[X] Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the quarterly period ended January 2, 2005

[ ] Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the transition period from ____ to ____

Commission File Number 1-5109

TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

DELAWARE 91-1506719
(State or other jurisdiction of (IRS Employer I.D. No.)
incorporation or organization)

1801- 16th AVENUE SW, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98134-1089
(Street address of principal executive offices - Zip Code)

Registrant's telephone number: (206) 623-1635

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 [X] No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Yes [X] No

There were 5,423,156 shares of the corporation's $.01 par value common stock outstanding at February 7, 2005.

"SAFE HARBOR" STATEMENT UNDER THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995

Statements contained in this Report which are not historical facts or information are "forward-looking statements." Words such as "believe," "expect," "intend," "will," "should," and other expressions that indicate future events and trends identify such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties which could cause the outcome to be materially different than stated. Such risks and uncertainties include both general economic risks and uncertainties and matters discussed in the Company's annual report on Form 10-K which relate directly to the Company's operations and properties. The Company cautions that any forward-looking statement reflects only the belief of the Company or its management at the time the statement was made. Although the Company believes such forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions, such assumptions may ultimately prove to be inaccurate or incomplete. The Company undertakes no obligation to updat e any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which the statement was made.

ITEM 1.
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATION
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND RETAINED EARNINGS
Periods Ended January 2, 2005 and December 28, 2003
(In thousands of dollars, except per share data)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.

TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands of dollars except per share data)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.

TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATION
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
Periods Ended January 2, 2005 and December 28, 2003
(in thousands of dollars)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.

Todd Shipyards Corporation (the "Company") filed its Consolidated Financial Statements for the fiscal year ended March 28, 2004 with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Form 10-K. The Consolidated Financial Statements, Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and Management's Discussion and Analysis contained in that report should be read in connection with this Form 10-Q.

The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements are unaudited but in the opinion of management reflect all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring accruals, necessary for a fair presentation of the Company's financial position and results of operations in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States applied on a consistent basis. The accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of March 28, 2004 is derived from audited financial statements included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year then ended.

In accordance with the Company's policy of ending its fiscal year on the Sunday nearest March 31, the Company's fiscal year 2005 will end on April 3, 2005 and include 53 weeks. Accordingly, although the respective fiscal 2005 and 2004 third quarters were each comprised of 13 week periods, the 9 month period ended January 2, 2005 contained 40 weeks rather than the 39 weeks included in the prior year 9 month period ended December 28, 2003.

On December 8, 2003, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Drug Act) was signed into law. The Medicare Drug Act introduced a prescription drug benefit under Medicare (Medicare Part D) as well as a federal subsidy to sponsors of retiree health benefit plans that provide prescription drug benefits that are deemed actuarially equivalent to the Medicare Part D. At that time the Company elected not to recognize the impact of the Federal subsidy on the accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation and net post-retirement benefit costs until specific authoritative guidance was finalized.

In the first quarter of fiscal year 2005, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Staff Position (FSP No. 106-2), Accounting and Disclosure Requirements Related to the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003. FSP No. 106-2 requires the disclosure of the effect of the subsidy on the measurement of the accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation and net periodic post-retirement benefit cost for the current period. The Company has elected prospective recognition, which affects accounting periods beginning after June 15, 2004. The impact for the third quarter of fiscal year 2005 is a $35 thousand reduction in post-retirement benefits costs. This represents a reduction of interest cost of $28 thousand and an actuarial loss of $7 thousand. For the nine-month period to date, the impact is a $70 thousand reduction in post-retirement benefits costs. This represents a reduction of interest cost of $56 thousand and an actuarial loss of $14 thousand. The impact of the Federal subsidy for the remainder of fiscal year 2005 will be a reduction in the accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation of $2.0 million and an additional reduction in net post-retirement benefit costs of $35 thousand for the balance of the year. This represents a decrease in interest cost of $84 thousand and an actuarial loss of $21 thousand for the fiscal year.

On December 16, 2004, the FASB issued FASB Statement No.123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment, which is a revision of FASB Statement No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Statement 123(R) supercedes APB Opinion No.25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and amends FASB Statement No.95, Statement of Cash Flows. Generally, the approach in Statement 123(R) is similar to the approach described in Statement 123. However, Statement 123(R)requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income statement based on their fair values. Pro forma disclosure is no longer an alternative. Statement 123(R) must be adopted in the first interim period beginning after June 15, 2005. The Company will adopt Statement 123(R) on July 3, 2005. The Company plans to adopt Statement 123 using the "modified prospective" recognition method in which compensation c ost is recognized beginning with the effective date July 3, 2005 based on the requirements of Statement 123(R) for all share-based payments granted after the effective date and based on the requirements of Statement 123 for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date of Statement 123(R) that remain unvested on the effective date. The impact of adoption on the Company's financial statements is not expected to be material.

