e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2010
Commission file
number: 0-51582
Hercules Offshore,
Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
56-2542838
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
9 Greenway Plaza, Suite 2200
Houston, Texas
(Address of principal
executive offices)
|
|
77046
(Zip
Code)
|
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(713) 350-5100
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share
|
|
NASDAQ Global Select Market
|
Rights to Purchase Preferred Stock
|
|
NASDAQ Global Select Market
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T
during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such
files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated
filer o
|
Accelerated
filer þ
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
|
Smaller
reporting
company o
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the registrants common stock
held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2010, based on the
closing price on the NASDAQ Global Select Market on such date,
was approximately $270 million. (As of such date, the
registrants directors and executive officers and LR
Hercules Holdings, LP and its affiliates were considered
affiliates of the registrant for this purpose.)
As of March 3, 2011, there were 115,032,964 shares of
the registrants common stock, par value $0.01 per share,
outstanding.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the registrants definitive proxy statement for
the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 10,
2011 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this
report.
PART I
In this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
we refer to Hercules Offshore, Inc. and its subsidiaries as
we, the Company or Hercules
Offshore, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.
Hercules Offshore, Inc. is a Delaware corporation formed in July
2004, with its principal executive offices located at 9 Greenway
Plaza, Suite 2200, Houston, Texas 77046. Hercules
Offshores telephone number at such address is
(713) 350-5100
and our Internet address is www.herculesoffshore.com.
Overview
Hercules Offshore, Inc. is a leading provider of shallow-water
drilling and marine services to the oil and natural gas
exploration and production industry globally. We provide these
services to national oil and gas companies, major integrated
energy companies and independent oil and natural gas operators.
As of February 16, 2011, we owned a fleet of 30 jackup
rigs, 17 barge rigs, three submersible rigs, one platform rig, a
fleet of marine support vessels and 60 liftboat vessels. In
addition, we operate five liftboat vessels owned by a third
party. We own two retired jackup rigs, Hercules 190 and
Hercules 254, located in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico,
for which we have an agreement to sell and we expect to close in
the first quarter of 2011. Our diverse fleet is capable of
providing services such as oil and gas exploration and
development drilling, well service, platform inspection,
maintenance and decommissioning operations in several key
shallow water provinces around the world.
We report our business activities in six business segments,
which as of February 16, 2011, included the following:
Domestic Offshore includes 22 jackup rigs and
three submersible rigs in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico that can
drill in maximum water depths ranging from 85 to 350 feet.
Ten of the jackup rigs are either working on short-term
contracts or available for contracts, one is in the shipyard and
eleven are cold-stacked. All three submersibles are cold-stacked.
International Offshore includes eight jackup
rigs and one platform rig outside of the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico. We have two jackup rigs working offshore in each of
India and Saudi Arabia. We have one jackup rig contracted
offshore in Malaysia, one jackup rig contracted in Angola and
one platform rig under contract in Mexico. In addition, we have
one jackup rig warm-stacked and one jackup rig cold-stacked in
Bahrain.
Inland includes a fleet of six conventional
and eleven posted barge rigs that operate inland in marshes,
rivers, lakes and shallow bay or coastal waterways along the
U.S. Gulf Coast. Three of our inland barges are either
operating on short-term contracts or available and fourteen are
cold-stacked.
Domestic Liftboats includes 41 liftboats in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Thirty-eight are operating or
available for contracts and three are cold-stacked.
International Liftboats includes 24
liftboats. Twenty-one are operating or available for contracts
offshore West Africa, including five liftboats owned by a third
party, one is cold-stacked offshore West Africa and two are
operating or available for contracts in the Middle East region.
Delta Towing our Delta Towing business
operates a fleet of 29 inland tugs, 10 offshore tugs, 34 crew
boats, 46 deck barges, 16 shale barges and five spud barges
along and in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and from time to time
along the Southeastern coast and in Mexico. Of these vessels, 26
crew boats, 11 inland tugs, three offshore tugs, one deck barge
and one spud barge are cold-stacked, and the remaining are
working, being repaired or available for contracts.
In December 2009, we entered into an agreement with First Energy
Bank B.S.C. (MENAdrill) whereby we would market,
manage and operate two Friede & Goldman Super M2
design new-build jackup drilling rigs, Hull 109 and
Hull 110 (also known as MENAdrill Hercules 1 and
2, respectively), each with a maximum water depth of
300 feet. We
received a notice of termination from MENAdrill with respect to
Hull 109 in December 2010, and MENAdrill paid us a
termination fee of $250,000 due under the contract on the date
of
3
termination. It is our understanding that Hull 110
has independently secured a contract in Mexico and we therefore,
expect to receive an additional termination fee of $250,000.
In January 2011, we entered into an agreement with China
Oilfield Services Limited (COSL) whereby we will
market and operate a Friede & Goldman JU2000E jackup
drilling rig with a maximum water depth of 400 feet. The
agreement is limited to a specified opportunity in Angola.
Investment
In January 2011, we paid $10 million to purchase
5.0 million shares, an investment in approximately eight
percent of the total outstanding equity of a new entity
incorporated in Luxembourg, Discovery Offshore S.A.
(Discovery Offshore), which investment was used by
Discovery Offshore towards funding the down payments on two
new-build ultra high specification harsh environment jackup
drilling rigs (the Rigs). We also executed a
construction management agreement (the Construction
Management Agreement) and a services agreement (the
Services Agreement) with Discovery Offshore with
respect to each of the Rigs (See Part II, Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations Recent
Developments).
Asset
Purchase Agreement
In February 2011, we entered into an asset purchase agreement
(the Asset Purchase Agreement) with Seahawk
Drilling, Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries
(Seahawk), pursuant to which Seahawk agreed to sell
to us 20 jackup rigs and related assets, accounts
receivable and cash and certain Seahawk liabilities for total
consideration of approximately $105 million (the
Consideration), as valued at the date of the Asset
Purchase Agreement, preliminarily consisting of
$25.0 million in cash plus 22.3 million shares of our
common stock, par value $0.01 per share (the Stock
Consideration), subject to adjustment (See Part II,
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Recent Developments).
Credit
Agreement Amendment
In March 2011, we amended our Credit Agreement for our term loan
and revolving credit facility (See the information set forth
under the caption Cash Requirements and Contractual
Obligations in Part II, Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations Liquidity and Capital
Resources).
Our
Fleet
Our jackup rigs, submersible rigs and barge rigs are used
primarily for exploration and development drilling in shallow
waters. Under most of our contracts, we are paid a fixed daily
rental rate called a dayrate, and we are required to
pay all costs associated with our own crews as well as the
upkeep and insurance of the rig and equipment. Dayrate drilling
contracts typically provide for higher rates while the unit is
operating and lower rates or a lump sum payment for periods of
mobilization or when operations are interrupted or restricted by
equipment breakdowns, adverse weather conditions or other
factors.
Our liftboats are self-propelled, self-elevating vessels with a
large open deck space, which provides a versatile, mobile and
stable platform to support a broad range of offshore maintenance
and construction services throughout the life of an oil or
natural gas well. A liftboat contract generally is based on a
flat dayrate for the vessel and crew. Our liftboat dayrates are
determined by prevailing market rates, vessel availability and
historical rates paid by the specific customer. Under most of
our liftboat contracts, we receive a variable rate for
reimbursement of costs such as catering, fuel, oil, rental
equipment, crane overtime and other items. Liftboat contracts
generally are for shorter terms than are drilling contracts,
although international liftboat contracts may have terms of
greater than one year.
4
Jackup
Drilling Rigs
Jackup rigs are mobile, self-elevating drilling platforms
equipped with legs that can be lowered to the ocean floor until
a foundation is established to support the drilling platform.
Once a foundation is established, the drilling platform is
jacked further up the legs so that the platform is above the
highest expected waves. The rig hull includes the drilling rig,
jackup system, crew quarters, loading and unloading facilities,
storage areas for bulk and liquid materials, helicopter landing
deck and other related equipment.
Jackup rig legs may operate independently or have a lower hull
referred to as a mat attached to the lower portion
of the legs in order to provide a more stable foundation in soft
bottom areas, similar to those encountered in certain of the
shallow-water areas of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico or
U.S. GOM. Mat-supported rigs generally are able
to more quickly position themselves on the worksite and more
easily move on and off location than independent leg rigs.
Twenty-one of our jackup rigs are mat-supported and nine are
independent leg rigs.
Twenty-three of our rigs have a cantilever design that permits
the drilling platform to be extended out from the hull to
perform drilling or workover operations over some types of
pre-existing platforms or structures. Seven rigs have a
slot-type design, which requires drilling operations to take
place through a slot in the hull. Slot-type rigs are usually
used for exploratory drilling rather than development drilling,
in that their configuration makes them difficult to position
over existing platforms or structures. Historically, jackup rigs
with a cantilever design have maintained higher levels of
utilization than rigs with a slot-type design.
5
As of February 16, 2011, 14 of our jackup rigs were
operating under contracts ranging in duration from
well-to-well
to three years, at an average contract dayrate of approximately
$71,643. In the following table, ILS means an
independent leg slot-type jackup rig, MC means a
mat-supported cantilevered jackup rig, ILC means an
independent leg cantilevered jackup rig and MS means
a mat-supported slot-type jackup rig.
The following table contains information regarding our jackup
rig fleet as of February 16, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Minimum
|
|
Rated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Built/
|
|
Water Depth
|
|
Drilling
|
|
|
|
|
Rig Name
|
|
Type
|
|
Upgraded(c)
|
|
Rating
|
|
Depth(a)
|
|
Location
|
|
Status(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Feet)
|
|
(Feet)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hercules 85
|
|
ILS
|
|
1982
|
|
|
85/9
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 101
|
|
MC
|
|
1980
|
|
|
100/20
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 120
|
|
MC
|
|
1958
|
|
|
120/22
|
|
|
18,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 150
|
|
ILC
|
|
1979
|
|
|
150/10
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 152
|
|
MC
|
|
1980
|
|
|
150/22
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 153
|
|
MC
|
|
1980/2007
|
|
|
150/22
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 156
|
|
ILC
|
|
1983
|
|
|
150/14
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
Bahrain
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 170
|
|
ILC
|
|
1981/2006
|
|
|
170/16
|
|
|
16,000
|
|
Bahrain
|
|
Warm Stacked
|
Hercules 173
|
|
MC
|
|
1971
|
|
|
173/22
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 185
|
|
ILC
|
|
1982/2009
|
|
|
150/20
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
Angola
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 200
|
|
MC
|
|
1979
|
|
|
200/23
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 201
|
|
MC
|
|
1981
|
|
|
200/23
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Ready Stacked
|
Hercules 202
|
|
MC
|
|
1981
|
|
|
200/23
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 203
|
|
MC
|
|
1982
|
|
|
200/23
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 204
|
|
MC
|
|
1981
|
|
|
200/23
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Shipyard
|
Hercules 205
|
|
MC
|
|
1979/2003
|
|
|
200/23
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 206
|
|
MC
|
|
1980/2003
|
|
|
200/23
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 207
|
|
MC
|
|
1981
|
|
|
200/23
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 208(d)
|
|
MC
|
|
1980/2008
|
|
|
200/22
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
Malaysia
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 211
|
|
MC
|
|
1980
|
|
|
200/23
|
|
|
18,000(e)
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 250
|
|
MS
|
|
1974
|
|
|
250/24
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 251
|
|
MS
|
|
1978
|
|
|
250/24
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Ready Stacked
|
Hercules 252
|
|
MS
|
|
1978
|
|
|
250/24
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 253
|
|
MS
|
|
1982
|
|
|
250/24
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 257
|
|
MS
|
|
1979
|
|
|
250/24
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 258
|
|
MS
|
|
1979/2008
|
|
|
250/24
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
India
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 260
|
|
ILC
|
|
1979/2008
|
|
|
250/12
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
India
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 261
|
|
ILC
|
|
1979/2008
|
|
|
250/12
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
Saudi Arabia
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 262
|
|
ILC
|
|
1982/2008
|
|
|
250/12
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
Saudi Arabia
|
|
Contracted
|
Hercules 350
|
|
ILC
|
|
1982
|
|
|
350/16
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Rated drilling depth means drilling depth stated by the
manufacturer of the rig. Depending on deck space and other
factors, a rig may not have the actual capacity to drill at the
rated drilling depth. |
|
(b) |
|
Rigs designated as Contracted are under contract
while rigs described as Ready Stacked are not under
contract but generally are ready for service. Rigs described as
Warm Stacked may have a reduced number of crew, but
only require a full crew to be ready for service. Rigs described
as Cold Stacked are not actively marketed, normally
require the hiring of an entire crew and require a maintenance
review and refurbishment before they can function as a drilling
rig. |
|
(c) |
|
Dates shown are the original date the rig was built and the date
of the most recent upgrade and/or major refurbishment, if any. |
|
(d) |
|
This rig is currently unable to operate in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico due to regulatory restrictions. |
|
(e) |
|
Rated workover depth. Hercules 211 is currently
configured for workover activity, which includes maintenance and
repair or modification of wells that have already been drilled
and completed to enhance or resume the wells production. |
6
Other
Drilling Rigs
A submersible rig is a mobile drilling platform that is towed to
the well site where it is submerged by flooding its lower hull
tanks until it rests on the sea floor, with the upper hull above
the water surface. After completion of the drilling operation,
the rig is refloated by pumping the water out of the lower hull,
so that it can be towed to another location. Submersible rigs
typically operate in water depths of 14 to 85 feet. Our
three submersible rigs are upgradeable for deep gas drilling.
A platform drilling rig is placed on a production platform and
is similar to a modular land rig. The production platforms
crane is capable of lifting the modularized rig crane that
subsequently sets the rig modules. The assembled rig has all the
drilling, housing and support facilities necessary for drilling
multiple production wells. Most platform drilling rig contracts
are for multiple wells and extended periods of time on the same
platform. Once work has been completed on a particular platform,
the rig can be redeployed to another platform for further work.
We have one platform drilling rig.
In the following table, Sub means a submersible rig
and Plat means a platform drilling rig. The
following table contains information regarding our other
drilling rig fleet as of February 16, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Minimum
|
|
Rated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Built/
|
|
Water Depth
|
|
Drilling
|
|
|
|
|
Rig Name
|
|
Type
|
|
Upgraded(c)
|
|
Rating
|
|
Depth(a)
|
|
Location
|
|
Status(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Feet)
|
|
(Feet)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hercules 75
|
|
|
Sub
|
|
|
1983
|
|
|
85/14
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 77
|
|
|
Sub
|
|
|
1982/2007
|
|
|
85/14
|
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Hercules 78
|
|
|
Sub
|
|
|
1985/2007
|
|
|
85/14
|
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
Platform 3
|
|
|
Plat
|
|
|
1993
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
Mexico
|
|
Contracted
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Rated drilling depth means drilling depth stated by the
manufacturer of the rig. Depending on deck space and other
factors, a rig may not have the actual capacity to drill at the
rated drilling depth. |
|
(b) |
|
Rigs described as Cold Stacked are not actively
marketed, normally require the hiring of an entire crew and
require a maintenance review and refurbishment before they can
function as a drilling rig while rigs described as
Contracted are under contract. |
|
(c) |
|
Dates shown are the original date the rig was built and the date
of the most recent upgrade and/or major refurbishment, if any. |
Barge
Drilling Rigs
Barge drilling rigs are mobile drilling platforms that are
submersible and are built to work in seven to 20 feet of
water. They are towed by tugboats to the drill site with the
derrick lying down. The lower hull is then submerged by flooding
compartments until it rests on the river or sea floor. The
derrick is then raised and drilling operations are conducted
with the barge resting on the bottom. Our barge drilling fleet
consists of 17 conventional and posted barge rigs. A posted
barge is identical to a conventional barge except that the hull
and superstructure are separated by 10 to 14 foot columns, which
increases the water depth capabilities of the rig. Several of
our barge drilling rigs are upgradeable for deep gas drilling.
7
The following table contains information regarding our barge
drilling rig fleet as of February 16, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Built/
|
|
Horsepower
|
|
Rated Drilling
|
|
|
|
|
Rig Name
|
|
Type
|
|
Upgraded(c)
|
|
Rating
|
|
Depth(a)
|
|
Location
|
|
Status(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Feet)
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Conv.
|
|
1980
|
|
2,000
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
9
|
|
Posted
|
|
1981
|
|
2,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
11
|
|
Conv.
|
|
1982
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
15
|
|
Conv.
|
|
1981
|
|
2,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
17
|
|
Posted
|
|
1981
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Ready Stacked
|
19
|
|
Conv.
|
|
1974
|
|
1,000
|
|
14,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
27
|
|
Posted
|
|
1979/2008
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
28
|
|
Conv.
|
|
1980
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
29
|
|
Conv.
|
|
1981
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
41
|
|
Posted
|
|
1981
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
46
|
|
Posted
|
|
1979
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
48
|
|
Posted
|
|
1982
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
49
|
|
Posted
|
|
1980
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Contracted
|
52
|
|
Posted
|
|
1981
|
|
2,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
55
|
|
Posted
|
|
1981
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
57
|
|
Posted
|
|
1975
|
|
2,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
64
|
|
Posted
|
|
1979
|
|
3,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
Cold Stacked
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Rated drilling depth means drilling depth stated by the
manufacturer of the rig. Depending on deck space and other
factors, a rig may not have the actual capacity to drill at the
rated drilling depth. |
|
(b) |
|
Rigs designated as Contracted are under contract.
Rigs described as Ready Stacked are not under
contract but generally are ready for service. Rigs described as
Cold Stacked are not actively marketed, normally
require the hiring of an entire crew and require a maintenance
review and refurbishment before they can function as a drilling
rig. |
|
(c) |
|
Dates shown are the original date the rig was built and the date
of the most recent upgrade and/or major refurbishment, if any. |
Liftboats
Unlike larger and more costly alternatives, such as jackup rigs
or construction barges, our liftboats are self-propelled and can
quickly reposition at a worksite or move to another location
without third-party assistance. Once a liftboat is in position,
typically adjacent to an offshore production platform or well,
third-party service providers perform:
|
|
|
|
|
production platform construction, inspection, maintenance and
removal;
|
|
|
|
well intervention and workover;
|
|
|
|
well plug and abandonment; and
|
|
|
|
pipeline installation and maintenance.
|
Our liftboats are ideal working platforms to support platform
and pipeline inspection and maintenance tasks because of their
ability to maneuver efficiently and support multiple activities
at different working heights. Diving operations may also be
performed from our liftboats in connection with underwater
inspections and repair. In addition, our liftboats provide an
effective platform from which to perform well-servicing
activities such as mechanical wireline, electrical wireline and
coiled tubing operations. Technological advances, such as coiled
tubing, allow more well-servicing procedures to be conducted
from liftboats. Moreover, during both platform construction and
removal, smaller platform components can be installed and
8
removed more efficiently and at a lower cost using a liftboat
crane and liftboat-based personnel than with a specialized
construction barge or jackup rig.
The length of the legs is the principal measure of capability
for a liftboat, as it determines the maximum water depth in
which the liftboat can operate. Our liftboats in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico range in leg lengths up to
229 feet, which allows us to service approximately 83% of
the approximately 3,500 existing production platforms in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Liftboats are typically moved to a
port during severe weather to avoid the winds and waves they
would be exposed to in open water.
As of February 16, 2011, we owned 41 liftboats operating in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, 17 liftboats operating in West
Africa, and two liftboats operating in the Middle East. In
addition, we operated five liftboats owned by a third party in
West Africa. The following table contains information regarding
the liftboats we operate as of February 16, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Built/
|
|
Leg
|
|
Deck
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
Liftboat Name(1)
|
|
Upgraded(5)
|
|
Length
|
|
Area
|
|
|
Deck Load
|
|
Location
|
|
Tonnage
|
|
|
|
|
(Feet)
|
|
(Square feet)
|
|
|
(Pounds)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whale Shark(4)
|
|
2005/2009
|
|
260
|
|
|
8,170
|
|
|
729,000
|
|
U.A.E.
|
|
|
1,142
|
|
Tiger Shark(3)
|
|
2001
|
|
230
|
|
|
5,300
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
469
|
|
Kingfish(3)
|
|
1996
|
|
229
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
500,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
188
|
|
Man-O-War(3)
|
|
1996
|
|
229
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
500,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
188
|
|
Wahoo(3)
|
|
1981
|
|
215
|
|
|
4,525
|
|
|
500,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
491
|
|
Blue Shark(4)
|
|
1981
|
|
215
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
|
400,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
1,182
|
|
Amberjack(4)
|
|
1981
|
|
205
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
|
500,000
|
|
U.A.E.
|
|
|
417
|
|
Bullshark(3)
|
|
1998
|
|
200
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
859
|
|
Creole Fish(3)
|
|
2001
|
|
200
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
798,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
192
|
|
Cutlassfish(3)
|
|
2006
|
|
200
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
798,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
183
|
|
Black Jack(4)
|
|
1997/2008
|
|
200
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
480,000
|
|
En route to Gabon
|
|
|
777
|
|
Swordfish(3)
|
|
2000
|
|
190
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
700,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
189
|
|
Mako(3)
|
|
2003
|
|
175
|
|
|
5,074
|
|
|
654,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
168
|
|
Leatherjack(3)
|
|
1998
|
|
175
|
|
|
3,215
|
|
|
575,850
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
168
|
|
Oilfish(4)
|
|
1996
|
|
170
|
|
|
3,200
|
|
|
590,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
495
|
|
Manta Ray(3)
|
|
1981
|
|
150
|
|
|
2,400
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
194
|
|
Seabass(3)
|
|
1983
|
|
150
|
|
|
2,600
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
186
|
|
F.J. Leleux(2)
|
|
1981
|
|
150
|
|
|
2,600
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
407
|
|
Black Marlin(4)
|
|
1984
|
|
150
|
|
|
2,600
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
407
|
|
Hammerhead(3)
|
|
1980
|
|
145
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
178
|
|
Pilotfish(4)
|
|
1990
|
|
145
|
|
|
2,400
|
|
|
175,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
292
|
|
Rudderfish(4)
|
|
1991
|
|
145
|
|
|
3,000
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
309
|
|
Blue Runner(3)
|
|
1980
|
|
140
|
|
|
3,400
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
174
|
|
Starfish(3)
|
|
1978
|
|
140
|
|
|
2,266
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
99
|
|
Rainbow Runner(3)
|
|
1981
|
|
140
|
|
|
3,400
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
174
|
|
Pompano(3)
|
|
1981
|
|
130
|
|
|
1,864
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
196
|
|
Sandshark(3)
|
|
1982
|
|
130
|
|
|
1,940
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
196
|
|
Stingray(3)
|
|
1979
|
|
130
|
|
|
2,266
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
99
|
|
Albacore(3)
|
|
1985
|
|
130
|
|
|
1,764
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
171
|
|
Moray(3)
|
|
1980
|
|
130
|
|
|
1,824
|
|
|
130,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
178
|
|
Skipfish(3)
|
|
1985
|
|
130
|
|
|
1,116
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
91
|
|
Sailfish(3)
|
|
1982
|
|
130
|
|
|
1,764
|
|
|
137,500
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
179
|
|
Mahi Mahi(3)
|
|
1980
|
|
130
|
|
|
1,710
|
|
|
142,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
99
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Built/
|
|
Leg
|
|
Deck
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
Liftboat Name(1)
|
|
Upgraded(5)
|
|
Length
|
|
Area
|
|
|
Deck Load
|
|
Location
|
|
Tonnage
|
|
|
|
|
(Feet)
|
|
(Square feet)
|
|
|
(Pounds)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Triggerfish(3)
|
|
2001
|
|
130
|
|
|
2,400
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
195
|
|
Scamp(4)
|
|
1984
|
|
130
|
|
|
2,400
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
195
|
|
Rockfish(3)
|
|
1981
|
|
125
|
|
|
1,728
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
192
|
|
Gar(3)
|
|
1978
|
|
120
|
|
|
2,100
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
98
|
|
Grouper(3)
|
|
1979
|
|
120
|
|
|
2,100
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
97
|
|
Sea Robin(3)
|
|
1984
|
|
120
|
|
|
1,507
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
98
|
|
Tilapia(3)
|
|
1976
|
|
120
|
|
|
1,280
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
97
|
|
Charlie Cobb(2)
|
|
1980
|
|
120
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
229
|
|
Durwood Speed(2)
|
|
1979
|
|
120
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
210
|
|
James Choat(2)
|
|
1980
|
|
120
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
210
|
|
Solefish(4)
|
|
1978
|
|
120
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
229
|
|
Tigerfish(4)
|
|
1980
|
|
120
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
210
|
|
Zoal Albrecht(2)
|
|
1982
|
|
120
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
213
|
|
Barracuda(3)
|
|
1979
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
93
|
|
Carp(3)
|
|
1978
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
98
|
|
Cobia(3)
|
|
1978
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
94
|
|
Dolphin(3)
|
|
1980
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
97
|
|
Herring(3)
|
|
1979
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
97
|
|
Marlin(3)
|
|
1979
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
97
|
|
Corina(3)
|
|
1974
|
|
105
|
|
|
953
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
98
|
|
Pike(3)
|
|
1980
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,360
|
|
|
130,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
92
|
|
Remora(3)
|
|
1976
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,179
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
94
|
|
Wolffish(3)
|
|
1977
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,044
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
99
|
|
Seabream(3)
|
|
1980
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,140
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
92
|
|
Sea Trout(3)
|
|
1978
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,500
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
97
|
|
Tarpon(3)
|
|
1979
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
97
|
|
Palometa(3)
|
|
1972
|
|
105
|
|
|
780
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
99
|
|
Jackfish(3)
|
|
1978
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,648
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
U.S. GOM
|
|
|
99
|
|
Bonefish(4)
|
|
1978
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,344
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
97
|
|
Croaker(4)
|
|
1976
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,344
|
|
|
72,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
82
|
|
Gemfish(4)
|
|
1978
|
|
105
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
100,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
223
|
|
Tapertail(4)
|
|
1979
|
|
105
|
|
|
1,392
|
|
|
110,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The Palometa, Wolffish, Skipfish and Croaker are
currently cold-stacked. All other liftboats are either available
or operating. |
|
(2) |
|
We operate these vessels; however, they are owned by a third
party. |
|
(3) |
|
Pursuant to U.S. Coast Guard documentation, international
regulatory bodies or
non-U.S.
Flag states may calculate gross tonnage differently than the
U.S. Coast Guard. |
|
(4) |
|
Pursuant to the registry documents issued by the Republic of
Panama. |
|
(5) |
|
Dates shown are the original date the vessel was built and the
date of the most recent upgrade and/or major refurbishment, if
any. |
10
Competition
The shallow-water businesses in which we operate are highly
competitive. Domestic drilling and liftboat contracts are
traditionally short term in nature, whereas international
drilling and liftboat contracts are longer term in nature. The
contracts are typically awarded on a competitive bid basis.
Pricing is often the primary factor in determining which
qualified contractor is awarded a job, although technical
capability of service and equipment, unit availability, unit
location, safety record and crew quality may also be considered.
Certain of our competitors in the shallow-water business may
have greater financial and other resources than we have, which
may better enable them to withstand periods of low utilization,
compete more effectively on the basis of price, build new rigs,
acquire existing rigs, and make technological improvements to
existing equipment or replace equipment that becomes obsolete.
Competition for offshore rigs is usually on a global basis, as
drilling rigs are highly mobile and may be moved, at a cost that
is sometimes substantial, from one region to another in response
to demand. However, our mat-supported jackup rigs are less
capable than independent leg jackup rigs of managing variable
sea floor conditions found in most areas outside the Gulf of
Mexico. As a result, our ability to move our mat-supported
jackup rigs to certain regions in response to changes in market
conditions is limited. Additionally, a number of our competitors
have independent leg jackup rigs with generally higher
specifications and capabilities than the independent leg rigs
that we currently operate in the Gulf of Mexico. Particularly
during market downturns when there is decreased rig demand,
higher specification rigs may be more likely to obtain contracts
than lower specification rigs.
Customers
Our customers primarily include major integrated energy
companies, independent oil and natural gas operators and
national oil companies. Sales to customers exceeding
10 percent or more of our total revenue are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited(a)
|
|
|
20
|
%
|
|
|
16
|
%
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
Chevron Corporation(b)
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Saudi Aramco(a)
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
PEMEX Exploración y Producción (PEMEX)(a)
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Revenue included in our International Offshore segment. |
|
(b) |
|
Revenue included in our Domestic Offshore, Domestic Liftboats
and International Liftboats segments. |
Contracts
Our contracts to provide services are individually negotiated
and vary in their terms and provisions. Currently, all of our
drilling contracts are on a dayrate basis. Dayrate drilling
contracts typically provide for payment on a dayrate basis, with
higher rates while the unit is operating and lower rates or a
lump sum payment for periods of mobilization or when operations
are interrupted or restricted by equipment breakdowns, adverse
weather conditions or other factors.
A dayrate drilling contract generally extends over a period of
time covering the drilling of a single well or group of wells or
covering a stated term. These contracts typically can be
terminated by the customer under various circumstances such as
the loss or destruction of the drilling unit or the suspension
of drilling operations for a specified period of time as a
result of a breakdown of major equipment or due to events beyond
the control of either party. In addition, customers in some
instances have the right to terminate our contracts with little
or no prior notice, and without penalty or early termination
payments. The contract term in some instances may be extended by
the customers exercising options for the drilling of additional
wells or for an additional term, or by exercising a right of
first refusal. To date, most of our contracts in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico have been on a short-term basis of less
than six months. Our contracts in international locations have
been longer-term, with contract terms of up to three years. For
contracts over six months in term we may
11
have the right to pass through certain cost escalations. Our
customers may have the right to terminate, or may seek to
renegotiate, existing contracts if we experience downtime or
operational problems above a contractual limit, if the rig is a
total loss, or in other specified circumstances. A customer is
more likely to seek to cancel or renegotiate its contract during
periods of depressed market conditions. We could be required to
pay penalties if some of our contracts with our customers are
canceled due to downtime or operational problems. Suspension of
drilling contracts results in the reduction in or loss of
dayrates for the period of the suspension.
A liftboat contract generally is based on a flat dayrate for the
vessel and crew. Our liftboat dayrates are determined by
prevailing market rates, vessel availability and historical
rates paid by the specific customer. Under most of our liftboat
contracts, we receive a variable rate for reimbursement of costs
such as catering, fuel, oil, rental equipment, crane overtime
and other items. Liftboat contracts generally are for shorter
terms than are drilling contracts.
On larger contracts, particularly outside the United States, we
may be required to arrange for the issuance of a variety of bank
guarantees, performance bonds or letters of credit. The issuance
of such guarantees may be a condition of the bidding process
imposed by our customers for work outside the United States. The
customer would have the right to call on the guarantee, bond or
letter of credit in the event we default in the performance of
the services. The guarantees, bonds and letters of credit would
typically expire after we complete the services.
Contract
Backlog
We calculate our backlog, or future contracted revenue, as the
contract dayrate multiplied by the number of days remaining on
the contract, assuming full utilization. Backlog excludes
revenue for mobilization, demobilization, contract preparation
and customer reimbursables. The amount of actual revenue earned
and the actual periods during which revenue is earned will be
different than the backlog disclosed or expected due to various
factors. Downtime due to various operational factors, including
unscheduled repairs, maintenance, weather and other factors
(some of which are beyond our control), may result in lower
dayrates than the full contractual operating dayrate. In some of
the contracts, our customer has the right to terminate the
contract without penalty and in certain instances, with little
or no notice. The following table reflects the amount of our
contract backlog by year as of February 16, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
$
|
29,081
|
|
|
$
|
29,081
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
International Offshore
|
|
|
167,554
|
|
|
|
121,646
|
|
|
|
21,737
|
|
|
|
21,677
|
|
|
|
2,494
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inland
|
|
|
914
|
|
|
|
914
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Liftboats
|
|
|
14,566
|
|
|
|
14,566
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
212,115
|
|
|
$
|
166,207
|
|
|
$
|
21,737
|
|
|
$
|
21,677
|
|
|
$
|
2,494
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employees
As of December 31, 2010, we had approximately
2,200 employees. We require skilled personnel to operate
and provide technical services and support for our rigs, barges
and liftboats. As a result, we conduct extensive personnel
training and safety programs.
Certain of our employees in West Africa are working under
collective bargaining agreements. Additionally, efforts have
been made from time to time to unionize portions of the offshore
workforce in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and Mexico. We believe
that our employee relations are good.
Insurance
We maintain insurance coverage that includes coverage for
physical damage, third party liability, workers
compensation and employers liability, general liability,
vessel pollution and other coverages.
12
Our primary marine package provides for hull and machinery
coverage for substantially all of our rigs and liftboats up to a
scheduled value of each asset. The total maximum amount of
coverage for these assets is $2.1 billion. The marine
package includes protection and indemnity and maritime
employers liability coverage for marine crew personal
injury and death and certain operational liabilities, with
primary coverage (or self-insured retention for maritime
employers liability coverage) of $5.0 million per
occurrence with excess liability coverage up to
$200.0 million. The marine package policy also includes
coverage for personal injury and death of third-parties with
primary and excess coverage of $25 million per occurrence
with additional excess liability coverage up to
$200 million, subject to a $250,000 per-occurrence
deductible. The marine package also provides coverage for cargo
and charterers legal liability. The marine package
includes limitations for coverage for losses caused in
U.S. Gulf of Mexico named windstorms, including an annual
aggregate limit of liability of $100.0 million for property
damage and removal of wreck liability coverage. We also procured
an additional $75.0 million excess policy for removal of
wreck and certain third-party liabilities incurred in
U.S. Gulf of Mexico named windstorms. Deductibles for
events that are not caused by a U.S. Gulf of Mexico named
windstorm are 12.5% of the insured drilling rig values per
occurrence, subject to a minimum of $1.0 million, and
$1.0 million per occurrence for liftboats. The deductible
for drilling rigs and liftboats in a U.S. Gulf of Mexico
named windstorm event is $25.0 million. Vessel pollution is
covered under a Water Quality Insurance Syndicate policy
(WQIS Policy) providing limits as required by
applicable law, including the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. The
WQIS Policy covers pollution emanating from our vessels and
drilling rigs, with primary limits of $5 million (inclusive
of a $3.0 million per-occurrence deductible) and excess
liability coverage up to $200 million.
Control-of-well
events generally include an unintended flow from the well that
cannot be contained by equipment on site (e.g., a blow-out
preventer), by increasing the weight of the drilling fluid or
that does not naturally close itself off through what is
typically described as bridging over. We carry a
contractors extra expense policy with $50 million
primary covering liability for well control costs, expenses
incurred to redrill wild or lost wells and pollution, with
excess liability coverage up to $200 million for pollution
liability that is covered in the primary policy. The policies
are subject to exclusions, limitations, deductibles,
self-insured retention and other conditions. In addition to the
marine package, we have separate policies providing coverage for
onshore foreign and domestic general liability, employers
liability, auto liability and non-owned aircraft liability, with
customary deductibles and coverage as well as a separate
underlying marine package for our Delta Towing business. Our
policy related to all but our Delta Towing business, which we
renew annually, expires in April 2011. Our policy related to our
Delta Towing business, which we also renew annually, expires in
August 2011.
Our drilling contracts provide for varying levels of
indemnification from our customers and in most cases, may
require us to indemnify our customers for certain liabilities.
Under our drilling contracts, liability with respect to
personnel and property is customarily assigned on a
knock-for-knock
basis, which means that we and our customers assume liability
for our respective personnel and property, regardless of how the
loss or damage to the personnel and property may be caused. Our
customers typically assume responsibility for and agree to
indemnify us from any loss or liability resulting from pollution
or contamination, including
clean-up and
removal and third-party damages arising from operations under
the contract and originating below the surface of the water,
including as a result of blow-outs or cratering of the well. We
generally indemnify the customer for the consequences of spills
of industrial waste or other liquids originating solely above
the surface of the water and emanating from our rigs or vessels.
Regulation
Our operations are affected in varying degrees by governmental
laws and regulations. Our industry is dependent on demand for
services from the oil and natural gas industry and, accordingly,
is also affected by changing tax and other laws relating to the
energy business generally. In the United States, we are also
subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Coast Guard, the
National Transportation Safety Board, the U.S. Customs and
Border Protection Service, the Department of Interior and the
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement
(BOEMRE), as well as private industry organizations
such as the American Bureau of Shipping. The Coast Guard and the
National Transportation Safety Board set safety standards and
13
are authorized to investigate vessel accidents and recommend
improved safety standards, and the U.S. Customs Service is
authorized to inspect vessels at will. Coast Guard regulations
also require annual inspections and periodic drydock inspections
or special examinations of our vessels.
The shorelines and shallow water areas of the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico are ecologically sensitive. Heightened environmental
concerns in these areas have led to higher drilling costs and a
more difficult and lengthy well permitting process and, in
general, have adversely affected drilling decisions of oil and
natural gas companies. In the United States, regulations
applicable to our operations include regulations that require us
to obtain and maintain specified permits or governmental
approvals, control the discharge of materials into the
environment, require removal and cleanup of materials that may
harm the environment or otherwise relate to the protection of
the environment. For example, as an operator of mobile offshore
units in navigable U.S. waters and some offshore areas, we
may be liable for damages and costs incurred in connection with
oil spills or other unauthorized discharges of chemicals or
wastes resulting from or related to those operations. Laws and
regulations protecting the environment have become more
stringent and may in some cases impose strict liability,
rendering a person liable for environmental damage without
regard to negligence or fault on the part of such person. Some
of these laws and regulations may expose us to liability for the
conduct of or conditions caused by others or for acts which were
in compliance with all applicable laws at the time they were
performed. The application of these requirements or the adoption
of new or more stringent requirements could have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition and results of
operations.
The U.S. Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972,
commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act, prohibits the
discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters of the United
States without a permit. The regulations implementing the Clean
Water Act require permits to be obtained by an operator before
specified exploration activities occur. Offshore facilities must
also prepare plans addressing spill prevention control and
countermeasures. Historically, the discharge of ballast water
and other substances incidental to the normal operation of
vessels visiting U.S. ports was exempted from the Clean
Water Act permitting requirements. Challenges arising largely
out of foreign invasive species contained in discharges of
ballast water resulted in a 2006 court order that vacated, as of
September 30, 2008, an exemption from Clean Water Act
discharge permit requirements for discharges incidental to
normal operation of a vessel. The district court later delayed
the vacation until February 6, 2009. Pursuant to the
courts ruling and recent legislation, the EPA adopted a
Vessel General Permit that became effective on December 19,
2008. The regulated community was required to comply with the
terms of the Vessel General Permit as of February 6, 2009.
We have obtained the necessary Vessel General Permit for all of
our vessels to which this regulation applies. In addition to
this federal development, some states have begun regulating
ballast water discharges. Violations of monitoring, reporting
and permitting requirements can result in the imposition of
civil and criminal penalties. We have incurred and will continue
to incur certain costs associated with the requirements under
the Vessel General Permit and other requirements that may be
adopted. However, we believe that any financial impacts
resulting from the imposition of the permitting exemption and
the implementation of federal and possible state regulation of
ballast water discharges will not be material.
The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) and
related regulations impose a variety of requirements on
responsible parties related to the prevention of oil
spills and liability for damages resulting from such spills. Few
defenses exist to the liability imposed by OPA, and the
liability could be substantial. Failure to comply with ongoing
requirements or inadequate cooperation in the event of a spill
could subject a responsible party to civil or criminal
enforcement action. OPA also requires owners and operators of
all vessels over 300 gross tons to establish and maintain
with the U.S. Coast Guard evidence of financial
responsibility sufficient to meet their potential liabilities
under OPA. The 2006 amendments to OPA require evidence of
financial responsibility for a vessel over 300 gross tons
in the amount that is the greater of $950 per gross ton or
$800,000. Under OPA, an owner or operator of a fleet of vessels
is required only to demonstrate evidence of financial
responsibility in an amount sufficient to cover the vessel in
the fleet having the greatest maximum liability under OPA.
Vessel owners and operators may evidence their financial
responsibility by showing proof of insurance, surety bond,
self-insurance or guarantee. We have obtained the necessary OPA
financial assurance certifications for each of our vessels
subject to such requirements. Amendments to OPA are currently
being
14
considered by Congress that would, if enacted, increase
liability of responsible parties and the limits on liability
relating to oil spill and pollution events.
The U.S. Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act authorizes
regulations relating to safety and environmental protection
applicable to lessees and permittees operating on the outer
continental shelf. Included among these are regulations that
require the preparation of spill contingency plans and establish
air quality standards for certain pollutants, including
particulate matter, volatile organic compounds, sulfur dioxide,
carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides. Specific design and
operational standards may apply to outer continental shelf
vessels, rigs, platforms, vehicles and structures. Violations of
lease conditions or regulations related to the environment
issued pursuant to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act can
result in substantial civil and criminal penalties, as well as
potential court injunctions curtailing operations and canceling
leases. Such enforcement liabilities can result from either
governmental or citizen prosecution.
The U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, also known as CERCLA or the
Superfund law, imposes liability without regard to
fault or the legality of the original conduct on some classes of
persons that are considered to have contributed to the release
of a hazardous substance into the environment. These
persons include the owner or operator of a facility where a
release occurred, the owner or operator of a vessel from which
there is a release, and companies that disposed or arranged for
the disposal of the hazardous substances found at a particular
site. Persons who are or were responsible for releases of
hazardous substances under CERCLA may be subject to joint and
several liability for the cost of cleaning up the hazardous
substances that have been released into the environment and for
damages to natural resources. Prior owners and operators are
also subject to liability under CERCLA. It is also not uncommon
for third parties to file claims for personal injury and
property damage allegedly caused by the hazardous substances
released into the environment.
In recent years, a variety of initiatives intended to enhance
vessel security were adopted to address terrorism risks,
including the U.S. Coast Guard regulations implementing the
Maritime Transportation and Security Act of 2002. These
regulations required, among other things, the development of
vessel security plans and on-board installation of automatic
information systems, or AIS, to enhance
vessel-to-vessel
and
vessel-to-shore
communications. We believe that our vessels are in substantial
compliance with all vessel security regulations.
Some operations are conducted in the U.S. domestic trade,
which is governed by the coastwise laws of the United States.
The U.S. coastwise laws reserve marine transportation,
including liftboat services, between points in the United States
to vessels built in and documented under the laws of the United
States and owned and manned by U.S. citizens. Generally, an
entity is deemed a U.S. citizen for these purposes so
long as:
|
|
|
|
|
it is organized under the laws of the United States or a state;
|
|
|
|
each of its president or other chief executive officer and the
chairman of its board of directors is a U.S. citizen;
|
|
|
|
no more than a minority of the number of its directors necessary
to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business are
non-U.S. citizens; and
|
|
|
|
at least 75% of the interest and voting power in the corporation
is held by U.S. citizens free of any trust, fiduciary
arrangement or other agreement, arrangement or understanding
whereby voting power may be exercised directly or indirectly by
non-U.S. citizens.
|
Because we could lose our privilege of operating our liftboats
in the U.S. coastwise trade if
non-U.S. citizens
were to own or control in excess of 25% of our outstanding
interests, our certificate of incorporation restricts foreign
ownership and control of our common stock to not more than 20%
of our outstanding interests. One of our liftboats relies on an
exemption from coastwise laws in order to operate in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico. If this liftboat were to lose this
exemption, we would be unable to use it in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico and would be forced to seek opportunities for it in
international locations.
