Attached files
file | filename |
---|---|
EX-23.1 - EX-23.1 - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | h68600exv23w1.htm |
EX-21.1 - EX-21.1 - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | h68600exv21w1.htm |
EX-31.1 - EX-31.1 - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | h68600exv31w1.htm |
EX-31.2 - EX-31.2 - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | h68600exv31w2.htm |
EX-24.1 - EX-24.1 - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | h68600exv24w1.htm |
EX-12.1 - EX-12.1 - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | h68600exv12w1.htm |
EX-32.1 - EX-32.1 - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | h68600exv32w1.htm |
EX-10.9 - EX-10.9 - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | h68600exv10w9.htm |
EX-10.19 - EX-10.19 - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | h68600exv10w19.htm |
EXCEL - IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT - DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC. | Financial_Report.xls |
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
þ | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009
OR
o | 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 1-13926
DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
76-0321760 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
15415 Katy Freeway
Houston, Texas 77094
(Address and zip code of principal executive offices)
Houston, Texas 77094
(Address and zip code of principal executive offices)
(281) 492-5300
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class | Name of each exchange on which registered | |
Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share | New York Stock Exchange |
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 þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or
Section 15(d) 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
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 þ 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. þ
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 definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer, and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check one):
Large accelerated filer þ | Accelerated filer o | Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates
computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold as of the last business
day of the registrants most recently completed second fiscal quarter.
As of June 30, 2009 | $5,694,071,609 |
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrants classes of common stock,
as of the latest practicable date.
As of February 19, 2010 | Common Stock, $0.01 par value per share | 139,026,178 shares |
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the definitive proxy statement relating to the 2010 Annual Meeting of
Stockholders of Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc., which will be filed within 120 days of
December 31, 2009, are incorporated by reference in Part III of this report.
DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
FORM 10-K for the Year Ended December 31, 2009
FORM 10-K for the Year Ended December 31, 2009
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No. | ||||||||
Cover Page |
1 | |||||||
Document Table of Contents |
2 | |||||||
3 | ||||||||
8 | ||||||||
16 | ||||||||
16 | ||||||||
16 | ||||||||
16 | ||||||||
18 | ||||||||
20 | ||||||||
21 | ||||||||
49 | ||||||||
52 | ||||||||
Consolidated Financial Statements |
54 | |||||||
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements |
59 | |||||||
88 | ||||||||
88 | ||||||||
89 | ||||||||
Certain information called for by Part III Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 has
been omitted as the Registrant intends to file with the Securities and
Exchange Commission not later than 120 days after the end of its fiscal
year a definitive Proxy Statement pursuant to Regulation 14A |
||||||||
89 | ||||||||
91 | ||||||||
92 | ||||||||
EX-10.9 | ||||||||
EX-10.19 | ||||||||
EX-12.1 | ||||||||
EX-21.1 | ||||||||
EX-23.1 | ||||||||
EX-24.1 | ||||||||
EX-31.1 | ||||||||
EX-31.2 | ||||||||
EX-32.1 | ||||||||
EX-101 INSTANCE DOCUMENT | ||||||||
EX-101 SCHEMA DOCUMENT | ||||||||
EX-101 CALCULATION LINKBASE DOCUMENT | ||||||||
EX-101 LABELS LINKBASE DOCUMENT | ||||||||
EX-101 PRESENTATION LINKBASE DOCUMENT | ||||||||
EX-101 DEFINITION LINKBASE DOCUMENT |
2
Table of Contents
PART I
Item 1. | Business. |
General
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. is a leading, global offshore oil and gas drilling contractor
with a fleet of 47 offshore rigs consisting of 32 semisubmersibles, 14 jack-ups and one drillship.
Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this report to Diamond Offshore, we, us
or our mean Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and our consolidated subsidiaries. We were
incorporated in Delaware in 1989.
The Fleet
Our fleet includes some of the most technologically advanced rigs in the world, enabling us to
offer a broad range of services worldwide in various markets, including the deepwater, harsh
environment, conventional semisubmersible and jack-up markets.
Semisubmersibles. We own and operate 32 semisubmersibles, consisting of 13 high-specification
and 19 intermediate rigs. Semisubmersible rigs consist of an upper working and living deck resting
on vertical columns connected to lower hull members. Such rigs operate in a semi-submerged
position, remaining afloat, off bottom, in a position in which the lower hull is approximately 55
feet to 90 feet below the water line and the upper deck protrudes well above the surface.
Semisubmersibles are typically anchored in position and remain stable for drilling in the
semi-submerged floating position due in part to their wave transparency characteristics at the
water line. Semisubmersibles can also be held in position through the use of a computer controlled
thruster (dynamic-positioning) system to maintain the rigs position over a drillsite. We have five
semisubmersible rigs in our fleet with this capability.
Our high-specification semisubmersibles are generally capable of working in water depths of
4,000 feet or greater or in harsh environments and have other advanced features, as compared to
intermediate semisubmersibles. As of January 25, 2010, seven of our 13 high-specification
semisubmersibles, including the recently acquired Ocean Courage, were located in the United States,
or U.S., Gulf of Mexico, or GOM. At that date we had two high- specification semisubmersibles rigs
operating offshore Brazil, while a third was en route to Brazil from the GOM. Of our remaining
high-specification semisubmersibles, one was located offshore each of Malaysia and Angola, while
the final rig, the Ocean Valor, was completing its commissioning in Singapore. See Fleet
Enhancements and Additions.
Our intermediate semisubmersibles generally work in maximum water depths up to 4,000 feet. As
of January 25, 2010, we had 19 intermediate semisubmersible rigs in various locations around the
world. Seven of these semisubmersibles were operating offshore Brazil and an eighth unit was en
route to Brazil; three were located in the North Sea; two each were located offshore Australia and
offshore Mexico; one was located in the GOM and one offshore Vietnam. One unit was en route to the
Falkland Islands, and our final intermediate semisubmersible rig, the Ocean Bounty, was in the
process of being cold stacked in Malaysia.
Drillship. We have one high-specification drillship, the Ocean Clipper, which was located
offshore Brazil as of January 25, 2010. Drillships, which are typically self-propelled, are
positioned over a drillsite through the use of either an anchoring system or a dynamic-positioning
system similar to those used on certain semisubmersible rigs. Deepwater drillships compete in many
of the same markets as do high-specification semisubmersible rigs.
Both semisubmersible rigs and drillships are commonly referred to as floaters in the offshore
drilling industry.
Jack-ups. We currently have 14 jack-up drilling rigs. Jack-up rigs are mobile,
self-elevating drilling platforms equipped with legs that are lowered to the ocean floor until a
foundation is established to support the drilling platform. The rig hull includes the drilling rig,
jacking system, crew quarters, loading and unloading facilities, storage areas for bulk and liquid
materials, heliport and other related equipment. Our jack-ups are used for drilling in water
depths from 20 feet to 350 feet. The water depth limit of a particular rig is principally
determined by the length of the rigs legs. A jack-up rig is towed to the drillsite with its hull
riding in the sea, as a vessel, with its legs retracted. Once over a drillsite, the legs are
lowered until they rest on the seabed and jacking continues with the legs penetrating the seabed
until resistance is sufficient to elevate the hull above the surface of the water. After
3
Table of Contents
completion of drilling operations, the hull is lowered until it rests in the water and then
the legs are retracted for relocation to another drillsite.
Most of our jack-up rigs are equipped with a cantilever system that enables the rig to
cantilever or extend its drilling package over the aft end of the rig. This is particularly
important when attempting to drill over existing platforms. Cantilever rigs have historically
earned higher dayrates and achieved greater utilization compared to slot rigs, which do not have
this capability.
As of January 25, 2010, six of our 14 jack-up rigs were located in the GOM and a seventh rig,
the Ocean Scepter, was en route from Uruguay for a six-well drilling program in the GOM. Four of
those rigs are independent-leg cantilevered units, two are mat-supported cantilevered units, and
one is a mat-supported slot unit. We cold-stacked the three mat-supported jack-up rigs located in
the GOM during the second quarter of 2009 and are no longer actively marketing these drilling
units. Of our seven remaining jack-up rigs, all of which are independent-leg cantilevered units,
two each were located offshore Egypt and Mexico, and one was located offshore each of Indonesia,
Croatia and the Joint Petroleum Development Area, or JPDA, between Australia and Timor Leste.
Fleet Enhancements and Additions. Our long-term strategy has been to economically upgrade our
fleet to meet customer demand for advanced, efficient, high-tech rigs, particularly deepwater
semisubmersibles, in order to maximize the utilization of, and dayrates earned by, the rigs in our
fleet. During 2009, we acquired two new-build deepwater, semisubmersible, dynamically-positioned
drilling rigs, the Ocean Courage (June 2009) and the Ocean Valor (September 2009). As of January
25, 2010, the Ocean Courage was in process of completing its commissioning and preparing for its
first contract in the GOM, which we expect to begin in the first quarter of 2010. We expect
commissioning of the Ocean Valor to be completed in Singapore in the first quarter of 2010.
In addition, excluding our two new deepwater floaters acquired in 2009, we have, since 1995,
increased the number of our rigs capable of operating in 3,500 feet or more of water from three
rigs to 14 (11 of which are high-specification units), primarily by upgrading our existing fleet.
Seven of these upgrades were to our Victory-class semisubmersible rigs, the design of which is
well-suited for significant upgrade projects. We have two additional Victory-class intermediate
semisubmersibles that could potentially be upgraded at some time in the future.
We will evaluate further rig acquisition and upgrade opportunities as they arise. However, we
can provide no assurance whether, or to what extent, we will continue to make rig acquisitions or
upgrades to our fleet. See Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations Sources of Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity and Capital
Requirements in Item 7 of this report.
4
Table of Contents
More detailed information concerning our fleet of mobile offshore drilling rigs, as of
January 25, 2010, is set forth in the table below.
Nominal | ||||||||||||
Water Depth | Year Built/Latest | Current | ||||||||||
Type and Name | Rating (a) | Attributes | Enhancement (b) | Location (c) | Customer (d) | |||||||
High-Specification Floaters |
||||||||||||
Semisubmersibles (13): |
||||||||||||
Ocean Valor |
10,000 | DP; 15K; 4M | 2009 | Singapore | Commissioning | |||||||
Ocean Courage |
10,000 | DP; 15K; 4M | 2009 | GOM | Commissioning and contract preparation: Petrobras Americas | |||||||
Ocean Confidence |
10,000 | DP; 15K; 4M | 2001/2008 | GOM | Murphy Exploration | |||||||
Ocean Monarch |
10,000 | VC; 15K; 4M | 1974/2008 | GOM | Marathon Oil | |||||||
Ocean Endeavor |
10,000 | VC; 15K; 4M | 1975/2007 | GOM | ExxonMobil | |||||||
Ocean Rover |
8,000 | VC; 15K; 4M | 1973/2008 | Malaysia | Shell Malaysia | |||||||
Ocean Baroness |
7,000 | VC; 15K; 4M | 1973/2002 | GOM | Hess | |||||||
Ocean Victory |
5,500 | VC; 15K; 3M | 1972/2006 | GOM | ATP Oil & Gas | |||||||
Ocean America |
5,500 | SP; 15K; 3M | 1988/1999 | GOM | Mariner Energy | |||||||
Ocean Valiant |
5,500 | SP; 15K; 3M | 1988/1999 | Angola | Total | |||||||
Ocean Star |
5,500 | VC; 15K; 3M | 1974/1999 | Brazil | Mobilizing: OGX | |||||||
Ocean Alliance |
5,250 | DP; 15K; 3M | 1988/1999 | Brazil | Petrobras | |||||||
Ocean Quest |
4,000 | VC; 15K; 3M | 1973/1996 | Brazil | OGX | |||||||
Drillship (1): |
||||||||||||
Ocean Clipper |
7,875 | DP; 15K; 3M | 1976/1999 | Brazil | Petrobras | |||||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles (19): |
||||||||||||
Ocean Winner |
4,000 | 3M | 1977/2004 | Brazil | Petrobras | |||||||
Ocean Worker |
4,000 | 3M | 1982/2008 | Brazil | Petrobras | |||||||
Ocean Yatzy |
3,300 | DP | 1989/1998 | Brazil | Petrobras | |||||||
Ocean Voyager |
3,200 | VC; 3M | 1973/1995 | Mexico | Actively marketing | |||||||
Ocean Patriot |
3,000 | 15K; 3M | 1982/2003 | Australia | Esso Australia | |||||||
Ocean Epoch |
3,000 | 3M | 1977/2000 | Australia | BHPB | |||||||
Ocean General |
3,000 | 3M | 1976/2000 | Vietnam | PVEP Dai Hung | |||||||
Ocean Yorktown |
2,850 | 3M | 1976/1996 | Brazil | Petrobras | |||||||
Ocean Concord |
2,300 | 3M | 1975/1999 | Brazil | Petrobras | |||||||
Ocean Lexington |
2,200 | 3M | 1976/1995 | Brazil | Mobilizing: OGX | |||||||
Ocean Saratoga |
2,200 | 3M | 1976/1995 | GOM | Taylor Energy | |||||||
Ocean Whittington |
1,650 | 3M | 1974/1995 | Brazil | Petrobras | |||||||
Ocean Bounty |
1,500 | VC; 3M | 1977/1992 | Malaysia | Preparing for cold stacking | |||||||
Ocean Guardian |
1,500 | 15K; 3M | 1985 | Falkland Islands | Mobilizing: AGR/Desire | |||||||
Ocean New Era |
1,500 | 3M | 1974/1990 | Mexico | PEMEX | |||||||
Ocean Princess |
1,500 | 15K; 3M | 1977/1998 | North Sea/U.K. | Talisman | |||||||
Ocean Vanguard |
1,500 | 15K; 3M | 1982 | North Sea/Norway | Statoil | |||||||
Ocean Nomad |
1,200 | 3M | 1975/2001 | North Sea/U.K. | Actively Marketing | |||||||
Ocean Ambassador |
1,100 | 3M | 1975/1995 | Brazil | OGX | |||||||
Jack-ups (14): |
||||||||||||
Ocean Scepter |
350 | IC; 15K; 3M | 2008 | GOM | Mobilizing: Arena Energy | |||||||
Ocean Shield |
350 | IC; 15K; 3M | 2008 | JPDA | Petronas Carigali Timor Leste | |||||||
Ocean Titan |
350 | IC; 15K; 3M | 1974/2004 | GOM | ANKOR Energy | |||||||
Ocean King |
300 | IC; 3M | 1973/1999 | Croatia | Bareboat charter to CROSCO | |||||||
Ocean Nugget |
300 | IC | 1976/1995 | Mexico | PEMEX | |||||||
Ocean Summit |
300 | IC | 1972/2003 | Mexico | PEMEX | |||||||
Ocean Heritage |
300 | IC | 1981/2002 | Egypt | SUCO | |||||||
Ocean Spartan |
300 | IC | 1980/2003 | GOM | Samson Offshore | |||||||
Ocean Spur |
300 | IC | 1981/2003 | Egypt | WEPCO | |||||||
Ocean Sovereign |
300 | IC | 1981/2003 | Indonesia | Kodeco | |||||||
Ocean Champion |
250 | MS | 1975/2004 | GOM | Cold stacked | |||||||
Ocean Columbia |
250 | IC | 1978/1990 | GOM | Shipyard: Survey | |||||||
Ocean Crusader |
200 | MC | 1982/1992 | GOM | Cold stacked | |||||||
Ocean Drake |
200 | MC | 1983/1986 | GOM | Cold stacked |
Attributes
DP = Dynamically-Positioned/Self-Propelled
|
MS = Mat-Supported Slot Rig | 3M = Three Mud Pumps | ||
IC = Independent-Leg Cantilevered Rig
|
VC = Victory-Class | 4M = Four Mud Pumps | ||
MC = Mat-Supported Cantilevered Rig
|
SP = Self-Propelled | 15K = 15,000 psi well control system |
See the footnotes to this table on the following page.
5
Table of Contents
(a) | Nominal water depth (in feet), as described above for semisubmersibles and drillships, reflects the current operating water depth capability for each drilling unit. In many cases, individual rigs are capable of drilling, or have drilled in, greater water depths. In all cases, floating rigs are capable of working successfully at greater depths than their nominal water depth. On a case by case basis, we may achieve a greater depth capacity by providing additional equipment. | |
(b) | Such enhancements may include water depth upgrades, mud pump additions and increases in deck load capacity | |
(c) | GOM means U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Four of our drilling rigs were en route between geographic locations. They have been presented in the preceding table in the geographic location in which they are expected to commence drilling operations in 2010. | |
(d) | For ease of presentation in this table, customer names have been shortened or abbreviated. |
Markets
The principal markets for our offshore contract drilling services are the following:
| the Gulf of Mexico, including the U.S. and Mexico; | ||
| South America, principally in Brazil; | ||
| Europe, principally in the United Kingdom, or U.K., and Norway; | ||
| the Mediterranean Basin, including Egypt; | ||
| Africa, currently in Angola; | ||
| Australia and Asia, including Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam; and | ||
| the Middle East, including Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. |
We actively market our rigs worldwide. From time to time our fleet operates in various other
markets throughout the world as the market demands. See Note 17 Segments and Geographic Area
Analysis to our Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this report.
We believe our presence in multiple markets is valuable in many respects. For example, we
believe that our experience with safety and other regulatory matters in the U.K. has been
beneficial in Australia and other international areas in which we operate, while production
experience we have gained through our Brazilian and North Sea operations has potential application
worldwide. Additionally, we believe our performance for a customer in one market segment or area
enables us to better understand that customers needs and better serve that customer in different
market segments or other geographic locations.
Offshore Contract Drilling Services
Our contracts to provide offshore drilling services vary in their terms and provisions. We
typically obtain our contracts through competitive bidding, although it is not unusual for us to be
awarded drilling contracts without competitive bidding. Our drilling contracts generally provide
for a basic drilling rate on a fixed dayrate basis regardless of whether or not such drilling
results in a productive well. Drilling contracts may also provide for lower rates during periods
when the rig is being moved or when drilling operations are interrupted or restricted by equipment
breakdowns, adverse weather conditions or other conditions beyond our control. Under dayrate
contracts, we generally pay the operating expenses of the rig, including wages and the cost of
incidental supplies. Historically, dayrate contracts have accounted for the majority of our
revenues. In addition, from time to time, our dayrate contracts may also provide for the ability
to earn an incentive bonus from our customer based upon performance.
A dayrate drilling contract generally extends over a period of time covering either the
drilling of a single well or a group of wells, which we refer to as a well-to-well contract, or a
fixed term, which we refer to as a term contract, and may be terminated by the customer in the
event the drilling unit is destroyed or lost or if drilling operations are suspended for an
extended period of time as a result of a breakdown of equipment or, in some cases, due to other
events beyond the control of either party to the contract. In addition, certain of our contracts
permit the customer to terminate the contract early by giving notice, and in most circumstances may
require the payment of an early termination fee by the customer. The contract term in many
instances may also be extended by the customer exercising options for the drilling of additional
wells or for an additional length of time, generally at competitive market rates and mutually
agreeable terms at the time of the extension. See Risk Factors The terms of our
drilling contracts may limit our ability to attain profitability in a
declining market or to benefit from increasing dayrates in an improving
market, Risk Factors Our drilling contracts may be terminated due to events beyond our
control, Risk Factors Our business involves numerous operating hazards, and we are not fully
insured against all of them and Risk Factors We
6
Table of Contents
have elected to self-insure for physical damage to rigs and equipment caused by named
windstorms in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico in Item 1A of this report, which are incorporated herein by
reference. For a discussion of our contract backlog, see Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations Overview Contract Drilling Backlog in Item 7 of
this report, which is incorporated herein by reference.
Customers
We provide offshore drilling services to a customer base that includes major and independent
oil and gas companies and government-owned oil companies. During 2009, we performed services for
47 different customers and for 49 different customers during each of 2008 and 2007. During 2009,
2008 and 2007, one of our two customers in Brazil, Petróleo Brasileiro S.A., or Petrobras (a
Brazilian multinational energy company that is majority-owned by the Brazilian government),
accounted for 15%, 13% and 9% of our annual total consolidated revenues, respectively. No other
customer accounted for 10% or more of our annual total consolidated revenues during 2009 and 2008,
nor did any single customer account for 10% or more of our annual total consolidated revenues
during 2007.
Brazil is the most active floater market in the world today. As of the date of this report,
the greatest concentration of our operating assets outside the United States is offshore Brazil,
where we have 12 rigs in our fleet either currently working or contracted to work during 2010. Our
contract backlog attributable to our expected operations offshore Brazil is $1.1 billion, $1.1
billion and $867.0 million for the years 2010, 2011 and 2012, respectively, and $1.2 billion in the
aggregate for the years 2013 to 2016. See Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Overview Contract Drilling Backlog included in Item 7 of
this report.
We principally market our services in North America through our Houston, Texas office. We
market our services in other geographic locations principally from our office in The Hague, The
Netherlands with support from our regional offices in Aberdeen, Scotland and Perth, Australia. We
provide technical and administrative support functions from our Houston office.
Competition
The offshore contract drilling industry is highly competitive with numerous industry
participants, none of which at the present time has a dominant market share. The drilling industry
has experienced consolidation in recent years and may experience additional consolidation, which
could create additional large competitors. Some of our competitors may have greater financial or
other resources than we do. We compete with offshore drilling contractors that together have more
than 600 mobile rigs available worldwide.
The offshore contract drilling industry is influenced by a number of factors, including global
economies and demand for oil and natural gas, current and anticipated prices of oil and natural
gas, expenditures by oil and gas companies for exploration and development of oil and natural gas
and the availability of drilling rigs.
Drilling contracts are traditionally awarded on a competitive bid basis. Intense price
competition is often the primary factor in determining which qualified contractor is awarded a job.
Customers may also consider rig availability and location, a drilling contractors operational and
safety performance record, and condition and suitability of equipment. We believe we compete
favorably with respect to these factors.
We compete on a worldwide basis, but competition may vary significantly by region at any
particular time. See Markets. Competition for offshore rigs generally takes place on a global
basis, as these rigs are highly mobile and may be moved, at a cost that may be substantial, from
one region to another. Competing contractors are able to adjust localized supply and demand
imbalances by moving rigs from areas of low utilization and dayrates to areas of greater activity
and relatively higher dayrates. Significant new rig construction and upgrades of existing drilling
units could also intensify price competition. See Risk Factors Our industry is highly
competitive and cyclical, with intense price competition in Item 1A of this report, which is
incorporated herein by reference.
Governmental Regulation
Our operations are subject to numerous international, U.S., state and local laws and
regulations that relate directly or indirectly to our operations, including regulations controlling
the discharge of materials into the environment, requiring removal and clean-up under some
circumstances, or otherwise relating to the protection of
7
Table of Contents
the environment, and may include laws or regulations pertaining to climate change, carbon
emissions or energy use. See Risk Factors Governmental laws and regulations may add to our
costs or limit our drilling activity and Risk Factors Compliance with or breach of
environmental laws can be costly and could limit our operations in Item 1A of this report, which
are incorporated herein by reference.
Operations Outside the United States
Our operations outside the U.S. accounted for approximately 66%, 59% and 50% of our total
consolidated revenues for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. See
Risk Factors A significant portion of our operations are conducted outside the United States and
involve additional risks not associated with domestic operations, Risk Factors Our drilling
contracts offshore Mexico expose us to greater risks than we normally assume and Risk Factors
Fluctuations in exchange rates and nonconvertibility of currencies could result in losses to us in
Item 1A of this report, which are incorporated herein by reference.
Employees
As of December 31, 2009, we had approximately 5,500 workers, including international crew
personnel furnished through independent labor contractors. We have experienced satisfactory labor
relations and provide comprehensive benefit plans for our employees.
Access to Company Filings
We are subject to the informational requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, or the Exchange Act, and accordingly file annual, quarterly and current reports, any
amendments to those reports, proxy statements and other information with the United States
Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. You may read and copy the information we file with the
SEC at the public reference facilities maintained by the SEC at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, DC
20549. Please call the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330 for further information on the operation of the public
reference room. Our SEC filings are also available to the public from the SECs Internet site at
www.sec.gov or from our Internet site at www.diamondoffshore.com. Our website provides a hyperlink
to a third-party SEC filings website where these reports may be viewed and printed at no cost as
soon as reasonably practicable after we have electronically filed such material with, or furnished
it to, the SEC. The information contained on our website, or on other websites linked to our
website, is not part of this report.
Item 1A. | Risk Factors. |
Our business is subject to a variety of risks, including the risks described below. You
should carefully consider these risks when evaluating us and our securities. The risks and
uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing our company. We are also subject to a
variety of risks that affect many other companies generally, as well as additional risks and
uncertainties not known to us or that we currently believe are not as significant as the risks
described below. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows, and the trading prices of our securities, may be materially
and adversely affected.
Our business depends on the level of activity in the oil and gas industry, which is significantly
affected by volatile oil and gas prices.
Our business depends on the level of activity in offshore oil and gas exploration, development
and production in markets worldwide. Worldwide demand for oil and gas, oil and gas prices, market
expectations of potential changes in these prices and a variety of political and economic factors
significantly affect this level of activity. However, higher or lower commodity demand and prices
do not necessarily translate into increased or decreased drilling activity since our customers
project development time, reserve replacement needs, as well as expectations of future commodity
demand and prices all combine to affect demand for our rigs. Oil and gas prices have been, and are
expected to continue to be, extremely volatile and are affected by numerous factors beyond our
control, including:
| worldwide demand for oil and gas; | ||
| the level of economic activity in energy-consuming markets; | ||
| the worldwide economic environment or economic trends, such as recessions; | ||
| the ability of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, commonly called OPEC, to set and maintain production levels and pricing; | ||
| the level of production in non-OPEC countries; |
8
Table of Contents
| the worldwide political and military environment, including uncertainty or instability resulting from an escalation or additional outbreak of armed hostilities in the Middle East, other oil-producing regions or other geographic areas or further acts of terrorism in the United States or elsewhere; | ||
| the cost of exploring for, producing and delivering oil and gas; | ||
| the discovery rate of new oil and gas reserves; | ||
| the rate of decline of existing and new oil and gas reserves; | ||
| available pipeline and other oil and gas transportation capacity; | ||
| the ability of oil and gas companies to raise capital; | ||
| weather conditions in the United States and elsewhere; | ||
| the policies of various governments regarding exploration and development of their oil and gas reserves; | ||
| development and exploitation of alternative fuels; | ||
| competition for customers drilling budgets from land-based energy markets around the world; | ||
| domestic and foreign tax policy; and | ||
| advances in exploration and development technology. |
The continuing global financial crisis and worldwide economic downturn has had, and may continue to
have, a negative impact on our business and financial condition.
