
|
|
|
|
Available days. Available days are the number
of ownership days less the aggregate number of days that our
vessels are off-hire due to major repairs, dry-dockings or
special or intermediate surveys. The shipping industry uses
available days to measure the number of ownership days in a
period during which vessels should be capable of generating
revenues.
|
|
|
|
Operating days. Operating days are the number
of available days in a period less the aggregate number of days
that vessels are off-hire due to any reason, including
unforeseen circumstances. The shipping industry uses operating
days to measure the aggregate number of days in a period during
which vessels actually generate revenues.
|
|
|
|
Fleet utilization. Fleet utilization is
determined by dividing the number of operating days during a
period by the number of ownership days during that period. The
shipping industry uses fleet utilization to measure a
companys efficiency in finding suitable employment for its
vessels and minimizing the amount of days that its vessels are
off-hire for any reason excluding scheduled repairs, vessel
upgrades, dry-dockings or special or intermediate surveys.
|
|
|
|
Off-hire. The period a vessel is unable to
perform the services for which it is required under a charter.
|
|
|
|
Time charter. A time charter is a contract for
the use of a vessel for a specific period of time during which
the charterer pays substantially all of the voyage expenses,
including port costs, canal charges and fuel expenses. The
vessel owner pays the vessel operating expenses, which include
crew wages, insurance, technical maintenance costs, spares,
stores and supplies and commissions on gross voyage revenues.
Time charter rates are usually fixed during the term of the
charter. Prevailing time charter rates do fluctuate on a
seasonal and year-to-year basis and may be substantially higher
or lower from a prior time charter agreement when the subject
vessel is seeking to renew the time charter agreement with the
existing charterer or enter into a new time charter agreement
with another charterer. Fluctuations in time charter rates are
influenced by changes in spot charter rates.
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
TCE. Time charter equivalent or TCE rates are
defined as our time charter revenues less voyage expenses during
a period divided by the number of our Operating days during the
period, which is consistent with industry standards. Voyage
expenses include port charges, bunker (fuel oil and diesel oil)
expenses, canal charges and commissions.
|
Revenues
Our revenues were driven primarily by the number of vessels we
operated, the number of operating days during which our vessels
generated revenues, and the amount of daily charter hire that
our vessels earned under charters. These, in turn, were affected
by a number of factors, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
The nature and duration of our charters;
|
|
|
|
The amount of time that we spent repositioning our vessels;
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amount of time that our vessels spent in dry-dock undergoing
repairs;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance and upgrade work;
|
|
|
|
The age, condition and specifications of our vessels;
|
|
|
|
The levels of supply and demand in the dry bulk carrier
transportation market; and
|
|
|
|
Other factors affecting charter rates for dry bulk carriers
under voyage charters.
|
A voyage charter is generally a contract to carry a specific
cargo from a load port to a discharge port for an
agreed-upon
total amount. Under voyage charters, voyage expenses such as
port, canal and fuel costs are paid by the vessel owner. A time
charter trip and a period time charter or period charter are
generally contracts to charter a vessel for a fixed period of
time at a set daily rate. Under time charters, the charterer
pays voyage expenses. Under both types of charters, the vessel
owners pay for vessel operating expenses, which include crew
costs, provisions, deck and engine stores, lubricating oil,
insurance, maintenance and repairs. The vessel owners are also
responsible for each vessels dry-docking and intermediate
and special survey costs.
Vessels operating on period time charters provide more
predictable cash flows, but can yield lower profit margins than
vessels operating in the spot charter market for single trips
during periods characterized by favorable market conditions.
Vessels operating in the spot charter market generate revenues
that are less predictable, but can yield increased profit
margins during periods of improvements in dry bulk rates. Spot
charters also expose vessel owners to the risk of declining dry
bulk rates and rising fuel costs. Our vessels were chartered on
period time charters during the year ended December 31,
2008. One of our vessels operated in the spot market during the
nine month period ended September 30, 2009.
A standard maritime industry performance measure is the
time charter equivalent or TCE. TCE
rates are defined as our time charter revenues less voyage
expenses during a period divided by the number of our available
days during the period, which is consistent with industry
standards. Voyage expenses include port charges, bunker (fuel
oil and diesel oil) expenses, canal charges and commissions. Our
average TCE rate for 2008 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 was $49,362 and $41,127, respectively.
Vessel
Operating Expenses
Vessel operating expenses include crew wages and related costs,
the cost of insurance, expenses relating to repairs and
maintenance, the costs of spares and consumable stores, tonnage
taxes and other miscellaneous expenses. Vessel operating
expenses generally represent costs of a fixed nature. Some of
these expenses are required, such as insurance costs and the
cost of spares.
Depreciation
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the
estimated useful lives of the vessels, after considering the
estimated salvage value. We estimate salvage value by taking the
cost of steel times the
51
vessels lightweight. Through June 30, 2009, management
estimated the useful life of our vessels at 25 years from
the date of their delivery from the shipyard. In July 2009, we
successfully executed a time charter contract for one of our
vessels that expires on its 26th anniversary, and based on the
projected necessary dry-docking costs and understanding of the
charterers needs, we believe that the vessel will complete
the next dry-docking following the expiration of such charter
and that we will be able to charter the vessel up to its 30th
anniversary. Based on this event as well as considering that it
is not uncommon for vessels to be operable to their 30th
anniversary, effective July 1, 2009, we have changed
the estimated useful life of our fleet to 30 years.
The estimated salvage value at December 31, 2008 was $270
per light weight ton.
Seasonality
Coal, iron ore and grains, which are the major bulks of the dry
bulk shipping industry, are somewhat seasonal in nature. The
energy markets primarily affect the demand for coal, with
increases during hot summer periods when air conditioning and
refrigeration require more electricity and towards the end of
the calendar year in anticipation of the forthcoming winter
period. The demand for iron ore tends to decline in the summer
months because many of the major steel users, such as automobile
makers, reduce their level of production significantly during
the summer holidays. Grains are completely seasonal as they are
driven by the harvest within a climate zone. Because three of
the five largest grain producers (the United States of America,
Canada and the European Union) are located in the northern
hemisphere and the other two (Argentina and Australia) are
located in the southern hemisphere, harvests occur throughout
the year and grains require dry bulk shipping accordingly.
Principal
Factors Affecting Our Business
The principal factors that affected our financial position,
results of operations and cash flows included the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Number of vessels owned and operated;
|
|
|
|
Charter market rates and periods of charter hire;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel operating expenses and direct voyage costs, which were
incurred in both U.S. dollars and other currencies,
primarily Euros;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expenses, which are a function of vessel cost, any
significant post-acquisition improvements, estimated useful
lives, estimated residual scrap values, and fluctuations in the
market value of our vessels;
|
|
|
|
Financing costs related to indebtedness associated with the
vessels; and
|
|
|
|
Fluctuations in foreign exchange rates.
|
Performance
Indicators
The figures shown below are non-GAAP statistical ratios used by
management to measure performance of our vessels and are not
included in financial statements prepared under US GAAP.
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
Fleet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of vessels(1)
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
Ownership days(2)
|
|
|
797
|
|
|
|
1,883
|
|
|
|
686
|
|
Available days(3)
|
|
|
739
|
|
|
|
1,654
|
|
|
|
686
|
|
Operating days(4)
|
|
|
735
|
|
|
|
1,646
|
|
|
|
678
|
|
Fleet utilization(5)
|
|
|
92.2
|
%
|
|
|
87.4
|
%
|
|
|
98.9
|
%
|
Average Daily Results:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel TCE rate(6)
|
|
|
30,052
|
|
|
|
42,127
|
|
|
|
49,362
|
|
Vessel operating expenses(7)
|
|
|
4,937
|
|
|
|
5,181
|
|
|
|
4,636
|
|
Management fees(8)
|
|
|
580
|
|
|
|
572
|
|
|
|
566
|
|
Total vessel operating expenses
|
|
|
5,517
|
|
|
|
5,753
|
|
|
|
5,202
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Average number of vessels is the number of vessels that
constituted our fleet for the relevant period, as measured by
the sum of the number of days each vessel was a part of our
fleet during the relevant period divided by the number of
calendar days in the relevant period. |
|
(2) |
|
Ownership days are the total number of days in a period during
which the vessels in a fleet have been owned. Ownership days are
an indicator of the size of our fleet over a period and affect
both the amount of revenues and the amount of expenses that we
recorded during a period. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Available days are the number of ownership days less the
aggregate number of days that vessels are
off-hire due
to major repairs, dry-dockings or special or intermediate
surveys. The shipping industry uses available days to measure
the number of ownership days in a period during which vessels
should be capable of generating revenues. During the three
months ended September 30, 2009, we incurred 58 off-hire
days for vessel scheduled dry-docking. During the nine months
ended September 30, 2009, we incurred 229
off-hire
days for vessel scheduled dry-docking. |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Operating days are the number of available days in a period less
the aggregate number of days that vessels are off-hire due to
any reason, including unforeseen circumstances. The shipping
industry uses operating days to measure the aggregate number of
days in a period during which vessels actually generate revenues. |
|
(5) |
|
Fleet utilization is the percentage of time that our vessels
were generating revenue, and is determined by dividing operating
days by ownership days for the relevant period. |
|
(6) |
|
Time charter equivalent, or TCE, rates are defined as our time
charter revenues less voyage expenses during a period divided by
the number of our operating days during the period, which is
consistent with industry standards. Voyage expenses include port
charges, bunker (fuel oil and diesel oil) expenses, canal
charges and commissions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
(In thousands of U.S. dollars, except operating day
amounts)
|
|
|
Net revenues from vessels
|
|
|
22,352
|
|
|
|
70,662
|
|
|
|
34,453
|
|
Voyage expenses
|
|
|
(42
|
)
|
|
|
(480
|
)
|
|
|
(151
|
)
|
Voyage expenses related party
|
|
|
(222
|
)
|
|
|
(841
|
)
|
|
|
(440
|
)
|
Net operating revenues
|
|
|
22,088
|
|
|
|
69,341
|
|
|
|
33,862
|
|
Operating days
|
|
|
735
|
|
|
|
1,646
|
|
|
|
686
|
|
Time charter equivalent rate
|
|
|
30,052
|
|
|
|
42,127
|
|
|
|
49,362
|
|
|
|
|
(7) |
|
Average daily vessel operating expenses, which includes crew
costs, provisions, deck and engine stores, lubricating oil,
insurance, maintenance and repairs, are calculated by dividing
vessel operating expenses by ownership days for the relevant
time periods: |
53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
(In thousands of U.S. dollars, except ownership days
amounts)
|
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
3,935
|
|
|
|
9,756
|
|
|
|
3,180
|
|
Ownership days
|
|
|
797
|
|
|
|
1,883
|
|
|
|
686
|
|
Daily vessel operating expenses
|
|
|
4,937
|
|
|
|
5,181
|
|
|
|
4,636
|
|
|
|
|
(8) |
|
Daily management fees are calculated by dividing total
management fees by ownership days for the relevant time period. |
Results
of Operations
Three
and nine months ended September 30, 2009 as compared to
three and nine months ended
September 30, 2008
Vessel Revenue Related Party, Net
Net vessel revenue, related party, for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2009 were $20,485,000 and $68,795,000,
respectively, after address commissions of 2.5%, or $618,000 and
$1,856,000, respectively, as compared to $6,122,000, after
address commissions of 2.5%, or $153,000, for the comparable
periods in 2008. The increase in net vessel revenue
related party, is a result of the operation of the six vessels
we acquired in the third quarter of 2008 for the full nine
months of 2009 and the consolidation of BETs operations
commencing on August 13, 2009 as compared to the operations
during the comparable period in 2008.
Vessel Revenue Net vessel revenue for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2009 was
$1,867,000 and $1,867,000 respectively after address commissions
of 2.5%, or $20,000 as compared to $0 and $0 for the comparable
periods in 2008. The increase in net vessel revenue from
unrelated third parties is the result of the chartering of the
African Oryx and the African Zebra to unrelated third parties
commencing on July 17, 2009 and July 20, 2009,
respectively.
Direct Voyage Expenses Direct voyage
expenses, which include bunkers and port expenses, amounted to
$42,000 and $480,000 for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009 respectively as compared to $143,000 for
the comparable periods in 2008. The increase in direct voyage
expenses is a result of the operation of the six vessels we
acquired in the third quarter of 2008 for the full nine months
of 2009 and the consolidation of BETs operations
commencing on August 13, 2009 as compared to the operations
in 2008.
Vessel Operating Expenses For the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2009, our vessel operating
expenses were $3,935,000 and $9,756,000, respectively, or an
average of $4,937 and $5,181 per ship per day, respectively, as
compared to $719,000, or an average of $5,366 per ship per day
for the comparable periods in 2008. Vessel operating expenses
include crew wages and related costs, the cost of insurance,
expenses relating to repairs and maintenance, chemicals and
lubricants, consumable stores, tonnage taxes and other
miscellaneous expenses. We operated an average of 8.7 and
6.9 vessels during the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009, respectively, as compared to an average
of four vessels during the comparable periods in 2008. Vessel
operating expenses increased as a result of the operation of the
increased number of vessels during the relevant periods in 2009
and the consolidation of BETs operations commencing on
August 13, 2009.
Voyage Expenses Related Party
These expenses represent commissions charged in relation to the
brokerage agreement we have with Safbulk, an affiliate, for the
provision of chartering services up to May 20, 2010. The
chartering commissions represent a commission of 1.25% payable
to Safbulk on the collected vessel revenue. For the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2009, commissions charged
amounted to $222,000 and $841,000, respectively, as compared to
$77,000, for the comparable periods in 2008, for the same
reasons described above.
Management Fees Related Party For
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2009,
management fees charged by EST, which is a related party,
amounted to $462,000 and $1,078,000, respectively as compared to
$82,000 for the comparable periods in 2008. The increase was due
to the same reasons
54
described above. Management fees primarily relate to the
management agreement we have with EST for the provision of
technical management services. The fixed daily fee per vessel is
Euro 425.00.
General and Administration Expenses For the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2009, we incurred
$1,014,000 and $3,083,000, respectively, of general and
administration expenses, compared to $208,000 and $805,000
respectively, for the comparable periods in 2008, an increase of
approximately 388% and 283%, respectively. Our general and
administration expenses primarily include audit fees, legal
expenses, consulting services and staff salaries. Our general
and administration expenses for the periods in 2009 were
comparatively higher than those in comparable periods in 2008
due to the fact that we had vessels operations, full-time
shoreside staff and related expenses during the periods in 2009
and had only limited operations during the comparable periods in
2008.
General and Administration Expenses Related
Party For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009, we incurred $459,000 and $1,553,000,
respectively, of related party general and administration
expenses, compared to $50,000 for the comparable periods in
2008. Our related party general and administration expenses are
primarily comprised of salaries of $322,000 for our executive
officers, $518,000 of remuneration to our board of directors,
office rental fees of $531,000 and consulting fees of $182,000.
The increase in such fees reflects the commencement of our
operations in 2009.
Gain from Acquisition For the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2009, we recognized a gain from the
BET acquisition of $6,813,000 and $6,813,000, respectively. The
gain is a result of the difference between the purchase price we
paid and the fair market value of the 50% interest in BET which
we acquired as of the closing date. The transaction occurred
because of the sellers desire to divest itself of its
shipping operations.
Depreciation We depreciate our vessels based
on a straight line basis over the expected useful life of each
vessel, which, effective July 1, 2009, is 30 years
from the date of the vessels initial delivery from the
shipyard. Depreciation is based on the cost of the vessel less
its estimated residual value, which is estimated at $270 per
lightweight ton. Secondhand vessels are depreciated from the
date of their acquisition through their remaining estimated
useful life. However, when regulations place limitations over
the ability of a vessel to trade on a worldwide basis, its
useful life is adjusted to end at the date such regulations
become effective. For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009, we recorded $5,286,000 and $20,716,000,
respectively, of vessel depreciation charges as compared to
$1,488,000 for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2008. Our fleet consisted of six vessels for
the full nine months ended September 30, 2009 plus five
additional vessels for the period between August 13, 2009
and September 30, 2009 as compared to the comparable
periods in 2008.