The United States is one of approximately 165 member countries
to the International Maritime Organization (IMO), a
specialized agency of the United Nations that is responsible for
developing measures
15
to improve the safety and security of international shipping and
to prevent marine pollution from ships. Among the various
international conventions negotiated by the IMO is the
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from
Ships (MARPOL). MARPOL imposes environmental
standards on the shipping industry relating to oil spills,
management of garbage, the handling and disposal of noxious
liquids, harmful substances in packaged forms, sewage and air
emissions.
Annex VI to MARPOL sets limits on sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen oxide emissions from ship exhausts and prohibits
deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances.
Annex VI also imposes a global cap on the sulfur content of
fuel oil and allows for specialized areas to be established
internationally with more stringent controls on sulfur
emissions. For vessels 400 gross tons and greater,
platforms and drilling rigs, Annex VI imposes various
survey and certification requirements. For this purpose, gross
tonnage is based on the International Tonnage Certificate for
the vessel, which may vary from the standard U.S. gross
tonnage for the vessel reflected in our liftboat table
previously. The United States has not yet ratified
Annex VI. Any vessels we operate internationally are,
however, subject to the requirements of Annex VI in those
countries that have implemented its provisions. We believe the
rigs we currently offer for international projects are generally
exempt from the more costly compliance requirements of
Annex VI and the liftboats we currently offer for
international projects are generally exempt from or otherwise
substantially comply with those requirements. Accordingly, we do
not anticipate incurring significant costs to comply with
Annex VI in the near term. If the United States does elect
to ratify Annex VI in the future, we could be required to
incur potentially significant costs to bring certain of our
vessels into compliance with these requirements.
In response to the Macondo well blowout incident in April 2010,
the Department of Interior, through the BOEMRE, has undertaken
an aggressive overhaul of the offshore oil and natural gas
regulatory process that has significantly impacted oil and gas
development in the United States Gulf of Mexico (the
GOM). From time to time, new rules, regulations and
requirements have been proposed and implemented by the BOEMRE
and the United States Congress that materially limit or
prohibit, and increase the cost of, offshore drilling in the
GOM. These new rules, regulations and requirements include the
moratorium on shallow-water drilling that was lifted in May
2010, but which has resulted in a significant delay in permits
being issued in the GOM, the adoption of new safety requirements
and policies relating to the approval of drilling permits in the
GOM, restrictions on oil and gas development and production
activities in the GOM, and the promulgation of numerous Notices
to Lessees (NTLs) that have impacted and may
continue to impact our operations. In addition to these
newly-implemented rules, regulations and requirements, the
federal government is considering new legislation that could
impose additional equipment and safety requirements on operators
and drilling contractors in the GOM, as well as regulations
relating to the protection of the environment, all of which
could materially adversely affect our financial condition and
results of operations.
Our
non-U.S. operations
are subject to other laws and regulations in countries in which
we operate, including laws and regulations relating to the
importation of and operation of rigs and liftboats, currency
conversions and repatriation, oil and natural gas exploration
and development, environmental protection, taxation of offshore
earnings and earnings of expatriate personnel, the use of local
employees and suppliers by foreign contractors and duties on the
importation and exportation of rigs, liftboats and other
equipment. Governments in some foreign countries have become
increasingly active in regulating and controlling the ownership
of concessions and companies holding concessions, the
exploration for oil and natural gas and other aspects of the oil
and natural gas industries in their countries. In some areas of
the world, this governmental activity has adversely affected the
amount of exploration and development work done by major oil and
natural gas companies and may continue to do so. Operations in
less developed countries can be subject to legal systems that
are not as mature or predictable as those in more developed
countries, which can lead to greater uncertainty in legal
matters and proceedings.
Although significant capital expenditures may be required to
comply with these governmental laws and regulations, such
compliance has not materially adversely affected our earnings or
competitive position. We believe that we are currently in
compliance in all material respects with the environmental
regulations to which we are subject.
16
Available
Information
General information about us, including our corporate governance
policies, can be found on our Internet website at
www.herculesoffshore.com. On our website we make
available, free of charge, our annual reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K,
and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically
file or furnish them to the SEC. These filings also are
available at the SECs Internet website at
www.sec.gov. Information contained on our website is not
part of this annual report.
Segment
and Geographic Information
Information with respect to revenue, operating income and total
assets attributable to our segments and revenue and long-lived
assets by geographic areas of operations is presented in
Note 17 of our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
included in Item 8 of this annual report. Additional
information about our segments, as well as information with
respect to the impact of seasonal weather patterns on domestic
operations, is presented in Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations in Item 7 of this annual report.
New
and proposed laws, regulations and requirements arising out of
the Macondo well blowout incident could prevent or cause delays
for our customers in obtaining approval to conduct drilling
operations and lead to increased potential liability and costs
for us and our customers, which could adversely impact our
operations and profitability in the United States Gulf of
Mexico.
In response to the Macondo well blowout incident in the United
States Gulf of Mexico in April 2010, the U.S. federal
government has promulgated new laws, regulations and
requirements that impose additional safety and environmental
requirements on offshore drilling companies and oil and gas
companies operating in the United States Gulf of Mexico. We have
significant operations that are either ongoing or scheduled to
commence in the Gulf of Mexico. The requirements set forth in
these new laws, regulations and requirements may continue to
delay our operations and cause us to incur additional expenses
in order for our rigs and operations in the Gulf of Mexico to be
compliant with the new laws, regulations and requirements. These
new laws, regulations and requirements and other potential
changes in laws and regulations applicable to the offshore
drilling industry in the Gulf of Mexico may also continue to
prevent our customers from obtaining new drilling permits and
approvals in a timely manner, if at all, which could adversely
impact our revenue and profitability.
In addition to the recently implemented laws, regulations and
requirements, the federal government is considering additional
new laws, regulations and requirements, including those that
impose additional equipment requirements and that relate to the
protection of the environment, which would be applicable to the
offshore drilling industry in the Gulf of Mexico. The
implementation of some of the currently proposed laws and
regulations could lead to substantially increased potential
liability and operating costs for us and our customers, which
could cause our customers to discontinue or delay operating in
the Gulf of Mexico
and/or
redeploy capital to international locations. These actions, if
taken by any of our customers, could result in underutilization
of our Gulf of Mexico assets and have an adverse impact on our
revenue, profitability and financial position. The regulatory
and legal environment in the Gulf of Mexico remains uncertain
and is currently in a state of flux. Accordingly, we cannot
predict at this time the impact that any potential changes in
laws and regulations relating to offshore oil and gas
exploration and development activity in the United States Gulf
of Mexico may have on our operations or contracts, the extent to
which the issuance of drilling permits will continue to be
delayed, the effect on the cost or availability of insurance, or
the impact on our customers and the demand for our services in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Future legislation or regulations
may impose new equipment and environmental requirements on us
and our customers that could delay or hinder our operations and
those of our customers in the United States Gulf of Mexico,
which could likewise have an adverse impact on our business and
financial results.
17
Our
business depends on the level of activity in the oil and natural
gas industry, which is significantly affected by volatile oil
and natural gas prices.
Our business depends on the level of activity of oil and natural
gas exploration, development and production in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico and internationally, and in particular,
the level of exploration, development and production
expenditures of our customers. Demand for our drilling services
is adversely affected by declines associated with depressed oil
and natural gas prices. Even the perceived risk of a decline in
oil or natural gas prices often causes oil and gas companies to
reduce spending on exploration, development and production.
Reductions in capital expenditures of our customers reduce rig
utilization and day rates. In particular, changes in the price
of natural gas materially affect our operations because drilling
in the shallow-water U.S. Gulf of Mexico is primarily
focused on developing and producing natural gas reserves.
However, higher prices do not necessarily translate into
increased drilling activity since our clients expectations
about future commodity prices typically drive demand for our
services. Oil and natural gas prices are extremely volatile. On
July 2, 2008 natural gas prices were $13.31 per million
British thermal unit, or MMBtu, at the Henry Hub. They
subsequently declined sharply, reaching a low of $1.88 per MMBtu
at the Henry Hub on September 4, 2009. As of March 3,
2011, the closing price of natural gas at the Henry Hub was
$3.75 per MMBtu. The spot price for West Texas intermediate
crude has recently ranged from a high of $145.29 per barrel as
of July 3, 2008, to a low of $31.41 per barrel as of
December 22, 2008, with a closing price of $101.91 per
barrel as of March 3, 2011. Commodity prices are affected
by numerous factors, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
the demand for oil and natural gas in the United States and
elsewhere;
|
|
|
|
the cost of exploring for, developing, producing and delivering
oil and natural gas, and the relative cost of onshore production
or importation of natural gas;
|
|
|
|
political, economic and weather conditions in the United States
and elsewhere;
|
|
|
|
imports of liquefied natural gas;
|
|
|
|
advances in exploration, development and production technology;
|
|
|
|
the ability of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries, commonly called OPEC, to set and maintain
oil production levels and pricing;
|
|
|
|
the level of production in non-OPEC countries;
|
|
|
|
domestic and international tax policies and governmental
regulations;
|
|
|
|
the development and exploitation of alternative fuels, and the
competitive, social and political position of natural gas as a
source of energy compared with other energy sources;
|
|
|
|
the policies of various governments regarding exploration and
development of their oil and natural gas reserves;
|
|
|
|
the worldwide military and political environment and uncertainty
or instability resulting from an escalation or additional
outbreak of armed hostilities or other crises in the Middle
East, North Africa, West Africa and other significant oil and
natural gas producing regions; and
|
|
|
|
acts of terrorism or piracy that affect oil and natural gas
producing regions, especially in Nigeria, where armed conflict,
civil unrest and acts of terrorism have recently increased.
|
While economic conditions have improved, reduced demand for
drilling and liftboat services has materially eroded dayrates
and utilization rates for our units, adversely affecting our
financial condition and results of operations. Continued
hostilities in the Middle East, North Africa, and West Africa
and the occurrence or threat of terrorist attacks against the
United States or other countries could negatively impact the
economies of the United States and other countries where we
operate. Another decline in the economy could result in a
decrease in energy consumption, which in turn would cause our
revenue and margins to further decline and limit our future
growth prospects.
18
The
offshore service industry is highly cyclical and is currently
experiencing low demand and low dayrates. The volatility of the
industry, coupled with our short-term contracts, has resulted
and could continue to result in sharp declines in our
profitability.
Historically, the offshore service industry has been highly
cyclical, with periods of high demand and high dayrates often
followed by periods of low demand and low dayrates. Periods of
low demand or increasing supply, such as we are currently
experiencing, intensify the competition in the industry and
often result in rigs or liftboats being idle for long periods of
time. While economic conditions have recently begun to improve,
in response to the economic downturn that commenced in late
2008, we stacked additional rigs and liftboats and entered into
lower dayrate contracts. As a result of the cyclicality of our
industry, we expect our results of operations to be volatile and
to decrease during market declines such as we are currently
experiencing.
We
have a significant level of debt, and could incur additional
debt in the future. Our debt could have significant consequences
for our business and future prospects.
As of December 31, 2010, we had total outstanding debt of
approximately $858.1 million. This debt represented
approximately 50% of our total book capitalization. As of
December 31, 2010, we had $163.5 million of available
capacity under our revolving credit facility, after the
commitment of $11.5 million for standby letters of credit
issued under it. However, our available capacity under our
revolving credit facility, as of and as amended on March 3,
2011, was $129.1 million after the commitment of
$10.9 million for standby letters of credit issued
under it. We may borrow under our revolving credit facility
to fund working capital or other needs in the near term up to
the remaining availability subject to our compliance with
financial covenants. Our debt and the limitations imposed on us
by our existing or future debt agreements could have significant
consequences for our business and future prospects, including
the following:
|
|
|
|
|
we may not be able to obtain necessary financing in the future
for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, debt
service requirements or other purposes and we may be required
under the terms of our credit facility, as amended, to use the
proceeds of any financing we obtain to repay or prepay existing
debt;
|
|
|
|
we will be required to dedicate a substantial portion of our
cash flow from operations to payments of principal and interest
on our debt;
|
|
|
|
we may be exposed to risks inherent in interest rate
fluctuations because 55 percent of our borrowings are at
variable rates of interest, which will result in higher interest
expense to the extent that we do not hedge such risk in the
event of increases in interest rates;
|
|
|
|
we could be more vulnerable during downturns in our business and
be less able to take advantage of significant business
opportunities and to react to changes in our business and in
market or industry conditions; and
|
|
|
|
we may have a competitive disadvantage relative to our
competitors that have less debt.
|
Our ability to make payments on and to refinance our
indebtedness, including the term loan issued in July 2007, the
convertible notes issued by us in June 2008 and the senior
secured notes issued by us in October 2009, and to fund planned
capital expenditures will depend on our ability to generate cash
in the future, which is subject to general economic, financial,
competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are
beyond our control. Our future cash flows may be insufficient to
meet all of our debt obligations and other commitments, and any
insufficiency could negatively impact our business. To the
extent we are unable to repay our indebtedness as it becomes due
or at maturity with cash on hand, we will need to refinance our
debt, sell assets or repay the debt with the proceeds from
equity offerings. Additional indebtedness or equity financing
may not be available to us in the future for the refinancing or
repayment of existing indebtedness, and we may not be able to
complete asset sales in a timely manner sufficient to make such
repayments.
If we
are unable to comply with the restrictions and covenants in our
credit agreement, there could be a default, which could result
in an acceleration of repayment of funds that we have
borrowed.
Our Credit Agreement (Credit Agreement) requires
that we meet certain financial ratios and tests. Effective
July 27, 2009, we entered into an amendment of our Credit
Agreement (2009 Credit Amendment)
19
to provide additional flexibility in certain financial
covenants. Furthermore, the 2009 Credit Amendment also imposes
other covenants and restrictions, including the imposition of a
requirement to maintain a minimum level of liquidity at all
times. Effective March 3, 2011, we entered into another
amendment to our Credit Facility (2011 Credit
Amendment) to, among other things, allow for the use of
cash to purchase certain assets from Seahawk Drilling, Inc.,
exempt the pro forma treatment of historical results from the
Seahawk assets with respect to the calculation of the financial
covenants in the Credit Agreement, increase our investment
basket and provide additional flexibility in a certain financial
covenant. However, there can be no assurance that we will be
able to comply with the modified financial covenants. Our
ability to comply with these financial covenants and
restrictions can be affected by events beyond our control.
Continued reduced activity levels in the oil and natural gas
industry could adversely impact our ability to comply with such
covenants in the future. Our failure to comply with such
covenants would result in an event of default under the Credit
Agreement. An event of default could prevent us from borrowing
under our revolving credit facility, which could in turn have a
material adverse effect on our available liquidity. In addition,
an event of default could result in our having to immediately
repay all amounts outstanding under the credit facility, the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes due 2038
(3.375% Convertible Senior Notes), the
10.5% Senior Secured Notes due 2017
(10.5% Senior Secured Notes) and in foreclosure
of liens on our assets. As of December 31, 2010, we were in
compliance with all of our financial covenants under the Credit
Agreement.
Our
Credit Agreement imposes significant additional costs and
operating and financial restrictions on us, which may prevent us
from capitalizing on business opportunities and taking certain
actions.
Our Credit Agreement imposes significant additional costs and
operating and financial restrictions on us. These restrictions
limit our ability to, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
make certain types of loans and investments;
|
|
|
|
pay dividends, redeem or repurchase stock, prepay, redeem or
repurchase other debt or make other restricted payments;
|
|
|
|
incur or guarantee additional indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
use proceeds from asset sales, new indebtedness or equity
issuances for general corporate purposes or investment into our
current business;
|
|
|
|
invest in certain new joint ventures;
|
|
|
|
create or incur liens;
|
|
|
|
place restrictions on our subsidiaries ability to make
dividends or other payments to us;
|
|
|
|
sell our assets or consolidate or merge with or into other
companies;
|
|
|
|
engage in transactions with affiliates; and
|
|
|
|
enter into new lines of business.
|
In addition, under our Credit Agreement, as amended, we are
required to prepay our term loan with 50% of our excess cash
flow through the fiscal year ending December 31, 2012. Our
term loan must also be prepaid using the proceeds from unsecured
debt issuances (with the exception of refinancing), secured debt
issuances and sales of assets in excess of $25 million
annually, casualty events not used to repair damaged property as
well as 50% of proceeds from equity issuances (excluding those
for permitted acquisitions or to meet the minimum liquidity
requirements) unless we have achieved a specified leverage
ratio. Our Credit Agreement also imposes significant financial
and operating restrictions on us. These restrictions limit our
ability to acquire assets, except in cases in which the
consideration is equity or the net cash proceeds of an issuance
thereof (with the exception of the Seahawk acquisition), unless
we are in compliance with more restrictive financial covenants
than what we are normally required to meet in each respective
period as defined in the 2011 Credit Amendment. Our compliance
with these provisions may materially adversely affect our
ability to react to changes in market conditions, take advantage
of business opportunities we believe to be desirable, obtain
20
future financing, fund needed capital expenditures, finance our
acquisitions, equipment purchases and development expenditures,
or withstand the present or any future downturn in our business.
Maintaining
idle assets or the sale of assets below their then carrying
value may cause us to experience losses and may result in
impairment charges.
Prolonged periods of low utilization and dayrates, the cold
stacking of idle assets or the sale of assets below their then
carrying value may cause us to experience losses. These events
may also result in the recognition of impairment charges on
certain of our assets if future cash flow estimates, based upon
information available to management at the time, indicate that
their carrying value may not be recoverable or if we sell assets
at below their then current carrying value.
Our
industry is highly competitive, with intense price competition.
Our inability to compete successfully may reduce our
profitability.
Our industry is highly competitive. Our contracts are
traditionally awarded on a competitive bid basis. Pricing is
often the primary factor in determining which qualified
contractor is awarded a job, although rig and liftboat
availability, location and technical capability and each
contractors safety performance record and reputation for
quality also can be key factors in the determination. Dayrates
also depend on the supply of rigs and vessels. Generally, excess
capacity puts downward pressure on dayrates, and we have
recently experienced declines in utilized days and dayrates.
Excess capacity can occur when newly constructed rigs and
vessels enter service, when rigs and vessels are mobilized
between geographic areas and when non-marketed rigs and vessels
are re-activated.
Several of our competitors also are incorporated in other
jurisdictions outside the United States, which provides them
with significant tax advantages that are not available to us as
a U.S. company, which may materially impair our ability to
compete with them for many projects that would be beneficial to
our company.
The
continuing worldwide economic problems have materially reduced
our revenue, profitability and cash flows.
While conditions have recently improved, the worldwide economic
problems that commenced in late 2008 led to a reduction in the
availability of liquidity and credit to fund business operations
worldwide, and adversely affected our customers, suppliers and
lenders. The economic decline caused a reduction in worldwide
demand for energy and resulted in lower oil and natural gas
prices. While oil prices and, to a lesser extent, natural gas
prices have recently rebounded, demand for our services depends
on oil and natural gas industry activity and capital expenditure
levels that are directly affected by trends in oil and natural
gas prices. Any prolonged reduction in oil and natural gas
prices will further depress the current levels of exploration,
development and production activity. Perceptions of longer-term
lower oil and natural gas prices by oil and gas companies can
similarly reduce or defer major expenditures. Lower levels of
activity result in a corresponding decline in the demand for our
services, which could have a material adverse effect on our
revenue and profitability.
We may
require additional capital in the future, which may not be
available to us or may be at a cost which reduces our cash flow
and profitability.
Our business is capital-intensive and, to the extent we do not
generate sufficient cash from operations, we may need to raise
additional funds through public or private debt (which would
increase our interest costs) or equity financings to execute our
business strategy, to fund capital expenditures or to meet our
covenants under the Credit Agreement. Adequate sources of
capital funding may not be available when needed or may not be
available on acceptable terms and under the terms of our Credit
Agreement, we may be required to use the proceeds of any capital
that we raise to repay existing indebtedness. If we raise
additional funds by issuing additional equity securities,
existing stockholders may experience dilution. If funding is
insufficient at any time in the future, we may be unable to fund
maintenance of our assets, take advantage of business
opportunities or respond to competitive pressures, any of which
could harm our business.
21
Asset
sales are currently an important component of our business
strategy for the purpose of reducing our debt. We may be unable
to identify appropriate buyers with access to financing or to
complete any sales on acceptable terms.
We are currently considering sales or other dispositions of
certain of our assets, and any such disposition could be
significant and could significantly affect the results of
operations of one or more of our business segments. In the
current economic environment, asset sales may occur on less
favorable terms than terms that might be available at other
times in the business cycle. At any given time, discussions with
one or more potential buyers may be at different stages.
However, any such discussions may or may not result in the
consummation of an asset sale. We may not be able to identify
buyers with access to financing or complete any sales on
acceptable terms.
Our
contracts are generally short term, and we will experience
reduced profitability if our customers reduce activity levels or
terminate or seek to renegotiate our drilling or liftboat
contracts or if we experience downtime, operational
difficulties, or safety-related issues.
Currently, all of our drilling contracts with major customers
are dayrate contracts, where we charge a fixed charge per day
regardless of the number of days needed to drill the well.
Likewise, under our current liftboat contracts, we charge a
fixed fee per day regardless of the success of the operations
that are being conducted by our customer utilizing our liftboat.
During depressed market conditions, a customer may no longer
need a rig or liftboat that is currently under contract or may
be able to obtain a comparable rig or liftboat at a lower daily
rate. As a result, customers may seek to renegotiate the terms
of their existing drilling contracts or avoid their obligations
under those contracts. In addition, our customers may have the
right to terminate, or may seek to renegotiate, existing
contracts if we experience downtime, operational problems above
the contractual limit or safety-related issues, if the rig or
liftboat is a total loss, if the rig or liftboat is not
delivered to the customer within the period specified in the
contract or in other specified circumstances, which include
events beyond the control of either party.
In the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, contracts are generally short
term, and oil and natural gas companies tend to reduce activity
levels quickly in response to downward changes in oil and
natural gas prices. Due to the short-term nature of most of our
contracts, a decline in market conditions can quickly affect our
business if customers reduce their levels of operations.
Some of our contracts with our customers include terms allowing
them to terminate the contracts without cause, with little or no
prior notice and without penalty or early termination payments.
In addition, we could be required to pay penalties if some of
our contracts with our customers are terminated due to downtime,
operational problems or failure to deliver. Some of our other
contracts with customers may be cancelable at the option of the
customer upon payment of a penalty, which may not fully
compensate us for the loss of the contract. Early termination of
a contract may result in a rig or liftboat being idle for an
extended period of time. The likelihood that a customer may seek
to terminate a contract is increased during periods of market
weakness. If our customers cancel or require us to renegotiate
some of our significant contracts, if we are unable to secure
new contracts on substantially similar terms, especially those
contracts in our International Offshore segment, or if contracts
are suspended for an extended period of time, our revenue and
profitability would be materially reduced.
An
increase in supply of rigs or liftboats could adversely affect
our financial condition and results of operations.
Reactivation of non-marketed rigs or liftboats, mobilization of
rigs or liftboats back to the U.S. Gulf of Mexico or new
construction of rigs or liftboats could result in excess supply
in the region, and our dayrates and utilization could be reduced.
Construction of rigs could result in excess supply in
international regions, which could reduce our ability to secure
new contracts for our stacked rigs and could reduce our ability
to renew, or extend or obtain new contracts for working rigs at
the end of their contract term. The excess supply would also
impact the dayrates on future contracts.
22
If market conditions improve, inactive rigs and liftboats that
are not currently being marketed could be reactivated to meet an
increase in demand. Improved market conditions in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico, particularly relative to other
regions, could also lead to jackup rigs, other mobile offshore
drilling units and liftboats being moved into the U.S. Gulf
of Mexico. Improved market conditions in any region worldwide
could lead to increased construction and upgrade programs by our
competitors. Some of our competitors have already announced
plans to upgrade existing equipment or build additional jackup
rigs with higher specifications than our rigs. According to
ODS-Petrodata, as of March 3, 2011, 56 jackup rigs
(excludes 10 rigs that have been indefinitely suspended)
were under construction or on order by industry participants,
national oil companies and financial investors for delivery
through 2014. Many of the rigs currently under construction have
not been contracted for future work, which may intensify price
competition as scheduled delivery dates occur. A significant
increase in the supply of jackup rigs, other mobile offshore
drilling units or liftboats could adversely affect both our
utilization and dayrates.
Our
business involves numerous operating hazards and exposure to
extreme weather and climate risks, and our insurance may not be
adequate to cover our losses.
Our operations are subject to the usual hazards inherent in the
drilling and operation of oil and natural gas wells, such as
blowouts, reservoir damage, loss of production, loss of well
control, punchthroughs, craterings, fires and pollution. The
occurrence of these events could result in the suspension of
drilling or production operations, claims by the operator,
severe damage to or destruction of the property and equipment
involved, injury or death to rig or liftboat personnel, and
environmental damage. We may also be subject to personal injury
and other claims of rig or liftboat personnel as a result of our
drilling and liftboat operations. Operations also may be
suspended because of machinery breakdowns, abnormal operating
conditions, failure of subcontractors to perform or supply goods
or services and personnel shortages.
In addition, our drilling and liftboat operations are subject to
perils of marine operations, including capsizing, grounding,
collision and loss or damage from severe weather. Tropical
storms, hurricanes and other severe weather prevalent in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico could have a material adverse effect on
our operations. During such severe weather conditions, our
liftboats typically leave location and cease to earn a full
dayrate. Under U.S. Coast Guard guidelines, the liftboats
cannot return to work until the weather improves and seas are
less than five feet. In addition, damage to our rigs, liftboats,
shorebases and corporate infrastructure caused by high winds,
turbulent seas, or unstable sea bottom conditions could
potentially cause us to curtail operations for significant
periods of time until the damages can be repaired. In addition,
we cold stack a number of rigs in certain locations offshore.
This concentration of rigs in specific locations could expose us
to increased liability from a catastrophic event and could cause
an increase in our insurance costs.
Damage to the environment could result from our operations,
particularly through oil spillage or extensive uncontrolled
fires. We may also be subject to property, environmental and
other damage claims by oil and natural gas companies and other
businesses operating offshore and in coastal areas. Our
insurance policies and contractual rights to indemnity may not
adequately cover losses, and we may not have insurance coverage
or rights to indemnity for all risks. Moreover, pollution and
environmental risks generally are subject to significant
deductibles and are not totally insurable. Risks from extreme
weather and marine hazards may increase in the event of ongoing
patterns of adverse changes in weather or climate.
A
significant portion of our business is conducted in
shallow-water areas of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. The mature
nature of this region could result in less drilling activity in
the area, thereby reducing demand for our
services.
The U.S. Gulf of Mexico, and in particular the
shallow-water region of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, is a
mature oil and natural gas production region that has
experienced substantial seismic survey and exploration activity
for many years. Because a large number of oil and natural gas
prospects in this region have already been drilled, additional
prospects of sufficient size and quality could be more difficult
to identify. According to the U.S. Energy Information
Administration, the average size of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico
discoveries has declined significantly since the early 1990s. In
addition, the amount of natural gas production in the
shallow-water U.S. Gulf of Mexico has declined over the
last decade. Moreover, oil and natural gas companies may be
23
unable to obtain financing necessary to drill prospects in this
region. The decrease in the size of oil and natural gas
prospects, the decrease in production or the failure to obtain
such financing may result in reduced drilling activity in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico and reduced demand for our services.
We can
provide no assurance that our current backlog of contract
drilling revenue will be ultimately realized.
As of February 16, 2011, our total contract drilling
backlog for our Domestic Offshore, International Offshore,
International Liftboats and Inland segments was approximately
$212.1 million. We calculate our contract revenue backlog,
or future contracted revenue, as the contract dayrate multiplied
by the number of days remaining on the contract, assuming full
utilization. Backlog excludes revenue for mobilization,
demobilization, contract preparation and customer reimbursables.
We may not be able to perform under our drilling contracts due
to various operational factors, including unscheduled repairs,
maintenance, operational delays, health, safety and
environmental incidents, weather events in the Gulf of Mexico
and elsewhere and other factors (some of which are beyond our
control), and our customers may seek to cancel or renegotiate
our contracts for various reasons. In some of the contracts, our
customer has the right to terminate the contract without penalty
and in certain instances, with little or no notice. Our
inability or the inability of our customers to perform under our
or their contractual obligations may have a material adverse
effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash
flows.
Our
insurance coverage has become more expensive, may become
unavailable in the future, and may be inadequate to cover our
losses.
Our insurance coverage is subject to certain significant
deductibles and levels of self-insurance, does not cover all
types of losses and, in some situations, may not provide full
coverage for losses or liabilities resulting from our
operations. In addition, due to the losses sustained by us and
the offshore drilling industry in recent years, primarily as a
result of Gulf of Mexico hurricanes, we are likely to continue
experiencing increased costs for available insurance coverage,
which may impose higher deductibles and limit maximum aggregated
recoveries, including for hurricane-related windstorm damage or
loss. Insurance costs may increase in the event of ongoing
patterns of adverse changes in weather or climate.
Further, we may not be able to obtain windstorm coverage in the
future, thus putting us at a greater risk of loss due to severe
weather conditions and other hazards. If a significant accident
or other event resulting in damage to our rigs or liftboats,
including severe weather, terrorist acts, piracy, war, civil
disturbances, pollution or environmental damage, occurs and is
not fully covered by insurance or a recoverable indemnity from a
customer, it could adversely affect our financial condition and
results of operations. Moreover, we may not be able to maintain
adequate insurance in the future at rates we consider reasonable
or be able to obtain insurance against certain risks.
As a result of a number of recent catastrophic weather related
and other events, insurance underwriters increased insurance
premiums for many of the coverages historically maintained and
issued general notices of cancellation and significant changes
for a wide variety of insurance coverages. The oil and natural
gas industry suffered extensive damage from several hurricanes.
As a result, over the past five years our insurance costs
increased significantly, our deductibles increased and our
coverage for named windstorm damage was restricted. Any
additional severe storm activity in the energy producing areas
of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico in the future could cause
insurance underwriters to no longer insure U.S. Gulf of
Mexico assets against weather-related damage. A number of our
customers that produce oil and natural gas have previously
maintained business interruption insurance for their production.
This insurance is less available and may cease to be available
in the future, which could adversely impact our customers
business prospects in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and reduce
demand for our services.
Our
customers may be unable or unwilling to indemnify
us.
Consistent with standard industry practice, our clients
generally assume, and indemnify us against, well control and
subsurface risks under dayrate contracts. These risks are those
associated with the loss of control
24
of a well, such as blowout or cratering, the cost to regain
control or redrill the well and associated pollution. There can
be no assurance, however, that these clients will necessarily be
financially able to indemnify us against all these risks. Also,
we may be effectively prevented from enforcing these indemnities
because of the nature of our relationship with some of our
larger clients. Additionally, from time to time we may not be
able to obtain agreement from our customer to indemnify us for
such damages and risks.
Our
international operations are subject to additional political,
economic, and other uncertainties not generally associated with
domestic operations.
An element of our business strategy is to continue to expand
into international oil and natural gas producing areas such as
West Africa, the Middle East and the Asia-Pacific region. We
operate liftboats in West Africa, including Nigeria, and in the
Middle East. We also operate drilling rigs in India, Southeast
Asia, Saudi Arabia, Mexico and West Africa. Our international
operations are subject to a number of risks inherent in any
business operating in foreign countries, including:
|
|
|
|
|
political, social and economic instability, war and acts of
terrorism;
|
|
|
|
potential seizure, expropriation or nationalization of assets;
|
|
|
|
damage to our equipment or violence directed at our employees,
including kidnappings and piracy;
|
|
|
|
increased operating costs;
|
|
|
|
complications associated with repairing and replacing equipment
in remote locations;
|
|
|
|
repudiation, modification or renegotiation of contracts,
disputes and legal proceedings in international jurisdictions;
|
|
|
|
limitations on insurance coverage, such as war risk coverage in
certain areas;
|
|
|
|
import-export quotas;
|
|
|
|
confiscatory taxation;
|
|
|
|
work stoppages or strikes, particularly in the West African and
Mexican labor environments;
|
|
|
|
unexpected changes in regulatory requirements;
|
|
|
|
wage and price controls;
|
|
|
|
imposition of trade barriers;
|
|
|
|
imposition or changes in enforcement of local content laws,
particularly in West Africa where the legislatures are active in
developing new legislation;
|
|
|
|
restrictions on currency or capital repatriations;
|
|
|
|
currency fluctuations and devaluations; and
|
|
|
|
other forms of government regulation and economic conditions
that are beyond our control.
|
In 2010, the level of political unrest, acts of terrorism, and
organized criminality in Nigeria increased as a part of efforts
of militant groups in the country to disrupt the presidential
election, which has been postponed until April 2011. The level
of political unrest, terrorism, organized criminality and piracy
in Nigeria is expected to continue until and after the
presidential election. In the past, many of our customers in
Nigeria, including Chevron Corporation, have interrupted their
activities during these episodes of increased terrorism, piracy
and armed conflict. These interruptions in activity can be
prolonged, during which time we may not receive dayrates for our
liftboats.
In early 2011, political and civil unrest escalated in the
Middle East and North Africa, including in Egypt and Libya. We
operate drilling rigs and liftboats in the Middle East and could
be impacted by the instability in the region. While we do not
operate in the countries that are experiencing this instability
and our operations have not been impacted by such instability,
our customers who operate drilling rigs and liftboats in the
affected countries could mobilize their assets to the countries
in which we operate, which could lead to increased competition
for us in these countries, potentially resulting in lower
utilization and lower dayrates for
25
our drilling rigs and liftboats in the region. In addition, if
the unrest spreads to other oil and natural gas producing
countries in the region, including those in which we operate,
our operations could be delayed, hindered, or indefinitely
postponed. The occurrence of any of these contingencies could
have an adverse impact on our business and financial results.
Many governments favor or effectively require that liftboat or
drilling contracts be awarded to local contractors or require
foreign contractors to employ citizens of, or purchase supplies
from, a particular jurisdiction. These practices may result in
inefficiencies or put us at a disadvantage when bidding for
contracts against local competitors.
Our
non-U.S. contract
drilling and liftboat operations are subject to various laws and
regulations in countries in which we operate, including laws and
regulations relating to the equipment and operation of drilling
rigs and liftboats, currency conversions and repatriation, oil
and natural gas exploration and development, taxation of
offshore earnings and earnings of expatriate personnel, the use
of local employees and suppliers by foreign contractors, the
ownership of assets by local citizens and companies, and duties
on the importation and exportation of units and other equipment.
Governments in some foreign countries have become increasingly
active in regulating and controlling the ownership of
concessions and companies holding concessions, the exploration
for oil and natural gas and other aspects of the oil and natural
gas industries in their countries. In some areas of the world,
this governmental activity has adversely affected the amount of
exploration and development work done by major oil and natural
gas companies and may continue to do so. Operations in
developing countries can be subject to legal systems which are
not as predictable as those in more developed countries, which
can lead to greater risk and uncertainty in legal matters and
proceedings.
Due to our international operations, we may experience currency
exchange losses when revenue is received and expenses are paid
in nonconvertible currencies or when we do not hedge an exposure
to a foreign currency. We may also incur losses as a result of
an inability to collect revenue because of a shortage of
convertible currency available to the country of operation,
controls over currency exchange or controls over the
repatriation of income or capital.
A
small number of customers account for a significant portion of
our revenue, and the loss of one or more of these customers
could adversely affect our financial condition and results of
operations.
We derive a significant amount of our revenue from a few energy
companies. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Chevron
Corporation and Saudi Aramco accounted for 20%, 17% and 14% of
our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2010,
respectively. In addition, our financial condition and results
of operations will be materially adversely affected if these
customers interrupt or curtail their activities, terminate their
contracts with us, fail to renew their existing contracts or
refuse to award new contracts to us and we are unable to enter
into contracts with new customers at comparable dayrates. The
loss of any of these or any other significant customer could
adversely affect our financial condition and results of
operations.
Our
existing jackup rigs are at a relative disadvantage to higher
specification rigs, which may be more likely to obtain contracts
than lower specification jackup rigs such as ours.
Many of our competitors have jackup fleets with generally higher
specification rigs than those in our jackup fleet. In addition,
all of the new rigs under construction are of higher
specification than our existing fleet. While Hercules has signed
agreements to manage the construction and operations of the two
ultra high specification harsh environment jackup drilling rigs
on order for Discovery Offshore, 21 of our 30 jackup rigs are
mat-supported, which are generally limited to geographic areas
with soft bottom conditions like much of the Gulf of Mexico.
Most of the rigs under construction are currently without
contracts, which may intensify price competition as scheduled
delivery dates occur. Particularly in periods in which there is
decreased rig demand, such as the current period, higher
specification rigs may be more likely to obtain contracts than
lower specification jackup rigs such as ours. In the past, lower
specification rigs have been stacked earlier in the cycle of
decreased rig demand than higher specification rigs and have
been reactivated later in the cycle, which may adversely impact
our business. In addition, higher specification rigs may be more
adaptable to different operating conditions and therefore have
greater flexibility to move to areas of demand in response to
26
changes in market conditions. Because a majority of our rigs
were designed specifically for drilling in the shallow-water
U.S. Gulf of Mexico, our ability to move them to other
regions in response to changes in market conditions is limited.
Furthermore, in recent years, an increasing amount of
exploration and production expenditures have been concentrated
in deepwater drilling programs and deeper formations, including
deep natural gas prospects, requiring higher specification
jackup rigs, semisubmersible drilling rigs or drillships. This
trend is expected to continue and could result in a decline in
demand for lower specification jackup rigs like ours, which
could have an adverse impact on our financial condition and
results of operations. One of our customers, PEMEX, has
indicated a shifting focus in drilling rig requirements since
the beginning of 2008, with more emphasis placed on newer,
higher specification rigs. Demand in Mexico for our jackup rig
fleet declined and the future contracting opportunities for such
rigs in Mexico could diminish.
We may
consider future acquisitions and may be unable to complete and
finance future acquisitions on acceptable terms. In addition, we
may fail to successfully integrate acquired assets or businesses
we acquire or incorrectly predict operating
results.
We may consider future acquisitions which could involve the
payment by us of a substantial amount of cash, the incurrence of
a substantial amount of debt or the issuance of a substantial
amount of equity. Unless we have achieved specified financial
covenant levels, our Credit Agreement restricts our ability to
make acquisitions involving the payment of cash or the
incurrence of debt. If we are restricted from using cash or
incurring debt to fund a potential acquisition, we may not be
able to issue, on terms we find acceptable, sufficient equity
that may be required for any such permitted acquisition or
investment. In addition, barring any restrictions under the
Credit Agreement, we still may not be able to obtain, on terms
we find acceptable, sufficient financing or funding that may be
required for any such acquisition or investment.
We cannot predict the effect, if any, that any announcement or
consummation of an acquisition would have on the trading price
of our common stock.
Any future acquisitions could present a number of risks,
including:
|
|
|
|
|
the risk of incorrect assumptions regarding the future results
of acquired operations or assets or expected cost reductions or
other synergies expected to be realized as a result of acquiring
operations or assets;
|
|
|
|
the risk of failing to integrate the operations or management of
any acquired operations or assets successfully and
timely; and
|
|
|
|
the risk of diversion of managements attention from
existing operations or other priorities.
|
Closing of the February 2011 Asset Purchase Agreement with
Seahawk is subject to bankruptcy court approval, as well as
regulatory approvals and other customary conditions. Our 2011
Credit Amendment included a modification to, among other things,
allow for the use of cash to purchase assets from Seahawk, to
the extent set forth in our Asset Purchase Agreement and exempt
the pro forma treatment of historical results from the Seahawk
assets with respect to the calculation of the financial
covenants in the Credit Agreement.
If we are unsuccessful in integrating our acquisitions in a
timely and cost-effective manner, our financial condition and
results of operations could be adversely affected.
Failure
to retain or attract skilled workers could hurt our
operations.
We require skilled personnel to operate and provide technical
services and support for our rigs and liftboats. The shortages
of qualified personnel or the inability to obtain and retain
qualified personnel could negatively affect the quality and
timeliness of our work. In periods of economic crisis or during
a recession, we may have difficulty attracting and retaining our
skilled workers as these workers may seek employment in less
cyclical or volatile industries or employers. In periods of
recovery or increasing activity, we may have to increase the
wages of our skilled workers, which could negatively impact our
operations and financial results.
27
Although our domestic employees are not covered by a collective
bargaining agreement, the marine services industry has been
targeted by maritime labor unions in an effort to organize
U.S. Gulf of Mexico employees. A significant increase in
the wages paid by competing employers or the unionization of our
U.S. Gulf of Mexico employees could result in a reduction
of our skilled labor force, increases in the wage rates that we
must pay, or both. If either of these events were to occur, our
capacity and profitability could be diminished and our growth
potential could be impaired.
Governmental
laws and regulations, including those related to climate and
emissions of greenhouse gases, may add to our costs
or limit drilling activity and liftboat
operations.
Our operations are affected in varying degrees by governmental
laws and regulations. We are also subject to the jurisdiction of
the United States Coast Guard, the National Transportation
Safety Board, the United States Customs and Border
Protection Service, the Department of Interior and the Bureau of
Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, as well as
private industry organizations such as the American Bureau of
Shipping. We may be required to make significant capital
expenditures to comply with laws and the applicable regulations
and standards of governmental authorities and organizations.
Moreover, the cost of compliance could be higher than
anticipated. Similarly, our international operations are subject
to compliance with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act,
certain international conventions and the laws, regulations and
standards of other foreign countries in which we operate. It is
also possible that existing and proposed governmental
conventions, laws, regulations and standards, including those
related to climate and emissions of greenhouse
gases, may in the future add significantly to our
operating costs or limit our activities or the activities and
levels of capital spending by our customers.
In addition, as our vessels age, the costs of drydocking the
vessels in order to comply with governmental laws and
regulations and to maintain their class certifications are
expected to increase, which could adversely affect our financial
condition and results of operations.
Compliance
with or a breach of environmental laws can be costly and could
limit our operations.
Our operations are subject to regulations that require us to
obtain and maintain specified permits or other governmental
approvals, control the discharge of materials into the
environment, require the removal and cleanup of materials that
may harm the environment or otherwise relate to the protection
of the environment. For example, as an operator of mobile
offshore drilling units and liftboats in navigable
U.S. waters and some offshore areas, we may be liable for
damages and costs incurred in connection with oil spills or
other unauthorized discharges of chemicals or wastes resulting
from those operations. Laws and regulations protecting the
environment have become more stringent in recent years, and may
in some cases impose strict liability, rendering a person liable
for environmental damage without regard to negligence or fault
on the part of such person. Some of these laws and regulations
may expose us to liability for the conduct of or conditions
caused by others or for acts that were in compliance with all
applicable laws at the time they were performed. The application
of these requirements, the modification of existing laws or
regulations or the adoption of new requirements, both in
U.S. waters and internationally, could have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition and results of
operations.
We may
not be able to maintain or replace our rigs and liftboats as
they age.
The capital associated with the repair and maintenance of our
fleet increases with age. We may not be able to maintain our
fleet by extending the economic life of existing rigs and
liftboats, and our financial resources may not be sufficient to
enable us to make expenditures necessary for these purposes or
to acquire or build replacement units.
Our
operating and maintenance costs with respect to our rigs include
fixed costs that will not decline in proportion to decreases in
dayrates.
We do not expect our operating and maintenance costs with
respect to our rigs to necessarily fluctuate in proportion to
changes in operating revenue. Operating revenue may fluctuate as
a function of changes in
28
dayrate, but costs for operating a rig are generally fixed or
only semi-variable regardless of the dayrate being earned.