Beginning in fiscal year 2003, the Company elected to apply the expense recognition provisions of FAS No. 123. The recognition provisions are applied to stock option grants awarded subsequent to March 31, 2002. The Company has adopted FAS No. 123 as it is designated as the preferred method of accounting for stock-based compensation.

Previously, the Company had applied the disclosure only provisions of FAS No. 123 and accounted for stock-based compensation using the intrinsic value method prescribed by Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25 (APB No. 25), Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees and related interpretations. Under APB No. 25, compensation cost for stock options is measured as the excess, if any, of the fair value of the Company's common stock at the date of grant over the stock option price.

If the Company had elected to apply the expense recognition provision of FAS No. 123 to options granted prior to March 31, 2002, then the net income (loss) would have been adjusted as follows (the estimated fair value of the options is amortized to expense over the options' vesting period):

In June 2001, the Company was awarded by the Navy, a six-year, cost-type contract, to provide phased maintenance repairs to four Navy AOE class supply ships stationed in the Puget Sound area. The original contract included options for thirteen repair availabilities to be performed between 2001 and 2007 and was expected to have a notional value of approximately $180.0 million if all of the options were exercised. Since the award, five repair availabilities have been accomplished. The options for the remaining availabilities will not be exercised as a result of the Navy's decision to decommission and/or transfer these vessels to Military Sealift Command ("MSC").

During the first quarter of fiscal year 2005, the Company submitted a proposal to the Navy to settle all outstanding issues related to its Emerald Sea dry dock, which includes the Navy's share of the un-recovered repair, maintenance and operating costs of the dry dock.  These are costs that the Company believes it is owed under the AOE contract.  There can be no assurance that the Navy will agree to settle these issues with the Company nor is there any assurance that the amounts sought by the Company will be agreed to by the Navy. As a result the Company has not recorded any recovery in the financial results for the current fiscal year.

During the first quarter of fiscal year 2001, the Company was awarded, by the Department of the Navy on a sole source basis, a five year, cost-type contract for the repair and maintenance of all Puget Sound based frigates and destroyers, which at the time included six surface combatant class vessels. Although the Navy has not released a notional value of the maintenance work, the Company believes that the value may be approximately $60 million to $75 million if all options are exercised. Work on this contract is being performed primarily in the Company's Seattle shipyard, as well as at Naval Station Everett, depending on the type of work to be performed.

During the first quarter of fiscal year 2005, the Department of the Navy awarded the Company a five-year, cost-type contract for the long-term overhaul and maintenance to the NIMITZ CLASS aircraft carriers (CVN) home ported in Puget Sound.  The contract consists of multiple contract options for planned incremental availabilities (PIA's), docking planned incremental availabilities (DPIA's) and continuous maintenance and upkeep for the USS LINCOLN (CVN-72), USS STENNIS (CVN-74), USS NIMITZ (CVN-68) and USS VINSON (CVN-70) when they are in Puget Sound. The work includes all types of non-nuclear ship repair, alteration and maintenance. All on-board work is accomplished by the Company's workforce at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton, Washington, or at Naval Station Everett.

The work is performed under a cost plus award fee with performance incentive fee contract and represents the second long term contract for aircraft carrier maintenance awarded to the Company. The first such contract, was awarded in 1999. The Company is supported in this effort by various regional suppliers and subcontractors. Significant support is provided by the Company's two teaming partners for this contract, Pacific Ship Repair and Fabrication ("PacShip") and AMSEC LLC ("AMSEC"). The notional value for this five-year contract is approximately $133 million if all options are exercised.

The work is performed under a cost plus incentive fee contract. The Company has performed similar work for the Coast Guard over the past several years under individual, competitively bid, firm fixed priced contracts. This current award marks the first time the Coast Guard has used a long term phased-maintenance approach on any Coast Guard vessels. The notional value of all options, if exercised by the Coast Guard, is approximately $50.0 million. Under this contract, the expected repair availability in the second quarter on the Polar Sea was delayed due to the lack of government funding for the major overhaul requirements on this vessel. There is no assurance that all options will be exercised, in whole or in part

During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004, the Company entered into a contract with Electric Boat Corporation of Groton, Connecticut ("Electric Boat") to support Electric Boat's work on Trident submarines. During the period from May to September 2003, the Company completed planning and preparation work for Electric Boat. During fiscal year 2004, the Company also began work on a follow-on contract to fabricate components and to accomplish associated steel outfitting, project management and quality assurance functions. This contract is associated with the structural retrofit work being accomplished by Electric Boat on the USS OHIO (SSBN 726) and USS MICHIGAN (SSBN 727) at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard ("PSNS").

The Company's work on the USS OHIO was performed under a cost plus incentive fee contract with Electric Boat for the fabrication work, and a firm fixed price contract for the associated project management and quality assurance work. The total value of this contract was approximately $5.2 million. Work on this contract was completed in the second quarter of fiscal year 2005. The Company's work on the USS MICHIGAN is being performed under a firm fixed price contract of approximately $4.9 million.