Interest and Finance Costs Interest and
finance costs for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009 amounted to $3,451,000 and $6,270,000,
respectively, as compared to $640,000 for the comparable periods
in 2008. The significant increase in interest and finance costs
is primarily attributable to our revolving credit and term loan
facilities, which we obtained in August 2008 in order to fund
our business combination and vessel purchase and for working
capital purposes. More specifically, interest expense related to
the revolving credit facility amounted to $338,000 and
$1,151,000 and interest on our term facility amounted to
$1,480,000 and $3,164,000 for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009, respectively, as compared to $87,000 of
interest on our revolving credit facility and $494,000 of
interest on our term facility for the comparable periods in 2008.
Interest and Finance Costs, Shareholders
Interest and finance costs, shareholders, for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2009 was $74,000 and $386,000,
respectively, as compared to $90,000 for the comparable periods
in 2008. The increase in interest and finance costs,
shareholders, is a result of the issuance of a convertible
secured promissory note, in the principal amount of $28,250,000,
to a shareholder in connection with our August 2008 business
combination.
Interest Income Money Market
Funds For the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009, we earned interest on our money market
funds of $108,000 and $363,000, respectively, as compared to
$644,000 and $3,257,000, respectively, for the comparable
periods in 2008. The decrease in interest income is a result of
the decrease of our money market funds that were used for our
August 2008 business combination.
55
Net Income We earned net income of
$13,983,000 and $33,265,000 for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2009, respectively, as compared to $3,270,000
and $5,286,000, respectively, for the comparable periods in
2008. The increase in our net income resulted primarily from the
closing of the business combination and the commencement of our
operations on August 28, 2008.
Year
ended December 31, 2008 (fiscal 2008) as
compared to year ended December 31, 2007 (fiscal
2007)
Vessel Revenue Related Party, Net
Net revenues for the year ended December 31, 2008 were
$34,453,000 after address commissions of 2.5%, or $880,000, as
compared to $0 in fiscal 2007. The increase in vessel revenue is
a result of the closing of the business combination and the
commencement of our operations on August 28, 2008. Our
gross revenues were $35,333,000. Our vessels Davakis G., Delos
Ranger and African Oryx commenced operations on August 28,
2008 for a daily charter fee of $60,000, $60,000 and $30,000,
respectively. Our vessel, Bremen Max, commenced operations on
September 11, 2008 for a daily charter fee of $65,000 and
our vessels, Hamburg Max and African Zebra, commenced operations
on September 25, 2008 for a daily charter fee of $65,000
and $36,000, respectively. Net revenues earned for the period
from August 28, 2008 to December 31, 2008 for each of
our vessels after address commissions amounted to $7,147,000 for
the Davakis G.; $7,162,000 for the Delos Ranger; $3,661,000 for
the African Oryx; $7,068,000 for the Bremen Max; $5,978,000 for
the Hamburg Max; and $3,437,000 for the African Zebra. The
vessels were employed under time charters with SAMC, an
affiliate, with initial terms of
11-13 months,
expiring in September 2009.
Direct Voyage Expenses Direct voyage
expenses, which include bunkers and port expenses, amounted to
$151,000 for the year ended December 31, 2008 as compared
to $0 for the comparable period in 2007. Direct voyage expenses
consisted of port and bunker expenses of $44,000 and $107,000,
respectively. The increase in direct voyage expenses is a result
of the closing of the business combination and the commencement
of our operations in August 2008.
Vessel Operating Expenses For the year ended
December 31, 2008, our vessel operating expenses were
$3,180,000, or an average of $4,636 per ship per day, as
compared to $0 in fiscal 2007. Vessel operating expenses
included crew wages and related costs, the cost of insurance,
expenses relating to repairs and maintenance, chemicals and
lubricants, consumable stores, tonnage taxes and other
miscellaneous expenses. We operated an average of
5.5 vessels from the date of consummation of the business
combination on August 28, 2008 through December 31,
2008. Vessel operating expenses increased as a result of the
closing of the business combination and the commencement of our
operations in August 2008.
Voyage Expenses Related Party
Voyage expenses related party
represent commissions charged in relation to the brokerage
agreement we have with Safbulk, an affiliate, for the provision
of chartering services up to May 20, 2010. The chartering
commissions represent a commission of 1.25% payable to Safbulk
on the collected vessel revenue. For the year ended
December 31, 2008, commissions charged amounted to $440,000
as compared to $0 in fiscal 2007, for the same reasons described
above.
Management Fees Related Party
For the year ended December 31, 2008,
management fees charged by a related party amounted to $388,000
as compared to $0 in fiscal 2007. The increase was due to the
same reasons described above. Management fees primarily relate
to the management agreement we have with EST, an affiliate, for
the provision of technical management services. The fixed daily
fee per vessel in operation is Euro 416.00 per vessel until
December 31, 2008. Thereafter the fixed daily fee was
re-negotiated to be Euro 425.00 per vessel.
General and Administration Expenses For the
year ended December 31, 2008, we incurred $1,840,000 of
general and administration expenses, compared to $445,000 for
the year ended December 31, 2007, an increase of
approximately 313%. Our general and administration expenses
primarily include auditing and accounting costs of $695,000,
legal fees of $432,000 and other professional fees of $371,000.
Our general and administration expenses for 2008 were
comparatively higher than those in the prior year due to the
fact that we commenced our vessel operations after the business
combination was consummated on August 28, 2008.
General and Administration Expenses
Related Party For the year ended
December 31, 2008, we incurred $430,000 of related party
general and administration expenses, compared to $0 for the year
ended December 31, 2007. Our related party general and
administration expenses are primarily comprised of salaries
56
of $139,000 for our executive officers, $155,000 of remuneration
to our board of directors, office rental fees of $88,000 and
consulting fees of $27,000. In addition, a service agreement was
signed with EST for consultancy services with respect to
financing and dealing with relations with third parties and for
assistance with the preparation of periodic reports to the
shareholders for a fixed monthly fee of $5,000 through
March 2, 2009 and amounted to $21,000. The increase in such
fees is due to the reasons described above.
Depreciation We depreciate our vessels based
on a straight line basis over the expected useful life of each
vessel, which is 25 years from the date of their initial
delivery from the shipyard. Depreciation is based on the cost of
the vessel less its estimated residual value, which is estimated
at $270 per lightweight ton. Secondhand vessels are depreciated
from the date of their acquisition through their remaining
estimated useful life. However, when regulations place
limitations over the ability of a vessel to trade on a worldwide
basis, its useful life is adjusted to end at the date such
regulations become effective. We constantly evaluate the useful
life of our fleet based on the market factors and specific facts
and circumstances applicable to each vessel.
For the year ended December 31, 2008, we recorded
$9,929,000 of vessel depreciation charges as compared to $0 in
fiscal 2007. These charges relate to our vessels of which three
vessels were placed into operations on August 28, 2008 and
the remaining three in September 2008.
Goodwill Impairment Loss We performed our
annual impairment testing of goodwill as at December 31,
2008. The current economic and market conditions, including the
significant disruptions in the global credit markets, are having
broad effects on participants in a wide variety of industries.
Since September 2008, the charter rates in the dry bulk charter
market have declined significantly, and dry bulk vessel values
have also declined. The fair value for goodwill impairment
testing was estimated using the expected present value of future
cash flows, using judgments and assumptions that management
believes were appropriate in the circumstances. The future cash
flows from operations were determined by considering the charter
revenues from existing time charters for the fixed fleet days
and an estimated daily time charter equivalent for the unfixed
days (based on a combination of Seanergys remaining
charter agreement rates,
2-year
forward freight agreements and the most recent
10-year
average historical 1 year time charter rates available for
each type of vessel) assuming an average annual inflation rate
of 2%. The weighted average cost of capital (WACC) used was 8%.
As a result, we recorded an impairment charge related to
goodwill of $44,795,000 in 2008 as compared to no impairment
charges in fiscal 2007 because we did not complete the business
combination until 2008.
Vessels Impairment Loss We evaluate
the carrying amounts of vessels and related dry-dock and special
survey costs and periods over which long-lived assets are
depreciated to determine if events have occurred which would
require modification to their carrying values or useful lives.
In evaluating useful lives and carrying values of long-lived
assets, we review certain indicators of potential impairment,
such as undiscounted projected operating cash flows, vessel
sales and purchases, business plans and overall market
conditions. The current economic and market conditions,
including the significant disruptions in the global credit
markets, are having broad effects on participants in a wide
variety of industries. Since September 2008, the charter rates
in the dry bulk charter market have declined significantly, and
dry bulk vessel values have also declined. We determine
undiscounted projected net operating cash flows for each vessel
and compare it to the vessels carrying value. The
projected net operating cash flows are determined by considering
the charter revenues from existing time charters for the fixed
fleet days and an estimated daily time charter equivalent for
the unfixed days (based on a combination of our remaining
charter agreement rates, two-year forward freight agreements and
the most recent
10-year
average historical 1 year time charter rates available for
each type of vessel) over the remaining economic life of each
vessel, net of brokerage and address commissions, expected
outflows for scheduled vessels maintenance, and vessel
operating expenses assuming an average annual inflation rate of
2%. Fleet utilization is assumed at 98.6% in our exercise,
taking into account each vessels off hire days based on
other companies operating in the dry bulk industry and our
historical performance.
A discount factor of 4.5% per annum, representing our
incremental borrowing rate, was applied to the undiscounted
projected net operating cash flows directly associated with and
expected to arise as a direct result of the use and eventual
disposition of the vessel, but only in the case where they were
lower than the carrying value of vessels. This resulted in an
impairment loss of $4,530,000 for fiscal 2008. There was no
impairment loss in 2007 because we did not acquire our vessels
until 2008.
57
Interest and Finance Costs The significant
increase in interest and finance costs of $4,077,000 in 2008 as
compared to $58,000 in 2007 is primarily attributable to our
revolving credit and term facilities, which we obtained in order
to fund our business combination and vessel purchase and for
working capital purposes. More specifically, interest expense
related to the revolving credit facility amounted to $799,000
and interest on our term facility amounted to $2,768,000 for the
year ended December 31, 2008. In 2008, our interest expense
primarily related to four months of operations since we drew
down our credit facilities on August 28, 2008, and obtained
our term loans in August and September 2008, respectively. Fees
incurred for obtaining new loans, including related legal and
other professional fees, are deferred and amortized using the
effective interest method over the life of the related debt.
Interest Income Money Market Funds
For the year ended December 31, 2008, we
earned interest on our money market funds of $3,361,000 as
compared to $1,948,000 for the year ended December 31,
2007. The increase in interest income of 72.5% is because we
obtained our trust funds from our initial public offering on
September 28, 2007 and therefore interest was earned for
approximately three months in 2007 as compared to approximately
eight months in 2008.
Net (Loss)/Income We incurred a net loss of
$31,985, 000 in 2008 as compared to a profit of $1,445,000 in
2007. The increase in our loss is a result of our vessel
operations commencing on August 28, 2008, income of
$18,095,000 set off by goodwill and vessel impairment charges of
$44,795,000 and $4,530,000, respectively, and set off by
increased interest and finance costs, which resulted in
$755,000 net finance expense in 2008 as compared to
$1,890,000 net finance income in 2007.
Year
Ended December 31, 2007 and the period from August 15,
2006 (Inception) to December 31, 2006
For the year ended December 31, 2007, we had a net income
of $1,445,000. The net income consisted of $1,948,000 of
interest income offset by operating expenses of $445,000 and
interest expenses of $58,000 ($45,000 related to the underwriter
and $13,000 related to shareholders). Operating expenses of
$445,000 consisted of consulting and professional fees of
$357,000, rent and office services expense of $22,000, insurance
expense of $25,000, investor relations expense of $33,000, and
other operating costs of $8,000.
For the period from August 15, 2006 (Inception) to
December 31, 2006, we had a net loss of $4,372,000. The net
loss consisted of $1,028,000 of interest income offset by
interest expense of $824,000, accounting fees of $1,000,000,
organization expenses of $3,450,000 and other operating expenses
of $126,000.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Our principal source of funds is operating cash flows, and our
revolving credit and term facilities. Our principal use of funds
has primarily been capital expenditures to establish our fleet,
close our business combination, maintain the quality of our dry
bulk carriers, comply with international shipping standards and
environmental laws and regulations, fund working capital
requirements, and make principal repayments on our outstanding
loan facilities.
We believe that our current cash balance and our operating cash
flow will be sufficient to meet our current liquidity needs,
although the dry bulk charter market has sharply declined since
September 2008 and our results of operations may be adversely
affected if market conditions do not improve. We expect to rely
upon operating cash flow to meet our liquidity requirements
going forward. We intend to use the net proceeds of this
offering and the concurrent sale to expand our fleet by
purchasing additional vessels and, to the extent not used for
vessel purchases, for general working capital purposes.
Despite the recent economic crisis, we are currently able to
meet our working capital needs and debt obligations. The current
decline in charter rates should not affect our revenue as we
have the charters locked in for 11 to 13 and 22 to
26 month periods including the BET vessels (expiring
between November 2009 and February 2012), with our longest
time charter expiring on February 24, 2012. Time charters
cover 76% of 2010 days and 50% of 2011 days. For the
calculation of contract coverage, we are using the latest
expiration date of our vessels time charters as presented
in the Our Fleet table on page 2. In
addition, we have not
58
reflected the effect of any future vessel acquisitions. As a
result, our actual vessel revenues may differ from anticipated
amounts.
We will have to make use of our cash flows not committed to the
repayment of the term loan and revolving facility mentioned
above to meet our financial obligations. Accordingly, unless we
are able to raise additional capital in other ways, such as
through a rights offering or private placement or if our
warrants are exercised, our ability to pursue acquisition
opportunities will be limited by the proceeds of this offering
and the concurrent sale. We provide no assurances that funds
will be raised through capital markets or that the warrants will
be exercised, or if exercised, the quantity which will be
exercised or the period in which they will be exercised.
Exercise of the warrants is not likely considering current
market prices.
Furthermore, our revolving credit facility is tied to the market
value of the vessels and not to the prevailing (spot) market
rates. For example, our existing term and revolving credit
facilities require that the aggregate market value of the
vessels and the value of any additional security must be at
least 135% of the aggregate of the outstanding debt financing
and any amount available for drawing under the revolving
facility less the aggregate amount of all deposits maintained.
If the percentage is below 135% then a prepayment of the loans
may be required or additional security may be requested. A
waiver from Marfin has been received with respect to this
covenant through January 1, 2011.
Under the BET loan agreement, the BET subsidiaries are subject
to operating and financial covenants that may affect BETs
business. These restrictions may, subject to certain exceptions,
limit the BET subsidiaries ability to engage in many of
its activities. Furthermore, the BET subsidiaries must assure
the lenders that the aggregate market value of the BET vessels
is not less than 125% of the outstanding amount of the BET loan.
If the market value of the vessels is less than this amount, the
BET subsidiaries may at the request of the lender prepay an
amount that will result in the market value of the vessels
meeting this requirement or offer additional security to the
lenders.
On September 30, 2009, BET entered into a supplemental
agreement with Citibank International PLC (as agent for the
syndicate of banks and financial institutions set forth in the
loan agreement) in connection with the $222,000,000 amortized
loan obtained by the six wholly owned subsidiaries of BET, which
financed the acquisition of their respective vessels. The
material terms of the supplemental agreement with Citibank
International PLC are as follows:
(1) the applicable margin for the period between
July 1, 2009 and ending on June 30, 2010 (the
amendment period) shall be increased to two per cent (2%) per
annum;
(2) the borrowers to pay to the agent a restructuring fee
of $286,198.91 and a part of the loan in the amount of
$20,000,000; and
(3) the borrowers and the corporate guarantor have
requested and the creditors consented to:
(a) the temporary reduction of the security requirement
during the amendment period from 125% to 100%; and
(b) the temporary reduction of the minimum equity ratio
requirement of the principal corporate guarantee to be amended
from 0.30: 1.0 to 0.175:1.0 during the amendment period at the
end of the accounting periods ending on December 31, 2009
and June 30, 2010.