The continuing worldwide financial crisis has reduced the availability of liquidity and in
some cases has reduced the availability of and/or increased the cost of credit to fund the
continuation and expansion of industrial business operations worldwide, and has led to a worldwide
economic recession. This deterioration of the worldwide economy has resulted in reduced demand for
crude oil and natural gas, exploration and production activity and offshore drilling services that
has had a negative impact on our business and financial condition, including declines in dayrates
earned by our drilling rigs and a decrease in new contract activity, which may continue and may
worsen.
In addition, the worldwide economic recession has had, and could continue to have, a negative
impact on our customers and/or our suppliers including, among other things, causing them to fail to
meet their obligations to us. Additionally, if a potential customer is unable to obtain an
adequate level of credit, it may preclude us from doing business with that potential customer.
Similarly, the restricted credit market could affect lenders participating in our credit facility,
making them unable to fulfill their commitments and obligations to us. Any such reductions in
drilling activity or failure by our customers, suppliers or lenders to meet their contractual
obligations to us, or our inability to secure additional financing, could adversely affect our
financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Our industry is highly competitive and cyclical, with intense price competition.
The offshore contract drilling industry is highly competitive with numerous industry
participants, none of which at the present time has a dominant market share. Some of our
competitors may have greater financial or other resources than we do. The drilling industry has
experienced consolidation in recent years and may experience additional consolidation, which could
create additional large competitors. Drilling contracts are traditionally awarded on a competitive
bid basis. Intense price competition is often the primary factor in determining which qualified
contractor is awarded a job, although rig availability and location, a drilling contractors safety
record and the quality and technical capability of service and equipment may also be considered.
Mergers among oil and natural gas exploration and production companies, as well as the contraction
of the global economy, have reduced the number of available customers, increasing competition.
Our industry has historically been cyclical. There have been periods of lower demand, excess
rig supply and low dayrates, followed by periods of high demand, short rig supply and high
dayrates. We cannot predict the timing or duration of such business cycles. Periods of excess rig
supply intensify the competition in the industry and often result in rigs being idle for long
periods of time. In response to a contraction in demand for our drilling services, we have cold
stacked three of our rigs as of the date of this report and are in the process of cold stacking a
fourth unit. We also may be required to idle additional rigs or to enter into lower rate
contracts. Prolonged periods of low utilization and dayrates could also result in the recognition
of impairment charges on certain of our drilling rigs if future cash flow estimates, based upon
information available to management at the time, indicate that the carrying value of these rigs may
not be recoverable.
Significant new rig construction and upgrades of existing drilling units could also intensify
price competition. As of the date of this report, based on analyst reports, we believe that there
are approximately 50 jack-up rigs and 70
9
Table of Contents
floaters on order and scheduled for delivery between 2010 and 2012. The resulting increases in rig
supply could be sufficient to further depress rig utilization and intensify price competition from
both existing competitors, as well as new entrants into the offshore drilling market. As of the
date of this report, not all of the rigs currently under construction have been contracted for
future work, which may further intensify price competition as scheduled delivery dates occur. This
potential oversupply of uncontracted rigs is greater in the jack-up market than it is in the
floater market. However, the majority of the floaters on order are dynamically-positioned drilling
units, which further increases competition with our fleet in certain circumstances, depending on
customer requirements.
We can provide no assurance that our current backlog of contract drilling revenue will be
ultimately realized.
As of the date of this report, our contract drilling backlog was approximately $8.5 billion
for contracted future work extending, in some cases, until 2016. Generally, contract backlog only
includes future earnings under firm commitments; however, from time to time, we may report
anticipated commitments for which definitive agreements have not yet been executed. We can provide
no assurance that we will be able to perform under these contracts due to events beyond our control
or that we will be able to ultimately execute a definitive agreement in cases where one does not
currently exist. In addition, we can provide no assurance that our customers will be able to or
willing to fulfill their contractual commitments to us. Our inability to perform under our
contractual obligations or to execute definitive agreements or our customers inability to fulfill
their contractual commitments to us may have a material adverse effect on our financial position,
results of operations and cash flows. See Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Overview Contract Drilling Backlog included in Item 7 of
this report.
We rely heavily on a relatively small number of customers and the loss of a significant customer
and/or a dispute that leads to the loss of a customer could have a material adverse impact on our
financial results.
We provide offshore drilling services to a customer base that includes major and independent
oil and gas companies and government-owned oil companies. However, the number of potential
customers has decreased in recent years as a result of mergers among the major international oil
companies and large independent oil companies. In 2009, our five largest customers in the
aggregate accounted for 41% of our consolidated revenues. We expect Petrobras, who accounted for
approximately 15% of our consolidated revenues in 2009, to continue to be a significant customer in
2010. While it is normal for our customer base to change over time as work programs are completed,
the loss of any major customer may have a material adverse effect on our financial position,
results of operations and cash flows.
The terms of our drilling contracts may limit our ability to attain profitability in a declining
market or to benefit from increasing dayrates in an improving market.
The duration of offshore drilling contracts is generally determined by customer requirements
and, to a lesser extent, the respective management strategies of the offshore drilling contractors.
In periods of decreasing demand for offshore rigs, drilling contractors generally prefer longer
term contracts, but often at flat or slightly lower dayrates, to preserve dayrates at existing
levels and ensure utilization, while customers prefer shorter contracts that allow them to more
quickly obtain the benefit of lower dayrates. Conversely, in periods of rising demand for offshore
rigs, contractors typically prefer shorter contracts that allow them to more quickly profit from
increasing dayrates. In contrast, during these periods customers with reasonably definite drilling
programs typically prefer longer term contracts to maintain dayrate prices at a consistent level.
An inability to obtain longer term contracts in a declining market or to fully benefit from
increasing dayrates in an improving market through shorter term contracts may limit our
profitability.
Contracts for our drilling units are generally fixed dayrate contracts, and increases in our
operating costs could adversely affect our profitability on those contracts.
Our contracts for our drilling units provide for the payment of a fixed dayrate per rig
operating day, although some contracts do provide for a limited escalation in dayrate due to
increased operating costs incurred by us. Many of our operating costs, such as labor costs, are
unpredictable and fluctuate based on events beyond our control. The gross margin that we realize
on these fixed dayrate contracts will fluctuate based on variations in our operating costs over the
terms of the contracts. In addition, for contracts with dayrate escalation clauses, we may not be
able to fully recover increased or unforeseen costs from our customers. Our inability to recover
these increased or unforeseen costs from our customers could adversely affect our financial
position, results of operations and cash flows.
10
Table of Contents
Our drilling contracts may be terminated due to events beyond our control.
Our customers may terminate some of our term drilling contracts if the drilling unit is
destroyed or lost or if we have to suspend drilling operations for a specified period of time as a
result of a breakdown of major equipment or, in some cases, due to other events beyond the control
of either party. In addition, some of our drilling contracts permit the customer to terminate the
contract after specified notice periods by tendering contractually specified termination amounts.
These termination payments may not fully compensate us for the loss of a contract. In addition,
the early termination of a contract may result in a rig being idle for an extended period of time,
which could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. During
periods of depressed market conditions, we may be subject to an increased risk of our customers
seeking to repudiate their contracts. Our customers ability to perform their obligations under
drilling contracts with us may also be adversely affected by restricted credit markets and the
economic downturn. If our customers cancel some of their contracts, and we are unable to secure
new contracts on a timely basis and on substantially similar terms, or if contracts are suspended
for an extended period of time or if a number of our contracts are renegotiated, it could adversely
affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Our business involves numerous operating hazards, and we are not fully insured against all of them.
Our operations are subject to the usual hazards inherent in drilling for oil and gas offshore,
such as blowouts, reservoir damage, loss of production, loss of well control, punchthroughs,
craterings, fires and natural disasters such as hurricanes. The occurrence of these events could
result in the suspension of drilling operations, damage to or destruction of the equipment involved
and injury or death to rig personnel, damage to producing or potentially productive oil and gas
formations and environmental damage, and could have a material adverse effect on our results of
operations and financial condition. Operations also may be suspended because of machinery
breakdowns, abnormal drilling conditions, failure of subcontractors to perform or supply goods or
services or personnel shortages. In addition, offshore drilling operators are subject to perils
peculiar to marine operations, including capsizing, grounding, collision and loss or damage from
severe weather, and we do not typically retain loss-of-hire insurance policies to cover our rigs.
Damage to the environment could also result from our operations, particularly through oil spillage
or extensive uncontrolled fires. Pollution and environmental risks generally are not fully
insurable. We may also be subject to damage claims by oil and gas companies or other parties.
Our insurance policies and contractual rights to indemnity may not adequately cover our
losses, or may have exclusions of coverage for some losses. We do not have insurance coverage or
rights to indemnity for all risks, including, among other things, liability risk for certain
amounts of excess coverage and certain physical damage risk. If a significant accident or other
event occurs and is not fully covered by insurance or contractual indemnity, it could adversely
affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. There can be no assurance that
we will continue to carry the insurance we currently maintain or that those parties with
contractual obligations to indemnify us will necessarily be financially able to indemnify us
against all these risks. In addition, no assurance can be made that we will be able to maintain
adequate insurance in the future at rates we consider to be reasonable or that we will be able to
obtain insurance against some risks.
We have elected to self-insure for physical damage to rigs and equipment caused by named windstorms
in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico.
Because the amount of insurance coverage available to us has been limited, and the cost for
such coverage has increased substantially, we have elected to self-insure for physical damage to
rigs and equipment caused by named windstorms in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. This results in a higher
risk of losses, which could be material, that are not covered by third party insurance contracts.
If one or more named windstorms in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico cause significant damage to our rigs or
equipment, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations
or cash flows.
A significant portion of our operations are conducted outside the United States and involve
additional risks not associated with domestic operations.
We operate in various regions throughout the world which may expose us to political and other
uncertainties, including risks of:
| terrorist acts, war and civil disturbances; |
11
Table of Contents
| piracy or assaults on property or personnel; | ||
| kidnapping of personnel; | ||
| expropriation of property or equipment; | ||
| renegotiation or nullification of existing contracts; | ||
| changing political conditions; | ||
| foreign and domestic monetary policies; | ||
| the inability to repatriate income or capital; | ||
| difficulties in collecting accounts receivable and longer collection periods; | ||
| fluctuations in currency exchange rates; | ||
| regulatory or financial requirements to comply with foreign bureaucratic actions; | ||
| travel limitations or operational problems caused by public health threats; and | ||
| changing taxation policies. |
We are subject to the U.S. Treasury Departments Office of Foreign Assets Control and other
U.S. laws and regulations governing our international operations. In addition, international
contract drilling operations are subject to various laws and regulations in countries in which we
operate, including laws and regulations relating to:
| the equipping and operation of drilling units; | ||
| import-export quotas or other trade barriers; | ||
| repatriation of foreign earnings; | ||
| oil and gas exploration and development; | ||
| taxation of offshore earnings and earnings of expatriate personnel; and | ||
| use and compensation of local employees and suppliers by foreign contractors. |
Some foreign governments favor or effectively require the awarding of drilling contracts to
local contractors, require use of a local agent or require foreign contractors to employ citizens
of, or purchase supplies from, a particular jurisdiction. These practices may adversely affect our
ability to compete in those regions. It is difficult to predict what governmental regulations may
be enacted in the future that could adversely affect the international drilling industry. The
actions of foreign governments may adversely affect our ability to compete.
As of the date of this report, the greatest concentration of our operating assets outside the
United States was offshore Brazil, where we had 12 rigs in our fleet either currently working or
contracted to work during 2010.
Our drilling contracts offshore Mexico expose us to greater risks than we normally assume.
We currently operate, and expect to continue to operate, our drilling rigs offshore Mexico for
PEMEX Exploración Y Producción, or PEMEX, the national oil company of Mexico. The terms of these
contracts expose us to greater risks than we normally assume, such as exposure to greater
environmental liability. In addition, each contract can be terminated by PEMEX on 30 days notice,
contractually or by statute, subject to certain conditions. While we believe that the financial
terms of these contracts and our operating safeguards in place mitigate these risks, we can provide
no assurance that the increased risk exposure will not have a negative impact on our future
operations or financial results.
Fluctuations in exchange rates and nonconvertibility of currencies could result in losses to us.
Due to our international operations, we have experienced currency exchange losses where
revenues are received and expenses are paid in nonconvertible currencies or where we do
not effectively hedge an exposure to a foreign currency. We may also incur losses as a result of
an inability to collect revenues 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. We can provide no assurance that financial hedging arrangements will effectively hedge
any foreign currency fluctuation losses that may arise.
Changes in laws, effective income tax rates or adverse outcomes resulting from examination of our
tax returns could adversely affect our financial results.
Tax laws and regulations are highly complex and subject to interpretation and disputes. We
conduct our worldwide operations through various subsidiaries and operating structures in a number
of different jurisdictions. We are subject to the tax laws, tax regulations and income tax
treaties within and between the countries in which we
12
Table of Contents
operate as well as countries in which we may be resident. We determine our income tax expense
based on our interpretation of the applicable tax laws and regulations in effect in each
jurisdiction for the period during which we operate and earn income. Our overall effective tax rate
could be adversely and suddenly affected by lower than anticipated earnings in countries where we
have lower statutory rates and higher than anticipated earnings in countries where we have higher
statutory rates, by changes in the valuation of our deferred tax assets and liabilities or by
changes in tax law, tax treaties, regulations, accounting principles or interpretations thereof in
one or more countries in which we operate.
Our income tax returns are subject to review and examination. We do not recognize the benefit
of income tax positions we believe are more likely than not to be disallowed upon challenge by a
tax authority. If any tax authority successfully challenges our operational structure, intercompany
pricing policies or the taxable presence of our key subsidiaries in certain countries; or if the
terms of certain income tax treaties are interpreted in a manner that is adverse to our structure;
or if we lose a material tax dispute in any country, our effective tax rate on our worldwide
earnings could increase substantially and our earnings and cash flows from operations could be
materially adversely affected.
We may be required to accrue additional tax liability on certain of our foreign earnings.
Certain of our international rigs are owned and operated, directly or indirectly, by Diamond
Offshore International Limited, or DOIL, our wholly-owned Cayman Islands subsidiary. Since forming
this subsidiary it has been our intention to indefinitely reinvest the earnings of this subsidiary
to finance foreign operations. During 2007, DOIL made a non-recurring distribution to its U.S.
parent company, and we recognized U.S. federal income tax expense on the portion of the
distribution that consisted of earnings of the subsidiary that had not previously been subjected to
U.S. federal income tax. Notwithstanding the non-recurring distribution made in December 2007, it
remains our intention to indefinitely reinvest the future earnings of DOIL to finance foreign
activities, except for the earnings of Diamond East Asia Limited, or DEAL, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of DOIL formed in December 2008. It is our intention to repatriate the earnings of
DEAL, and U.S. income taxes will be provided on such earnings. We do not expect to provide for
U.S. taxes on any future earnings generated by DOIL, except to the extent that these earnings are
immediately subjected to U.S. federal income tax or as they relate to DEAL. Should a future
distribution be made from any unremitted earnings of this subsidiary, we may be required to record
additional U.S. income taxes that, if material, could have an adverse effect on our financial
position, results of operations and cash flows.
Future acts of terrorism and other political and military events could adversely affect the markets
for our drilling services.
Terrorist acts and political events around the world have resulted in military actions in
Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as related political and economic unrest in various parts of the
world. Future terrorist attacks and the continued threat of terrorism in the U.S. or abroad, the
continuation or escalation of existing armed hostilities or the outbreak of additional hostilities
could lead to increased political, economic and financial market instability and a downturn in the
economies of the U.S. and other countries. A lower level of economic activity could result in a
decline in energy consumption or an increase in the volatility of energy prices, either of which
could adversely affect the market for our offshore drilling services, our dayrates or utilization
and, accordingly, our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, it
has been reported that terrorists might target domestic energy facilities. While we take steps that
we believe are appropriate to increase the security of our energy assets, there is no assurance
that we can completely secure these assets, completely protect them against a terrorist attack or
obtain adequate insurance coverage for terrorist acts at reasonable rates. Moreover, U.S.
government regulations may effectively preclude us from actively engaging in business activities in
certain countries. These regulations could be amended to cover countries where we currently
operate or where we may wish to operate in the future.
Public health threats could have a material adverse effect on our operations and financial results.
Public health threats such as outbreaks of highly communicable diseases, which periodically
occur in various parts of the world in which we operate, could adversely impact our operations, the
operations of our customers and the global economy, including the worldwide demand for oil and
natural gas and the level of demand for our services. Any quarantine of personnel or inability to
access our offices or rigs could adversely affect our operations. Travel restrictions or
operational problems in any part of the world in which we operate, or any reduction in the demand
for drilling services caused by public health threats in the future, may have a material adverse
effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
13
Table of Contents
We may be subject to litigation that could have an adverse effect on us.
We are, from time to time, involved in various litigation matters. These matters may include,
among other things, contract disputes, personal injury claims, environmental claims or proceedings,
asbestos and other toxic tort claims, employment and tax matters and other litigation that arises
in the ordinary course of our business. Although we intend to defend these matters vigorously, we
cannot predict with certainty the outcome or effect of any claim or other litigation matter, and
there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome of any litigation. Litigation may have an
adverse effect on us because of potential adverse outcomes, defense costs, the diversion of our
managements resources and other factors.
Governmental laws and regulations may add to our costs or limit our drilling activity.
Our operations are affected from time to time in varying degrees by governmental laws and
regulations. The drilling industry is dependent on demand for services from the oil and gas
exploration industry and, accordingly, is affected by changing tax and other laws relating to the
energy business generally. We may be required to make significant capital expenditures to comply
with governmental laws and regulations. It is also possible that these laws and regulations may in
the future add significantly to our operating costs or may significantly limit drilling activity.
Governments in some foreign countries are increasingly active in regulating and controlling
the ownership of concessions, the exploration for oil and gas and other aspects of the oil and gas
industries. The modification of existing laws or regulations or the adoption of new laws or
regulations curtailing exploratory or developmental drilling for oil and gas for economic,
environmental or other reasons could materially and adversely affect our operations by limiting
drilling opportunities.
As awareness of climate change issues increases, governments around the world are beginning to
address the matter. This may result in new environmental regulations that may unfavorably impact
us, our suppliers and our customers. We may be exposed to risks related to new laws or regulations
pertaining to climate change, carbon emissions or energy use that could decrease the use of oil or
natural gas, thus reducing demand for hydrocarbon-based fuel and our drilling services.
Governments may also pass laws or regulations encouraging or mandating the use of alternative
energy sources, such as wind power and solar energy, which may reduce demand for oil and natural
gas and our drilling services. In addition, new laws or regulations may require an increase in our
capital spending for additional equipment to comply with such requirements and could also result in
a reduction in revenues associated with downtime required to install such equipment.
The Minerals Management Service of the U.S. Department of the Interior, or MMS, has
established guidelines for drilling operations in the GOM. We believe that we are currently in
compliance with the existing regulations set forth by the MMS with respect to our operations in the
GOM; however, these regulations are continually under review by the MMS and may change from time to
time. Implementation of additional MMS regulations may subject us to increased costs of operating,
or a reduction in the area and/or periods of operation, in the GOM.
Compliance with or breach of environmental laws can be costly and could limit our operations.
In the United States and in many of the international locations in which we operate,
regulations controlling the discharge of materials into the environment, requiring removal and
cleanup of materials that may harm the environment or otherwise relating to the protection of the
environment apply to some of our operations. For example, we, as an operator of mobile offshore
drilling units in navigable United States waters and some offshore areas, may be liable for damages
and costs incurred in connection with oil spills related to those operations. Laws and regulations
protecting the environment have become increasingly 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 that person. 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 United States Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA 90, and similar legislation enacted in
Texas, Louisiana and other coastal states, addresses oil spill prevention and control and
significantly expands liability exposure across all segments of the oil and gas industry. OPA 90
and such similar legislation and related regulations impose a variety of obligations on us related
to the prevention of oil spills and liability for damages resulting from such spills. OPA 90
imposes strict and, with limited exceptions, joint and several liability upon each responsible
party for oil removal costs and a variety of public and private damages.
14
Table of Contents
The application of these requirements or the adoption of new requirements could have a
material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Failure to obtain and retain highly skilled personnel could hurt our operations.
We require highly skilled personnel to operate and provide technical services and support for
our business. To the extent that demand for drilling services and the size of the worldwide
industry fleet increase (including the impact of newly constructed rigs), shortages of qualified
personnel could arise, creating upward pressure on wages and difficulty in staffing and servicing
our rigs, which could adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, the entrance of
new participants into the offshore drilling market would cause further competition for qualified
and experienced personnel as these entities seek to hire personnel with expertise in the offshore
drilling industry. The heightened competition for skilled personnel could adversely impact our
financial position, results of operations and cash flows by limiting our operations or further
increasing our costs.
Although we have paid special cash dividends in the past, we may not pay special cash dividends in
the future and we can give no assurance as to the amount or timing of the payment of any future
special cash dividends.
We have adopted a policy to consider paying special cash dividends, in amounts to be
determined, on a quarterly basis. Any determination to declare a special cash dividend, as well as
the amount of any special cash dividend which may be declared, will be based on our financial
position, earnings, earnings outlook, capital spending plans and other factors that our Board of
Directors considers relevant at that time. Moreover, our dividend policy may change from time to
time. We cannot assure you that we will continue to declare any special cash dividends at all or
in any particular amounts. If in the future we pay special cash dividends less frequently or in
smaller amounts, or cease to pay any special cash dividends, it could have a negative effect on the
market price of our common stock. See Market for the Registrants Common Equity, Related
Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Dividend Policy included in Item 5
of this report and Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Sources of Liquidity and Capital Resources and Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Historical Cash Flows included in Item 7 of
this report.
Rig conversions, upgrades or new-builds may be subject to delays and cost overruns.
From time to time we may undertake to add new capacity through conversions or upgrades to our
existing rigs or through new construction. Projects of this type are subject to risks of delay or
cost overruns inherent in any large construction project resulting from numerous factors, including
the following:
| shortages of equipment, materials or skilled labor; | ||
| work stoppages; | ||
| unscheduled delays in the delivery of ordered materials and equipment; | ||
| unanticipated cost increases; | ||
| weather interferences; | ||
| difficulties in obtaining necessary permits or in meeting permit conditions; | ||
| design and engineering problems; | ||
| customer acceptance delays; | ||
| shipyard failures or unavailability; and | ||
| failure or delay of third party service providers and labor disputes. |
Failure to complete a rig upgrade or new construction on time, or failure to complete a rig
conversion or new construction in accordance with its design specifications may, in some
circumstances, result in the delay, renegotiation or cancellation of a drilling contract, resulting
in a loss of revenue to us. If a drilling contract is terminated under these circumstances, we may
not be able to secure a replacement contract with equally favorable terms.
Our debt levels may limit our liquidity and flexibility in obtaining additional financing and in
pursuing other business opportunities.
As of December 31, 2009, we had $1.5 billion in long-term debt. Our ability to meet our debt
service
15
Table of Contents
obligations is dependent upon our future performance, which is subject to general economic
conditions, industry cycles and financial, business and other factors affecting our operations,
many of which are beyond our control. Our debt levels and the terms of our indebtedness may limit
our liquidity and flexibility in obtaining additional financing and pursuing other business
opportunities. In addition, our overall debt level and/or market conditions could lead the credit
rating agencies to lower our corporate credit ratings. A downgrade in our corporate credit ratings
could impact our ability to issue additional debt by raising the cost of issuing new debt. As a
consequence, we may not be able to issue additional debt in amounts and/or with terms that we
consider to be reasonable. This could limit our ability to pursue other business opportunities.
We are controlled by a single stockholder, which could result in potential conflicts of interest.
Loews Corporation, which we refer to as Loews, beneficially owned approximately 50.4% of our
outstanding shares of common stock as of February 19, 2010 and is in a position to control actions
that require the consent of stockholders, including the election of directors, amendment of our
Restated Certificate of Incorporation and any merger or sale of substantially all of our assets. In
addition, three officers of Loews serve on our Board of Directors. One of those, James S. Tisch,
the Chairman of the Board of our company, is also the Chief Executive Officer and a director of
Loews. We have also entered into a services agreement and a registration rights agreement with
Loews and we may in the future enter into other agreements with Loews.
Loews and its subsidiaries and we are generally engaged in businesses sufficiently different
from each other as to make conflicts as to possible corporate opportunities unlikely. However, it
is possible that Loews may in some circumstances be in direct or indirect competition with us,
including competition with respect to certain business strategies and transactions that we may
propose to undertake. In addition, potential conflicts of interest exist or could arise in the
future for our directors who are also officers of Loews with respect to a number of areas relating
to the past and ongoing relationships of Loews and us, including tax and insurance matters,
financial commitments and sales of common stock pursuant to registration rights or otherwise.
Although the affected directors may abstain from voting on matters in which our interests and those
of Loews are in conflict so as to avoid potential violations of their fiduciary duties to
stockholders, the presence of potential or actual conflicts could affect the process or outcome of
Board deliberations. We cannot assure you that these conflicts of interest will not materially
adversely affect us.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.
Not applicable.
Item 2. Properties.
We own an eight-story office building containing approximately 182,000-net rentable square
feet on approximately 6.2 acres of land located in Houston, Texas, where our corporate headquarters
are located, two buildings totaling 39,000 square feet and 20 acres of land in New Iberia,
Louisiana, for our offshore drilling warehouse and storage facility, a 13,000-square foot building
and five acres of land in Aberdeen, Scotland, for our North Sea operations and two buildings
totaling 65,000 square feet and 11 acres of land in Macae, Brazil, for our South American
operations. Additionally, we currently lease various office, warehouse and storage facilities in
Louisiana, Australia, Brazil, Indonesia, Norway, The Netherlands, Malaysia, Singapore, Egypt,
Angola, Vietnam and Mexico to support our offshore drilling operations.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
Not applicable.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
Not applicable.