In addition to Electric Boat's contract for the Trident's structural retrofit at PSNS, the Company has entered into a contract to provide a number of repair and alteration services aboard the USS OHIO and USS MICHIGAN at PSNS. 

In October 2004, the Company was awarded, by the Department of the Navy, a contract to accomplish preservation work on the USS COLUMBUS, a Los Angeles Class nuclear submarine (SSN-762). The Company's work on this contract is being performed under a firm fixed price contract for $9.7 million with the Navy. The work is being accomplished in drydock at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard in Bremerton, Washington. This availability commenced on October 15, 2004 and is scheduled to be completed by May 31, 2005. The Company is supported in this effort by its subcontractor, IMIA, LLC, a division of Earl Industries of Portsmouth, Virginia.

The Company's third quarter revenue of $21.4 million reflects a decrease of $19.0 million (47.0%) from the same period last fiscal year. The quarter to quarter decrease is primarily attributable to lower Navy volumes related to lower CVN and CMT activity and less US Coast Guard work and commercial ship repair activity. This volume decrease was partially offset by submarine work and high incentive performance fees awarded in the quarter. Revenues for the first nine months of fiscal year 2005 of $90.1 million reflect a decrease of $15.8 million (14.9%) from fiscal year 2004 comparable periods. The decrease in revenue in the first nine months of fiscal year 2005 is primarily attributable lower Navy, US Coast Guard and commercial ship repair volumes, partially offset by submarine activity and the above mentioned incentive performance fees awarded in the third quarter.

As discussed in the Company's Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 28, 2004, the Company faces significant potential liabilities in connection with the alleged presence of hazardous waste materials at its Seattle shipyard and at two additional sites used by the Company for disposal of alleged hazardous waste. The Company has also been named as a defendant in civil actions by parties alleging damages from past exposure to toxic substances at Company facilities.

The Company continues to analyze environmental matters and associated liabilities for which it may be responsible. No assurance can be given as to the existence or extent of any environmental liabilities until such analysis has been completed. The eventual outcome of all environmental matters cannot be determined at this time, however, the analyses of the known matters have progressed sufficiently to warrant establishment of reserve provisions in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

In fiscal year 2001, the Company entered into a 30-year agreement with an insurance company that provides broad-based insurance coverage for the remediation of the Company's operable units at the Harbor Island Superfund Site ("Site").

The agreement provides coverage for the known liabilities in an amount not to exceed the policy limits. As of January 2, 2005 these limits exceed the Company's current booked reserves of approximately $19.9 million. Included in the reserves are sediment remediation costs for Harbor Island of $12.1 million that are expected to occur in the next 12 months. These costs are reflected in the Company's balance sheet under current liabilities. Likewise, the insurance receivable of $12.1 million relating to these reserves is reflected in the Company's balance sheet under current assets.

Additionally, the Company entered into a 15-year agreement for coverage of any new environmental conditions discovered at the Seattle shipyard property that would require environmental remediation.

During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2003, the company and the EPA entered into a Consent Decree for the cleanup of the Shipyards Sediments Operable Unit (the "SSOU"), which, along with the associated Remedial Design Statement of Work for Remedial Action ("SOW"), was subsequently approved by the Department of Justice. The Consent Decree provides for the submittal of the Remedial Action Work Plan to the EPA subsequent to the approval by the EPA of the final design. The Remedial Action Work Plan will provide for construction and implementation of the remedy set forth in the Record of Decision ("ROD"), the two Explanation of Significant Differences (issued in fiscal years 2000 and 2003), the SOW, and the design plans and specifications developed in accordance with the Remedial Action Work Plan and approved by the EPA. During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004 the Company submitted its Final Design Report to the EPA for the SSOU. The Final Design Report provides for the following a ctions to take place at the SSOU:

Pursuant to the current schedule, remediation of the SSOU began in the second quarter of fiscal 2005. Current environmental regulations limit the period of time during the year that dredging may occur. Given these limits, dredging in the SSOU will require several years to accomplish. The Company will complete its first year of dredging during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2005 and expects to be finished with the pier demolition and dredging in its entirety during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006. The current estimated cost of the SSOU cleanup is included in the environmental reserve.

Under the Federal Superfund law, potentially responsible parties may have liability for damages to natural resources in addition to liability for remediation. During fiscal year 2003, the Company began discussions with the natural resource trustees ("Trustees") for the Site. The Company anticipates that the Trustees will file a claim against the Company at some future date alleging damages to the natural resources at the Site caused by the release of hazardous substances. The best estimate of the Company's natural resource damage liability is included in the environmental remediation reserve. The payment of any eventual claim is covered by the aforementioned insurance policy, provided that aggregate policy limits have not been exceeded.