We acquired our dry bulk carriers using a combination of funds
received from equity investors and financed with our revolving
term credit facilities.
We intend to continue to expand our fleet in the future. Growth
will depend on locating and acquiring suitable vessels,
identifying and consummating acquisitions or joint ventures;
enhancing our customer base; obtaining required financing (debt
or equity or a combination of both); and obtaining favorable
terms in all cases.
In February 2009, our vessel African Zebra entered its scheduled
dry-docking, which was completed on July 20, 2009. The
delay was due to labor strikes in the repairing yard and other
unforeseen events. The cost for this dry-dock was
$3.2 million. On May 17, 2009, our vessel Hamburg Max
commenced its scheduled
dry-docking,
which was completed on June 23, 2009 at a cost of
$1.1 million. One vessel is scheduled for dry-docking in
2010
59
and three vessels in 2011. For the BET fleet, three vessels,
namely BET Prince, BET Scouter and BET Fighter are scheduled for
dry-docking in 2010 and one vessel, BET Intruder, in 2011. BET
Commander commenced its scheduled dry-docking in August 2009,
which was completed in October 2009 at a cost of
$1.2 million. The dry-docking costs related to 2010 and
2011 are estimated to be $4.5 million and
$4.0 million, respectively.
Our short-term liquidity requirements relate to servicing our
debt (including principal payments on our term loan), payment of
operating costs, dry-docking costs of two vessels, funding
working capital requirements and maintaining cash reserves
against fluctuations in operating cash flows. Sources of
short-term liquidity are primarily our revenues earned from our
charters.
Our medium and long term liquidity requirements include
repayment of long-term debt balances, debt interest payments and
dry-docking costs. As of September 30, 2009, we had
outstanding borrowings of $184,595,000 due to Marfin. We have
drawn down $54,845,000 of our revolving credit facility. On
August 28, 2009, the revolving facility was reduced to
$72,000,000. This reduction will be followed by five consecutive
annual reductions of $12,000,000 and any outstanding balance to
be fully repaid together with the balloon payment of the term
loan. In 2009, we have made or will make principal repayments on
our Marfin term facility amounting to $27,750,000.
BET financed the acquisition of its vessels with the proceeds of
a loan from Citibank International PLC, as agent for a syndicate
of banks and financial institutions. The outstanding principal
amount as of December 31, 2008 was $150,725,000. The loan
is repayable in semi-annual installments of principal in the
amount of $8,286,500 followed by a balloon payment due on
maturity in the amount of $51,289,000, as these installment
amounts were revised after the BET Performer sale. As of
June 30, 2009, the outstanding loan facility was
$142,472,000. Following BETs supplemental agreement dated
September 30, 2009 and prepayment of $20 million, the
semi-annual
installments of principal and the balloon payment amount to
$7,128,158 and $44,062,262, respectively. Interest is due and
payable quarterly based on interest periods selected by BET.
During 2009, we will make principal repayments on our BET loan
facility amounting to $14.3 million.
In 2010, we have principal repayments due of $18,950,000 and
$14,256,317 on the Marfin and BET loans, respectively.
As of September 30, 2009, Seanergy had available cash
reserves of $60,403,000, which is shown as cash and cash
equivalent. These amounts are not restricted.
Our revolving credit facility and term facility are from Marfin
(see Credit Facilities below), and in
addition, we had a Note due to shareholders amounting to
$28,250,000 (face value), which following an amendment dated as
of August 19, 2009 has been converted into
6,585,868 shares of common stock.
Between the January 1, 2008 and July 2008, we paid
dividends amounting to $4,254,000 to our public shareholders. We
currently have suspended the payment of dividends pursuant to
the waiver received from Marfin (see Credit
Facilities below) and dividends will not be declared
without the prior written consent of Marfin.
Our Private Warrants may be exercised by the holders on a
cashless basis. Each warrant entitles the holder to purchase one
share of common stock and expires on September 28, 2011.
More specifically, we have 38,984,667 warrants to purchase
shares of our common stock issued and outstanding at an exercise
price of $6.50 per share, of which 16,016,667 are exercisable on
a cashless basis. In addition, we have assumed Seanergy
Maritimes obligation to issue 1,000,000 shares of
common stock and warrants to purchase 1,000,000 shares of
our common stock under the unit purchase option it granted the
underwriter in its initial public offering at an exercise price
of $12.50 per unit. The exercise of the Warrants is not likely
taking into consideration current market prices.
Cash
Flows
Nine
months ended September 30, 2009 compared to nine months
ended September 30, 2008
Operating Activities: Net cash from operating
activities totaled $36,445,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009, as compared to $3,476,000 for the nine
months ended September 30, 2008. This increase
60
primarily reflected our net income of $33,265,000 and revenue
from time charters and related vessel operating expenses.
Investing Activities: Net cash provided by
investing activities totaled $36,353,000 for the nine months
ended September 30, 2009, as compared to net cash used in
investing activities $142,360,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008. This is primarily a result of the
completion of our August 2008 business combination.
Financing Activities: Net cash used in
financing activities totaled $39,933,000 for the nine months
ended September 30, 2009, as compared to net cash provided
by financing activities of $150,632,000 for the nine months
ended September 30, 2008. In the first nine months of 2009,
cash was used for the repayment of long-term debt used as
compared to 2008, during which we received proceeds from the
borrowings to finance our business combination and cash used for
dividend payments and redemption of shares.
Fiscal
2008 compared to Fiscal 2007 and the period from August 15,
2006 (Inception) to December 31, 2006
Operating activities: Net cash from operating
activities totaled $25,700,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2008, as compared to $1,585,000 for the year
ended December 31, 2007. This increase primarily reflected
our revenue from time charters, which commenced on
August 28, 2008 for three vessels and in September 2008 for
the remaining three vessels, and the related vessel operating
expenses. Net cash from operating activities totaled $1,585,000
for the year ended December 31, 2007, as compared to an
outflow of $20,000 for the period from August 15, 2006
(inception) to December 31, 2006.
Investing activities: Net cash used in
investing activities totaled $142,919,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2008, as compared to $232,923,000 used in
investing activities for the year ended December 31, 2007.
This decrease is primarily a result of the use of $375,833,000
in connection with the consummation of our business combination,
which was offset by using the funds held in trust of
$232,923,000. Net cash used in investing activities for the year
ended December 31, 2007 totaled $232,923,000 as compared to
$0 for the period from August 15, 2006 (inception) to
December 31, 2006. The increase in the use of funds is due
to the monies received in our IPO being placed in trust to be
used for the purpose of a business combination.
Financing activities: Net cash provided by
financing activities totaled $142,551,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2008, as compared to $233,193,000 for the year
ended December 31, 2007. In 2008, cash was provided from
the proceeds of our revolving credit and term facilities in the
amount of $219,845,000 and from warrant exercises in the amount
of $858,000 which was offset by the payment of $63,705,000
relating to the redemption of common shares in connection with
the closing of our business combination, principal loan
repayments of $7,500,000, debt issuance costs of $2,693,000 and
dividends paid of $4,254,000. In 2007, the net cash provided was
as a result of our private and public offering of common stock
totaling $233,619,000, net of the offering costs. For the period
from August 15, 2006 (inception) to December 31, 2006,
the net cash from financing activities amounted to $376,000.
Credit
Facilities
Marfin
Revolving Credit Facility
As of September 30, 2009, we had utilized $54,845,000 of
the amount available under our revolving credit facility, which
is equal to the lesser of $72,000,000 and an amount in dollars
which when aggregated with the amounts already drawn down under
the term facility does not exceed 70% of the aggregate market
values of the vessels and other securities held in favor of the
lender for the business combination and working capital purposes.
The revolving credit facility bears interest at LIBOR plus 2.25%
per annum. In connection with the addendum, during the time any
waiver period is in effect, the interest payable in respect of
the revolving credit facility increases to
three-month
LIBOR plus 3.50%. A commitment fee of 0.25% per annum is
calculated on the daily aggregate un-drawn balance and
un-cancelled
amount of the revolving credit facility, payable quarterly in
arrears from the date of the signing of the loan agreements.
61
The revolving facility is subject to five consecutive annual
reductions of $12,000,000 and any outstanding balance must be
fully repaid together with the balloon payment of the term loan.
Marfin
Term Facility
The initial vessel acquisition was financed with an amortizing
term loan from Marfin equal to $165,000,000, representing 42% of
the vessels aggregate acquisition costs, excluding any
amounts associated with the earn-out provision. In December
2008, we repaid $7,500,000 of the term facility.
The loan is repayable commencing three months from the last
drawdown, or March 31, 2009, whichever is earlier, through
twenty-eight consecutive quarterly principal installments, of
which the first four principal installments will be equal to
$7,500,000 each, the next four principal installments will be
equal to $5,250,000 each and the final twenty principal
installments will be equal to $3,200,000 each, with a balloon
payment equal to $50,000,000 due concurrently with the
twenty-eighth principal installment. On September 9, 2009,
we executed addendum no. 1 to the loan agreement. In
connection with the amendment, Marfin accelerated the due date
of installment no. 5 to September 25, 2009 and of
installment nos. 6 and 7 to January 4, 2010.
The loan bears interest at an annual rate of three-month-LIBOR
plus 1.75%. In connection with the addendum, during the time any
waiver period is in effect, the interest payable in respect of
the term facility increases to three-month-LIBOR plus 3.00%.
The term facility is secured by the following: a first priority
mortgage on the vessels, on a joint and several basis; a first
priority general assignment of any and all earnings, insurances
and requisition compensation of the vessels and the respective
notices and acknowledgements thereof; a first priority specific
assignment of the benefit of all charters exceeding 12 calendar
months duration and all demise charters in respect of the
vessels and the respective notices and acknowledgements thereof
to be effected in case of default or potential event of default
to the absolute discretion of Marfin; assignments, pledges and
charges over the earnings accounts held in the name of each
borrower with the security trustee; undertakings by the
technical and commercial managers of the vessels; and
subordination agreement between Martin and the holder of the
Note. All of the aforementioned security will be on a full cross
collateral basis.
The term facility includes covenants, among others, that require
the borrowers and the corporate guarantor, to maintain vessel
insurance for an aggregate amount greater than the vessels
aggregate market value or an amount equal to 130% of the
aggregate of (a) the outstanding amount under both the
revolving credit and term facilities and (b) the amount
available for drawing under the revolving facility. The
vessels insurance is to include as a minimum cover hull
and machinery, war risk and protection and indemnity insurance,
$1,000,000,000 for oil pollution and for excess oil spillage and
pollution liability insurance. In relation to the protection and
indemnity insurance, no risk should be excluded or the
deductibles as provided by the P&I Association materially
altered or increased to amounts exceeding $150,000 without the
prior written consent of Marfin. In addition mortgagees
interest insurance on the vessels and the insured value must be
at least 110% of the aggregate of the revolving credit and term
facility.
In addition, if a vessel is sold or becomes a total loss or the
mortgage on the vessel is discharged on its disposal, we are
required to repay such part of the facilities as is equal to the
higher of the amount related to such vessel or the amount
necessary to maintain the security clause margin.
Other covenants include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
not to borrow any money or permit such borrowings to continue
other than by way of subordinated shareholders loans or
enter into any agreement for deferred terms, other than in any
customary suppliers credit terms or any equipment lease or
contract hire agreement other than in the ordinary course of
business;
|
|
|
|
|
|
no loans, advances or investments in, any person, firm,
corporation or joint venture or to any officer director,
shareholder or customer;
|
|
|
|
not to assume, guarantee or otherwise undertake the liability of
any person, firm, or company;
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
not to authorize any capital commitments;
|
|
|
|
not to declare or pay dividends in any amount greater than 60%
of the net cash flow of Seanergy, on a consolidated basis as
determined by the lender on the basis of the most recent annual
audited financial statements provided, or repay any
shareholders loans or make any distributions in excess of
the above amount without the lenders prior written consent
(see below for terms of waiver obtained on December 31,
2008);
|
|
|
|
not to change our Chief Executive Officer
and/or
Chairman without the prior written consent of the lender;
|
|
|
|
not to assign, transfer, sell or otherwise dispose of vessels or
any of the property, assets or rights without the prior written
consent of the lender;
|
|
|
|
to ensure that the members of the Restis and Koutsolioutsos
families (or companies affiliated with them) own at all times an
aggregate of at least 10% of our issued share capital;
|
|
|
|
no change of control without the written consent of the lender;
|
|
|
|
not to engage in any business other than the operation of the
vessels without the prior written consent of the lender; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
not to violate the security margin clause, which provides that:
the aggregate market values of the vessels and the value of any
additional security shall not be less than (or at least) 135% of
the aggregate of the outstanding amounts under the revolving
credit and term facilities and any amount available for drawing
under the revolving facility, less the aggregate amount of all
deposits maintained. As of December 31, 2008, we would not
have been in compliance with the security margin clause under
the Marfin loan agreement had we not later obtained certain
retroactive waivers from Marfin. During the first quarter of
2009, we obtained waivers from Marfin of our compliance with
these various financial and other covenants, which waivers were
effective as of December 31, 2008. These waivers expired in
July 2009, when the first of our original charterers was
replaced. On September 9, 2009 and November 13, 2009,
we executed addenda no. 1 and no. 2, respectively, to
the loan agreement and obtained a waiver from Marfin through
January 1, 2011. In connection with the amendment and
waiver, Marfin made certain changes to our loan agreement
including increasing the interest payable during the waiver
period, accelerating the due dates of certain principal
installments and limiting our ability to pay dividends without
their prior consent. As a result of these waivers, we are not
currently in default under our Marfin loan agreement.
|
Financial covenants include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
ratio of financial indebtedness to earnings, before interest,
taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) shall be less than
6.5:1 (financial indebtedness or net debt are defined is the sum
of all outstanding debt facilities minus cash and cash
equivalents). The covenant is to be tested quarterly on an LTM
basis (the last twelve months). The calculation of
the covenant is not applicable for the quarter ended
December 31, 2008.
|
|
|
|
the ratio of LTM (last twelve months) EBITDA to net
interest expense shall not be less than 2:1. The covenant is to
be tested quarterly on a LTM basis. The calculation of the
covenant is not applicable for the quarter ended
December 31, 2008.
|
|
|
|
the ratio of total liabilities to total assets shall not exceed
0.70:1;
|
|
|
|
unrestricted cash deposits, other than in favor of the lender
shall not be less than 2.5% of the financial
indebtedness; and
|
|
|
|
average quarterly unrestricted cash deposits, other than in
favor of the lender, shall not be less than 5% of the financial
indebtedness.
|
The last three financial covenants listed above are to be tested
on a quarterly basis, commencing on December 31, 2008
(where applicable). We were in compliance with our loan
covenants as of September 30, 2009.
63
BET
Loan Agreement
The six wholly-owned subsidiaries of BET financed the
acquisition of their respective vessels with the proceeds of an
amortizing loan from Citibank International PLC, as agent for
the syndicate of banks and financial institutions set forth in
the loan agreement, in the principal amount of $222,000,000. The
loan agreement dated June 26, 2007 is guaranteed by BET.
The BET subsidiaries drew down on agreed portions of the loan
facility to acquire each of the original six vessels in the BET
fleet. The amount of the loan for each vessel was less than or
equal to 70% of the contractual purchase price for the
applicable vessel. The loan bears interest at the annual rate of
LIBOR plus 0.75%. As of September 30, 2009, the principal
amount due under the BET loan was $123,100,000.