16
Table of Contents
Executive Officers of the Registrant
We have included information on our executive officers in Part I of this report in reliance on
General Instruction G(3) to Form 10-K. Our executive officers are elected annually by our Board of
Directors to serve until the next annual meeting of our Board of Directors, or until their
successors are duly elected and qualified, or until their earlier death, resignation,
disqualification or removal from office. Information with respect to our executive officers is set
forth below.
Age as of | ||||||
Name | January 31, 2010 | Position | ||||
Lawrence R. Dickerson
|
57 | President, Chief Executive Officer and Director | ||||
John M. Vecchio
|
59 | Executive Vice President | ||||
Gary T. Krenek
|
51 | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | ||||
William C. Long
|
43 | Senior Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary | ||||
Beth G. Gordon
|
54 | Controller Chief Accounting Officer | ||||
Lyndol L. Dew
|
55 | Senior Vice President Worldwide Operations | ||||
Robert G. Blair
|
58 | Senior Vice President Contracts & Marketing |
Lawrence R. Dickerson has served as our President and a Director since March 1998 and as our
Chief Executive Officer since June 2008. Mr. Dickerson served as our Chief Operating Officer from
March 1998 to June 2008. Mr. Dickerson served on the United States Commission on Ocean Policy from
2001 to 2004.
John M. Vecchio has served as Executive Vice President since August 2009. Mr. Vecchio
previously served as our Senior Vice President Technical Services from April 2002 to July 2009.
Gary T. Krenek has served as a Senior Vice President and our Chief Financial Officer since
October 2006. Mr. Krenek previously served as our Vice President and Chief Financial Officer since
March 1998.
William C. Long has served as a Senior Vice President and our General Counsel and Secretary
since October 2006. Mr. Long previously served as our Vice President, General Counsel and
Secretary since March 2001 and as our General Counsel and Secretary from March 1999 through
February 2001.
Beth G. Gordon has served as our Controller and Chief Accounting Officer since April 2000.
Lyndol L. Dew has served as a Senior Vice President since September 2006. Previously, Mr. Dew
served as our Vice President International Operations from January 2006 to August 2006 and as our
Vice President North American Operations from January 2003 to December 2005.
Robert G. Blair has served as a Senior Vice President since July 2009. Mr. Blair previously
served as our Vice President Contracts & Marketing North & South America from November 1999 to
June 2009.
17
Table of Contents
PART II
Item 5. | Market for the Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities. |
Price Range of Common Stock
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, or NYSE, under the symbol DO.
The following table sets forth, for the calendar quarters indicated, the high and low closing
prices of our common stock as reported by the NYSE.
Common Stock | ||||||||
High | Low | |||||||
2009 |
||||||||
First Quarter |
$ | 71.41 | $ | 54.29 | ||||
Second Quarter |
92.57 | 63.59 | ||||||
Third Quarter |
96.85 | 76.21 | ||||||
Fourth Quarter |
107.01 | 92.45 | ||||||
2008 |
||||||||
First Quarter |
$ | 140.07 | $ | 106.91 | ||||
Second Quarter |
145.68 | 117.70 | ||||||
Third Quarter |
139.70 | 98.63 | ||||||
Fourth Quarter |
100.35 | 55.45 |
As
of February 19, 2010 there were approximately 218 holders of record of our common stock.
This number represents registered shareholders and does not include shareholders who hold their
shares institutionally.
Dividend Policy
In 2009, we paid regular cash dividends of $0.125 per share of our common stock on March 2,
June 1, September 1 and December 1. We also paid special cash dividends in 2009 of $1.875 per
share of our common stock on March 2, June 1, September 1 and December 1. In 2008, we paid regular
cash dividends of $0.125 per share of our common stock on March 3, June 2, September 1 and December
1. We also paid special cash dividends in 2008 of $1.25 per share of our common stock on March 3,
June 2 and September 1 and $1.875 per share of our common stock on December 1.
On February 3, 2010, we declared a regular cash dividend and a special cash dividend of $0.125
and $1.875, respectively, per share of our common stock. Both the regular and special cash
dividends are payable on March 1, 2010 to stockholders of record on February 12, 2010.
We have adopted a policy to consider paying special cash dividends, in amounts to be
determined, on a quarterly basis. Any determination to declare a special cash dividend, as well as
the amount of any special cash dividend which may be declared, will be based on our financial
position, earnings, earnings outlook, capital spending plans and other factors that our Board of
Directors considers relevant at that time.
18
Table of Contents
CUMULATIVE TOTAL STOCKHOLDER RETURN
The following graph shows the cumulative total stockholder return for our common stock, the
Standard & Poors 500 Index and a Peer Group Index over the five year period ended December 31,
2009.
Comparison of 2005 2009 Cumulative Total Return (1)
Dec. 31, | Dec. 31, | Dec. 31, | Dec. 31, | Dec. 31, | Dec. 31, | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Diamond Offshore |
100 | 175 | 206 | 392 | 172 | 318 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
S&P 500 |
100 | 105 | 121 | 128 | 81 | 102 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peer Group (2) |
100 | 147 | 156 | 212 | 86 | 148 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(1) | Total return assuming reinvestment of dividends. Assumes $100 invested on December 31, 2004 in our common stock, the S&P 500 Index and a peer group index comprised of a group of other companies in the contract drilling industry. |
Our dividend history for the periods reported above is as follows:
Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Year | Regular | Special | Regular | Special | Regular | Special | Regular | Special | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009
|
$ | 0.125 | $ | 1.875 | $ | 0.125 | $ | 1.875 | $ | 0.125 | $ | 1.875 | $ | 0.125 | $ | 1.875 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2008
|
$ | 0.125 | $ | 1.25 | $ | 0.125 | $ | 1.25 | $ | 0.125 | $ | 1.25 | $ | 0.125 | $ | 1.875 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2007
|
$ | 0.125 | $ | 4.00 | $ | 0.125 | | $ | 0.125 | | $ | 0.125 | $ | 1.25 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2006
|
$ | 0.125 | $ | 1.50 | $ | 0.125 | | $ | 0.125 | | $ | 0.125 | | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2005
|
$ | 0.063 | | $ | 0.063 | | $ | 0.125 | | $ | 0.125 | | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(2) | The peer group is comprised of the following companies: ENSCO International Incorporated, Noble Drilling Corporation, Pride International, Inc., Rowan Companies, Inc. and Transocean Inc. Total return calculations were weighted according to the respective companys market capitalization. |
19
Table of Contents
Item 6. | Selected Financial Data. |
The following table sets forth certain historical consolidated financial data relating to
Diamond Offshore. We prepared the selected consolidated financial data from our consolidated
financial statements as of and for the periods presented. The selected consolidated financial data
below should be read in conjunction with Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations in Item 7 and our Consolidated Financial Statements (including
the Notes thereto) in Item 8 of this report. Historical data for the four annual periods ending on
or prior to December 31, 2008 have been restated to reflect the effect thereon of the adoption on
January 1, 2009 of an accounting standard that requires all convertible debt securities that may be
settled by the issuer fully or partially in cash to be separated into a debt and an equity
component. The bifurcation requirement applies to both newly issued debt and debt issuances
outstanding for any time during the accounting periods for which financial statements are presented
and has been applied retrospectively to all past periods presented below. See Note 1 General
Information to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this report.
As of and for the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
2008 | 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | |||||||||||||||||
2009 | Adjusted | Adjusted | Adjusted | Adjusted | ||||||||||||||||
(In thousands, except per share and ratio data) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Income Statement Data: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenues |
$ | 3,631,284 | $ | 3,544,057 | $ | 2,567,723 | $ | 2,052,572 | $ | 1,221,002 | ||||||||||
Operating income |
1,903,213 | 1,910,194 | 1,223,044 | 940,029 | 373,996 | |||||||||||||||
Net income |
1,376,219 | 1,310,547 | 844,464 | 699,088 | 243,293 | |||||||||||||||
Net income per share: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Basic |
9.90 | 9.43 | 6.13 | 5.41 | 1.89 | |||||||||||||||
Diluted |
9.89 | 9.42 | 6.11 | 5.14 | 1.88 | |||||||||||||||
Balance Sheet Data: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Drilling and other property and
equipment, net |
$ | 4,432,052 | $ | 3,414,373 | $ | 3,056,300 | $ | 2,644,392 | $ | 2,313,207 | ||||||||||
Total assets |
6,264,261 | 4,954,431 | 4,357,702 | 4,148,006 | 3,616,921 | |||||||||||||||
Long-term debt (excluding current
maturities) (1) |
1,495,375 | 503,280 | 503,071 | 931,937 | 927,811 | |||||||||||||||
Other Financial Data: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Capital expenditures |
$ | 1,362,468 | $ | 666,857 | $ | 647,877 | $ | 556,392 | $ | 294,388 | ||||||||||
Cash dividends declared per share |
8.00 | 6.13 | 5.75 | 2.00 | 0.375 | |||||||||||||||
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (2) |
37.29 | x | 64.54 | x | 31.16 | x | 19.03 | x | 5.74 | x |
(1) | See Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Sources of Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity and Capital Requirements in Item 7 and Note 10 Long-Term Debt to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this report for a discussion of changes in our long-term debt. | |
(2) | For all periods presented, the ratio of earnings to fixed charges has been computed on a total enterprise basis. Earnings represent pre-tax income from continuing operations plus fixed charges. Fixed charges include (i) interest, whether expensed or capitalized, (ii) amortization of debt issuance costs, whether expensed or capitalized, and (iii) a portion of rent expense, which we believe represents the interest factor attributable to rent. |
20
Table of Contents
Item 7. | Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. |
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial
Statements (including the Notes thereto) in Item 8 of this report.
We provide contract drilling services to the energy industry around the globe and are a leader
in offshore drilling. Our fleet of 47 offshore drilling rigs consists of 32 semisubmersibles, 14
jack-ups and one drillship.
Overview
Industry Conditions
The global economy remained weak in the fourth quarter of 2009 and into the first quarter of
2010 and energy prices continued to be volatile. Given the unpredictable economic environment, the
demand for our services and the dayrates we were able to command for new contracts softened. This
volatility and uncertainty could continue until the global economy improves. Absent global
economic improvement the decline in drilling activity could be further exacerbated by the influx of
new-build rigs over the next several years, particularly in regard to jack-up units.
We have experienced negative effects of the current market such as customer credit problems,
customers attempting to renegotiate or terminate contracts, one customer seeking bankruptcy
protection, a further slowing in the pace of new contracting activity, declines in dayrates for new
contracts, declines in utilization and the stacking of idle equipment. Nevertheless, during 2009,
we added new commitments to our contract backlog. We entered 2010 with a contract backlog
approaching $8.5 billion, which we expect to help mitigate the impact of the current market on us
in 2010.
Floaters
Approximately 81% of the time on our intermediate and high-specification floater rigs is
committed for 2010. Additionally, 55% of the time on our floating rigs is committed in 2011.
International Jack-ups
The industrys jack-up market is divided between an international sector and a U.S. sector,
with the international sector historically characterized by contracts of longer duration and higher
prices, compared to the generally shorter term and lower priced domestic sector. However, in 2009
demand and dayrates softened internationally as existing rigs rolled off contract and met
competition from un-contracted new-build jack-ups that came to market. It is expected that this
oversupply of jack-up rigs will have an increasingly negative impact on the international sector
during 2010 and beyond.
GOM Jack-ups
In the domestic jack-up sector, lower natural gas prices have negatively impacted both demand
and dayrates. In response, to reduce costs, we have cold-stacked three of our lower-end jack-up
units, and they are not being actively marketed. Our four remaining higher-specification jack-ups
in the GOM are largely working under short-term contracts. Absent a sustained improvement in
energy prices, weakness in the GOM jack-up market is likely to continue in 2010, with the
possibility of additional rigs being cold-stacked by the industry in an effort to help bring
equipment supply and demand into equilibrium.
Contract Drilling Backlog
The following table reflects our contract drilling backlog as of February 1, 2010, October 22,
2009 (the date reported in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
2009) and February 5, 2009 (the date reported in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008). The October 2009 period includes both firm commitments (typically represented
by signed contracts), as well as previously-disclosed letters of intent, or LOIs, where indicated.
An LOI is subject to customary conditions, including the execution of a definitive agreement, and
as such may not result in a binding contract. Contract drilling backlog is calculated by
multiplying the contracted operating dayrate by the firm contract period and adding one-half of any
potential rig performance bonuses. Our calculation also assumes full utilization of our drilling
equipment for the contract period (excluding scheduled shipyard and survey days); however, the
amount of actual revenue earned and the actual
21
Table of Contents
periods during which revenues are earned will be different than the amounts and periods shown
in the tables below due to various factors. Utilization rates, which generally approach 95-98%
during contracted periods, can be adversely impacted by downtime due to various operating factors
including, but not limited to, weather conditions and unscheduled repairs and maintenance.
Contract drilling backlog excludes revenues for mobilization, demobilization, contract preparation
and customer reimbursables. No revenue is generally earned during periods of downtime for
regulatory surveys. Changes in our contract drilling backlog between periods are a function of the
performance of work on term contracts, as well as the extension or modification of existing term
contracts and the execution of additional contracts.
February 1, | October 22, | February 5, | ||||||||||
2010(1) (2) | 2009(3) | 2009 | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Contract Drilling Backlog |
||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters (1) (3) |
$ | 4,177,000 | $ | 4,450,000 | $ | 4,448,000 | ||||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles (2) |
4,030,000 | 4,061,000 | 5,985,000 | |||||||||
Jack-ups |
249,000 | 249,000 | 421,000 | |||||||||
Total |
$ | 8,456,000 | $ | 8,760,000 | $ | 10,854,000 | ||||||
(1) | Contract drilling backlog as of February 1, 2010 for our high-specification floaters includes $1.3 billion attributable to our expected operations offshore Brazil for the years 2010 to 2016. | |
(2) | Contract drilling backlog as of February 1, 2010 for our intermediate semisubmersibles includes $2.9 billion attributable to our expected operations offshore Brazil for the years 2010 to 2015. | |
(3) | Contract drilling backlog as of October 22, 2009 included an aggregate $124.1 million in contract drilling revenue related to future work for one of our high-specification floaters for which a definitive agreement was subsequently reached. |
The following table reflects the amount of our contract drilling backlog by year as of
February 1, 2010.
For the Years Ending December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 2016 | ||||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Contract Drilling Backlog |
||||||||||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters (1) |
$ | 4,177,000 | $ | 1,536,000 | $ | 1,245,000 | $ | 570,000 | $ | 826,000 | ||||||||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles (2) |
4,030,000 | 1,393,000 | 1,026,000 | 860,000 | 751,000 | |||||||||||||||
Jack-ups |
249,000 | 210,000 | 39,000 | | | |||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 8,456,000 | $ | 3,139,000 | $ | 2,310,000 | $ | 1,430,000 | $ | 1,577,000 | ||||||||||
(1) | Contract drilling backlog as of February 1, 2010 for our high-specification floaters includes $374.0 million, $294.0 million and $135.0 million for the years 2010, 2011 and 2012, respectively, and $476.0 million in the aggregate for the years 2013 to 2016, attributable to our expected operations offshore Brazil. | |
(2) | Contract drilling backlog as of February 1, 2010 for our intermediate semisubmersibles includes $715.0 million, $788.0 million and $732.0 million for the years 2010, 2011 and 2012, respectively, and $698.0 million in the aggregate for the years 2013 to 2015, attributable to our expected operations offshore Brazil. |
The following table reflects the percentage of rig days committed by year as of February 1,
2010. The percentage of rig days committed is calculated as the ratio of total days committed
under contracts, as well as scheduled shipyard, survey and mobilization days for all rigs in our
fleet, to total available days (number of rigs multiplied by the number of days in a particular
year). Total available days have been calculated based on the expected final commissioning date
for the Ocean Valor.
For the Years Ending December 31, | ||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 2016 | |||||||||||||
Rig Days Committed (1) |
||||||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters |
84 | % | 57 | % | 27 | % | 10 | % | ||||||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles |
78 | % | 54 | % | 44 | % | 10 | % | ||||||||
Jack-ups |
42 | % | 6 | % | | |
(1) | Includes approximately 970 and 80 scheduled shipyard, survey and mobilization days for 2010 and 2011, respectively. |
22
Table of Contents
Casualty Loss
In September 2008, the jack-up rig Ocean Tower sustained significant damage during Hurricane
Ike, which impacted the Gulf of Mexico and the upper Texas and Louisiana Gulf coasts. The Ocean
Tower lost its derrick, drill floor and drill floor equipment during the hurricane. During the
third quarter of 2008, we wrote off the approximately $2.6 million net book value of the derrick,
drill floor and drill floor equipment for the Ocean Tower and accrued $3.7 million in estimated
salvage costs for the recovery of equipment from the ocean floor. The aggregate amount of these
items was reflected in Casualty Loss in our Consolidated Statements of Operations for the year
ended December 31, 2008 included in Item 8 of this report.
In December 2008, we entered into an agreement to sell the Ocean Tower and transferred the
$32.2 million net book value of the rig to Assets held for sale in our Consolidated Balance
Sheets included in Item 8 of this report. The sale of the Ocean Tower was completed on October 26,
2009, and we recognized a $6.7 million gain on the sale which has been presented as Gain on
disposition of assets in our Consolidated Statements of Operations for the year ended December 31,
2009 included in Item 8 of this report. The agreement prohibited the competitive use of the rig,
which is expected to be deployed by the purchaser as an accommodation unit.
General
The two most significant variables affecting our revenues are dayrates for rigs and rig
utilization rates, each of which is a function of rig supply and demand in the marketplace. Demand
for drilling services is dependent upon the level of expenditures set by oil and gas companies for
offshore exploration and development, as well as a variety of political and economic factors. The
availability of rigs in a particular geographical region also affects both dayrates and utilization
rates. These factors are not within our control and are difficult to predict.
Demand affects the number of days our fleet is utilized and the dayrates earned. As
utilization rates increase, dayrates tend to increase as well, reflecting the lower supply of
available rigs. Conversely, as utilization rates decrease, dayrates tend to decrease as well,
reflecting the excess supply of rigs. When a rig is idle, no dayrate is earned and revenues will
decrease as a result. Revenues can also be affected as a result of the acquisition or disposal of
rigs, required surveys and shipyard upgrades. In order to improve utilization or realize higher
dayrates, we may mobilize our rigs from one market to another. However, during periods of
mobilization, revenues may be adversely affected. As a response to changes in demand, we may
withdraw a rig from the market by stacking it or may reactivate a rig stacked previously, which may
decrease or increase revenues, respectively.
We recognize revenue from dayrate drilling contracts as services are performed. In connection
with such drilling contracts, we may receive fees (either lump-sum or dayrate) for the mobilization
of equipment. We earn these fees as services are performed over the initial term of the related
drilling contracts. We defer mobilization fees received, as well as direct and incremental
mobilization costs incurred, and amortize each, on a straight-line basis, over the term of the
related drilling contracts (which is the period we estimate to be benefited from the mobilization
activity). Straight-line amortization of mobilization revenues and related costs over the term of
the related drilling contracts (which generally range from two to 60 months) is consistent with the
timing of net cash flows generated from the actual drilling services performed. Absent a contract,
mobilization costs are recognized currently.
From time to time, we may receive fees from our customers for capital improvements to our rigs
(either lump-sum or dayrate). We defer such fees and recognize them into income on a straight-line
basis over the period of the related drilling contract as a component of contract drilling revenue.
We capitalize the costs of such capital improvements and depreciate them over the estimated useful
life of the improvement.
We receive reimbursements for the purchase of supplies, equipment, personnel services and
other services provided at the request of our customers in accordance with a contract or agreement.
We record these reimbursements at the gross amount billed to the customer, as Revenues related to
reimbursable expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Operations included in Item 8 of this
report.
Operating Income. Our operating income is primarily affected by revenue factors, but is also
a function of varying levels of operating expenses. Our operating expenses represent all direct
and indirect costs associated with the operation and maintenance of our drilling equipment. The
principal components of our operating costs are, among other things, direct and indirect costs of
labor and benefits, repairs and maintenance, freight, regulatory inspections, boat and helicopter
rentals and insurance. Labor and repair and maintenance costs represent the most
23
Table of Contents
significant components of our operating expenses. In general, our labor costs increase
primarily due to higher salary levels, rig staffing requirements and costs associated with labor
regulations in the geographic regions in which our rigs operate.
Costs to repair and maintain our equipment fluctuate depending upon the type of activity the
drilling unit is performing, as well as the age and condition of the equipment and the regions in
which our rigs are working.
Operating expenses generally are not affected by changes in dayrates, and short-term
reductions in utilization do not necessarily result in lower operating expenses. For instance, if
a rig is to be idle for a short period of time, few decreases in operating expenses may actually
occur since the rig is typically maintained in a prepared or ready-stacked state with a full
crew. In addition, when a rig is idle, we are responsible for certain operating expenses such as
rig fuel and supply boat costs, which are typically costs of the operator when a rig is under
contract. However, if the rig is to be idle for an extended period of time, we may reduce the size
of a rigs crew and take steps to cold stack the rig, which lowers expenses and partially offsets
the impact on operating income. We recognize, as incurred, operating expenses related to
activities such as inspections, painting projects and routine overhauls that meet certain criteria
and which maintain rather than upgrade our rigs. These expenses vary from period to period. Costs
of rig enhancements are capitalized and depreciated over the expected useful lives of the
enhancements. Higher depreciation expense decreases operating income in periods following capital
upgrades.
For 2010, we expect depreciation expense to increase approximately $26.6 million compared to
2009, due to the 2009 acquisitions of the Ocean Courage and Ocean Valor. See Sources of
Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity and Capital Requirements Capital Expenditures.
Periods of high, sustained utilization may result in cost increases for maintenance and
repairs in order to maintain our equipment in proper, working order. In addition, during periods
of high activity and dayrates, higher prices generally pervade the entire offshore drilling
industry and its support businesses, which causes our costs for goods and services to increase.
Our operating income is negatively impacted when we perform certain regulatory inspections,
which we refer to as a 5-year survey, or special survey, that are due every five years for each of
our rigs. Operating revenue decreases because these surveys are performed during scheduled
downtime in a shipyard. Operating expenses increase as a result of these surveys due to the cost
to mobilize the rigs to a shipyard, inspection costs incurred and repair and maintenance costs.
Repair and maintenance costs may be required resulting from the survey or may have been previously
planned to take place during this mandatory downtime. The number of rigs undergoing a 5-year
survey will vary from year to year, as well as from quarter to quarter.
In addition, operating income may be negatively impacted by intermediate surveys, which are
performed at interim periods between 5-year surveys. Intermediate surveys are generally less
extensive in duration and scope than a 5-year survey. Although an intermediate survey may require
some downtime for the drilling rig, it normally does not require dry-docking or shipyard time,
except for rigs located in the U.K. and Norwegian sectors of the North Sea.
During 2010, five of our rigs will require 5-year surveys, and we expect that they will be out
of service for approximately 320 days in the aggregate. We also expect to spend an additional
approximately 730 days during 2010 for intermediate surveys, the mobilization of rigs,
commissioning and contract acceptance testing and extended maintenance projects. We can provide no
assurance as to the exact timing and/or duration of downtime associated with regulatory
inspections, planned rig mobilizations and other shipyard projects. See Overview Contract
Drilling Backlog.
We are self-insured for physical damage to rigs and equipment caused by named windstorms in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. If a named windstorm in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico causes significant damage
to our rigs or equipment, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial position,
results of operations or cash flows. However, under our current insurance policy that expires on
May 1, 2010, we continue to carry physical damage insurance for certain losses other than those
caused by named windstorms in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, for which our deductible for physical damage
is $25.0 million per occurrence.
Construction and Capital Upgrade Projects. We capitalize interest cost for the construction
and upgrade of qualifying assets in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
U.S., or GAAP. The period of interest capitalization covers the duration of the activities
required to make the asset ready for its intended use, and
24
Table of Contents
the capitalization period ends when the asset is substantially complete and ready for its
intended use. For the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, we capitalized interest of $16.9
million and $19.3 million, respectively, on qualifying expenditures related to the upgrades of the
Ocean Endeavor and Ocean Monarch for ultra-deepwater service and the construction of two jack-up
rigs, the Ocean Shield and Ocean Scepter, through the date of each projects completion. The
upgrades of the Ocean Endeavor and Ocean Monarch were completed in March 2007 and December 2008,
respectively. Construction of the Ocean Shield and Ocean Scepter was completed in May 2008 and
August 2008, respectively. We did not capitalize interest on any qualifying assets during 2009.
Interest Expense. We expect interest expense in 2010 to increase approximately $32.5 million
compared to 2009 as a result of our issuance of $500.0 million in aggregate principal amount of
5.70% Senior Notes due 2039, or 5.70% Senior Notes, in October 2009 and $500.0 million aggregate
principal amount of 5.875% Senior Notes due 2019, or 5.875% Senior Notes, in May 2009. See
Sources of Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity and Capital Requirements 5.70% Senior
Notes and Sources of Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity and Capital Requirements
5.875% Senior Notes. Also see Note 10 Long-Term Debt to our Consolidated Financial Statements
in Item 8 of this report.
Critical Accounting Estimates
Our significant accounting policies are included in Note 1 General Information to our
Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this report. Judgments, assumptions and estimates
by our management are inherent in the preparation of our financial statements and the application
of our significant accounting policies. We believe that our most critical accounting estimates are
as follows:
Property, Plant and Equipment. We carry our drilling and other property and equipment at
cost. Maintenance and routine repairs are charged to income currently while replacements and
betterments, which meet certain criteria, are capitalized. Depreciation is amortized up to
applicable salvage values by applying the straight-line method over the remaining estimated useful
lives. Our management makes judgments, assumptions and estimates regarding capitalization, useful
lives and salvage values. Changes in these judgments, assumptions and estimates could produce
results that differ from those reported.