During the third quarter of fiscal year 2005, the Company, along with 55 other companies and organizations, was notified that it is a potentially responsible party at the BKK Landfill Facility in West Covina, California. The site is the subject of an investigation and remedial order from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. It is alleged that the Company's San Pedro shipyard (closed in 1990) caused shipyard waste to be sent to the BKK Facility during the 1970s and 1980s. The Company is investigating these allegations.

During the second quarter of fiscal year 2005, the Company was notified by the EPA that it is a potentially responsible party ("PRP") at the Malone Service Company Superfund Site ("Malone") in Galveston County, Texas. The EPA alleges that the Company's Galveston shipyard, which ceased operations in 1990, was the generator of waste materials that were delivered, through independent transport companies, to the Malone site. The EPA has further indicated that the Company will, based on volumes of material at the site believed to have been generated by the Company, be eligible to participate in a "de minimus" settlement for small contributors. The Company has included its best estimate of the settlement amount in its environmental reserve.

As reported in the Company's Form 10-K for its fiscal year 2004, the Company has been named as a defendant in civil actions by parties alleging damages from past exposure to toxic substances, generally asbestos, at closed former Company facilities.

The cases generally include as defendants, in addition to the Company, other ship builders and repairers, ship owners, asbestos manufacturers, distributors and installers, and equipment manufacturers and arise from injuries or illnesses allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos or other toxic substances. The Company assesses claims as they are filed and as the cases develop, analyzing them in two different categories based on severity of illness. Based on current fact patterns, certain diseases including mesothelioma, lung cancer and fully developed asbestosis are categorized by the Company as "malignant" claims. All others of a less medically serious nature are categorized as "non-malignant". The Company is currently defending approximately 24 "malignant" claims and approximately 554 "non-malignant" claims. The Company and its insurers are vigorously defending these actions.

As of January 2, 2005 the Company has recorded a bodily injury liability reserve of $7.9 million and a bodily injury insurance receivable of $5.8 million. This compares to a previously recorded bodily injury reserve and insurance receivable of $8.1 million and $5.8 million, respectively, at March 28, 2004. These bodily injury liabilities and receivables are classified within the Company's Consolidated Balance Sheets as environmental and other reserves, and insurance receivables, respectively.

During the first quarter of fiscal year 2004, the Company recorded a reserve of $2.5 million related to the unanticipated bankruptcy of one of its former workers compensation insurance carriers. The reserve, which reflects the Company's best estimate of the known liabilities associated with unpaid workers compensation claims arising from the two-year coverage period that commenced October 1, 1998, is subject to change as additional facts are uncovered. These claims have reverted to the Company due the liquidation of the insurance carrier. Although the Company expects to recover at least a portion of these costs from the liquidation and other sources, the amount and the timing of any such recovery cannot be estimated currently and therefore no estimate of amounts recoverable is included in the current financial results.

Since establishing the reserve during the first quarter of fiscal year 2004, the Company has paid approximately $0.4 million in claims, which have been charged against the reserve.

The Company reported comprehensive income of $1.2 million for the quarter ended January 2,2005 which consisted of net income of $1.3 million and a reduction in net unrealized gains on available-for-sale marketable securities of $0.1 million, which is recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income. For the nine month period then ended, the Company reported comprehensive income of $4.7 million, which consisted of net income of $5.0 million offset by a decrease in net unrealized gains on available-for-sale marketable securities of $0.3 million.

During the same periods of fiscal year 2004, the Company reported comprehensive income of $1.6 million for the quarter ended December 28, 2003, which consisted of net income of $1.7 million offset by the decrease in net unrealized gains on available-for-sale marketable securities of $0.1 million. For the nine month period then ended, the Company reported comprehensive income of $1.6 million, which consisted of net income of $1.5 million and changes in net unrealized gains on available-for-sale marketable securities of $0.1 million.

The following table represents the calculation of net earnings per common equivalent share - diluted

In fiscal year 2003, the Board of Directors approved the purchase of up to 500,000 shares of the Company's common stock in open market or negotiated transactions. During the nine-month period ended January 2, 2005, the Company did not purchase any shares.

In October 2003, the smaller of the two dry docks that the Company leased from the Navy sustained damage during a windstorm. The Company was reimbursed by the insurance carrier for the majority of the costs incurred to recover the dry dock. The dock was declared a total constructive loss and was demolished in October 2004. The Company's repair and maintenance operations have not been materially affected by the inability to use this dock.

Todd Pacific Shipyards Corporation ("Todd Pacific"), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, has a $10.0 million revolving credit facility available for its working capital requirements. As of January 2, 2005 Todd Pacific had no outstanding borrowings on its credit line. Todd Pacific is in compliance with all debt covenants.

Nonunion Pension Plans - The Company sponsors the Todd Shipyards Corporation Retirement System (the "Retirement System"), a non-contributory defined benefit plan under which all nonunion employees are covered. The benefits are based on years of service and the employee's compensation before retirement. The Company's funding policy is to fund such retirement costs as required to meet allowable deductibility limits under current Internal Revenue Service regulations. The Retirement System plan assets consist principally of common stocks and Government and corporate obligations.