The loan is repayable commencing on December 28, 2007
through 15 equal semi-annual installments of principal in the
amount of $8,286,500 followed by a balloon payment due six
months thereafter in the amount of $51,289,000, as these
installment amounts were revised after the BET Performer sale.
Following BETs supplemental agreement dated
September 30, 2009 and prepayment of $20 million, the
semi-annual
installments of principal and the balloon payment amount to
$7,128,158 and $44,062,262, respectively. The borrowers are
required to deposit one-sixth of the next principal payment in a
retention account each month to fund each semi-annual principal
payment. Interest in due and payable based on interest periods
selected by BET equal to one month, two months, three months,
six months, or a longer period up to 12 months. For
interest periods longer than three months, interest is due in
three-month installments.
The BET loan facility is secured by the following: the loan
agreement, a letter agreement regarding payment of certain fees
and expenses by BET; a first priority mortgage on each of the
BET vessels; the BET guaranty of the loan; a general assignment
or deed of covenant of any and all earnings, insurances and
requisition compensation of each of the vessels; pledges over
the earnings accounts and retention accounts held in the name of
each borrower; undertakings by the technical managers of the BET
vessels; and the trust deed executed by Citibank for the benefit
of the other lenders, among others.
The ship security documents include covenants, among others,
that require the borrowers to maintain vessel insurance for an
aggregate amount equal to the greater of the vessels
aggregate market value or an amount equal to 125% of the
outstanding amount under the loan. The vessels insurance
is to include as a minimum cover fire and usual marine risks,
war risk and protection and indemnity insurance, and
$1,000,000,000 for oil pollution. In addition, the borrowers
agree to reimburse the mortgagee for mortgagees interest
insurance on the vessels in an amount of up to 110% of the
outstanding amount under the loan.
In addition, if a vessel is sold or becomes a total loss, BET is
required to repay such part of the loan as is equal to the
greater of the relevant amount for such vessel, or such amount
as is necessary to maintain compliance with the minimum security
covenant in the loan agreement. This covenant requires the
borrowers to assure that the market value of the BET vessels is
not less than 125% of the outstanding amount under the loan. On
July 10, 2008, BET, through its wholly owned subsidiary
sold the BET Performer and paid an amount on the loan equal to
$41,453,000, as required by the loan agreement.
The Borrowers also must assure that the aggregate market value
of the BET vessels is not less than 125% of the outstanding
amount of the loan. If the market value of the vessels is less
than this amount, the Borrowers must prepay an amount that will
result in the market value of the vessels meeting this
requirement or offer additional security to the lender with a
value sufficient to meet this requirement, which additional
security must be acceptable to the lender. The value of the BET
vessels shall be determined when requested by the lender, and
such determination shall be made by any two of the lenders
approved shipbrokers, one of which shall be nominated by the
lender and one of which shall be nominated by the borrowers.
Other covenants include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Not to permit any lien to be created over all or any part of the
borrowers present or future undertakings, assets, rights
or revenues to secure any present or future indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
Not to merge or consolidate with any other person;
|
64
|
|
|
|
|
Not to sell, transfer, dispose of or exercise direct control
over any part of the borrowers assets, rights or revenue
without the consent of the lender;
|
|
|
|
Not to undertake any business other than the ownership and
operation of vessels and the chartering of vessels to third
parties;
|
|
|
|
Not to acquire any assets other than the BET vessels;
|
|
|
|
Not to incur any obligations except under the loan agreement and
related documents or contracts entered into in the ordinary
course of business;
|
|
|
|
Not to borrow money other than pursuant to the loan agreement,
except that the borrowers may borrow money from their
shareholders or directors or their related companies as long as
such borrowings are subordinate to amounts due under the loan
agreement;
|
|
|
|
Not to guarantee, indemnify or become contingently liable for
the obligations of another person or entity except pursuant to
the loan agreement and related documents, except, in general,
for certain guarantees that arise in the ordinary course of
business;
|
|
|
|
Not to make any loans or grant any credit to any person, except
that the borrowers make loans to BET or the borrowers
related companies as long as they are made on an arms
length basis in the ordinary course of business and are fully
subordinated to the rights of the lender;
|
|
|
|
Not to redeem their own shares of stock;
|
|
|
|
Not to permit any change in the legal or beneficial ownership of
any of the borrowers or BET or cause any change in the
shareholders agreement or constitutional documents related
to BET; and
|
|
|
|
Not to enter into any related party transactions except on an
arms length basis and for full value.
|
On September 30, 2009, BET entered into a supplemental
agreement with Citibank International PLC (as agent for the
syndicate of banks and financial institutions set forth in the
loan agreement) in connection with the $222,000,000 loan
obtained by the six wholly owned subsidiaries of BET, which
financed the acquisition of their respective vessels. The
material terms of the supplemental agreement with Citibank
International PLC are as follows:
(1) the applicable margin for the period between
July 1, 2009 and ending on June 30, 2010 (the
amendment period) shall be increased to two per cent (2%) per
annum;
(2) the borrowers to pay part of the loan in the amount of
$20,000,000; and
(3) the borrowers and the corporate guarantor have
requested and the creditors consented to:
(a) the temporary reduction of the security requirement
during the amendment period from 125% to 100%; and
(b) the temporary reduction of the minimum equity ratio
requirement of the principal corporate guarantee to be amended
from 0.30: 1.0 to 0.175:1.0 during the amendment period at the
end of the accounting periods ending on December 31, 2009
and June 30, 2010.
Promissory
Note
As of June 30, 2009, we had a convertible unsecured
promissory note issued to certain Restis affiliate shareholders
amounting in aggregate to $28.25 million (face value). The
Note accrued interest at a rate of 2.9% per annum and matured in
May 2010. The Note was initially convertible into common stock
at the option of the holders at a conversion price of $12.50 per
share. On August 19, 2009, we amended the Note to reduce
the conversion price to the average closing price of our common
stock for the five trading days commencing on the effective date
of the amendment, which amounted to $4.45598 per share. As a
condition to such amendment, the holders agreed to convert their
Note at the time of the amendment. Upon conversion, the holders
received 6,585,868 shares of our common stock and the Note
was extinguished.
65
Debt
Repayment and Terms
Capital
Requirements
Our capital expenditures have thus far related solely to the
purchase of our six vessels included in our business combination
and the routine dry-docking of our vessels. We funded the
business combination through our trust fund proceeds, our
revolving credit and term facilities and the Note.
In addition, the following table summarizes our next anticipated
dry-docks:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel
|
|
Next Schedule Dry-Dock
|
|
Estimated Cost
|
|
|
African Oryx
|
|
October 2010
|
|
$
|
900,000
|
|
African Zebra
|
|
February 2011
|
|
$
|
1,000,000
|
|
Bremen Max
|
|
June 2011
|
|
$
|
1,000,000
|
|
Hamburg Max
|
|
June 2012
|
|
$
|
1,000,000
|
|
Davakis G.
|
|
May 2011
|
|
$
|
500,000
|
|
Delos Ranger
|
|
August 2011
|
|
$
|
500,000
|
|
BET Commander*
|
|
August 2011
|
|
$
|
1,200,000
|
|
BET Fighter*
|
|
September 2010
|
|
$
|
1,200,000
|
|
BET Prince*
|
|
May 2010
|
|
$
|
1,200,000
|
|
BET Scouter*
|
|
April 2010
|
|
$
|
1,200,000
|
|
BET Intruder*
|
|
March 2011
|
|
$
|
1,000,000
|
|
The annual principal payments required to be made after
September 30, 2009 (based on the amount drawn down as of
September 30, 2009 and assuming the Note had been converted
into common stock as of such date), are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reducing revolving
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term Facility
|
|
|
credit facility
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
7,128
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
7,128
|
|
2010
|
|
|
33,206
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
33,206
|
|
2011
|
|
|
27,056
|
|
|
|
6,845
|
|
|
|
33,902
|
|
2012
|
|
|
27,056
|
|
|
|
12,000
|
|
|
|
39,056
|
|
2013
|
|
|
27,056
|
|
|
|
12,000
|
|
|
|
39,056
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
131,348
|
|
|
|
24,000
|
|
|
|
155,347
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
252,850
|
|
|
|
54,845
|
|
|
|
307,695
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures of Market Risk
Interest
rate risk
We are subject to interest-rate risk relating to the
floating-rate interest on our revolving credit facility and on
our term facility with Marfin as well as on our BET loan. These
facilities bear interest at LIBOR plus a spread. For the nine
months ended September 30, 2009 the weighted average
interest rate was 2.22% and 2.77% for revolving facility and
term facility with Marfin respectively. For the same period the
overall weighted average interest rate was 2.37% for Marfin
facilities. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009
the weighted average interest rate on the BET loan was 1.56%. A
1% increase in LIBOR would have resulted in an increase in
interest expense for the nine months ended September 30,
2009 of approximately $1.5 million and $1.1 million on
the Marfin term loan and on the BET loan, had we owned an
interest in BET on such dates, respectively.
66
Currency
and Exchange Rates
We generate all of our revenue in U.S. dollars. The
majority of our operating expenses are in U.S. dollars
except primarily for our management fees and our executive
office rental expenses which are denominated in Euros. This
difference could lead to fluctuations in net income due to
changes in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to the
Euro, but we do not expect such fluctuations to be material.
As of September 30, 2009, we had no open foreign currency
exchange contracts.
Inflation
We do not consider inflation to be a significant risk to direct
expenses in the current and foreseeable future.
Off-balance
Sheet Arrangements
As of September 30, 2009, we did not have any off-balance
sheet arrangements as defined in Item 303(a)(4)(ii) of
Regulation S-K.
Contractual
Obligations and Commercial Commitments
The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of
September 30, 2009 based on the contractual terms of the
arrangements as modified by a waiver received from our lenders.
Based on the waiver, the table does not reflect any potential
acceleration due to non-compliance with covenant terms. The
waivers expire on January 1, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2014 and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(in thousands of U.S. dollars)
|
|
|
Seanergy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revolving credit facility(1)
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
6,845
|
|
|
|
12,000
|
|
|
|
12,000
|
|
|
|
24,000
|
|
|
|
54,845
|
|
Interest on revolving credit
|
|
|
514
|
|
|
|
2,194
|
|
|
|
2,185
|
|
|
|
1,785
|
|
|
|
1,275
|
|
|
|
1,148
|
|
|
|
9,101
|
|
facility(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property leases(3)
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
759
|
|
|
|
681
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,628
|
|
Term facility
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
18,950
|
|
|
|
12,800
|
|
|
|
12,800
|
|
|
|
12,800
|
|
|
|
72,400
|
|
|
|
129,750
|
|
Interest on term facility(4)
|
|
|
1,054
|
|
|
|
4,118
|
|
|
|
3,975
|
|
|
|
3,495
|
|
|
|
3,015
|
|
|
|
4,121
|
|
|
|
19,778
|
|
Management fees(5)
|
|
|
345
|
|
|
|
1,368
|
|
|
|
1,396
|
|
|
|
1,427
|
|
|
|
1,452
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,988
|
|
BET
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term facility
|
|
|
7,128
|
|
|
|
14,256
|
|
|
|
14,256
|
|
|
|
14,256
|
|
|
|
14,256
|
|
|
|
58,948
|
|
|
|
123,100
|
|
Interest on term facility(6)
|
|
|
769
|
|
|
|
2,810
|
|
|
|
2,699
|
|
|
|
2,307
|
|
|
|
1,915
|
|
|
|
2,137
|
|
|
|
12,637
|
|
Management fees
|
|
|
287
|
|
|
|
1,140
|
|
|
|
1,163
|
|
|
|
1,189
|
|
|
|
1,210
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,989
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Commencing one year from signing the loan agreement, the
revolving facility is reduced to the applicable limit available
on such reduction date. The first annual reduction, which
reduced the available credit amount by $18,000,000 to
$72,000,000 in August 2009, will be followed by five consecutive
annual reductions of $12,000,000 and any outstanding balance
must be fully repaid together with the balloon payment of the
term loan. The annual principal payments on the revolving credit
facility are based on the amount drawn down as of
September 30, 2009. |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
The revolving credit facility bears interest at LIBOR plus a
spread of 2.25%. As part of the new waiver, the spread will be
increased to 3.50% until expiration of the waiver period.
Interest has been computed by using a LIBOR rate of 0.5% through
the end of 2010 and 2% thereafter. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
The property lease reflects our lease agreement with Waterfront
for the lease of our executive offices. The initial lease term
is for a period of three years with an option to extend for one
more year. The lease |
67
|
|
|
|
|
payments are 42,000 per month. The monthly payment due
under the property lease in U.S. dollars has been computed by
using a Euro/U.S. dollar exchange rate as of September 30,
2009, which was 1.00:$1.47. |
|
|
|
(4) |
|
The term facility bears interest at a three-month LIBOR plus
spread of 1.75%. As part of the new waiver, the spread will be
increased to 3.00% until expiration of the waiver period.
Interest has been computed by using a LIBOR rate of 0.5% through
the end of 2010 and 2% thereafter. |
|
|
|
(5) |
|
Management fees for 2009 are Euro 425 per vessel per day, which
thereafter are adjusted on an annual basis as defined per the
agreement. Management fees in the dollars have been computed by
using a Euro/U.S. dollar exchange rate as of September 30,
2009, which was 1.00:$1.47, an assumption of 2% increase
annually and 365 days per year. |
|
|
|
(6) |
|
The term facility for BET bears interest at a three-month LIBOR
plus a spread of 0.75%. Pursuant to the supplemental agreement,
the spread increased to 2% until July 1, 2010. Interest has
been computed by using a LIBOR rate of 0.5% through the end of
2010 and 2% thereafter. |
68
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE VESSELS PREVIOUSLY OWNED BY
SELLERS
The following managements discussion and analysis should
be read in conjunction with the combined annual and condensed
combined interim financial statements and accompanying notes
prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting
Standards as issued by the International Accounting Standards
Board (IASB), included elsewhere in this prospectus,
of Goldie Navigation Ltd., Pavey Services Ltd., Shoreline
Universal Ltd., Valdis Marine Corp., Kalistos Marine S.A. and
Kalithea Marine S.A. (together, the Group). This
discussion relates to the operations and financial condition of
the dry bulk vessels acquired from the Restis family (sellers)
and not of Seanergy. Although as of September 25, 2008, we
had purchased the six vessels that are included in the
sellers financial statements, we did not purchase the
other assets of the sellers or assume any of their liabilities.
In addition, although we charter these vessels and earn revenue
from charter hire, as the sellers did, we have chartered the
vessels to different charterers on different terms than the
sellers. The expense structure of the sellers is also different
from ours, as the sellers, which are part of a larger group of
companies controlled by members of the Restis family, do not
employ any executive officers. Certain vessel-related fees, such
as management fees, will also vary from the amount that was
previously paid by the sellers. As a result, the sellers
financial statements and this discussion of them may not be
indicative of what our historical results of operations would
have been for the comparable periods had we operated these
vessels at that time nor the results if the sellers had operated
these vessels on a stand-alone basis. In addition, the
sellers results of operations and financial condition may
not be indicative of what our results of operations and
financial condition might be in the future.
This discussion contains forward-looking statements that reflect
our current views with respect to future events and financial
performance. Our actual results may differ materially from those
anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of
various factors, such as those set forth in the section entitled
Risk Factors and elsewhere in this prospectus.
General
The sellers are six ship-owning companies that collectively
owned and operated four vessels in the dry bulk shipping market.
In addition, two newly built vessels were delivered to the
sellers in May 2008 and August 2008, both of which had no
operating history. These vessels represented a portion of the
vessels owned
and/or
operated by companies associated with members of the Restis
family. As of September 25, 2008, the sellers had sold
these vessels, including the two newly built vessels, to us
pursuant to the Master Agreement and the MOAs during August 2008
and September 2008. The combined financial statements of the
Group for 2005, 2006 and 2007 include the assets, liabilities
and results of operations for four of the vessels from the dates
they were placed in service by the sellers in 2005. The
condensed combined interim financial statements for the six
months ended June 30, 2008 include the assets, liabilities
and results from operations of these four vessels for the entire
period and one vessel delivered and placed in service in May
2008. The final vessel was delivered in August 2008 and had no
operations through June 30, 2008.