We evaluate our property and equipment for impairment whenever changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable (such as the cold-stacking a
rig or excess spending over budget on a new-build or major rig upgrade). We utilize a
probability-weighted cash flow analysis in testing an asset for potential impairment. Our
assumptions and estimates underlying this analysis include the following:
| dayrate by rig; |
| utilization rate by rig (expressed as the actual percentage of time per year that the rig would be used); |
| the per day operating cost for each rig if active, ready-stacked or cold-stacked; and |
| salvage value for each rig. |
Based on these assumptions and estimates, we develop a matrix by assigning probabilities to
various combinations of assumed utilization rates and dayrates. We also consider the impact of a
5% reduction in assumed dayrates for the cold-stacked rigs (holding all other assumptions and
estimates in the model constant), or alternatively the impact of a 5% reduction in utilization
(again holding all other assumptions and estimates in the model constant) as part of our analysis.
As of December 31, 2009, we had cold-stacked our three mat-supported jack-up rigs and were in
the process of cold-stacking an intermediate semisubmersible drilling rig in Malaysia. We
performed an impairment review for each of these rigs using the methodology described above. Based
on our analyses, we have concluded that these four rigs were not subject to impairment at December
31, 2009.
At December 31, 2009, the remaining rigs in our fleet were currently working under contract,
mobilizing to new locations or being actively marketed. We do not believe that current
circumstances indicate that there was an impairment of these 43 rigs at December 31, 2009.
Managements assumptions are an inherent part of our asset impairment evaluation and the use
of different assumptions could produce results that differ from those reported.
25
Table of Contents
Personal Injury Claims. Our deductible for liability coverage for personal injury claims,
which primarily result from Jones Act liability in the Gulf of Mexico, is $5.0 million per
occurrence, with no aggregate deductible. The Jones Act is a federal law that permits seamen to
seek compensation for certain injuries during the course of their employment on a vessel and
governs the liability of vessel operators and marine employers for the work-related injury or death
of an employee. We estimate our aggregate reserve for personal injury claims based on our
historical losses and utilizing various actuarial models.
The eventual settlement or adjudication of these claims could differ materially from our
estimated amounts due to uncertainties such as:
| the severity of personal injuries claimed; | ||
| significant changes in the volume of personal injury claims; | ||
| the unpredictability of legal jurisdictions where the claims will ultimately be litigated; | ||
| inconsistent court decisions; and | ||
| the risks and lack of predictability inherent in personal injury litigation. |
Income Taxes. We account for income taxes in accordance with accounting standards that
require the recognition of the amount of taxes payable or refundable for the current year and an
asset and liability approach in recognizing the amount of deferred tax liabilities and assets for
the future tax consequences of events that have been currently recognized in our financial
statements or tax returns. In each of our tax jurisdictions we recognize a current tax liability
or asset for the estimated taxes payable or refundable on tax returns for the current year and a
deferred tax asset or liability for the estimated future tax effects attributable to temporary
differences and carryforwards. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance, if
necessary, which is determined by the amount of any tax benefits that, based on available evidence,
are not expected to be realized under a more likely than not approach. We do not establish
deferred tax liabilities for certain of our foreign earnings that we intend to indefinitely
reinvest to finance foreign activities. However, if these earnings become subject to U.S. federal
tax, any required provision could have a material impact on our financial results. We make
judgments regarding future events and related estimates especially as they pertain to the
forecasting of our effective tax rate, the potential realization of deferred tax assets such as
utilization of foreign tax credits, and exposure to the disallowance of items deducted on tax
returns upon audit.
We record interest related to accrued unrecognized tax positions in interest expense and
recognize penalties associated with uncertain tax positions in our tax expense.
26
Table of Contents
Results of Operations
Although we perform contract drilling services with different types of drilling rigs and in
many geographic locations, there is a similarity of economic characteristics among all our
divisions and locations, including the nature of services provided and the type of customers for
our services. We believe that the combination of our drilling rigs into one reportable segment is
the appropriate aggregation in accordance with applicable accounting standards on segment
reporting. However, for purposes of this discussion and analysis of our results of operations, we
provide greater detail with respect to the types of rigs in our fleet and the geographic regions in
which they operate to enhance the readers understanding of our financial condition, changes in
financial condition and results of operations.
Years Ended December 31, 2009 and 2008
Comparative data relating to our revenue and operating expenses by equipment type are listed
below.
Year Ended | ||||||||||||
December 31, | Favorable/ | |||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING REVENUE |
||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters |
$ | 1,380,771 | $ | 1,322,125 | $ | 58,646 | ||||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles |
1,698,584 | 1,629,358 | 69,226 | |||||||||
Jack-ups |
457,224 | 524,934 | (67,710 | ) | ||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Revenue |
$ | 3,536,579 | $ | 3,476,417 | $ | 60,162 | ||||||
Revenues Related to Reimbursable Expenses |
$ | 94,705 | $ | 67,640 | $ | 27,065 | ||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters |
$ | 407,203 | $ | 367,531 | $ | (39,672 | ) | |||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles |
557,634 | 581,161 | 23,527 | |||||||||
Jack-ups |
235,924 | 224,365 | (11,559 | ) | ||||||||
Other |
23,010 | 11,950 | (11,060 | ) | ||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Expense |
$ | 1,223,771 | $ | 1,185,007 | $ | (38,764 | ) | |||||
Reimbursable Expenses |
$ | 93,097 | $ | 65,895 | $ | (27,202 | ) | |||||
OPERATING INCOME |
||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters |
$ | 973,568 | $ | 954,594 | $ | 18,974 | ||||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles |
1,140,950 | 1,048,197 | 92,753 | |||||||||
Jack-ups |
221,300 | 300,569 | (79,269 | ) | ||||||||
Other |
(23,010 | ) | (11,950 | ) | (11,060 | ) | ||||||
Reimbursable expenses, net |
1,608 | 1,745 | (137 | ) | ||||||||
Depreciation |
(346,446 | ) | (287,417 | ) | (59,029 | ) | ||||||
General and administrative expense |
(62,913 | ) | (60,142 | ) | (2,771 | ) | ||||||
Bad debt expense |
(9,746 | ) | (31,952 | ) | 22,206 | |||||||
Casualty loss |
| (6,281 | ) | 6,281 | ||||||||
Gain on disposition of assets |
7,902 | 2,831 | 5,071 | |||||||||
Total Operating Income |
$ | 1,903,213 | $ | 1,910,194 | $ | (6,981 | ) | |||||
Other income (expense): |
||||||||||||
Interest income |
4,497 | 11,744 | (7,247 | ) | ||||||||
Interest expense |
(49,610 | ) | (10,096 | ) | (39,514 | ) | ||||||
Foreign currency transaction gain (loss) |
11,483 | (65,566 | ) | 77,049 | ||||||||
Other, net |
(1,152 | ) | 770 | (1,922 | ) | |||||||
Income before income tax expense |
1,868,431 | 1,847,046 | 21,385 | |||||||||
Income tax expense |
(492,212 | ) | (536,499 | ) | 44,287 | |||||||
NET INCOME |
$ | 1,376,219 | $ | 1,310,547 | $ | 65,672 | ||||||
27
Table of Contents
Operating income in 2009 decreased $7.0 million, or less than 1%, compared to 2008.
During 2009, our contracted revenue backlog allowed us to partially mitigate the impact of the
global economic recession on our business. Despite the downturn in the market, our contract
drilling revenues increased $60.2 million in 2009 compared to 2008. The Ocean Monarch, which began
service in mid-March 2009 after completing a major upgrade, generated revenues of $124.5 million
during 2009. Our two new-build jack-up rigs, the Ocean Shield and Ocean Scepter, contributed
additional revenues of $90.1 million during 2009 compared to 2008. However, our operating results
were negatively impacted by ready-stacking of the Ocean Star, Ocean Victory, Ocean Guardian and
Ocean Scepter for extended periods and the cold stacking of our three mat-supported GOM jack-up
rigs. The Ocean Bounty completed its contract offshore Australia in the third quarter of 2009 and
is currently being prepared for cold-stacking in Malaysia. In addition, the international jack-up
market, which had remained strong throughout the majority of 2008, continued to be affected by
softening demand and reduced dayrates during 2009.
Total contract drilling expenses in 2009 increased $38.8 million, or 3% compared to 2008.
Operating costs during 2009 include normal operating costs for the upgraded Ocean Monarch and a
full year of operating costs for our two new-build jack-ups.
Depreciation expense increased $59.0 million to $346.4 million during 2009, or 21% compared to
2008, due to a higher depreciable asset base for 2009. Depreciation expense for 2009 included
depreciation associated with our capital additions in 2008 and 2009, including the Ocean Shield,
Ocean Scepter and Ocean Monarch, which were all placed in service at various times during 2008.
Depreciation expense for 2009 also included depreciation of the newly acquired Ocean Courage. See
Sources of Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity and Capital Requirements Capital
Expenditures.
High-Specification Floaters.
Year Ended | ||||||||||||
December 31, | Favorable/ | |||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
HIGH-SPECIFICATION FLOATERS: |
||||||||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING REVENUE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 943,024 | $ | 1,051,178 | $ | (108,154 | ) | |||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
153,757 | 69,419 | 84,338 | |||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
66,156 | | 66,156 | |||||||||
South America |
217,834 | 201,528 | 16,306 | |||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Revenue |
$ | 1,380,771 | $ | 1,322,125 | $ | 58,646 | ||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 250,025 | $ | 223,954 | $ | (26,071 | ) | |||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
34,144 | 35,079 | 935 | |||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
14,037 | | (14,037 | ) | ||||||||
South America |
108,997 | 108,498 | (499 | ) | ||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Expense |
$ | 407,203 | $ | 367,531 | $ | (39,672 | ) | |||||
OPERATING INCOME |
$ | 973,568 | $ | 954,594 | $ | 18,974 | ||||||
GOM. Revenues generated by our high-specification floaters operating in the GOM
decreased $108.2 million during 2009 compared to 2008. Excluding the Ocean Monarch, our GOM fleet
had approximately 700 fewer rig operating days in 2009, compared to the prior year, resulting in a
$283.7 million reduction in revenues generated by the fleet in 2009. The decrease in utilization
is attributable to incremental downtime associated with contract preparation activities and
subsequent relocation out of the GOM of two of our high-specification floaters, the Ocean Quest (to
Brazil late in the first quarter of 2009) and the Ocean Valiant (to Angola during the third quarter
of 2009) and scheduled surveys and related repairs. In addition, two of our rigs were ready
stacked for a total of 245 days in 2009 compared to zero ready-stack days in 2008.
Average operating revenue per day for our high-specification floaters in this market
(excluding the Ocean Monarch) increased to $417,100 in 2009 compared to $394,100 in 2008, resulting
in the generation of additional revenues of $51.1 million.
28
Table of Contents
Operating costs for our high-specification floaters in the GOM increased by $26.1 million in
2009 compared to 2008 to $250.0 million. The overall increase in operating costs in 2009 was
primarily due to higher survey, repair and mobilization costs associated with a special survey for
the Ocean America. These cost increases were partially offset by lower operating costs in the
region for the Ocean Quest and Ocean Valiant, which we relocated to Brazil and Angola,
respectively.
The Ocean Monarch, which began operating in the GOM late in the first quarter of 2009,
generated revenues and incurred operating expenses, including the amortization of deferred
mobilization costs, of $124.5 million and $28.1 million, respectively.
Australia/Asia/Middle East. During 2009, our high-specification rig operating offshore
Malaysia, the Ocean Rover, generated $84.3 million in additional revenues compared to 2008
primarily due to an increase in average operating revenue per day from $237,200 during 2008 to
$433,700 during 2009 ($69.7 million). Utilization increased in 2009 compared to 2008, when the rig
had 67 days of scheduled downtime for a special survey and related repairs, resulting in the
generation of $14.6 million in incremental revenues.
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean. The Ocean Valiant began operating offshore Angola in the third
quarter of 2009 and generated revenues and incurred operating expenses of $66.2 million and $14.0
million, respectively.
South America. Revenues earned by our high-specification floaters operating offshore Brazil
in 2009 increased $16.3 million compared to 2008. The Ocean Quest, which we relocated from the GOM
late in the first quarter of 2009, generated additional revenues in 2009 of $90.3 million compared
to 2008. Increased utilization in 2009 of the Ocean Clipper, which experienced significant
downtime during 2008 for a survey and unplanned repairs to its propulsion system, generated
incremental revenues of $17.3 million compared to 2008. However, total revenues generated in the
region were negatively impacted by a decline in average operating revenue per day for the Ocean
Alliance from $443,600 in 2008 to $187,200 in 2009, resulting in an $84.8 million reduction in
revenues.
Contract drilling expense for our operations in Brazil increased slightly in 2009 by $0.5
million compared to 2008, primarily due to the inclusion of normal operating costs for the Ocean
Quest partially offset by a reduction in costs attributable to a 2008 survey of the Ocean Clipper
and repairs to its propulsion system.
Intermediate Semisubmersibles.
Year Ended | ||||||||||||
December 31, | Favorable/ | |||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
INTERMEDIATE SEMISUBMERSIBLES: |
||||||||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING REVENUE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 132,195 | $ | 134,880 | $ | (2,685 | ) | |||||
Mexico |
217,628 | 220,754 | (3,126 | ) | ||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
423,117 | 395,124 | 27,993 | |||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
481,944 | 518,382 | (36,438 | ) | ||||||||
South America |
443,700 | 360,218 | 83,482 | |||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Revenue |
$ | 1,698,584 | $ | 1,629,358 | $ | 69,226 | ||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 32,184 | $ | 44,902 | $ | 12,718 | ||||||
Mexico |
46,769 | 54,187 | 7,418 | |||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
119,674 | 141,170 | 21,496 | |||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
137,542 | 167,786 | 30,244 | |||||||||
South America |
221,465 | 173,116 | (48,349 | ) | ||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Expense |
$ | 557,634 | $ | 581,161 | $ | 23,527 | ||||||
OPERATING INCOME |
$ | 1,140,950 | $ | 1,048,197 | $ | 92,753 | ||||||
29
Table of Contents
GOM. Revenues generated by our intermediate semisubmersible fleet operating in the GOM
in 2009 decreased $2.7 million compared to 2008. The decrease in revenues is primarily due to a
decrease in operating dayrate earned by the Ocean Saratoga in 2009 compared to 2008 ($20.8
million). The Ocean Ambassador, which relocated to the GOM from Mexico in the second quarter of
2008, earned incremental revenues of $18.9 million in the GOM in 2009 prior to its relocation to
the Brazil market late in the second quarter of 2009.
During 2008, we had three rigs at various times either operating or undergoing surveys or
shipyard projects in the GOM compared with only two rigs operating in the GOM for all or part of
2009. The decrease in the number of rigs in the GOM between 2008 and 2009, combined with the
absence of survey-related costs in 2009, resulted in a $12.7 million reduction in operating costs
in the region compared to the prior year.
Mexico. Revenues generated and contract drilling expense incurred by our intermediate
semisubmersibles operating offshore Mexico decreased $3.1 million and $7.4 million, respectively,
during 2009 compared to 2008, primarily due to the relocation of the Ocean Ambassador to the GOM,
which resulted in a reduction in 2009 revenues and operating expenses of $13.2 million and $8.0
million, respectively. The decline in 2009 revenues was partially offset by an increase in average
operating revenue per day in 2009 compared to 2008 for both of our intermediate semisubmersibles
operating for PEMEX as a result of an unfavorable reserve for disputed downtime recorded in
December 2008.
Australia/Asia/Middle East. Operating revenue for our intermediate semisubmersibles working
in the Australia/Asia/Middle East region increased $28.0 million in 2009 compared to 2008. An
increase in average operating revenue per day from $306,600 in 2008 to $333,700 in 2009 generated
additional revenues of $41.6 million in 2009.
Average utilization of our intermediate semisubmersible fleet in the region remained constant
at 87% for both 2008 and 2009; however, downtime incurred in 2009, combined with reduced dayrates
earned by the individual rigs, resulted in a $9.1 million reduction in 2009 revenues compared to
2008. The Ocean Bounty was stacked after completion of its contract offshore Australia at the
beginning of the third quarter of 2009, resulting in a $40.6 million reduction in revenues compared
to 2008. The negative impact on revenues from stacking the Ocean Bounty was partially offset by an
increase in rig operating days for the Ocean Patriot and Ocean General that resulted in the
generation of $34.6 million in incremental revenues during 2009.
Contract drilling expense for the Australia/Asia/Middle East region decreased $21.5 million in
2009 compared to 2008, primarily due to the absence of costs associated with the 2008 special
surveys of the Ocean Patriot and Ocean General and reduced costs for the Ocean Bounty, which
completed drilling operations offshore Australia in July 2009.
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean. Operating revenue for our intermediate semisubmersibles working
in the Europe/Africa/Mediterranean region decreased $36.4 million in 2009 compared to 2008. Our
North Sea fleet (both U.K. and Norwegian sectors) generated $14.8 million less in revenues in 2009
compared to 2008 due to 129 fewer rig operating days in 2009 compared to 2008. Rig operating days
decreased in 2009 as a result of the early termination of a drilling contract for the Ocean Nomad
and intermittent work for the Ocean Guardian prior to its departure for the Falkland Islands,
partially offset by reduced downtime for the Ocean Princess, which completed its 2008 special
survey in early 2009. The impact of the reduction in rig operating days was partially offset by an
increase in average operating revenue per day for our North Sea fleet from $321,200 in 2008 to
$344,000 in 2009.
The Ocean Lexington operated offshore Egypt during 2008 through August 2009, and in September
2009, the rig was mobilized to a shipyard in Cadiz, Spain for contract preparation activities in
connection with a contract offshore Brazil. Revenues generated by the Ocean Lexington in 2009
decreased $21.6 million compared to 2008 due to 103 fewer rig operating days in 2009, partially
offset by higher average operating revenue per day earned in 2009 as compared to the prior year.
At December 31, 2009, the Ocean Lexington was en route to Brazil.
Contract drilling expense for our intermediate semisubmersible rigs operating in the
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean markets decreased $30.2 million in 2009 compared to 2008, primarily due
to lower labor and personnel related costs for our rigs operating in the North Sea, including the
reversal of a previously recorded reserve for paid time off for our U.K. national employees, and
reduced costs associated with regulatory surveys due to fewer rigs undergoing surveys in 2009 than
in 2008. In addition, operating costs in this region decreased as a result of the relocation of
the Ocean Lexington to a Spanish shipyard in September 2009.
30
Table of Contents
South America. Revenues generated by our intermediate semisubmersibles working in the South
American region increased $83.5 million in 2009 compared to 2008. At December 31, 2009, we had
seven intermediate semisubmersible rigs operating offshore Brazil and another rig, the intermediate
semisubmersible Ocean Lexington, undergoing contract modification activities and mobilizing to
Brazil. During 2009, our Brazilian intermediate semisubmersible fleet logged 1,996 rig operating
days and earned average operating revenue per day of $217,400 compared to 1,425 rig operating days
and average operating revenue per day of $177,600 in 2008. This increase in rig operating days and
average operating revenue per day for our operations offshore Brazil combined to generate
additional revenues of $185.4 million in 2009 compared to 2008. During 2008, the Ocean Worker
earned $101.9 million operating offshore Trinidad and Tobago prior to mobilizing to Brazil in the
third quarter of 2008. The Ocean Worker did not begin drilling operations offshore Brazil until
March 2009.
Contract drilling expense for our intermediate semisubmersibles operating in the South
American region increased $48.3 million in 2009 compared to 2008. The increase in costs in the
South American region reflects the increase in number of rigs in the region, including higher
maintenance and other costs associated with customer acceptance testing and the amortization of
costs associated with the mobilization of our rigs into the region, shorebase support costs and
revenue-based agency fees. In addition, the increased operating costs reflect higher freight and
customs charges that are inherent in operations in the region.
Jack-Ups.
Year Ended | ||||||||||||
December 31, | Favorable/ | |||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
JACK-UPS: |
||||||||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING REVENUE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 63,016 | $ | 189,500 | $ | (126,484 | ) | |||||
Mexico |
105,431 | 105,055 | 376 | |||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
140,783 | 92,596 | 48,187 | |||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
93,080 | 115,652 | (22,572 | ) | ||||||||
South America |
54,914 | 22,131 | 32,783 | |||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Revenue |
$ | 457,224 | $ | 524,934 | $ | (67,710 | ) | |||||
CONTRACT DRILLING EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 72,454 | $ | 99,533 | $ | 27,079 | ||||||
Mexico |
38,209 | 33,303 | (4,906 | ) | ||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
50,097 | 42,184 | (7,913 | ) | ||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
38,896 | 35,058 | (3,838 | ) | ||||||||
South America |
36,268 | 14,287 | (21,981 | ) | ||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Expense |
$ | 235,924 | $ | 224,365 | $ | (11,559 | ) | |||||
OPERATING INCOME |
$ | 221,300 | $ | 300,569 | $ | (79,269 | ) | |||||
GOM. Revenue generated by our jack-up rigs operating in the GOM decreased $126.5 million
during 2009 compared to 2008. Average utilization decreased from 91% in 2008 to 39% in 2009 due to
a decrease in demand for rigs in the GOM, and resulted in a $90.9 million decrease in revenues.
Our jack-up fleet in the GOM had 1,011 ready- and cold-stacked days during 2009 compared to 22
ready-stacked days in 2008. In addition, we relocated the Ocean Summit to Mexico for a contract
with PEMEX at the beginning of the third quarter of 2009. The Ocean Tower, prior to being taken
out of service due to damage sustained in a hurricane in the third quarter of 2008, generated
revenues of $34.3 million in 2008.
As a result of the depressed GOM market, in 2009 we elected to cold stack and no longer
actively market our three mat-supported jack-ups in this region.
31
Table of Contents
Contract drilling expense for our jack-ups operating in the GOM decreased $27.1 million in
2009 compared to 2008, primarily due to significantly reduced operating costs for the Ocean Tower
(prior to its sale in October 2009) and our three cold-stacked rigs. The decline in operating
costs was partially offset by 2009 survey and repair costs for the Ocean Titan and Ocean Summit and
demobilization costs for the Ocean Columbia associated with its relocation from Mexico to the GOM
in the fourth quarter of 2009 for a shipyard project.
Mexico. Revenue and contract drilling expense generated by our jack-up rigs operating in
Mexico increased $0.4 million and $4.9 million, respectively. The relatively stable revenues
generated by our jack-up fleet offshore Mexico reflects incremental revenues generated by the Ocean
Summit beginning in the third quarter of 2009, partly offset by a reduction in revenues generated
by the Ocean Columbia, which completed its contract with PEMEX at the beginning of the fourth
quarter of 2009. Revenues were further reduced, compared to 2008, due to a contract extension for
the Ocean Nugget until 2011, but at a lower dayrate than it previously earned. The increase in
contract drilling expense was primarily due to contract preparations and customer acceptance of the
Ocean Summit, as well as the inclusion of normal operating costs, partially offset by lower
operating costs for the Ocean Columbia due to its relocation to the GOM.
Australia/Asia/Middle East. Revenue generated by our jack-up rigs operating in the
Australia/Asia/Middle East region increased $48.2 million in 2009 compared to 2008, including $57.3
million of incremental revenues earned by the Ocean Shield, which began operating in the region
late in the second quarter of 2008. The Ocean Heritage, which generated $11.8 million in revenues
in 2008, completed its contract offshore Qatar during the first quarter of 2008 and was relocated
to Egypt in late June 2008.
Contract drilling expense in the Australia/Asia/Middle East region increased $7.9 million in
2009 compared to 2008 primarily due to the inclusion of normal operating costs for the Ocean Shield
for a full year in 2009 and costs associated with a survey and shipyard project for the Ocean
Sovereign. The increased costs were partially offset by the absence of operating costs for the
Ocean Heritage in 2009.
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean. Revenues generated by our jack-up rigs operating in the
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean region decreased $22.6 million in 2009 compared to 2008, primarily due
to an $18.2 million reduction in revenues generated by the Ocean Spur in 2009. The Ocean Spur
operated offshore Egypt during both 2009 and 2008; however, average operating revenue per day for
the Ocean Spur decreased to $107,700 in 2009 from $152,700 in 2008, while utilization increased to
nearly 100% in 2009 compared to 91% in 2008. During 2008, we recognized a $6.5 million lump-sum
demobilization fee earned by the Ocean Spur upon completion of its initial contract offshore Egypt.
The $3.8 million increase in operating expense in the region in 2009 compared to 2008 is
primarily attributable to the inclusion of a full year of operating costs in 2009 for the Ocean
Heritage, which relocated from Qatar in the second quarter of 2008.
South America. Our newly constructed jack-up rig, the Ocean Scepter, began operating offshore
Argentina late in the third quarter of 2008. Our operations offshore Argentina generated $54.9
million in revenues and incurred $36.3 million in contract drilling expense during 2009. The Ocean
Scepter completed its contract in July 2009.
Other Contract Drilling Expense.
Other contract drilling expense increased $11.1 million in 2009 compared to 2008 primarily due
to an increase in labor and overhead costs associated with rig-based training and a higher usage of
fleet spare parts and supplies inventories.
Bad Debt Expense.
In December 2008, we recorded a $31.9 million provision for bad debts to reserve the
uncollected balance of one of our customers in the U.K. that had entered into administration (a
U.K. insolvency proceeding similar to U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy). In December 2009, we recorded a
$10.7 million provision for bad debts to reserve a portion of the uncollected balance of
receivables related to our operations in Egypt and recovered $0.9 million associated with the
reserve for bad debts recorded in 2008.
32
Table of Contents
Casualty Loss.
During 2008, we wrote off certain equipment that was damaged during Hurricane Ike, including
the net book value of approximately $2.6 million of the Ocean Towers derrick, drill floor and
related equipment lost in the storm, and we accrued $3.7 million in estimated salvage costs for
recovery of equipment from the ocean floor.
Gain on Disposition of Assets.
Net gain on disposition of assets in 2009 includes a $6.7 million gain on the sale of the
Ocean Tower compared to aggregate net gains of $2.8 million in 2008 on the sale and disposition of
miscellaneous equipment.