Under a provision of the Omnibus Budget Reform Act of 1990 ("OBRA '90") the Company will transfer approximately $1.6 million in excess pension assets from its Retirement System into a fund to pay fiscal year 2005 retiree medical benefit expenses. OBRA '90 was modified by the Work Incentives Improvement Act of 1999 and extended by the Pension Funding Equity Act of 2004 to extend annual excess asset transfers through the fiscal year ending March 28, 2014.

Post Retirement Group Health Insurance Program - The Company sponsors a defined benefit retirement health care plan that provides post retirement medical benefits to former full-time exempt employees, and their spouses, who meet specified criteria. The Company terminated post retirement health benefits for any employees retiring subsequent to May 15, 1988. The retirement health care plan contains cost-sharing features such as deductibles and coinsurance. These benefits are funded monthly through the payment of group health insurance premiums.

Because such benefit obligations do not accrue to current employees of the Company, there is no current year service cost component of the accumulated post retirement health benefit obligation.

Union Pension Plans - Operating Shipyard - The Company participates in several multi-employer plans, which provide defined benefits to the Company's collective bargaining employees. The expense for these plans totaled $0.4 million and $1.7 million for the quarter and nine month periods ending January 2, 2005, respectively.

During the same periods of fiscal year 2004, the expense for these plans totaled $1.1 million and $3.0 million, resectively.

Union Pension Plans - Previously Operated Shipyards - The Company no longer sponsors union pension plans attributable to the prior operation of other shipyards. The ongoing operation and management of these plans has either been terminated or transferred to other parties.

The Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and should be read in conjunction herewith.

The Company derives a significant portion of its revenues from work performed under its contracts with the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Coast Guard. Work under such contracts is scheduled by and at the convenience of the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Coast Guard. The work lost as a result of the transfer or decommissioning of the Fast Combat Support Ships under the AOE contract has been partially offset by CVN work deferred in fiscal year 2004 due to operations in Iraq and submarine work for Electric Boat.

Under the new United States Coast Guard - Multi - Ship, Multi - Option contract (MSMO contract) awarded to the Company in fiscal year 2004, the expected repair availability on the Polar Sea was delayed due to the lack of government funding for the major overhaul requirements on this vessel. This reduced the level of work the Company performed for the Coast Guard in the third quarter. As well, third quarter commercial business volumes were reduced due to a very competitive ship repair market and a lack of available drydock space.

Work on submarine contracts for Electric Boat and directly for the Navy on the USS Columbus contributed significantly to the amount of work done in the third quarter of fiscal year 2005.

On December 16, 2004 the Company announced that it had been awarded a five-year lease with the Navy for the use of the AFDM-10 Drydock, "Resolute". The Navy plans to move the Resolute from its current location in Virginia to Puget Sound during the summer of 2005 where Todd will take possession. The Resolute is 522 feet in length, 124 feet wide and has a lifting capacity of 18,000 tons. Once in place at Todd, the Resolute will be used to dock a variety of commercial and government ships.

All comparisons within the following discussion are with the corresponding periods in the previous year, unless otherwise stated.

Revenue - The Company's third quarter revenue of $21.4 million reflects a decrease of $19.0 million (47.0%) from the same period last fiscal year. The quarter to quarter decrease is primarily attributable to lower Navy volumes related to the reduction of AOE work associated with the transfer/ decommissioning of the AOE's, and lower volumes of US Coast Guard and commercial ship repair work. This volume decrease was partially offset by submarine work and high incentive performance fees awarded in the quarter. Revenues for the first nine months of fiscal year 2005 of $90.1 million reflect an decrease of $15.8 million (14.9%) from fiscal year 2004 comparable period. The decrease in the first nine months of the comparable fiscal year 2005 is primarily attributable to lower volumes of Navy, US Coast Guard and commercial ship repair activity partially offset by submarine work and the above mentioned incentive performance fees awarded in the third quarter.

Cost of Revenue - Cost of revenue during the third quarter of fiscal year 2005 was $11.9 million, or 55.6% of revenue. Cost of revenue during the third quarter of fiscal year 2004 was $27.9 million, or 69.3% of revenue. The cost of revenue decrease in the third quarter of fiscal year 2005 is primarily attributable to decreased volumes. Cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue decreased by 13.7% during the third quarter of 2005 from the comparable period of fiscal year 2004 mostly as a result of the higher margins in all areas of the Company's operations and the above mentioned incentive performance fees, which, because the work was completed in a previous quarter, have no costs associated with them.