Additionally, if our rigs incur idle time between contracts, we
typically do not de-man those rigs because we will use the crew
to prepare the rig for its next contract. During times of
reduced activity, reductions in costs may not be immediate as
portions of the crew may be required to prepare our rigs for
stacking, after which time the crew members are assigned to
active rigs or dismissed. Moreover, as our rigs are mobilized
from one geographic location to another, the labor and other
operating and maintenance costs can vary significantly. In
general, labor costs increase primarily due to higher salary
levels and inflation. Equipment maintenance expenses fluctuate
depending upon the type of activity the unit is performing and
the age and condition of the equipment. Contract preparation
expenses vary based on the scope and length of contract
preparation required and the duration of the firm contractual
period over which such expenditures are amortized.
Upgrade,
refurbishment and repair projects are subject to risks,
including delays and cost overruns, which could have an adverse
impact on our available cash resources and results of
operations.
We make upgrade, refurbishment and repair expenditures for our
fleet from time to time, including when we acquire units or when
repairs or upgrades are required by law, in response to an
inspection by a governmental authority or when a unit is
damaged. We also regularly make certain upgrades or
modifications to our drilling rigs to meet customer or contract
specific requirements. Upgrade, refurbishment and repair
projects are subject to the risks of delay or cost overruns
inherent in any large construction project, including costs or
delays resulting from the following:
|
|
|
|
|
unexpectedly long delivery times for, or shortages of, key
equipment, parts and materials;
|
|
|
|
shortages of skilled labor and other shipyard personnel
necessary to perform the work;
|
|
|
|
unforeseen increases in the cost of equipment, labor and raw
materials, particularly steel;
|
|
|
|
unforeseen design and engineering problems;
|
|
|
|
latent damages to or deterioration of hull, equipment and
machinery in excess of engineering estimates and assumptions;
|
|
|
|
unanticipated actual or purported change orders;
|
|
|
|
work stoppages;
|
|
|
|
failure or delay of third-party service providers and labor
disputes;
|
|
|
|
disputes with shipyards and suppliers;
|
|
|
|
delays and unexpected costs of incorporating parts and materials
needed for the completion of projects;
|
|
|
|
failure or delay in obtaining acceptance of the rig from our
customer;
|
|
|
|
financial or other difficulties at shipyards;
|
|
|
|
adverse weather conditions; and
|
|
|
|
inability or delay in obtaining customer acceptance or
flag-state, classification society, certificate of inspection,
or regulatory approvals.
|
Significant cost overruns or delays would adversely affect our
financial condition and results of operations. Additionally,
capital expenditures for rig upgrade and refurbishment projects
could exceed our planned capital expenditures. Failure to
complete an upgrade, refurbishment or repair project on time
may, in some circumstances, result in the delay, renegotiation
or cancellation of a drilling or liftboat contract and could put
at risk our planned arrangements to commence operations on
schedule. We also could be exposed to penalties for failure to
complete an upgrade, refurbishment or repair project and
commence operations in a timely manner. Our rigs and liftboats
undergoing upgrade, refurbishment or repair generally do not
earn a dayrate during the period they are out of service.
29
We are
subject to litigation that could have an adverse effect on
us.
We are from time to time involved in various litigation matters.
The numerous operating hazards inherent in our business
increases our exposure to litigation, including personal injury
litigation brought against us by our employees that are injured
operating our rigs and liftboats. These matters may include,
among other things, contract dispute, personal injury,
environmental, asbestos and other toxic tort, employment, tax
and securities litigation, and litigation that arises in the
ordinary course of our business. We have extensive litigation
brought against us in federal and state courts located in
Louisiana, Mississippi and South Texas, areas that were
significantly impacted by hurricanes during the last several
years and recently by the Macondo well blowout incident. The
jury pools in these areas have become increasingly more hostile
to defendants, particularly corporate defendants in the oil and
gas industry. We cannot predict with certainty the outcome or
effect of any claim or other litigation matter. Litigation may
have an adverse effect on us because of potential negative
outcomes, the costs associated with defending the lawsuits, the
diversion of our managements resources and other factors.
Changes
in effective tax rates, taxation of our foreign subsidiaries,
limitations on utilization of our net operating losses or
adverse outcomes resulting from examination of our tax returns
could adversely affect our operating results and financial
results.
Our future effective tax rates could be adversely affected by
changes in tax laws, both domestically and internationally. From
time to time, Congress and foreign, state and local governments
consider legislation that could increase our effective tax
rates. We cannot determine whether, or in what form, legislation
will ultimately be enacted or what the impact of any such
legislation would be on our profitability. If these or other
changes to tax laws are enacted, our profitability could be
negatively impacted.
Our future effective tax rates could also be adversely affected
by changes in the valuation of our deferred tax assets and
liabilities, the ultimate repatriation of earnings from foreign
subsidiaries to the United States, or by changes in tax
treaties, regulations, accounting principles or interpretations
thereof in one or more countries in which we operate. In
addition, we are subject to the potential examination of our
income tax returns by the Internal Revenue Service and other tax
authorities where we file tax returns. We regularly assess the
likelihood of adverse outcomes resulting from these examinations
to determine the adequacy of our provision for taxes. There can
be no assurance that such examinations will not have an adverse
effect on our operating results and financial condition.
Our
business would be adversely affected if we failed to comply with
the provisions of U.S. law on coastwise trade, or if those
provisions were modified, repealed or waived.
We are subject to U.S. federal laws that restrict maritime
transportation, including liftboat services, between points in
the United States to vessels built and registered in the United
States and owned and manned by U.S. citizens. We are
responsible for monitoring the ownership of our common stock. If
we do not comply with these restrictions, we would be prohibited
from operating our liftboats in U.S. coastwise trade, and
under certain circumstances we would be deemed to have
undertaken an unapproved foreign transfer, resulting in severe
penalties, including permanent loss of U.S. coastwise
trading rights for our liftboats, fines or forfeiture of the
liftboats.
During the past several years, interest groups have lobbied
Congress to repeal these restrictions to facilitate foreign flag
competition for trades currently reserved for
U.S.-flag
vessels under the federal laws. We believe that interest groups
may continue efforts to modify or repeal these laws currently
benefiting
U.S.-flag
vessels. If these efforts are successful, it could result in
increased competition, which could adversely affect our results
of operations.
Our
liquidity depends upon cash on hand, cash from operations and
availability under our revolving credit facility.
Our liquidity depends upon cash on hand, cash from operations
and availability under our revolving credit facility. The size
of our revolving credit facility was reduced by the 2009 Credit
Amendment from $250 million
30
to $175 million and by the 2011 Credit Amendment from
$175 million to $140 million. The availability under
the revolving credit facility is to be used for working capital,
capital expenditures and other general corporate purposes and
cannot be used to prepay outstanding term loans under our credit
facility. All borrowings under the revolving credit facility
mature on July 11, 2012, and the revolving credit facility
requires interest-only payments on a quarterly basis until the
maturity date. No amounts were outstanding under the revolving
credit facility as of December 31, 2010, although
$11.5 million in stand-by letters of credit had been issued
under it. The remaining availability under the revolving credit
facility is $163.5 million at December 31, 2010. As of
March 3, 2011, the effective date of the 2011 Credit
Amendment, there were no amounts outstanding and
$10.9 million in standby letters of credit issued leaving
remaining availability of $129.1 million under the
revolving credit facility.
We currently maintain a shelf registration statement covering
the future issuance from time to time of various types of
securities, including debt and equity securities. If we issue
any debt securities off the shelf registration statement or
otherwise incur debt, we may be required to make payments on our
term loan. We currently believe we will have adequate liquidity
to fund our operations for the foreseeable future. However, to
the extent we do not generate sufficient cash from operations,
we may need to raise additional funds through public or private
debt or equity offerings to fund operations and under the terms
of the amendments to our credit facility, we may be required to
use the proceeds of any capital that we raise to repay existing
indebtedness. Furthermore, we may need to raise additional funds
through public or private debt or equity offerings or asset
sales to avoid a breach of our financial covenants in our Credit
Facility to refinance our indebtedness or for general corporate
purposes.
We are
a holding company, and we are dependent upon cash flow from
subsidiaries to meet our obligations.
We currently conduct our operations through, and most of our
assets are owned by, both U.S. and foreign subsidiaries,
and our operating income and cash flow are generated by our
subsidiaries. As a result, cash we obtain from our subsidiaries
is the principal source of funds necessary to meet our debt
service obligations. Contractual provisions or laws, as well as
our subsidiaries financial condition and operating
requirements, may limit our ability to obtain cash from our
subsidiaries that we require to pay our debt service
obligations, including payments on our convertible notes.
Applicable tax laws may also subject such payments to us by our
subsidiaries to further taxation.
The inability to transfer cash from our subsidiaries to us may
mean that, even though we may have sufficient resources on a
consolidated basis to meet our obligations, we may not be
permitted to make the necessary transfers from subsidiaries to
the parent company in order to provide funds for the payment of
the parent companys obligations.
We
limit foreign ownership of our company, which may restrict
investment in our common stock and could reduce the price of our
common stock.
Our certificate of incorporation limits the percentage of
outstanding common stock and other classes of capital stock that
can be owned by
non-United
States citizens within the meaning of statutes relating to the
ownership of
U.S.-flagged
vessels. Applying the statutory requirements applicable today,
our certificate of incorporation provides that no more than 20%
of our outstanding common stock may be owned by
non-United States
citizens and establishes mechanisms to maintain compliance with
these requirements. These restrictions may have an adverse
impact on the liquidity or market value of our common stock
because holders may be unable to transfer our common stock to
non-United
States citizens. Any attempted or purported transfer of our
common stock in violation of these restrictions will be
ineffective to transfer such common stock or any voting,
dividend or other rights in respect of such common stock.
Our certificate of incorporation also provides that any
transfer, or attempted or purported transfer, of any shares of
our capital stock that would result in the ownership or control
of in excess of 20% of our outstanding capital stock by one or
more persons who are not United States citizens for purposes of
U.S. coastwise shipping will be void and ineffective as
against us. In addition, if at any time persons other than
United States
31
citizens own shares of our capital stock or possess voting power
over any shares of our capital stock in excess of 20%, we may
withhold payment of dividends, suspend the voting rights
attributable to such shares and redeem such shares.
We
have no plans to pay regular dividends on our common stock, so
investors in our common stock may not receive funds without
selling their shares.
We do not intend to declare or pay regular dividends on our
common stock in the foreseeable future. Instead, we generally
intend to invest any future earnings in our business. Subject to
Delaware law, our board of directors will determine the payment
of future dividends on our common stock, if any, and the amount
of any dividends in light of any applicable contractual
restrictions limiting our ability to pay dividends, our earnings
and cash flows, our capital requirements, our financial
condition, and other factors our board of directors deems
relevant. Our Credit Agreement restricts our ability to pay
dividends or other distributions on our equity securities.
Accordingly, stockholders may have to sell some or all of their
common stock in order to generate cash flow from their
investment. Stockholders may not receive a gain on their
investment when they sell our common stock and may lose the
entire amount of their investment.
Provisions in our charter documents, stockholder rights
plan or Delaware law may inhibit a takeover, which could
adversely affect the value of our common stock.
Our certificate of incorporation, bylaws, stockholder rights
plan and Delaware corporate law contain provisions that could
delay or prevent a change of control or changes in our
management that a stockholder might consider favorable. These
provisions will apply even if the offer may be considered
beneficial by some of our stockholders. If a change of control
or change in management is delayed or prevented, the market
price of our common stock could decline.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
Our property consists primarily of jackup rigs, barge rigs,
submersible rigs, a platform rig, marine support vessels,
liftboats and ancillary equipment, substantially all of which we
own. The majority of our vessels and substantially all of our
other personal property, are pledged to collateralize our Credit
Agreement and 10.5% Senior Secured Notes.
We maintain offices, maintenance facilities, yard facilities,
warehouses, waterfront docks as well as residential premises in
various countries, including the United States, Mexico, Nigeria,
India, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and the Cayman
Islands. Almost all of these properties are leased. Our leased
principal executive offices are located in Houston, Texas.
We incorporate by reference in response to this item the
information set forth in Item 1 of this annual report.
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
In connection with our July 2007 acquisition of TODCO, we
assumed certain other material legal proceedings from TODCO and
its subsidiaries.
In October 2001, TODCO was notified by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that
the EPA had identified a subsidiary of TODCO as a potentially
responsible party under CERCLA in connection with the Palmer
Barge Line superfund site located in Port Arthur, Jefferson
County, Texas. Based upon the information provided by the EPA
and our review of our internal records to date, we dispute our
designation as a potentially responsible party and do not expect
that the ultimate outcome of this case will have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations,
financial position or cash flows. We continue to monitor this
matter.
32
Robert E. Aaron et al. vs. Phillips 66 Company et
al. Circuit Court, Second Judicial District, Jones County,
Mississippi. This is the case name used to refer
to several cases that have been filed in the Circuit Courts of
the State of Mississippi involving 768 persons that allege
personal injury or whose heirs claim their deaths arose out of
asbestos exposure in the course of their employment by the
defendants between 1965 and 2002. The complaints name as
defendants, among others, certain of TODCOs subsidiaries
and certain subsidiaries of TODCOs former parent to whom
TODCO may owe indemnity and other unaffiliated defendant
companies, including companies that allegedly manufactured
drilling related products containing asbestos that are the
subject of the complaints. The number of unaffiliated defendant
companies involved in each complaint ranges from approximately
20 to 70. The complaints allege that the defendant drilling
contractors used asbestos-containing products in offshore
drilling operations, land based drilling operations and in
drilling structures, drilling rigs, vessels and other equipment
and assert claims based on, among other things, negligence and
strict liability, and claims authorized under the Jones Act. The
plaintiffs seek, among other things, awards of unspecified
compensatory and punitive damages. All of these cases were
assigned to a special master who has approved a form of
questionnaire to be completed by plaintiffs so that claims made
would be properly served against specific defendants.
Approximately 700 questionnaires were returned and the remaining
plaintiffs, who did not submit a questionnaire reply, have had
their suits dismissed without prejudice. Of the respondents,
approximately 100 shared periods of employment by TODCO and
its former parent which could lead to claims against either
company, even though many of these plaintiffs did not state in
their questionnaire answers that the employment actually
involved exposure to asbestos. After providing the
questionnaire, each plaintiff was further required to file a
separate and individual amended complaint naming only those
defendants against whom they had a direct claim as identified in
the questionnaire answers. Defendants not identified in the
amended complaints were dismissed from the plaintiffs
litigation. To date, three plaintiffs named TODCO as a defendant
in their amended complaints. It is possible that some of the
plaintiffs who have filed amended complaints and have not named
TODCO as a defendant may attempt to add TODCO as a defendant in
the future when case discovery begins and greater attention is
given to each individual plaintiffs employment background.
We have not determined which entity would be responsible for
such claims under the Master Separation Agreement between TODCO
and its former parent. More than three years has passed since
the court ordered that amended complaints be filed by each
individual plaintiff, and the original complaints. No additional
plaintiffs have attempted to name TODCO as a defendant and such
actions may now be time-barred. We intend to defend ourselves
vigorously and do not expect the ultimate outcome of these
lawsuits to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated
results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
We and our subsidiaries are involved in a number of other
lawsuits, all of which have arisen in the ordinary course of our
business. We do not believe that ultimate liability, if any,
resulting from any such other pending litigation will have a
material adverse effect on our business or consolidated
financial statements.
We cannot predict with certainty the outcome or effect of any of
the litigation matters specifically described above or of any
other pending litigation. There can be no assurance that our
belief or expectations as to the outcome or effect of any
lawsuit or other litigation matter will prove correct, and the
eventual outcome of these matters could materially differ from
our current estimates.
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Quarterly
Common Stock Prices and Dividend Policy
Our common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market
under the symbol HERO. As of March 3, 2011,
there were 96 stockholders of record. On March 3, 2011, the
closing price of our common
33
stock as reported by NASDAQ was $5.85 per share. The
following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the range
of high and low sales prices for our common stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
High
|
|
Low
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$
|
3.65
|
|
|
$
|
2.16
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
2.78
|
|
|
|
2.05
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
4.73
|
|
|
|
2.39
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
|
5.85
|
|
|
|
3.51
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
High
|
|
Low
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$
|
6.60
|
|
|
$
|
4.21
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
7.28
|
|
|
|
3.02
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
5.64
|
|
|
|
1.54
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
|
5.92
|
|
|
|
1.07
|
|
We have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock since
becoming a publicly held corporation in October 2005, and we do
not intend to declare or pay regular dividends on our common
stock in the foreseeable future. Instead, we generally intend to
invest any future earnings in our business. Subject to Delaware
law, our board of directors will determine the payment of future
dividends on our common stock, if any, and the amount of any
dividends in light of any applicable contractual restrictions
limiting our ability to pay dividends, our earnings and cash
flows, our capital requirements, our financial condition, and
other factors our board of directors deems relevant. Our Credit
Agreement and 10.5% Senior Secured Notes restrict our
ability to pay dividends or other distributions on our equity
securities.
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
The following table sets forth for the periods indicated certain
information with respect to our purchases of our common stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased
|
|
|
Shares that
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
as Part of a
|
|
|
may yet be
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Publicly
|
|
|
Purchased
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price Paid
|
|
|
Announced
|
|
|
Under the
|
|
Period
|
|
Purchased(1)
|
|
|
per Share
|
|
|
Plan(2)
|
|
|
Plan(2)
|
|
|
October 1 - 31, 2010
|
|
|
653
|
|
|
$
|
2.56
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
November 1 - 30, 2010
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
2.93
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
December 1 - 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
786
|
|
|
|
2.63
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents the surrender of shares of our common stock to
satisfy tax withholding obligations in connection with the
vesting of restricted stock issued to employees under our
stockholder-approved long-term incentive plan. |
|
(2) |
|
We did not have at any time during 2010, 2009 or 2008, and
currently do not have, a share repurchase program in place. |
34
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
We have derived the following condensed consolidated financial
information as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and for the
years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 from our
audited consolidated financial statements included in
Item 8 of this annual report. The condensed consolidated
financial information as of December 31, 2008 and for the
year ended December 31, 2007 was derived from our audited
consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of our
annual report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2009. The condensed
consolidated financial information as of December 31, 2007
and for the year ended December 31, 2006 was derived from
our audited consolidated financial statements included in
Item 8 of our annual report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2008, as amended by our
current report on
Form 8-K
filed on September 23, 2009. The condensed consolidated
financial information as of December 31, 2006 was derived
from our audited consolidated financial statements included in
Item 8 of our annual report on
Form 10-K,
as amended, for the year ended December 31, 2006.
We were formed in July 2004 and commenced operations in August
2004. From our formation to December 31, 2010, we completed
the acquisition of TODCO and several significant asset
acquisitions that impact the comparability of our historical
financial results. Our financial results reflect the impact of
the TODCO business and the asset acquisitions from the dates of
closing.
The selected consolidated financial information below should be
read together with Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
in Item 7 of this annual report and our audited
consolidated financial statements and related notes included in
Item 8 of this annual report. In addition, the following
information may not be deemed indicative of our future
operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2010(a)
|
|
2009(b)
|
|
2008(c)
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
657,480
|
|
|
$
|
742,851
|
|
|
$
|
1,111,807
|
|
|
$
|
726,278
|
|
|
$
|
344,312
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
(145,160
|
)
|
|
|
(92,146
|
)
|
|
|
(1,120,913
|
)
|
|
|
225,642
|
|
|
|
158,057
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
|
(90,149
|
)
|
|
|
(1,081,870
|
)
|
|
|
136,012
|
|
|
|
119,050
|
|
Earnings (loss) per share from continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(1.17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.93
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12.25
|
)
|
|
$
|
2.31
|
|
|
$
|
3.80
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
(1.17
|
)
|
|
|
(0.93
|
)
|
|
|
(12.25
|
)
|
|
|
2.28
|
|
|
|
3.70
|
|
Balance Sheet Data (as of end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
136,666
|
|
|
$
|
140,828
|
|
|
$
|
106,455
|
|
|
$
|
212,452
|
|
|
$
|
72,772
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
182,276
|
|
|
|
144,813
|
|
|
|
224,785
|
|
|
|
367,117
|
|
|
|
110,897
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
1,995,309
|
|
|
|
2,277,476
|
|
|
|
2,590,895
|
|
|
|
3,643,948
|
|
|
|
605,581
|
|
Long-term debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
853,166
|
|
|
|
856,755
|
|
|
|
1,015,764
|
|
|
|
890,013
|
|
|
|
91,850
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
853,132
|
|
|
|
978,512
|
|
|
|
925,315
|
|
|
|
2,011,433
|
|
|
|
394,851
|
|
Cash dividends per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes $125.1 million ($81.3 million, net of taxes
or $0.71 per diluted share) in impairment of property and
equipment charges. |
|
(b) |
|
Includes $26.9 million ($13.1 million, net of taxes or
$0.13 per diluted share) of impairment charges related to the
write-down of the Hercules 110 to fair value less costs
to sell during the second quarter of 2009. The sale of the rig
was completed in August 2009. In addition, 2009 includes
$31.6 million ($20.5 million, net of taxes or $0.21
per diluted share) related to an allowance for doubtful accounts
receivable of approximately $26.8 million, associated with
a customer in our International Offshore segment, a non-cash
charge of approximately $7.3 million to fully impair the
related deferred mobilization |
35
|
|
|
|
|
and contract preparation costs, partially offset by a
$2.5 million reduction in previously accrued contract
related operating costs that are not expected to be settled if
the receivable is not collected. |
|
(c) |
|
Includes $950.3 million ($950.3 million, net of taxes
or $10.76 per diluted share) and $376.7 million
($236.7 million, net of taxes or $2.68 per diluted share)
in impairment of goodwill and impairment of property and
equipment charges, respectively. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
24,420
|
|
|
$
|
137,861
|
|
|
$
|
269,727
|
|
|
$
|
175,741
|
|
|
$
|
124,241
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(21,306
|
)
|
|
|
(60,510
|
)
|
|
|
(515,787
|
)
|
|
|
(825,007
|
)
|
|
|
(149,983
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(7,276
|
)
|
|
|
(42,978
|
)
|
|
|
140,063
|
|
|
|
788,946
|
|
|
|
50,939
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
22,018
|
|
|
|
76,141
|
|
|
|
585,084
|
(a)
|
|
|
155,390
|
|
|
|
204,456
|
|
Deferred drydocking expenditures
|
|
|
15,040
|
|
|
|
15,646
|
|
|
|
17,269
|
|
|
|
20,772
|
|
|
|
12,544
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes the purchase of Hercules 350, Hercules 262
and Hercules 261 as well as related equipment. |
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
The following discussion and analysis of our financial
condition and results of operations should be read in
conjunction with the accompanying consolidated financial
statements as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 and for the
years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 included in
Item 8 of this annual report. The following discussion and
analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks
and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially from
those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a
result of certain factors, including those set forth under
Risk Factors in Item 1A and elsewhere in this
annual report. See Forward-Looking Statements.
OVERVIEW
We are a leading provider of shallow-water drilling and marine
services to the oil and natural gas exploration and production
industry globally. We provide these services to national oil and
gas companies, major integrated energy companies and independent
oil and natural gas operators. As of February 16, 2011, we
owned a fleet of 30 jackup rigs, 17 barge rigs, three
submersible rigs, one platform rig, a fleet of marine support
vessels and 60 liftboat vessels. In addition, we operate five
liftboat vessels owned by a third party. We own two retired
jackup rigs, Hercules 190 and Hercules 254,
located in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, for which we have an
agreement to sell and we expect to close in the first quarter of
2011. Our diverse fleet is capable of providing services such as
oil and gas exploration and development drilling, well service,
platform inspection, maintenance and decommissioning operations
in several key shallow water provinces around the world.
We report our business activities in six business segments,
which as of February 16, 2011, included the following:
Domestic Offshore includes 22 jackup rigs and
three submersible rigs in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico that can
drill in maximum water depths ranging from 85 to 350 feet.
Ten of the jackup rigs are either working on short-term
contracts or available for contracts, one is in the shipyard and
eleven are cold-stacked. All three submersibles are cold-stacked.
International Offshore includes eight jackup
rigs and one platform rig outside of the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico. We have two jackup rigs working offshore in each of
India and Saudi Arabia. We have one jackup rig contracted
offshore in Malaysia, one jackup rig contracted in Angola and
one platform rig under contract in Mexico. In addition, we have
one jackup rig warm-stacked and one jackup rig cold-stacked in
Bahrain.
36
Inland includes a fleet of six conventional
and eleven posted barge rigs that operate inland in marshes,
rivers, lakes and shallow bay or coastal waterways along the
U.S. Gulf Coast. Three of our inland barges are either
operating on short-term contracts or available and fourteen are
cold-stacked.
Domestic Liftboats includes 41 liftboats in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Thirty-eight are operating or
available for contracts and three are cold-stacked.
International Liftboats includes 24
liftboats. Twenty-one are operating or available for contracts
offshore West Africa, including five liftboats owned by a third
party, one is cold-stacked offshore West Africa and two are
operating or available for contracts in the Middle East region.
Delta Towing our Delta Towing business
operates a fleet of 29 inland tugs, 10 offshore tugs, 34 crew
boats, 46 deck barges, 16 shale barges and five spud barges
along and in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and from time to time
along the Southeastern coast and in Mexico. Of these vessels, 26
crew boats, 11 inland tugs, three offshore tugs, one deck barge
and one spud barge are cold-stacked, and the remaining are
working, being repaired or available for contracts.
In December 2009, we entered into an agreement with First Energy
Bank B.S.C. (MENAdrill) whereby we would market,
manage and operate two Friede & Goldman Super M2
design new-build jackup drilling rigs, Hull 109 and
Hull 110 (also known as MENAdrill Hercules 1 and
2, respectively), each with a maximum water depth of
300 feet. We received a notice of termination from
MENAdrill with respect to Hull 109 in December 2010, and
MENAdrill paid us a termination fee of $250,000 due under the
contract on the date of termination. It is our understanding
that Hull 110 has independently secured a contract
in Mexico and we therefore, expect to receive an additional
termination fee of $250,000.
Our jackup and submersible rigs and our barge rigs are used
primarily for exploration and development drilling in shallow
waters. Under most of our contracts, we are paid a fixed daily
rental rate called a dayrate, and we are required to
pay all costs associated with our own crews as well as the
upkeep and insurance of the rig and equipment.
Our liftboats are self-propelled, self-elevating vessels with a
large open deck space, which provides a versatile, mobile and
stable platform to support a broad range of offshore maintenance
and construction services throughout the life of an oil or
natural gas well. Under most of our liftboat contracts, we are
paid a fixed dayrate for the rental of the vessel, which
typically includes the costs of a small crew of four to eight
employees, and we also receive a variable rate for reimbursement
of other operating costs such as catering, fuel, rental
equipment and other items.
Our revenue is affected primarily by dayrates, fleet
utilization, the number and type of units in our fleet and
mobilization fees received from our customers. Utilization and
dayrates, in turn, are influenced principally by the demand for
rig and liftboat services from the exploration and production
sectors of the oil and natural gas industry. Our contracts in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico tend to be short-term in nature and
are heavily influenced by changes in the supply of units
relative to the fluctuating expenditures for both drilling and
production activity. Our international drilling contracts and
some of our liftboat contracts in West Africa are longer term in
nature.
Our operating costs are primarily a function of fleet
configuration and utilization levels. The most significant
direct operating costs for our Domestic Offshore, International
Offshore and Inland segments are wages paid to crews,
maintenance and repairs to the rigs, and insurance. These costs
do not vary significantly whether the rig is operating under
contract or idle, unless we believe that the rig is unlikely to
work for a prolonged period of time, in which case we may decide
to cold-stack or warm-stack the rig.
Cold-stacking is a common term used to describe a rig that is
expected to be idle for a protracted period and typically for
which routine maintenance is suspended and the crews are either
redeployed or laid-off. When a rig is cold-stacked, operating
expenses for the rig are significantly reduced because the crew
is smaller and maintenance activities are suspended. Placing
rigs in service that have been cold-stacked typically requires a
lengthy reactivation project that can involve significant
expenditures and potentially additional regulatory review,
particularly if the rig has been cold-stacked for a long period
of time. Warm-stacking is a term used for a rig expected to be
idle for a period of time that is not as prolonged as is the
case with a cold-stacked rig.
37
Maintenance is continued for warm-stacked rigs and crews are
reduced but a small crew is retained. Warm-stacked rigs
generally can be reactivated in three to four weeks.
The most significant costs for our Domestic Liftboats and
International Liftboats segments are the wages paid to crews and
the amortization of regulatory drydocking costs. Unlike our
Domestic Offshore, International Offshore and Inland segments, a
significant portion of the expenses incurred with operating each
liftboat are paid for or reimbursed by the customer under
contractual terms and prices. This includes catering, fuel, oil,
rental equipment, crane overtime and other items. We record
reimbursements from customers as revenue and the related
expenses as operating costs. Our liftboats are required to
undergo regulatory inspections every year and to be drydocked
two times every five years; the drydocking expenses and length
of time in drydock vary depending on the condition of the
vessel. All costs associated with regulatory inspections,
including related drydocking costs, are deferred and amortized
over a period of twelve months.
RECENT
DEVELOPMENTS
Investment
In January 2011, we paid $10 million to purchase
5.0 million shares, an investment in approximately eight
percent of the total outstanding equity of a new entity
incorporated in Luxembourg, Discovery Offshore S.A.
(Discovery Offshore), which investment was used by
Discovery Offshore towards funding the down payments on two
new-build ultra high specification harsh environment jackup
drilling rigs (the Rigs). The Rigs, Keppel FELS
Super A design, are being constructed by Keppel FELS
in its Singapore shipyard and have a maximum water depth rating
of 400 feet, two million pound hook load capacity, and are
capable of drilling up to 35,000 feet deep. The two Rigs
are expected to be delivered in the second and fourth quarter of
2013, respectively. Discovery Offshore also holds options to
purchase two additional rigs of the same specifications, which
must be exercised by the third and fourth quarter of 2011, with
delivery dates expected in the second quarter and fourth quarter
of 2014, respectively.
We also executed a construction management agreement (the
Construction Management Agreement) and a services
agreement (the Services Agreement) with Discovery
Offshore with respect to each of the Rigs. Under the
Construction Management Agreement, we will plan, supervise and
manage the construction and commissioning of the Rigs in
exchange for a fixed fee of $7.0 million per Rig, which we
received in February 2011. Pursuant to the terms of the Services
Agreement, we will market, manage, crew and operate the Rigs and
any other rigs that Discovery Offshore subsequently acquires or
controls, in exchange for a fixed daily fee of $6,000 per Rig
plus five percent of Rig-based EBITDA (EBITDA excluding
SG&A expense) generated per day per Rig, which commences
once the Rigs are completed and operating. Under the Services
Agreement, Discovery Offshore will be responsible for
operational and capital expenses for the Rigs. We are entitled
to a minimum fee of $5 million per Rig in the event
Discovery Offshore terminates a Services Agreement in the
absence of a breach of contract by Hercules Offshore.
In addition to the $10 million investment, we received
500,000 additional shares worth $1.0 million to cover our
costs incurred and efforts expended in forming Discovery
Offshore. We were issued warrants to purchase up to
5.0 million additional shares of Discovery Offshore stock
at a strike price equivalent to $2.00 which is exercisable in
the event that the Discovery stock price reaches an average
equal to or higher than 23 Norwegian Kroner per share,
which approximated $4.00 per share as of March 3,
2011, for 30 consecutive trading days. We have no other
financial obligations or commitments with respect to the Rigs or
our ownership in Discovery Offshore. Two of our officers are on
the Board of Directors of Discovery Offshore.
Alliance
Agreement
In January 2011, we entered into an agreement with China
Oilfield Services Limited (COSL) whereby we will
market and operate a Friede & Goldman JU2000E jackup
drilling rig with a maximum water depth of 400 feet. The
agreement is limited to a specified opportunity in Angola.
38
Asset
Purchase Agreement
In February 2011, we entered into an asset purchase
agreement (the Asset Purchase Agreement) with
Seahawk Drilling, Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries
(Seahawk), pursuant to which Seahawk agreed to sell
us 20 jackup rigs and related assets, accounts receivable and
cash and certain Seahawk liabilities in a transaction pursuant
to Section 363 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. In
connection with the Asset Purchase Agreement, Seahawk filed
voluntary Chapter 11 petitions before the
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas,
Corpus Christi Division.
The purchase consideration is approximately $105 million
(the Consideration), as valued at the date of the
Asset Purchase Agreement, preliminarily consisting of
$25.0 million in cash plus 22.3 million shares of our
common stock, par value $0.01 per share (the Stock
Consideration), subject to adjustment as further
described. The cash consideration is subject to increase at the
request of Seahawk up to an additional $20.0 million, if
required for the purpose of paying Seahawks debt, and if
the cash consideration is increased, the number of shares
comprising the Stock Consideration shall be reduced by an amount
equal to such increase, divided by $3.36. In addition, the
Consideration is subject to certain other adjustments, including
a working capital adjustment.
Our Board of Directors, and our lenders through the 2011 Credit
Amendment, have approved the transaction. Closing of the
transaction remains subject to bankruptcy court approval as well
as regulatory approvals and other customary conditions. Assuming
such conditions are achieved, the transaction is expected to
close during the second quarter of 2011.
Credit
Agreement Amendment
In March 2011, we amended our Credit Agreement for our term loan
and revolving credit facility (See the information set forth
under the caption Cash Requirements and Contractual
Obligations in Part II, Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations Liquidity and Capital
Resources).
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Generally, domestic drilling industry conditions were mixed in
2010. While first half 2010 activity levels rebounded from the
lows experienced in late 2009, second half 2010 activity was
negatively impacted by the new regulations in the wake of the
Macondo well blowout incident for offshore drilling imposed by
BOEMRE, which resulted in our customers experiencing significant
delays in obtaining necessary permits to operate in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Conversely, our Domestic Liftboat and
Delta Towing segments realized increased activity levels due to
our response to the clean up efforts related to the Macondo well
blowout incident.
From an international perspective, our International Offshore
segment experienced lower demand and increased jackup supply in
2010 as compared to 2009, which contributed to fewer operating
days in 2010. However, our International Liftboats segment
benefited from increased dayrates and significantly higher
operating days in 2010 as compared to 2009.
Our domestic liftboat operations generally are affected by the
seasonal weather patterns in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. These
seasonal patterns may result in increased operations in the
spring, summer and fall periods and a decrease in the winter
months. The rainy weather, tropical storms, hurricanes and other
storms prevalent in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico during the year
affect our domestic liftboat operations. During such severe
storms, our liftboats typically leave location and cease to earn
a full dayrate. Under U.S. Coast Guard guidelines, the
liftboats cannot return to work until the weather improves and
seas are less than five feet. Demand for our domestic rigs may
decline during hurricane season, which is generally considered
June 1 through November 30, as our customers may reduce drilling
activity. Accordingly, our operating results may vary from
quarter to quarter, depending on factors outside of our control.
39
The following table sets forth financial information by
operating segment and other selected information for the periods
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
Domestic Offshore:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of rigs (as of end of period)
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
124,063
|
|
|
$
|
140,889
|
|
|
$
|
382,358
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
147,715
|
|
|
|
175,473
|
|
|
|
227,884
|
|
Impairment of goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
507,194
|
|
Impairment of property and equipment
|
|
|
84,744
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
174,613
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
68,335
|
|
|
|
60,775
|
|
|
|
66,850
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
5,663
|
|
|
|
6,496
|
|
|
|
4,673
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
$
|
(182,394
|
)
|
|
$
|
(101,855
|
)
|
|
$
|
(598,856
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Offshore:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of rigs (as of end of period)
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
291,516
|
|
|
$
|
393,797
|
|
|
$
|
327,983
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
130,460
|
|
|
|
169,418
|
|
|
|
147,899
|
|
Impairment of goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,886
|
|
Impairment of property and equipment
|
|
|
37,973
|
|
|
|
26,882
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
58,275
|
|
|
|
63,808
|
|
|
|
37,865
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
7,930
|
|
|
|
35,694
|
|
|
|
2,980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
$
|
56,878
|
|
|
$
|
97,995
|
|
|
$
|
(11,647
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inland:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of barges (as of end of period)
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
21,922
|
|
|
$
|
19,794
|
|
|
$
|
162,487
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
27,702
|
|
|
|
44,593
|
|
|
|
125,656
|
|
Impairment of goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
205,474
|
|
Impairment of property and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
202,055
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
23,516
|
|
|
|
32,465
|
|
|
|
43,107
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(1,420
|
)
|
|
|
1,831
|
|
|
|
8,347
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
$
|
(27,876
|
)
|
|
$
|
(59,095
|
)
|
|
$
|
(422,152
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic Liftboats:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of liftboats (as of end of period)
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
70,710
|
|
|
$
|
75,584
|
|
|
$
|
94,755
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
42,073
|
|
|
|
48,738
|
|
|
|
54,474
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
14,698
|
|
|
|
20,267
|
|
|
|
21,317
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
1,850
|
|
|
|
2,039
|
|
|
|
2,386
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
$
|
12,089
|
|
|
$
|
4,540
|
|
|
$
|
16,578
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Liftboats:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of liftboats (as of end of period)
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
116,616
|
|
|
$
|
88,537
|
|
|
$
|
85,896
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
55,879
|
|
|
|
48,240
|
|
|
|
39,122
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
17,711
|
|
|
|
12,880
|
|
|
|
9,912
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
5,815
|
|
|
|
4,990
|
|
|
|
5,990
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
$
|
37,211
|
|
|
$
|
22,427
|
|
|
$
|
30,872
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
Delta Towing:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
32,653
|
|
|
$
|
24,250
|
|
|
$
|
58,328
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
25,101
|
|
|
|
27,674
|
|
|
|
36,676
|
|
Impairment of goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86,733
|
|
Impairment of property and equipment
|
|
|
2,419
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
5,471
|
|
|
|
7,917
|
|
|
|
10,926
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
1,395
|
|
|
|
1,336
|
|
|
|
4,058
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
$
|
(1,733
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12,677
|
)
|
|
$
|
(80,065
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
657,480
|
|
|
$
|
742,851
|
|
|
$
|
1,111,807
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
428,930
|
|
|
|
514,136
|
|
|
|
631,711
|
|
Impairment of goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
950,287
|
|
Impairment of property and equipment
|
|
|
125,136
|
|
|
|
26,882
|
|
|
|
376,668
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
191,183
|
|
|
|
201,421
|
|
|
|
192,894
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
57,391
|
|
|
|
92,558
|
|
|
|
81,160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(145,160
|
)
|
|
|
(92,146
|
)
|
|
|
(1,120,913
|
)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(82,941
|
)
|
|
|
(77,986
|
)
|
|
|
(63,778
|
)
|
Expense of credit agreement fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,073
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on early retirement of debt, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,157
|
|
|
|
26,345
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
3,885
|
|
|
|
3,967
|
|
|
|
3,315
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(224,216
|
)
|
|
|
(169,081
|
)
|
|
|
(1,155,031
|
)
|
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
89,622
|
|
|
|
78,932
|
|
|
|
73,161
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
|
(90,149
|
)
|
|
|
(1,081,870
|
)
|
Loss from discontinued operation, net of taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,585
|
)
|
|
|
(1,520
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
(91,734
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,083,390
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table sets forth selected operational data by
operating segment for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
Operating
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
Available
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Expense
|
|
|
Days
|
|
Days
|
|
Utilization(1)
|
|
per Day(2)
|
|
per Day(3)
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
|
3,321
|
|
|
|
4,086
|
|
|
|
81.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
37,357
|
|
|
$
|
36,151
|
|
International Offshore
|
|
|
2,106
|
|
|
|
3,344
|
|
|
|
63.0
|
%
|
|
|
138,422
|
|
|
|
39,013
|
|
Inland
|
|
|
986
|
|
|
|
1,095
|
|
|
|
90.0
|
%
|
|
|
22,233
|
|
|
|
25,299
|
|
Domestic Liftboats
|
|
|
9,641
|
|
|
|
13,870
|
|
|
|
69.5
|
%
|
|
|
7,334
|
|
|
|
3,033
|
|
International Liftboats
|
|
|
5,100
|
|
|
|
8,546
|
|
|
|
59.7
|
%
|
|
|
22,866
|
|
|
|
6,539
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
Operating
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
Available
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Expense
|
|
|
Days
|
|
Days
|
|
Utilization(1)
|
|
per Day(2)
|
|
per Day(3)
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
|
2,676
|
|
|
|
4,544
|
|
|
|
58.9
|
%
|
|
$
|
52,649
|
|
|
$
|
38,616
|
|
International Offshore
|
|
|
3,100
|
|
|
|
3,714
|
|
|
|
83.5
|
%
|
|
|
127,031
|
|
|
|
45,616
|
|
Inland
|
|
|
651
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
41.3
|
%
|
|
|
30,406
|
|
|
|
28,259
|
|
Domestic Liftboats
|
|
|
9,535
|
|
|
|
14,804
|
|
|
|
64.4
|
%
|
|
|
7,927
|
|
|
|
3,292
|
|
International Liftboats
|
|
|
4,293
|
|
|
|
7,209
|
|
|
|
59.6
|
%
|
|
|
20,624
|
|
|
|
6,692
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
Operating
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
Available
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Expense
|
|
|
Days
|
|
Days
|
|
Utilization(1)
|
|
per Day(2)
|
|
per Day(3)
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
|
5,907
|
|
|
|
8,166
|
|
|
|
72.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
64,730
|
|
|
$
|
27,906
|
|
International Offshore
|
|
|
2,753
|
|
|
|
3,005
|
|
|
|
91.6
|
%
|
|
|
119,137
|
|
|
|
49,218
|
|
Inland
|
|
|
4,048
|
|
|
|
5,885
|
|
|
|
68.8
|
%
|
|
|
40,140
|
|
|
|
21,352
|
|
Domestic Liftboats
|
|
|
10,343
|
|
|
|
15,785
|
|
|
|
65.5
|
%
|
|
|
9,161
|
|
|
|
3,451
|
|
International Liftboats
|
|
|
5,028
|
|
|
|
6,501
|
|
|
|
77.3
|
%
|
|
|
17,084
|
|
|
|
6,018
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Utilization is defined as the total number of days our rigs or
liftboats, as applicable, were under contract, known as
operating days, in the period as a percentage of the total
number of available days in the period. Days during which our
rigs and liftboats were undergoing major refurbishments,
upgrades or construction, and days during which our rigs and
liftboats are cold-stacked, are not counted as available days.
Days during which our liftboats are in the shipyard undergoing
drydocking or inspection are considered available days for the
purposes of calculating utilization. |
|
(2) |
|
Average revenue per rig or liftboat per day is defined as
revenue earned by our rigs or liftboats, as applicable, in the
period divided by the total number of operating days for our
rigs or liftboats, as applicable, in the period. Included in
International Offshore revenue is a total of $14.7 million,
$16.3 million and $11.6 million related to
amortization of deferred mobilization revenue and contract
specific capital expenditures reimbursed by the customer for the
years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. |
|
(3) |
|
Average operating expense per rig or liftboat per day is defined
as operating expenses, excluding depreciation and amortization,
incurred by our rigs or liftboats, as applicable, in the period
divided by the total number of available days in the period. We
use available days to calculate average operating expense per
rig or liftboat per day rather than operating days, which are
used to calculate average revenue per rig or liftboat per day,
because we incur operating expenses on our rigs and liftboats
even when they are not under contract and earning a dayrate. In
addition, the operating expenses we incur on our rigs and
liftboats per day when they are not under contract are typically
lower than the per day expenses we incur when they are under
contract. |
2010
Compared to 2009
Revenue
Consolidated. Total revenue for 2010 was
$657.5 million compared with $742.9 million for 2009,
a decrease of $85.4 million, or 11%. This decrease is
further described below.