Interest Income.
We earned interest income of $4.5 million in 2009 compared to $11.7 million in 2008. The $7.2
million decrease in interest income is primarily the result of lower average interest-bearing cash
balances during 2009 compared to 2008.
Interest Expense.
Interest expense in 2009 and 2008 relates primarily to interest accrued on our outstanding
indebtedness, net of capitalized interest, and our liabilities for uncertain tax positions. During
2009, we incurred interest expense of $19.6 million related to our 5.875% Senior Notes issued in
May 2009 and $6.6 million related to our 5.70% Senior Notes issued in October 2009 partially offset
by a net $3.4 million reduction in accrued interest expense related to uncertain tax positions.
See Income Tax Expense.. During 2008, we capitalized interest of $16.9 million related to
qualifying construction projects and major upgrades that were all completed in 2008. We did not
capitalize interest costs in 2009 as there were no qualifying activities during 2009.
Foreign Currency Transaction Gain (Loss).
Foreign currency transaction gains (losses) include both realized and unrealized gains and
losses from the settlement of and from mark-to-market accounting for our foreign currency forward
exchange, or FOREX, contracts that we have not designated as accounting hedges. Such gains and
losses fluctuate based on the level of transactions in foreign currencies, as well as fluctuations
in such currencies. Prior to May 1, 2009, we did not designate any of our FOREX contracts as
accounting hedges.
During 2009, we recognized net foreign currency exchange gains of $11.5 million, including
$8.9 million realized and unrealized gains on FOREX contracts ($37.3 million in net unrealized
gains from mark-to-market accounting and $28.4 million in net realized losses on settled FOREX
contracts) and net gains of $2.6 million on other foreign currency transactions. During 2008, we
recognized net foreign currency exchange losses of $65.6 million, including $54.0 million in net
losses on FOREX contracts ($37.2 million in net unrealized losses from mark-to-market accounting
and $16.8 million in net realized losses on settlement of FOREX contracts) and other net foreign
currency transaction losses of $11.6 million.
Income Tax Expense.
Our income tax expense is a function of the mix between our domestic and international pre-tax
earnings or losses, respectively, as well as the mix of international tax jurisdictions in which we
operate. We recognized $492.2 million of tax expense on pre-tax income of $1.9 billion for the
year ended December 31, 2009 compared to tax expense of $536.5 million on pre-tax income of $1.8
billion in 2008.
Certain of our international rigs are owned and operated, directly or indirectly, by Diamond
Offshore International Limited, or DOIL, a Cayman Islands subsidiary which we wholly own. Since
forming this subsidiary in 2002, it has been our intention to indefinitely reinvest the earnings of
the subsidiary to finance foreign activities. Consequently, no U.S. federal income taxes are
provided on these earnings except to the extent that such earnings were immediately subject to U.S.
federal income taxes and except for the earnings of Diamond East Asia Limited, or DEAL, a
wholly-owned subsidiary of DOIL formed in December 2008. It is our intention to repatriate the
earnings of DEAL and, accordingly, U.S. income taxes are provided on its earnings. The effective
annual tax rate of 26.3% in 2009 compared favorably to the effective annual tax rate of 29.1% in
2008 primarily because of higher earnings of DOIL in 2009 which were taxed at lower rates.
33
Table of Contents
Our income tax returns are subject to review and examination in the various jurisdictions in
which we operate and we are currently contesting various tax assessments. We accrue for income tax
contingencies, or uncertain tax positions, that we believe are more likely than not exposures. We
recognized expense of $3.3 million and $3.4 million for uncertain tax positions in 2009 and 2008,
respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2009 we recorded a net reduction to interest
expense related to uncertain tax positions of $3.4 million. During the year ended December 31,
2008, we recognized $0.8 million of interest expense related to uncertain tax positions. Penalty
related tax expense for uncertain tax positions during the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008
was $4.7 million and $1.1 million, respectively. On March 31, 2009, the statute of limitations
relative to a 2003 uncertain tax position in Mexico expired. As a consequence, we reversed $5.5
million of previously accrued interest expense and $5.9 million of previously accrued tax expense,
$0.8 million of which had been accrued for penalties. In December 2009 we received an
approximately $26 million assessment from the Brazilian tax authorities for the years 2004 and
2005. We contested the tax assessment in January 2010 and are awaiting the outcome of the appeal.
As required by GAAP, only the portion of the tax benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of
being realized upon settlement is to be recognized. Consequently, we have accrued approximately $7
million of expense attributable to the portion of the tax assessment we determined to be an
uncertain tax position in our 2009 Consolidated Statements of Operations, of which approximately $2
million was interest related and approximately $2 million was penalty related.
34
Table of Contents
Years Ended December 31, 2008 and 2007
Comparative data relating to our revenue and operating expenses by equipment type are listed
below.
Year Ended | ||||||||||||
December 31, | Favorable/ | |||||||||||
2008 | 2007 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING REVENUE |
||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters |
$ | 1,322,125 | $ | 1,030,892 | $ | 291,233 | ||||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles |
1,629,358 | 1,028,667 | 600,691 | |||||||||
Jack-ups |
524,934 | 446,104 | 78,830 | |||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Revenue |
$ | 3,476,417 | $ | 2,505,663 | $ | 970,754 | ||||||
Revenues Related to Reimbursable Expenses |
$ | 67,640 | $ | 62,060 | $ | 5,580 | ||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters |
$ | 367,531 | $ | 318,555 | $ | (48,976 | ) | |||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles |
581,161 | 482,464 | (98,697 | ) | ||||||||
Jack-ups |
224,365 | 183,024 | (41,341 | ) | ||||||||
Other |
11,950 | 19,746 | 7,796 | |||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Expense |
$ | 1,185,007 | $ | 1,003,789 | $ | (181,218 | ) | |||||
Reimbursable Expenses |
$ | 65,895 | $ | 60,261 | $ | (5,634 | ) | |||||
OPERATING INCOME |
||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters |
$ | 954,594 | $ | 712,337 | $ | 242,257 | ||||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles |
1,048,197 | 546,203 | 501,994 | |||||||||
Jack-ups |
300,569 | 263,080 | 37,489 | |||||||||
Other |
(11,950 | ) | (19,746 | ) | 7,796 | |||||||
Reimbursable expenses, net |
1,745 | 1,799 | (54 | ) | ||||||||
Depreciation |
(287,417 | ) | (235,729 | ) | (51,688 | ) | ||||||
General and administrative expense |
(60,142 | ) | (53,483 | ) | (6,659 | ) | ||||||
Bad debt expense |
(31,952 | ) | | (31,952 | ) | |||||||
Casualty loss |
(6,281 | ) | | (6,281 | ) | |||||||
Gain on disposition of assets |
2,831 | 8,583 | (5,752 | ) | ||||||||
Total Operating Income |
$ | 1,910,194 | $ | 1,223,044 | $ | 687,150 | ||||||
Other income (expense): |
||||||||||||
Interest income |
11,744 | 33,566 | (21,822 | ) | ||||||||
Interest expense |
(10,096 | ) | (21,878 | ) | 11,782 | |||||||
Foreign currency transaction gain (loss) |
(65,566 | ) | 2,906 | (68,472 | ) | |||||||
Other, net |
770 | 5,734 | (4,964 | ) | ||||||||
Income before income tax expense |
1,847,046 | 1,243,372 | 603,674 | |||||||||
Income tax expense |
(536,499 | ) | (398,908 | ) | (137,591 | ) | ||||||
NET INCOME |
$ | 1,310,547 | $ | 844,464 | $ | 466,083 | ||||||
Demand was strong for our high-specification floaters and intermediate semisubmersible
rigs in all markets and geographic regions during the first nine months of 2008, however, during
the fourth quarter of 2008, the growing global economic recession became apparent in our industry
and resulted in reduced demand for energy and a significant decline in crude oil prices. Because
of our contracted revenue backlog, however, our results were not greatly impacted by these market
conditions during the fourth quarter of 2008. The high overall utilization and historically high
dayrates for our floater fleet contributed to an overall increase in our revenues of $891.9
million, or 43%, to $3.0 billion in 2008 compared to $2.1 billion in 2007.
Total contract drilling revenues in 2008 increased $970.8 million, or 39% compared to 2007, to
$3.5 billion. Average realized dayrates in 2008 in many of our floater markets increased as our
rigs operated under contracts at higher dayrates than those earned during 2007, which resulted in
the generation of additional contract drilling
revenues. However, overall revenue increases for our floater fleet were negatively impacted
by the effect of
35
Table of Contents
downtime associated with scheduled shipyard projects and mandatory inspections or
surveys. In addition, the GOM jack-up market, which had improved in early 2008 compared to the
prior year, experienced reduced demand and dayrates by the end of 2008. The international jack-up
market, which had been strong throughout the majority of 2008, also began to reflect softening
demand and reduced dayrates by the end of 2008. Our GOM and international jack-up fleets earned
lower dayrates during 2008 compared to 2007 despite a fleet-wide increase in utilization during
2008.
Total contract drilling expense increased $181.2 million, or 18%, in 2008 compared to 2007.
Overall cost increases for maintenance and repairs between the 2008 and 2007 periods reflected the
impact of high, sustained utilization of our drilling units across our fleet, additional survey and
related maintenance costs, contract preparation and mobilization costs, as well as the inclusion of
normal operating costs for the Ocean Endeavor, Ocean Shield and Ocean Scepter. The increase in
overall operating and overhead costs also reflected the impact of higher prices throughout the
offshore drilling industry and its support businesses, including higher costs associated with
hiring and retaining skilled personnel for our worldwide offshore fleet.
Depreciation expense increased $51.7 million to $287.4 million during 2008, or 22% compared to
2007, due to a higher depreciable asset base.
Our results during 2008 were negatively impacted by $54.0 million in losses on foreign
currency forward exchange contracts not designated as accounting hedges included in Foreign
currency transaction gain (loss), a $31.9 million provision for bad debt expense related to one of
our North Sea semisubmersible rigs that was contracted to a U.K. customer that had entered into
administration under U.K. law and the recognition of a casualty loss aggregating $6.3 million in
connection with damages sustained from Hurricane Ike. See Overview Casualty Loss.
High-Specification Floaters.
Year Ended | ||||||||||||
December 31, | Favorable/ | |||||||||||
2008 | 2007 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
HIGH-SPECIFICATION FLOATERS: |
||||||||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING REVENUE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 1,051,178 | $ | 833,751 | $ | 217,427 | ||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
69,419 | 73,004 | (3,585 | ) | ||||||||
South America |
201,528 | 124,137 | 77,391 | |||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Revenue |
$ | 1,322,125 | $ | 1,030,892 | $ | 291,233 | ||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 223,954 | $ | 206,393 | $ | (17,561 | ) | |||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
35,079 | 26,407 | (8,672 | ) | ||||||||
South America |
108,498 | 85,755 | (22,743 | ) | ||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Expense |
$ | 367,531 | $ | 318,555 | $ | (48,976 | ) | |||||
OPERATING INCOME |
$ | 954,594 | $ | 712,337 | $ | 242,257 | ||||||
GOM. Revenues generated by our high-specification floaters operating in the GOM
increased $217.4 million in 2008 compared to 2007, primarily due to higher average dayrates earned
during 2008 ($131.7 million). Average operating revenue per day for our rigs in this market,
excluding the Ocean Endeavor, increased to $413,300 during 2008 compared to $354,400 in 2007.
Excluding the Ocean Endeavor, six of our seven other high-specification semisubmersible rigs in the
GOM were operating at higher dayrates in 2008 than those earned during 2007. The Ocean Endeavor
began operating in the GOM during the third quarter of 2007 and generated additional revenues of
$49.7 million during 2008 compared to 2007.
Average utilization for our high-specification rigs operating in the GOM, excluding the Ocean
Endeavor, increased slightly from 87% in 2007 to 91% in 2008, and generated $36.0 million in
additional revenues in 2008.
The increase in utilization in 2008 was attributable to 88 fewer downtime days during 2008 compared
to 2007 when rigs were down, primarily for regulatory inspections and repairs.
36
Table of Contents
Operating costs during 2008 for our high-specification floaters in the GOM increased $17.6
million to $224.0 million (including $11.3 million in incremental operating expenses for the Ocean
Endeavor) compared to 2007. Operating costs for 2008 reflected higher labor, benefits and other
personnel-related costs, higher maintenance and other project costs and higher property insurance
costs, partially offset by lower mobilization and other inspection related costs for these rigs
compared to 2007.
Australia/Asia/Middle East. Revenues generated by the Ocean Rover, our high-specification rig
operating offshore Malaysia, decreased $3.6 million in 2008 compared to 2007. The revenue decrease
was primarily due to scheduled downtime (67 days) for a survey and maintenance, partially offset by
the effect of a higher average dayrate earned during 2008 compared to 2007.
Contract drilling expenses for the Ocean Rover increased $8.7 million in 2008 compared to 2007
primarily due to costs associated with the rigs 2008 survey and other maintenance and repair costs
and, to a lesser extent, higher labor, benefits and other personnel-related costs.
South America. Revenues earned by our high-specification floaters operating offshore Brazil
during 2008 increased $77.4 million compared to 2007. Average operating revenue per day increased
from $185,300 during 2007 to $339,700 during 2008, and generated additional revenues of $92.3
million. Utilization in 2008 decreased to 81% from 92% in 2007 primarily as the result of 99 days
of incremental unpaid downtime for the Ocean Clipper for a special survey and repairs to its
propulsion system. The decline in utilization reduced revenues by $14.9 million in 2008.
Contract drilling expense for our operations in Brazil increased $22.7 million in 2008
compared to 2007. The increase in costs was primarily due to inspection and repair costs for the
Ocean Clipper and higher revenue-based agency fees and personnel and related costs during 2008, as
compared to 2007.
Intermediate Semisubmersibles.
Year Ended | ||||||||||||
December 31, | Favorable/ | |||||||||||
2008 | 2007 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
INTERMEDIATE SEMISUBMERSIBLES: |
||||||||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING REVENUE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 134,880 | $ | 170,449 | $ | (35,569 | ) | |||||
Mexico |
220,754 | 86,135 | 134,619 | |||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
395,124 | 239,200 | 155,924 | |||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
518,382 | 400,785 | 117,597 | |||||||||
South America |
360,218 | 132,098 | 228,120 | |||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Revenue |
$ | 1,629,358 | $ | 1,028,667 | $ | 600,691 | ||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 44,902 | $ | 79,288 | $ | 34,386 | ||||||
Mexico |
54,187 | 63,711 | 9,524 | |||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
141,170 | 112,641 | (28,529 | ) | ||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
167,786 | 143,555 | (24,231 | ) | ||||||||
South America |
173,116 | 83,269 | (89,847 | ) | ||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Expense |
$ | 581,161 | $ | 482,464 | $ | (98,697 | ) | |||||
OPERATING INCOME |
$ | 1,048,197 | $ | 546,203 | $ | 501,994 | ||||||
GOM. Revenues generated during 2008 by our intermediate semisubmersible fleet operating
in the GOM decreased $35.6 million compared to 2007, primarily as a result of the relocation of
three of our rigs from the GOM
(Ocean Voyager and Ocean New Era to Mexico and Ocean Concord to Brazil) in the fourth quarter of
2007. During 2007, these three rigs generated revenues of $128.9 million while operating in the
GOM.
37
Table of Contents
The negative impact on revenues of the departure of these rigs was partially offset by $65.6
million and $27.8 million in additional revenues generated by the Ocean Saratoga and the Ocean
Ambassador, respectively, during 2008 compared to 2007. The additional contribution by the Ocean
Saratoga was primarily due to the rig operating at a higher dayrate that began in the fourth
quarter of 2007 and increased utilization during 2008 compared to 2007, when the rig was out of
service for 116 days to complete a service life extension project. We relocated the Ocean
Ambassador to the GOM from Mexico during the second quarter of 2008.
Contract drilling expenses in the GOM decreased by $34.4 million during 2008 compared to 2007,
primarily due to the absence of operating costs for the Ocean Voyager, Ocean New Era and Ocean
Concord ($47.9 million) which relocated to other markets during 2007 and costs associated with
shipyard projects for the Ocean Whittington and Ocean Worker ($16.8 million) that were completed in
2007 prior to relocating these rigs to the South America region. The overall decrease in contract
drilling expenses in 2008 was partially offset by the inclusion of normal operating expenses and
special survey costs for the Ocean Ambassador ($21.8 million). Also included in operating expenses
for 2008 was $3.2 million in maintenance and other costs associated with contract preparation
activities for the Ocean Yorktown prior to its mobilization to Brazil in May 2008.
Mexico. Offshore Mexico, three of our intermediate semisubmersible rigs completed their
contracts with PEMEX after the second quarter of 2007 and relocated out of the region. During the
fourth quarter of 2007, we relocated two semisubmersible units, the Ocean New Era and Ocean
Voyager, from the GOM to Mexico. Average operating revenue per day for our rigs working offshore
Mexico increased to $277,900 for 2008 compared to $98,900 per day for 2007 primarily because these
two new rigs in the region worked for PEMEX at dayrates substantially higher than average rates
earned during 2007. Higher dayrates, partially offset by the net reduction in the number of rigs
between periods, generated $134.6 million of additional revenues during 2008 compared to 2007.
Contract drilling expenses for the Mexico region decreased $9.5 million during 2008 compared
to 2007 primarily due to the effect on operating costs of the net reduction of one rig in the
region, partially offset by higher maintenance costs and revenue-based agency fees.
Australia/Asia/Middle East. Our intermediate semisubmersibles working in the
Australia/Asia/Middle East region generated revenues of $395.1 million during 2008 compared to
revenues of $239.2 million in 2007. The $155.9 million increase in operating revenue was primarily
due to an increase in average operating revenue per day from $171,500 during 2007 to $306,600
during 2008, which generated additional revenues of $171.0 million during 2008.
Average utilization in this region decreased to 87% during 2008 from 94% during 2007,
resulting in a $15.1 million reduction in revenues during 2008. The decrease in utilization was
primarily the result of 170 days of scheduled downtime for special surveys and repairs for three of
our rigs in this region during 2008.
Contract drilling expense for the Australia/Asia/Middle East region increased $28.5 million in
2008 compared to 2007, primarily due to inspection and related repair costs associated with special
surveys during 2008. In addition, normal operating costs for the Ocean Patriot were higher during
2008 when the rig operated offshore Australia compared to operating offshore New Zealand during
2007. Operating costs in this region also reflected higher labor and personnel-related costs during
2008 compared to the prior year.
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean. Operating revenue for our intermediate semisubmersibles in the
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean region increased $117.6 million in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due
to higher dayrates earned by our four rigs in the North Sea (both U.K. and Norwegian sectors).
Average operating revenue per day for our North Sea semisubmersibles increased from $211,500 during
2007 to $321,200 during 2008, and contributed $144.7 million in additional revenue in 2008 compared
to the prior year. The increase in revenue was partially offset by the impact of 126 days of
incremental downtime during 2008 primarily associated with surveys of our U.K. rigs. The decrease
in utilization reduced revenues by $27.4 million during 2008 compared to 2007.
Contract drilling expense for our intermediate semisubmersible rigs in the
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean markets increased $24.2 million in 2008 compared to 2007, primarily due
to the inclusion of costs associated with surveys of our rigs operating in the U.K. sector of the
North Sea. In addition, during 2008, all of our rigs in this
market incurred higher overall costs, primarily for labor and benefits and repairs. Operating
costs for 2008 included additional costs for the Ocean Vanguard which operated offshore Ireland for
a portion of 2008.
38
Table of Contents
South America. Revenues generated by our intermediate semisubmersibles working in the South
American region increased $228.1 million during 2008 compared to 2007. During 2008, six of our
rigs operated in the region compared to four rigs during 2007. Following the first quarter of
2007, we relocated the Ocean Whittington and Ocean Concord to Brazil and the Ocean Worker to
Trinidad and Tobago where they generated additional aggregate revenues of $196.2 million in 2008.
The Ocean Yorktown began operating in Brazil during the third quarter of 2008 and generated $30.4
million in revenues.
Operating expenses for our operations in the South American region increased $89.8 million in
2008, compared to 2007, primarily due to the inclusion of normal operating costs for two of the
rigs transferred to this region ($48.1 million) and incremental operating costs for the Ocean
Worker and Ocean Whittington ($38.6 million) which only operated in the South American region for a
portion of 2007. Operating expenses for 2008 also reflected higher labor and other
personnel-related expenses, freight and repair and maintenance costs for our other two
semisubmersible rigs in this market.
Jack-Ups.
Year Ended | ||||||||||||
December 31, | Favorable/ | |||||||||||
2008 | 2007 | (Unfavorable) | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
JACK-UPS: |
||||||||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING REVENUE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 189,500 | $ | 222,276 | $ | (32,776 | ) | |||||
Mexico |
105,055 | 62,451 | 42,604 | |||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
92,596 | 88,497 | 4,099 | |||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
115,652 | 72,880 | 42,772 | |||||||||
South America |
22,131 | | 22,131 | |||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Revenue |
$ | 524,934 | $ | 446,104 | $ | 78,830 | ||||||
CONTRACT DRILLING EXPENSE |
||||||||||||
GOM |
$ | 99,533 | $ | 119,216 | $ | 19,683 | ||||||
Mexico |
33,303 | 16,108 | (17,195 | ) | ||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
42,184 | 28,214 | (13,970 | ) | ||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
35,058 | 19,486 | (15,572 | ) | ||||||||
South America |
14,287 | | (14,287 | ) | ||||||||
Total Contract Drilling Expense |
$ | 224,365 | $ | 183,024 | $ | (41,341 | ) | |||||
OPERATING INCOME |
$ | 300,569 | $ | 263,080 | $ | 37,489 | ||||||
GOM. Revenue generated by our jack-up rigs operating in the GOM decreased $32.8 million
during 2008 compared to 2007, primarily due to the relocation of the Ocean King (Croatia) and the
Ocean Columbia (Mexico) after the second quarter of 2007. These two rigs generated $42.1 million
in revenues while operating in the GOM during 2007. In addition, average operating revenue per
day, excluding the Ocean King and Ocean Columbia, decreased to $80,800 in 2008 from $90,500 during
2007 and resulted in an additional $18.3 million decrease in revenue from the prior year.
Average utilization (excluding the Ocean King and Ocean Columbia) increased from 78% during
2007 to 92% during 2008, resulting in an increase in revenues of $32.5 million. The increase in
utilization was primarily due to an improvement in market conditions in the GOM during 2008
compared to 2007 that resulted in fewer ready-stack days for our jack-up fleet between wells during
2008 (22 days) compared to 2007 (306 days). However, revenues decreased $4.8 million as a result
of the Ocean Tower being taken out of service due to damages sustained during Hurricane Ike in the
third quarter of 2008, which partially offset the favorable effect of increased utilization in
2008.
Contract drilling expense in the GOM decreased $19.7 million during 2008 compared to 2007.
The overall decrease in operating costs during 2008 was due to the absence of operating costs in
the GOM for the Ocean King and Ocean Columbia ($21.8 million). The reduction in overall operating
costs was partially offset by costs associated with a regulatory survey for one of our GOM
jack-ups, higher labor and benefits costs and higher overhead costs for our remaining rigs in the
GOM during 2008 compared to 2007.
39
Table of Contents
Mexico. Revenue and contract drilling expense from our rigs operating in Mexico increased
$42.6 million and $17.2 million, respectively, in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to the
operation of the Ocean Columbia offshore Mexico, which began in the first quarter of 2008. The
Ocean Columbia generated $42.0 million in revenues and incurred $17.1 million in operating expenses
during 2008.
Australia/Asia/Middle East. Revenue generated by our jack-up rigs operating in the
Australia/Asia/Middle East region increased $4.1 million during 2008 compared to 2007. Our newly
constructed jack-up rig, the Ocean Shield, began work offshore Malaysia during the second quarter
of 2008 and generated $39.0 million in revenues during 2008. In addition, the Ocean Sovereign,
which operated offshore Indonesia in 2008, generated additional revenues of $8.4 million due to an
increase in the operating dayrate earned by the rig beginning late in the second quarter of 2008.
These favorable contributions to revenue in the region were partially offset by a decrease in
revenue generated by the Ocean Heritage, which was ready-stacked in a shipyard in Qatar from March
2008 through late June 2008 until it was subsequently relocated out of the region to Egypt.
Contract drilling expense in the Australia/Asia/Middle East region increased by $14.0 million
in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to the inclusion of normal operating costs for the Ocean
Shield and higher labor, benefits, repair and other operating costs for the Ocean Sovereign. These
cost increases were partially offset by the absence of operating costs for the Ocean Heritage due
to its relocation to Egypt.
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean. Revenue generated by our jack-up rigs operating in the
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean region increased $42.8 million in 2008 compared to 2007. The Ocean
King, operating under a two-year bareboat charter offshore Croatia that began in the third quarter
of 2007, generated revenues of $37.8 million during 2008. In addition, the Ocean Heritage, which
relocated to Egypt during the third quarter of 2008, generated $17.0 million of revenues in the
region.
Revenues were negatively impacted by the Ocean Spur, which operated offshore Egypt all of 2008
and in both Tunisia and Egypt in 2007. The Ocean Spur generated $12.0 million less in revenues
during 2008 compared to 2007, primarily due to the recognition of other operating revenues
associated with its contract offshore Tunisia during 2007.
Contract drilling expense in the Europe/Africa/Mediterranean region increased by $15.6 million
in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to the inclusion of normal operating costs for the Ocean
Heritage that began in the third quarter of 2008 and, to a lesser extent, operating expenses
associated with the Ocean Kings bareboat charter for the entire 2008 period.
South America. Our newly constructed jack-up rig, the Ocean Scepter, began operating offshore
Argentina during the third quarter of 2008 and generated $22.1 million in revenues and incurred
$14.3 million in contract drilling expenses during 2008.
Other Contract Drilling.
Other contract drilling expenses decreased $7.8 million during 2008 compared to 2007 primarily
due to insurance proceeds received in 2008 related to claims filed in connection with the 2005
Hurricane Katrina. These costs had previously been expensed due to uncertainty of recovery from
insurance.