Cost of revenue during the first nine months of fiscal year 2005 was $57.2 million, or 63.6% of revenue. During the comparable period in fiscal year 2004, cost of revenue was $76.6 million, or 72.4% of revenue. The decrease in cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue is primarily attributable to two factors. First, in fiscal year 2004, there was a $2.5 million charge related to the unanticipated bankruptcy of one of the Company's former workers compensation insurers. Cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue for the first nine months of fiscal year 2004 would have been 70.0% without this charge. Second, margins were favorably impacted by improved cost performance in all areas of the Company's operations and by the above mentioned performance fees, which, because the work was completed in a previous quarter, have no costs associated with them.

Administrative and manufacturing overhead expense - Overhead costs for administrative and manufacturing activities were $7.7 million, or 36.2% of revenue for the third quarter of fiscal year 2005. During the same period of fiscal year 2004, administrative and manufacturing overhead costs were $10.9 million, or 27.0% of revenue. The $3.1 million decrease in administrative and manufacturing overhead is attributable to volume decreases and targeted reductions in overhead spending during the third quarter of fiscal year 2005. The increase in administrative and manufacturing costs as a percentage of revenue is primarily attributable to lower volumes in the third quarter of the current year.

Administrative and manufacturing overhead costs for the first nine months of fiscal year 2005 were $26.1 million, or 28.9% of revenue. During the same period of fiscal year 2004, administrative and manufacturing overhead costs were $29.0 million, or 27.4% of revenue. The $2.9 million decrease is due to targeted reductions in overhead spending and volume decreases during the third quarter of fiscal year 2005. The increase in administrative and manufacturing costs as a percentage of revenue is primarily attributable to lower volumes in the current year.

Investment and other income - Investment and other income was $0.2 million for the third quarter and $0.6 million for the first nine months of fiscal year 2005. During the same periods in fiscal year 2004, investment and other income was $1.0 million and $1.5 million, respectively.

Income Taxes - For the third quarter ended January 2, 2005, the Company reported income before income taxes of $2.0 million and recorded $0.7 million in federal income tax expense, resulting in net income reported for the period of $1.3 million. In the prior year period ended December 28, 2003, the Company reported income before income taxes of $2.7 million and recorded $1.0 million federal income tax expense, resulting in net income for the period of $1.7 million.

For the nine months ended January 2, 2005 the Company reported income before income taxes of $7.3 million and recorded $2.3 million in federal income tax expense, resulting in net income reported for the period of $5.0 million. During the same period in fiscal year 2004, the Company reported income before income taxes of $2.3 million and recorded $0.8 million federal income tax expense, resulting in net income for the period of $1.5 million.

Based upon its current cash, marketable securities position, anticipated cash flow and access to credit facilities and capital markets, the Company believes it has sufficient liquidity to continue to fund operations. Accordingly, shipyard capital expenditures are expected to be financed out of working capital. A change in the composition or timing of projected work arising from factors unknown presently could cause capital expenditures and repair and maintenance expenditures to be impacted favorably or unfavorably.

Working capital at January 2, 2005 was $42.4 million, an increase of $6.0 million (16.5%) from the working capital reported at the end of fiscal year 2004. This increase is primarily attributable to the increase in net income of $3.5 million and the decrease in costs on incomplete projects in excess of billings as a result of decreased volume.

Capital expenditures for the first nine-months of fiscal year 2005 were $2.2 million and were primarily attributable to costs associated with planned improvements to the Seattle shipyard facility.

Todd Pacific Shipyards Corporation ("Todd Pacific"), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, has a $10.0 million revolving credit facility available for its working capital requirements. As of January 2, 2005 Todd Pacific had no outstanding borrowings on its credit line. Todd Pacific is in compliance with all debt covenants.

In fiscal year 2003, the Board of Directors approved the purchase of up to 500,000 shares of the Company's common stock in open market or negotiated transactions. During the nine-month period, the Company did not purchase any shares.

On December 23, 2004, the Company paid a dividend of 10 cents ($0.10) per share to all shareholders of record as of September 8, 2004. The approximate amount of the dividend paid was $0.5 million.

The Company has provided total aggregate reserves of $28.7 million at January 2, 2005 for its contingent environmental and bodily injury liabilities. As of March 28, 2004, the Company had recorded aggregate reserves of $32.0 million. Due to the complexities and extensive history of the Company's environmental and bodily injury matters, the amounts and timing of future expenditures are uncertain. As a result, there can be no assurance that the ultimate resolution of these environmental and bodily injury matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial position, cash flows or results of operations.

The Company has various insurance policies and agreements that provide coverage on the costs to remediate environmental sites and for the defense and settlement of bodily injury cases. These policies and agreements are primarily with two insurance companies. Based upon the current credit ratings of both of these companies, the Company anticipates that both parties will be able to perform under their respective policy or agreement.