Domestic Offshore. Revenue for our Domestic
Offshore segment was $124.1 million for 2010 compared with
$140.9 million for 2009, a decrease of $16.8 million,
or 12%. This decrease resulted primarily from a 29% decline in
average dayrates which contributed to an approximate
$41 million decrease during 2010 as compared to 2009.
Partially offsetting this decrease was an increase in operating
days to 3,321 days during 2010 from 2,676 days during
2009, which contributed to an approximate $24 million
increase in revenue. Average utilization was 81.3% in 2010
compared with 58.9% in 2009.
42
International Offshore. Revenue for our
International Offshore segment was $291.5 million for 2010
compared with $393.8 million for 2009, a decrease of
$102.3 million, or 26%. Approximately $26 million of
this decrease related to Hercules 156 and Hercules
170, which did not work in 2010, approximately
$55 million was associated with a decline in revenue from
mobilizing Hercules 205 and Hercules 206 to the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico, and approximately $27 million
related to Hercules 185 not meeting revenue recognition
criteria in 2010. Partially offsetting these decreases was an
approximate $8 million increase for Hercules 260
primarily due to downtime in 2009 for leg repairs.
Inland. Revenue for our Inland segment was
$21.9 million for 2010 compared with $19.8 million for
2009, an increase of $2.1 million, or 11%. This increase
resulted from a 51% increase in operating days, 986 in 2010
compared to 651 in 2009, which contributed to an approximate
$7 million increase in revenue. Partially offsetting this
increase, average dayrates declined 27% which contributed to an
approximate $5 million decrease in revenue.
Domestic Liftboats. Revenue for our Domestic
Liftboats segment was $70.7 million for 2010 compared with
$75.6 million in 2009, a decrease of $4.9 million, or
6%. Approximately $8 million of this decrease resulted from
the transfer of four vessels to West Africa in the fourth
quarter of 2009, offset in part by increased operating days for
the remaining vessels. Operating days increased slightly to
9,641 days during 2010 as compared to 9,535 days
during 2009 due in part to increased activity associated with
the Macondo well blowout incident remediation efforts, largely
offset by the impact of the transfer of four vessels. Average
revenue per vessel per day was $7,334 in 2010 compared with
$7,927 in 2009, a decrease of $593 per day due to both weaker
dayrates on our smaller class vessels and a shift in the mix of
vessel class as we mobilized four larger class vessels to West
Africa in the fourth quarter of 2009.
International Liftboats. Revenue for our
International Liftboats segment was $116.6 million for 2010
compared with $88.5 million in 2009, an increase of
$28.1 million, or 32%. Approximately $34 million of
this increase resulted from the transfer of four vessels from
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Average revenue per liftboat per
day increased to $22,866 in 2010 compared with $20,624 in 2009
and operating days increased to 5,100 days in 2010 as
compared to 4,293 in 2009.
Delta Towing. Revenue for our Delta Towing
segment was $32.7 million for 2010 compared with
$24.3 million for 2009, an increase of $8.4 million,
or 35%. An increase in operating days during 2010 as compared to
2009, due in part to activity associated with the Macondo well
blowout incident remediation efforts, contributed to an
approximate $16 million increase in revenue. This increase was
partially offset by the impact of a decrease in average vessel
dayrates during 2010 as compared to 2009, which contributed to
an approximate $7 million decrease.
Operating
Expenses
Consolidated. Total operating expenses for
2010 were $428.9 million compared with $514.1 million
in 2009, a decrease of $85.2 million, or 17%. This decrease
is further described below.
Domestic Offshore. Operating expenses for our
Domestic Offshore segment were $147.7 million in 2010
compared with $175.5 million in 2009, a decrease of
$27.8 million, or 16%. The decrease was driven in part by
458 fewer available days during 2010 as compared to 2009, or a
10% decline, due to our cold stacking of rigs. Our cold stacking
resulted in a reduction to our labor, repairs and maintenance,
and workers compensation expenses. Additionally, 2010
includes gains totaling $10.2 million for the sale of
Hercules 155, Hercules 191 and Hercules
255. Partially offsetting these decreases are increases in
insurance costs and equipment rentals of $5.1 million,
accrued sales and use tax expense of approximately
$3.0 million related to a multi-year state sales and use
tax audit as well as a gain of $6.3 million in 2009 for an
insurance settlement related to hurricane damage. Average
operating expenses per rig per day were $36,151 in 2010 compared
with $38,616 in 2009.
International Offshore. Operating expenses for
our International Offshore segment were $130.5 million in
2010 compared with $169.4 million in 2009, a decrease of
$39.0 million, or 23%. Hercules 170 was in warm
stack during all of 2010 which contributed to a decrease of
$7.5 million, and Hercules 205 and Hercules 206
were transferred to the Domestic Offshore segment in the
first quarter of 2010 and fourth quarter of 2009,
43
respectively, which contributed to a decrease of
$19.8 million. Additionally, Hercules 185 was on
stand-by in 2010, but operated a portion of 2009 which
contributed to a decrease of $8.8 million. In addition,
2009 included a charge of $4.8 million associated with a
customer in our International Offshore segment
($7.3 million to fully impair the related deferred
mobilization and contract preparation costs, partially offset by
a $2.5 million reduction in previously accrued contract
related operating costs that are not expected to be settled if
the receivable is not collected). Average operating expenses per
rig per day were $39,013 in 2010 compared with $45,616 in 2009.
Inland. Operating expenses for our Inland
segment were $27.7 million in 2010 compared with
$44.6 million in 2009, a decrease of $16.9 million, or
38%. Our cold stacking of barges reduced our available days from
1,578 in 2009 to 1,095 in 2010. This reduction in available days
coupled with the reduction in our labor force significantly
reduced the segments variable operating costs. In
addition, 2010 includes a $3.1 million gain on the sale of
eight of our retired barges, while 2009 includes a
$0.6 million gain of the sale of two of our retired barges.
These decreases are partially offset by accrued sales and use
tax expense of approximately $3.0 million related to a
multi-year state sales and use tax audit. Average operating
expenses per rig per day were $25,299 in 2010 compared with
$28,259 in 2009.
Domestic Liftboats. Operating expenses for our
Domestic Liftboats segment were $42.1 million in 2010
compared with $48.7 million in 2009, a decrease of
$6.7 million, or 14%. The transfer of four vessels to our
International Liftboats segment contributed $3.3 million to
this decrease. In addition, labor costs decreased
$2.4 million. Available days declined to 13,870 in 2010
from 14,804 in 2009 due to the transfer of four vessels to our
International Liftboats segment in the fourth quarter of 2009.
Average operating expenses per vessel per day decreased to
$3,033 per day during 2010 from $3,292 per day during 2009.
International Liftboats. Operating expenses
for our International Liftboats segment were $55.9 million
for 2010 compared with $48.2 million in 2009, an increase
of $7.6 million, or 16%. The transfer of four vessels from
our Domestic Liftboats segment in the fourth quarter of 2009
contributed $4.1 million to this increase. In addition,
higher expenses for equipment rentals and certain regulatory
fees contributed to an increase of $2.2 million. Available
days increased to 8,546 in 2010 from 7,209 in 2009 largely
related to the transfer of four vessels. Average operating
expenses per vessel per day decreased to $6,539 per day during
2010 from $6,692 per day during 2009.
Delta Towing. Operating expenses for our Delta
Towing segment were $25.1 million in 2010 compared with
$27.7 million in 2009, a decrease of $2.6 million, or
9%. This decrease is primarily due to lower labor expenses
during 2010 as compared to 2009 due to the cold stacking of
vessels. These decreases are partially offset by costs
associated with increased activity due to the Macondo well
blowout incident remediation efforts.
Impairment
of Property and Equipment
In the year ended December 31, 2010, we incurred
$125.1 million of impairment charges related to certain
property and equipment on our Domestic Offshore, International
Offshore and Delta Towing segments, the impact of which by
segment was $84.7 million, $38.0 million and
$2.4 million, respectively. In June 2009, we entered into
an agreement to sell Hercules 110, which was cold stacked
in Trinidad, and incurred a $26.9 million impairment charge
to write-down the rig to its fair value less costs to sell.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense in 2010 was
$191.2 million compared with $201.4 million in 2009, a
decrease of $10.2 million, or 5%. This decrease resulted
primarily from lower amortization of our international contract
values and drydocking costs, which contributed a decrease of
$3.4 million and $3.2 million, respectively, as well
as reduced depreciation due to asset sales and certain assets
being fully depreciated, which contributed a decrease of
approximately $12 million. These decreases were partially
offset by the impact of capital additions which contributed to
an approximate $8 million increase.
44
General
and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses in 2010 were
$57.4 million compared with $92.6 million in 2009, a
decrease of $35.2 million, or 38%. This decrease relates
primarily to a $26.8 million allowance for doubtful
accounts receivable that was recorded in 2009 related to a
customer in our International Offshore segment. In addition,
labor costs decreased in 2010 as compared to 2009 driven in part
by an adjustment of approximately $2.8 million to
stock-based compensation expense due to a revision of our
estimated forfeiture rate during 2010 as well as the impact of
headcount reductions.
Interest
Expense
Interest expense increased $5.0 million, or 6%. This
increase was related to interest expense incurred on our
10.5% Senior Secured Notes issued in October 2009,
partially offset by lower interest on our term loan as the
increase in interest rates after the 2009 Credit Amendment were
offset by lower debt balances due to the early retirement of a
portion of our term loan in the third and fourth quarters of
2009. In addition, interest expense decreased on our
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes due to our second quarter
2009 retirements.
Expense
of Credit Agreement Fees
During 2009, we amended our Credit Agreement and repaid and
terminated a portion of our credit facility. In doing so, we
recorded the write-off of certain deferred debt issuance costs
and certain fees directly related to these activities totaling
$15.1 million.
Gain on
Early Retirement of Debt, Net
Gain on early retirement of debt, net was $12.2 million in
2009. During 2009, we retired a portion of our term loan
facility and wrote off $1.6 million in associated
unamortized issuance costs. In addition, in 2009 we retired
$65.8 million aggregate principal amount of the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes for cash and equity
consideration of approximately $40.1 million, resulting in
a gain of $13.7 million, net of an associated write-off of
a portion of our unamortized issuance costs.
Income
Tax Benefit
Income tax benefit was $89.6 million on pre-tax loss of
$224.2 million during 2010, compared to a benefit of
$78.9 million on pre-tax loss of $169.1 million for
2009. The effective tax rate decreased to a tax benefit of 40.0%
during 2010 as compared to a tax benefit of 46.7% during 2009.
The decrease in tax benefit for 2010 results from a higher tax
charge associated with a deemed repatriation of foreign earnings
and a reduction in state income tax benefits, partially offset
by reduced foreign tax cost when compared to 2009.
2009
Compared to 2008
Revenue
Consolidated. Total revenue for 2009 was
$742.9 million compared with $1,111.8 million for
2008, a decrease of $369.0 million, or 33.2%. This decrease
is further described below.
Domestic Offshore. Revenue for our Domestic
Offshore segment was $140.9 million for 2009 compared with
$382.4 million for 2008, a decrease of $241.5 million,
or 63.2%. This decline resulted from decreased operating days
from 5,907 in 2008 to 2,676 in 2009 primarily due to an overall
decrease in demand and our cold stacking of rigs, which
contributed $170.1 million of the decrease, and lower
average dayrates which contributed $71.4 million of the
decrease. Average utilization was 58.9% in 2009 compared with
72.3% in 2008.
International Offshore. Revenue for our
International Offshore segment was $393.8 million for 2009
compared with $328.0 million for 2008, an increase of
$65.8 million, or 20.1%. Approximately $154 million of
this increase was due to increased operating days as a result of
the commencement of the Hercules 260 in late April 2008,
Hercules 258 in June 2008, Hercules 208 in August
2008, Hercules 261 in December 2008
45
and Hercules 262 in January 2009. These favorable
increases were partially offset by a decrease of approximately
$76 million related to the Hercules 156 and
Hercules 170 being in warm stack, Hercules 206
being transferred to Domestic Offshore for cold stack in the
fourth quarter of 2009 and Hercules 110 in cold stack
during 2009 until the date of sale, and a lower average dayrate
realized on Hercules 205. In addition, the Hercules
185 contributed to an approximate $14 million decrease
as it was in the shipyard for an upgrade for a portion of 2009.
Average revenue per rig per day increased to $127,031 in 2009
from $119,137 in 2008 due primarily to higher average dayrates
earned on Hercules 261 and Hercules 208 for a more
significant portion of 2009 as well as the commencement of the
Hercules 262 in January 2009, partially offset by lower
average dayrates earned on Hercules 205 and Hercules
206, and Hercules 156 in warm stack a majority of the
year as well as Hercules 185 which operated at a higher
dayrate, but for fewer operating days.
Inland. Revenue for our Inland segment was
$19.8 million for 2009 compared with $162.5 million
for 2008, a decrease of $142.7 million, or 87.8% as a
result of an industry-wide decline in drilling in the transition
zones. This decrease resulted primarily from decreased operating
days, 651 in 2009 compared to 4,048 in 2008, an 83.9% decrease.
Available days declined 73.2% during 2009 as compared to 2008
due to our cold stacking plan. Furthermore, average utilization
was 41.3% on fewer available days in 2009 compared with 68.8% in
2008 as demand in the segment declined.
Domestic Liftboats. Revenue for our Domestic
Liftboats segment was $75.6 million for 2009 compared with
$94.8 million in 2008, a decrease of $19.2 million, or
20.2%. This decrease resulted primarily from lower average
dayrates, which contributed $12.8 million of the decrease,
as well as a $6.4 million decrease due to fewer operating
days in 2009. Average revenue per vessel per day was $7,927 in
2009 compared with $9,161 in 2008, a decrease of $1,234 per day
due primarily to lower dayrates in all vessel classes with a
slight decrease due to mix of vessel class.
International Liftboats. Revenue for our
International Liftboats segment was $88.5 million for 2009
compared with $85.9 million in 2008, an increase of
$2.6 million, or 3.1%. This increase resulted from higher
average dayrates, which contributed $17.8 million of the
increase, significantly offset by fewer operating days, which
contributed a $15.2 million decrease. The higher average
dayrate was due to increased operating days on our larger class
vessels, which have higher dayrates and lower utilization on the
smaller class vessels which have lower dayrates.
Delta Towing. Revenue for our Delta Towing
segment was $24.3 million for 2009 compared with
$58.3 million for 2008, a decrease of $34.1 million,
or 58.4%, due to decreased activity both offshore and in the
transition zone.
Operating
Expenses
Consolidated. Total operating expenses for
2009 were $514.1 million compared with $631.7 million
in 2008, a decrease of $117.6 million, or 18.6%. This
decrease is further described below.
Domestic Offshore. Operating expenses for our
Domestic Offshore segment were $175.5 million in 2009
compared with $227.9 million in 2008, a decrease of
$52.4 million, or 23.0%. The decrease was driven primarily
by lower labor, catering, repairs and maintenance, and insurance
expenses primarily as a result of our cold stacking of rigs.
Available days decreased to 4,544 in 2009 from 8,166 in 2008 due
to our cold stacking of rigs. Average operating expenses per rig
per day were $38,616 in 2009 compared with $27,906 in 2008 due
in part to shore based support and cold stacked rig costs being
allocated over fewer available days.
International Offshore. Operating expenses for
our International Offshore segment were $169.4 million in
2009 compared with $147.9 million in 2008, an increase of
$21.5 million, or 14.5%. Available days increased to 3,714
in 2009 from 3,005 in 2008. Average operating expenses per rig
per day were $45,616 in 2009 compared with $49,218 in 2008. This
decrease related primarily to the Hercules 156 and
Hercules 170 being in warm stack during a portion of 2009
and the initial
start-up
costs incurred during 2008 related to our India and Malaysia
operations, partially offset by an increase due to the
commencement of Hercules 261 and Hercules 262 in
December 2008 and January 2009, respectively.
46
Inland. Operating expenses for our Inland
segment were $44.6 million in 2009 compared with
$125.7 million in 2008, a decrease of $81.1 million,
or 64.5%. By mid 2009, fourteen of our seventeen barges were
cold stacked which significantly reduced the segments
variable operating costs. Average operating expenses per rig per
day were $28,259 in 2009 compared with $21,352 in 2008. The
increase in cost per day was driven primarily by costs
associated with shore based support and cold stacked barges
being allocated over fewer available days.
Domestic Liftboats. Operating expenses for our
Domestic Liftboats segment were $48.7 million in 2009
compared with $54.5 million in 2008, a decrease of
$5.7 million, or 10.5% due primarily to lower labor
expense, fuel and oil and insurance costs. Available days
decreased to 14,804 in 2009 from 15,785 in 2008 due to four
vessels that were transferred to our International Liftboats
Segment, these four vessels were not marketed during the third
quarter 2009 in preparation of their mobilization to our
International Liftboats Segment in the fourth quarter of 2009,
and due to the cold stacking of several liftboats during 2009
that were available in 2008. Average operating expenses per
vessel per day had a slight decrease to $3,292 per day during
2009 from $3,451 per day during 2008.
International Liftboats. Operating expenses
for our International Liftboats segment were $48.2 million
for 2009 compared with $39.1 million in 2008, an increase
of $9.1 million, or 23.3%. Available days increased to
7,209 in 2009 from 6,501 in 2008 largely related to the current
year availability of the Whale Shark and
Amberjack, which were transferred to our International
Liftboats segment from the Domestic Liftboats segment during
2008. Average operating expenses per liftboat per day were
$6,692 in 2009 compared with $6,018 in 2008 due to higher
repairs and maintenance expenses and costs associated with
transferring and preparing the four domestic vessels to work in
West Africa.
Delta Towing. Operating expenses for our Delta
Towing segment were $27.7 million in 2009 compared with
$36.7 million in 2008, a decrease of $9.0 million, or
24.5%. Due to the decline in activity in both offshore and the
transition zone, we cold stacked certain assets in our fleet
which resulted in lower labor, repairs and maintenance and fuel
and oil expenses during 2009.
Impairment
of Property and Equipment
Impairment of property and equipment in 2009 was
$26.9 million compared with $376.7 million in 2008.
The 2008 impairment charges of $376.7 million related to
certain property and equipment on our Domestic Offshore and
Inland segments in 2008. In June 2009, we entered into an
agreement to sell Hercules 110, which was cold stacked in
Trinidad, and incurred a $26.9 million impairment charge to
write-down the rig to its fair value less costs to sell.
Depreciation
and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense in 2009 was
$201.4 million compared with $192.9 million in 2008,
an increase of $8.5 million, or 4.4%. This increase
resulted primarily from additional depreciation related to the
commencement of Hercules 260 in late April 2008,
Hercules 350 in June 2008, Hercules 208 in August
2008, Hercules 261 in December 2008 and Hercules 262
in January 2009. These increases are partially offset by
reduced depreciation due to the impairment of certain rigs,
barges and related equipment in the fourth quarter of 2008 and
lower amortization of our international contract values.
General
and Administrative Expenses
General and administrative expenses in 2009 were
$92.6 million compared with $81.2 million in 2008, an
increase of $11.4 million, or 14.0%. This increase relates
primarily to an allowance for doubtful accounts receivable of
$30.8 million, net, of which approximately
$26.8 million as of December 31, 2009, related to a
customer in its International Offshore segment, partially offset
by the cost reduction initiatives implemented in late 2008 and
in 2009 in response to the significant decline in activity in
several of our business segments. In addition, 2008 included
$7.5 million in executive severance related costs.
47
Interest
Expense
Interest expense increased $14.2 million, or 22.3%. This
increase was primarily related to the higher interest
capitalized in 2008 and interest expense incurred on our
10.5% Senior Secured Notes issued in October 2009. In
addition, the increase in interest rates after the 2009 Credit
Amendment were offset by lower debt balances due to the early
retirement of a portion of our term loan.
Expense
of Credit Agreement Fees
During 2009, we amended our Credit Agreement and repaid and
terminated a portion of our credit facility. In doing so, we
recorded the write-off of certain deferred debt issuance costs
and certain fees directly related to these activities totaling
$15.1 million.
Gain
(Loss) on Early Retirement of Debt, Net
Gain on early retirement of debt, net was $12.2 million in
2009 compared with $26.3 million in 2008, a decrease of
$14.2 million or 53.9%. During 2009, we retired a portion
of our term loan facility and wrote off $1.6 million in
associated unamortized issuance costs. In addition, in 2009 we
retired $65.8 million aggregate principal amount of the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes for cash and equity
consideration of approximately $40.1 million, resulting in
a gain of $13.7 million, net of an associated write-off of
a portion of our unamortized issuance costs. In 2008, the gain
on early retirement of debt in the amount of $26.3 million
related to the December 2008 redemption of $73.2 million
accreted principal amount ($88.2 million aggregate
principal amount) of the 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes
for a cost of $44.8 million, net of the related write off
of $2.1 million of unamortized issuance costs.
Other
Income
Other income in 2009 was $4.0 million compared with
$3.3 million in 2008, an increase of $0.7 million or
19.7%. This increase is primarily due to foreign currency
exchange gains, partially offset by lower interest income.
Income
Tax Benefit
Income tax benefit was $78.9 million on pre-tax loss of
$169.1 million during 2009, compared to a benefit of
$73.2 million on pre-tax loss of $1,155.0 million for
2008. The effective tax rate changed to a tax benefit of 46.7%
in 2009 from a tax benefit of 6.3% in 2008. The change in the
effective tax rate is due to the non-deductible goodwill
impairment in 2008 as well as a state tax benefit of
$14.1 million based on prior year state tax audits
concluded in the fourth quarter of 2009 and a federal tax
benefit of $2.5 million based on recent court cases related
to alternative minimum tax positions.
Non-GAAP Financial
Measures
Regulation G, General Rules Regarding Disclosure of
Non-GAAP Financial Measures and other SEC regulations
define and prescribe the conditions for use of certain
Non-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
(Non-GAAP) financial measures. We use various
Non-GAAP financial measures such as adjusted operating income
(loss), adjusted income (loss) from continuing operations,
adjusted diluted earnings (loss) per share from continuing
operations, EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA. EBITDA is defined as net
income plus interest expense, income taxes, depreciation and
amortization. We believe that in addition to GAAP based
financial information, Non-GAAP amounts are meaningful
disclosures for the following reasons: (i) each are
components of the measures used by our board of directors and
management team to evaluate and analyze our operating
performance and historical trends, (ii) each are components
of the measures used by our management team to make
day-to-day
operating decisions, (iii) the Credit Agreement contains
covenants that require us to maintain a total leverage ratio and
a consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio, which contain
Non-GAAP adjustments as components, (iv) each are
components of the measures used by our management to facilitate
internal comparisons to competitors results and the
shallow-water drilling and marine services industry in general,
(v) results excluding certain costs and expenses provide
useful information for the
48
understanding of the ongoing operations without the impact of
significant special items, and (vi) the payment of certain
bonuses to members of our management is contingent upon, among
other things, the satisfaction by the Company of financial
targets, which may contain Non-GAAP measures as components. We
acknowledge that there are limitations when using Non-GAAP
measures. The measures below are not recognized terms under GAAP
and do not purport to be an alternative to net income as a
measure of operating performance or to cash flows from operating
activities as a measure of liquidity. EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA
are not intended to be a measure of free cash flow for
managements discretionary use, as it does not consider
certain cash requirements such as tax payments and debt service
requirements. In addition, the EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA
amounts presented in the following table should not be used for
covenant compliance purposes as these amounts could differ
materially from the amounts ultimately calculated under our
Credit Agreement. Because all companies do not use identical
calculations, the amounts below may not be comparable to other
similarly titled measures of other companies.
49
The following tables present a reconciliation of the GAAP
financial measures to the corresponding adjusted financial
measures (in thousands, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Operating Loss
|
|
$
|
(145,160
|
)
|
|
$
|
(92,146
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,120,913
|
)
|
Adjustments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment impairment
|
|
|
125,136
|
|
|
|
26,882
|
|
|
|
376,668
|
|
Goodwill impairment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
950,287
|
|
Executive separation and benefit related charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,468
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments
|
|
|
125,136
|
|
|
|
26,882
|
|
|
|
1,334,423
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted Operating Income (Loss)
|
|
$
|
(20,024
|
)
|
|
$
|
(65,264
|
)
|
|
$
|
213,510
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from Continuing Operations
|
|
$
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
(90,149
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,081,870
|
)
|
Adjustments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment impairment
|
|
|
125,136
|
|
|
|
26,882
|
|
|
|
376,668
|
|
Goodwill impairment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
950,287
|
|
Executive separation and benefit related charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,468
|
|
Gain on early retirement of debt, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,157
|
)
|
|
|
(26,345
|
)
|
Expense of credit agreement fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,073
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax impact of adjustments
|
|
|
(43,883
|
)
|
|
|
(14,799
|
)
|
|
|
(133,331
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments
|
|
|
81,253
|
|
|
|
14,999
|
|
|
|
1,174,747
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations
|
|
$
|
(53,341
|
)
|
|
$
|
(75,150
|
)
|
|
$
|
92,877
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted Loss per Share from Continuing Operations
|
|
$
|
(1.17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.93
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12.25
|
)
|
Adjustments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment impairment
|
|
|
1.09
|
|
|
|
0.28
|
|
|
|
4.26
|
|
Goodwill impairment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.76
|
|
Executive separation and benefit related charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.08
|
|
Gain on early retirement of debt, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
|
(0.30
|
)
|
Expense of credit agreement fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax impact of adjustments
|
|
|
(0.38
|
)
|
|
|
(0.15
|
)
|
|
|
(1.51
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments
|
|
|
0.71
|
|
|
|
0.16
|
|
|
|
13.29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted Diluted Earnings (Loss) per Share from Continuing
Operations
|
|
$
|
(0.46
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.77
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.04
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from Continuing Operations
|
|
$
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
(90,149
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,081,870
|
)
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
82,941
|
|
|
|
77,986
|
|
|
|
63,778
|
|
Income tax benefit
|
|
|
(89,622
|
)
|
|
|
(78,932
|
)
|
|
|
(73,161
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
191,183
|
|
|
|
201,421
|
|
|
|
192,894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
|
49,908
|
|
|
|
110,326
|
|
|
|
(898,359
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment impairment
|
|
|
125,136
|
|
|
|
26,882
|
|
|
|
376,668
|
|
Goodwill impairment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
950,287
|
|
Executive separation and benefit related charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,468
|
|
Gain on early retirement of debt, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,157
|
)
|
|
|
(26,345
|
)
|
Expense of credit agreement fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,073
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments
|
|
|
125,136
|
|
|
|
29,798
|
|
|
|
1,308,078
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA
|
|
$
|
175,044
|
|
|
$
|
140,124
|
|
|
$
|
409,719
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50
Critical
Accounting Policies
Critical accounting policies are those that are important to our
results of operations, financial condition and cash flows and
require managements most difficult, subjective or complex
judgments. Different amounts would be reported under alternative
assumptions. We have evaluated the accounting policies used in
the preparation of the consolidated financial statements and
related notes appearing elsewhere in this annual report. We
apply those accounting policies that we believe best reflect the
underlying business and economic events, consistent with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
We believe that our policies are generally consistent with those
used by other companies in our industry. We base our estimates
on historical experience and on various other assumptions that
are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the
results of which form the basis for making judgments about the
carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily
apparent from other sources. Actual results could differ from
those estimates.
We periodically update the estimates used in the preparation of
the financial statements based on our latest assessment of the
current and projected business and general economic environment.
During recent periods, there has been substantial volatility and
a decline in natural gas prices. This decline may adversely
impact the business of our customers, and in turn our business.
This could result in changes to estimates used in preparing our
financial statements, including the assessment of certain of our
assets for impairment. Our significant accounting policies are
summarized in Note 1 to our consolidated financial
statements. We believe that our more critical accounting
policies include those related to property and equipment,
revenue recognition, income tax, allowance for doubtful
accounts, deferred charges, stock-based compensation, cash and
cash equivalents and intangible assets. Inherent in such
policies are certain key assumptions and estimates.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, demand deposits
with banks and all highly liquid investments with original
maturities of three months or less.
Property
and Equipment
Property and equipment represents 82% of our total assets as of
December 31, 2010. Property and equipment is stated at
cost, less accumulated depreciation. Expenditures that
substantially increase the useful lives of our assets are
capitalized and depreciated, while routine expenditures for
repairs and maintenance items are expensed as incurred, except
for expenditures for drydocking our liftboats. Drydock costs are
capitalized at cost as Other Assets, Net on the Consolidated
Balance Sheets and amortized on the straight-line method over a
period of 12 months (see Deferred Charges).
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method, after
allowing for salvage value where applicable, over the useful
life of the asset, which is typically 15 years for our rigs
and liftboats. We review our property and equipment for
potential impairment when events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying value of any asset may not be
recoverable or when reclassifications are made between property
and equipment and assets held for sale. Factors that might
indicate a potential impairment may include, but are not limited
to, significant decreases in the market value of the long-lived
asset, a significant change in the long-lived assets
physical condition, a change in industry conditions or a
substantial reduction in cash flows associated with the use of
the long-lived asset. For property and equipment held for use,
the determination of recoverability is made based on the
estimated undiscounted future net cash flows of the related
asset or group of assets being reviewed. Any actual impairment
charge would be recorded using the estimated discounted value of
future cash flows. This evaluation requires us to make judgments
regarding long-term forecasts of future revenue and costs. In
turn these forecasts are uncertain in that they require
assumptions about demand for our services, future market
conditions and technological developments. Significant and
unanticipated changes to these assumptions could require a
provision for impairment in a future period. Given the nature of
these evaluations and their application to specific asset groups
and specific times, it is not possible to reasonably quantify
the impact of changes in these assumptions.
Supply and demand are the key drivers of rig and vessel
utilization and our ability to contract our rigs and vessels at
economical rates. During periods of an oversupply, it is not
uncommon for us to have rigs or
51
vessels idled for extended periods of time, which could indicate
that an asset group may be impaired. Our rigs and vessels are
mobile units, equipped to operate in geographic regions
throughout the world and, consequently, we may move rigs and
vessels from an oversupplied region to one that is more
lucrative and undersupplied when it is economical to do so. As
such, our rigs and vessels are considered to be interchangeable
within classes or asset groups and accordingly, we perform our
impairment evaluation by asset group.
Our estimates, assumptions and judgments used in the application
of our property and equipment accounting policies reflect both
historical experience and expectations regarding future industry
conditions and operations. Using different estimates,
assumptions and judgments, especially those involving the useful
lives of our rigs and liftboats and expectations regarding
future industry conditions and operations, would result in
different carrying values of assets and results of operations.
For example, a prolonged downturn in the drilling industry in
which utilization and dayrates were significantly reduced could
result in an impairment of the carrying value of our assets.
Useful lives of rigs and vessels are difficult to estimate due
to a variety of factors, including technological advances that
impact the methods or cost of oil and gas exploration and
development, changes in market or economic conditions and
changes in laws or regulations affecting the drilling industry.
We evaluate the remaining useful lives of our rigs and vessels
when certain events occur that directly impact our assessment of
the remaining useful lives of the rigs and vessels and include
changes in operating condition, functional capability and market
and economic factors. We also consider major capital upgrades
required to perform certain contracts and the long-term impact
of those upgrades on the future marketability when assessing the
useful lives of individual rigs and vessels.
When analyzing our assets for impairment, we separate our
marketable assets, those assets that are actively marketed and
can be warm stacked or cold stacked for short periods of time
depending on market conditions, from our non-marketable assets,
those assets that have been cold stacked for an extended period
of time or those assets that we currently do not reasonably
expect to market in the foreseeable future.
During the fourth quarter 2008, demand for our domestic drilling
assets declined dramatically, significantly beyond our
expectations. Demand in these segments is driven by underlying
commodity prices which fell to levels lower than those seen in
several years. The deterioration in these industry conditions in
the fourth quarter of 2008 negatively impacted our outlook for
2009 and we responded by cold stacking several additional rigs
in 2009. We considered these factors and our change in our
outlook as an indicator of impairment and assessed the rig
assets of the Inland and Domestic Offshore segments for
impairment. Based on an undiscounted cash flow analysis, it was
determined that the non-marketable rigs for both segments were
impaired. We estimated the value of the discounted cash flows
for each segments non-marketable rigs and we recorded an
impairment charge of $376.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008. In addition, we analyzed our other
segments for impairment as of December 31, 2008 and noted
that each segment had adequate undiscounted cash flows to
recover their property and equipment carrying values.
In 2009 we entered into an agreement to sell Hercules 110
and we realized approximately $26.9 million
($13.1 million, net of tax) of impairment charges related
to the write-down of the rig to fair value less costs to sell
during the second quarter 2009. The sale was completed in August
2009.
During the fourth quarter 2010, we considered the continued
downturn in the drilling industry as an indicator of impairment
and assessed our segments for impairment as of December 31,
2010. When analyzing our Domestic Offshore, International
Offshore and Delta segments for impairment, we determined five
of our domestic jackup rigs, one of our international jackup
rigs and several of our Delta Towing assets that had previously
been considered marketable, would not be marketed in the
foreseeable future and were included in the impairment analysis
of non-marketable assets. This determination was based on our
current estimate of reactivation costs associated with these
assets which, based on current and forecasted near-term dayrates
and utilization levels, are economically prohibitive, and the
sustained lack of visibility in the issuance of offshore
drilling permits in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Based on an
undiscounted cash flow analysis, it was determined that the
non-marketable assets were impaired. We estimated the value of
the discounted cash flows for each segments non-marketable
assets, which included managements estimate of sales
proceeds less costs to sell,
52
and recorded an impairment charge of $125.1 million. We
analyzed our other segments and our marketable assets for
impairment as of December 31, 2010 and noted that each
segment had adequate undiscounted cash flows to recover its
property and equipment carrying values.
Revenue
Recognition
Revenue generated from our contracts is recognized as services
are performed, as long as collectability is reasonably assured.
Some of our contracts also allow us to recover additional direct
costs, including mobilization and demobilization costs,
additional labor and additional catering costs. Additionally,
some of our contracts allow us to receive fees for contract
specific capital improvements to a rig. Under most of our
liftboat contracts, we receive a variable rate for reimbursement
of costs such as catering, fuel, oil, rental equipment, crane
overtime and other items. Revenue for the recovery or
reimbursement of these costs is recognized when the costs are
incurred except for mobilization revenue and reimbursement for
contract specific capital expenditures, which are recognized as
services are performed over the term of the related contract.
Income
Taxes
Our provision for income taxes takes into account the
differences between the financial statement treatment and tax
treatment of certain transactions. Deferred tax assets and
liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences
attributable to differences between the financial statement
carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their
respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are
measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable
income in the years in which those temporary differences are
expected to be recovered or settled. The effect of a change in
tax rates is recognized as income or expense in the period that
includes the enactment date.
Our net income tax expense or benefit is determined based on the
mix of domestic and international pre-tax earnings or losses,
respectively, as well as the tax jurisdictions in which we
operate. We operate in multiple countries through various legal
entities. As a result, we are subject to numerous domestic and
foreign tax jurisdictions and are taxed on various bases: income
before tax, deemed profits (which is generally determined using
a percentage of revenue rather than profits), and withholding
taxes based on revenue. The calculation of our tax liabilities
involves consideration of uncertainties in the application and
interpretation of complex tax regulations in our operating
jurisdictions. Changes in tax laws, regulations, agreements and
treaties, or our level of operations or profitability in each
taxing jurisdiction could have an impact upon the amount of
income taxes that we provide during any given year.
In March 2007, one of our subsidiaries received an assessment
from the Mexican tax authorities related to our operations for
the 2004 tax year. This assessment contested our right to
certain deductions and also claimed the subsidiary did not remit
withholding tax due on certain of these deductions. During 2010,
the Company effectively reached a compromise settlement of all
issues for 2004 through 2007. The Company paid
$11.6 million and reversed (i) previously provided
reserves and (ii) an associated tax benefit in the year
which totaled $5.8 million.
Certain of our international rigs are owned or operated,
directly or indirectly, by our wholly owned Cayman Islands
subsidiaries. Most of the earnings from these subsidiaries are
reinvested internationally and remittance to the United States
is indefinitely postponed.
Allowance
for Doubtful Accounts
Accounts receivable represents approximately 7.2% of our total
assets and 43.7% of our current assets as of December 31,
2010. We continuously monitor our accounts receivable from our
customers to identify any collectability issues. An allowance
for doubtful accounts is established based on reviews of
individual customer accounts, recent loss experience, current
economic conditions and other pertinent factors. Accounts deemed
uncollectable are charged to the allowance. We establish an
allowance for doubtful accounts based on the actual amount we
believe is not collectable. As of December 31, 2010 and
2009, there was $29.8 million and $38.5 million in
allowance for doubtful accounts, respectively.
53
Deferred
Charges
All of our U.S. flagged liftboats are required to undergo
regulatory inspections on an annual basis and to be drydocked
two times every five years to ensure compliance with
U.S. Coast Guard regulations for vessel safety and vessel
maintenance standards. Costs associated with these inspections,
which generally involve setting the vessels on a drydock, are
deferred, and the costs are amortized over a period of
12 months. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, our net
deferred charges related to regulatory inspection costs totaled
$5.4 million and $4.8 million, respectively. The
amortization of the regulatory inspection costs was reported as
part of our depreciation and amortization expense.
Stock-Based
Compensation
We recognize compensation cost for all share-based payments
awarded in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) Codification Topic 718,
Compensation Stock Compensation and in
accordance with such we record the grant date fair value of
share-based payments awarded as compensation expense using a
straight-line method over the service period. The fair value of
our restricted stock grants is based on the closing price of our
common stock on the date of grant. Our estimate of compensation
expense requires a number of complex and subjective assumptions
and changes to those assumptions could result in different
valuations for individual share awards. We estimate the fair
value of the options granted using the Trinomial Lattice option
pricing model using the following assumptions: expected dividend
yield, expected stock price volatility, risk-free interest rate
and employee exercise patterns (expected life of the options).
We also estimate future forfeitures and related tax effects.
We are estimating that the cost relating to stock options
granted through December 31, 2010 will be $2.6 million
over the remaining vesting period of 1.4 years and the cost
relating to restricted stock granted through December 31,
2010 will be $2.3 million over the remaining vesting period
of 1.2 years; however, due to the uncertainty of the level
of share-based payments to be granted in the future, these
amounts are estimates and subject to change.
OUTLOOK
Offshore
Demand for our oilfield services is driven by our Exploration
and Production (E&P) customers capital
spending, which can experience significant fluctuations
depending on, current commodity prices and their expectations of
future price levels, among other factors. Demand in the shallow
water U.S. Gulf of Mexico is particularly driven by natural
gas prices, while international demand is typically driven by
prices for crude oil.
Drilling activity levels in the shallow water U.S. Gulf of
Mexico are typically dependent on natural gas prices, and to a
lesser extent crude oil prices, as well as our customers
ability to obtain necessary drilling permits to operate in the
region. As of March 3, 2011, the spot price for Henry Hub
natural gas was $3.75 per MMbtu, with the twelve month strip, or
average of the next twelve months futures contracts, at
$4.22 per MMbtu. We expect natural gas to continue to account
for the majority of hydrocarbon production in the shallow water
U.S. Gulf of Mexico and the performance of our Domestic
Offshore segment will remain dependent on natural gas prices.
Additionally, in the wake of the Macondo well blowout incident,
new regulations for offshore drilling were imposed by BOEMRE,
which have resulted in our customers experiencing significant
delays in obtaining necessary permits to operate in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico. While we believe that the current
state of the permit approval process appears to have improved
since the advent of these new regulations, it is likely that our
customers will continue to experience some degree of delay in
obtaining drilling permits into 2011.
The supply of marketed jackup rigs in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico has declined significantly since the financial crisis
starting in 2008 and again with imposition of new regulations
during 2010, as drilling contractors such as ourselves and some
of our competitors have elected to cold stack, or no longer
actively market, a number of rigs in the region, while other
competitors have mobilized rigs out of the U.S. Gulf of
54
Mexico. As a result, the number of actively marketed jackup rigs
in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico has declined from 63 rigs in
late 2008 to 51 rigs as of March 3, 2011. Although we are
encouraged by the reduction in the marketed supply of jackup
rigs in the region, which has helped to partially offset the
reduction in demand for drilling rigs, we remain cautious about
the outlook for improved demand and dayrates in Domestic
Offshore given the permit delays and market expectations for a
prolonged period of relatively low natural gas prices.
Furthermore, any new regulatory or legislative changes that
would affect shallow water drilling activity in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico could have a material impact on
Domestic Offshores financial results.
Demand for our rigs in our International Offshore segment is
primarily dependent on crude oil prices. Strong crude oil prices
during 2010 and market expectations of continued strength
through 2011, as well as what appears to be an increase in the
number of international tenders for drilling rigs, leads us to
believe that international capital spending and demand for
drilling rigs overseas will increase in 2011. Our expectation
for greater international rig demand is tempered by the current
number of idle jackup rigs and the anticipated growth in supply.
As of March 3, 2011, there were 350 jackup rigs marketed in
international regions, of which 54 rigs were uncontracted.
Further, there were 56 new jackup rigs (excludes 10 rigs that
have been indefinitely suspended) either under construction or
on order for delivery through 2014, of which 40 were without
contracts. All of the jackup rigs under construction have higher
specifications than the rigs in our existing fleet. We expect
that increased market demand will be sufficient to absorb the
increased supply of drilling rigs with higher specifications,
and we have entered into agreements with Discovery Offshore to
manage the construction, marketing and operations of two ultra
high specification harsh environment jackup drilling rigs
scheduled to be delivered in the second quarter and fourth
quarter of 2013, respectively.
Five of our international rigs will complete three year
contracts during 2011 and current market rates for comparable
rigs in the various international regions where we operate are
substantially below our existing contracted rates. There is no
guarantee we will be able to secure new contracts for these
rigs. If we are successful in securing new contracts, we expect
the new dayrates will be substantially below current contract
rates. Further, as our international customers typically have
longer term investment programs, and tend to enter into
multi-year contracts for our services, new international
contracts could expose our International Offshore segment to
much lower rates over the next several years.
Activity for inland barge drilling in the U.S. generally
follows the same drivers as drilling in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico, with activity following operators expectations of
prices for natural gas and crude oil. The predominance of
smaller independent operators active in inland waters adds to
the volatility of this region. Inland barge drilling activity
has slowed dramatically since 2008, as a number of key operators
have curtailed or ceased activity in the inland market for
various reasons, including lack of funding, lack of drilling
success and reallocation of capital to other onshore basins.
Inland activity levels appear to have stabilized in 2010, but
remain depressed relative to historical levels. As of
February 28, 2011, there were 24 marketed barge rigs, of
which 18 were contracted. We expect industry activity levels in
2011 to remain relatively flat with such levels, barring a
significant increase in commodity prices.
Liftboats
Demand for liftboats is typically a function of our
customers demand for platform inspection and maintenance,
well maintenance, offshore construction, well plugging and
abandonment, and other related activities. Although activity
levels for liftboats are not as closely correlated to commodity
prices as our drilling segments, commodity prices are still a
key driver of liftboat demand. In addition, liftboat demand in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico typically experiences seasonal
fluctuations, due in large part to the operating limitations of
liftboats in rough waters, which tend to occur during the winter
months.
Domestic Liftboat segment demand was positively impacted by
clean up efforts related to the Macondo well blowout incident
throughout mid-2010, with a peak of 12 out of our 38 marketed
liftboats dedicated to this activity. Such demand effectively
concluded by the end of the third quarter of 2010, and we do not
expect this source of revenue to recur. On September 15,
2010, the Department of Interior issued the Notice to Lessees
Number 2010-G05, which provides federal guidelines for the
plugging and abandonment of wells and
55
decommissioning of offshore platforms in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico. These new federal regulations require E&P operators
to perform such services, and we expect liftboat demand in
support of these services will increase over an extended period
of time, in particular demand for the larger class liftboats.