Depreciation.
Depreciation expense increased $51.7 million to $287.4 million in 2008 compared to $235.7
million in 2007 primarily due to depreciation associated with capital additions in 2007 and 2008,
which included a partial years depreciation of our two newly constructed jack-ups, the Ocean
Shield and Ocean Scepter.
General and Administrative Expense.
We incurred general and administrative expense of $60.1 million in 2008 compared to $53.5
million in 2007. The $6.7 million increase in overhead costs between the periods was primarily due
to an increase in payroll costs as a result of higher compensation and staffing increases, travel
and related costs and engineering and tax consulting fees. These cost increases were partially
offset by a reduction in legal fees due to a 2008 insurance reimbursement related to certain
litigation.
40
Table of Contents
Bad Debt Expense.
We recorded a provision for bad debt expense of $31.9 million in 2008 related to one of our
North Sea semisubmersible rigs contracted to a U.K. customer that entered into administration under
U.K. law.
Casualty Loss.
During September 2008, one of our jack-up rigs, the Ocean Tower, sustained significant damage
during Hurricane Ike. As a result of this damage, we wrote off the net book value of the Ocean
Towers derrick, drill floor and related equipment lost in the storm of approximately $2.6 million
and accrued $3.7 million in estimated salvage costs for recovery of equipment from the ocean floor.
Gain on Disposition of Assets.
We recognized a net gain of $2.8 million on the sale and disposition of assets in 2008
compared to a net gain of $8.6 million in 2007 primarily for the recognition of gains on insurance
settlements and from sales of used equipment.
Interest Income.
Our interest income decreased $21.8 million to $11.7 million in 2008 from $33.6 million in
2007, primarily due to lower interest rates earned on our invested cash balances in 2008 compared
to 2007.
Interest Expense.
We recorded interest expense of $10.1 million in 2008 compared to $21.9 million in 2007.
Interest expense in 2007 included $9.2 million in debt issuance costs that we wrote off in
connection with conversions during the period of our 1.5% Convertible Senior Debentures Due 2031
and our Zero Coupon Convertible Debentures due 2020, or Zero Coupon Debentures, into shares of our
common stock. We wrote off $84,000 in debt issuance costs during 2008 related to conversions
during the year.
Foreign Currency Transaction Gain (Loss).
Foreign currency transaction gains (losses) include gains and losses from the settlement of
foreign currency forward exchange contracts not designated as accounting hedges and fluctuate based
on the level of transactions in foreign currencies, as well as fluctuations in such currencies.
During 2008, we recognized net foreign currency exchange losses of $65.6 million, including $54.0
million in net losses on foreign currency forward exchange contracts ($37.2 million in net
unrealized losses resulting from mark-to-market accounting on our open positions at December 31,
2008 and $16.8 million in net realized losses on settlement of forward contracts). During 2007, we
recognized net foreign currency exchange gains of $2.9 million.
Income Tax Expense.
Our income tax expense is a function of the mix between our domestic and international pre-tax
earnings or losses, respectively, as well as the mix of international tax jurisdictions in which we
operate. We recognized $536.5 million of tax expense on pre-tax income of $1.8 billion for the
year ended December 31, 2008 compared to tax expense of $398.9 million on a pre-tax income of $1.2
billion in 2007.
Certain of our international rigs are owned and operated, directly or indirectly, by DOIL, a
Cayman Islands subsidiary which we wholly own. Since forming this subsidiary in 2002, it has been
our intention to indefinitely reinvest the earnings of the subsidiary to finance foreign
activities. Consequently, no U.S. federal income taxes were provided on these earnings in years
subsequent to 2002 except to the extent that such earnings were immediately subject to U.S. federal
income taxes. In December 2007, DOIL made a non-recurring distribution of
$850.0 million to its U.S. parent, a portion of which consisted of earnings of the subsidiary
that had not previously been subjected to U.S. federal income tax. We recognized $58.6 million of
U.S. federal income tax expense in 2007 as a result of the distribution. Notwithstanding the
non-recurring distribution made in December 2007, it remains our intention to indefinitely reinvest
future earnings of DOIL to finance foreign activities except for the earnings of
41
Table of Contents
DEAL, a wholly-owned subsidiary of DOIL formed in December 2008. It is our intention to repatriate the
earnings of DEAL and, accordingly, U.S. income taxes are provided on its earnings.
Our income tax returns are subject to review and examination in the various jurisdictions in
which we operate and we are currently contesting various tax assessments. We accrue for income tax
contingencies, or uncertain tax positions, that we believe are more likely than not exposures. We
recognized expense of $3.4 million and $3.7 million for uncertain tax positions in 2008 and 2007,
respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, we recognized $0.8 million and
$1.7 million of interest expense related to uncertain tax positions, respectively. Penalty related
tax expense for uncertain tax positions during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007 was $1.1
million and $0.8 million, respectively.
Sources of Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our principal sources of liquidity and capital resources are cash flows from our operations
and our cash reserves. We may also make use of our $285 million credit facility for cash
liquidity. See $285 Million Revolving Credit Facility.
At December 31, 2009, we had $376.4 million in Cash and cash equivalents and $400.9 million
in Investments and marketable securities, representing our investment of cash available for
current operations.
Cash Flows from Operations. Our cash flows from operations are impacted by the ability of our
customers to weather the continuing global financial crisis and restrictions in the credit market,
as well as the volatility in energy prices. In general, before working for a customer with whom we
have not had a prior business relationship and/or whose financial stability may appear uncertain to
us, we perform a credit review on that company. Based on that analysis, we may require that the
customer present a letter of credit, prepay or provide other credit
enhancements. If a potential customer
is unable to obtain an adequate level of credit, it may preclude us from doing business with that
potential customer. The global financial crisis could also have an impact on our existing
customers, causing them to fail to meet their obligations to us or attempt to renegotiate existing
contract terms. In addition, we may offer inducements to our customers to extend existing
contracts. For example, during the second half of 2009, we reached an agreement with one of our
customers in the GOM for a second one-year contract extension. In exchange for the extension, we
agreed to a varying dayrate structure which provides for lower dayrates during the four-month
period when the rig is restricted from operating during hurricane season, and higher dayrates at
other times.
During the second quarter of 2009, one of our customers sought short-term financial relief
with respect to an existing contractual agreement with us for a six-well, one-year minimum contract
term, program that began in May 2009. As a result, we agreed to amend our existing contract with
this customer, and in consideration of this amendment, we are to receive a $20,000 per day increase
in the total contractual operating dayrate, to a total of $560,000 per day, for a minimum of the
first 240 days of the initial one-year contract. Under the terms of the amended agreement, the
customer is obligated to pay us $75,000 per day in accordance with our normal credit terms (due 30
days after receipt of invoice). The remainder of the dayrate for the six-well program (minimum of
240 days) will be paid through the conveyance of a 27% net profits interest, or NPI, in a minimum
of five developmental oil-and-gas producing properties covering six wells owned by the customer.
Based on the current production payout estimate, we anticipate that the first payment from the
conveyance of the NPI will commence in early 2010. Payments of such amounts, and the timing of
such payments, are contingent upon such production and upon energy sale prices. The residual days
under the initial one-year (365 day) contract will be deferred until the fourth quarter of 2011
when the customer will utilize the rig at the originally contracted dayrate and provide a 25%
up-front escrow payment with the remaining 75% to be paid in accordance with normal credit terms.
At December 31, 2009, the portion of our trade receivable that is expected to be paid from the NPI
was $70.5 million and is presented as Accounts Receivable in our Consolidated Balance Sheets
included in Item 8 of this report.
These external factors which affect our cash flows from operations are not within our control
and are difficult to predict. For a description of other factors that could affect our cash flows
from operations, see Overview Industry Conditions, Forward-Looking Statements and Risk
Factors in Item 1A of this report.
$285 Million Revolving Credit Facility. We maintain a $285 million syndicated, senior
unsecured revolving credit facility, or Credit Facility, for general corporate purposes, including
loans and performance or standby letters of credit, that will mature on November 2, 2011.
42
Table of Contents
Loans under the Credit Facility bear interest at a rate per annum equal to, at our election,
either (i) the higher of the prime rate or the federal funds rate plus 0.5% or (ii) the London
Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, plus an applicable margin, varying from 0.20% to 0.525%, based on
our current credit ratings. Under our Credit Facility, we also pay, based on our current credit
ratings, and as applicable, other customary fees, including, but not limited to, a facility fee on
the total commitment under the Credit Facility regardless of usage and a utilization fee that
applies if the aggregate of all loans outstanding under the Credit Facility equals or exceeds 50%
of the total commitment under the facility. Changes in credit ratings could lower or raise the
fees that we pay under the Credit Facility.
The Credit Facility contains customary covenants, including, but not limited to, the
maintenance of a ratio of consolidated indebtedness to total capitalization, as defined in the
Credit Facility, of not more than 60% at the end of each fiscal quarter and limitations on liens,
mergers, consolidations, liquidation and dissolution, changes in lines of business, swap
agreements, transactions with affiliates and subsidiary indebtedness.
Based on our current credit ratings at December 31, 2009, the applicable margin on LIBOR loans
would have been 0.24%. As of December 31, 2009, there were no loans outstanding under the Credit
Facility; however $63.3 million in letters of credit were issued and outstanding under the Credit
Facility.
Liquidity and Capital Requirements
Our liquidity and capital requirements are primarily a function of our working capital needs,
capital expenditures and debt service requirements. We determine the amount of cash required to
meet our capital commitments by evaluating the need to upgrade rigs to meet specific customer
requirements and by evaluating our ongoing rig equipment replacement and enhancement programs,
including water depth and drilling capability upgrades. We believe that our operating cash flows
and cash reserves will be sufficient to meet both our working capital requirements and our capital
commitments over the next twelve months; however, we will continue to make periodic assessments
based on industry conditions and will adjust capital spending programs if required.
In addition, we may, from time to time, issue debt or equity securities, or a combination
thereof, to finance capital expenditures, the acquisition of assets and businesses or for general
corporate purposes. Our ability to access the capital markets by issuing debt or equity securities
will be dependent on our results of operations, our current financial condition, current market
conditions and other factors beyond our control. Additionally, we may also make use of our Credit
Facility to finance capital expenditures or for other general corporate purposes.
Contractual Cash Obligations. The following table sets forth our contractual cash obligations
at December 31, 2009.
Payments Due By Period | ||||||||||||||||||||
Less than | After 5 | |||||||||||||||||||
Contractual Obligations | Total | 1 year | 1 3 years | 4 5 years | years | |||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt (principal and interest)
|
$ | 2,776,286 | $ | 87,661 | $ | 165,875 | $ | 415,875 | $ | 2,106,875 | ||||||||||
Operating leases
|
2,200 | 1,200 | 1,000 | | | |||||||||||||||
Total obligations
|
$ | 2,778,486 | $ | 88,861 | $ | 166,875 | $ | 415,875 | $ | 2,106,875 | ||||||||||
The above table excludes foreign currency forward exchange contracts in the aggregate
notional amount of $114.0 million outstanding at December 31, 2009. See further information
regarding these contracts in Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Foreign Exchange Risk and Note 5 Derivative Financial Instruments to our Consolidated Financial
Statements in Item 8 of this report.
As of December 31, 2009, the total unrecognized tax benefit related to uncertain tax positions
was $27.0 million. Due to the high degree of uncertainty regarding the timing of future cash
outflows associated with the
liabilities recognized in this balance, we are unable to make reasonably reliable estimates of the
period of cash settlement with the respective taxing authorities.
We had no purchase obligations for major rig upgrades or any other significant obligations at
December 31, 2009, except for those related to our direct rig operations, which arise during the
normal course of business.
43
Table of Contents
5.70% Senior Notes
On October 8, 2009, we issued $500.0 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.70% Senior
Notes for general corporate purposes. The 5.70% Senior Notes were issued at an offering price of
99.344% of the principal and resulted in net proceeds to us of approximately $496.7 million.
These notes bear interest at 5.70% per year, payable semiannually in arrears on April 15 and
October 15 of each year, beginning April 15, 2010, and mature on October 15, 2039. The 5.70%
Senior Notes are unsecured and unsubordinated obligations of Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and
rank equal in right of payment to its existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated
indebtedness, and will be effectively subordinated to all existing and future obligations of our
subsidiaries. We have the right to redeem all or a portion of these notes for cash at any time or
from time to time, on at least 15 days but not more than 60 days prior written notice, at the
redemption price specified in the governing indenture plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date
of redemption.
5.875% Senior Notes
On May 4, 2009, we issued $500.0 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.875% Senior Notes
for general corporate purposes. The 5.875% Senior Notes were issued at an offering price of
99.851% of the principal and resulted in net proceeds to us of approximately $499.3 million.
These notes bear interest at 5.875% per year, payable semiannually in arrears on May 1 and
November 1 of each year, and mature on May 1, 2019. The 5.875% Senior Notes are unsecured and
unsubordinated obligations of Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and rank equal in right of payment to
its existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated indebtedness, and will be effectively
subordinated to all existing and future obligations of our subsidiaries. We have the right to
redeem all or a portion of these notes for cash at any time or from time to time, on at least 15
days but not more than 60 days prior written notice, at the redemption price specified in the
governing indenture plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption.
See Note 10 Long-Term Debt to our Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this report
for further discussion of our 5.70% Senior Notes, 5.875% Senior Notes and our other long-term debt.
Other Commercial Commitments Letters of Credit.
We were contingently liable as of December 31, 2009 in the amount of $166.6 million under
certain performance, bid, supersedeas and custom bonds and letters of credit, including $63.3
million in letters of credit issued under our Credit Facility. Eight of these bonds totaling
$103.1 million were purchased from a related party after obtaining competitive quotes. Agreements
relating to approximately $95.7 million of performance bonds can require collateral at any time.
As of December 31, 2009 we had not been required to make any collateral deposits with respect to
these agreements. The remaining agreements cannot require collateral except in events of default.
Banks have issued letters of credit on our behalf securing certain of these bonds. See Note 13
Related-Party Transactions to our Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this
report. The table below provides a list of these obligations in U.S. dollar equivalents and their
time to expiration.
For the Years Ending December 31, | ||||||||||||||||
Total | 2010 | 2011 | Thereafter | |||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||
Other Commercial Commitments |
||||||||||||||||
Customs bonds |
$ | 41,370 | $ | 41,370 | $ | | $ | | ||||||||
Performance bonds |
109,478 | 90,622 | 7,032 | 11,824 | ||||||||||||
Other |
15,715 | 15,715 | | | ||||||||||||
Total obligations |
$ | 166,563 | $ | 147,707 | $ | 7,032 | $ | 11,824 | ||||||||
Credit Ratings.
Our current credit rating is Baa1 for Moodys Investors Services and A- for Standard & Poors.
Although our long-term ratings continue at investment grade levels, lower ratings would result in
higher rates for borrowings under our Credit Facility and could also result in higher interest
rates on future debt issuances.
44
Table of Contents
Capital Expenditures.
During 2009, we spent approximately $1 billion toward the purchase of two new-build, 7,500
foot semisubmersible drilling rigs, the Ocean Courage and Ocean Valor, and the completion of the
upgrade of the Ocean Monarch, which commenced drilling operations late in the first quarter of
2009. We spent an additional approximately $355 million in 2009 on our continuing rig capital
maintenance program (other than rig upgrades and new construction) and to meet other corporate
capital expenditure requirements.
We have budgeted approximately $365 million on capital expenditures for 2010 associated with
our ongoing rig equipment replacement and enhancement programs, equipment required for our
long-term international contracts and other corporate requirements. In addition, we expect to
spend approximately $75 million in 2010 towards the commissioning and outfitting for service of the
recently acquired Ocean Courage and Ocean Valor. We expect to finance our 2010 capital
expenditures through the use of our existing cash balances or internally generated funds. From
time to time, however, we may also make use of our Credit Facility to finance capital expenditures.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements.
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, we had no off-balance sheet debt or other arrangements.
Historical Cash Flows
The following is a discussion of our historical cash flows from operating, investing and
financing activities for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to 2008.
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities.
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Change | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Net income
|
$ | 1,376,219 | $ | 1,310,547 | $ | 65,672 | ||||||
Net changes in operating assets and liabilities
|
(286,069 | ) | (87,321 | ) | (198,748 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from settlement of FOREX contracts
designated as accounting hedges
|
8,895 | | 8,895 | |||||||||
(Gain) loss on sale and disposition of assets,
including casualty loss on Ocean Tower
|
(7,902 | ) | 3,450 | (11,352 | ) | |||||||
Gain on sale of marketable securities
|
(619 | ) | (1,282 | ) | 663 | |||||||
(Gain) loss on FOREX contracts
|
(17,751 | ) | 54,010 | (71,761 | ) | |||||||
Deferred tax provision
|
85,524 | 61,404 | 24,120 | |||||||||
Depreciation and other non-cash items, net
|
358,517 | 278,880 | 79,637 | |||||||||
$ | 1,516,814 | $ | 1,619,688 | $ | (102,874 | ) | ||||||
Our cash flows from operations in 2009 decreased to $1.5 billion compared to $1.6 billion in
2008, primarily due to an increase in cash required to satisfy working capital requirements in 2009
compared to 2008. Our working capital requirements used $286.1 million during 2009 compared to
$87.3 million during 2008. The increase in cash required to satisfy working capital requirements
is primarily due to an increase in our outstanding accounts receivable balances at December 31,
2009 compared to the prior year. Trade and other receivables used cash of $219.9 million in 2009
compared to $42.5 million in 2008. During 2009, the balance of our customer receivables increased
due to higher average dayrates earned by certain of our rigs, the acceptance of an NPI to satisfy
$70.5 million of a customer receivable (see Sources of Liquidity and Capital Resources Cash
Flows from Operations), as well as an increase in collection time for certain of our trade
receivables. During 2008, we received insurance proceeds of $9.4 million related to the
settlement of certain hurricane-related insurance claims resulting from damages sustained in 2005.
During 2009, we made U.S. federal income tax payments of $252.4
million compared to $393.2 million in 2008 for estimated U.S. federal income tax payments. We paid
foreign income taxes, net of refunds, of $176.2 million and $120.7 million during 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Beginning in May 2009, we began a hedging strategy and designated certain of our qualifying
FOREX contracts as cash flow hedges. Realized gains or losses upon settlement of derivative
contracts designated as cash
45
Table of Contents
flow hedges are reported as a component of Contract drilling expense
in our Consolidated Statements of Operations to offset the impact of foreign currency fluctuations
in our expenditures in local foreign currencies in the countries in which we operate. During 2009,
we received $8.9 million in net proceeds on settlement of our FOREX contracts designated as
accounting hedges. As of December 31, 2009, we had FOREX contracts outstanding, in the aggregate
notional amount of $114.0 million, consisting of $37.6 million in Australian dollars, $42.6 million
in Brazilian reais, $20.7 million in British pounds sterling, $5.3 million in Mexican pesos and
$7.8 million in Norwegian kroner. These contracts settle at various times through September 2010.
All of these contracts were designated as accounting hedges at December 31, 2009.
Net Cash Used in Investing Activities.
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Change | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Purchase of marketable securities
|
$ | (4,473,575 | ) | $ | (1,888,792 | ) | $ | (2,584,783 | ) | |||
Proceeds from sale of marketable securities
|
4,473,891 | 1,493,803 | 2,980,088 | |||||||||
Capital expenditures (including rig
acquisitions)
|
(1,362,468 | ) | (666,857 | ) | (695,611 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from disposition of assets
|
40,462 | 5,881 | 34,581 | |||||||||
Cost of settlement of FOREX contracts
|
(28,445 | ) | (16,800 | ) | (11,645 | ) | ||||||
$ | (1,350,135 | ) | $ | (1,072,765 | ) | $ | (277,370 | ) | ||||
Our investing activities used $1.4 billion in 2009 compared to $1.1 billion in 2008. During
2008, we purchased marketable securities, net of sales, of $395.0 million compared to net sales of
$0.3 million during 2009, but at a higher volume in 2009 than in the preceding year. Our level of
investment activity is dependent on our working capital and other capital requirements during the
year, as well as a response to actual or anticipated events or conditions in the securities
markets.
We spent $1.0 billion for the purchase of the Ocean Courage and Ocean Valor and the completion
of the major upgrade of the Ocean Monarch during 2009. We spent an additional $354.7 million in
2009 on our continuing rig capital maintenance program (other than rig upgrades and new
construction) and to meet other corporate capital expenditure requirements. During 2008, we spent
$181.9 million related to the major upgrade of the Ocean Monarch and construction of the Ocean
Scepter and Ocean Shield and $485.0 million for our ongoing capital maintenance programs, including
rig modifications to meet contractual requirements. See Liquidity and Capital Requirements
Capital Expenditures.
During the fourth quarter of 2009, we completed the sale of the Ocean Tower and recognized
proceeds, net of commissions, of $35.4 million. In 2008, we received a $3.5 million deposit
related to the sale, which was reflected as a component of net cash provided by operating
activities.
Prior to May 2009, we entered into FOREX contracts as economic hedges of our foreign currency
requirements; however, we did not designate these contracts as accounting hedges. During the
latter part of 2008 and into the first five months of 2009, the strengthening U.S. dollar (or,
conversely, the weakening foreign currency) negatively impacted these expiring FOREX contracts and
resulted in aggregate, net realized losses of $28.4 million and $16.8 million for 2009 and 2008,
respectively. We have presented the settlement of these contracts within Net Cash Used in
Investing Activities.
Net Cash Used in Financing Activities.
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | Change | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Issuance of senior unsecured debt
|
$ | 995,975 | $ | | $ | 995,975 | ||||||
Debt issue costs and arrangement fees
|
(8,671 | ) | | (8,671 | ) | |||||||
Payment of dividends
|
(1,115,211 | ) | (852,153 | ) | (263,058 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from stock options exercised
|
1,494 | 2,002 | (508 | ) | ||||||||
Other
|
99 | 1,319 | (1,220 | ) | ||||||||
$ | (126,314 | ) | $ | (848,832 | ) | $ | 722,518 | |||||
46
Table of Contents
In 2009, we issued two tranches of senior, unsecured debt aggregating $1.0 billion for general
corporate purposes and paid $8.7 million in fees related to these issuances. See Liquidity and
Capital Requirements 5.70% Senior Notes and Liquidity and Capital Requirements 5.875%
Senior Notes for a further discussion of these debt issuances.
During 2009, we paid cash dividends totaling $1.1 billion, consisting of aggregate regular
cash dividends of $69.5 million, or $0.125 per share of our common stock per quarter, and aggregate
special cash dividends of $1.0 billion, or $1.875 per share of our common stock per quarter.
During 2008, we paid cash dividends totaling $852.2 million, consisting of aggregate regular cash
dividends of $69.5 million, or $0.125 per share of our common stock per quarter, and aggregate
special cash dividends of $782.7 million ($1.25 per share of our common stock for each of the first
three quarters of 2008 and $1.875 per share of our common stock during the final quarter of 2008).
On February 3, 2010, we declared a regular quarterly cash dividend and a special cash dividend
of $0.125 and $1.875, respectively, per share of our common stock. Both the quarterly and special
cash dividends are payable on March 1, 2010 to stockholders of record on February 12, 2010.
Our Board of Directors has adopted a policy to consider paying special cash dividends, in
amounts to be determined, on a quarterly basis. Our Board of Directors may, in subsequent
quarters, consider paying additional special cash dividends, in amounts to be determined, if it
believes that our financial position, earnings, earnings outlook, capital spending plans and other
relevant factors warrant such action at that time.
Depending on market conditions, we may, from time to time, purchase shares of our common stock
in the open market or otherwise. We did not repurchase any shares of our outstanding common stock
during the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008.
Other
Currency Risk. Some of our subsidiaries conduct a portion of their operations in the local
currency of the country where they conduct operations. Currency environments in which we have
significant business operations include Mexico, Brazil, the U.K., Australia and Malaysia. When
possible, we attempt to minimize our currency exchange risk by seeking international contracts
payable in local currency in amounts equal to our estimated operating costs payable in local
currency with the balance of the contract payable in U.S. dollars. At present, however, only a
limited number of our contracts are payable both in U.S. dollars and the local currency.
To the extent that we are not able to cover our local currency operating costs with customer
payments in the local currency, we also utilize foreign exchange forward contracts to reduce our
currency exchange risk. Our forward currency exchange contracts may obligate us to exchange
predetermined amounts of specified foreign currencies at specified foreign exchange rates on
specific dates or to net settle the spread between the contracted foreign currency exchange rate
and the spot rate on the contract settlement date, which, for most of our contracts, is the average
spot rate for the contract period.
We record currency transaction gains and losses, including gains and losses on settlement of
our foreign currency forward exchange contracts, as Foreign currency transaction gain (loss) in
our Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
The Financial Standards Accounting Board, or FASB, has issued Accounting Standards Update
2010-06, or ASU 2010-06, that describes amendments to FASB Accounting Standards Codification
Subtopic 820-10 relating to fair value measurements. ASU 2010-06 amends the original codification
to require additional disclosures regarding transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value
measurements and activity within Level 3 fair value measurements. In addition, ASU 2010-06
clarifies existing disclosure requirements regarding the level of disaggregation of classes of
assets and liabilities for which fair value measurements are disclosed, as well as disclosures
about inputs and valuation techniques. This amendment is effective for interim and annual
reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for certain disclosures regarding Level
3 fair value measurements which are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010.
Early adoption is permitted. We are currently reviewing the effect of these amendments; however,
we do not expect the application of ASU 2010-06 to have a material effect on our results of
operations or financial position.