As of January 2, 2005, the Company has recorded aggregate assets of $28.5 million related to its reserves for environmental and bodily injury liabilities. As of March 28, 2004, the Company had recorded aggregate assets of $31.8 million. These assets reflect receivables under contractual arrangements with the insurance companies to share costs for certain environmental and other matters, as well as amounts deposited to securitize certain remediation activities. Amounts recoverable from insurance companies are recorded within the Company's Consolidated Balance Sheets as insurance receivables and, in the case of reimbursements currently due, as a current asset. Amounts held in security deposits are recorded within the Company's Consolidated Balance Sheets as restricted cash.

Recurring costs associated with the Company's environmental compliance program are not material and are expensed as incurred.

The Company faces significant potential liabilities in connection with the alleged presence of hazardous waste materials at its Seattle shipyard and at two additional sites used by the Company for disposal of alleged hazardous waste. The Company has also been named as a defendant in civil actions by parties alleging damages from past exposure to toxic substances at Company facilities.

During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2003, the company and the EPA entered into a Consent Decree for the cleanup of the Shipyards Sediments Operable Unit (the "SSOU"), which, along with the associated Remedial Design Statement of Work for Remedial Action ("SOW"), was subsequently approved by the Department of Justice. The Consent Decree provides for the submittal of the Remedial Action Work Plan to the EPA subsequent to the approval by the EPA of the final design. The Remedial Action Work Plan will provide for construction and implementation of the remedy set forth in the Record of Decision ("ROD"), the two Explanation of Significant Differences (issued in fiscal years 2000 and 2003), the SOW, and the design plans and specifications developed in accordance with the Remedial Action Work Plan and approved by the EPA. During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004 the Company submitted its Final Design Report to the EPA for the SSOU. The Final Design Report provides for the following a ctions to take place at the SSOU:

Pursuant to the current schedule, remediation of the SSOU began in the second quarter of fiscal 2005. Current environmental regulations limit the period of time during the year that dredging may occur. Given these limits, dredging in the SSOU will require several years to complete. The Company will complete its first year of dredging during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2005 and expects to be finished with the pier demolition and dredging in its entirety during the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006. The current estimated cost of the SSOU cleanup is included in the environmental reserve.

Under the Federal Superfund law, potentially responsible parties may have liability for damages to natural resources in addition to liability for remediation. During fiscal year 2003, the Company began discussions with the natural resource trustees ("Trustees") for the Site. The Company anticipates that the Trustees will file a claim against the Company at some future date alleging damages to the natural resources at the Site caused by the release of hazardous substances. The best estimate of the Company's natural resource damage liability is included in the environmental remediation reserve. The payment of any eventual claim is covered by the aforementioned insurance policy, provided that aggregate policy limits have not been exceeded.

During the third quarter of fiscal year 2005, the Company, along with 55 other companies and organizations, was notified that it is a potentially responsible party at the BKK Landfill Facility in West Covina, California. The site is the subject of an investigation and remedial order from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. It is alleged that the Company's San Pedro shipyard (closed in 1990) caused shipyard waste to be sent to the BKK Facility during the 1970s and 1980s. The Company is investigating these allegations.

During the second quarter of fiscal year 2005, the Company was notified by the EPA that it is a potentially responsible party ("PRP") at the Malone Service Company Superfund Site ("Malone") in Galveston County, Texas. The EPA alleges that the Company's Galveston shipyard, which ceased operations in 1990, was the generator of waste materials that were delivered, through independent transport companies, to the Malone site. The EPA has further indicated that the Company will, based on volumes of material at the site believed to have been generated by the Company, be eligible to participate in a "de minimus" settlement for small contributors. The company has included its best estimate of the settlement amount in its environmental reserve.

As reported in the Company's Form 10-K for its fiscal year 2004, the Company has been named as a defendant in civil actions by parties alleging damages from past exposure to toxic substances, generally asbestos, at closed former Company facilities.

The cases generally include as defendants, in addition to the Company, other ship builders and repairers, ship owners, asbestos manufacturers, distributors and installers, and equipment manufacturers and arise from injuries or illnesses allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos or other toxic substances. The Company assesses claims as they are filed and as the cases develop, analyzing them in two different categories based on severity of illness. Based on current fact patterns, certain diseases including mesothelioma, lung cancer and fully developed asbestosis are categorized by the Company as "malignant" claims. All others of a less medically serious nature are categorized as "non-malignant." The Company is currently defending approximately 24 "malignant" claims and approximately 554 "non-malignant" claims. The Company and its insurers are vigorously defending these actions.

During the first nine months of fiscal year 2005, the Company experienced relatively minor changes in its bodily injury liabilities and insurance receivables. As of January 2, 2005 the Company has recorded a bodily injury liability reserve of $7.9 million and a bodily injury insurance receivable of $5.8 million. This compares to a previously recorded bodily injury reserve and insurance receivable of $8.1 million and $5.8 million, respectively, at March 28, 2004. These bodily injury liabilities and receivables are classified within the Company's Consolidated Balance Sheets as environmental and other reserves, and insurance receivables, respectively.