However, the magnitude of demand growth for plugging,
abandonment and decommissioning services, and the related
increase in demand for liftboats, is uncertain. Further, barring
any exogenous industry event, it is also uncertain whether such
an increase in liftboat demand stemming from these new
regulations will be adequate to fully offset the absence of
clean up related business that we benefited from in 2010.
Our International Liftboat segment is driven by our
customers demand for production, platform maintenance and
support activities in West Africa and the Middle East. While
international rates for liftboats typically exceed those in the
U.S., operating costs are also higher, and we expect this
dynamic to continue through the foreseeable future. In recent
years, international liftboat utilization has lagged the
U.S. We believe that this is due in part to competitive
pressures and curtailment of capital spending by various
customers in wake of the 2008 financial crisis. During late 2010
and continuing into 2011, we have seen some signs of improvement
in liftboat demand from various international customers. Over
the long term, we believe that international liftboat demand
will benefit from: (i) the aging offshore infrastructure
and maturing offshore basins; (ii) desire by our
international customers to economically produce from these
mature basins and service their infrastructure; and
(iii) the cost advantages of liftboats to perform these
services relative to alternatives. Tempering this demand outlook
is our expectation of increased competition in our international
markets.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Sources
and Uses of Cash
Sources and uses of cash for 2010 and 2009 are as follows (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities
|
|
$
|
24.4
|
|
|
$
|
137.9
|
|
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Investing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions of Property and Equipment
|
|
|
(22.0
|
)
|
|
|
(76.1
|
)
|
Deferred Drydocking Expenditures
|
|
|
(15.0
|
)
|
|
|
(15.6
|
)
|
Proceeds from Sale of Assets, Net
|
|
|
23.2
|
|
|
|
25.8
|
|
Insurance Proceeds Received
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
Increase in Restricted Cash
|
|
|
(7.5
|
)
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(21.3
|
)
|
|
|
(60.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Financing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term Debt Repayments, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.5
|
)
|
Long-term Debt Borrowings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
292.1
|
|
Long-term Debt Repayments
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)
|
|
|
(403.6
|
)
|
Redemption of 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6.1
|
)
|
Common Stock Issuance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89.6
|
|
Excess Tax Benefit from Stock-Based Arrangements
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
Payment of Debt Issuance Costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(7.3
|
)
|
|
|
(43.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
|
$
|
(4.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
34.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sources
of Liquidity and Financing Arrangements
Our liquidity is comprised of cash on hand, cash from operations
and availability under our revolving credit facility. We also
maintain a shelf registration statement covering the future
issuance from time to time of various types of securities,
including debt and equity securities. If we issue any debt
securities off the shelf or otherwise incur debt, we would
generally be required to allocate the proceeds of such debt to
repay or
56
refinance existing debt. We currently believe we will have
adequate liquidity to meet the minimum liquidity requirement
under our Credit Agreement that governs our $475.2 million
term loan and $140.0 million revolving credit facility and
to fund our operations. However, to the extent we do not
generate sufficient cash from operations we may need to raise
additional funds through debt, equity offerings or the sale of
assets. Furthermore, we may need to raise additional funds
through debt or equity offerings or asset sales to meet certain
covenants under the Credit Agreement, to refinance existing debt
or for general corporate purposes. In July 2012, our
$140.0 million revolving credit facility matures. To the
extent we are unsuccessful in extending the maturity or entering
into a new revolving credit facility, our liquidity would be
negatively impacted. In June 2013, we may be required to settle
our 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes. As of
December 31, 2010, the notional amount of these notes
outstanding was $95.9 million. Additionally, our term loan
matures in July 2013 and currently requires a balloon payment of
$464.1 million at maturity. We intend to meet these
obligations through one or more of the following: cash flow from
operations, asset sales, debt refinancing and future debt or
equity offerings.
Our Credit Agreement imposes various affirmative and negative
covenants, including requirements to meet certain financial
ratios and tests, which we currently meet. Our failure to comply
with such covenants would result in an event of default under
the Credit Agreement. Additionally, in order to maintain
compliance with our financial covenants, borrowings under our
revolving credit facility may be limited to an amount less than
the full amount of remaining availability after outstanding
letters of credit. An event of default could prevent us from
borrowing under the revolving credit facility, which would in
turn have a material adverse effect on our available liquidity.
Furthermore, an event of default could result in us having to
immediately repay all amounts outstanding under the term loan
facility, the revolving credit facility, our 10.5% Senior
Secured Notes and our 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes and
in the foreclosure of liens on our assets.
Cash
Requirements and Contractual Obligations
Debt
Our current debt structure is used to fund our business
operations.
In July 2007, we terminated all prior facilities and entered
into a $1,050.0 million credit facility with a syndicate of
financial institutions, consisting of a $900.0 million term
loan and a $150.0 million revolving credit facility which
is governed by the Credit Agreement. In April 2008, we entered
into an agreement to increase the revolving credit facility to
$250.0 million and in each of July 2009 and March 2011, the
terms of the Credit Agreement were amended. The substantial
changes to the terms of the Credit Agreement related to the July
2009 and March 2011 amendments are further described:
July
2009 Credit Amendment
On July 27, 2009, we amended the Credit Agreement (the
2009 Credit Amendment). A fee of 0.50% was paid to
lenders consenting to the 2009 Credit Amendment, based on their
total commitment, which approximated $4.8 million.
The 2009 Credit Amendment reduced the revolving credit facility
by $75.0 million to $175.0 million. The commitment fee
on the revolving credit facility increased from 0.375% to 1.00%
and the letter of credit fee with respect to the undrawn amount
of each letter of credit issued under the revolving credit
facility increased from 1.75% to 4.00% per annum. Additionally,
the 2009 Credit Amendment established a minimum London Interbank
Offered Rate (LIBOR) of 2.00% for Eurodollar Loans,
a minimum rate of 3.00% with respect to Alternative Base Rate
(ABR) Loans, and increased the margin applicable to
Eurodollar Loans and
57
ABR Loans, subject to a grid based on the aggregate principal
amount of the term loans outstanding as follows ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal Amount Outstanding
|
|
Margin Applicable to:
|
Less than or equal to:
|
|
Greater than:
|
|
Eurodollar Loans
|
|
ABR Loans
|
|
$
|
882.00
|
|
|
$
|
684.25
|
|
|
|
6.50
|
%
|
|
|
5.50
|
%
|
|
684.25
|
|
|
|
484.25
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
%
|
|
|
4.00
|
%
|
|
484.25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.00
|
%
|
|
|
3.00
|
%
|
The 2009 Credit Amendment also modified certain provisions of
the Credit Agreement to, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
Eliminate the requirement that we comply with the total leverage
ratio financial covenant for the nine month period commencing
October 1, 2009 and ending on June 30, 2010.
|
|
|
|
Amend the maximum total leverage ratio that we must comply with.
The total leverage ratio for any test period is calculated as
the ratio of consolidated indebtedness on the test date to
consolidated EBITDA for the trailing twelve months, all as
defined in the Credit Agreement.
|
|
|
|
Require us to maintain a minimum level of liquidity, measured as
the amount of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents we have on
hand and availability under the revolving credit facility, of
(i) $100.0 million for the period between
October 1, 2009 through December 31, 2010,
(ii) $75.0 million during calendar year 2011 and
(iii) $50.0 million thereafter. As of
December 31, 2010, as calculated pursuant to our Credit
Agreement, our total liquidity was $300.2 million.
|
|
|
|
Revise the consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio definition
and reduce the minimum fixed charge coverage ratio that we must
maintain to the following schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Charge
|
Period
|
|
Coverage Ratio
|
|
July 1, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
1.00 to 1.00
|
|
January 1, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
1.05 to 1.00
|
|
April 1, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2012
|
|
|
1.10 to 1.00
|
|
July 1, 2012 and thereafter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.15 to 1.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio for any test period
is defined as the sum of consolidated EBITDA for the test period
plus an amount that may be added for the purpose of calculating
the ratio for such test period, not to exceed
$130.0 million in total during the term of the credit
facility, to consolidated fixed charges for the test period
adjusted by an amount not to exceed $110.0 million during
the term of the credit facility to be deducted from capital
expenditures, all as defined in the Credit Agreement. As of
December 31, 2010, our fixed charge coverage ratio was 1.66
to 1.00.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Require mandatory prepayments of debt outstanding under the
Credit Agreement with 100% of excess cash flow as defined in the
Credit Agreement for the fiscal year ending December 31,
2009 and 50% of excess cash flow as defined in the Credit
Agreement for the fiscal years ending December 31, 2010,
2011 and 2012, and with proceeds from:
|
|
|
|
|
|
unsecured debt issuances, with the exception of refinancing;
|
|
|
|
secured debt issuances;
|
|
|
|
casualty events not used to repair damaged property;
|
|
|
|
sales of assets in excess of $25 million annually; and
|
|
|
|
unless we have achieved a specified leverage ratio, 50% of
proceeds from equity issuances, excluding those for permitted
acquisitions or to meet the minimum liquidity requirements.
|
58
March
2011 Credit Amendment
On March 3, 2011, we amended our Credit Agreement
(2011 Credit Amendment) to, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
Allow for the use of cash to purchase assets from Seahawk
Drilling, Inc. (Seahawk), to the extent set forth in
our previously disclosed Asset Purchase Agreement with Seahawk;
|
|
|
|
Exempt the pro forma treatment of historical results from the
Seahawk assets with respect to the calculation of the financial
covenants in the Credit Agreement;
|
|
|
|
Increase our investment basket to $50 million from
$25 million; and
|
|
|
|
Revise the covenant threshold levels of the Total Leverage
Ratio, as defined in the Credit Agreement, to the following
schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amended Total
|
|
Amended Total
|
|
|
|
|
Leverage Ratio
|
|
Leverage Ratio
|
|
|
|
|
(if Seahawk
|
|
(if Seahawk
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition has
|
|
Acquisition has
|
|
|
|
|
been
|
|
not been
|
|
|
|
|
consummated
|
|
consummated
|
|
|
|
|
during or prior to
|
|
during or prior to
|
|
|
Previous Total
|
|
the relevant Test
|
|
the relevant Test
|
Test Date
|
|
Leverage Ratio
|
|
Period)
|
|
Period)
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
8.00 to 1.00
|
|
No Change
|
|
No Change
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
|
No Change
|
|
No Change
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
7.00 to 1.00
|
|
No Change
|
|
No Change
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
6.75 to 1.00
|
|
No Change
|
|
No Change
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
6.00 to 1.00
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
5.50 to 1.00
|
|
7.75 to 1.00
|
|
7.75 to 1.00
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
5.25 to 1.00
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
|
7.75 to 1.00
|
June 30, 2012
|
|
5.00 to 1.00
|
|
7.25 to 1.00
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
September 30, 2012
|
|
4.75 to 1.00
|
|
6.75 to 1.00
|
|
7.00 to 1.00
|
December 31, 2012
|
|
4.50 to 1.00
|
|
6.25 to 1.00
|
|
6.50 to 1.00
|
March 31, 2013
|
|
4.25 to 1.00
|
|
6.00 to 1.00
|
|
6.25 to 1.00
|
June 30, 2013
|
|
4.00 to 1.00
|
|
5.75 to 1.00
|
|
6.00 to 1.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010, our total leverage ratio was 5.06 to
1.00.
|
In addition, the interest rates on borrowings under the Credit
Facility will increase to 5.50% plus LIBOR for Eurodollar Loans
and 4.50% plus the Alternate Base Rate for ABR Loans, compared
to prior rates of 4.00% plus LIBOR for Eurodollar Loans and
3.00% plus the Alternate Base Rate for ABR Loans. The minimum
LIBOR of 2.00% for Eurodollar Loans, or a minimum base rate of
3.00% with respect to ABR Loans, which was established with the
2009 Credit Amendment, remains. We also agreed to pay consenting
lenders an upfront fee of 0.25% on their commitment, or
approximately $1.4 million. Including agent bank fees and
expenses our total cost is approximately $2.0 million.
Total commitments on the revolving credit facility, which is
currently unfunded, will be reduced to $140.0 million from
$175.0 million.
At December 31, 2010, the credit facility consisted of a
$475.2 million term loan which matures on July 11,
2013 and a $175.0 million revolving credit facility that
matures on July 11, 2012, under which the remaining
availability was $163.5 million as $11.5 million in
standby letters of credit had been issued under it. As of
March 3, 2011, the effective date of the 2011 Credit
Amendment, the credit facility consisted of a
$475.2 million term loan and a $140.0 million
revolving credit facility, which had remaining availability of
$129.1 million as $10.9 million in standby letters of
credit were outstanding under it. The availability under the
revolving credit facility must be used for working capital,
capital expenditures and other general corporate purposes and
cannot be used to prepay our term loan. Other than the required
prepayments as outlined previously, the principal amount of the
term loan amortizes in equal quarterly installments of
approximately $1.2 million, with the balance due on
July 11, 2013. Interest payments on both the revolving and
term loan
59
facility are due at least on a quarterly basis and in certain
instances, more frequently. In addition to our scheduled
payments, during the fourth quarter of 2009, we used the net
proceeds from the equity issuance pursuant to the partial
exercise of the underwriters over-allotment option and the
10.5% Senior Secured Notes due 2017, which approximated
$287.5 million, as well as cash on hand to retire
$379.6 million of the outstanding balance on our term loan
facility. In connection with the early retirement, we recorded a
pretax charge of $1.6 million, $1.0 million, net of
tax, related to the write off of unamortized issuance costs. As
of December 31, 2010, $475.2 million was outstanding
on the term loan facility and the interest rate was 6.00%. The
annualized effective interest rate was 8.29% for the year ended
December 31, 2010 after giving consideration to revolver
fees and derivative activity.
Other covenants contained in the Credit Agreement restrict,
among other things, asset dispositions, mergers and
acquisitions, dividends, stock repurchases and redemptions,
other restricted payments, debt issuances, liens, investments,
convertible notes repurchases and affiliate transactions. The
Credit Agreement also contains a provision under which an event
of default on any other indebtedness exceeding
$25.0 million would be considered an event of default under
our Credit Agreement.
In July 2007, we entered into a zero cost LIBOR collar on
$300.0 million of term loan principal with a final
settlement date of October 1, 2010 (which was settled on
October 1, 2010 per the agreement with a cash payment of
$3.4 million) with a ceiling of 5.75% and a floor of 4.99%.
The counterparty was obligated to pay us in any quarter that
actual LIBOR reset above 5.75% and we paid the counterparty in
any quarter that actual LIBOR reset below 4.99%. The terms and
settlement dates of the collar matched those of the term loan
through July 27, 2009, the date of the 2009 Credit
Amendment.
As a result of the inclusion of a LIBOR floor in the Credit
Agreement, we determined, as of July 27, 2009 and on an
ongoing basis, that the interest rate collar (which was settled
on October 1, 2010) will not be highly effective in achieving
offsetting changes in cash flows attributable to the hedged
interest rate risk during the period that the hedge was
designated. As such, we discontinued cash flow hedge accounting
for the interest rate collar as of July 27, 2009. Because
cash flow hedge accounting was not applied to this instrument,
changes in fair value related to the interest rate collar
subsequent to July 27, 2009 have been recorded in earnings.
As a result of discontinuing the cash flow hedging relationship,
we recognized a decrease in fair value of $0.3 million and
$1.7 million related to the hedge ineffectiveness of our
interest rate collar as Interest Expense in our Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31,
2010 and 2009, respectively. We did not recognize a gain or loss
due to hedge ineffectiveness in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations for the year ended December 31, 2008 related to
interest rate derivative instruments. The change in the fair
value of our hedging instruments resulted in a decrease in
derivative liabilities of $10.3 million during the year
ended December 31, 2010. We had net unrealized gains on
hedge transactions of $5.8 million, net of tax of
$3.1 million and $9.2 million, net of tax of
$4.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2010 and
2009, respectively, and net unrealized losses on hedge
transactions of $6.8 million, net of tax of
$3.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Overall, our interest expense was increased by
$9.1 million, $18.3 and $7.7 million during the years
ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively, as a
result of our interest rate derivative instruments.
On October 20, 2009, we completed an offering of
$300.0 million of senior secured notes at a coupon rate of
10.5% (10.5% Senior Secured Notes) with a
maturity in October 2017. The interest on the 10.5% Senior
Secured Notes is payable in cash semi-annually in arrears on
April 15 and October 15 of each year, which commenced on
April 15, 2010, to holders of record at the close of
business on April 1 or October 1. Interest on the notes
will be computed on the basis of a
360-day year
of twelve
30-day
months. The notes were sold at 97.383% of their face amount to
yield 11.0% and were recorded at their discounted amount, with
the discount to be amortized over the life of the notes. We used
the net proceeds of approximately $284.4 million from the
offering to repay a portion of the indebtedness outstanding
under our term loan facility. As of December 31, 2010,
$300.0 million notional amount of the 10.5% Senior
Secured Notes was outstanding. The carrying amount of the
10.5% Senior Secured Notes was $292.9 million at
December 31, 2010.
60
The notes are guaranteed by all of our existing and future
restricted subsidiaries that incur or guarantee indebtedness
under a credit facility, including our existing credit facility.
The notes are secured by liens on all collateral that secures
our obligations under our secured credit facility, subject to
limited exceptions. The liens securing the notes share on an
equal and ratable first priority basis with liens securing our
credit facility. Under the intercreditor agreement, the
collateral agent for the lenders under our secured credit
facility is generally entitled to sole control of all decisions
and actions.
All the liens securing the notes may be released if our secured
indebtedness, other than these notes, does not exceed the lesser
of $375.0 million and 15.0% of our consolidated tangible
assets. We refer to such a release as a collateral
suspension. If a collateral suspension is in effect, the
notes and the guarantees will be unsecured, and will effectively
rank junior to our secured indebtedness to the extent of the
value of the collateral securing such indebtedness. If, after
any such release of liens on collateral, the aggregate principal
amount of our secured indebtedness, other than these notes,
exceeds the greater of $375.0 million and 15.0% of our
consolidated tangible assets, as defined in the indenture, then
the collateral obligations of the Company and guarantors will be
reinstated and must be complied with within 30 days of such
event.
The indenture governing the notes contains covenants that, among
other things, limit our ability and the ability of our
restricted subsidiaries to:
|
|
|
|
|
incur additional indebtedness or issue certain preferred stock;
|
|
|
|
pay dividends or make other distributions;
|
|
|
|
make other restricted payments or investments;
|
|
|
|
sell assets;
|
|
|
|
create liens;
|
|
|
|
enter into agreements that restrict dividends and other payments
by restricted subsidiaries;
|
|
|
|
engage in transactions with our affiliates; and
|
|
|
|
consolidate, merge or transfer all or substantially all of our
assets.
|
The indenture governing the notes also contains a provision
under which an event of default by us or by any restricted
subsidiary on any other indebtedness exceeding
$25.0 million would be considered an event of default under
the indenture if such default: a) is caused by failure to
pay the principal at final maturity, or b) results in the
acceleration of such indebtedness prior to maturity.
Prior to October 15, 2012, we may redeem the notes with the
net cash proceeds of certain equity offerings, at a redemption
price equal to 110.50% of the aggregate principal amount plus
accrued and unpaid interest; provided, that (i) after
giving effect to any such redemption, at least 65% of the notes
originally issued would remain outstanding immediately after
such redemption and (ii) we make such redemption not more
than 90 days after the consummation of such equity
offering. In addition, prior to October 15, 2013, we may
redeem all or part of the notes at a price equal to 100% of the
aggregate principal amount of notes to be redeemed, plus the
applicable premium, as defined in the indenture, and accrued and
unpaid interest.
On or after October 15, 2013, we may redeem the notes, in
whole or part, at the redemption prices set forth below,
together with accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date.
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Optional Redemption Price
|
|
2013
|
|
|
105.2500
|
%
|
2014
|
|
|
102.6250
|
%
|
2015
|
|
|
101.3125
|
%
|
2016 and thereafter
|
|
|
100.0000
|
%
|
If we experience a change of control, as defined, we must offer
to repurchase the notes at an offer price in cash equal to 101%
of their principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest.
Furthermore, following certain asset sales, we may be required
to use the proceeds to offer to repurchase the notes at an offer
price in cash equal to 100% of their principal amount, plus
accrued and unpaid interest.
61
On June 3, 2008, we completed an offering of
$250.0 million convertible senior notes at a coupon rate of
3.375% (3.375% Convertible Senior Notes) with a
maturity in June 2038. As of December 31, 2010,
$95.9 million notional amount of the $250.0 million
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes was outstanding. The net
carrying amount of the 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes was
$86.5 million at December 31, 2010.
The interest on the 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes is
payable in cash semi-annually in arrears, on June 1 and
December 1 of each year until June 1, 2013, after which the
principal will accrete at an annual yield to maturity of 3.375%
per year. We will also pay contingent interest during any
six-month interest period commencing June 1, 2013, for
which the trading price of these notes for a specified period of
time equals or exceeds 120% of their accreted principal amount.
The notes will be convertible under certain circumstances into
shares of our common stock (Common Stock) at an
initial conversion rate of 19.9695 shares of Common Stock
per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which is equal to an
initial conversion price of approximately $50.08 per share. Upon
conversion of a note, a holder will receive, at our election,
shares of Common Stock, cash or a combination of cash and shares
of Common Stock. At December 31, 2010, the number of
conversion shares potentially issuable in relation to our
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes was 1.9 million. We
may redeem the notes at our option beginning June 6, 2013,
and holders of the notes will have the right to require us to
repurchase the notes on June 1, 2013 and certain dates
thereafter or on the occurrence of a fundamental change.
We determined that upon maturity or redemption, we have the
intent and ability to settle the principal amount of our
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes in cash, and any additional
conversion consideration spread (the excess of conversion value
over face value) in shares of our Common Stock.
The indenture governing the 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes
contains a provision under which an event of default by us or by
any subsidiary on any other indebtedness exceeding
$25.0 million would be considered an event of default under
the indenture if such default is: a) caused by failure to
pay the principal at final maturity, or b) results in the
acceleration of such indebtedness prior to maturity.
During December 2008 and April 2009, we repurchased
$88.2 million and $20.0 million aggregate principal
amount of the 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes,
respectively, for a cost of $44.8 million and
$6.1 million, respectively. In addition, during December
2008 and April 2009 we recognized a gain of $28.4 million
and $10.7 million, respectively and expensed
$2.1 million and $0.4 million of unamortized issuance
costs, respectively, in connection with the retirements. In June
2009, we retired $45.8 million aggregate principal amount
of our 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes in exchange for the
issuance of 7,755,440 shares of Common Stock valued at
$4.38 per share and payment of accrued interest, resulting in a
gain of $4.4 million. In addition, we expensed
$1.0 million of unamortized issuance costs in connection
with the retirement. The settlement consideration was allocated
to the extinguishment of the liability component in an amount
equal to the fair value of that component immediately prior to
extinguishment, with the difference between this allocation and
the net carrying amount of the liability component and
unamortized debt issuance costs recognized as a gain or loss on
debt extinguishment. If there would have been any remaining
settlement consideration, it would have been allocated to the
reacquisition of the equity component and recognized as a
reduction of Stockholders Equity.
The fair value of our 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes,
10.5% Senior Secured Notes and term loan facility is
estimated based on quoted prices in active markets. The fair
value of our 7.375% Senior Notes is estimated based on
discounted cash flows using inputs from quoted prices in active
markets for similar debt instruments. The following table
provides the carrying value and fair value of our long-term debt
instruments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Value
|
|
Value
|
|
Value
|
|
Value
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
Term Loan Facility, due July 2013
|
|
$
|
475.2
|
|
|
$
|
443.7
|
|
|
$
|
482.9
|
|
|
$
|
468.4
|
|
10.5% Senior Secured Notes, due October 2017
|
|
|
292.9
|
|
|
|
245.1
|
|
|
|
292.3
|
|
|
|
315.8
|
|
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes, due June 2038
|
|
|
86.5
|
|
|
|
69.1
|
|
|
|
83.1
|
|
|
|
76.8
|
|
7.375% Senior Notes, due April 2018
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
62
In April 2010, we completed the annual renewal of all of our key
insurance policies. Our primary marine package provides for hull
and machinery coverage for substantially all of our rigs and
liftboats up to a scheduled value of each asset. The total
maximum amount of coverage for these assets is
$2.1 billion. The marine package includes protection and
indemnity and maritime employers liability coverage for
marine crew personal injury and death and certain operational
liabilities, with primary coverage (or self-insured retention
for maritime employers liability coverage) of
$5.0 million per occurrence with excess liability coverage
up to $200.0 million. The marine package policy also
includes coverage for personal injury and death of third-parties
with primary and excess coverage of $25 million per
occurrence with additional excess liability coverage up to
$200 million, subject to a $250,000 per-occurrence
deductible. The marine package also provides coverage for cargo
and charterers legal liability. The marine package
includes limitations for coverage for losses caused in
U.S. Gulf of Mexico named windstorms, including an annual
aggregate limit of liability of $100.0 million for property
damage and removal of wreck liability coverage. We also procured
an additional $75.0 million excess policy for removal of
wreck and certain third-party liabilities incurred in
U.S. Gulf of Mexico named windstorms. Deductibles for
events that are not caused by a U.S. Gulf of Mexico named
windstorm are 12.5% of the insured drilling rig values per
occurrence, subject to a minimum of $1.0 million, and
$1.0 million per occurrence for liftboats. The deductible
for drilling rigs and liftboats in a U.S. Gulf of Mexico
named windstorm event is $25.0 million. Vessel pollution is
covered under a Water Quality Insurance Syndicate policy
(WQIS Policy) providing limits as required by
applicable law, including the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. The
WQIS Policy covers pollution emanating from our vessels and
drilling rigs, with primary limits of $5 million (inclusive
of a $3.0 million per-occurrence deductible) and excess
liability coverage up to $200 million.
Control-of-well
events generally include an unintended flow from the well that
cannot be contained by equipment on site (e.g., a blow-out
preventer), by increasing the weight of the drilling fluid or
that does not naturally close itself off through what is
typically described as bridging over. We carry a
contractors extra expense policy with $50 million
primary covering liability for well control costs, expenses
incurred to redrill wild or lost wells and pollution, with
excess liability coverage up to $200 million for pollution
liability that is covered in the primary policy. The policies
are subject to exclusions, limitations, deductibles,
self-insured retention and other conditions. In addition to the
marine package, we have separate policies providing coverage for
onshore foreign and domestic general liability, employers
liability, auto liability and non-owned aircraft liability, with
customary deductibles and coverage as well as a separate
underlying marine package for our Delta Towing business.
Our drilling contracts provide for varying levels of
indemnification from our customers and in most cases, may
require us to indemnify our customers for certain liabilities.
Under our drilling contracts, liability with respect to
personnel and property is customarily assigned on a
knock-for-knock
basis, which means that we and our customers assume liability
for our respective personnel and property, regardless of how the
loss or damage to the personnel and property may be caused. Our
customers typically assume responsibility for and agree to
indemnify us from any loss or liability resulting from pollution
or contamination, including
clean-up and
removal and third-party damages arising from operations under
the contract and originating below the surface of the water,
including as a result of blow-outs or cratering of the well. We
generally indemnify the customer for the consequences of spills
of industrial waste or other liquids originating solely above
the surface of the water and emanating from our rigs or vessels.
In 2010, in connection with the renewal of certain of our
insurance policies, we entered into agreements to finance a
portion of our annual insurance premiums. Approximately
$25.9 million was financed through these arrangements, and
$6.0 million was outstanding at December 31, 2010. The
interest rate on the $24.1 million note is 3.79% and the
note is scheduled to mature in March 2011. The interest rate on
the $1.8 million note is 3.54% and the note is scheduled to
mature in July 2011. There was $5.5 million outstanding in
insurance notes payable at December 31, 2009 which were
fully paid during 2010.
We are self-insured for the deductible portion of our insurance
coverage. Management believes adequate accruals have been made
on known and estimated exposures up to the deductible portion of
our insurance coverage. Management believes that claims and
liabilities in excess of the amounts accrued are adequately
insured. However, our insurance is subject to exclusions and
limitations, and there is no assurance that such
63
coverage will adequately protect us against liability from all
potential consequences. In addition, there is no assurance of
renewal or the ability to obtain coverage acceptable to us.
Common
Stock Offering
In September 2009, we raised approximately $82.3 million in
net proceeds from an underwritten public offering of
17,500,000 shares of our Common Stock. In addition, in
October 2009, we sold an additional 1,313,590 shares of our
Common Stock pursuant to the partial exercise of the
underwriters over-allotment option and raised an
additional $6.3 million in net proceeds. We used a portion
of the net proceeds from these sales of Common Stock to repay a
portion of our outstanding indebtedness under our term loan
facility.
Capital
Expenditures
We expect to spend approximately $60 million on capital
expenditures and drydocking during 2011. Planned capital
expenditures are generally maintenance and regulatory in nature
and do not include refurbishment or upgrades to our rigs,
liftboats, and other marine vessels. Should we elect to
reactivate cold stacked rigs or upgrade and refurbish selected
rigs or liftboats our capital expenditures may increase.
Reactivation, upgrades and refurbishments are subject to our
discretion and will depend on our view of market conditions and
our cash flows.
Costs associated with refurbishment or upgrade activities which
substantially extend the useful life or operating capabilities
of the asset are capitalized. Refurbishment entails replacing or
rebuilding the operating equipment. An upgrade entails
increasing the operating capabilities of a rig or liftboat. This
can be accomplished by a number of means, including adding new
or higher specification equipment to the unit, increasing the
water depth capabilities or increasing the capacity of the
living quarters, or a combination of each.
We are required to inspect and drydock our liftboats on a
periodic basis to meet U.S. Coast Guard requirements. The
amount of expenditures is impacted by a number of factors,
including, among others, our ongoing maintenance expenditures,
adverse weather, changes in regulatory requirements and
operating conditions. In addition, from time to time we agree to
perform modifications to our rigs and liftboats as part of a
contract with a customer. When market conditions allow, we
attempt to recover these costs as part of the contract cash flow.
From time to time, we may review possible acquisitions of rigs,
liftboats or businesses, joint ventures, mergers or other
business combinations, and we may have outstanding from time to
time bids to acquire certain assets from other companies. We may
not, however, be successful in our acquisition efforts. We are
generally restricted by our Credit Agreement from making
acquisitions for cash consideration, except to the extent the
acquisition is funded by an issuance of our stock or cash
proceeds from the issuance of stock (with the exception of the
Seahawk acquisition), or unless we are in compliance with more
restrictive financial covenants than what we are normally
required to meet in each respective period as defined in the
2011 Credit Amendment. If we acquire additional assets, we would
expect that the ongoing capital expenditures for our company as
a whole would increase in order to maintain our equipment in a
competitive condition.
Our ability to fund capital expenditures would be adversely
affected if conditions deteriorate in our business.
Contractual
Obligations
Our contractual obligations and commitments principally include
obligations associated with our outstanding indebtedness,
certain income tax liabilities, surety bonds, letters of credit,
future minimum operating lease obligations, purchase commitments
and management compensation obligations.
64
The following table summarizes our contractual obligations and
contingent commitments by period as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments due by Period
|
|
Contractual Obligations and
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
1-3
|
|
|
4-5
|
|
|
After 5
|
|
|
|
|
Contingent Commitments
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Recorded Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt obligations
|
|
$
|
4,924
|
|
|
$
|
566,155
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
303,508
|
|
|
$
|
874,587
|
|
Insurance notes payable
|
|
|
5,984
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,984
|
|
Interest on debt and notes payable(c)
|
|
|
6,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,974
|
|
Purchase obligations(a)
|
|
|
5,388
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,388
|
|
Other
|
|
|
2,756
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,756
|
|
Unrecorded Obligations(b):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on debt and notes payable(c)
|
|
|
59,012
|
|
|
|
111,945
|
|
|
|
63,518
|
|
|
|
63,647
|
|
|
|
298,122
|
|
Bank guarantees
|
|
|
966
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
966
|
|
Letters of credit
|
|
|
11,568
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,568
|
|
Surety bonds
|
|
|
31,414
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,414
|
|
Management compensation obligations
|
|
|
3,538
|
|
|
|
6,808
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,346
|
|
Purchase obligations(a)
|
|
|
1,945
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,945
|
|
Operating lease obligations
|
|
|
4,174
|
|
|
|
4,503
|
|
|
|
4,120
|
|
|
|
4,266
|
|
|
|
17,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual obligations
|
|
$
|
138,643
|
|
|
$
|
689,411
|
|
|
$
|
67,638
|
|
|
$
|
371,421
|
|
|
$
|
1,267,113
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
A purchase obligation is defined as an agreement to
purchase goods or services that is enforceable and legally
binding on the company and that specifies all significant terms,
including: fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased; fixed,
minimum or variable price provisions; and the approximate timing
of the transaction. These amounts are primarily comprised of
open purchase order commitments to vendors and subcontractors. |
|
(b) |
|
Tax liabilities of $6.4 million have been excluded from the
table above as a reasonably reliable estimate of the period of
cash settlement cannot be made. |
|
(c) |
|
Estimated interest on our Term Loan Facility is based on
3 month LIBOR reset quarterly and extrapolated from the
forward curve dated as of the balance sheet date. There was
$475.2 million outstanding under our Term Loan Facility as
of December 31, 2010 and the interest estimates above
assume the reduction in principal related to scheduled principal
payments. The remaining interest estimates are based on the
rates associated with the respective fixed rate instrument. In
March 2011, we amended our credit agreement for our Term Loan
Facility and Revolving Credit Facility. The portion of the
estimated unrecorded interest for our Term Loan Facility in the
previous table does not incorporate any changes related to the
March 2011 amendment. The total estimated additional interest
would be approximately $16.5 million over the remaining
life of the debt based on 3 month LIBOR reset quarterly and
extrapolated from the forward curve as of March 3, 2011. |
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
Guarantees
Our obligations under the credit facility and 10.5% Senior
Secured Notes are secured by liens on a majority of our vessels
and substantially all of our other personal property.
Substantially all of our domestic subsidiaries, and several of
our international subsidiaries, guarantee the obligations under
the credit facility
65
and 10.5% Senior Secured Notes and have granted similar
liens on the majority of their vessels and substantially all of
their other personal property.
Bank
Guarantees, Letters of Credit and Surety Bonds
We execute bank guarantees, letters of credit and surety bonds
in the normal course of business. While these obligations are
not normally called, these obligations could be called by the
beneficiaries at any time before the expiration date should we
breach certain contractual or payment obligations. As of
December 31, 2010, we had $44.0 million of bank
guarantees, letters of credit and surety bonds outstanding,
consisting of a $1.0 million unsecured bank guarantee, a
$0.1 million unsecured outstanding letter of credit,
$11.5 million in standby letters of credit outstanding
under our revolver and $31.4 million outstanding in surety
bonds that guarantee our performance as it relates to our
drilling contracts and other obligations primarily in Mexico and
the U.S. If the beneficiaries called the bank guarantee,
letters of credit and surety bonds, the called amount would
become an on-balance sheet liability, and we would be required
to settle the liability with cash on hand or through borrowings
under our available line of credit. As of December 31, 2010
we have restricted cash of $11.1 million to support surety
bonds primarily related to the Companys Mexico and
U.S. operations.
Accounting
Pronouncements
In January 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update
(ASU) No. 2010-06, Improving Disclosures
about Fair Value Measurements (ASU
2010-06),
which requires additional disclosures about the various classes
of assets and liabilities measured at fair value, the valuation
techniques and inputs used, the activity in Level 3 fair
value measurements and the transfers between Levels 1, 2,
and 3. The disclosures are effective for interim and annual
reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except
for the disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and
settlements in the roll forward of activity in Level 3 fair
value measurements, which are effective for interim and annual
reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010. We
adopted the required portions of ASU
2010-06 as
of January 1, 2010 with no material impact to our
consolidated financial statements and will adopt the remaining
portions on January 1, 2011 with no expected material
impact on our consolidated financial statements.
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on
Form 10-K
includes forward-looking statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. All
statements, other than statements of historical fact, included
in this annual report that address outlook, activities, events
or developments that we expect, project, believe or anticipate
will or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements.
These include such matters as:
|
|
|
|
|
our levels of indebtedness, covenant compliance and access to
capital under current market conditions;
|
|
|
|
our ability to enter into new contracts for our rigs and
liftboats and future utilization rates and dayrates for the
units;
|
|
|
|
our ability to renew or extend our long-term international
contracts, or enter into new contracts, at current dayrates when
such contracts expire;
|
|
|
|
demand for our rigs and our liftboats;
|
|
|
|
activity levels of our customers and their expectations of
future energy prices and ability to obtain drilling permits;
|
|
|
|
sufficiency and availability of funds for required capital
expenditures, working capital and debt service;
|
|
|
|
levels of reserves for accounts receivable;
|
|
|
|
success of our cost cutting measures and plans to dispose of
certain assets;
|
|
|
|
expected completion times for our refurbishment and upgrade
projects;
|
66
|
|
|
|
|
our plans to increase international operations;
|
|
|
|
expected useful lives of our rigs and liftboats;
|
|
|
|
future capital expenditures and refurbishment, reactivation,
transportation, repair and upgrade costs;
|
|
|
|
our ability to effectively reactivate rigs that we have stacked;
|
|
|
|
liabilities and restrictions under coastwise and other laws of
the United States and regulations protecting the environment;
|
|
|
|
expected outcomes of litigation, claims and disputes and their
expected effects on our financial condition and results of
operations; and
|
|
|
|
expectations regarding offshore drilling activity and dayrates,
market conditions, demand for our rigs and liftboats, our
earnings, operating revenue, operating and maintenance expense,
insurance coverage, insurance expense and deductibles, interest
expense, debt levels and other matters with regard to outlook.
|
We have based these statements on our assumptions and analyses
in light of our experience and perception of historical trends,
current conditions, expected future developments and other
factors we believe are appropriate in the circumstances.
Forward-looking statements by their nature involve substantial
risks and uncertainties that could significantly affect expected
results, and actual future results could differ materially from
those described in such statements. Although it is not possible
to identify all factors, we continue to face many risks and
uncertainties. Among the factors that could cause actual future
results to differ materially are the risks and uncertainties
described under Risk Factors in Item 1A of this
annual report and the following:
|
|
|
|
|
the ability of our customers in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico to
obtain drilling permits;
|
|
|
|
oil and natural gas prices and industry expectations about
future prices;
|
|
|
|
levels of oil and gas exploration and production spending;
|
|
|
|
demand for and supply of offshore drilling rigs and liftboats;
|
|
|
|
our ability to enter into and the terms of future contracts;
|
|
|
|
the worldwide military and political environment, uncertainty or
instability resulting from an escalation or additional outbreak
of armed hostilities or other crises in the Middle East, North
Africa, West Africa and other oil and natural gas producing
regions or acts of terrorism or piracy;
|
|
|
|
the impact of governmental laws and regulations, including new
laws and regulations in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico arising out
of the Macondo well blowout incident;
|
|
|
|
the adequacy and costs of sources of credit and liquidity;
|
|
|
|
uncertainties relating to the level of activity in offshore oil
and natural gas exploration, development and production;
|
|
|
|
competition and market conditions in the contract drilling and
liftboat industries;
|
|
|
|
the availability of skilled personnel in view of recent
reductions in our personnel;
|
|
|
|
labor relations and work stoppages, particularly in the West
African and Mexican labor environments;
|
|
|
|
operating hazards such as hurricanes, severe weather and seas,
fires, cratering, blowouts, war, terrorism and cancellation or
unavailability of insurance coverage or insufficient coverage;
|
|
|
|
the effect of litigation and contingencies; and
|
|
|
|
our inability to achieve our plans or carry out our strategy.
|
Many of these factors are beyond our ability to control or
predict. Any of these factors, or a combination of these
factors, could materially affect our future financial condition
or results of operations and the ultimate accuracy of the
forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are
not guarantees of our future
67
performance, and our actual results and future developments may
differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking
statements. Management cautions against putting undue reliance
on forward-looking statements or projecting any future results
based on such statements or present or prior earnings levels. In
addition, each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the
date of the particular statement, and we undertake no obligation
to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements
except as required by applicable law.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
We are currently exposed to market risk from changes in interest
rates. From time to time, we may enter into derivative financial
instrument transactions to manage or reduce our market risk, but
we do not enter into derivative transactions for speculative
purposes. As of December 31, 2010, we have no derivative
financial instruments outstanding. A discussion of our market
risk exposure in financial instruments follows.
Interest
Rate Exposure
We are subject to interest rate risk on our fixed-interest and
variable-interest rate borrowings. Variable rate debt, where the
interest rate fluctuates periodically, exposes us to short-term
changes in market interest rates. Fixed rate debt, where the
interest rate is fixed over the life of the instrument, exposes
us to changes in market interest rates reflected in the fair
value of the debt and to the risk that we may need to refinance
maturing debt with new debt at a higher rate.
As of December 31, 2010, the long-term borrowings that were
outstanding subject to fixed interest rate risk consisted of the
7.375% Senior Notes due April 2018, the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes due June 2038 and the
10.5% Senior Secured Notes due October 2017 with a carrying
amount of $3.5 million, $86.5 million, and
$292.9 million, respectively.
As of December 31, 2010 the interest rate for the
$475.2 million outstanding under the term loan was 6.0%. If
the interest rate averages 1% more for 2011 than the rates as of
December 31, 2010, annual interest expense would increase
by approximately $4.8 million. This sensitivity analysis
assumes there are no changes in our financial structure and
excludes the impact of our interest rate derivatives, if any.
The fair value of our 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes,
10.5% Senior Secured Notes and term loan facility is
estimated based on quoted prices in active markets. The fair
value of our 7.375% Senior Notes is estimated based on
discounted cash flows using inputs from quoted prices in active
markets for similar debt instruments. The following table
provides the carrying value and fair value of our long-term debt
instruments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Value
|
|
Value
|
|
Value
|
|
Value
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
Term Loan Facility, due July 2013
|
|
$
|
475.2
|
|
|
$
|
443.7
|
|
|
$
|
482.9
|
|
|
$
|
468.4
|
|
10.5% Senior Secured Notes, due October 2017
|
|
|
292.9
|
|
|
|
245.1
|
|
|
|
292.3
|
|
|
|
315.8
|
|
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes, due June 2038
|
|
|
86.5
|
|
|
|
69.1
|
|
|
|
83.1
|
|
|
|
76.8
|
|
7.375% Senior Notes, due April 2018
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
68
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and
Stockholders of Hercules Offshore, Inc.:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Hercules Offshore, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31,
2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders equity, comprehensive loss and
cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2010. Our audits also included the financial
statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 15(a). These
financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements and schedule based on our
audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of Hercules Offshore, Inc. and subsidiaries
at December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the consolidated results
of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also,
in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken
as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the
information set forth therein.
As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial
statements, on January 1, 2009, the Company adopted
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Staff
Position No. APB
14-1,
Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments that May Be
Settled in Cash upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash
Settlement) (codified in FASB ASC Topic 470
Debt) and, as required, the consolidated financial
statements have been adjusted for retrospective application.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States),
Hercules Offshore Inc. and subsidiaries internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on
criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission and our report dated March 9, 2011
expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
Houston, Texas
March 9, 2011
69
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and
Stockholders of Hercules Offshore, Inc.:
We have audited Hercules Offshore, Inc. and subsidiaries
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(the COSO criteria). Hercules Offshore, Inc. and
subsidiaries management is responsible for maintaining
effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting included in the accompanying
Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
companys internal control over financial reporting based
on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, Hercules Offshore, Inc. and subsidiaries
maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on
the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets of Hercules Offshore, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the
related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity, comprehensive loss and cash flows for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31,
2010 of Hercules Offshore, Inc. and subsidiaries, and our report
dated March 9, 2011, expressed an unqualified opinion
thereon.