The operations of the sellers vessels were managed by EST,
which is an affiliate of members of the Restis family. Following
the vessel acquisition, EST continued to manage the vessels
pursuant to the Management Agreement. EST provided the sellers
with a wide range of shipping services. These services included,
at a daily fee per vessel (payable monthly), the required
technical management, such as managing day-to-day vessel
operations including supervising the crewing, supplying,
maintaining and dry-docking of the vessels. Safbulk, which is
also an affiliate of the sellers, provided commercial brokerage
services to the sellers and earned fees in connection with the
charter of the vessels. Safbulk continues to provide these
services for us pursuant to the Brokerage Agreement.
69
The following table details the vessels owned by the sellers
that were sold to us:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of Delivery to
|
Vessel Name
|
|
Dwt
|
|
|
Vessel Type
|
|
Built
|
|
|
Seanergy
|
|
African Oryx
|
|
|
24,110
|
|
|
Handysize
|
|
|
1997
|
|
|
August 28, 2008
|
African Zebra
|
|
|
38,632
|
|
|
Handymax
|
|
|
1985
|
|
|
September 25, 2008
|
Bremen Max
|
|
|
73,503
|
|
|
Panamax
|
|
|
1993
|
|
|
September 11, 2008
|
Hamburg Max
|
|
|
73,498
|
|
|
Panamax
|
|
|
1994
|
|
|
September 25, 2008
|
Davakis G. (ex. Hull NO. KA 215)
|
|
|
54,000
|
|
|
Supramax
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
August 28, 2008
|
Delos Ranger (ex. Hull No. KA 216)
|
|
|
54,000
|
|
|
Supramax
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
August 28, 2008
|
Important
Measures for Analyzing the Sellers Results of
Operations
The sellers believe that the important non-GAAP/non-IFRS
measures and definitions for analyzing their results of
operations consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Ownership days. Ownership days are the total
number of calendar days in a period during which the sellers
owned each vessel in their fleet. Ownership days are an
indicator of the size of the fleet over a period and affect both
the amount of revenues and the amount of expenses recorded
during that period.
|
|
|
|
Available days. Available days are the number
of ownership days less the aggregate number of days that the
sellers vessels are off-hire due to major repairs,
dry-dockings or special or intermediate surveys. The shipping
industry uses available days to measure the number of ownership
days in a period during which vessels are actually capable of
generating revenues.
|
|
|
|
Operating days. Operating days are the number
of available days in a period less the aggregate number of days
that vessels are off-hire due to any reason, including
unforeseen circumstances. The shipping industry uses operating
days to measure the aggregate number of days in a period during
which vessels actually generate revenues.
|
|
|
|
Fleet utilization. Fleet utilization is
determined by dividing the number of operating days during a
period by the number of ownership days during that period. The
shipping industry uses fleet utilization to measure a
companys efficiency in finding suitable employment for its
vessels and minimizing the amount of days that its vessels are
off-hire for any reason including scheduled repairs, vessel
upgrades, dry-dockings or special or intermediate surveys.
|
|
|
|
Off-hire. The period a vessel is unable to
perform the services for which it is required under a charter.
|
|
|
|
Time charter. A time charter is a contract for
the use of a vessel for a specific period of time during which
the charterer pays substantially all of the voyage expenses,
including port costs, canal charges and fuel expenses. The
vessel owner pays the vessel operating expenses, which include
crew wages, insurance, technical maintenance costs, spares,
stores and supplies and commissions on gross voyage revenues.
Time charter rates are usually fixed during the term of the
charter. Prevailing time charter rates do fluctuate on a
seasonal and year-to-year basis and may be substantially higher
or lower from a prior time charter agreement when the subject
vessel is seeking to renew the time charter agreement with the
existing charterer or enter into a new time charter agreement
with another charterer. Fluctuations in time charter rates are
influenced by changes in spot charter rates.
|
|
|
|
Voyage charter. A voyage charter is an
agreement to charter the vessel for an agreed per-ton amount of
freight from specified loading port(s) to specified discharge
port(s). In contrast to a time charter, the vessel owner is
required to pay substantially all of the voyage expenses,
including port costs, canal charges and fuel expenses, in
addition to the vessel operating expenses.
|
|
|
|
TCE. Time charter equivalent, or TCE, is a
measure of the average daily revenue performance of a vessel on
a per voyage basis. The sellers method of calculating TCE
is consistent with industry standards and is determined by
dividing operating revenues (net of voyage expenses) by
operating days for the relevant time period. Voyage expenses
primarily consist of port, canal and fuel costs that are
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
unique to a particular voyage, which would otherwise be paid by
the charterer under a time charter contract. TCE is a standard
shipping industry performance measure used primarily to compare
period-to-period
changes in a shipping companys performance despite changes
in the mix of charter types (i.e., spot charters, time charters
and bareboat charters) under which the vessels may be employed
between the periods.
|
Revenues
The sellers revenues were driven primarily by the number
of vessels they operated, the number of operating days during
which their vessels generated revenues, and the amount of daily
charter hire that their vessels earned under charters. These, in
turn, were affected by a number of factors, including the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
The nature and duration of the sellers charters;
|
|
|
|
The amount of time that the sellers spent repositioning
their vessels;
|
|
|
|
The amount of time that the sellers vessels spent in
dry-dock undergoing repairs;
|
|
|
|
Maintenance and upgrade work;
|
|
|
|
The age, condition and specifications of the sellers
vessels;
|
|
|
|
The levels of supply and demand in the dry bulk carrier
transportation market; and
|
|
|
|
Other factors affecting charter rates for dry bulk carriers
under voyage charters.
|
A voyage charter is generally a contract to carry a specific
cargo from a load port to a discharge port for an
agreed-upon
total amount. Under voyage charters, voyage expenses such as
port, canal and fuel costs are paid by the vessel owner. A time
charter trip and a period time charter or period charter are
generally contracts to charter a vessel for a fixed period of
time at a set daily rate. Under time charters, the charterer
pays voyage expenses. Under both types of charters, the vessel
owners pay for vessel operating expenses, which include crew
costs, provisions, deck and engine stores, lubricating oil,
insurance, maintenance and repairs. The vessel owners are also
responsible for each vessels dry-docking and intermediate
and special survey costs.
Vessels operating on period time charters provide more
predictable cash flows, but can yield lower profit margins than
vessels operating in the spot charter market for single trips
during periods characterized by favorable market conditions.
Vessels operating in the spot charter market generate revenues
that are less predictable, but can yield increased profit
margins during periods of improvements in dry bulk rates. Spot
charters also expose vessel owners to the risk of declining dry
bulk rates and rising fuel costs. The sellers vessels were
chartered on period time charters during the six months ended
June 30, 2008, fiscal 2007, fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2005.
A standard maritime industry performance measure is the
time charter equivalent or TCE. TCE
revenues are voyage revenues minus voyage expenses divided by
the number of operating days during the relevant time period.
Voyage expenses primarily consist of port, canal and fuel costs
that are unique to a particular voyage and that would otherwise
be paid by a charterer under a time charter. Some companies in
our industry believe that the daily TCE neutralizes the
variability created by unique costs associated with particular
voyages or the employment of dry bulk carriers on time charter
or on the spot market and presents a more accurate
representation of the revenues generated by dry bulk carriers.
The sellers average TCE rates for 2007, 2006 and 2005 were
$25,256, $18,868 and $23,170, respectively, and $35,812 and
$24,706 for the six months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007,
respectively.
Vessel
Operating Expenses
Vessel operating expenses include crew wages and related costs,
the cost of insurance, expenses relating to repairs and
maintenance, the costs of spares and consumable stores, tonnage
taxes and other miscellaneous expenses. Vessel operating
expenses generally represent costs of a fixed nature. Some of
these expenses are required, such as insurance costs and the
cost of spares.
71
Depreciation
During the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 and
the six months ended June 30, 2008, the sellers
depreciated their vessels on a straight-line basis over their
then remaining useful lives after considering the residual
value. The residual value for 2008 was increased to $500 from
$175 in 2007 per light weight tonnage reflecting an increase in
steel scrap prices. The estimated useful lives as of
June 30, 2008 were between 3 and 16 years, based on an
industry-wide accepted estimated useful life of 25 years
from the original build dates of the vessels, for financial
statement purposes. The sellers capitalized the total
costs associated with a dry-docking and amortized these costs on
a straight-line basis over the period before the next
dry-docking
became due, which was generally 2.5 years.
Seasonality
Coal, iron ore and grains, which are the major bulks of the dry
bulk shipping industry, are somewhat seasonal in nature. The
energy markets primarily affect the demand for coal, with
increases during hot summer periods when air conditioning and
refrigeration require more electricity and towards the end of
the calendar year in anticipation of the forthcoming winter
period. The demand for iron ore tends to decline in the summer
months because many of the major steel users, such as automobile
makers, reduce their level of production significantly during
the summer holidays. Grains are completely seasonal as they are
driven by the harvest within a climate zone. Because three of
the five largest grain producers (the United States of America,
Canada and the European Union) are located in the northern
hemisphere and the other two (Argentina and Australia) are
located in the southern hemisphere, harvests occur throughout
the year and grains require dry bulk shipping accordingly.
Principal
Factors Affecting the Sellers Business
The principal factors that affected the sellers financial
position, results of operations and cash flows included the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
Number of vessels owned and operated;
|
|
|
|
Charter market rates and periods of charter hire;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel operating expenses and voyage costs, which were incurred
in both U.S. dollars and other currencies, primarily Euros;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of dry-docking and special surveys;
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expenses, which were a function of the cost, any
significant post-acquisition improvements, estimated useful
lives and estimated residual scrap values of sellers
vessels;
|
|
|
|
Financing costs related to indebtedness associated with the
vessels; and
|
|
|
|
Fluctuations in foreign exchange rates.
|
72
Performance
Indicators
The sellers believe that the unaudited information provided
below is important for measuring trends in the results of
operations. The figures shown below are statistical
ratios/non-GAAP/non-IFRS financial measures and definitions used
by management to measure performance of the vessels. They are
not included in financial statements prepared under IFRS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Fleet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of vessels(1)
|
|
|
4.21
|
|
|
|
3.83
|
|
|
|
3.85
|
|
|
|
3.81
|
|
|
|
3.21
|
|
Ownership days(2)
|
|
|
769
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
1,460
|
|
|
|
1,460
|
|
|
|
1,250
|
|
Available days(3) (equals operating days for the periods
listed(4))
|
|
|
767
|
|
|
|
693
|
|
|
|
1,411
|
|
|
|
1,393
|
|
|
|
1,166
|
|
Fleet utilization(5)
|
|
|
99.7
|
%
|
|
|
95.7
|
%
|
|
|
96.6
|
%
|
|
|
95.4
|
%
|
|
|
93.3
|
%
|
Average Daily Results:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average TCE rate(6)
|
|
|
35,812
|
|
|
|
24,706
|
|
|
|
25,256
|
|
|
|
18,868
|
|
|
|
23,170
|
|
Vessel operating expenses(7)
|
|
|
5,168
|
|
|
|
3,887
|
|
|
|
4,130
|
|
|
|
3,849
|
|
|
|
4,049
|
|
Management fees(8)
|
|
|
535
|
|
|
|
535
|
|
|
|
535
|
|
|
|
515
|
|
|
|
515
|
|
Total vessel operating expenses
|
|
|
5,703
|
|
|
|
4,422
|
|
|
|
4,665
|
|
|
|
4,364
|
|
|
|
4,564
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Average number of vessels is the number of vessels the sellers
owned for the relevant period, as measured by the sum of the
number of days each vessel was owned during the period divided
by the number of calendar days in the period. |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Ownership days are the total number of days in a period during
which the sellers owned each vessel. Ownership days are an
indicator of the size of the sellers fleet over a period
and affect both the amount of revenues and the amount of
expenses that sellers recorded during a period. |
|
(3) |
|
Available days are the number of ownership days less the
aggregate number of days that the sellers vessels were
off-hire due to major repairs, dry-dockings or special or
intermediate surveys. The shipping industry uses available days
to measure the number of ownership days in a period during which
vessels should be capable of generating revenues. |
|
(4) |
|
Operating days are the number of available days in a period less
the aggregate number of days that the sellers vessels were
off-hire due to any reason, including unforeseen circumstances.
The shipping industry uses operating days to measure the
aggregate number of days in a period during which vessels
actually generate revenues. |
|
(5) |
|
Fleet utilization is determined by dividing the number of
operating days during a period by the number of ownership days
during that period. The shipping industry uses fleet utilization
to measure a companys efficiency in finding suitable
employment for its vessels and minimizing the amount of days
that its vessels are off-hire for any reason excluding scheduled
repairs, vessel upgrades, dry-dockings or special or
intermediate surveys. |
|
(6) |
|
Time charter equivalent, is a measure of the average daily
revenue performance of a vessel on a per voyage basis. The
sellers method of calculating TCE was consistent with
industry standards and was determined by dividing operating
revenues (net of voyage expenses and commissions) by operating
days for the relevant time period. Voyage expenses primarily
consist of port, canal and fuel costs that are unique to a
particular voyage, which would otherwise be paid by the
charterer under a time charter contract. TCE is a standard
shipping industry performance measure used primarily to compare
period-to-period changes in a |
73
|
|
|
|
|
shipping companys performance despite changes in the mix
of charter types (i.e., spot charters, time charters and
bareboat charters) under which the vessels may be employed
between the periods: |
|
|
|
The following table is unaudited and includes information that
is extracted directly from the combined financial statements, as
well as other information used by the sellers for monitoring
performance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands except per diem amounts)
|
|
|
Operating revenues
|
|
|
28,227
|
|
|
|
17,181
|
|
|
|
35,717
|
|
|
|
26,347
|
|
|
|
27,156
|
|
Voyage revenues
|
|
|
(759
|
)
|
|
|
(60
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
(64
|
)
|
|
|
(139
|
)
|
Net operating revenues
|
|
|
27,468
|
|
|
|
17,121
|
|
|
|
35,635
|
|
|
|
26,283
|
|
|
|
27,017
|
|
Operating days
|
|
|
767
|
|
|
|
693
|
|
|
|
1,411
|
|
|
|
1,393
|
|
|
|
1,166
|
|
Average TCE daily rate
|
|
|
35,812
|
|
|
|
24,706
|
|
|
|
25,256
|
|
|
|
18,868
|
|
|
|
23,170
|
|
|
|
|
(7) |
|
Average daily vessel operating expenses, which includes crew
costs, provisions, deck and engine stores, lubricating oil,
insurance, maintenance and repairs, is calculated by dividing
vessel operating expenses by ownership days for the relevant
time periods: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands except per diem amounts)
|
|
|
Crew costs and other operating expenses
|
|
|
3,974
|
|
|
|
2,814
|
|
|
|
6,031
|
|
|
|
5,619
|
|
|
|
5,061
|
|
Ownership days
|
|
|
769
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
1,460
|
|
|
|
1,460
|
|
|
|
1,250
|
|
Daily vessel operating expense
|
|
|
5,168
|
|
|
|
3,887
|
|
|
|
4,130
|
|
|
|
3,849
|
|
|
|
4,049
|
|
|
|
|
(8) |
|
Daily management fees are calculated by dividing total
management fees expensed on vessels owned by ownership days for
the relevant time period. |
Critical
Accounting Policies
The discussion and analysis of the sellers financial
condition and results of operations is based upon their combined
financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance
with International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by
the IASB, or IFRS. The preparation of those financial statements
requires the sellers to make estimates and judgments that affect
the reported amount of assets and liabilities, revenues and
expenses and related disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of their financial statements. Actual
results may differ from these estimates under different
assumptions or conditions.