During the first quarter of fiscal year 2004, the Company recorded a reserve of $2.5 million related to the unanticipated bankruptcy of one of its former workers compensation carriers. The reserve, which reflects the Company's best estimate of the known liabilities associated with unpaid workers compensation claims arising from the two-year coverage period that commenced October 1, 1998, is subject to change as additional facts are uncovered. These claims have reverted to the Company due the liquidation of the insurance carrier. Although the Company expects to recover at least a portion of these costs from the liquidation and other sources, the amount and the timing of any such recovery cannot be estimated currently and therefore no estimate of amounts recoverable is included in the current financial results.

Since establishing the reserve during the first quarter of fiscal year 2004, the Company has paid approximately $0.4 million in claims, which have been charged against the reserve.

At January 2, 2005 the Company's firm shipyard backlog consisted of approximately $12 million of repair and overhaul work. The Company's backlog at March 28, 2004 was approximately $19 million. The decrease in the backlog work at the end of the first nine months of fiscal year 2005 is primarily due to decreased work for the Navy, US Coast Guard and commercial ship repair activity partially offset by submarine work.

Todd Pacific Shipyards currently operates under the terms and conditions of a collective bargaining agreement with the Puget Sound Metal Trades Council (the bargaining umbrella for all unions at Todd Pacific Shipyards). The three-year agreement is in effect from August 1, 2002 to July 31, 2005. The Company believes its relationship with its labor unions is stable.

On December 8, 2003, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (Medicare Drug Act) was signed into law. The Medicare Drug Act introduced a prescription drug benefit under Medicare (Medicare Part D) as well as a federal subsidy to sponsors of retiree health benefit plans that provide prescription drug benefits that are deemed actuarially equivalent to the Medicare Part D. Previously, the Company had elected not to recognize the impact of the Federal subsidy on the accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation and net post-retirement benefit costs until specific authoritative guidance was finalized.

In the first quarter of fiscal year 2005, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued FASB Staff Position (FSP No. 106-2), Accounting and Disclosure Requirements Related to the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003. FSP No. 106-2 requires the disclosure of the effect of the subsidy on the measurement of the accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation and net periodic post-retirement benefit cost for the current period. The Company has elected prospective recognition, which affects accounting periods beginning after June 15, 2004. The impact for the third quarter of fiscal year 2005 is $35 thousand. This represents a reduction of interest cost of $28 thousand and actuarial loss of $7 thousand. The impact of the Federal subsidy for the remainder of fiscal year 2005 will be a reduction in the accumulated post-retirement benefit obligation of $2.0 million and an additional reduction in net post-retiremen t benefit costs of $35 thousand for the balance of the year. The represents a decrease in interest cost of $84 thousand and actuarial loss of $21 thousand.

On December 16, 2004, the FASB issued FASB Statement No.123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment, which is a revision of FASB Statement No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Statement 123(R) supercedes APB Opinion No.25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and amends FASB Statement No.95, Statement of Cash Flows. Generally, the approach in Statement 123(R) is similar to the approach described in Statement 123. However, Statement 123(R)requires all share-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income statement on their fair values. Pro forma disclosure is no longer an alternative. Statement 123(R) must be adopted in the first interim period beginning after June 15, 2005. The Company will adopt Statement 123(R) on July 3, 2005. The Company plans to adopt Statement 123 using the "modified prospective" recognition method in which compensation cost is recognized beginning with the effectiv e date July 3, 2005 based on the requirements of Statement 123(R) for all share-based payments granted after the effective date and based on the requirements of Statement 123 for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date of Statement 123(R) that remain unvested on the effective date. The impact of adoption on the Company's financial statements is not expected to be material.

(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures. The Securities and Exchange Commission defines the term "disclosure controls and procedures" to mean a company's controls and other procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports that it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the Commission's rules and forms. Our chief executive officer and our chief financial officer have concluded, based on the evaluation of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures by our management, with the participation of our chief executive officer and our chief financial officer, as of the end of the period covered by this report, that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective for this purpose.

(b) Changes in Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting. There has been no significant changes in our internal controls over financial reporting during the three months ended December 31, 2004 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect our internal controls over financial reporting.

(a) Exhibits

No. 31.1 Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14a

(filed herewith)

No. 31.2 Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14a

(filed herewith)

No. 32.1 Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-

14(b) and section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18,

United States Code. (furnished herewith)*

No. 32.2 Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-

14(b) and section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18,

United States Code. (furnished herewith)*

No. 99.1 Press Release dated February 8, 2005 announcing financial results

for the Company's quarterly period ended January 2, 2005.

(furnished herewith)*

*Notwithstanding any incorporation of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q in any other filing by the Registrant, Exhibits furnished herewith and designated with an asterisk (*) shall not be deemed incorporated by reference to any other filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 unless specifically otherwise set forth therein.

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.

TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATION

Registrant

By:/s/Scott H. Wiscomb

Scott H. Wiscomb

Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer

February 8, 2005