Houston, Texas
March 9, 2011
70
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except par value)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
|
$
|
136,666
|
|
|
$
|
140,828
|
|
Restricted Cash
|
|
|
11,128
|
|
|
|
3,658
|
|
Accounts Receivable, Net of Allowance for Doubtful Accounts of
$29,798 and $38,522 as of December 31, 2010 and 2009,
respectively
|
|
|
143,796
|
|
|
|
133,662
|
|
Prepaids
|
|
|
17,142
|
|
|
|
13,706
|
|
Current Deferred Tax Asset
|
|
|
8,488
|
|
|
|
22,885
|
|
Other
|
|
|
11,794
|
|
|
|
6,675
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
329,014
|
|
|
|
321,414
|
|
Property and Equipment, Net
|
|
|
1,634,542
|
|
|
|
1,923,603
|
|
Other Assets, Net
|
|
|
31,753
|
|
|
|
32,459
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,995,309
|
|
|
$
|
2,277,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term Debt and Current Portion of Long-term Debt
|
|
$
|
4,924
|
|
|
$
|
4,952
|
|
Insurance Notes Payable
|
|
|
5,984
|
|
|
|
5,484
|
|
Accounts Payable
|
|
|
52,279
|
|
|
|
51,868
|
|
Accrued Liabilities
|
|
|
59,861
|
|
|
|
67,773
|
|
Interest Payable
|
|
|
6,974
|
|
|
|
6,624
|
|
Taxes Payable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,671
|
|
Other Current Liabilities
|
|
|
16,716
|
|
|
|
34,229
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
146,738
|
|
|
|
176,601
|
|
Long-term Debt, Net of Current Portion
|
|
|
853,166
|
|
|
|
856,755
|
|
Other Liabilities
|
|
|
6,716
|
|
|
|
19,809
|
|
Deferred Income Taxes
|
|
|
135,557
|
|
|
|
245,799
|
|
Commitments and Contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock, $0.01 Par Value;
200,000 Shares Authorized; 116,336 and
116,154 Shares Issued, Respectively; 114,784 and
114,650 Shares Outstanding, Respectively
|
|
|
1,163
|
|
|
|
1,162
|
|
Capital in Excess of Par Value
|
|
|
1,924,659
|
|
|
|
1,921,037
|
|
Treasury Stock, at Cost, 1,552 Shares and
1,504 Shares, Respectively
|
|
|
(50,333
|
)
|
|
|
(50,151
|
)
|
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,773
|
)
|
Retained Deficit
|
|
|
(1,022,357
|
)
|
|
|
(887,763
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
853,132
|
|
|
|
978,512
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,995,309
|
|
|
$
|
2,277,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
71
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
657,480
|
|
|
$
|
742,851
|
|
|
$
|
1,111,807
|
|
Costs and Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Expenses
|
|
|
428,930
|
|
|
|
514,136
|
|
|
|
631,711
|
|
Impairment of Goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
950,287
|
|
Impairment of Property and Equipment
|
|
|
125,136
|
|
|
|
26,882
|
|
|
|
376,668
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization
|
|
|
191,183
|
|
|
|
201,421
|
|
|
|
192,894
|
|
General and Administrative
|
|
|
57,391
|
|
|
|
92,558
|
|
|
|
81,160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
802,640
|
|
|
|
834,997
|
|
|
|
2,232,720
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Loss
|
|
|
(145,160
|
)
|
|
|
(92,146
|
)
|
|
|
(1,120,913
|
)
|
Other Income (Expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense
|
|
|
(82,941
|
)
|
|
|
(77,986
|
)
|
|
|
(63,778
|
)
|
Expense of Credit Agreement Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,073
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on Early Retirement of Debt, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,157
|
|
|
|
26,345
|
|
Other, Net
|
|
|
3,885
|
|
|
|
3,967
|
|
|
|
3,315
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss Before Income Taxes
|
|
|
(224,216
|
)
|
|
|
(169,081
|
)
|
|
|
(1,155,031
|
)
|
Income Tax Benefit
|
|
|
89,622
|
|
|
|
78,932
|
|
|
|
73,161
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from Continuing Operations
|
|
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
|
(90,149
|
)
|
|
|
(1,081,870
|
)
|
Loss from Discontinued Operation,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net of Taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,585
|
)
|
|
|
(1,520
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loss
|
|
$
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
(91,734
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,083,390
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic Loss Per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from Continuing Operations
|
|
$
|
(1.17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.93
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12.25
|
)
|
Loss from Discontinued Operation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loss
|
|
$
|
(1.17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.94
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12.26
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted Loss Per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from Continuing Operations
|
|
$
|
(1.17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.93
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12.25
|
)
|
Loss from Discontinued Operation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loss
|
|
$
|
(1.17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.94
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12.26
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average Shares Outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
114,753
|
|
|
|
97,114
|
|
|
|
88,351
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
114,753
|
|
|
|
97,114
|
|
|
|
88,351
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
72
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Common Stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
116,154
|
|
|
$
|
1,162
|
|
|
|
89,459
|
|
|
$
|
895
|
|
|
|
88,876
|
|
|
$
|
889
|
|
Exercise of Stock Options
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
478
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Issuance of Common Stock, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,569
|
|
|
|
266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of Restricted Stock
|
|
|
171
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at End of Period
|
|
|
116,336
|
|
|
|
1,163
|
|
|
|
116,154
|
|
|
|
1,162
|
|
|
|
89,459
|
|
|
|
895
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital in Excess of Par Value:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,921,037
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,785,462
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,731,882
|
|
Exercise of Stock Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,122
|
|
Issuance of Common Stock, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122,762
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of Restricted Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Compensation Expense Recognized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,257
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,535
|
|
Adjustment due to Convertible Debt Accounting Change (See
Note 1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,070
|
|
Excess Tax Benefit (Deficit) From Stock-Based Arrangements, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(826
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,571
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,860
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at End of Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,924,659
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,921,037
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,785,462
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury Stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
(1,504
|
)
|
|
|
(50,151
|
)
|
|
|
(1,483
|
)
|
|
|
(50,081
|
)
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
|
|
(582
|
)
|
Repurchase of Common Stock
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
(182
|
)
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
(70
|
)
|
|
|
(1,464
|
)
|
|
|
(49,499
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at End of Period
|
|
|
(1,552
|
)
|
|
|
(50,333
|
)
|
|
|
(1,504
|
)
|
|
|
(50,151
|
)
|
|
|
(1,483
|
)
|
|
|
(50,081
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,773
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,932
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,117
|
)
|
Change in Unrealized Gain (Loss) on Hedge Transactions, Net of
Tax of $(3,108), $(4,932) and $3,669, Respectively
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,773
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,159
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,815
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at End of Period, Net of Tax of $0, $3,108 and $8,040,
Respectively
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,773
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,932
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained Deficit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(887,763
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(796,029
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
287,361
|
|
Net Loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(91,734
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,083,390
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at End of Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,022,357
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(887,763
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(796,029
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Stockholders Equity
|
|
|
114,784
|
|
|
$
|
853,132
|
|
|
|
114,650
|
|
|
$
|
978,512
|
|
|
|
87,976
|
|
|
$
|
925,315
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
73
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Net Loss
|
|
$
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
(91,734
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,083,390
|
)
|
Other Comprehensive Income (Loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes Related to Hedge Transactions
|
|
|
5,773
|
|
|
|
9,159
|
|
|
|
(6,815
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive Loss
|
|
$
|
(128,821
|
)
|
|
$
|
(82,575
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,090,205
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
74
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Operating Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loss
|
|
$
|
(134,594
|
)
|
|
$
|
(91,734
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,083,390
|
)
|
Adjustments to Reconcile Net Loss to Net Cash Provided by
Operating Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization
|
|
|
191,183
|
|
|
|
201,421
|
|
|
|
192,918
|
|
Stock-Based Compensation Expense
|
|
|
4,431
|
|
|
|
8,257
|
|
|
|
12,535
|
|
Deferred Income Taxes
|
|
|
(98,468
|
)
|
|
|
(89,295
|
)
|
|
|
(118,685
|
)
|
Provision for Doubtful Accounts Receivable
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
32,912
|
|
|
|
6,167
|
|
Amortization of Original Issue Discount
|
|
|
4,078
|
|
|
|
4,120
|
|
|
|
4,292
|
|
Amortization of Deferred Financing Fees
|
|
|
3,302
|
|
|
|
3,594
|
|
|
|
4,036
|
|
Non-Cash Loss on Derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,429
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on Insurance Settlement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,700
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on Disposal of Assets
|
|
|
(14,345
|
)
|
|
|
(970
|
)
|
|
|
(3,029
|
)
|
Expense of Credit Agreement Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,073
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on Early Retirement of Debt, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,157
|
)
|
|
|
(26,345
|
)
|
Impairment of Goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
950,287
|
|
Impairment of Property and Equipment
|
|
|
125,136
|
|
|
|
26,882
|
|
|
|
376,668
|
|
Excess Tax Benefit from Stock-Based Arrangements
|
|
|
(401
|
)
|
|
|
(5,629
|
)
|
|
|
(6,081
|
)
|
(Increase) Decrease in Operating Assets -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts Receivable
|
|
|
(10,316
|
)
|
|
|
126,515
|
|
|
|
(78,510
|
)
|
Prepaid Expenses and Other
|
|
|
22,193
|
|
|
|
39,487
|
|
|
|
52,795
|
|
Increase (Decrease) in Operating Liabilities -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts Payable
|
|
|
411
|
|
|
|
(37,256
|
)
|
|
|
(5,482
|
)
|
Insurance Notes Payable
|
|
|
(25,438
|
)
|
|
|
(28,966
|
)
|
|
|
(45,173
|
)
|
Other Current Liabilities
|
|
|
(28,994
|
)
|
|
|
(35,281
|
)
|
|
|
17,125
|
|
Other Liabilities
|
|
|
(13,940
|
)
|
|
|
(11,841
|
)
|
|
|
19,599
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities
|
|
|
24,420
|
|
|
|
137,861
|
|
|
|
269,727
|
|
Cash Flows from Investing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(320,839
|
)
|
Additions of Property and Equipment
|
|
|
(22,018
|
)
|
|
|
(76,141
|
)
|
|
|
(264,245
|
)
|
Deferred Drydocking Expenditures
|
|
|
(15,040
|
)
|
|
|
(15,646
|
)
|
|
|
(17,269
|
)
|
Proceeds from Sale of Marketable Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,300
|
|
Insurance Proceeds Received
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,168
|
|
|
|
30,221
|
|
Proceeds from Sale of Assets, Net
|
|
|
23,222
|
|
|
|
25,767
|
|
|
|
17,045
|
|
Increase in Restricted Cash
|
|
|
(7,470
|
)
|
|
|
(3,658
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Used in Investing Activities
|
|
|
(21,306
|
)
|
|
|
(60,510
|
)
|
|
|
(515,787
|
)
|
Cash Flows from Financing Activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term Debt Borrowings (Repayments), Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,455
|
)
|
|
|
2,455
|
|
Long-term Debt Borrowings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
292,149
|
|
|
|
350,000
|
|
Long-term Debt Repayments
|
|
|
(7,695
|
)
|
|
|
(403,648
|
)
|
|
|
(121,427
|
)
|
Redemption of 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,099
|
)
|
|
|
(44,848
|
)
|
Common Stock Issuance (Repurchase)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89,600
|
|
|
|
(49,228
|
)
|
Excess Tax Benefit from Stock-Based Arrangements
|
|
|
401
|
|
|
|
5,629
|
|
|
|
6,081
|
|
Payment of Debt Issuance Costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18,143
|
)
|
|
|
(8,097
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
5,127
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Financing Activities
|
|
|
(7,276
|
)
|
|
|
(42,978
|
)
|
|
|
140,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
|
|
(4,162
|
)
|
|
|
34,373
|
|
|
|
(105,997
|
)
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
140,828
|
|
|
|
106,455
|
|
|
|
212,452
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period
|
|
$
|
136,666
|
|
|
$
|
140,828
|
|
|
$
|
106,455
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
75
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
1.
|
Nature of
Business and Significant Accounting Policies
|
Organization
Hercules Offshore, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its
majority owned subsidiaries (the Company) provide
shallow-water drilling and marine services to the oil and
natural gas exploration and production industry globally through
its Domestic Offshore, International Offshore, Inland, Domestic
Liftboats, International Liftboats and Delta Towing segments
(See Note 17). At December 31, 2010, the Company owned
a fleet of 30 jackup rigs, 17 barge rigs, three submersible
rigs, one platform rig, a fleet of marine support vessels
operated through Delta Towing, a wholly owned subsidiary, and 60
liftboat vessels and operated an additional five liftboat
vessels owned by a third party. In addition, the Company
currently owns two retired jackup rigs, Hercules 190 and
Hercules 254, both located in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico, for which the Company has an agreement to sell and
expects to close in the first quarter of 2011 (See Notes 5
and 17). The Companys diverse fleet is capable of
providing services such as oil and gas exploration and
development drilling, well service, platform inspection,
maintenance and decommissioning operations in several key
shallow water provinces around the world.
In December 2009, the Company entered into an agreement with
First Energy Bank B.S.C. (MENAdrill) whereby it
would market, manage and operate two Friede & Goldman
Super M2 design new-build jackup drilling rigs, Hull 109
and Hull 110 (also known as MENAdrill Hercules 1
and 2, respectively), each with a maximum water depth
of 300 feet. The Company received a notice of termination
from MENAdrill with respect to Hull 109 in
December 2010, and MENAdrill paid the Company a termination
fee of $250,000 due under the contract on the date of
termination. It is the Companys understanding that
Hull 110 has independently secured a contract in
Mexico and the Company therefore, expects to receive an
additional termination fee of $250,000.
Adjustment
for Retrospective Application of FSP APB
14-1,
Primarily Codified into Financial Accounting Standards
Boards (FASB) Codification Topic
470-20,
Debt Debt with Conversion and Other
Options
The Company has adjusted the financial statements as of and for
the year ended December 31, 2008 to reflect its adoption of
the FASB Codification Topic
470-20,
Debt Debt with Conversion and Other Options,
which clarifies the accounting for convertible debt instruments
that may be settled in cash (including partial cash settlement)
upon conversion. It requires issuers to account separately for
the liability and equity components of certain convertible debt
instruments in a manner that reflects the issuers
nonconvertible debt (unsecured debt) borrowing rate when
interest cost is recognized. It also requires bifurcation of a
component of the debt, classification of that component in
equity and the accretion of the resulting discount on the debt
to be recognized as part of interest expense in the
Companys consolidated statement of operations. The
standard became effective as of January 1, 2009 and it
required retrospective application to the terms of instruments
as they existed for all periods presented. This adoption affects
the accounting for the Companys 3.375 percent
Convertible Senior Notes due 2038 issued in 2008
(3.375% Convertible Senior Notes).
Principles
of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All intercompany
account balances and transactions have been eliminated.
Common
Stock Offering
In September 2009, the Company raised approximately
$82.3 million in net proceeds from an underwritten public
offering of 17,500,000 shares of its common stock. In
addition, in October 2009, the Company sold an additional
1,313,590 shares of its common stock pursuant to the
partial exercise of the underwriters over-allotment option
and raised an additional $6.3 million in net proceeds. The
Company used a portion of the net
76
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
proceeds from these sales of common stock to repay a portion of
its outstanding indebtedness under its term loan facility.
Reclassifications
Certain reclassifications have been made to conform prior year
financial information to the current period presentation.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, demand deposits
with banks and all highly liquid investments with original
maturities of three months or less.
Restricted
Cash
At December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had restricted
cash of $11.1 million and $3.7 million, respectively,
to support surety bonds primarily related to the Companys
Mexico and U.S. operations.
Revenue
Recognition
Revenue generated from the Companys contracts is
recognized as services are performed, as long as collectability
is reasonably assured. For certain contracts, the Company may
receive lump-sum fees for the mobilization of equipment and
personnel. Mobilization fees received and costs incurred to
mobilize a rig from one market to another under contracts longer
than ninety days are recognized as services are performed over
the term of the related drilling contract. Amounts related to
mobilization fees are summarized below (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
Mobilization revenue deferred
|
|
$
|
600
|
|
|
$
|
12,180
|
|
|
$
|
33,727
|
|
Mobilization expense deferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,468
|
|
|
|
7,490
|
|
Mobilization revenue recognized
|
|
|
15,343
|
|
|
|
16,491
|
|
|
|
11,860
|
|
Mobilization expense recognized(a)
|
|
|
1,979
|
|
|
|
6,514
|
|
|
|
5,550
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes a $2.6 million write-off of deferred mobilization
costs in 2009 due to an impairment related to an international
contract. |
For certain contracts, the Company may receive fees from its
customers for capital improvements to its rigs. Such fees are
deferred and recognized as services are performed over the term
of the related contract. The Company capitalizes such capital
improvements and depreciates them over the useful life of the
asset.
77
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The balances related to the Companys Deferred Mobilization
and Contract Preparation Costs and Deferred Mobilization Revenue
are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
Classification
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred Operating Expenses-Current Portion
|
|
Other
|
|
$
|
1,824
|
|
|
$
|
1,092
|
|
Deferred Operating Expenses-Non-Current Portion
|
|
Other Assets, Net
|
|
|
3,172
|
|
|
|
1,651
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred Revenue-Current Portion
|
|
Other Current Liabilities
|
|
|
12,628
|
|
|
|
19,406
|
|
Deferred Revenue-Non-Current Portion
|
|
Other Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,628
|
|
Stock-Based
Compensation
The Company recognizes compensation cost for all share-based
payments awarded in accordance with FASB Codification Topic 718,
Compensation Stock Compensation and in
accordance with such records the grant date fair value of
share-based payments awarded as compensation expense using a
straight-line method over the service period. The fair value of
the Companys restricted stock grants is based on the
closing price of our common stock on the date of grant. The
Companys estimate of compensation expense requires a
number of complex and subjective assumptions and changes to
those assumptions could result in different valuations for
individual share awards. The Company estimates the fair value of
the options granted using the Trinomial Lattice option pricing
model using the following assumptions: expected dividend yield,
expected stock price volatility, risk-free interest rate and
employee exercise patterns (expected life of the options). The
Company also estimates future forfeitures and related tax
effects.
The Company estimates the cost relating to stock options granted
through December 31, 2010 will be $2.6 million over
the remaining vesting period of 1.4 years and the cost
relating to restricted stock granted through December 31,
2010 will be $2.3 million over the remaining vesting period
of 1.2 years; however, due to the uncertainty of the level
of share-based payments to be granted in the future, these
amounts are estimates and subject to change.
Accounts
Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
Accounts receivable are stated at the historical carrying amount
net of write-offs and allowance for doubtful accounts.
Management of the Company monitors the accounts receivable from
its customers for any collectability issues. An allowance for
doubtful accounts is established based on reviews of individual
customer accounts, recent loss experience, current economic
conditions, and other pertinent factors. Accounts deemed
uncollectable are charged to the allowance. The Company had an
allowance of $29.8 million and $38.5 million at
December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Prepaid
Expenses
Prepaid expenses consist of prepaid insurance, prepaid income
tax and other prepayments. At December 31, 2010 and 2009,
prepaid insurance totaled $12.4 million and
$11.7 million, respectively. At December 31, 2010,
prepaid taxes totaled $2.4 million. There were no prepaid
taxes at December 31, 2009.
Property
and Equipment
Property and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated
depreciation. Expenditures for property and equipment and items
that substantially increase the useful lives of existing assets
are capitalized at cost and depreciated. Expenditures for
drydocking the Companys liftboats are capitalized at cost
in Other Assets, Net
78
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
on the Consolidated Balance Sheets and amortized on the
straight-line method over a period of 12 months. Routine
expenditures for repairs and maintenance are expensed as
incurred.
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method, after
allowing for salvage value where applicable, over the useful
lives of the assets. Depreciation of leasehold improvements is
computed utilizing the straight-line method over the lease term
or life of the asset, whichever is shorter.
The useful lives of property and equipment for the purposes of
computing depreciation are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Drilling rigs and marine equipment (salvage value of 10%)
|
|
|
15
|
|
Drilling machinery and equipment
|
|
|
312
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
3
|
|
Computer equipment
|
|
|
37
|
|
Automobiles and trucks
|
|
|
3
|
|
The carrying value of long-lived assets, principally property
and equipment and excluding goodwill, is reviewed for potential
impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that
the carrying amount of such assets may not be recoverable or
when reclassifications are made between property and equipment
and assets held for sale. Factors that might indicate a
potential impairment may include, but are not limited to,
significant decreases in the market value of the long-lived
asset, a significant change in the long-lived assets
physical condition, a change in industry conditions or a
substantial reduction in cash flows associated with the use of
the long-lived asset. For property and equipment held for use,
the determination of recoverability is made based upon the
estimated undiscounted future net cash flows of the related
asset or group of assets being evaluated. Actual impairment
charges are recorded using an estimate of discounted future cash
flows. This evaluation requires the Company to make judgments
regarding long-term forecasts of future revenue and costs. In
turn these forecasts are uncertain in that they require
assumptions about demand for the Companys services, future
market conditions and technological developments. Significant
and unanticipated changes to these assumptions could require a
provision for impairment in a future period. Given the nature of
these evaluations and their application to specific asset groups
and specific times, it is not possible to reasonably quantify
the impact of changes in these assumptions.
Supply and demand are the key drivers of rig and vessel
utilization and the Companys ability to contract its rigs
and vessels at economical rates. During periods of an
oversupply, it is not uncommon for the Company to have rigs or
vessels idled for extended periods of time, which could indicate
that an asset group may be impaired. The Companys rigs and
vessels are mobile units, equipped to operate in geographic
regions throughout the world and, consequently, the Company may
move rigs and vessels from an oversupplied region to one that is
more lucrative and undersupplied when it is economical to do so.
As such, the Companys rigs and vessels are considered to
be interchangeable within classes or asset groups and
accordingly, the Company performs its impairment evaluation by
asset group.
The Companys estimates, assumptions and judgments used in
the application of its property and equipment accounting
policies reflect both historical experience and expectations
regarding future industry conditions and operations. Using
different estimates, assumptions and judgments, especially those
involving the useful lives of the Companys rigs and
liftboats and expectations regarding future industry conditions
and operations, would result in different carrying values of
assets and results of operations. For example, a prolonged
downturn in the drilling industry in which utilization and
dayrates were significantly reduced could result in an
impairment of the carrying value of the Companys assets.
Useful lives of rigs and vessels are difficult to estimate due
to a variety of factors, including technological advances that
impact the methods or cost of oil and gas exploration and
development, changes in market or economic conditions and
changes in laws or regulations affecting the drilling industry.
The Company evaluates
79
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
the remaining useful lives of its rigs and vessels when certain
events occur that directly impact its assessment of the
remaining useful lives of the rigs and vessels and include
changes in operating condition, functional capability and market
and economic factors. The Company also considers major capital
upgrades required to perform certain contracts and the long-term
impact of those upgrades on the future marketability when
assessing the useful lives of individual rigs and vessels.
When analyzing its assets for impairment, the Company separates
its marketable assets, those assets that are actively marketed
and can be warm stacked or cold stacked for short periods of
time depending on market conditions, from its non-marketable
assets, those assets that have been cold stacked for an extended
period of time or those assets that the Company currently does
not reasonably expect to market in the foreseeable future.
During the fourth quarter 2008, demand for the Companys
domestic drilling assets declined dramatically, significantly
beyond expectations. Demand in these segments is driven by
underlying commodity prices which fell to levels lower than
those seen in several years. The deterioration in these industry
conditions in the fourth quarter of 2008 negatively impacted the
Companys outlook for 2009 and the Company responded by
cold stacking several additional rigs. The Company considered
these factors and its change in outlook as an indicator of
impairment and assessed the rig assets of the Inland and
Domestic Offshore segments for impairment. Based on an
undiscounted cash flow analysis, it was determined that the
non-marketable rigs for both segments were impaired. The Company
estimated the value of the discounted cash flows for each
segments non-marketable rigs and recorded an impairment
charge of $376.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2008. In addition, the Company analyzed its
other segments for impairment as of December 31, 2008 and
noted that each segment had adequate undiscounted cash flows to
recover its property and equipment carrying values.
In 2009 the Company entered into an agreement to sell
Hercules 110 and realized approximately
$26.9 million of impairment charges related to the
write-down of the rig to fair value less costs to sell during
the second quarter 2009 (See Notes 5 and 12). The sale was
completed in August 2009.
During the fourth quarter 2010, the Company considered the
continued downturn in the drilling industry as an indicator of
impairment and assessed its segments for impairment as of
December 31, 2010. When analyzing its Domestic Offshore,
International Offshore and Delta segments for impairment, the
Company determined five of its domestic jackup rigs, one of its
international jackup rigs and several of its Delta Towing assets
that had previously been considered marketable, would not be
marketed in the foreseeable future and were included in the
impairment analysis of non-marketable assets. This determination
was based on the Companys current estimate of reactivation
costs associated with these assets which, based on current and
forecasted near-term dayrates and utilization levels, are
economically prohibitive, and the sustained lack of visibility
in the issuance of offshore drilling permits in the
U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Based on an undiscounted cash flow
analysis, it was determined that the non-marketable assets were
impaired. The Company estimated the value of the discounted cash
flows for each segments non-marketable assets, which
included managements estimate of sales proceeds less costs
to sell, and recorded an impairment charge of
$125.1 million. The Company analyzed its other segments and
its marketable assets for impairment as of December 31,
2010 and noted that each segment had adequate undiscounted cash
flows to recover its property and equipment carrying values.
Goodwill
Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of business acquired
over the fair value of the net assets acquired at the date of
acquisition. These assets are not amortized but rather tested
for impairment at least annually by applying a fair-value based
test. The Company determined its reporting units to be the same
as its operating segments. The Company performed a preliminary
annual impairment assessment as of October 1, 2008.
However, during the fourth quarter of 2008, the Companys
market capitalization continued to decline
80
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
significantly, therefore, the Company completed its analysis as
of December 31, 2008. As of December 31, 2008, the
Companys market capitalization was significantly below its
book value. The Company compared the fair value of each
reporting unit to its carrying value and determined that each
reporting unit was impaired. Upon completion of step two of the
impairment test, the Company recorded a goodwill impairment of
$950.3 million, which represented all of the Companys
goodwill as of December 31, 2008 (See Note 17).
Other
Assets
Other assets consist of drydocking costs for marine vessels,
other intangible assets, deferred operating expenses, financing
fees, investments and deposits. Drydock costs are capitalized at
cost and amortized on the straight-line method over a period of
12 months. Drydocking costs, net of accumulated
amortization, at December 31, 2010 and 2009 were
$5.9 million and $4.9 million, respectively.
Amortization expense for drydocking costs was
$14.0 million, $17.2 million and $19.0 million
for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Financing fees are deferred and amortized over the life of the
applicable debt instrument. However, in the event of an early
repayment of debt or certain debt amendments, the related
unamortized deferred financing fees are expensed in connection
with the repayment or amendment (See Note 10). Unamortized
deferred financing fees at December 31, 2010 and 2009 were
$11.4 million and $14.7 million, respectively.
Amortization expense for financing fees was $3.3 million,
$3.6 million and $4.0 million for the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively, and is
included in Interest Expense on the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Income
Taxes
We use the liability method for determining our income taxes.
The Companys income tax provision is based upon the tax
laws and rates in effect in the countries in which the
Companys operations are conducted and income is earned.
The income tax rates imposed and methods of computing taxable
income in these jurisdictions vary substantially. The
Companys effective tax rate is expected to fluctuate from
year to year as operations are conducted in different taxing
jurisdictions and the amount of pre-tax income fluctuates.
Current income tax expense reflects an estimate of the
Companys income tax liability for the current year,
withholding taxes, changes in prior year tax estimates as
returns are filed, or from tax audit adjustments, while the net
deferred tax expense or benefit represents the changes in the
balance of deferred tax assets and liabilities as reported on
the balance sheet.
Valuation allowances are established to reduce deferred tax
assets when it is more likely than not that some portion or all
of the deferred tax assets will not be realized in the future.
The Company currently does not have any valuation allowances
related to the tax assets. While the Company has considered
estimated future taxable income and ongoing prudent and feasible
tax planning strategies in assessing the need for the valuation
allowances, changes in these estimates and assumptions, as well
as changes in tax laws, could require the Company to adjust the
valuation allowances for deferred tax assets. These adjustments
to the valuation allowance would impact the Companys
income tax provision in the period in which such adjustments are
identified and recorded.
Certain of the Companys international rigs and liftboats
are owned or operated, directly or indirectly, by the
Companys wholly owned Cayman Islands subsidiaries. Most of
the earnings from these subsidiaries are reinvested
internationally and remittance to the United States is
indefinitely postponed. In certain circumstances, management
expects that, due to the changing demands of the offshore
drilling and liftboat markets and the ability to redeploy the
Companys offshore units, certain of such units will not
reside in a location long enough to give rise to future tax
consequences in that location. As a result, no deferred tax
asset or liability has been recognized in these circumstances.
Should managements expectations change regarding the
81
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
length of time an offshore drilling unit will be used in a given
location, the Company would adjust deferred taxes accordingly.
Use of
Estimates
In preparing financial statements in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States, management
makes estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts
of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets
and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, as well
as the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the
reporting period. On an ongoing basis, the Company evaluates its
estimates, including those related to bad debts, investments,
intangible assets, property and equipment, income taxes,
insurance, employment benefits and contingent liabilities. The
Company bases its estimates on historical experience and on
various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable
under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for
making judgments about the carrying values of assets and
liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources.
Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
The carrying amounts of the Companys financial
instruments, which include cash and cash equivalents, restricted
cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued
liabilities, approximate fair values because of the short-term
nature of the instruments.
The fair value of the Companys 3.375% Convertible
Senior Notes, 10.5% Senior Secured Notes and term loan
facility is estimated based on quoted prices in active markets.
The fair value of the Companys 7.375% Senior Notes is
estimated based on discounted cash flows using inputs from
quoted prices in active markets for similar debt instruments.
The following table provides the carrying value and fair value
of our long-term debt instruments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Value
|
|
Value
|
|
Value
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
Term Loan Facility, due July 2013
|
|
$
|
475.2
|
|
|
$
|
443.7
|
|
|
$
|
482.9
|
|
|
$
|
468.4
|
|
10.5% Senior Secured Notes, due October 2017
|
|
|
292.9
|
|
|
|
245.1
|
|
|
|
292.3
|
|
|
|
315.8
|
|
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes, due June 2038
|
|
|
86.5
|
|
|
|
69.1
|
|
|
|
83.1
|
|
|
|
76.8
|
|
7.375% Senior Notes, due April 2018
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
Accounting
Pronouncements
In January 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update
(ASU) No.
2010-06,
Improving Disclosures about Fair Value Measurements
(ASU 2010-06), which requires additional
disclosures about the various classes of assets and liabilities
measured at fair value, the valuation techniques and inputs
used, the activity in Level 3 fair value measurements and
the transfers between Levels 1, 2, and 3. The disclosures
are effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning
after December 15, 2009, except for the disclosures about
purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the roll forward
of activity in Level 3 fair value measurements, which are
effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning
after December 15, 2010. The Company adopted the required
portions of ASU
2010-06 as
of January 1, 2010 with no material impact to its
consolidated financial statements and will adopt the remaining
portions on January 1, 2011 with no expected material
impact on its consolidated financial statements (See
Note 12).
82
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
2.
|
Property
and Equipment, Net
|
The following is a summary of property and equipment, at cost,
less accumulated depreciation (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Drilling rigs and marine equipment
|
|
$
|
2,048,243
|
|
|
$
|
2,224,799
|
|
Drilling machinery and equipment
|
|
|
74,762
|
|
|
|
80,185
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
10,555
|
|
|
|
11,209
|
|
Automobiles and trucks
|
|
|
2,614
|
|
|
|
2,540
|
|
Computer equipment
|
|
|
13,943
|
|
|
|
17,787
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
990
|
|
|
|
1,553
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property and equipment, at cost
|
|
|
2,151,107
|
|
|
|
2,338,073
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(516,565
|
)
|
|
|
(414,470
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
1,634,542
|
|
|
$
|
1,923,603
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expense was $175.6 million,
$179.2 million and $166.3 million for the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Additionally, the decrease in drilling rigs and marine equipment
relates primarily to the impairment of property and equipment in
2010 (See Notes 1 and 12).
The Company calculates basic earnings per share by dividing net
income by the weighted average number of shares outstanding.
Diluted earnings per share is computed by dividing net income by
the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the
period as adjusted for the dilutive effect of the Companys
stock option and restricted stock awards. The effect of stock
option and restricted stock awards is not included in the
computation for periods in which a net loss occurs, because to
do so would be anti-dilutive. Stock equivalents of 6,282,625,
4,587,868 and 3,009,099 were anti-dilutive and are excluded from
the calculation of the dilutive effect of stock equivalents for
the diluted earnings per share calculations for the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
In February 2008, the Company entered into a definitive
agreement to purchase three jackup drilling rigs and related
equipment for $320.0 million. The Company completed the
purchase of the Hercules 350 and the Hercules 261
and related equipment during March 2008, while the purchase
of the Hercules 262 and related equipment was completed
in May 2008.
83
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
From time to time the Company enters into agreements to sell
assets. The following table provides information related to the
sale of several of the Companys jackup rigs and barges
during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rig
|
|
Segment
|
|
Period of Sale
|
|
Proceeds
|
|
|
Gain/(Loss)
|
|
|
2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Various(a)
|
|
Inland
|
|
March 2010
|
|
$
|
2,200
|
|
|
$
|
1,753
|
|
|
|
Various(a)
|
|
Inland
|
|
April 2010
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
|
410
|
|
|
|
Hercules 191
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
April 2010
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
3,067
|
|
|
|
Hercules 255
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
September 2010
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
3,180
|
|
|
|
Hercules 155
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
December 2010
|
|
|
4,800
|
|
|
|
3,969
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
17,800
|
|
|
$
|
12,379
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hercules 100
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
August 2009
|
|
$
|
2,000
|
|
|
$
|
295
|
|
|
|
Hercules 110(b)
|
|
International Offshore
|
|
August 2009
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hercules 20
|
|
Inland
|
|
September 2009
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
Hercules 21
|
|
Inland
|
|
November 2009
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
432
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
12,600
|
|
|
$
|
866
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hercules 256
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
May 2008
|
|
$
|
8,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The Company entered into an agreement to sell six of its retired
barges for $3.0 million. The sale of 3 barges closed in
each of March and April 2010. |
|
(b) |
|
The Company realized approximately $26.9 million
($13.1 million, net of tax) of impairment charges related
to the write-down of the Hercules 110 to fair value less
costs to sell during the second quarter of 2009 (See
Note 12). |
In November 2010, the Company entered into an agreement to sell
its retired jackups Hercules 190 and Hercules 254
for a total of $4.0 million for both jackups, which is
expected to close in the first quarter of 2011. The financial
information for Hercules 190 and Hercules 254 has
been reported as part of the Domestic Offshore segment (See
Note 17).
|
|
6.
|
Discontinued
Operation
|
The Company sold its nine land rigs and related equipment in the
fourth quarter of 2007. The results of operations of the land
rig operations are reflected in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008
as a discontinued operation. There was no discontinued operation
in the year ended December 31, 2010.
84
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Operating results and wind down costs of the land rigs were as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
240
|
|
|
$
|
1,818
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss Before Income Taxes
|
|
$
|
(2,440
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,341
|
)
|
Income Tax Benefit
|
|
|
855
|
|
|
|
821
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from Discontinued Operation, Net of Taxes
|
|
$
|
(1,585
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,520
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.
|
Long-Term
Incentive Awards
|
Stock-based
Compensation
The company recognizes compensation cost for all share-based
payments awarded in accordance with FASB Codification Topic 718,
Compensation Stock Compensation and in
accordance with such records the grant date fair value of
share-based payments awarded as compensation expense using a
straight-line method over the service period. In addition it is
required that the excess tax benefit (the amount of the realized
tax benefit related to deductible compensation cost in excess of
the cumulative compensation cost recognized for financial
reporting) be reported as cash flows from financing activities.
The Company classified $0.4 million, $5.6 million, and
$6.1 million in excess tax benefits as a financing cash
inflow for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008, respectively.
The Companys 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the 2004
Plan) provides for the granting of stock options,
restricted stock, performance stock awards and other stock-based
awards to selected employees and non-employee directors of the
Company. At December 31, 2010, approximately
2.4 million shares were available for grant or award under
the 2004 Plan. The Compensation Committee of the Companys
Board of Directors selects participants from time to time and,
subject to the terms and conditions of the 2004 Plan, determines
all terms and conditions of awards. Most of the option and
restricted stock grants issued are subject to a three year
vesting period with some vesting one-third on each anniversary
of the grant date and others vesting on the third anniversary of
the grant date. The options when granted have a maximum
contractual term of 10 years. The Company issues originally
issued shares upon exercise of stock options and for restricted
stock grants. The fair value of restricted stock grants was
calculated based on the average of the high and low trading
price of the Companys stock on the day of grant for grants
prior to 2008. The fair value of restricted stock grants in 2008
and after was calculated based on the closing price of the
Companys stock on the day of grant.
The unrecognized compensation cost related to the Companys
unvested stock options and restricted stock grants as of
December 31, 2010 was $2.6 million and
$2.3 million, respectively, and is expected to be
recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.4 years and
1.2 years, respectively.
Cash received from stock option exercises was eighteen thousand
dollars and $5.1 million during the years ended
December 31, 2010 and 2008, respectively. There were no
stock option exercises in 2009.
The Company recognized $4.4 million, $8.3 million and
$12.5 million in employee stock-based compensation expense
during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The related income tax benefit recognized for the
years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was
$1.6 million, $2.9 million and $4.4 million,
respectively.
85
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The fair value of the options granted under the 2004 Plan was
estimated on the date of grant using the Trinomial Lattice
option pricing model with the following assumptions used:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected price volatility
|
|
|
45.8
|
%
|
|
|
45.0
|
%
|
|
|
40.8
|
%
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
|
|
2.1
|
%
|
|
|
2.9
|
%
|
Expected life of options (in years)
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
Weighted-average fair value of options granted
|
|
$
|
1.67
|
|
|
$
|
0.75
|
|
|
$
|
6.35
|
|
The Company currently uses the historical volatility of its
common stock to estimate volatility and it uses the simplified
method to estimate the expected life of the options granted.
The following table summarizes stock option activity under the
2004 Plan as of December 31, 2010 and changes during the
year then ended:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
Options
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2010
|
|
|
4,452,321
|
|
|
$
|
11.36
|
|
|
|
6.58
|
|
|
$
|
6,145
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,375,000
|
|
|
|
3.75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(11,051
|
)
|
|
|
1.65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(102,000
|
)
|
|
|
5.29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(114,298
|
)
|
|
|
18.21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
5,599,972
|
|
|
|
9.48
|
|
|
|
6.44
|
|
|
|
3,393
|
|
Vested or Expected to Vest at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
5,410,499
|
|
|
|
9.16
|
|
|
|
6.40
|
|
|
|
3,330
|
|
Exercisable at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
2,909,706
|
|
|
|
14.39
|
|
|
|
4.51
|
|
|
|
1,285
|
|
The intrinsic value of options exercised during 2010 and 2008
was twenty thousand dollars and $11.7 million,
respectively. There were no options exercised in 2009.
The following table summarizes information about restricted
stock outstanding as of December 31, 2010 and changes
during the year then ended:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Restricted
|
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Non-Vested at January 1, 2010
|
|
|
349,077
|
|
|
$
|
25.15
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
782,532
|
|
|
|
3.79
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(170,010
|
)
|
|
|
26.01
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(58,352
|
)
|
|
|
7.17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Vested at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
903,247
|
|
|
|
8.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted-average grant date fair value of restricted stock
granted during the years ended 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $3.79,
$4.82 and $26.12, respectively. The total fair value of
restricted stock vested during the years ended 2010, 2009 and
2008 was $0.7 million, $0.4 million and
$2.6 million, respectively.
86
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Liability
Retention Awards
In December 2010, the Compensation Committee of the
Companys Board of Directors approved retention and
incentive arrangements for the Companys Chief Executive
Officer, consisting of three separate awards.
Vesting under each award is conditioned upon continuous
employment with the Company from the date of grant until the
earlier of a specified vesting date or a change in control of
the Company. Subject to the satisfaction of all vesting
requirements, awards are payable in cash based on the product of
the number of shares of Common Stock specified in the award, the
percentage of that number of shares that vest under the award
and the average price of the Common Stock for the 90 days
prior to the date of vesting (Average Share Price).
The grant date of each of the three awards is January 1,
2011. Vesting of any award and the amount payable under any
vested award do not affect vesting or the amount payable under
any of the other awards. Subject to vesting, all awards are
payable in cash within thirty days of vesting. No shares of
common stock are issuable under any of the awards. These awards
will be accounted for under stock-compensation principles of
accounting as liability instruments. The fair value of these
awards will be remeasured based on the awards estimated
fair value at the end of each reporting period and will be
recorded to expense over the vesting period.
The first award is a Special Retention Agreement (the
Agreement), which provides for a cash payment based
on 500,000 shares of the Companys common stock,
subject to vesting. Upon satisfaction of vesting requirements,
100% of the amount under the Agreement becomes vested on
December 31, 2013 and the payout will equal the product of
500,000 and the lesser of the Average Share Price and $10.00. If
all of the requirements necessary for vesting of this award are
not met, no amounts become vested and no amount is payable.
The second and third awards are performance awards under the
2004 Plan (Performance Awards). Each Performance
Award provides for a cash payment, subject to vesting, based on
250,000 shares of the Companys common stock. Upon
satisfaction of vesting requirements, 100% of the first
Performance Award will vest on December 31, 2013, and 100%
of the second Performance Award will vest on March 31,
2014. Under each Performance Award, vesting is subject to the
further requirement that the Average Share Price is at least
$5.00. Subject to the satisfaction of the vesting requirements,
the payout of each Performance Award shall be equal to the
product of (1) 250,000, (2) the Average Share Price or
$10.00, whichever is less, divided by $10.00, and (3) the
lesser of the Average Share Price or $10.00. If the requirements
necessary for vesting of a Performance Award are met, the amount
payable in cash under each of the Performance Awards shall be
not less than $625,000 and not more than $2,500,000.
Accrued liabilities are comprised of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Accrued Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxes other than Income
|
|
$
|
15,548
|
|
|
$
|
9,435
|
|
Accrued Payroll and Employee Benefits
|
|
|
25,068
|
|
|
|
29,283
|
|
Accrued Self-Insurance Claims
|
|
|
19,106
|
|
|
|
28,768
|
|
Other
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
287
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
59,861
|
|
|
$
|
67,773
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company currently has two 401(k) plans in which
substantially all U.S. employees are eligible to
participate. Under the Hercules plan and Delta Towing plan prior
to April 1, 2009, the Company matched participant
contributions equal to 100% of the first 6% of a
participants eligible compensation. However, under the
Hercules plan, the Company match was reduced to 100% of the
first 3% of participant eligible compensation on April 1,
2009 and subsequently eliminated on August 1, 2009. In
addition, under the Delta Towing plan, the Company match was
reduced to 100% of the first 3% of participant eligible
compensation on April 1, 2009 and subsequently eliminated
on October 1, 2009. The Company made total matching
contributions of $3.4 million and $8.6 million for the
years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The
Company made no matching contributions in the year ended
December 31, 2010.