Critical accounting policies are those that reflect significant
judgments or uncertainties, and potentially result in materially
different results under different assumptions and conditions.
The sellers have described below what they believe are the
estimates and assumptions that have the most significant effect
on the amounts recognized in their combined financial
statements. These estimates and assumptions relate to useful
lives of their vessels, valuation and impairment losses on
vessels, and dry-docking costs because the sellers believe that
the shipping industry is highly cyclical, experiencing
volatility in profitability, vessel values and charter rates
resulting from changes in the supply of and demand for shipping
capacity. In addition, the dry bulk market is affected by the
current international financial crisis which has slowed down
world trade and caused drops in charter rates. The lack of
financing, global steel production cuts and outstanding
agreements between iron ore producers and Chinese industrial
customers have temporarily brought the market to a stagnation.
Useful Lives of Vessels. The sellers evaluated
the periods over which their vessels were depreciated to
determine if events or changes in circumstances had occurred
that would require modification to their useful lives. In
evaluating useful lives of vessels, the sellers review certain
indicators of potential impairment, such as the age of the
vessels. The sellers depreciated each of their vessels on a
straight-line basis over its estimated useful life, which during
the six months ended June 30, 2008 was estimated to be
between 3 and 16 years. Newly constructed vessels were
depreciated using an estimated useful life of 25 years from
the date of their initial delivery from the shipyard.
Depreciation was based on cost less the estimated residual scrap
value.
74
Furthermore, the sellers estimated the residual values of their
vessels to be $500.00 per lightweight ton as of June 30,
2008 as compared to $175.00 as of December 31, 2007, due to
substantial increases in the price of steel. An increase in the
useful life of a vessel or in the residual value would have the
effect of decreasing the annual depreciation charge and
extending it into later periods. A decrease in the useful life
of the vessel or in the residual value would have the effect of
increasing the annual depreciation charge. However, when
regulations place limitations on the ability of a vessel to
trade on a worldwide basis, the vessels useful life was
adjusted to end at the date such regulations become effective.
Valuation of Vessels and Impairment. The sellers
originally valued their vessels at cost less accumulated
depreciation and accumulated impairment losses. Vessels were
subsequently measured at fair value on an annual basis.
Increases in an individual vessels carrying amount as a
result of the revaluation was recorded in recognized income and
expense and accumulated in equity under the caption revaluation
surplus. The increase is recorded in the combined statements of
income to the extent that it reversed a revaluation decrease of
the related asset. Decreases in an individual vessels
carrying amount is recorded in the combined statements of income
as a separate line item. However, the decrease were recorded in
recognized income and expense to the extent of any credit
balance existing in the revaluation surplus in respect of the
related asset. The decrease recorded in recognized income and
expense reduced the amount accumulated in equity under the
revaluation surplus. The fair value of a vessel was determined
through market value appraisal, on the basis of a sale for
prompt, charter-free delivery, for cash, on normal commercial
terms, between willing sellers and willing buyers of a vessel
with similar characteristics.
The sellers consider this to be a critical accounting policy
because assessments need to be made due to the shipping industry
being highly cyclical, experiencing volatility in profitability,
vessel values and fluctuation in charter rates resulting from
changes in the supply of and demand for shipping capacity. In
the current time the dry bulk market is affected by the current
international financial crisis which has slowed down world trade
and caused drops in charter rates. The lack of financing, global
steel production cuts and outstanding agreements between iron
ore producers and Chinese industrial customers have temporarily
brought the market to a stagnation.
To determine whether there is an indication of impairment, we
compare the recoverable amount of the vessel, which is the
greater of the fair value less costs to sell or value in use.
Fair value represents the market price of a vessel in an active
market, and value in use is based on estimations on future cash
flows resulting from the use of each vessel less operating
expenses and its eventual disposal. The assumptions to be used
to determine the greater of the fair value or value in use
requires a considerable degree of estimation on the part of our
management team. Actual results could differ from those
estimates, which could have a material effect on the
recoverability of the vessels.
The most significant assumptions used are: the determination of
the possible future new charters, future charter rates, on-hire
days which are estimated at levels that are consistent with the
on-hire statistics, future market values, time value of money.
Estimates are based on market studies and appraisals made by
leading independent shipping analysts and brokers, and
assessment by management on the basis of market information,
shipping newsletters, chartering and sale of comparable vessels
reported in the press and historical charter rates for similar
vessels.
An impairment loss will be recognized if the carrying value of
the vessel exceeds its estimated recoverable amount.
Dry-docking Costs. From time to time the
sellers vessels were required to be dry-docked for
inspection and re-licensing at which time major repairs and
maintenance that could not be performed while the vessels were
in operation were generally performed (generally every
2.5 years). At the date of acquisition of a second hand
vessel, management estimated the component of the cost that
corresponded to the economic benefit to be derived from
capitalized dry-docking cost, until the first scheduled
dry-docking of the vessel under the ownership of the sellers,
and this component was depreciated on a straight-line basis over
the remaining period to the estimated dry-docking date.
75
Results
of Operations
Six
months ended June 30, 2008 as compared to six months ended
June 30, 2007
Revenues Operating revenues for the six
months ended June 30, 2008 were $28,227,000, an increase of
$11,046,000, or 64.29%, over the comparable period in 2007.
Revenues increased primarily as a result of improved time
charter rates and a higher number of operating days. Revenue
from Swiss Marine Services S.A., an affiliate of the sellers,
amounted to $0 in the six months ended June 30, 2008 and
$3,430,000 for the comparable period in 2007. Related party
revenue decreased as a result of third party charterers
completely replacing related party charterers.
Direct Voyage Expenses Direct voyage
expenses, which include classification fees and surveys, fuel
expenses, port expenses, tugs, commissions and fees, and
insurance and other voyage expenses, totaled $759,000 for the
six months ended June 30,2008, as compared to $60,000 for
the comparable period in 2007, which represents an increase of
1,165%. This increase of $699,000 in direct voyage expenses
primarily reflects increased bunkers expenses due to the
inclusion of Davakis G. (delivered on May 20,
2008) fuel.
Crew Costs Crew costs for the six months
ended June 30, 2008 were $2,143,000, an increase of
$800,000, or 59.6%, compared to the comparable period in 2007.
This increase is primarily due to (a) salary increases
which became effective as of January 1, 2008, (b) the
addition of crew cost for the Davakis G, which was delivered on
May 20, 2008, and (c) increased bonuses to the crews
of certain vessels.
Management Fees Related Party
Management fees related party represent a fixed fee
per day for each vessel in operation paid to EST for technical
management services. The fee per day amounted to $535 for the
six months ended June 30, 2008 and $535 for the six months
ended June 30, 2007. Total management fees
related party for the six months ended June 30, 2008
totaled $411,000, as compared to $387,000 for the six months
ended June 30, 2007. This increase of 6.2% was due to the
increase in operating days in 2008 resulting from the delivery
of the Davakis G on May 20, 2008.
Other Operating Expenses Other operating
expenses were $1,831,000 for the six months ended June 30,
2008, an increase of $360,000, or 24.5%, over $1,471,000 for the
comparable period in 2007. Other operating expenses include the
costs of chemicals and lubricants, repairs and maintenance,
insurance and administration expenses for the vessels. These
expenses increased during the six months ended June 30,
2008, primarily due to increases in prices for these items and
the addition of the Davakis G on May 20, 2008.
Depreciation For the six months ended
June 30, 2008, depreciation expense totaled $16,314,000, as
compared to $6,260,000 for the comparable period in 2007, which
represented an increase of $10,054,000, or 106.61%. This
increase resulted from the higher carrying amount of the vessels
because the vessels were revalued to a higher fair value at the
end of fiscal 2007 and due to additional depreciation from the
Davakis G delivered on May 20, 2008, partially reduced by
lower depreciation charges of $1,053,000 in 2008 due to the
increase in the estimated residual value of the vessels used in
calculating depreciation from $175 to $500 per light-weight
tonnage due to the increase in steel prices compared to 2007.
Operating Income For the six months ended
June 30, 2008, operating income was $6,769,000, which
represents a decrease of $891,000, or 11.6%, compared to
operating income of $7,660,000 for the comparable period in
2007. The primary reason for the decline in operating income was
the increase in depreciation and amortization cost in the six
months ended June 30, 2008 by $10,054,000, which amount was
partially offset by the improvement in revenue by $11,046,000.
Net Finance Costs Net finance cost for the
six months ended June 30, 2008 was $978,000, which
represents a decrease of $481,000, or 32.9%, compared to
$1,459,000 for the comparable period in 2007. The net decrease
in finance costs resulted primarily from the timing of
repayments of the sellers loan outstanding during the six
months ended June 30, 2007, as compared to June 30,
2008.
Net Profit The net profit for the six months
ended June 30, 2008 was $5,791,000, as compared to
$6,201,000 for the comparable period in 2007. This decrease of
$410,000, or 6.6%, is primarily due the increase in depreciation
and amortization cost in the six months ended June 30, 2008
by $10,054,000, which
76
amount was partially offset by the improvement in revenue for
the six months ended June 30, 2008 by $11,046,000.
Year
ended December 31, 2007 (fiscal 2007) as
compared to year ended December 31, 2006 (fiscal
2006)
Revenues Operating revenues for fiscal 2007
were $35,717,000, an increase of $9,370,000, or 35.6%, over
fiscal 2006. Revenues increased primarily as a result of
improved time charter rates and a higher number of operating
days. Revenue from Swiss Marine Services S.A., an affiliate of
the sellers, amounted to $3,420,000 in fiscal 2007 and
$10,740,000 in fiscal 2006, a decrease of 68.2%. Related party
revenue decreased as a result of third party charterers
replacing related party charterers.
Direct Voyage Expenses Direct voyage
expenses, which include classification fees and surveys, fuel
expenses, port expenses, tugs, commissions and fees, and
insurance and other voyage expenses, totaled $82,000 for fiscal
2007, as compared to $64,000 for fiscal 2006, which represents
an increase of 28%. This increase of $18,000 in direct voyage
expenses primarily reflects additional fuel consumed in
positioning the M/V Hamburg Max for dry-docking. No vessels were
in dry-dock during fiscal 2006.
Crew Costs Crew costs for fiscal 2007 were
$2,803,000, an increase of $26,000, of 0.9%, compared to fiscal
2006. This increase is primarily due to an increase in basic
wages and crew signing-on expenses (including fees charged by
the flag state for endorsement of seafarer certificates).
Management Fees Related Party
Management fees related party represent a fixed fee
per day for each vessel in operation paid to EST for technical
management services. The fee per day amounted to $535 in 2007
and $515 in 2006. Total Management fees related
party for fiscal 2007 totaled $782,000, as compared to $752,000
for fiscal 2006. This increase of 4% was mutually agreed for
2007 between the sellers and EST to offset increases in the
overhead of EST.
Other Operating Expenses Other operating
expenses were $3,228,000 for fiscal 2007, an increase of
$386,000, or 13.58%, over $2,842,000 for fiscal 2006. Other
operating expenses include the costs of chemicals and
lubricants, repairs and maintenance, insurance and
administration expenses for the vessels. These expenses
increased in fiscal 2007 primarily due to increases in prices
for these items (in particular an approximately 33% increase in
the costs of lubricants) and repairs and maintenance to the M/V
Hamburg Max.
Depreciation For fiscal 2007, depreciation
expense totaled $12,625,000, as compared to $6,567,000 for
fiscal 2006, which represented an increase of $6,058,000, or
92.24%. This increase resulted from the higher carrying amount
of the vessels because the vessels were revalued to a higher
fair value at the end of fiscal 2006.
Impairment Reversal (Loss) At year end the
sellers adjust their vessels to fair value. During fiscal 2006,
the sellers reversed an impairment loss associated with the
value of each of the vessels amounting in total to $19,311,000.
No such reversals were made by the sellers during fiscal 2007.
The primary reason for the reversal of the impairment loss in
fiscal 2006 was the increase in the fair value of the vessels in
the year ended December 31, 2006. At December 31,
2006, due to changing market conditions, the fair value of the
vessels exceeded the carrying value by $44,430,000, and
accordingly, an amount of $19,311,000 was recorded as an
impairment reversal. The remaining surplus of $25,119,000 was
recorded as recognized income and expense under the caption
revaluation reserve in the combined statement of changes in
equity. At December 31, 2007, due to prevailing positive
market conditions, the fair value of the individual vessels
exceeded the carrying amount again and a revaluation surplus of
$129,265,000 arose and is recorded as recognized income and
expense under the caption revaluation reserve in the combined
statement of changes in equity.
Operating Income For fiscal 2007, operating
income was $16,197,000, which represents a decrease of
$16,459,000, or 50.4%, compared to operating income of
$32,656,000 for fiscal 2006. The primary reasons for the decline
in operating income was the reversal of the impairment loss in
fiscal 2006, which increased operating income by $19,311,000,
and the increase in depreciation and amortization cost in fiscal
2007 by $6,058,000, which amounts were partially offset by the
improvement in revenue during fiscal 2007 by $9,370,000.
77
Net Finance Costs Net finance cost for fiscal
2007 was $2,837,000, which represents a decrease of $342,000, or
10.7%, compared to $3,179,000 fiscal 2006. The net decrease in
finance costs resulted primarily from the reduction in the
principal amount of sellers loan outstanding during fiscal
2007.
Net Profit The net profit for fiscal 2007 was
$13,360,000, as compared to $29,477,000 for fiscal 2006. This
decrease of $16,117,000, or 54.67%, is primarily due to the
reversal of the impairment loss in fiscal 2006 in the amount of
$19,311,000 together with the increase in depreciation in fiscal
2007 by $6,058,000, which was partially offset by the increase
in revenue during fiscal 2007 by $9,370,000.
Year
Ended December 31, 2006 (fiscal 2006) as
compared to year ended December 31, 2005 (fiscal
2005)
Revenues Operating revenues for fiscal 2006
were $26,347,000, a decrease of $809,000, or 2.97%, over fiscal
2005. Revenues decreased primarily as a result of decreased
charter rates and TCE, which decrease was partially offset by
the increased number of operating days in fiscal 2006. The
sellers acquired four vessels in fiscal 2005, and thus the
vessels were not operated by the sellers for the full fiscal
year. Revenue from Swiss Marine Services S.A., an affiliate of
the sellers, amounted to $10,740,000 in fiscal 2006 and
$10,140,000 in fiscal 2005, which represents an increase of
5.9%. Related party revenue increased as a result of increased
operating days under the related party charters in fiscal 2006.
Direct Voyage Expenses Direct voyage expenses
totaled $64,000 for fiscal 2006, as compared to $139,000 for
fiscal 2005, which represents a decrease of 53.95%. This
decrease of $75,000 is due to the favorable (compared to market)
fixed values at which the sellers repurchased fuel remaining on
board the vessels at the time of their redeliveries to the
sellers from time charterers.
Crew Costs Crew costs for fiscal 2006 were
$2,777,000, an increase of $801,000, of 40.53%, compared to
fiscal 2005. This increase is primarily due to the increase in
the number of ownership days from 1,250 in 2005 to 1,460 in 2006
and thus the number of days the sellers paid crew wages.
Management Fees Related Party
Management fees related party represent a fixed fee
per day for each vessel in operation paid to EST for technical
management services. The fee per day amounted to $515 in 2006
and 2005. Total Management fees related party for
fiscal 2006 were $752,000, as compared to $644,000 for fiscal
2005. This increase of 16.77% resulted primarily from the
increase in the number of ownership days from 1,250 in 2005 to
1,460 in 2006.
Other Operating Expenses Other operating
expenses were $2,842,000 for fiscal 2006, a decrease of
$243,000, or 7.87%, over $3,085,000 for fiscal 2005. Other
operating expenses decreased in fiscal 2006 primarily due to a
charge of $716,000 in fiscal 2005 representing reimbursements to
time charterers.