47
Table of Contents
Forward-Looking Statements
We or our representatives may, from time to time, either in this report, in periodic press
releases or otherwise, make or incorporate by reference certain written or oral statements that are
forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
or the Exchange Act. All statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed
to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, without limitation, any
statement that may project, indicate or imply future results, events, performance or achievements,
and may contain or be identified by the words expect, intend, plan, predict, anticipate,
estimate, believe, should, could, may, might, will, will be, will continue, will
likely result, project, forecast, budget and similar expressions. In addition, any
statement concerning future financial performance (including future revenues, earnings or growth
rates), ongoing business strategies or prospects, and possible actions taken by or against us,
which may be provided by management, are also forward-looking statements as so defined. Statements
made by us in this report that contain forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to,
information concerning our possible or assumed future results of operations and statements about
the following subjects:
| future market conditions and the effect of such conditions on our future results of operations; | ||
| future uses of and requirements for financial resources; | ||
| interest rate and foreign exchange risk; | ||
| future contractual obligations; | ||
| future operations outside the United States including, without limitation, our operations in Mexico and Brazil; | ||
| business strategy; | ||
| growth opportunities; | ||
| competitive position; | ||
| expected financial position; | ||
| future cash flows and contract backlog; | ||
| future regular or special dividends; | ||
| financing plans; | ||
| market outlook; | ||
| tax planning; | ||
| debt levels, including impacts of the financial crisis and restrictions in the credit market; | ||
| budgets for capital and other expenditures; | ||
| timing and duration of required regulatory inspections for our drilling rigs; | ||
| timing and cost of completion of rig upgrades and other capital projects; | ||
| delivery dates and drilling contracts related to rig conversion or upgrade projects or rig acquisitions; | ||
| plans and objectives of management; | ||
| idling drilling rigs or reactivating stacked rigs; | ||
| performance of contracts; | ||
| outcomes of legal proceedings; | ||
| compliance with applicable laws; and | ||
| adequacy of insurance or indemnification. |
These types of statements are based on current expectations about future events and inherently
are subject to a variety of assumptions, risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our
control, that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expected, projected or
expressed in forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include, among others, the
following:
| those described under Risk Factors in Item 1A; | ||
| general economic and business conditions, including the extent and duration of the continuing financial crisis and restrictions in the credit market, the worldwide economic downturn and recession; | ||
| worldwide demand for oil and natural gas; | ||
| changes in foreign and domestic oil and gas exploration, development and production activity; | ||
| oil and natural gas price fluctuations and related market expectations; | ||
| the ability of OPEC to set and maintain production levels and pricing, and the level of production in non-OPEC countries; |
48
Table of Contents
| policies of various governments regarding exploration and development of oil and gas reserves; | ||
| our inability to obtain contracts for our rigs that do not have contracts; | ||
| the cancellation of contracts included in our reported contract backlog; | ||
| advances in exploration and development technology; | ||
| the worldwide political and military environment, including in oil-producing regions; | ||
| casualty losses; | ||
| operating hazards inherent in drilling for oil and gas offshore; | ||
| the risk of physical damage to rigs and equipment caused by named windstorms in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico; | ||
| industry fleet capacity; | ||
| market conditions in the offshore contract drilling industry, including dayrates and utilization levels; | ||
| competition; | ||
| changes in foreign, political, social and economic conditions; | ||
| risks of international operations, compliance with foreign laws and taxation policies and expropriation or nationalization of equipment and assets; | ||
| risks of potential contractual liabilities pursuant to our various drilling contracts in effect from time to time; | ||
| the ability of customers and suppliers to meet their obligations to us and our subsidiaries; | ||
| the risk that an LOI may not result in a definitive agreement; | ||
| foreign exchange and currency fluctuations and regulations, and the inability to repatriate income or capital; | ||
| risks of war, military operations, other armed hostilities, terrorist acts and embargoes; | ||
| changes in offshore drilling technology, which could require significant capital expenditures in order to maintain competitiveness; | ||
| regulatory initiatives and compliance with governmental regulations including, without limitation, regulations pertaining to climate change, carbon emissions or energy use; | ||
| compliance with environmental laws and regulations; | ||
| potential changes in accounting policies by the FASB, the SEC or regulatory agencies for our industry which may cause us to revise our financial accounting and/or disclosures in the future, and which may change the way analysts measure our business or financial performance; | ||
| development and exploitation of alternative fuels; | ||
| customer preferences; | ||
| effects of litigation, tax audits and contingencies and the impact of compliance with judicial rulings and jury verdicts; | ||
| cost, availability and adequacy of insurance; | ||
| the results of financing efforts; | ||
| the risk that future regular or special dividends may not be declared; | ||
| adequacy of our sources of liquidity; | ||
| risks resulting from our indebtedness; | ||
| the availability of qualified personnel to operate and service our drilling rigs; and | ||
| various other matters, many of which are beyond our control. |
The risks and uncertainties included here are not exhaustive. Other sections of this report
and our other filings with the SEC include additional factors that could adversely affect our
business, results of operations and financial performance. Given these risks and uncertainties,
investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Forward-looking
statements included in this report speak only as of the date of this report. We expressly disclaim
any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking
statement to reflect any change in our expectations or beliefs with regard to the statement or any
change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any forward-looking statement is based.
Item 7A. | Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk. |
The information included in this Item 7A is considered to constitute forward-looking
statements for purposes of the statutory safe harbor provided in Section 27A of the Securities Act
and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. See Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Forward-Looking Statements in Item 7 of this report.
49
Table of Contents
Our measure of market risk exposure represents an estimate of the change in fair value of our
financial instruments. Market risk exposure is presented for each class of financial instrument
held by us at December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, assuming immediate adverse market movements
of the magnitude described below. We believe that the various rates of adverse market movements
represent a measure of exposure to loss under hypothetically assumed adverse conditions. The
estimated market risk exposure represents the hypothetical loss to future earnings and does not
represent the maximum possible loss or any expected actual loss, even under adverse conditions,
because actual adverse fluctuations would likely differ. In addition, since our investment
portfolio is subject to change based on our portfolio management strategy as well as in response to
changes in the market, these estimates are not necessarily indicative of the actual results that
may occur.
Exposure to market risk is managed and monitored by our senior management. Senior management
approves the overall investment strategy that we employ and has responsibility to ensure that the
investment positions are consistent with that strategy and the level of risk acceptable to us. We
may manage risk by buying or selling instruments or entering into offsetting positions.
Interest Rate Risk
We have exposure to interest rate risk arising from changes in the level or volatility of
interest rates. Our investments in marketable securities are primarily in fixed maturity
securities. We monitor our sensitivity to interest rate risk by evaluating the change in the value
of our financial assets and liabilities due to fluctuations in interest rates. The evaluation is
performed by applying an instantaneous change in interest rates by varying magnitudes on a static
balance sheet to determine the effect such a change in rates would have on the recorded market
value of our investments and the resulting effect on stockholders equity. The analysis presents
the sensitivity of the market value of our financial instruments to selected changes in market
rates and prices which we believe are reasonably possible over a one-year period.
The sensitivity analysis estimates the change in the market value of our interest sensitive
assets and liabilities that were held on December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, due to
instantaneous parallel shifts in the yield curve of 100 basis points, with all other variables held
constant.
The interest rates on certain types of assets and liabilities may fluctuate in advance of
changes in market interest rates, while interest rates on other types may lag behind changes in
market rates. Accordingly, the analysis may not be indicative of, is not intended to provide, and
does not provide a precise forecast of the effect of changes in market interest rates on our
earnings or stockholders equity. Further, the computations do not contemplate any actions we could
undertake in response to changes in interest rates.
Loans under our $285 million syndicated, senior unsecured revolving Credit Facility bear
interest at our option at a rate per annum equal to (i) the higher of the prime rate or the federal
funds rate plus 0.5% or (ii) LIBOR plus an applicable margin, varying from 0.20% to 0.525%, based
on our current credit ratings. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, there were no loans outstanding
under the Credit Facility (however, as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, $63.3 million and $58.1
million, respectively, in letters of credit were issued and outstanding under the Credit Facility).
Our long-term debt, as of December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, is denominated in U.S.
dollars. Our debt has been primarily issued at fixed rates, and as such, interest expense would not
be impacted by interest rate shifts. The impact of a 100-basis point increase in interest rates on
fixed rate debt would result in a decrease in market value of $136.2 million and $20.9 million as
of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. A 100-basis point decrease would result in an
increase in market value of $121.3 million and $21.6 million as of December 31, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Foreign Exchange Risk
Foreign exchange rate risk arises from the possibility that changes in foreign currency
exchange rates will impact the value of financial instruments. It is customary for us to enter
into foreign currency forward exchange contracts in the normal course of business. These contracts
may require us to exchange predetermined amounts of foreign currencies on specified dates or to net
settle the spread between the contracted foreign currency exchange rate and the spot rate on the
contract settlement date, which, for most of our outstanding contracts, is the average spot rate
for the contract period. As of December 31, 2009, we had foreign currency exchange contracts
outstanding, in the aggregate notional amount of $114.0 million, consisting of $37.6 million in
Australian dollars,
50
Table of Contents
$42.6 million in Brazilian reais, $20.7 million in British pounds sterling,
$5.3 million in Mexican pesos and $7.8 million in Norwegian kroner. These contracts settle at
various times through September 2010. At December 31, 2009, we have presented the fair value of
our outstanding foreign currency forward exchange contracts as a current asset of $2.6 million in
Prepaid expenses and other current assets and a current liability of $(0.2) million in Accrued
liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets included in Item 8 of this report. We have
presented the fair value of our outstanding foreign currency forward exchange contracts at December
31, 2008 as a current liability of $(37.3) million in Accrued liabilities in our Consolidated
Balance Sheets included in Item 8 of this report.
The sensitivity analysis assumes an instantaneous 20% change in foreign currency exchange
rates versus the U.S. dollar from their levels at December 31, 2009 and 2008.
The following table presents our exposure to market risk by category (interest rates and
foreign currency exchange rates):
Fair Value Asset (Liability) | Market Risk | |||||||||||||||
December 31, | December 31, | |||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||
Interest rate: |
||||||||||||||||
Marketable securities |
$ | 400,853 | (a) | $ | 400,592 | (a) | $ | (300 | )(c) | $ | (2,000 | )(c) | ||||
Long-term debt |
1,546,900 | (b) | 470,000 | (b) | | | ||||||||||
Foreign Exchange: |
||||||||||||||||
Forward exchange
contracts
receivable positions |
2,600 | (d) | | (d) | (17,600) | (e) | | (e) | ||||||||
Forward exchange
contracts liability
positions |
(200 | )(d) | (37,300 | )(d) | (3,700) | (e) | (32,600 | )(e) |
(a) | The fair market value of our investment in marketable securities, excluding repurchase agreements, is based on the quoted closing market prices on December 31, 2009 and 2008. | |
(b) | The fair values of our 4.875% Senior Notes due July 1, 2015 and 5.15% Senior Notes due September 1, 2014 are based on the quoted closing market prices on December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008. The fair value of our Zero Coupon Debentures is based on the closing market price of our common stock on December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008. The fair values of our 5.70% Senior Notes and 5.875% Senior Notes are based on the quoted market prices on December 31, 2009. | |
(c) | The calculation of estimated market risk exposure is based on assumed adverse changes in the underlying reference price or index of an increase in interest rates of 100 basis points at December 31, 2009 and 2008. | |
(d) | The fair value of our foreign currency forward exchange contracts is based on both quoted market prices and valuations derived from pricing models on December 31, 2009 and 2008. | |
(e) | The calculation of estimated foreign exchange risk assumes an instantaneous 20% decrease in the foreign currency exchange rates versus the U.S. dollar from their values at December 31, 2009 and 2008, with all other variables held constant. |
51
Table of Contents
Item 8. | Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. |
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Houston, Texas
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Houston, Texas
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and
subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders equity, comprehensive income and cash flows for each of the
three years in the period ended December 31, 2009. Our audits also included the financial
statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 15. These financial statements and financial
statement schedule are the responsibility of the Companys management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on the financial statements and the financial statement 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, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects,
the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the results of its
operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009, in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in
our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic
consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly, in all material respects, the
information set forth therein.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the Companys internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2009, based on the criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 23,
2010 expressed an unqualified opinion on the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Houston, Texas
February 23, 2010
Houston, Texas
February 23, 2010
52
Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Houston, Texas
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and Subsidiaries
Houston, Texas
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc.
and subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2009, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission. The Companys 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 Item 9A of this Form 10-K under the heading Managements
Annual 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 by, or under the
supervision of, the companys principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons
performing similar functions, and effected by the companys board of directors, management, and
other personnel 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 the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including the
possibility of collusion or improper management override of controls, material misstatements due to
error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any
evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future periods
are subject to the risk that the 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, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on the criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December
31, 2009 of the Company and our report dated February 23, 2010 expressed an unqualified opinion on
those financial statements and the financial statement schedule.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Houston, Texas
February 23, 2010
Houston, Texas
February 23, 2010
53
Table of Contents
DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
December 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Current assets: |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 376,417 | $ | 336,052 | ||||
Marketable securities |
400,853 | 400,592 | ||||||
Accounts receivable, net of provision for bad debts |
791,023 | 574,842 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
155,077 | 123,046 | ||||||
Assets held for sale |
| 32,201 | ||||||
Total current assets |
1,723,370 | 1,466,733 | ||||||
Drilling and other property and equipment, net of
accumulated depreciation |
4,432,052 | 3,414,373 | ||||||
Other assets |
108,839 | 73,325 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 6,264,261 | $ | 4,954,431 | ||||
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||
Current liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts payable |
$ | 75,015 | $ | 93,982 | ||||
Accrued liabilities |
301,871 | 329,526 | ||||||
Taxes payable |
32,410 | 85,579 | ||||||
Current portion of long-term debt |
4,179 | | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
413,475 | 509,087 | ||||||
Long-term debt |
1,495,375 | 503,280 | ||||||
Deferred tax liability |
546,024 | 462,026 | ||||||
Other liabilities |
178,745 | 118,553 | ||||||
Total liabilities |
2,633,619 | 1,592,946 | ||||||
Commitments and contingencies (Note 12) |
| | ||||||
Stockholders equity: |
||||||||
Preferred stock (par value $0.01, 25,000,000 shares authorized, none
issued and outstanding) |
| | ||||||
Common stock (par value $0.01, 500,000,000 shares authorized;
143,942,978 shares issued and 139,026,178 shares outstanding at
December 31, 2009; 143,917,850 shares issued and 139,001,050 shares
outstanding at December 31, 2008) |
1,439 | 1,439 | ||||||
Additional paid-in capital |
1,965,513 | 1,957,041 | ||||||
Retained earnings |
1,776,498 | 1,516,908 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive gains |
1,605 | 510 | ||||||
Treasury stock, at cost (4,916,800 shares at December 31, 2009
and 2008) |
(114,413 | ) | (114,413 | ) | ||||
Total stockholders equity |
3,630,642 | 3,361,485 | ||||||
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
$ | 6,264,261 | $ | 4,954,431 | ||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
54
Table of Contents
DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except per share data)
(In thousands, except per share data)
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
Revenues: |
||||||||||||
Contract drilling |
$ | 3,536,579 | $ | 3,476,417 | $ | 2,505,663 | ||||||
Revenues related to reimbursable expenses |
94,705 | 67,640 | 62,060 | |||||||||
Total revenues |
3,631,284 | 3,544,057 | 2,567,723 | |||||||||
Operating expenses: |
||||||||||||
Contract drilling |
1,223,771 | 1,185,007 | 1,003,789 | |||||||||
Reimbursable expenses |
93,097 | 65,895 | 60,261 | |||||||||
Depreciation |
346,446 | 287,417 | 235,729 | |||||||||
General and administrative |
62,913 | 60,142 | 53,483 | |||||||||
Bad debt expense |
9,746 | 31,952 | | |||||||||
Casualty loss |
| 6,281 | | |||||||||
(Gain) on disposition of assets |
(7,902 | ) | (2,831 | ) | (8,583 | ) | ||||||
Total operating expenses |
1,728,071 | 1,633,863 | 1,344,679 | |||||||||
Operating income |
1,903,213 | 1,910,194 | 1,223,044 | |||||||||
Other income (expense): |
||||||||||||
Interest income |
4,497 | 11,744 | 33,566 | |||||||||
Interest expense |
(49,610 | ) | (10,096 | ) | (21,878 | ) | ||||||
Foreign currency transaction gain (loss) |
11,483 | (65,566 | ) | 2,906 | ||||||||
Other, net |
(1,152 | ) | 770 | 5,734 | ||||||||
Income before income tax expense |
1,868,431 | 1,847,046 | 1,243,372 | |||||||||
Income tax expense |
(492,212 | ) | (536,499 | ) | (398,908 | ) | ||||||
Net income |
$ | 1,376,219 | $ | 1,310,547 | $ | 844,464 | ||||||
Earnings per share: |
||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 9.90 | $ | 9.43 | $ | 6.13 | ||||||
Diluted |
$ | 9.89 | $ | 9.42 | $ | 6.11 | ||||||
Weighted-average shares outstanding: |
||||||||||||
Shares of common stock |
139,007 | 138,959 | 137,816 | |||||||||
Dilutive potential shares of common stock |
90 | 114 | 1,129 | |||||||||
Total weighted-average shares
outstanding
assuming dilution |
139,097 | 139,073 | 138,945 | |||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
55
Table of Contents
DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
(In thousands, except number of shares)
(In thousands, except number of shares)
Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional | Other | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common Stock | Paid-in | Retained | Comprehensive | Treasury Stock | Stockholders | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shares | Amount | Capital | Earnings | Gains (Losses) | Shares | Amount | Equity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2006 |
134,133,776 | $ | 1,341 | $ | 1,299,846 | $ | 1,108,729 | $ | (4,417 | ) | 4,916,800 | $ | (114,413 | ) | $ | 2,291,086 | ||||||||||||||||
Cumulative effect of
adoption of new accounting
pronouncement (Note 1) |
111,698 | (96,300 | ) | 15,398 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
January 1, 2007 |
134,133,776 | 1,341 | 1,411,544 | 1,012,429 | (4,417 | ) | 4,916,800 | (114,413 | ) | 2,306,484 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income |
| | | 844,464 | | | | 844,464 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dividends to stockholders
($5.75 per share) |
| | | (796,194 | ) | | | | (796,194 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Anti-dilution adjustment
paid to stock plan
participants ($1.25 per
share) |
| | | (541 | ) | | | | (541 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversion of long-term debt |
9,330,274 | 94 | 459,654 | | | | | 459,748 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reversal of deferred tax
liability related to
imputed interest on
converted debentures |
| | 54,154 | | | | | 54,154 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock options exercised |
323,156 | 3 | 10,707 | | | | | 10,710 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation, net |
| | 7,131 | | | | | 7,131 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loss on investments, net |
| | | | (94 | ) | | | (94 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Pension plan termination |
| | | | 4,526 | | | 4,526 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2007 |
143,787,206 | 1,438 | 1,943,190 | 1,060,158 | 15 | 4,916,800 | (114,413 | ) | 2,890,388 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income |
| | | 1,310,547 | | | | 1,310,547 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dividends to stockholders
($6.125 per share) |
| | | (851,128 | ) | | | | (851,128 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Anti-dilution adjustment
paid to stock plan
participants ($5.625 per
share) |
| | | (2,669 | ) | | | | (2,669 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Conversion of long-term debt |
71,574 | 1 | 3,532 | | | | | 3,533 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reversal of deferred tax
liability related to
imputed interest on
converted debentures |
| | 532 | | | | | 532 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock options exercised |
59,070 | | 2,002 | | | | | 2,002 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation, net |
| | 7,785 | | | | | 7,785 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gain on investments, net |
| | | | 495 | | | 495 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2008 |
143,917,850 | 1,439 | 1,957,041 | 1,516,908 | 510 | 4,916,800 | (114,413 | ) | 3,361,485 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income |
| | | 1,376,219 | | | | 1,376,219 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dividends to stockholders
($8.00 per share) |
| | | (1,112,058 | ) | | | | (1,112,058 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Anti-dilution adjustment
paid to stock plan
participants ($7.50 per
share) |
| | | (4,571 | ) | | | | (4,571 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock options exercised |
25,128 | | 1,069 | | | | | 1,069 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation, net |
| | 7,403 | | | | | 7,403 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gain on foreign currency forward exchange contracts,
net |
1,563 | 1,563 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Loss on investments, net |
| | | | (468 | ) | | | (468 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, 2009 |
143,942,978 | $ | 1,439 | $ | 1,965,513 | $ | 1,776,498 | $ | 1,605 | 4,916,800 | $ | (114,413 | ) | $ | 3,630,642 | |||||||||||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
56
Table of Contents
DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(In thousands)
(In thousands)
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 1,376,219 | $ | 1,310,547 | $ | 844,464 | ||||||
Other comprehensive gains, net of tax: |
||||||||||||
Pension plan termination |
| | 4,526 | |||||||||
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts: |
||||||||||||
Unrealized holding gain |
6,395 | | | |||||||||
Reclassification adjustment for gain
included in net income |
(4,832 | ) | | | ||||||||
Investments in marketable securities: |
||||||||||||
Unrealized holding gain on investments |
41 | 507 | 188 | |||||||||
Reclassification adjustment for gain
included in net income |
(509 | ) | (12 | ) | (282 | ) | ||||||
Total other comprehensive gain |
1,095 | 495 | 4,432 | |||||||||
Comprehensive income |
$ | 1,377,314 | $ | 1,311,042 | $ | 848,896 | ||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
57
Table of Contents
DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)
(In thousands)
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
Operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 1,376,219 | $ | 1,310,547 | $ | 844,464 | ||||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Depreciation |
346,446 | 287,417 | 235,729 | |||||||||
Gain on disposition of assets |
(7,902 | ) | (2,831 | ) | (8,583 | ) | ||||||
Casualty loss |
| 6,281 | | |||||||||
Gain on sale of marketable securities, net |
(619 | ) | (1,282 | ) | (1,796 | ) | ||||||
(Gain) loss on foreign currency forward exchange contracts |
(17,751 | ) | 54,010 | (5,423 | ) | |||||||
Deferred tax provision |
85,524 | 61,404 | 682 | |||||||||
Accretion of discounts on marketable securities |
(679 | ) | (2,258 | ) | (11,830 | ) | ||||||
Amortization/write-off of debt issuance costs |
672 | 529 | 9,649 | |||||||||
Amortization of debt discounts |
299 | 242 | 238 | |||||||||
Stock-based compensation expense |
6,440 | 6,293 | 4,454 | |||||||||
Excess tax benefits from stock-based payment arrangements |
(99 | ) | (1,392 | ) | (5,194 | ) | ||||||
Deferred income, net |
37,405 | 4,610 | 35,645 | |||||||||
Deferred expenses, net |
(46,640 | ) | (20,556 | ) | (37,429 | ) | ||||||
Other items, net |
14,673 | 3,995 | 15,640 | |||||||||
Proceeds from settlement of foreign currency forward
exchange contracts designated as accounting hedges |
8,895 | | | |||||||||
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
||||||||||||
Accounts receivable |
(219,867 | ) | (42,451 | ) | 43,467 | |||||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
3,503 | 1,318 | (3,933 | ) | ||||||||
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
(26,698 | ) | (27,150 | ) | 28,583 | |||||||
Taxes payable |
(43,007 | ) | (19,038 | ) | 63,953 | |||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
1,516,814 | 1,619,688 | 1,208,316 | |||||||||
Investing activities: |
||||||||||||
Capital expenditures |
(412,444 | ) | (666,857 | ) | (647,101 | ) | ||||||
Rig acquisitions |
(950,024 | ) | | | ||||||||
Proceeds from disposition of assets, net of disposal costs |
40,462 | 5,881 | 10,861 | |||||||||
Proceeds from sale and maturities of marketable securities |
4,473,891 | 1,493,803 | 3,163,475 | |||||||||
Purchase of marketable securities |
(4,473,575 | ) | (1,888,792 | ) | (2,850,135 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from (cost of) settlement of foreign currency forward exchange contracts not designated as accounting
hedges |
(28,445 | ) | (16,800 | ) | 8,109 | |||||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(1,350,135 | ) | (1,072,765 | ) | (314,791 | ) | ||||||
Financing activities: |
||||||||||||
Issuance of 5.875% senior unsecured notes |
499,255 | | | |||||||||
Issuance of 5.70% senior unsecured notes |
496,720 | | | |||||||||
Debt issuance costs and arrangement fees |
(8,671 | ) | | | ||||||||
Payment of dividends |
(1,115,211 | ) | (852,153 | ) | (796,292 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from stock options exercised |
1,494 | 2,002 | 10,836 | |||||||||
Excess tax benefits from share-based payment arrangements |
99 | 1,392 | 5,194 | |||||||||
Redemption of remaining 1.5% debentures |
| (73 | ) | | ||||||||
Net cash used in financing activities |
(126,314 | ) | (848,832 | ) | (780,262 | ) | ||||||
Net change in cash and cash equivalents |
40,365 | (301,909 | ) | 113,263 | ||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year |
336,052 | 637,961 | 524,698 | |||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year |
$ | 376,417 | $ | 336,052 | $ | 637,961 | ||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
58
Table of Contents
DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. General Information
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. is a leading, global offshore oil and gas drilling contractor
with a current fleet of 47 offshore rigs consisting of 32 semisubmersibles, 14 jack-ups and one
drillship. Unless the context otherwise requires, references in these Notes to Diamond Offshore,
we, us or our mean Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and our consolidated subsidiaries. We
were incorporated in Delaware in 1989.
Our management has evaluated subsequent events through the time of our filing with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 23, 2010, the date on which we issued our financial
statements.
As of February 19, 2010, Loews Corporation, or Loews, owned 50.4% of the outstanding shares of
our common stock.
Principles of Consolidation
Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc.
and our subsidiaries after elimination of intercompany transactions and balances.
Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the U.S., or GAAP, requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect
the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
at the date of the financial statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the
reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimated.
Restatement of Convertible Debt Securities Which May Be Partially or Fully Settled in Cash
Prior to January 1, 2009, convertible debt securities that may be settled by the issuer fully
or partially in cash were not required to be separated into a debt and equity component.
Subsequent to that date, GAAP requires that all convertible debt securities that may be settled by
the issuer fully or partially in cash be separated into a debt and an equity component. The
proceeds of the issuance are first allocated to the debt portion based on the estimated fair value
of a similar debt issue without a conversion option; the remaining proceeds are allocated to
equity. The bifurcation requirement applies to both newly issued debt and debt issuances
outstanding for any time during the accounting periods for which financial statements are presented
and is to be retrospectively applied to all past periods presented.