Debt is comprised of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Term Loan Facility, due July 2013
|
|
$
|
475,156
|
|
|
$
|
482,852
|
|
10.5% Senior Secured Notes, due October 2017
|
|
|
292,935
|
|
|
|
292,272
|
|
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes, due June 2038
|
|
|
86,488
|
|
|
|
83,071
|
|
7.375% Senior Notes, due April 2018
|
|
|
3,511
|
|
|
|
3,512
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Debt
|
|
|
858,090
|
|
|
|
861,707
|
|
Less Short-term Debt and Current Portion of Long-term Debt
|
|
|
4,924
|
|
|
|
4,952
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Long-term Debt, Net of Current Portion
|
|
$
|
853,166
|
|
|
$
|
856,755
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following is a summary of scheduled long-term debt
maturities by year (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
4,924
|
|
2012
|
|
|
4,924
|
|
2013
|
|
|
551,796
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
296,446
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
858,090
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior
secured Credit Agreement
In connection with the July 2007 acquisition of TODCO, the
Company obtained a $1,050.0 million credit facility,
consisting of a $900.0 million term loan facility and a
$150.0 million revolving credit facility which is governed
by the credit agreement (Credit Agreement). The
proceeds from the term loan were used, together with cash on
hand, to finance the cash portion of the Companys
acquisition of TODCO, to repay amounts under TODCOs senior
secured credit facility outstanding at the closing of the
facility and to make certain other payments in connection with
the Companys acquisition of TODCO. In connection with the
term loan facility, the Company entered into derivative
instruments with the purpose of hedging future interest payments
(See Note 11). In April 2008, the Company entered into an
agreement to increase the revolving credit facility to
$250.0 million and in each of July 2009 and March 2011, the
terms of the Credit Agreement were amended.
88
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The substantial changes to the terms of the Credit Agreement
related to the July 2009 and March 2011 amendments are further
described:
July
2009 Credit Amendment
On July 27, 2009 the Company amended its Credit Agreement
(2009 Credit Amendment) in order to revise its
covenants to be more favorable to the Company. A fee of 0.50%,
which approximated $4.8 million, was paid to lenders
consenting to the 2009 Credit Amendment based on their total
commitment. The Company recognized a pretax charge of
$10.8 million, $7.0 million net of tax, related to the
write off of unamortized issuance costs in connection with the
2009 Credit Amendment. The 2009 Credit Amendment reduced the
revolving credit facility by $75.0 million to
$175.0 million. The commitment fee on the revolving credit
facility increased from 0.375% to 1.00% and the letter of credit
fee with respect to the undrawn amount of each letter of credit
issued under the revolving credit facility increased from 1.75%
to 4.00% per annum. The availability under the
$175.0 million revolving credit facility must be used for
working capital, capital expenditures and other general
corporate purposes and cannot be used to prepay the term loan.
Additionally, the 2009 Credit Amendment established a minimum
London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) of 2.00% for
Eurodollar Loans, a minimum rate of 3.00% with respect to
Alternative Base Rate (ABR) Loans, and increased the
margin applicable to Eurodollar Loans and ABR Loans, subject to
a grid based on the aggregate principal amount of the term loans
outstanding as follows ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal Amount Outstanding
|
|
Margin Applicable to:
|
Less than or equal to:
|
|
Greater than:
|
|
Eurodollar Loans
|
|
ABR Loans
|
|
|
$882.00
|
|
|
$
|
684.25
|
|
|
|
6.50%
|
|
|
|
5.50%
|
|
|
684.25
|
|
|
|
484.25
|
|
|
|
5.00%
|
|
|
|
4.00%
|
|
|
484.25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.00%
|
|
|
|
3.00%
|
|
The 2009 Credit Amendment also modified certain provisions of
the Credit Agreement to, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
Eliminate the requirement that the Company comply with the total
leverage ratio financial covenant for the nine month period
commencing October 1, 2009 and ending on June 30, 2010.
|
|
|
|
Amend the maximum total leverage ratio that the Company must
comply with. The total leverage ratio for any test period is
calculated as the ratio of consolidated indebtedness on the test
date to consolidated EBITDA for the trailing twelve months, all
as defined in the Credit Agreement.
|
|
|
|
Require the Company to maintain a minimum level of liquidity,
measured as the amount of unrestricted cash and cash equivalents
on hand and availability under the revolving credit facility, of
(i) $100.0 million for the period between
October 1, 2009 through December 31, 2010,
(ii) $75.0 million during calendar year 2011 and
(iii) $50.0 million thereafter. As of
December 31, 2010, as calculated pursuant to the Credit
Agreement, the Companys total liquidity was
$300.2 million.
|
|
|
|
Revise the consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio definition
and reduce the minimum fixed charge coverage ratio that the
Company must maintain to the following schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Charge
|
Period
|
|
Coverage Ratio
|
|
July 1, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
1.00 to 1.00
|
|
January 1, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
|
1.05 to 1.00
|
|
April 1, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2012
|
|
|
1.10 to 1.00
|
|
July 1, 2012 and thereafter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.15 to 1.00
|
|
89
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
The consolidated fixed charge coverage ratio for any test period
is defined as the sum of consolidated EBITDA for the test period
plus an amount that may be added for the purpose of calculating
the ratio for such test period, not to exceed
$130.0 million in total during the term of the credit
facility, to consolidated fixed charges for the test period
adjusted by an amount not to exceed $110.0 million during
the term of the credit facility to be deducted from capital
expenditures, all as defined in the Credit Agreement. As of
December 31, 2010, the Companys fixed charge coverage
ratio was 1.66 to 1.00.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Require mandatory prepayments of debt outstanding under the
Credit Agreement with 100% of excess cash flow as defined in the
Credit Agreement for the fiscal year ending December 31,
2009 and 50% of excess cash flow as defined in the Credit
Agreement for the fiscal years ending December 31, 2010,
2011 and 2012, and with proceeds from:
|
|
|
|
|
|
unsecured debt issuances, with the exception of refinancing;
|
|
|
|
secured debt issuances;
|
|
|
|
casualty events not used to repair damaged property;
|
|
|
|
sales of assets in excess of $25 million annually; and
|
|
|
|
unless the Company has achieved a specified leverage ratio, 50%
of proceeds from equity issuances, excluding those for permitted
acquisitions or to meet the minimum liquidity requirements.
|
March
2011 Credit Amendment
On March 3, 2011, the Company amended its Credit Agreement
(2011 Credit Amendment) to, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
Allow for the use of cash to purchase assets from Seahawk
Drilling, Inc. (Seahawk), to the extent set forth in
the Companys previously disclosed Asset Purchase Agreement
with Seahawk;
|
|
|
|
Exempt the pro forma treatment of historical results from the
Seahawk assets with respect to the calculation of the financial
covenants in the Credit Agreement;
|
|
|
|
Increase the Companys investment basket to
$50 million from $25 million; and
|
90
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
Revise the covenant threshold levels of the Total Leverage
Ratio, as defined in the Credit Agreement, to the following
schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amended Total
|
|
Amended Total
|
|
|
|
|
Leverage Ratio
|
|
Leverage Ratio
|
|
|
|
|
(If Seahawk
|
|
(If Seahawk
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
|
|
Acquisition
|
|
|
|
|
has been
|
|
has not been
|
|
|
|
|
consummated
|
|
consummated
|
|
|
|
|
during or prior to
|
|
during or prior to
|
|
|
Previous Total
|
|
the relevant Test
|
|
the relevant Test
|
Test Date
|
|
Leverage Ratio
|
|
Period)
|
|
Period)
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
8.00 to 1.00
|
|
No Change
|
|
No Change
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
|
No Change
|
|
No Change
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
7.00 to 1.00
|
|
No Change
|
|
No Change
|
June 30, 2011
|
|
6.75 to 1.00
|
|
No Change
|
|
No Change
|
September 30, 2011
|
|
6.00 to 1.00
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
5.50 to 1.00
|
|
7.75 to 1.00
|
|
7.75 to 1.00
|
March 31, 2012
|
|
5.25 to 1.00
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
|
7.75 to 1.00
|
June 30, 2012
|
|
5.00 to 1.00
|
|
7.25 to 1.00
|
|
7.50 to 1.00
|
September 30, 2012
|
|
4.75 to 1.00
|
|
6.75 to 1.00
|
|
7.00 to 1.00
|
December 31, 2012
|
|
4.50 to 1.00
|
|
6.25 to 1.00
|
|
6.50 to 1.00
|
March 31, 2013
|
|
4.25 to 1.00
|
|
6.00 to 1.00
|
|
6.25 to 1.00
|
June 30, 2013
|
|
4.00 to 1.00
|
|
5.75 to 1.00
|
|
6.00 to 1.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010, the Companys total leverage
ratio was 5.06 to 1.00.
|
In addition, the interest rates on borrowings under the Credit
Facility will increase to 5.50% plus LIBOR for Eurodollar Loans
and 4.50% plus the Alternate Base Rate for ABR Loans, compared
to prior rates of 4.00% plus LIBOR for Eurodollar Loans and
3.00% plus the Alternate Base Rate for ABR Loans. The minimum
LIBOR of 2.00% for Eurodollar Loans, or a minimum base rate of
3.00% with respect to ABR Loans, which was established with the
2009 Credit Amendment, remains. The Company also agreed to pay
consenting lenders an upfront fee of 0.25% on their commitment,
or approximately $1.4 million. Including agent bank fees
and expenses the Companys total cost is approximately
$2.0 million. Total commitments on the revolving credit
facility, which is currently unfunded, will be reduced to
$140.0 million from $175.0 million.
Other
Terms and Conditions
The Companys obligations under the Credit Agreement are
secured by liens on a majority of its vessels and substantially
all of its other personal property. Substantially all of the
Companys domestic subsidiaries, and several of its
international subsidiaries, guarantee the obligations under the
Credit Agreement and have granted similar liens on the majority
of their vessels and substantially all of their other personal
property.
Other covenants contained in the Credit Agreement restrict,
among other things, asset dispositions, mergers and
acquisitions, dividends, stock repurchases and redemptions,
other restricted payments, debt issuances, liens, investments,
convertible notes repurchases and affiliate transactions. The
Credit Agreement also contains a provision under which an event
of default on any other indebtedness exceeding
$25.0 million would be considered an event of default under
the Companys Credit Agreement.
The Credit Agreement requires that the Company meet certain
financial ratios and tests, which it met as of December 31,
2010. The Companys failure to comply with such covenants
would result in an event of default under the Credit Agreement.
Additionally, in order to maintain compliance with our financial
covenants, borrowings under our revolving credit facility may be
limited to an amount less than the full amount of remaining
availability after outstanding letters of credit. An event of
default could prevent the
91
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Company from borrowing under the revolving credit facility,
which would in turn have a material adverse effect on the
Companys available liquidity. Furthermore, an event of
default could result in the Company having to immediately repay
all amounts outstanding under the credit facility, the
10.5% Senior Secured Notes and the 3.375% Convertible
Senior Notes and in the foreclosure of liens on its assets.
Other than the required prepayments as outlined previously, the
principal amount of the term loan amortizes in equal quarterly
installments of approximately $1.2 million, with the
balance due on July 11, 2013. All borrowings under the
revolving credit facility mature on July 11, 2012. Interest
payments on both the revolving and term loan facility are due at
least on a quarterly basis and in certain instances, more
frequently. In addition to its scheduled payments, during the
fourth quarter of 2009, the Company used the net proceeds from
the equity issuance pursuant to the partial exercise of the
underwriters over-allotment option and the
10.5% Senior Secured Notes due 2017, which approximated
$287.5 million, as well as cash on hand to retire
$379.6 million of the outstanding balance on the
Companys term loan facility. In connection with the early
retirement, the Company recorded a pretax charge of
$1.6 million, $1.0 million, net of tax, related to the
write off of unamortized issuance costs (See Note 1).
As of December 31, 2010, no amounts were outstanding and
$11.5 million in standby letters of credit had been issued
under the revolving credit facility, therefore the remaining
availability under this revolving credit facility was
$163.5 million. As of December 31, 2010,
$475.2 million was outstanding on the term loan facility
and the interest rate was 6.00%. The annualized effective rate
of interest was 8.29% for the year ended December 31, 2010
after giving consideration to revolver fees and derivative
activity. As of March 3, 2011, the effective date of the
2011 Credit Amendment, the credit facility consisted of a
$475.2 million term loan and a $140.0 million
revolving credit facility, which had remaining availability of
$129.1 million as $10.9 million in a standby letters
of credit were outstanding under it.
10.5% senior
secured notes due 2017
On October 20, 2009, the Company completed an offering of
$300.0 million of senior secured notes at a coupon rate of
10.5% (10.5% Senior Secured Notes) with a
maturity in October 2017. The interest on the 10.5% Senior
Secured Notes is payable in cash semi-annually in arrears on
April 15 and October 15 of each year, which commenced on
April 15, 2010, to holders of record at the close of
business on April 1 or October 1. Interest on the notes
will be computed on the basis of a
360-day year
of twelve
30-day
months. The notes were sold at 97.383% of their face amount to
yield 11.0% and were recorded at their discounted amount, with
the discount to be amortized over the life of the notes. The
Company used the net proceeds of approximately
$284.4 million from the offering to repay a portion of the
indebtedness outstanding under its term loan facility. The
notional amount of the 10.5% Senior Secured Notes, its
unamortized discount and its net carrying amount was
$300.0 million, $7.1 million and $292.9 million,
respectively, as of December 31, 2010 and
$300.0 million, $7.7 million and $292.3 million,
respectively, as of December 31, 2009. The unamortized
discount is being amortized to interest expense over the life of
the 10.5% Senior Secured Notes which ends in October 2017.
During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company
recognized $32.1 million, $20.8 million, net of tax,
in interest expense, or $0.18 per diluted share, at an effective
rate of 11%, of which $31.4 million related to the coupon
rate of 10.5% and $0.7 million related to discount
amortization. During the year ended December 31, 2009, the
Company recognized $6.4 million, $4.2 million, net of
tax, in interest expense, or $0.04 per diluted share, at an
effective rate of 11%, of which $6.3 million related to the
coupon rate of 10.5% and $0.1 million related to discount
amortization.
The notes are guaranteed by all of the Companys existing
and future restricted subsidiaries that incur or guarantee
indebtedness under a credit facility, including the
Companys existing credit facility. The notes are secured
by liens on all collateral that secures the Companys
obligations under its secured credit facility, subject to
limited exceptions. The liens securing the notes share on an
equal and ratable first priority basis with liens securing the
Companys credit facility. Under the intercreditor
agreement, the collateral agent for the lenders under the
Companys secured credit facility is generally entitled to
sole control of all decisions and actions.
92
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
All the liens securing the notes may be released if the
Companys secured indebtedness, other than these notes,
does not exceed the lesser of $375.0 million and 15.0% of
our consolidated tangible assets. The Company refers to such a
release as a collateral suspension. If a collateral
suspension is in effect, the notes and the guarantees will be
unsecured, and will effectively rank junior to our secured
indebtedness to the extent of the value of the collateral
securing such indebtedness. If, after any such release of liens
on collateral, the aggregate principal amount of the
Companys secured indebtedness, other than these notes,
exceeds the greater of $375.0 million and 15.0% of its
consolidated tangible assets, as defined in the indenture, then
the collateral obligations of the Company and guarantors will be
reinstated and must be complied with within 30 days of such
event.
The indenture governing the notes contains covenants that, among
other things, limit the Companys ability and the ability
of its restricted subsidiaries to:
|
|
|
|
|
incur additional indebtedness or issue certain preferred stock;
|
|
|
|
pay dividends or make other distributions;
|
|
|
|
make other restricted payments or investments;
|
|
|
|
sell assets;
|
|
|
|
create liens;
|
|
|
|
enter into agreements that restrict dividends and other payments
by restricted subsidiaries;
|
|
|
|
engage in transactions with its affiliates; and
|
|
|
|
consolidate, merge or transfer all or substantially all of its
assets.
|
The indenture governing the notes also contains a provision
under which an event of default by the Company or by any
restricted subsidiary on any other indebtedness exceeding
$25.0 million would be considered an event of default under
the indenture if such default: a) is caused by failure to
pay the principal at final maturity, or b) results in the
acceleration of such indebtedness prior to maturity.
Prior to October 15, 2012, the Company may redeem the notes
with the net cash proceeds of certain equity offerings, at a
redemption price equal to 110.50% of the aggregate principal
amount plus accrued and unpaid interest; provided, that
(i) after giving effect to any such redemption, at least
65% of the notes originally issued would remain outstanding
immediately after such redemption and (ii) the Company
makes such redemption not more than 90 days after the
consummation of such equity offering. In addition, prior to
October 15, 2013, the Company may redeem all or part of the
notes at a price equal to 100% of the aggregate principal amount
of notes to be redeemed, plus the applicable premium, as defined
in the indenture, and accrued and unpaid interest.
On or after October 15, 2013, the Company may redeem the
notes, in whole or part, at the redemption prices set forth
below, together with accrued and unpaid interest to the
redemption date.
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Optional Redemption Price
|
|
2013
|
|
|
105.2500
|
%
|
2014
|
|
|
102.6250
|
%
|
2015
|
|
|
101.3125
|
%
|
2016 and thereafter
|
|
|
100.0000
|
%
|
If the Company experiences a change of control, as defined, it
must offer to repurchase the notes at an offer price in cash
equal to 101% of their principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid
interest. Furthermore, following certain asset sales, the
Company may be required to use the proceeds to offer to
repurchase the notes at an offer price in cash equal to 100% of
their principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest.
93
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
3.375%
convertible senior notes due 2038
On June 3, 2008, the Company completed an offering of
$250.0 million convertible senior notes at a coupon rate of
3.375% (3.375% Convertible Senior Notes) with a
maturity in June 2038. The interest on the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes is payable in cash
semi-annually in arrears, on June 1 and December 1 of each year
until June 1, 2013, after which the principal will accrete
at an annual yield to maturity of 3.375% per year. The Company
will also pay contingent interest during any six-month interest
period commencing June 1, 2013, for which the trading price
of these notes for a specified period of time equals or exceeds
120% of their accreted principal amount. The notes will be
convertible under certain circumstances into shares of the
Companys common stock (Common Stock) at an
initial conversion rate of 19.9695 shares of Common Stock
per $1,000 principal amount of notes, which is equal to an
initial conversion price of approximately $50.08 per share. Upon
conversion of a note, a holder will receive, at the
Companys election, shares of Common Stock, cash or a
combination of cash and shares of Common Stock. At
December 31, 2010, the number of conversion shares
potentially issuable in relation to the 3.375% Convertible
Senior Notes was 1.9 million. The Company may redeem the
notes at its option beginning June 6, 2013, and holders of
the notes will have the right to require the Company to
repurchase the notes on June 1, 2013 and certain dates
thereafter or on the occurrence of a fundamental change. Net
proceeds of $243.5 million were used to purchase
approximately 1.45 million shares, or $49.2 million,
of the Companys common stock, to repay outstanding
borrowings under its senior secured revolving credit facility
which totaled $100.0 million at the time of the offering
and for other general corporate purposes.
The indenture governing the 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes
contains a provision under which an event of default by the
Company or by any subsidiary on any other indebtedness exceeding
$25.0 million would be considered an event of default under the
indenture if such default is: a) caused by failure to pay
the principal at final maturity, or b) results in the
acceleration of such indebtedness prior to maturity.
As of January 1, 2009, the Company was required to adopt
the provisions of FASB Codification Topic
470-20,
Debt Debt with Conversion and Other Options,
with retrospective application to the terms of the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes as they existed for all
periods presented (See Note 1). The Consolidated Statements
of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2008 has been
restated to reflect the adoption. The restatement of the
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the year ended
December 31, 2008 resulted in the Company recognizing
$4.3 million, $2.8 million, net of tax, in interest
expense, or $0.03 per diluted share, related to discount
amortization as well as $15.0 million, $9.7 million,
net of tax, or $0.11 per diluted share, to reduce the gain on
early retirement of debt associated with the December 2008
redemption.
The carrying amount of the equity component of the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes was $30.1 million at
both December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009. The
principal amount of the liability component of the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes, its unamortized discount
and its net carrying amount was $95.9 million,
$9.4 million and $86.5 million, respectively, as of
December 31, 2010 and $95.9 million,
$12.8 million and $83.1 million, respectively, as of
December 31, 2009. The unamortized discount is being
amortized to interest expense over the expected life of the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes which ends June 1,
2013. During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company
recognized $6.7 million, $4.3 million, net of tax, in
interest expense, or $0.04 per diluted share, at an effective
rate of 7.93%, of which $3.3 million related to the coupon
rate of 3.375% and $3.4 million related to discount
amortization. During the year ended December 31, 2009, the
Company recognized $8.2 million, $5.3 million, net of
tax, in interest expense, or $0.05 per diluted share, at an
effective rate of 7.93%, of which $4.2 million related to
the coupon rate of 3.375% and $4.0 million related to
discount amortization.
The Company determined that upon maturity or redemption, it has
the intent and ability to settle the principal amount of its
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes in cash, and any additional
conversion consideration spread (the excess of conversion value
over face value) in shares of the Companys Common Stock.
There were no stock equivalents to exclude from the calculation
of the dilutive effect of stock equivalents for the
94
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
diluted earnings per share calculations for the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 related to the assumed
conversion of the 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes under the
if-converted method as there was no excess of conversion value
over face value in any period.
During December 2008, the Company redeemed $73.2 million
accreted principal amount, or $88.2 million aggregate
principal amount of the 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes for
a cost of $44.8 million resulting in a gain of
$28.4 million. In addition, the Company expensed
$2.1 million of unamortized issuance costs in connection
with the redemption. In April 2009, the Company repurchased
$20.0 million aggregate principal amount of the
3.375% Convertible Senior Notes for a cost of
$6.1 million, resulting in a gain of $10.7 million. In
addition, the Company expensed $0.4 million of unamortized
issuance costs in connection with the retirement. In June 2009,
the Company retired $45.8 million aggregate principal
amount of its 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes in exchange
for the issuance of 7,755,440 shares of Common Stock valued
at $4.38 per share and payment of accrued interest, resulting in
a gain of $4.4 million. In addition, the Company expensed
$1.0 million of unamortized issuance costs in connection
with the retirement. In accordance with FASB Codification Topic
470-20
Debt Debt with Conversion and Other Options,
the settlement consideration was allocated to the extinguishment
of the liability component in an amount equal to the fair value
of that component immediately prior to extinguishment, with the
difference between this allocation and the net carrying amount
of the liability component and unamortized debt issuance costs
recognized as a gain or loss on debt extinguishment. If there
would have been any remaining settlement consideration, it would
have been allocated to the reacquisition of the equity component
and recognized as a reduction of Stockholders Equity.
Other
debt
In connection with the TODCO acquisition in July 2007, one of
our domestic subsidiaries assumed approximately
$3.5 million of 7.375% Senior Notes due in April 2018.
There are no financial or operating covenants associated with
these notes.
|
|
11.
|
Derivative
Instruments and Hedging
|
The Company is required to recognize all of its derivative
instruments as either assets or liabilities in the statement of
financial position at fair value. The accounting for changes in
the fair value of a derivative instrument depends on whether it
has been designated and qualifies as part of a hedging
relationship and further, on the type of hedging relationship.
For those derivative instruments that are designated and qualify
as hedging instruments, a company must designate the hedging
instrument, based upon the exposure being hedged, as a fair
value hedge, cash flow hedge, or a hedge of a net investment in
a foreign operation.
The Company periodically uses derivative instruments to manage
its exposure to interest rate risk, including interest rate swap
agreements to effectively fix the interest rate on variable rate
debt and interest rate collars to limit the interest rate range
on variable rate debt. These hedge transactions have
historically been accounted for as cash flow hedges.
For derivative instruments that are designated and qualify as a
cash flow hedge, the effective portion of the gain or loss on
the derivative instrument is reported as a component of other
comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings in the same
line item associated with the forecasted transaction and in the
period or periods during which the hedged transaction affects
earnings. The effective portion of the interest rate swaps and
collar hedging the exposure to variability in expected future
cash flows due to changes in interest rates is reclassified into
interest expense. The remaining gain or loss on the derivative
instrument in excess of the cumulative change in the present
value of future cash flows of the hedged item, if any, or hedged
components excluded from the assessment of effectiveness, is
recognized in interest expense.
In July 2007, the Company entered into a zero cost LIBOR collar
on $300.0 million of term loan principal with a final
settlement date of October 1, 2010, which was settled on
October 1, 2010 per the
95
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
agreement with a cash payment of $3.4 million, with a
ceiling of 5.75% and a floor of 4.99%. The counterparty was
obligated to pay the Company in any quarter that actual LIBOR
reset above 5.75% and the Company paid the counterparty in any
quarter that actual LIBOR reset below 4.99%. The terms and
settlement dates of the collar matched those of the term loan
through July 27, 2009, the date of the 2009 Credit
Amendment.
As a result of the inclusion of a LIBOR floor in the Credit
Agreement, the Company determined, as of July 27, 2009 and
on an ongoing basis, that the interest rate collar (which was
settled on October 1, 2010) will not be highly effective in
achieving offsetting changes in cash flows attributable to the
hedged interest rate risk during the period that the hedge was
designated. As such, the Company discontinued cash flow hedge
accounting for the interest rate collar as of July 27,
2009. Because cash flow hedge accounting was not applied to this
instrument, changes in fair value related to the interest rate
collar subsequent to July 27, 2009 were recorded in
earnings. As a result of discontinuing the cash flow hedging
relationship, the Company recognized a decrease in fair value of
$0.3 million and $1.7 million related to the hedge
ineffectiveness of its interest rate collar as Interest Expense
in its Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended
December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
The following table provides the fair values of the
Companys interest rate derivatives (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
Balance Sheet
|
|
Fair
|
|
Classification
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Derivatives(a):
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Asset Derivatives
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Current Liabilities
|
|
$
|
10,312
|
|
Other Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liability Derivatives
|
|
$
|
10,312
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
These interest rate contracts were designated as cash flow
hedges through July 27, 2009. |
The following table provides the effect of the Companys
interest rate derivatives on the Consolidated Statements of
Operations (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
Derivatives(a)
|
|
I.
|
|
II.
|
|
III.
|
|
IV.
|
|
V.
|
|
Interest rate contracts
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(1,654
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11,849
|
)
|
|
Interest Expense
|
|
$
|
(8,881
|
)
|
|
$
|
(16,636
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7,745
|
)
|
|
|
Interest Expense
|
|
|
$
|
(264
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,706
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
These interest rate contracts were designated as cash flow
hedges through July 27, 2009. |
|
|
I.
|
Amount of Gain (Loss), Net of Taxes Recognized in Other
Comprehensive Income (Loss) on Derivative (Effective Portion)
|
|
II.
|
Classification of Gain (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated
Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) into Income (Loss) (Effective
Portion)
|
|
III.
|
Amount of Gain (Loss) Reclassified from Accumulated Other
Comprehensive Income (Loss) into Income (Loss) (Effective
Portion)
|
|
IV.
|
Classification of Gain (Loss) Recognized in Income (Loss) on
Derivative
|
96
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
V. |
Amount of Gain (Loss) Recognized in Income (Loss) on
Derivative
|
A summary of the changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative unrealized loss, net of tax of $4,371 as of
December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
(8,117
|
)
|
Reclassification of losses into net income, net of tax of $2,711
|
|
|
5,034
|
|
Other comprehensive losses, net of tax of $6,380
|
|
|
(11,849
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative unrealized loss, net of tax of $8,040, as of
December 31, 2008
|
|
$
|
(14,932
|
)
|
Reclassification of losses into net income, net of tax of $5,823
|
|
|
10,813
|
|
Other comprehensive losses, net of tax of $891
|
|
|
(1,654
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative unrealized loss, net of tax of $3,108, as of
December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
(5,773
|
)
|
Reclassification of losses into net income, net of tax of $3,108
|
|
|
5,773
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative unrealized loss, net of tax, as of December 31,
2010
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.
|
Fair
Value Measurements
|
FASB ASC Topic
820-10,
Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures defines fair
value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value under
generally accepted accounting principles and expands disclosures
about fair value measurements; however, it does not require any
new fair value measurements, rather, its application is made
pursuant to other accounting pronouncements that require or
permit fair value measurements.
Fair value measurements are generally based upon observable and
unobservable inputs. Observable inputs reflect market data
obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs
reflect our view of market assumptions in the absence of
observable market information. The Company utilizes valuation
techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and
minimize the use of unobservable inputs. FASB ASC Topic
820-10,
Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures includes a fair
value hierarchy that is intended to increase consistency and
comparability in fair value measurements and related
disclosures. The fair value hierarchy consists of the following
three levels:
Level 1 Inputs are quoted prices in active
markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 Inputs are quoted prices for similar
assets or liabilities in an active market, quoted prices for
identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are
not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable
and market-corroborated inputs which are derived principally
from or corroborated by observable market data.
Level 3 Inputs are derived from valuation
techniques in which one or more significant inputs or value
drivers are unobservable.
As of January 1, 2010, the Company adopted the FASB ASU
2010-06
which requires additional disclosures about the various classes
of assets and liabilities measured at fair value, the valuation
techniques and inputs used, the activity in Level 3 fair
value measurements and the transfers between Levels 1, 2,
and 3. The requirement for disclosures about purchases, sales,
issuances and settlements in the roll forward of activity in
Level 3 fair value measurements are effective for interim
and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15,
2010 and will be adopted by the Company on January 1, 2011
(See Note 1).
As of December 31, 2009 the fair value of the
Companys interest rate derivative was in a liability
position in the amount of $10.3 million. The fair value of
the interest rate derivative was determined based on a
discontinued cash flow approach using market observable inputs.
97
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table represents our derivative liabilities
measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of
December 31, 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Active Markets for
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
Measurement
|
|
Identical Asset or
|
|
Observable
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Liability
|
|
Inputs
|
|
Inputs
|
|
|
2009
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
Interest Rate Contracts
|
|
$
|
10,312
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
10,312
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
There were no derivative liabilities outstanding at
December 31, 2010.
The following tables represent our assets measured at fair value
on a non-recurring basis for which an impairment measurement was
made as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Active Markets for
|
|
Other
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
Measurement
|
|
Identical Asset or
|
|
Observable
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Liability
|
|
Inputs
|
|
Inputs
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2010
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
Gain (Loss)
|
|
Property and Equipment, Net
|
|
$
|
27,848
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
27,848
|
|
|
$
|
(125,136
|
)
|
The Company incurred $125.1 million ($81.3 million,
net of tax) in impairment of property and equipment charges
related to certain of its assets (See Note 1). The
property, plant and equipment was valued based on the discounted
cash flows associated with the assets which included
managements estimate of sales proceeds less costs to sell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Active Markets for
|
|
Other
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
|
Measurement
|
|
Identical Asset or
|
|
Observable
|
|
Unobservable
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Liability
|
|
Inputs
|
|
Inputs
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2009
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
Gain (Loss)
|
|
Assets Held for Sale
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(26,882
|
)
|
Long-lived assets held for sale at December 31, 2008 were
written down to their fair value less costs to sell of
$9.8 million in the second quarter of 2009, resulting in an
impairment charge of approximately $26.9 million
($13.1 million, net of tax) related to Hercules 110.
The sale of Hercules 110 was completed in August 2009
(See Note 5).
|
|
13.
|
Supplemental
Cash Flow Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest, net of capitalized interest
|
|
$
|
76,993
|
|
|
$
|
62,297
|
|
|
$
|
55,865
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
22,092
|
|
|
|
26,942
|
|
|
|
42,854
|
|
During 2009 and 2008, the Company capitalized interest of
$0.3 million and $8.8 million, respectively. The
Company did not capitalize interest in 2010.
The Company had non-cash financing activities related to its
June 2009 retirement of $45.8 million aggregate principal
amount of its 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes in exchange
for the issuance of 7,755,440 shares of Common Stock valued
at $4.38 per share ($34.0 million) and payment of accrued
interest, resulting in a gain of $4.4 million (See
Note 10).
98
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
14.
|
Concentration
of Credit Risk
|
The Company maintains its cash in bank deposit accounts at high
credit quality financial institutions or in highly rated money
market funds as permitted by its Credit Agreement. The balances,
at many times, exceed federally insured limits.
The Company provides services to a diversified group of
customers in the oil and natural gas exploration and production
industry. Credit is extended based on an evaluation of each
customers financial condition. The Company maintains an
allowance for doubtful accounts receivable based on expected
collectability and establishes a reserve when payment is
unlikely to occur.
|
|
15.
|
Sales to
Major Customers
|
The Companys customers primarily include major integrated
energy companies, independent oil and natural gas operators and
national oil companies. Sales to customers exceeding
10 percent or more of the Companys total revenue are
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited(a)
|
|
|
20
|
%
|
|
|
16
|
%
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
Chevron Corporation(b)
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Saudi Aramco(a)
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
PEMEX Exploración y Producción (PEMEX)(a)
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Revenue included in the Companys International Offshore
segment. |
|
(b) |
|
Revenue included in the Companys Domestic Offshore,
Domestic Liftboats and International Liftboats segments. |
Income (loss) before income taxes consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
(318,476
|
)
|
|
$
|
(271,879
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,267,606
|
)
|
Foreign
|
|
|
94,260
|
|
|
|
102,798
|
|
|
|
112,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
(224,216
|
)
|
|
$
|
(169,081
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,155,031
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
99
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The income tax (benefit) provision consisted of the following
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Current-United
States
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(16,335
|
)
|
|
$
|
11,733
|
|
Current-foreign
|
|
|
8,752
|
|
|
|
35,144
|
|
|
|
31,103
|
|
Current-state
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
|
(9,302
|
)
|
|
|
1,867
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current income tax provision
|
|
|
8,846
|
|
|
|
9,507
|
|
|
|
44,703
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred-United
States
|
|
|
(102,033
|
)
|
|
|
(80,458
|
)
|
|
|
(103,077
|
)
|
Deferred-foreign
|
|
|
3,748
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
(5,683
|
)
|
Deferred-state
|
|
|
(183
|
)
|
|
|
(8,042
|
)
|
|
|
(9,104
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax benefit
|
|
|
(98,468
|
)
|
|
|
(88,439
|
)
|
|
|
(117,864
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income tax benefit
|
|
$
|
(89,622
|
)
|
|
$
|
(78,932
|
)
|
|
$
|
(73,161
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The components of and changes in the net deferred taxes were as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating loss carryforward (Federal, State &
Foreign)
|
|
$
|
144,720
|
|
|
$
|
108,307
|
|
Credit carryforwards
|
|
|
14,711
|
|
|
|
14,677
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
11,530
|
|
|
|
14,329
|
|
Unearned income
|
|
|
1,296
|
|
|
|
3,417
|
|
Intangibles
|
|
|
9,030
|
|
|
|
5,440
|
|
Stock-Based Compensation
|
|
|
7,155
|
|
|
|
7,046
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,622
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
188,442
|
|
|
|
165,838
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed assets
|
|
|
(290,749
|
)
|
|
|
(369,639
|
)
|
Convertible Notes
|
|
|
(7,586
|
)
|
|
|
(7,018
|
)
|
Deferred expenses
|
|
|
(9,148
|
)
|
|
|
(7,602
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(8,028
|
)
|
|
|
(4,493
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(315,511
|
)
|
|
|
(388,752
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax liabilities
|
|
$
|
(127,069
|
)
|
|
$
|
(222,914
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
A reconciliation of statutory and effective income tax rates is
as shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Statutory rate
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
|
|
35.0
|
%
|
Effect of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of Goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29.3
|
)
|
State income taxes
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Taxes on foreign earnings at greater (lesser) than the U.S.
statutory rate
|
|
|
7.6
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Uncertain Tax Positions
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
(2.8
|
)
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Deemed Repatriation of foreign earnings
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective rate
|
|
|
40.0
|
%
|
|
|
46.7
|
%
|
|
|
6.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amount of consolidated U.S. net operating losses
(NOLs) available as of December 31, 2010 is
approximately $413.5 million. These NOLs will expire in the
years 2017 through 2030. Because of the TODCO acquisition, the
Companys ability to utilize certain of its tax benefits is
subject to an annual limitation, in addition to certain
additional limitations resulting from TODCOs prior
transactions. However, the Company believes that, in light of
the amount of the annual limitations, it should not have a
material effect on the Companys ability to utilize its tax
benefits for the foreseeable future and the Company has not
recorded any valuation allowance related to the tax assets. In
addition, the Company has $14.7 million of non-expiring
alternative minimum tax credits.
The Company has not recorded deferred income taxes on the
remaining undistributed earnings of its foreign subsidiaries
because of managements intent to permanently reinvest such
earnings. At December 31, 2010, the aggregate amount of
undistributed earnings of the foreign subsidiaries was
$153.8 million. Upon distribution of these earnings in the
form of dividends or otherwise, the Company may be subject to
U.S. income taxes and foreign withholding taxes. It is not
practical, however, to estimate the amount of taxes that may be
payable on the remittance of these earnings.
Effective January 1, 2007, the Company adopted the
provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes, codified in FASB ASC Topic 740,
Income Taxes. Its adoption did not have a material impact
on the Companys financial statements. The Company did not
derecognize any tax benefits, nor recognize any interest expense
or penalties on unrecognized tax benefits as of the date of
adoption. The Company recognizes interest and penalties related
to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense. The Company
recorded interest and penalties of $0.4 million,
$6.3 million and $3.1 million through the Consolidated
Statement of Operations for the years ended December 31,
2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. In addition, in 2008 the
Company recorded interest and penalties of $6.3 million as
a component of goodwill related to the TODCO acquisition.
The Company, directly or through its subsidiaries, files income
tax returns in the United States, and multiple state and foreign
jurisdictions. The Companys tax returns for 2005 through
2009 remain open for examination by the taxing authorities in
the respective jurisdictions where those returns were filed. In
addition, certain tax returns filed by TODCO and its
subsidiaries are open for years prior to 2004, however TODCO tax
obligations from periods prior to its initial public offering in
2004 are indemnified by Transocean under the tax sharing
agreement, except for the Trinidad and Tobago jurisdiction. The
Companys Trinidadian tax returns are open for examination
for the years 2004 through 2009.
101
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table presents the reconciliation of the total
amounts of unrecognized tax benefits (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period
|
|
$
|
13,529
|
|
|
|
13,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross increases tax positions in prior periods
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,009
|
|
Gross decreases tax positions in prior periods
|
|
|
(1,499
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross increases current period tax positions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141
|
|
|
|
5,467
|
|
Settlements
|
|
|
(7,921
|
)
|
|
|
(88
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period
|
|
$
|
4,109
|
|
|
$
|
13,529
|
|
|
$
|
13,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From time to time, our tax returns are subject to review and
examination by various tax authorities within the jurisdictions
in which we operate or have operated. We are currently
contesting tax assessments in Mexico and Venezuela, and may
contest future assessments where we believe the assessments are
meritless.
In December 2002, TODCO received an assessment from SENIAT, the
national Venezuelan tax authority, relating to calendar years
1998 through 2001. After a series of partial payments and
appeals, in July 2009, the Company settled the remaining tax and
interest portion of the assessment. Residual penalties of
$0.8 million (based on the official exchange rate at
December 31, 2010) remain in dispute. The Company, as
successor to TODCO, is fully indemnified by TODCOs former
parent, Transocean Ltd. for this issue. The Company does not
expect the ultimate resolution of this assessment and settlement
to have a material impact on its consolidated financial
statements. In January 2008, SENIAT commenced an audit for the
2003 calendar year, which was completed in the fourth quarter of
2008. The Company has not yet received any proposed adjustments
from SENIAT for that year.
In March 2007, a subsidiary of the Company received an
assessment from the Mexican tax authorities related to its
operations for the 2004 tax year. This assessment contested the
Companys right to certain deductions and also claimed it
did not remit withholding tax due on certain of these
deductions. In accordance with local statutory requirements, we
provided a surety bond for an amount equal to approximately
$13 million, which was released in July 2010, to contest
these assessments. In 2008, the Mexican tax authorities
commenced an audit for the 2005 tax year. During 2010, the
Company effectively reached a compromise settlement of all
issues for 2004 through 2007. The Company paid
$11.6 million and reversed (i) previously provided
reserves and (ii) an associated tax benefit in the year
which totaled $5.8 million.
As of December 31, 2010, the Company had Taxes Receivable
of $5.6 million which is included in Other on the
Consolidated Balance Sheets.
As of December 31, 2010, the Company has $4.1 million
unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would impact the
effective income tax rate.
The Company reports its business activities in six business
segments: (1) Domestic Offshore, (2) International
Offshore, (3) Inland, (4) Domestic Liftboats,
(5) International Liftboats and (6) Delta Towing. The
financial information of the Companys discontinued
operation is not included in the financial information presented
for the Companys reporting segments. The Company
eliminates inter-segment revenue and expenses, if any.
102
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following describes the Companys reporting segments as
of December 31, 2010:
Domestic Offshore includes 22 jackup rigs and
three submersible rigs in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico that can
drill in maximum water depths ranging from 85 to 350 feet.
Eleven of the jackup rigs are either working on short-term
contracts or available for contracts and eleven are
cold-stacked. All three submersibles are cold-stacked.
International Offshore includes eight jackup
rigs and one platform rig outside of the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico. The Company has two jackup rigs working offshore in each
of India and Saudi Arabia, one jackup rig contracted offshore in
Malaysia and one platform rig under contract in Mexico. In
addition, the Company has one jackup rig warm-stacked and one
jackup rig cold-stacked in Bahrain as well as one jackup rig
contracted to a customer in Angola, however the rig was on
stand-by in Gabon preparing for a new contract.
Inland includes a fleet of 6 conventional and
11 posted barge rigs that operate inland in marshes, rivers,
lakes and shallow bay or coastal waterways along the
U.S. Gulf Coast. Three of the Companys inland barges
are either operating on short-term contracts or available and 14
are cold-stacked.
Domestic Liftboats includes 41 liftboats in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Thirty-eight are operating or
available and three are cold-stacked.
International Liftboats includes 24
liftboats. Twenty-one are operating or available
offshore West Africa, including five liftboats owned by a
third party, one is cold-stacked offshore West Africa and two
are operating or available in the Middle East region.
Delta Towing the Companys Delta Towing
business operates a fleet of 29 inland tugs, 10 offshore tugs,
34 crew boats, 46 deck barges, 16 shale barges and five spud
barges along and in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and from time
to time along the Southeastern coast and in Mexico. Of these
vessels, 26 crew boats, 11 inland tugs, three offshore tugs, one
deck barge and one spud barge are cold-stacked, and the
remaining are working, being repaired or available for contracts.
The Companys jackup rigs, submersible rigs and platform
rigs are used primarily for exploration and development drilling
in shallow waters. The Companys liftboats are
self-propelled, self-elevating vessels with a large open deck
space, which provides a versatile, mobile and stable platform to
support a broad range of offshore maintenance and construction
services throughout the life of an oil or natural gas well.