Depreciation For fiscal 2006, depreciation
expense totaled $6,567,000, as compared to $6,970,000 for fiscal
2005, which represented a decrease of $403,000, or 5.78%. This
decrease resulted from the lower carrying amount of the vessels
during 2006 because the fair value of the vessels had declined,
and thus they were impaired as of December 31, 2005.
Impairment Reversal (Loss) At
December 31, 2006 due to changing market conditions, the
fair value of vessels exceeded the carrying value by
$44,430,000, and accordingly, an amount of $19,311,000 was
recorded as an impairment reversal. The impairment loss of
$19,311,000 was originally recorded as of December 31,
2005. The primary reason for the recording of the impairment
loss was a decrease in the fair value of vessels in the dry bulk
market generally, which caused a decrease in the fair value of
sellers vessels. The sellers determined that the
impairment loss should be reversed in fiscal 2006 when the
market for dry bulk vessels rebounded. The remaining surplus of
$25,119,000 is recorded as recognized income and expense under
the caption revaluation reserve in the combined
statement of changes in equity.
Operating Income For fiscal 2006, operating
income was $32,656,000, which represents an increase of
$37,625,000, compared to an operating loss of $4,969,000 for
fiscal 2005. The primary reasons for the improvement in
operating income was in fiscal 2006 were the reversal of the
impairment loss originally recorded in fiscal 2005, which
increased operating income by $19,311,000 in fiscal 2006 as well
as decreasing
78
operating income by this same amount during fiscal 2005, and the
absence of any other impairment losses during fiscal 2006.
Net Finance Cost Net finance cost for fiscal
2006 was $3,179,000, which represents an increase of $811,000,
or 34.2%, compared to $2,368,000 in fiscal 2005. The increase
was primarily due to an increase in the LIBOR rate associated
with the sellers long-term debt during fiscal 2006 and the
higher principal balance of sellers long-term debt during
all of fiscal 2006, which reflects the greater number of
ownership days in fiscal 2006 compared to fiscal 2005.
Net Profit (Loss) The net profit for fiscal
2006 was $29,477,000, as compared to a net loss of $7,337,000
for fiscal 2005. This improvement of $36,814,000 is primarily
due to the reversal of the impairment loss in fiscal 2006, which
loss was originally recorded in fiscal 2005, which reversal
improved net income by $19,311,000, and the absence of any other
impairment losses during fiscal 2006.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
The sellers principal sources of funds have been equity
provided by their shareholders, operating cash flows and
long-term borrowings. Their principal uses of funds have been
capital expenditures to acquire and maintain their fleet,
payments of dividends, working capital requirements and
principal repayments on outstanding loan facilities. Based on
current market conditions, the sellers expect to rely upon
operating cash flows to fund their working capital needs in the
near future. On May 20, 2008 and August 22, 2008,
Hull KA 215 (Davakis G.) and Hull KA 216 (Delos
Ranger), respectively were delivered to the sellers. Sellers do
not anticipate any other capital expenditures in the foreseeable
future due to the sale of these vessels to Seanergy on
August 28, 2008.
Because the sellers are part of a larger group of companies in
the shipping business associated with members of the Restis
family, the sellers (other than the owners of the two newly
built vessels) obtained, together with other affiliated
companies as co-borrowers, a syndicated loan in the amount of
$500,000,000 on December 24, 2004. The loan is allocated to
each of the sellers (other than the owners of the two newly
built vessels), among other affiliates of Lincoln Finance Corp.,
an affiliate of the sellers, based upon the acquisition cost of
each vessel at the date of acquisition. The syndicated loan is
payable in variable principal installments plus interest at
variable rates (LIBOR plus a spread of 0.875%) with an original
balloon installment due in March 2015 of $45,500,000 (which as
of June 30, 2008 was $23,702,000). This debt was secured by
a mortgage on each of the vessels, assignments of earnings,
insurance and requisition compensation of the mortgaged vessel
and is guaranteed by Lincoln Finance Corp. and Nouvelle
Enterprises S.A., which is the sole shareholder of Lincoln. The
sellers that own the second hand vessels used the syndicated
loan to finance some or all of the acquisition costs of their
respective vessels. As of June 30, 2008, December 31,
2007 and 2006, the long-term debt of the sellers represented the
allocated amount of the remaining balance of the syndicated loan
after taking into account vessel sales. The long-term debt
applicable to the sellers as of June 30, 2008,
December 31, 2007 and 2006 was $60,884,000, $48,330,000 and
$49,774,000, respectively. We have not assumed any portion of
this loan, and the sellers delivered the four vessels to us free
and clear of all liens and encumbrances.
On December 24, 2004, certain of the sellers entered into
memoranda of agreement with third parties pursuant to which they
agreed to purchase the African Oryx f/k/a the M.V. Gangga
Nagara, the African Zebra f/k/a the M.V. Handy Tiger, the Bremen
Max f/k/a the M.V. Bunga Saga Satu and the Hamburg Max f/k/a the
Bunga Saga Empat for a purchase price of $20.5 million,
$14.0 million, $29.0 million and $32.0 million,
respectively. The African Oryx, the African Zebra, the Bremen
Max and the Hamburg Max were delivered to the respective sellers
on April 4, 2005, January 3, 2005, January 26,
2005 and April 1, 2005, respectively.
On June 23, 2006, the sellers that own the two newly built
vessels and a third vessel-owning company that is not one of the
sellers, entered into a loan facility of up to $20,160,000 and a
guarantee of up to $28,800,000 each to be used to partly finance
and guarantee payment to the shipyard for the newly constructed
vessels. The loan bears interest at variable rates (LIBOR plus a
spread of 0.65%) and was repayable in full at the earlier of
May 18, 2009 or the date the newly constructed vessels are
delivered by the shipyard. This loan
79
has been paid in full. We have not assumed any portion of this
loan and the sellers delivered the two newly constructed vessels
to us free and clear of all liens and encumbrances.
The sellers financed the purchase price of the vessels as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel
|
|
Financed(1)
|
|
|
Cash(2)
|
|
|
Africa Oryx
|
|
$
|
13,851,850
|
|
|
$
|
6,648,150
|
|
Africa Zebra
|
|
$
|
9,459,800
|
|
|
$
|
4,540,200
|
|
Bremen Max
|
|
$
|
19,595,300
|
|
|
$
|
9,404,700
|
|
Hamburg Max
|
|
$
|
21,622,400
|
|
|
$
|
10,377,600
|
|
Davakis G (ex. Hull No. KA 215)
|
|
$
|
16,674,000
|
|
|
$
|
7,146,000
|
|
Delos Ranger (ex. Hull No. KA 216)
|
|
$
|
16,674,000
|
|
|
$
|
7,146,000
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Financed with the credit facilities described above. |
|
(2) |
|
Cash provided to the sellers by their shareholders. |
The dry bulk carriers the sellers owned had an average age of
10.5 years as of June 30, 2008. For financial
statement purposes, the sellers used an estimated remaining
useful life as June 30, 2008 of between 3 and 16 years
for its vessels other than the newly constructed vessels, which
vessels life it estimated as 25 years. However, economics,
rather than a set number of years, determines the actual useful
life of a vessel. As a vessel ages, the maintenance costs rise
particularly with respect to the cost of surveys. So long as the
revenue generated by the vessel sufficiently exceeds its
maintenance costs, the vessel will remain in use, which time
period could well exceed the useful life estimate described
above. If the revenue generated or expected future revenue does
not sufficiently exceed the maintenance costs, or if the
maintenance costs exceed the revenue generated or expected
future revenue, then the vessel owner usually sells the vessel
for scrap.
Cash
Flows
Operating Activities Net cash from operating
activities totaled $17,993,000 during the six months ended
June 30, 2008, as compared to $4,094,000 during the
comparable period in 2007. This increase reflected is primarily
due to increased revenue as a result of improved time charter
rates and higher operating days. Net cash from operating
activities totaled $25,577,000 during fiscal 2007, as compared
to $19,161,000 during fiscal 2006. This increase reflected
primarily the increase in vessel revenues received in 2007. The
decrease in net cash from operating activities from fiscal 2006
as compared to fiscal 2005, during which net cash from operating
activities totaled $26,169,000, resulted primarily from a slight
decrease in charter revenue during 2006 and the repayment of
amounts due to related parties in 2006.
Investing Activities The sellers used
$21,499,000 of cash in investing activities during the six month
period ended June 30, 2008 as compared to $5,534,000 used
in investing activities during the comparable period in 2007.
The increase was primarily a result of amounts paid under the
vessel construction contracts for the two newly constructed
vessels during the first six months of 2008, one of which was
delivered and put into operation in May 2008. The sellers used
$13,531,000 of cash in investing activities during fiscal 2007
as compared to $6,474,000 used in investing activities during
fiscal 2006. The increase was primarily a result of amounts paid
under the vessel construction contracts for the newly
constructed vessels in fiscal 2007. The sellers used $86,711,000
of cash in investing activities during fiscal 2005, which
related primarily to the purchase of four vessels.
Financing Activities Net cash provided by
financing activities during the six months ended June 30,
2008 was $7,646,000, which includes $12,812,000 of dividend
payments to the shareholders of sellers and $9,081,000 of
repayments of long term debt, offset by $7,904,000 of capital
contributions and $21,635,000 of proceeds from long term debt
used to finance vessel acquisitions. Net cash used in financing
activities during fiscal 2007 was $13,471,000, which includes
$15,932,000 of dividend payments to the shareholders of the
sellers and $9,844,000 of repayments of long term debt,
partially offset by capital contributions from the sellers
shareholders of $3,905,000 and proceeds from long-term debt of
$8,400,000. Net cash used in financing activities in fiscal 2006
was $11,248,000, which primarily reflects $11,838,000 of
dividend payments
80
to the shareholders of the sellers and $7,573,000 of repayments
of long term debt, partially offset by capital contributions
from the sellers shareholders of $8,163,000. Net cash
provided by financing activities in fiscal 2005 was $60,549,000,
which primarily reflects proceeds of borrowings of $55,070,000
used by the sellers to acquire four vessels and capital
contributions from the sellers shareholders of
$15,980,000, which was partially offset by $3,319,000 of
dividend payments to the shareholders of the sellers and
repayment of long-term debt of $7,182,000.
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures of Market Risk
Interest
rate risk
The sellers long-term debt in relation to the four vessels
and the new buildings bears an interest rate of LIBOR plus a
spread of 0.875% and 0.65%, respectively. A 100 basis-point
increase in LIBOR would result in an increase to the finance
cost of $483,000 in the next year. The sellers have no further
obligation, with respect to their long-term debt, in relation to
the six vessels it sold to Seanergy in August and September 2008.
Foreign
exchange risk
The sellers generated revenue in U.S. dollars and incurred
minimal expenditures relating to consumables in foreign
currencies. The foreign currency risk was minimal.
Inflation
The sellers did not consider inflation to be a significant risk
to direct expenses in the current and foreseeable future.
Capital
Requirements
On May 20, 2008 and August 22, 2008, the Davakis G
(Hull No. KA 215) and the Delos Ranger
(ex. Hull No. KA 216), respectively, were
delivered to the sellers. As of June 30, 2008, the capital
commitment was approximately $11.8 million. The sellers did
not anticipate any other capital expenditures during the year
ended December 31, 2008 as these vessels had been sold to
Seanergy on August 28, 2008.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
As of December 31, 2007 and June 30, 2008, the sellers
did not have off-balance sheet arrangements.
Contractual
Obligations and Commercial Commitments
The following tables summarize the sellers contractual
obligations as of December 31, 2007 and June 30, 2008.
The sellers neither have capital leases nor operating leases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More Than
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
1-2 Years
|
|
|
2-5 Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
Long-term debt(1)
|
|
|
48,330
|
|
|
|
9,750
|
|
|
|
4,724
|
|
|
|
14,171
|
|
|
|
19,685
|
|
Management fees(2)
|
|
|
3,317
|
|
|
|
973
|
|
|
|
1,172
|
|
|
|
1,172
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital commitments for vessel construction
|
|
|
30,840
|
|
|
|
30,840
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total obligations
|
|
|
82,487
|
|
|
|
41,563
|
|
|
|
5,896
|
|
|
|
15,343
|
|
|
|
19,685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More Than
|
|
June 30, 2008
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
1-2 Years
|
|
|
2-5 Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
Long-term debt(1)
|
|
|
60,884
|
|
|
|
12,364
|
|
|
|
5,643
|
|
|
|
16,931
|
|
|
|
25,946
|
|
Management fees(2)
|
|
|
2,901
|
|
|
|
1,143
|
|
|
|
1,172
|
|
|
|
586
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital commitment for vessel construction
|
|
|
11,820
|
|
|
|
11,820
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total obligations
|
|
|
75,605
|
|
|
|
25,327
|
|
|
|
6,815
|
|
|
|
17,517
|
|
|
|
25,946
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The long-term debt has been repaid or reallocated as of the
dates the vessels were delivered to Seanergy in August and
September 2008. |
|
(2) |
|
EST provides management services in exchange for a fixed fee per
day for each vessel in operation. These agreements are entered
into with an initial three-year term until terminated by the
other party. The amounts indicated above are based on a
management fee of $535 dollars per day per vessel. This
management fee agreement has been terminated as of the dates the
vessels were delivered to Seanergy in August and September 2008. |
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
A number of new standards, amendments to standards and
interpretations were not yet effective for the year ended
December 31, 2007 or the six months ended June 30,
2008, and have not been applied in preparing the sellers
combined financial statements:
(i) IFRS 8 Operating Segments introduces the
management approach to segment reporting. IFRS 8,
which becomes mandatory for the financial statements of 2009,
will require the disclosure of segment information based on the
internal reports regularly reviewed by the sellers Chief
Operating Decision Maker in order to assess each segments
performance and to allocate resources to them. The sellers are
evaluating the impact of this standard on the combined financial
statements.
(ii) Revised IAS 23 Borrowing Costs removes the option to
expense borrowing costs and requires that an entity capitalize
borrowing costs directly attributable to the acquisition,
construction or production of a qualifying asset as part of the
cost of that asset. Currently, the sellers capitalize borrowing
costs directly attributable to the construction of the vessels
and therefore the revised IAS 23 which will become mandatory for
the sellers 2009 financial statements is not expected to
have a significant effect.
(iii) IFRIC 11 IFRS 2 Group and Treasury Share Transactions
requires a share-based payment arrangement in which an entity
receives goods or services as consideration for its own equity
instruments to be accounted for as an equity-settled share-based
payment transaction, regardless of how the equity instruments
are obtained. IFRIC 11 will become mandatory for the
sellers 2008 financial statements, with retrospective
application required. This standard does not have an effect on
the combined financial statements as it is not relevant to the
sellers operations.
(iv) IFRIC 12 Service Concession Arrangements provides
guidance on certain recognition and measurement issues that
arise in accounting for public-to-private service concession
arrangements. IFRIC 12, which becomes mandatory for the
sellers 2008 financial statements. IFRIC 12 does not have
an effect on the combined financial statements as it is not
relevant to the sellers operations.
(v) IFRIC 13 Customer Loyalty Programs addresses the
accounting by entities that operate, or otherwise participate
in, customer loyalty programs for their customers. It relates to
customer loyalty programs under which the customer can redeem
credits for awards such as free or discounted goods or services.
IFRIC 13, which becomes mandatory for the sellers 2009
financial statements, is not expected to have any impact on the
combined financial statements.
82
(vi) IFRIC 14 IAS 19 The Limit on a Defined Benefit Asset,
Minimum Funding Requirements and their Interaction clarifies
when refunds or reductions in future contributions in relation
to defined benefit assets should be regarded as available and
provides guidance on the impact of minimum funding requirements
(MFR) on such assets. It also addresses when a MFR might give
rise to a liability. IFRIC 14 will become mandatory for the
sellers 2008 financial statements, with retrospective
application required. IFRIC 14 does not have an effect on the
combined financial statements as it is not relevant to the
sellers operations.