Information regarding reportable segments is as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
from
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Domestic Offshore(a)
|
|
$
|
124,063
|
|
|
$
|
(182,394
|
)
|
|
$
|
68,335
|
|
|
$
|
140,889
|
|
|
$
|
(101,855
|
)
|
|
$
|
60,775
|
|
International Offshore(b)
|
|
|
291,516
|
|
|
|
56,878
|
|
|
|
58,275
|
|
|
|
393,797
|
|
|
|
97,995
|
|
|
|
63,808
|
|
Inland
|
|
|
21,922
|
|
|
|
(27,876
|
)
|
|
|
23,516
|
|
|
|
19,794
|
|
|
|
(59,095
|
)
|
|
|
32,465
|
|
Domestic Liftboats
|
|
|
70,710
|
|
|
|
12,089
|
|
|
|
14,698
|
|
|
|
75,584
|
|
|
|
4,540
|
|
|
|
20,267
|
|
International Liftboats
|
|
|
116,616
|
|
|
|
37,211
|
|
|
|
17,711
|
|
|
|
88,537
|
|
|
|
22,427
|
|
|
|
12,880
|
|
Delta Towing(c)
|
|
|
32,653
|
|
|
|
(1,733
|
)
|
|
|
5,471
|
|
|
|
24,250
|
|
|
|
(12,677
|
)
|
|
|
7,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
657,480
|
|
|
$
|
(105,825
|
)
|
|
$
|
188,006
|
|
|
$
|
742,851
|
|
|
$
|
(48,665
|
)
|
|
$
|
198,112
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39,335
|
)
|
|
|
3,177
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(43,481
|
)
|
|
|
3,309
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
$
|
657,480
|
|
|
$
|
(145,160
|
)
|
|
$
|
191,183
|
|
|
$
|
742,851
|
|
|
$
|
(92,146
|
)
|
|
$
|
201,421
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
(a) |
|
2010 Income (Loss) from Operations includes an impairment of
property and equipment charge of $84.7 million. |
|
(b) |
|
2010 Income (Loss) from Operations includes an impairment of
property and equipment charge of $38.0 million. 2009 Income
(Loss) from Operations includes an impairment of property and
equipment charge of $26.9 million as well as an allowance
for doubtful accounts receivable of approximately
$26.8 million, related to a customer in West Africa that
was contracted to utilize one rig in its International Offshore
segment, a non-cash charge of approximately $7.3 million to
fully impair the related deferred mobilization and contract
preparation costs, partially offset by a $2.5 million
reduction in previously accrued contract related operating costs
that are not expected to be settled if the receivable is not
collected. |
|
(c) |
|
2010 Income (Loss) from Operations includes an impairment of
property and equipment charge of $2.4 million. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Domestic Offshore(a)
|
|
$
|
382,358
|
|
|
$
|
(598,856
|
)
|
|
$
|
66,850
|
|
International Offshore(b)
|
|
|
327,983
|
|
|
|
(11,647
|
)
|
|
|
37,865
|
|
Inland(c)
|
|
|
162,487
|
|
|
|
(422,152
|
)
|
|
|
43,107
|
|
Domestic Liftboats
|
|
|
94,755
|
|
|
|
16,578
|
|
|
|
21,317
|
|
International Liftboats
|
|
|
85,896
|
|
|
|
30,872
|
|
|
|
9,912
|
|
Delta Towing(d)
|
|
|
58,328
|
|
|
|
(80,065
|
)
|
|
|
10,926
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,111,807
|
|
|
$
|
(1,065,270
|
)
|
|
$
|
189,977
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(55,643
|
)
|
|
|
2,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
$
|
1,111,807
|
|
|
$
|
(1,120,913
|
)
|
|
$
|
192,894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
2008 Income (Loss) from Operations includes $507.2 million
and $174.6 million in impairment of goodwill and impairment
of property and equipment charges, respectively. |
|
(b) |
|
2008 Income (Loss) from Operations includes an impairment of
goodwill charge of $150.9 million. |
|
(c) |
|
2008 Income (Loss) from Operations includes $205.5 million
and $202.1 million in impairment of goodwill and impairment
of property and equipment charges, respectively. |
|
(d) |
|
2008 Income (Loss) from Operations includes an impairment of
goodwill charge of $86.7 million. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
$
|
772,950
|
|
|
$
|
870,723
|
|
International Offshore
|
|
|
712,988
|
|
|
|
860,252
|
|
Inland
|
|
|
136,229
|
|
|
|
160,354
|
|
Domestic Liftboats
|
|
|
86,013
|
|
|
|
88,942
|
|
International Liftboats
|
|
|
167,561
|
|
|
|
164,221
|
|
Delta Towing
|
|
|
56,631
|
|
|
|
62,563
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
62,937
|
|
|
|
70,421
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
$
|
1,995,309
|
|
|
$
|
2,277,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008(a)
|
|
|
Capital Expenditures and Deferred Drydocking Expenditures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic Offshore
|
|
$
|
11,133
|
|
|
$
|
8,665
|
|
|
$
|
139,893
|
|
International Offshore
|
|
|
6,469
|
|
|
|
46,246
|
|
|
|
390,732
|
|
Inland
|
|
|
758
|
|
|
|
9,886
|
|
|
|
39,739
|
|
Domestic Liftboats
|
|
|
9,987
|
|
|
|
11,025
|
|
|
|
12,362
|
|
International Liftboats
|
|
|
7,470
|
|
|
|
15,717
|
|
|
|
8,302
|
|
Delta Towing
|
|
|
927
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
|
|
4,125
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
314
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
$
|
37,058
|
|
|
$
|
91,787
|
|
|
$
|
602,353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes the purchase of Hercules 350, Hercules 262
and Hercules 261 as well as related equipment (See
Note 4). |
A substantial portion of our assets are mobile. Asset locations
at the end of the period are not necessarily indicative of the
geographic distribution of the revenue generated by such assets
during the periods. The following tables present revenue and
long-lived assets by country based on the location of the
service provided (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Operating Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
248,234
|
|
|
$
|
258,868
|
|
|
$
|
697,930
|
|
Saudi Arabia
|
|
|
103,712
|
|
|
|
109,256
|
|
|
|
371
|
|
India
|
|
|
130,533
|
|
|
|
122,016
|
|
|
|
93,544
|
|
Mexico
|
|
|
21,240
|
|
|
|
77,245
|
|
|
|
90,815
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
97,163
|
|
|
|
75,016
|
|
|
|
83,141
|
|
Malaysia
|
|
|
47,071
|
|
|
|
47,006
|
|
|
|
17,367
|
|
Other(a)
|
|
|
9,527
|
|
|
|
53,444
|
|
|
|
128,639
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
657,480
|
|
|
$
|
742,851
|
|
|
$
|
1,111,807
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Long-Lived Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
971,640
|
|
|
$
|
1,122,294
|
|
Saudi Arabia
|
|
|
289,125
|
|
|
|
311,365
|
|
India
|
|
|
136,495
|
|
|
|
147,497
|
|
Mexico
|
|
|
9,365
|
|
|
|
50,728
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
106,565
|
|
|
|
115,656
|
|
Malaysia
|
|
|
53,678
|
|
|
|
58,965
|
|
Other(a)
|
|
|
99,427
|
|
|
|
149,557
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1,666,295
|
|
|
$
|
1,956,062
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Other represents countries in which we operate that individually
had operating revenue or long-lived assets representing less
than 4% of total operating revenue or total long-lived assets. |
|
|
18.
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
Operating
Leases
The Company has non-cancellable operating lease commitments that
expire at various dates through 2017. As of December 31,
2010, future minimum lease payments related to non-cancellable
operating leases were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
4,174
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2,404
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2,099
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2,042
|
|
2015
|
|
|
2,078
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
4,266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
17,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expense for all operating leases was $13.2 million,
$15.3 million and $13.3 million for the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Legal
Proceedings
The Company is involved in various claims and lawsuits in the
normal course of business. As of December 31, 2010,
management did not believe any accruals were necessary in
accordance with FASB Codification Topic
450-20,
Contingencies Loss Contingencies.
In connection with the July 2007 acquisition of TODCO, the
Company assumed certain material legal proceedings from TODCO
and its subsidiaries.
In October 2001, TODCO was notified by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that
the EPA had identified a subsidiary of TODCO as a potentially
responsible party under CERCLA in connection with the Palmer
Barge Line superfund site located in Port Arthur, Jefferson
County, Texas. Based upon the information provided by the EPA
and the Companys review of its internal records to date,
the Company disputes the Companys designation as a
potentially responsible party and does not expect that the
ultimate outcome of this case will have a material adverse
effect on its consolidated results of operations, financial
position or cash flows. The Company continues to monitor this
matter.
Robert E. Aaron et al. vs. Phillips 66 Company et al. Circuit
Court, Second Judicial District, Jones County,
Mississippi. This is the case name used to refer
to several cases that have been filed in the Circuit Courts of
the State of Mississippi involving 768 persons that allege
personal injury or whose heirs claim their deaths arose out of
asbestos exposure in the course of their employment by the
defendants between 1965 and 2002. The complaints name as
defendants, among others, certain of TODCOs subsidiaries
and certain subsidiaries of TODCOs former parent to whom
TODCO may owe indemnity and other unaffiliated defendant
companies, including companies that allegedly manufactured
drilling related products containing asbestos that are the
subject of the complaints. The number of unaffiliated defendant
companies involved in each complaint ranges from approximately
20 to 70. The complaints allege that the defendant drilling
contractors used asbestos-containing products in offshore
drilling operations, land based drilling operations and in
drilling structures, drilling rigs, vessels and other equipment
and assert claims based on, among other things,
106
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
negligence and strict liability, and claims authorized under the
Jones Act. The plaintiffs seek, among other things, awards of
unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. All of these
cases were assigned to a special master who has approved a form
of questionnaire to be completed by plaintiffs so that claims
made would be properly served against specific defendants.
Approximately 700 questionnaires were returned and the remaining
plaintiffs, who did not submit a questionnaire reply, have had
their suits dismissed without prejudice. Of the respondents,
approximately 100 shared periods of employment by TODCO and
its former parent which could lead to claims against either
company, even though many of these plaintiffs did not state in
their questionnaire answers that the employment actually
involved exposure to asbestos. After providing the
questionnaire, each plaintiff was further required to file a
separate and individual amended complaint naming only those
defendants against whom they had a direct claim as identified in
the questionnaire answers. Defendants not identified in the
amended complaints were dismissed from the plaintiffs
litigation. To date, three plaintiffs named TODCO as a defendant
in their amended complaints. It is possible that some of the
plaintiffs who have filed amended complaints and have not named
TODCO as a defendant may attempt to add TODCO as a defendant in
the future when case discovery begins and greater attention is
given to each individual plaintiffs employment background.
The Company has not determined which entity would be responsible
for such claims under the Master Separation Agreement between
TODCO and its former parent. More than three years has passed
since the court ordered that amended complaints be filed by each
individual plaintiff, and the original complaints. No additional
plaintiffs have attempted to name TODCO as a defendant and such
actions may now be time-barred. The Company intends to defend
vigorously and does not expect the ultimate outcome of these
lawsuits to have a material adverse effect on its consolidated
results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
The Company and its subsidiaries are involved in a number of
other lawsuits, all of which have arisen in the ordinary course
of business. The Company does not believe that ultimate
liability, if any, resulting from any such other pending
litigation will have a material adverse effect on its business
or consolidated financial statements.
The Company cannot predict with certainty the outcome or effect
of any of the litigation matters specifically described above or
of any other pending litigation. There can be no assurance that
the Companys belief or expectations as to the outcome or
effect of any lawsuit or other litigation matter will prove
correct, and the eventual outcome of these matters could
materially differ from managements current estimates.
Insurance
The Company is self-insured for the deductible portion of its
insurance coverage. Management believes adequate accruals have
been made on known and estimated exposures up to the deductible
portion of the Companys insurance coverage. Management
believes that claims and liabilities in excess of the amounts
accrued are adequately insured. However, the Companys
insurance is subject to exclusions and limitations, and there is
no assurance that such coverage will adequately protect the
Company against liability from all potential consequences. In
addition, there is no assurance of renewal or the ability to
obtain coverage acceptable to the Company.
The Company maintains insurance coverage that includes coverage
for physical damage, third party liability, workers
compensation and employers liability, general liability,
vessel pollution and other coverages.
In April 2010, the Company completed the annual renewal of all
of its key insurance policies. The Companys primary marine
package provides for hull and machinery coverage for
substantially all of the Companys rigs and liftboats up to
a scheduled value of each asset. The total maximum amount of
coverage for these assets is $2.1 billion. The marine
package includes protection and indemnity and maritime
employers liability coverage for marine crew personal
injury and death and certain operational liabilities, with
primary coverage (or self-insured retention for maritime
employers liability coverage) of $5.0 million per
107
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
occurrence with excess liability coverage up to
$200.0 million. The marine package policy also includes
coverage for personal injury and death of third-parties with
primary and excess coverage of $25 million per occurrence
with additional excess liability coverage up to
$200 million, subject to a $250,000 per-occurrence
deductible. The marine package also provides coverage for cargo
and charterers legal liability. The marine package
includes limitations for coverage for losses caused in
U.S. Gulf of Mexico named windstorms, including an annual
aggregate limit of liability of $100.0 million for property
damage and removal of wreck liability coverage. The Company also
procured an additional $75.0 million excess policy for
removal of wreck and certain third-party liabilities incurred in
U.S. Gulf of Mexico named windstorms. Deductibles for
events that are not caused by a U.S. Gulf of Mexico named
windstorm are 12.5% of the insured drilling rig values per
occurrence, subject to a minimum of $1.0 million, and
$1.0 million per occurrence for liftboats. The deductible
for drilling rigs and liftboats in a U.S. Gulf of Mexico
named windstorm event is $25.0 million. Vessel pollution is
covered under a Water Quality Insurance Syndicate policy
(WQIS Policy) providing limits as required by
applicable law, including the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. The
WQIS Policy covers pollution emanating from the Companys
vessels and drilling rigs, with primary limits of
$5 million (inclusive of a $3.0 million per-occurrence
deductible) and excess liability coverage up to
$200 million.
Control-of-well
events generally include an unintended flow from the well that
cannot be contained by equipment on site (e.g., a blow-out
preventer), by increasing the weight of the drilling fluid or
that does not naturally close itself off through what is
typically described as bridging over. The Company carries a
contractors extra expense policy with $50 million
primary covering liability for well control costs, expenses
incurred to redrill wild or lost wells and pollution, with
excess liability coverage up to $200 million for pollution
liability that is covered in the primary policy. The policies
are subject to exclusions, limitations, deductibles,
self-insured retention and other conditions. In addition to the
marine package, the Company has separate policies providing
coverage for onshore foreign and domestic general liability,
employers liability, auto liability and non-owned aircraft
liability, with customary deductibles and coverage as well as a
separate underlying marine package for its Delta Towing business.
The Companys drilling contracts provide for varying levels
of indemnification from its customers and in most cases, may
require the Company to indemnify its customers for certain
liabilities. Under the Companys drilling contracts,
liability with respect to personnel and property is customarily
assigned on a
knock-for-knock
basis, which means that the Company and its customers assume
liability for the Companys respective personnel and
property, regardless of how the loss or damage to the personnel
and property may be caused. The Companys customers
typically assume responsibility for and agree to indemnify the
Company from any loss or liability resulting from pollution or
contamination, including
clean-up and
removal and third-party damages arising from operations under
the contract and originating below the surface of the water,
including as a result of blow-outs or cratering of the well. The
Company generally indemnifies the customer for the consequences
of spills of industrial waste or other liquids originating
solely above the surface of the water and emanating from its
rigs or vessels.
In 2010, in connection with the renewal of certain of its
insurance policies, the Company entered into agreements to
finance a portion of its annual insurance premiums.
Approximately $25.9 million was financed through these
arrangements, and $6.0 million was outstanding at
December 31, 2010. The interest rate on the
$24.1 million note is 3.79% and the note is scheduled to
mature in March 2011. The interest rate on the $1.8 million
note is 3.54% and the note is scheduled to mature in July 2011.
There was $5.5 million outstanding in insurance notes
payable at December 31, 2009 which were fully paid during
2010. The amounts financed, related interest rates and maturity
dates in connection with the prior year renewals were
$21.4 million at 4.15% which matured in March 2010 and
$1.9 million at 3.75% which matured in July 2010.
Surety
Bonds, Bank Guarantees and Unsecured Letters of
Credit
The Company had $31.4 million outstanding related to surety
bonds at December 31, 2010. The surety bonds guarantee our
performance as it relates to the Companys drilling
contracts, and other obligations in
108
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
various jurisdictions. These obligations could be called at any
time prior to the expiration dates. The obligations that are the
subject of the surety bonds are geographically concentrated
primarily in Mexico and the U.S.
The Company had a $1.0 million unsecured bank guarantee and
a $0.1 million unsecured letter of credit outstanding at
December 31, 2010.
Sales
Tax Audits
Certain of the Companys legal entities obtained in the
TODCO acquisition are under audit by various taxing authorities
for several prior-year periods. These audits are ongoing and the
Company is working to resolve all relevant issues, however, the
Company has accrued approximately $5.9 million as of
December 31, 2010 while the Company provides additional
information and responds to auditor requests.
|
|
19.
|
Unaudited
Interim Financial Data
|
Unaudited interim financial information for the years ended
December 31, 2010 and 2009 is as follows (in thousands,
except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
December 31(a)
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
150,849
|
|
|
$
|
165,895
|
|
|
$
|
168,484
|
|
|
$
|
172,252
|
|
Operating Loss
|
|
|
(20,344
|
)
|
|
|
(5,574
|
)
|
|
|
(1,412
|
)
|
|
|
(117,830
|
)
|
Net Loss
|
|
$
|
(15,956
|
)
|
|
$
|
(18,984
|
)
|
|
$
|
(15,061
|
)
|
|
$
|
(84,593
|
)
|
Net Loss Per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
(0.14
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.74
|
)
|
Diluted
|
|
|
(0.14
|
)
|
|
|
(0.17
|
)
|
|
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
|
(0.74
|
)
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes $125.1 million in impairment of property and
equipment charges (See Notes 1 and 12). |
109
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
|
|
June 30(a)
|
|
|
September 30
|
|
|
December 31(b)
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$
|
223,491
|
|
|
$
|
183,691
|
|
|
$
|
159,262
|
|
|
$
|
176,407
|
|
Operating Income (Loss)
|
|
|
9,109
|
|
|
|
(25,829
|
)
|
|
|
(32,712
|
)
|
|
|
(42,714
|
)
|
Loss from Continuing Operations
|
|
|
(4,511
|
)
|
|
|
(11,787
|
)
|
|
|
(46,970
|
)
|
|
|
(26,881
|
)
|
Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operation, Net of Taxes
|
|
|
(433
|
)
|
|
|
(242
|
)
|
|
|
(1,290
|
)
|
|
|
380
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loss
|
|
$
|
(4,944
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12,029
|
)
|
|
$
|
(48,260
|
)
|
|
$
|
(26,501
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic Loss Per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from Continuing Operations
|
|
$
|
(0.05
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.48
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.23
|
)
|
Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operation
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loss
|
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.14
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.50
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.23
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted Loss Per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from Continuing Operations
|
|
$
|
(0.05
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.48
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.23
|
)
|
Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operation
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loss
|
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.14
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.50
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.23
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Includes approximately $26.9 million of impairment charges
related to the write-down of Hercules 110 to fair value
less costs to sell during the second quarter of 2009 (See
Notes 5 and 12). The sale was completed in August 2009. |
|
(b) |
|
Includes an allowance for doubtful accounts receivable of
approximately $26.8 million as of December 31, 2009,
related to a customer in West Africa that was contracted to
utilize one rig in the Companys International Offshore
segment, a non-cash charge of approximately $7.3 million to
fully impair the related deferred mobilization and contract
preparation costs, partially offset by a $2.5 million
reduction in previously accrued contract related operating costs
that are not expected to be settled if the receivable is not
collected. |
The Company engages in transactions in the ordinary course of
business with entities with whom certain of our directors or
members of management have a relationship. The Company has
determined that these transactions were carried out on an
arms-length basis and are not material individually or in
the aggregate. All of these transactions were approved in
accordance with the Companys Policy on Covered
Transactions with Related Persons. The following provides a
brief description of these relationships.
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys Chairman of the Board of Directors is a
Senior Advisor to Lime Rock Partners, who owns a controlling
interest in IDM Group, Ltd. (Cyprus) who purchased Louisiana
Electric Rig Services, Inc., an equipment manufacturing and
service company, and Southwest Oilfield Products, Inc., an
oilfield equipment manufacturing company, in December 2008 and
June 2008, respectively, and who holds an investment interest in
Allis-Chalmers Energy Inc., an oilfield equipment and services
company, and Tesco Corporation, an oilfield equipment and
services company. In addition, the Chairman was a member of the
Board of Directors for
T-3 Energy
Services, Inc., an oil field equipment and services company.
|
110
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
Another member of the Companys Board of Directors serves
on the Board of Directors for Peregrine Oil & Gas LP,
an exploration and production company, and is the Chairman of
the Board for Carrizo Oil & Gas, Inc., an exploration
and production company. In addition, another of the
Companys directors serves on the Board of Directors for
Carrizo Oil & Gas, Inc.
|
|
|
|
Another member of the Companys Board of Directors serves
as Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Technip, a project
management, engineering and construction company.
|
|
|
|
A member of the Companys Board of Directors is a member of
the Board of Directors of HCC Insurance Holdings, a specialty
insurance group.
|
|
|
|
The Company holds a three percent investment in each of
Hall-Houston Exploration II, L.P. and
Hall-Houston
Exploration III, L.P., exploration and production funds.
|
|
|
|
In January 2011, the Company paid $10 million to purchase
5.0 million shares, an investment in approximately eight
percent of the total outstanding equity of a new entity
incorporated in Luxembourg, Discovery Offshore S.A.
(Discovery Offshore). Two of the Companys
officers are on the Board of Directors of Discovery Offshore.
|
Investment
In January 2011, the Company paid $10 million to purchase
5.0 million shares, an investment in approximately eight
percent of the total outstanding equity of a new entity
incorporated in Luxembourg, Discovery Offshore S.A.
(Discovery Offshore), which investment was used by
Discovery Offshore towards funding the down payments on two
new-build ultra high specification harsh environment jackup
drilling rigs (the Rigs). The Rigs, Keppel FELS
Super A design, are being constructed by Keppel FELS
in its Singapore shipyard and have a maximum water depth rating
of 400 feet, two million pound hook load capacity, and are
capable of drilling up to 35,000 feet deep. The two Rigs
are expected to be delivered in the second and fourth quarter of
2013, respectively. Discovery Offshore also holds options to
purchase two additional rigs of the same specifications, which
must be exercised by the third and fourth quarter of 2011, with
delivery dates expected in the second quarter and fourth quarter
of 2014, respectively.
The Company also executed a construction management agreement
(the Construction Management Agreement) and a
services agreement (the Services Agreement) with
Discovery Offshore with respect to each of the Rigs. Under the
Construction Management Agreement, the Company will plan,
supervise and manage the construction and commissioning of the
Rigs in exchange for a fixed fee of $7.0 million per Rig,
which we received in February 2011. Pursuant to the terms of the
Services Agreement, the Company will market, manage, crew and
operate the Rigs and any other rigs that Discovery Offshore
subsequently acquires or controls, in exchange for a fixed daily
fee of $6,000 per Rig plus five percent of Rig-based EBITDA
(EBITDA excluding SG&A expense) generated per day per Rig,
which commences once the Rigs are completed and operating. Under
the Services Agreement, Discovery Offshore will be responsible
for operational and capital expenses for the Rigs. The Company
is entitled to a minimum fee of $5 million per Rig in the
event Discovery Offshore terminates a Services Agreement in the
absence of a breach of contract by Hercules Offshore.
In addition to the $10 million investment, the Company
received 500,000 additional shares worth $1.0 million to
cover its costs incurred and efforts expended in forming
Discovery Offshore. The Company was issued warrants to purchase
up to 5.0 million additional shares of Discovery Offshore
stock at a strike price equivalent to $2.00 which is exercisable
in the event that the Discovery Offshore stock price reaches an
average equal to or higher than 23 Norwegian Kroner per
share, which approximated $4.00 per share as of
March 3, 2011, for 30 consecutive trading days. The Company
has no other financial obligations or
111
HERCULES
OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
commitments with respect to the Rigs or its ownership in
Discovery Offshore. Two of the Companys officers are on
the Board of Directors of Discovery Offshore.
Alliance
Agreement
In January 2011, the Company entered into an agreement with
China Oilfield Services Limited (COSL) whereby it
will market and operate a Friede & Goldman JU2000E
jackup drilling rig with a maximum water depth of 400 feet.
The agreement is limited to a specified opportunity in Angola.
Asset
Purchase Agreement
In February 2011, the Company entered into an asset
purchase agreement (the Asset Purchase Agreement)
with Seahawk Drilling, Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries,
pursuant to which Seahawk agreed to sell the Company 20 jackup
rigs and related assets, accounts receivable and cash and
certain Seahawk liabilities in a transaction pursuant to
Section 363 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. In connection
with the Asset Purchase Agreement, Seahawk filed voluntary
Chapter 11 petitions before the U.S. Bankruptcy Court
for the Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division.
The purchase consideration is approximately $105 million
(the Consideration), as valued at the date of the
Asset Purchase Agreement, preliminarily consisting of
$25.0 million in cash plus 22.3 million shares of the
Companys common stock, par value $0.01 per share (the
Stock Consideration), subject to adjustment as
further described. The cash consideration is subject to increase
at the request of Seahawk up to an additional
$20.0 million, if required for the purpose of paying
Seahawks debt, and if the cash consideration is increased,
the number of shares comprising the Stock Consideration shall be
reduced by an amount equal to such increase, divided by $3.36.
In addition, the Consideration is subject to certain other
adjustments, including a working capital adjustment.
The Companys Board of Directors, and its lenders through
the 2011 Credit Amendment, have approved the transaction.
Closing of the transaction remains subject to bankruptcy court
approval as well as regulatory approvals and other customary
conditions. Assuming such conditions are achieved, the
transaction is expected to close during the second quarter of
2011.
Credit
Agreement Amendment
In March 2011, the Company amended its Credit Agreement for its
term loan and revolving credit facility (See Note 10).
112
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management, with the participation of our chief executive
officer and our chief financial officer, evaluated the
effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of
the end of the period covered by this report. Our chief
executive officer and chief financial officer evaluated whether
our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the
period covered by this report were designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that
we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is
(1) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the
time periods specified in the SECs rules and forms and
(2) accumulated and communicated to our management,
including our chief executive officer and our chief financial
officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding
required disclosure. Based on their evaluation, our chief
executive officer and chief financial officer concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective to achieve the
foregoing objectives as of the end of the period covered by this
report.
There were no changes in our internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the most recent fiscal quarter
that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Managements
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term
is defined in
Rule 13a-15(f)
under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Our
internal control over financial reporting is a process designed
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles. Because of its inherent limitations,
internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or
detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of
effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions,
or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures
may deteriorate.
Our management assessed the effectiveness of the Companys
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2010. In making this assessment, it used the
criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal
Control Integrated Framework. Based on our
assessment, we have concluded that, as of December 31,
2010, our internal control over financial reporting is effective
based on those criteria.
Our independent registered public accounting firm has audited
our internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2010, as stated in their report entitled
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting
Firm which appears herein.
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information
|
None.
113
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to our definitive proxy statement, which is to be
filed with the SEC pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 within 120 days after the end of our fiscal year on
December 31, 2010.
Code of
Business Conduct and Ethical Practices
We have adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, which
applies to, among others, our principal executive officer,
principal financial officer, principal accounting officer and
persons performing similar functions. We have posted a copy of
the code in the Corporate Governance section of our
internet website at www.herculesoffshore.com. Copies of
the code may be obtained free of charge on our website or by
requesting a copy in writing from our Corporate Secretary at 9
Greenway Plaza, Suite 2200, Houston, Texas 77046. Any
waivers of the code must be approved by our board of directors
or a designated board committee. Any amendments to, or waivers
from, the code that apply to our executive officers and
directors will be posted in the Corporate Governance
section of our internet website at
www.herculesoffshore.com.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to our definitive proxy statement, which is to be
filed with the SEC pursuant to the Exchange Act within
120 days after the end of our fiscal year on
December 31, 2010.
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to our definitive proxy statement, which is to be
filed with the SEC pursuant to the Exchange Act within
120 days after the end of our fiscal year on
December 31, 2010.
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to our definitive proxy statement, which is to be
filed with the SEC pursuant to the Exchange Act within
120 days after the end of our fiscal year on
December 31, 2010.
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
The information required by this item is incorporated by
reference to our definitive proxy statement, which is to be
filed with the SEC pursuant to the Exchange Act within
120 days after the end of our fiscal year on
December 31, 2010.
PART IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a) The following documents are included as part of this
report:
(1) Financial Statements
(2) Consolidated Financial Statement Schedule on
page 119 of this Report.
(3) The Exhibits of the Company listed below in
Item 15(b)
114
(b) Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
1
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Underwriting Agreement, dated September 24, 2009, by and
between Hercules Offshore, Inc. and Morgan Stanley &
Co. Incorporated and UBS Securities LLC, as representatives of
the underwriters named in Schedule A thereto (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 1.1 to Hercules Current
Report on
Form 8-K
dated September 30, 2009).
|
|
2
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated February 11, 2011, by and
between Hercules Offshore, Inc., SD Drilling LLC and
Seahawk Drilling, Inc., Seahawk Global Holdings LLC, Seahawk
Mexico Holdings LLC, Seahawk Drilling Management LLC, Seahawk
Drilling LLC, Seahawk Offshore Management LLC, Energy Supply
International LLC and Seahawk Drilling USA, LLC (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Hercules Current Report
on
Form 8-K
dated February 15, 2011 (File No. 0-51582)).
|
|
2
|
.2
|
|
|
|
Plan of Conversion (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 2.1 to Hercules Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(Registration
No. 333-126457),
as amended (the
S-1
Registration Statement), originally filed on July 8,
2005).
|
|
2
|
.3
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated
effective as of March 18, 2007, by and among Hercules, THE
Hercules Offshore Drilling Company LLC and TODCO (incorporated
by reference to Annex A to the Joint Proxy/Statement
Prospectus included in Part I of Hercules
Registration Statement on
Form S-4
(Registration
No. 333-142314),
as amended (the
S-4
Registration Statement), originally filed April 24,
2007).
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Certificate of Incorporation of Hercules (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Hercules Current Report
on
Form 8-K
dated November 1, 2005 (File
No. 0-51582)
(the 2005
Form 8-K)).
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws (effective December 31, 2009)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Hercules
Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated December 8, 2009).
|
|
4
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Form of specimen common stock certificate (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the
S-1
Registration Statement).
|
|
4
|
.2
|
|
|
|
Rights Agreement, dated as of October 31, 2005, between
Hercules and American Stock Transfer &
Trust Company, as rights agent (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 4.1 to the 2005
Form 8-K).
|
|
4
|
.3
|
|
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Rights Agreement, dated as of
February 1, 2008, between Hercules and American Stock
Transfer & Trust Company, as rights agent.
|
|
4
|
.4
|
|
|
|
Certificate of Designations of Series A Junior
Participating Preferred Stock (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 to the 2005
Form 8-K).
|
|
4
|
.5
|
|
|
|
Credit Agreement dated as of July 11, 2007 among Hercules,
as borrower, its subsidiaries party thereto, as guarantors, UBS
AG, Stamford Branch, as issuing bank, administrative agent and
collateral agent, Amegy Bank National Association and Comerica
Bank, as co-syndication agents, Deutsche Bank AG Cayman Islands
Branch and Jefferies Finance LLC, as co-documentation agents,
and the lenders party thereto (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated July 11, 2007 (File
No. 0-51582)).
Hercules and its subsidiaries are parties to several debt
instruments that have not been filed with the SEC under which
the total amount of securities authorized does not exceed 10% of
the total assets of Hercules and its subsidiaries on a
consolidated basis. Pursuant to paragraph 4(iii)(A) of
Item 601(b) of
Regulation S-K,
Hercules agrees to furnish a copy of such instruments to the SEC
upon request.
|
|
4
|
.6
|
|
|
|
Indenture, dated as of June 3, 2008, by and between the
Company and the Trustee (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 to Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated June 3, 2008 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
4
|
.7
|
|
|
|
Form of Note (included in Exhibit 4.6).
|
|
4
|
.8
|
|
|
|
Amendment No. 2 dated as of July 23, 2009, to the
Credit Agreement dated July 11, 2007, among Hercules
Offshore, Inc., as borrower, its subsidiaries party thereto, as
guarantors, and UBS AG, Stamford Branch, as issuing bank,
administrative agent and collateral agent, and the lenders party
thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to
Hercules Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
dated July 29, 2009).
|
115
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
4
|
.9
|
|
|
|
Indenture dated as of October 20, 2009, by and among
Hercules Offshore, Inc., the Guarantors named therein and U.S.
Bank National Association as Trustee and Collateral Agent
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Hercules
Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated October 26, 2009).
|
|
4
|
.10
|
|
|
|
Form of 10.50% Senior Secured Note due 2017 (included in
Exhibit 4.9).
|
|
4
|
.11
|
|
|
|
Security Agreement dated as of October 20, 2009, by and
among Hercules Offshore, Inc. and the Guarantors party thereto
and U.S. Bank National Association as Collateral Agent
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to Hercules
Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated October 26, 2009).
|
|
4
|
.12
|
|
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement dated as of October 20, 2009,
by and among Hercules Offshore, Inc., the Guarantors named
therein and the Initial Purchasers party thereto (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to Hercules Current
Report on
Form 8-K
dated October 26, 2009).
|
|
4
|
.13
|
|
|
|
Form of Indenture between Hercules and the trustee thereunder
(the Senior Trustee) in respect of senior debt
securities (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.7 to
Hercules Registration Statement on
Form S-3
filed December 3, 2010).
|
|
4
|
.14
|
|
|
|
Form of Indenture between Hercules and the trustee thereunder
(the Subordinated Trustee) in respect of
subordinated debt securities (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.8 to Hercules Registration Statement on
Form S-3
filed December 3, 2010).
|
|
4
|
.15
|
|
|
|
Amendment No. 3 to Credit Agreement, dated as of
March 3, 2011, by and among the Company, as borrower, its
subsidiaries party thereto, as guarantors, the Issuing Banks (as
defined in the Credit Agreement) party thereto, and UBS AG,
Stamford Branch, as administrative agent for the Lenders and as
collateral agent and instructing beneficiary under the Mortgage
Trust Agreement (as defined in the Credit Agreement) for
the Secured Parties (as defined in the Credit Agreement)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to
Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated March 8, 2011) (File No. 0-51582).
|
|
10
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Executive Employment Agreement dated as of December 15,
2008, between Hercules and John T. Rynd (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the 2008
Form 8-K).
|
|
10
|
.2
|
|
|
|
Executive Employment Agreement dated as of June 20, 2008,
between Hercules Offshore, Inc. and John T. Rynd (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to Hercules Current
Report on
Form 8-K
dated June 23, 2008 (File No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.3
|
|
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of December 15, 2008, by and
between Hercules and Lisa W. Rodriguez (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the 2008
Form 8-K).
|
|
10
|
.4
|
|
|
|
Executive Employment Agreement, dated December 15, 2008,
between Hercules and James W. Noe (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to the 2008
Form 8-K).
|
|
10
|
.5
|
|
|
|
Executive Employment Agreement, dated December 15, 2008,
between Hercules and Terrell L. Carr (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.5 to the 2008
Form 8-K).
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
|
|
Executive Employment Agreement, dated December 15, 2008,
between Hercules and Todd Pellegrin (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.6 to the 2008
Form 8-K).
|
|
10
|
.7
|
|
|
|
Executive Employment Agreement, dated December 15, 2008,
between Hercules and Troy L. Carson (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.7 to the 2008
Form 8-K).
|
|
10
|
.8
|
|
|
|
Executive Employment Agreement, dated December 15, 2008,
between Hercules and Stephen M. Butz (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.1 to Hercules Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
|
|
Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement for Lisa W.
Rodriguez, dated May 7, 2010 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to Hercules Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
|
|
Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement for Stephen M. Butz,
dated May 7, 2010 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to Hercules Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
|
|
Amendment to Executive Employment Agreement for Troy L. Carson,
dated May 7, 2010 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to Hercules Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
116
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
|
|
Expatriate Employment Agreement, dated November 1, 2006,
between Hercules and Don P. Rodney (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated October 31, 2006 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
|
|
Extension Letter between Hercules and Don P. Rodney, dated
December 31, 2008 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated January 6, 2009 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
*10
|
.14
|
|
|
|
Extension Letter between Hercules and Don P. Rodney, dated
November 1, 2010.
|
|
10
|
.15
|
|
|
|
Waiver of Executive Employment Agreement between the Company and
John T. Rynd, dated April 27, 2009 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Hercules Current Report
on
Form 8-K
dated April 28, 2009).
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
|
|
Waiver of Executive Employment Agreement between the Company and
Lisa W. Rodriguez, dated April 27, 2009 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 to Hercules Current Report
on
Form 8-K
dated April 28, 2009).
|
|
10
|
.17
|
|
|
|
Waiver of Executive Employment Agreement between the Company and
James W. Noe, dated April 27, 2009 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.3 to Hercules Current Report
on
Form 8-K
dated April 28, 2009).
|
|
10
|
.18
|
|
|
|
Waiver of Executive Employment Agreement between the Company and
Terrell L. Carr, dated April 27, 2009 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.4 to Hercules Current Report
on
Form 8-K
dated April 28, 2009).
|
|
10
|
.19
|
|
|
|
Waiver of Executive Employment Agreement between the Company and
Todd A. Pellegrin, dated April 27, 2009 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.5 to Hercules Current Report
on
Form 8-K
dated April 28, 2009).
|
|
10
|
.20
|
|
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated April 7, 2006 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.21
|
|
|
|
Amended and Restated Hercules Offshore 2004 Long-Term Incentive
Plan (incorporated by reference to Annex E to the Joint
Proxy Statement/Prospectus included in Part I of the
S-4
Registration Statement).
|
|
10
|
.22
|
|
|
|
First Amendment to Hercules Offshore Inc. Amended and Restated
2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to Hercules Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.23
|
|
|
|
Form of Stock Option Award Agreement (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.1 to Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated March 3, 2009).
|
|
10
|
.24
|
|
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement.
|
|
10
|
.25
|
|
|
|
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement for Employees and Consultants.
|
|
10
|
.26
|
|
|
|
Form of Restricted Stock Agreement for Directors (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.14 to Hercules Annual
Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2006 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
*10
|
.27
|
|
|
|
Performance Award Agreement, dated January 1, 2011, between
Hercules and John T. Rynd.
|
|
*10
|
.28
|
|
|
|
Performance Award Agreement, dated January 1, 2011, between
Hercules and John T. Rynd.
|
|
*10
|
.29
|
|
|
|
Special Retention Award Agreement, dated January 1, 2011,
between Hercules and John T. Rynd.
|
|
10
|
.30
|
|
|
|
Hercules Offshore, Inc. Amended and Restated Deferred
Compensation Plan.
|
|
10
|
.31
|
|
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of July 8, 2005,
between Hercules and the holders listed on the signature page
thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to
Hercules Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2005 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.32
|
|
|
|
Increase Joinder, dated as of April 28, 2008, among
Hercules, as borrower, its subsidiaries party thereto, the
incremental lenders and other lenders party thereto, and UBS AG
Stamford Branch, as administrative agent for the lenders party
thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to
Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated April 30, 2008 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
117
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.33
|
|
|
|
Purchase Agreement, dated May 28, 2008, by and between the
Company and Goldman, Sachs & Co., Banc of America
Securities LLC and UBS Securities LLC, as representatives of the
Initial Purchasers (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated June 3, 2008 (File No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.34
|
|
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated April 3, 2006, by and
between Hercules Liftboat Company, LLC and Laborde Marine Lifts,
Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to
Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated April 3, 2006 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.35
|
|
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of August 23, 2006, by
and among Hercules International Holdings, Ltd., Halliburton
West Africa Ltd. and Halliburton Energy Services Nigeria Limited
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to
Hercules Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.36
|
|
|
|
First Amendment to Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of
November 1, 2006, by and among Hercules International
Holdings, Ltd., Hercules Oilfield Services Ltd., Halliburton
West Africa Ltd. and Halliburton Energy Services Nigeria Limited
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to
Hercules Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.37
|
|
|
|
Earnout Agreement, dated November 7, 2006, by and among
Hercules Oilfield Services, Ltd., Halliburton West Africa Ltd.
and Halliburton Energy Services Nigeria Limited (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.3 to Hercules Current Report
on
Form 8-K
dated November 7, 2006 (File
No. 0-51582)).
|
|
10
|
.38
|
|
|
|
Basic Form of Exchange Agreement between the Company and certain
holders of our 3.375% Convertible Senior Notes due 2038
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to
Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated June 18, 2009).
|
|
10
|
.39
|
|
|
|
Purchase Agreement, dated October 8, 2009, by and among
Hercules Offshore, Inc., the guarantors party thereto, UBS
Securities LLC, Banc of America Securities LLC, Deutsche Bank
Securities Inc. and Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated,
as representatives of the initial purchasers named in
Schedule I thereto (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated October 14, 2009).
|
|
10
|
.40
|
|
|
|
Intercreditor Agreement dated as of October 20, 2009, among
Hercules Offshore, Inc., the subsidiaries party thereto as
guarantors, UBS AG, Stamford Branch, as Bank Collateral Agent
and U.S. Bank National Association, as Notes Collateral Agent
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to
Hercules Current Report on
Form 8-K
dated October 26, 2009).
|
|
*21
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Subsidiaries of Hercules.
|
|
*23
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP.
|
|
*31
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer of Hercules pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
*31
|
.2
|
|
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer of Hercules pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
*32
|
.1
|
|
|
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief
Financial Officer of Hercules pursuant to Section 901 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
|
|
Compensatory plan, contract or arrangement. |
(c) Financial Statement Schedules
(1) Valuation and Qualifying Accounts and Allowances
118
SCHEDULE II
HERCULES OFFSHORE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS AND ALLOWANCES
FOR THE THREE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
Charged to
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of
|
Description
|
|
of Period
|
|
Expense, Net
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
Deductions
|
|
Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for uncollectible accounts receivable
|
|
$
|
38,522
|
|
|
$
|
182
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(8,906
|
)
|
|
$
|
29,798
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for uncollectible accounts receivable
|
|
$
|
7,756
|
|
|
$
|
32,912
|
|
|
$
|
78
|
|
|
$
|
(2,224
|
)
|
|
$
|
38,522
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for uncollectible accounts receivable
|
|
$
|
634
|
|
|
$
|
6,167
|
|
|
$
|
965
|
|
|
$
|
(10
|
)
|
|
$
|
7,756
|
|
All other financial statement schedules have been omitted
because they are not applicable or not required, or the
information required thereby is included in the consolidated
financial statements or the notes thereto included in this
annual report.
119
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Houston, State of
Texas, on March 9, 2011.
HERCULES OFFSHORE, INC.
John T. Rynd
Chief Executive Officer and President
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on
behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities indicated on
March 9, 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
|
Title
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John
T. Rynd
John
T. Rynd
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and President
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
|
|
/s/ Stephen
M. Butz
Stephen
M. Butz
|
|
Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
(Principal Financial Officer)
|
|
|
|
/s/ Troy
L. Carson
Troy
L. Carson
|
|
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas
R. Bates, Jr.
Thomas
R. Bates, Jr.
|
|
Chairman of the Board
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas
N. Amonett
Thomas
N. Amonett
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
/s/ Suzanne
V. Baer
Suzanne
V. Baer
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas
M Hamilton
Thomas
M Hamilton
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas
J. Madonna
Thomas
J. Madonna
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
/s/ F.
Gardner Parker
F.
Gardner Parker
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thierry
Pilenko
Thierry
Pilenko
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
/s/ Steven
A. Webster
Steven
A. Webster
|
|
Director
|
120