(vii) Revision to IAS 1, Presentation of Financial
Statements: The revised standard is effective for annual periods
beginning on or after January 1, 2009. The revision to IAS
1 is aimed at improving users ability to analyze and
compare the information given in financial statements. The
changes made are to require information in financial statements
to be aggregated on the basis of shared characteristics and to
introduce a statement of comprehensive income. This will enable
readers to analyze changes in equity resulting from transactions
with owners in their capacity as owners (such as dividends and
share repurchases) separately from non-owner changes
(such as transactions with third parties). In response to
comments received through the consultation process, the revised
standard gives preparers of financial statements the option of
presenting items of income and expense and components of other
comprehensive income either in a single statement of
comprehensive income with sub-totals, or in two separate
statements (a separate income statement followed by a statement
of comprehensive income). Management is currently assessing the
impact of this revision on the sellers financial
statements.
(viii) Revision to IFRS 3 Business Combinations and an
amended version of IAS 27 Consolidated and Separate Financial
Statements: These versions were issued by IASB on
January 10, 2008, which take effect on July 1, 2009.
The main changes to the existing standards include:
(i) minority interests (now called noncontrolling
interests) are measured either as their proportionate interest
in the net identifiable assets (the existing IFRS 3 requirement)
or at fair value; (ii) for step acquisitions, goodwill is
measured as the difference at acquisition date between the fair
value of any investment in the business held before the
acquisition, the consideration transferred and the net assets
acquired (therefore there is no longer the requirement to
measure assets and liabilities at fair value at each step to
calculate a portion of goodwill); (iii) acquisition-related
costs are generally recognized as expenses (rather than included
in goodwill); (iv) contingent consideration must be
recognized and measured at fair value at acquisition date with
any subsequent changes in fair value recognized usually in the
profit or loss (rather than by adjusting goodwill) and (v)
transactions with noncontrolling interests which do not result
in loss of control are accounted for as equity transactions.
Management is currently assessing the impact that these
revisions will have on the sellers.
(ix) Revision to IFRS 2 Share-based Payment: The
revision is effective for annual periods on or after
January 1, 2009 and provides clarification for the
definition of vesting conditions and the accounting treatment of
cancellations. It clarifies that vesting conditions are service
conditions and performance conditions only. Other features of a
share-based payment are not vesting conditions. It also
specifies that all cancellations, whether by the entity or other
parties, should receive the same accounting treatment. The
sellers do not expect this standard to affect its combined
financial statements as currently there are no share-based
payment plans.
83
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR BET
The following managements discussion and analysis should
be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial
statements and accompanying notes prepared in accordance with
International Financial Reporting Standards as issued by the
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB),
included elsewhere in this prospectus, of BET. This discussion
relates to the operations and financial condition of BET
including its wholly owned subsidiaries prior to the time we
acquired a 50% interest in BET. We control BET through our right
to appoint a majority of the BET board of directors. Although,
BET charters the vessels it owns and earns revenue from charter
hire, as it did prior to the time we purchased a controlling
interest in BET, we have chartered some of the vessels to
different charterers on different terms than existed prior to
our acquisition of a controlling interest in BET. The
pre-acquisition expense structure of BET was also different from
ours, as BET, which was a joint venture between Constellation
and an affiliate of the Restis family, did not employ any
executive officers or staff except crew on board each of its
vessels. Certain vessel-related fees, such as management fees,
will also vary from the amount that was previously paid by BET.
As a result, BETs financial statements and this discussion
may not be indicative of what our historical results of
operations would have been for the comparable periods had we
owned a 50% interest in BET at that time. In addition,
BETs results of operations and financial condition may not
be indicative of what our results of operations and financial
condition might be in the future.
This discussion contains forward-looking statements that reflect
our current views with respect to future events and financial
performance. Our actual results may differ materially from those
anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of
various factors, such as those set forth in the section entitled
Risk Factors and elsewhere in this prospectus.
General
BET is a provider of worldwide ocean transportation services
through the ownership of five dry bulk carriers. BET was
incorporated in December 2006 under the laws of the Republic of
the Marshall Islands, as a joint venture between Constellation
and Mineral Transport.
The operations of BETs vessels were managed by EST, which
is an affiliate of members of the Restis family and which
manages our other vessels. Following our acquisition of a 50%
interest in BET, EST is continuing to manage BETs vessels
pursuant to a management agreement. EST provides BET with a wide
range of shipping services. These services include, at a daily
fee per vessel (payable monthly), the required technical
management, such as managing day-to-day vessel operations
including supervising the crewing, supplying, maintaining and
dry-docking of the vessels. Constellation Energy Commodities
Group Limited, a company affiliated with Constellation, provided
commercial brokerage services to BET and earned fees in
connection with the charter of the vessels prior to our
acquisition of an interest in BET. Following our acquisition of
a 50% interest in BET, Safbulk Maritime is providing these
services to BET pursuant to a brokerage agreement.
The following table details the vessels owned by BET:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel Name
|
|
Dwt
|
|
|
Vessel Type
|
|
|
Built
|
|
|
Date of Delivery
|
|
BET Commander
|
|
|
149,507
|
|
|
|
Capesize
|
|
|
|
1991
|
|
|
December 17, 2007
|
BET Scouter
|
|
|
171,175
|
|
|
|
Capesize
|
|
|
|
1995
|
|
|
July 23, 2007
|
BET Fighter
|
|
|
173,149
|
|
|
|
Capesize
|
|
|
|
1992
|
|
|
August 29, 2007
|
BET Intruder
|
|
|
69,235
|
|
|
|
Panamax
|
|
|
|
1993
|
|
|
March 20, 2008
|
BET Prince
|
|
|
163,554
|
|
|
|
Capesize
|
|
|
|
1995
|
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
84
Important
Measures for Analyzing BETs Results of
Operations
BET believes that the important non-GAAP/non-IFRS measures and
definitions for analyzing its results of operations consist of
the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Ownership days. Ownership days are the total
number of calendar days in a period during which BET owned each
vessel in its fleet. Ownership days are an indicator of the size
of the fleet over a period and affect both the amount of
revenues and the amount of expenses recorded during that period.
|
|
|
|
Available days. Available days are the number
of ownership days less the aggregate number of days that a
companys vessels are off-hire due to major repairs,
dry-dockings or special or intermediate surveys. The shipping
industry uses available days to measure the number of ownership
days in a period during which vessels should be capable of
generating revenues.
|
|
|
|
Operating days. Operating days are the number
of available days in a period less the aggregate number of days
that vessels are off-hire due to any reason, including
unforeseen circumstances. The shipping industry uses operating
days to measure the aggregate number of days in a period during
which vessels actually generate revenues.
|
|
|
|
Fleet utilization. Fleet utilization is
determined by dividing the number of operating days during a
period by the number of ownership days during that period. The
shipping industry uses fleet utilization to measure a
companys efficiency in finding suitable employment for its
vessels and minimizing the amount of days that its vessels are
off-hire for any reason excluding scheduled repairs, vessel
upgrades, dry-dockings or special or intermediate surveys.
|
|
|
|
Off-hire. The period a vessel is unable to
perform the services for which it is required under a charter.
|
|
|
|
Time charter. A time charter is a contract for
the use of a vessel for a specific period of time during which
the charterer pays substantially all of the voyage expenses,
including port costs, canal charges and fuel expenses. The
vessel owner pays the vessel operating expenses, which include
crew wages, insurance, technical maintenance costs, spares,
stores and supplies and commissions on gross voyage revenues.
Time charter rates are usually fixed during the term of the
charter. Prevailing time charter rates do fluctuate on a
seasonal and year-to-year basis and may be substantially higher
or lower from a prior time charter agreement when the subject
vessel is seeking to renew the time charter agreement with the
existing charterer or enter into a new time charter agreement
with another charterer. Fluctuations in time charter rates are
influenced by changes in spot charter rates.
|
|
|
|
TCE. Time charter equivalent or TCE rates are
defined as our time charter revenues less voyage expenses during
a period divided by the number of our operating days during the
period, which is consistent with industry standards. Voyage
expenses include port charges, bunker (fuel oil and diesel oil)
expenses, canal charges and commissions.
|
Revenues
BETs revenues were driven primarily by the number of
vessels it operated, the number of operating days during which
its vessels generated revenues, and the amount of daily charter
hire that its vessels earned under charters. These, in turn,
were affected by a number of factors, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
The nature and duration of BETs charters;
|
|
|
|
The amount of time that BETs spent repositioning its
vessels;
|
|
|
|
The amount of time that BETs vessels spent in dry-dock
undergoing repairs;
|
|
|
|
Maintenance and upgrade work;
|
|
|
|
The age, condition and specifications of BETs vessels;
|
|
|
|
The levels of supply and demand in the dry bulk carrier
transportation market; and
|
|
|
|
Other factors affecting charter rates for dry bulk carriers
under voyage charters.
|
85
A voyage charter is generally a contract to carry a specific
cargo from a load port to a discharge port for an
agreed-upon
total amount. Under voyage charters, voyage expenses such as
port, canal and fuel costs are paid by the vessel owner. A time
charter trip and a period time charter or period charter are
generally contracts to charter a vessel for a fixed period of
time at a set daily rate. Under time charters, the charterer
pays voyage expenses. Under both types of charters, the vessel
owners pay for vessel operating expenses, which include crew
costs, provisions, deck and engine stores, lubricating oil,
insurance, maintenance and repairs. The vessel owners are also
responsible for each vessels dry-docking and intermediate
and special survey costs.
Vessels operating on period time charters provide more
predictable cash flows, but can yield lower profit margins than
vessels operating in the spot charter market for single trips
during periods characterized by favorable market conditions.
Vessels operating in the spot charter market generate revenues
that are less predictable, but can yield increased profit
margins during periods of improvements in dry bulk rates. Spot
charters also expose vessel owners to the risk of declining dry
bulk rates and rising fuel costs. BETs vessels were
chartered on spot and period time charters during the six months
ended June 30, 2009, and during fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2007.
A standard maritime industry performance measure is the
time charter equivalent or TCE. TCE
revenues are voyage revenues minus voyage expenses divided by
the number of operating days during the relevant time period.
Voyage expenses primarily consist of port, canal and fuel costs
that are unique to a particular voyage and that would otherwise
be paid by a charterer under a time charter. Some companies in
our industry believe that the daily TCE neutralizes the
variability created by unique costs associated with particular
voyages or the employment of dry bulk carriers on time charter
or on the spot market and presents a more accurate
representation of the revenues generated by dry bulk carriers.
BETs average TCE rates for 2008 and 2007 were $32,604 and
$13,622, respectively.
Vessel
Operating Expenses
Vessel operating expenses include management fees, crew wages
and related costs, the cost of insurance, expenses relating to
repairs and maintenance, the costs of spares and consumable
stores, tonnage taxes and other miscellaneous expenses. Vessel
operating expenses generally represent costs of a fixed nature.
Some of these expenses are required, such as insurance costs and
the cost of spares.
Depreciation
During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007 and the
six months ended June 30, 2009, BET depreciated its vessels
on a straight-line basis over their then remaining useful lives
after considering the residual value of the vessels. The
residual value for the six months ended June 30, 2009 and
for fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2007 was $500 per light weight
tonnage. The estimated useful lives as of June 30, 2009
were 25 years, based on an industry-wide accepted estimated
useful life of 25 years from the original build dates of
the vessels, for financial statement purposes. BETs total
costs associated with dry-docking and special surveys were
deferred and amortized on a straight-line basis over a period of
between two to five years.
Seasonality
Coal, iron ore and grains, which are the major bulks of the dry
bulk shipping industry, are somewhat seasonal in nature. The
energy markets primarily affect the demand for coal, with
increases during hot summer periods when air conditioning and
refrigeration require more electricity and towards the end of
the calendar year in anticipation of the forthcoming winter
period. The demand for iron ore tends to decline in the summer
months because many of the major steel users, such as automobile
makers, reduce their level of production significantly during
the summer holidays. Grains are completely seasonal as they are
driven by the harvest within a climate zone. Because three of
the five largest grain producers (the United States of America,
Canada and the European Union) are located in the northern
hemisphere and the other two (Argentina and Australia) are
located in the southern hemisphere, harvests occur throughout
the year and grains require dry bulk shipping accordingly.
86
Principal
Factors Affecting BETs Business
The principal factors that affected BETs financial
position, results of operations and cash flows included the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
Number of vessels owned and operated;
|
|
|
|
Charter market rates and periods of charter hire;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel operating expenses and voyage costs, which were incurred
in both U.S. dollars and other currencies, primarily Euros;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of dry-docking and special surveys;
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expenses, which were a function of the cost, any
significant post-acquisition improvements, estimated useful
lives and estimated residual scrap values of sellers
vessels;
|
|
|
|
Financing costs related to indebtedness associated with the
vessels;
|
|
|
|
Fluctuations in foreign exchange rates; and
|
|
|
|
Impairment losses on vessels.
|
Performance
Indicators
BET believes that the unaudited information provided below is
important for measuring trends in its results of operations. The
figures shown below are statistical ratios/non-GAAP/non-IFRS
financial measures and definitions used by management to measure
performance of the vessels. They are not included in financial
statements prepared under IFRS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Fleet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of vessels(1)
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
Ownership days(2)
|
|
|
905
|
|
|
|
1,937
|
|
|
|
397
|
|
Available days(3)
|
|
|
905
|
|
|
|
1,937
|
|
|
|
397
|
|
Operating days(4))
|
|
|
892
|
|
|
|
1,811
|
|
|
|
392
|
|
Fleet utilization(5)
|
|
|
98.6
|
%
|
|
|
93.5
|
%
|
|
|
98.71
|
%
|
Average Daily Results:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average TCE rate(6)
|
|
|
16,768
|
|
|
|
32,604
|
|
|
|
13,622
|
|
Vessel operating expenses(7)
|
|
|
5,997
|
|
|
|
6,196
|
|
|
|
7,091
|
|
Management fees(8)
|
|
|
799
|
|
|
|
1,002
|
|
|
|
1,111
|
|
Total vessel operating expenses
|
|
|
6,796
|
|
|
|
7,198
|
|
|
|
8,202
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Average number of vessels is the number of vessels that
constituted BETs fleet for the relevant period, as
measured by the sum of the number of days each vessel was a part
of BETs fleet during the relevant period divided by the
number of calendar days in the relevant period. |
|
(2) |
|
Ownership days are the total number of days in a period during
which the vessels in a fleet have been owned. Ownership days are
an indicator of the size of BETs fleet over a period and
affect both the amount of revenues and the amount of expenses
that BET recorded during a period. |
|
(3) |
|
Available days are the number of ownership days less the
aggregate number of days that vessels are
off-hire due
to major repairs, dry-dockings or special or intermediate
surveys. The shipping industry uses available days to measure
the number of ownership days in a period during which vessels
should be capable of generating revenues. |
87
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Operating days are the number of available days in a period less
the aggregate number of days that vessels are off-hire due to
any reason, including unforeseen circumstances. The shipping
industry uses operating days to measure the aggregate number of
days in a period during which vessels actually generate revenues. |
|
(5) |
|
Fleet utilization is the percentage of time that BETs
vessels were generating revenue, and is determined by dividing
operating days by ownership days for the relevant period. |
|
(6) |
|
Time charter equivalent, or TCE, rates are defined as the time
charter revenues less voyage expenses during a period divided by
the number of our operating days during the period, which is
consistent with industry standards. Voyage expenses include port
charges, bunker (fuel oil and diesel oil) expenses, canal
charges and commissions. |
|
|
|
The following table is unaudited and includes information that
is extracted directly from the financial statements, as well as
other information used by BET for monitoring performance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ended
|
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands except per diem amounts)
|
|
|
Vessel revenues
|
|
|
17,481
|
|
|
|
61,027
|
|
|
|
5,362
|
|
Voyage expenses
|
|
|
2,524
|
|
|
|
1,981
|
|
|
|