Both our Zero Coupon Convertible Debentures due 2020, or Zero Coupon Debentures, and our 1.5%
Convertible Senior Debentures Due 2031, or 1.5% Debentures, have such conversion features as
previously described. Our other outstanding indebtedness does not have similar conversion
features. See Note 10.
59
Table of Contents
We have retrospectively applied the bifurcation requirement to our Zero Coupon Debentures and
1.5% Debentures and, accordingly, have adjusted our consolidated financial statements and notes
thereto to reflect this change as of January 1, 2007, the earliest period presented. The effect of
bifurcation on our Consolidated Balance Sheets was as follows:
Zero Coupon Debentures | 1.5% Debentures | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, | December 31, | December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Increase (Decrease): |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Drilling and other
property and
equipment, net |
$ | 6,082 | $ | 6,429 | $ | 8,852 | $ | 9,240 | $ | 14,934 | $ | 15,669 | ||||||||||||
Deferred tax liability |
1,018 | 1,080 | 1,676 | 1,741 | 2,694 | 2,821 | ||||||||||||||||||
Additional paid-in
capital |
48,997 | 48,997 | 62,701 | 62,701 | 111,698 | 111,698 | ||||||||||||||||||
Retained earnings |
(43,933 | ) | (43,648 | ) | (55,525 | ) | (55,202 | ) | (99,458 | ) | (98,850 | ) |
The carrying amounts of the liability and equity components of the debentures at December
31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 were as follows:
Zero Coupon Debentures | 1.5% Debentures | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31, | December 31, | December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Carrying
amount of
liability
component of
debt issue |
$ | 4,179 | $ | 4,036 | $ | | $ | | $ | 4,179 | $ | 4,036 | ||||||||||||
Carrying amount
of equity
component of
debt issue |
$ | 48,997 | $ | 48,997 | $ | 62,701 | $ | 62,701 | $ | 111,698 | $ | 111,698 |
Debt discounts related to our Zero Coupon Debentures and 1.5% Debentures were fully
amortized in 2005 and 2007, respectively. Consequently, the adoption of the bifurcation
requirement had no effect on the carrying amount of our Zero Coupon Debentures at December 31, 2009
and December 31, 2008. We redeemed our then outstanding 1.5% Debentures in full in April 2008.
The effect of bifurcation of our Zero Coupon Debentures and 1.5% Debentures on our
Consolidated Statements of Operations was as follows:
Zero Coupon Debentures | 1.5% Debentures | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
For the Year Ended December 31, | For the Year Ended December 31, | For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Increase (Decrease): |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Depreciation expense
|
$ | 347 | $ | 278 | $ | 276 | $ | 388 | $ | 290 | $ | 202 | $ | 735 | $ | 568 | $ | 478 | ||||||||||||||||||
Interest expense
|
| | | | | 2,687 | | | 2,687 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tax expense
|
(62 | ) | (48 | ) | (48 | ) | (65 | ) | (46 | ) | (1,040 | ) | (127 | ) | (94 | ) | (1,088 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Income from
continuing operations
|
(285 | ) | (230 | ) | (228 | ) | (323 | ) | (244 | ) | (1,849 | ) | (608 | ) | (474 | ) | (2,077 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Net income
|
(285 | ) | (230 | ) | (228 | ) | (323 | ) | (244 | ) | (1,849 | ) | (608 | ) | (474 | ) | (2,077 | ) |
Interest expense (net of capitalized interest) for our Zero Coupon Debentures and 1.5%
Debentures related to their contractual coupon rate (including amortization of the remaining debt
discount on our 1.5% Debentures) was as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Zero Coupon Debentures |
$ | 145 | $ | 50 | $ | 79 | ||||||
1.5% Debentures |
| 34 | 5,354 |
The effective interest rate for our Zero Coupon Debentures and 1.5% Debentures was 3.63%
and 1.6%, respectively, in each year for which interest expense has been presented in the table
above.
60
Table of Contents
The effect of accounting for the bifurcation of our Zero Coupon Debentures and 1.5% Debentures
on previously reported basic and diluted earnings per share, or EPS, is summarized below.
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||
2008 | 2007 | |||||||||||||||
Reported | Restated | Reported | Restated | |||||||||||||
Earnings per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 9.43 | $ | 9.43 | $ | 6.14 | $ | 6.13 | ||||||||
Diluted |
9.43 | 9.42 | 6.12 | 6.11 |
Other Reclassifications
Previously reported amounts for Reimbursable expenses in our Consolidated Statements of
Operations for the year ended December 31, 2007 have been adjusted to include $7.4 million in
reimbursable catering expense to conform to the current presentation. These amounts were
previously reported as Contract drilling expense in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.
This reclassification had no effect on total operating expenses, operating income or net income for
the year ended December 31, 2007.
Certain amounts applicable to the prior periods have been reclassified to conform to the
classifications currently followed. Such reclassifications do not affect earnings.
Cash and Cash Equivalents, Marketable Securities
We consider short-term, highly liquid investments that have an original maturity of three
months or less and deposits in money market mutual funds that are readily convertible into cash to
be cash equivalents.
We classify our investments in marketable securities as available for sale and they are stated
at fair value in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Accordingly, any unrealized gains and losses,
net of taxes, are reported in our Consolidated Balance Sheets in Accumulated other comprehensive
gains (losses) until realized. The cost of debt securities is adjusted for amortization of
premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity and such adjustments are included in our
Consolidated Statements of Operations in Interest income. The sale and purchase of securities are
recorded on the date of the trade. The cost of debt securities sold is based on the specific
identification method. Realized gains or losses, as well as any declines in value that are judged
to be other than temporary, are reported in our Consolidated Statements of Operations in Other
income (expense).
Derivative Financial Instruments
Our derivative financial instruments include foreign currency forward exchange contracts. See
Notes 5 and 6.
Supplementary Cash Flow Information
We paid interest totaling $39.5 million, $25.1 million and $25.3 million on long-term debt for
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
We paid $176.2 million, $120.7 million and $31.7 million in foreign income taxes, net of
foreign tax refunds, during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. We
paid $252.4 million, $393.2 million and $299.0 million in U.S. federal income taxes during the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. We received a refund of $25,000 in
U.S. income taxes during the year ended December 31, 2007. We paid state income taxes of $0.2
million and $0.6 million during the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2007, respectively, and
received a $0.1 million refund of state income tax during the year ended December 31, 2008.
Cash payments for capital expenditures for the year ended December 31, 2009 included $59.4
million of capital expenditures that were accrued but unpaid at December 31, 2008. Cash payments
for capital expenditures for the year ended December 31, 2008 included $43.0 million of capital
expenditures that were accrued but unpaid at December 31, 2007. Capital expenditures that were
accrued but not paid as of December 31, 2009 totaled $64.9 million. We have included this amount
in Accrued liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2009.
61
Table of Contents
We recorded income tax benefits of $1.0 million, $1.5 million and $2.7 million related to the
exercise of employee stock options in 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
During 2008, holders of $33,000 in accreted, or carrying, value through the date of conversion
of our Zero Coupon Debentures elected to convert their outstanding debentures into shares of our
common stock. Also during 2008, the holders of $3.5 million in principal amount of our 1.5%
Debentures elected to convert their outstanding debentures into shares of our common stock. See
Note 10.
Assets Held For Sale
At December 31, 2008, we had transferred the $32.2 million net book value of the Ocean Tower
to Assets held for sale in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. In December 2008, we entered into an
agreement to sell the rig, which was damaged during Hurricane Ike (see Note 16), at a price in
excess of its carrying value. In connection with the execution of the sales agreement, we received
an initial deposit of $3.5 million from the purchaser which we recorded in Accrued liabilities in
our Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2008. The sale of the Ocean Tower was completed on
October 26, 2009, and we recognized a $6.7 million gain on the transaction.
Drilling and Other Property and Equipment
Our drilling and other property and equipment are carried at cost. We charge maintenance and
routine repairs to income currently while replacements and betterments, which meet certain
criteria, are capitalized. Costs incurred for major rig upgrades are accumulated in construction
work-in-progress, with no depreciation recorded on the additions, until the month the upgrade is
completed and the rig is placed in service. Upon retirement or sale of a rig, the cost and related
accumulated depreciation are removed from the respective accounts and any gains or losses are
included in our results of operations. Depreciation is recognized up to applicable salvage values
by applying the straight-line method over the remaining estimated useful lives from the year the
asset is placed in service. Drilling rigs and equipment are depreciated over their estimated
useful lives ranging from three to 30 years.
Capitalized Interest
We capitalize interest cost for the construction and upgrade of qualifying assets. For the
two years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, we capitalized interest on qualifying expenditures
related to the upgrades of the Ocean Endeavor and Ocean Monarch for ultra-deepwater service and the
construction of two jack-up rigs, the Ocean Shield and Ocean Scepter, through the date of each
projects completion. The upgrades of the Ocean Endeavor and Ocean Monarch were completed in March
2007 and December 2008, respectively. Construction of the Ocean Shield and Ocean Scepter was
completed in May 2008 and August 2008, respectively.
A reconciliation of our total interest cost to Interest expense as reported in our
Consolidated Statements of Operations is as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||
2008 | 2007 | |||||||
(In Thousands) | ||||||||
Total interest cost including amortization of debt
issuance costs |
$ | 26,966 | $ | 41,198 | ||||
Capitalized interest |
(16,870 | ) | (19,320 | ) | ||||
Total interest expense as reported |
$ | 10,096 | $ | 21,878 | ||||
We did not capitalize any interest cost during the year ended December 31, 2009 as there
were no qualifying expenditures during the period.
Asset Retirement Obligations
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, we had no asset retirement obligations.
62
Table of Contents
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
We evaluate our property and equipment for impairment whenever changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable (such as cold-stacking a rig
or excess spending over budget on a new-build or major rig upgrade). We utilize a
probability-weighted cash flow analysis in testing an asset for potential impairment. Our
assumptions and estimates underlying this analysis include the following:
| dayrate by rig; |
| utilization rate by rig (expressed as the actual percentage of time per year that the rig would be used); |
| the per day operating cost for each rig if active, ready-stacked or cold-stacked; and |
| salvage value for each rig. |
Based on these assumptions and estimates, we develop a matrix by assigning probabilities to various
combinations of assumed utilization rates and dayrates. We also consider the impact of a 5%
reduction in assumed dayrates for the cold-stacked rigs (holding all other assumptions and
estimates in the model constant), or alternatively the impact of a 5% reduction in utilization
(again holding all other assumptions and estimates in the model constant) as part of our analysis.
2009. As of December 31, 2009, we had cold-stacked our three mat-supported jack-up rigs and
were in the process of cold-stacking an intermediate semisubmersible drilling rig in Malaysia. We
performed an impairment review for each of these rigs using the methodology described above. Based
on our analyses, we have concluded that these four rigs were not subject to impairment at December
31, 2009.
At December 31, 2009, the remaining rigs in our fleet were currently working under contract,
mobilizing to new locations or being actively marketed. We do not believe that current
circumstances indicate that there was an impairment of these 43 rigs at December 31, 2009.
2008. As of December 31, 2008, all of our drilling rigs were either under contract, in
shipyards for surveys or contract modifications or, as in the case of the upgraded Ocean Monarch,
mobilizing to the U.S., except for two jack-up rigs. One of these idle units, the Ocean Tower, was
damaged during Hurricane Ike in September 2008 (see Note 16), and was presented as Assets held for
sale in our Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2008. The rig was subsequently sold in
October 2009 for a net gain of $6.7 million. At December 31, 2008, the second of our idle rigs was
ready-stacked while waiting to begin drilling operations in early January 2009. Consequently, we
determined that an impairment test of our drilling equipment was not needed as all of our drilling
units were being marketed at the time, and we did not have any cold-stacked rigs at December 31,
2008. We have concluded that circumstances at that time did not indicate that there was an
impairment of our property and equipment.
2007. As of December 31, 2007, all of our drilling rigs were either under contract or were in
shipyards for surveys, contract modifications or major upgrade, except for two of our jack-up
drilling rigs located in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. At December 31, 2007, one of these idle units
was under contract but waiting to begin drilling operations while the other unit was being actively
marketed. Consequently, we determined that an impairment test of our drilling equipment was not
needed as we were currently marketing all of our drilling units at the time. We did not have any
cold-stacked rigs at December 31, 2007. We have concluded that circumstances at that time did not
indicate that there was an impairment of our property and equipment.
Managements assumptions are an inherent part of our asset impairment evaluation and the use
of different assumptions could produce results that differ from those reported.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
We believe that the carrying amount of our current financial instruments approximates fair
value because of the short maturity of these instruments. For non-current financial instruments we
use quoted market prices, when available, and discounted cash flows to estimate fair value. See
Note 6.
63
Table of Contents
Debt Issuance Costs
Debt issuance costs are included in our Consolidated Balance Sheets in Other assets and are
amortized over the respective terms of the related debt. Interest expense for 2008 included
$84,000 in debt issuance costs that we wrote off in connection with the conversions and final
redemption of our 1.5% Debentures during 2008. Interest expense for the years ended December 31,
2007 included $9.2 million in debt issuance costs that we wrote off in connection with conversions
of our 1.5% Debentures and Zero Coupon Debentures into shares of our common stock. See Note 10.
Income Taxes
We account for income taxes in accordance with accounting standards that require the
recognition of the amount of taxes payable or refundable for the current year and an asset and
liability approach in recognizing the amount of deferred tax liabilities and assets for the future
tax consequences of events that have been currently recognized in our financial statements or tax
returns. In each of our tax jurisdictions we recognize a current tax liability or asset for the
estimated taxes payable or refundable on tax returns for the current year and a deferred tax asset
or liability for the estimated future tax effects attributable to temporary differences and
carryforwards. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance, if necessary, which is
determined by the amount of any tax benefits that, based on available evidence, are not expected to
be realized under a more likely than not approach. We make judgments regarding future events and
related estimates especially as they pertain to the forecasting of our effective tax rate, the
potential realization of deferred tax assets such as utilization of foreign tax credits, and
exposure to the disallowance of items deducted on tax returns upon audit.
Our net income tax expense or benefit is a function of the mix between our domestic and
international pre-tax earnings or losses, respectively, as well as the mix of international tax
jurisdictions in which we operate. Certain of our international rigs are owned or operated,
directly or indirectly, by Diamond Offshore International Limited, a Cayman Islands subsidiary
which we wholly own. Since forming this subsidiary in 2002, it has been our intention to
indefinitely reinvest the earnings of the subsidiary to finance foreign activity. In December
2007, this subsidiary made a non-recurring distribution to its U.S. parent. Notwithstanding the
non-recurring distribution made in December 2007, it remains our intention to indefinitely reinvest
the earnings of this subsidiary to finance foreign activities, except for the earnings of Diamond
East Asia Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Diamond Offshore International Limited formed in
December 2008. It is our intention to repatriate the earnings of Diamond East Asia Limited and,
accordingly, U.S. income taxes are recorded on its earnings.
We record interest related to accrued unrecognized tax positions in interest expense and
recognize penalties associated with uncertain tax positions in our tax expense. See Note 14.
Treasury Stock
Depending on market conditions, we may, from time to time, purchase shares of our common stock
in the open market or otherwise. We account for the purchase of treasury stock using the cost
method, which reports the cost of the shares acquired in Treasury stock as a deduction from
stockholders equity in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We did not repurchase any shares of our
outstanding common stock during 2009, 2008 or 2007.
Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Comprehensive income (loss) is the change in equity of a business enterprise during a period
from transactions and other events and circumstances except those transactions resulting from
investments by owners and distributions to owners. Comprehensive income (loss) for the three years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 includes net income (loss) and unrealized holding gains and
losses on marketable securities and financial derivatives designated as cash flow accounting
hedges, as well as an adjustment related to the termination of our pension plan in 2007. See Note
11.
Foreign Currency
Our functional currency is the U.S. dollar. Foreign currency transaction gains and losses,
including gains and losses from the settlement of foreign currency forward exchange, or FOREX,
contracts not designated as accounting hedges, are reported as Foreign currency transaction gain
(loss) in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.
64
Table of Contents
For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recognized net foreign currency gains
(losses) of $11.5 million, $(65.6) million and $2.9 million, respectively. See Note 5.
Revenue Recognition
Revenue from our dayrate drilling contracts is recognized as services are performed. In
connection with such drilling contracts, we may receive fees (either lump-sum or dayrate) for the
mobilization of equipment. These fees are earned as services are performed over the initial term
of the related drilling contracts. We defer mobilization fees received, as well as direct and
incremental mobilization costs incurred, and amortize each, on a straight line basis, over the term
of the related drilling contracts (which is the period we estimate to be benefited from the
mobilization activity). Straight line amortization of mobilization revenues and related costs over
the initial term of the related drilling contracts (which generally range from two to 60 months) is
consistent with the timing of net cash flows generated from the actual drilling services performed.
Absent a contract, mobilization costs are recognized as incurred.
From time to time, we may receive fees from our customers for capital improvements to our rigs
(either lump-sum or dayrate). We defer such fees received in Accrued liabilities and Other
liabilities in our Consolidated Balance Sheets and recognize these fees into income on a
straight-line basis over the period of the related drilling contract. We capitalize the costs of
such capital improvements and depreciate them over the estimated useful life of the asset.
We record reimbursements received for the purchase of supplies, equipment, personnel services
and other services provided at the request of our customers in accordance with a contract or
agreement, for the gross amount billed to the customer, as Revenues related to reimbursable
expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
The Financial Standards Accounting Board, or FASB, has issued Accounting Standards Update
2010-06, or ASU 2010-06, that describes amendments to FASB Accounting Standards Codification
Subtopic 820-10 relating to fair value measurements. ASU 2010-06 amends the original codification
to require additional disclosures regarding transfers in and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value
measurements and activity within Level 3 fair value measurements. In addition, ASU 2010-06
clarifies existing disclosure requirements regarding the level of disaggregation of classes of
assets and liabilities for which fair value measurements are disclosed, as well as disclosures
about inputs and valuation techniques. This amendment is effective for interim and annual
reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009, except for certain disclosures regarding Level
3 fair value measurements which are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2010.
Early adoption is permitted. We are currently reviewing the effect of these amendments; however,
we do not expect the application of ASU 2010-06 to have a material effect on our results of
operations or financial position.
2. Stock-Based Compensation
Our Second Amended and Restated 2000 Stock Option Plan, as amended, or Stock Plan, provides
for the issuance of either incentive stock options or non-qualified stock options to our employees,
consultants and non-employee directors. Our Stock Plan also authorizes the award of stock
appreciation rights, or SARs, in tandem with stock options or separately. The maximum aggregate
number of shares of our common stock for which stock options or SARs may be granted is 1,500,000
shares. The exercise price per share may not be less than the fair market value of the common
stock on the date of grant. Generally, stock options and SARs vest ratably over a four year period
and expire in ten years.
Total compensation cost recognized for Stock Plan transactions for the years ended December
31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $6.5 million, $6.3 million and $4.5 million, respectively. Tax
benefits recognized for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 related thereto were $2.1
million, $2.1 million and $1.5 million, respectively.
The fair value of options and SARs granted under the Stock Plan during each of the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was estimated using the Black Scholes pricing model.
65
Table of Contents
The following are the weighted average assumptions used in estimating the fair value of our
options and SARS:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
Expected life of stock options/SARs (in years) |
5 | 5 | 5 | |||||||||
Expected volatility |
37.24 | % | 31.96 | % | 27.53 | % | ||||||
Dividend yield |
.62 | % | .51 | % | .48 | % | ||||||
Risk free interest rate |
2.17 | % | 2.66 | % | 4.28 | % |
Expected life of stock options and SARs is based on historical data as is the expected
volatility. The dividend yield is based on the current approved regular dividend rate in effect
and the current market price at the time of grant. Risk free interest rates are determined using
the U.S. Treasury yield curve at time of grant with a term equal to the expected life of the
options and SARs.
A summary of activity under the Stock Plan as of December 31, 2009 and changes during the year
then ended is as follows:
Weighted- | ||||||||||||||||
Average | ||||||||||||||||
Remaining | Aggregate | |||||||||||||||
Weighted- | Contractual | Intrinsic | ||||||||||||||
Number of | Average | Term | Value | |||||||||||||
Awards | Exercise Price | (Years) | (In Thousands) | |||||||||||||
Awards outstanding at January 1, 2009 |
547,032 | $ | 97.04 | |||||||||||||
Granted |
201,050 | $ | 83.48 | |||||||||||||
Exercised |
(42,087 | ) | $ | 65.73 | ||||||||||||
Forfeited |
(20,252 | ) | $ | 97.85 | ||||||||||||
Expired |
(4,000 | ) | $ | 119.83 | ||||||||||||
Awards outstanding at December 31, 2009 |
681,743 | $ | 94.82 | 8.1 | $ | 8,618 | ||||||||||
Awards exercisable at December 31, 2009 |
283,272 | $ | 91.11 | 7.5 | $ | 4,593 | ||||||||||
The weighted-average grant date fair values of awards granted during the years ended December
31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 were $28.46, $33.73 and $36.80, respectively. The total intrinsic value of
awards exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $1.5 million, $6.3
million and $20.6 million, respectively. The total fair value of awards vested during the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $6.6 million, $5.3 million and $3.6 million,
respectively. As of December 31, 2009 there was $9.8 million of total unrecognized compensation
cost related to nonvested stock options and SARs granted under the Stock Plan which we expect to
recognize over a weighted average period of 2.37 years.
66
Table of Contents
3. Earnings Per Share
A reconciliation of the numerators and the denominators of the basic and diluted per-share
computations follows:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
(In thousands, except per share data) | ||||||||||||
Net income basic (numerator): |
$ | 1,376,219 | $ | 1,310,547 | $ | 844,464 | ||||||
Effect of dilutive potential shares |
||||||||||||
Zero Coupon Debentures |
94 | 32 | 49 | |||||||||
1.5% Debentures |
| 22 | 3,845 | |||||||||
Net income including conversions diluted (numerator): |
$ | 1,376,313 | $ | 1,310,601 | $ | 848,358 | ||||||
Weighted-average shares basic (denominator): |
139,007 | 138,959 | 137,816 | |||||||||
Effect of dilutive potential shares |
||||||||||||
Zero Coupon Debentures |
51 | 51 | 54 | |||||||||
1.5% Debentures |
| 19 | 1,015 | |||||||||
Stock options and SARs |
39 | 44 | 60 | |||||||||
Weighted-average shares including conversions
diluted (denominator): |
139,097 | 139,073 | 138,945 | |||||||||
Earnings per share: |
||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 9.90 | $ | 9.43 | $ | 6.13 | ||||||
Diluted |
$ | 9.89 | $ | 9.42 | $ | 6.11 | ||||||
Our computation of diluted EPS for the year ended December 31, 2009 excludes stock
options representing 8,291 shares of common stock and 413,610 SARs. The inclusion of such
potentially dilutive shares in the computation of diluted EPS would have been antidilutive for the
period.
Our computation of diluted EPS for the year ended December 31, 2008 excludes stock options
representing 3,362 shares of common stock and 254,821 SARs. The inclusion of such potentially
dilutive shares in the computation of diluted EPS would have been antidilutive for the period.
Our computation of diluted EPS for the year ended December 31, 2007 excludes stock options
representing 22,937 shares of common stock and 154,119 SARs. The inclusion of such potentially
dilutive shares in the computation of diluted EPS would have been antidilutive for the period.
67
Table of Contents
4. Marketable Securities
We report our investments as current assets in our Consolidated Balance Sheets in Marketable
securities, representing the investment of cash available for current operations.
Our other investments in marketable securities are classified as available for sale and are
summarized as follows:
December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||
Amortized | Unrealized | Market | ||||||||||
Cost | Gain (Loss) | Value | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Due within one year |
$ | 399,997 | $ | (1 | ) | $ | 399,996 | |||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
792 | 65 | 857 | |||||||||
Total |
$ | 400,789 | $ | 64 | $ | 400,853 | ||||||
December 31, 2008 | ||||||||||||
Amortized | Unrealized | Market | ||||||||||
Cost | Gain | Value | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Due within one year |
$ | 398,791 | $ | 758 | $ | 399,549 | ||||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
1,016 | 27 | 1,043 | |||||||||
Total |
$ | 399,807 | $ | 785 | $ | 400,592 | ||||||
Proceeds from maturities and sales of marketable securities and gross realized gains and
losses are summarized as follows:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Proceeds from maturities |
$ | 1,925,000 | $ | 550,000 | $ | 1,325,000 | ||||||
Proceeds from sales |
2,548,891 | 943,803 | 1,838,475 | |||||||||
Gross realized gains |
791 | 1,291 | 1,856 | |||||||||
Gross realized losses |
(172 | ) | (9 | ) | (60 | ) |
5. Derivative Financial Instruments
Foreign Currency Forward Exchange Contracts
Our international operations expose us to foreign exchange risk associated with our costs
payable in foreign currencies for employee compensation, foreign income tax payments and purchases
from foreign suppliers. We may utilize FOREX contracts to reduce our foreign exchange risk. Our
FOREX contracts may obligate us to exchange predetermined amounts of foreign currencies on
specified dates or to net settle the spread between the contracted foreign currency exchange rate
and the spot rate on the contract settlement date, which, for most of our contracts, is the average
spot rate for the contract period.
We enter into FOREX contracts when we believe market conditions are favorable to purchase
contracts for future settlement with the expectation that such contracts, when settled, will reduce
our exposure to foreign currency gains/losses on foreign currency expenditures in the future. The
amount and duration of such contracts is based on our monthly forecast of expenditures in the
significant currencies in which we do business and for which there is a financial market (i.e.,
Australian dollars, Brazilian reais, British pounds sterling, Mexican pesos and Norwegian kroner).
These forward contracts are derivatives as defined by GAAP.
In accordance with GAAP, each derivative contract is stated in the balance sheet at its fair
value with gains and losses reflected in the income statement except that, to the extent the
derivative qualifies for and is designated as an accounting hedge, the gains and losses are
reflected in income in the same period as offsetting losses and gains on
68
Table of Contents
the qualifying hedged positions. For derivative contracts entered into prior to May 2009, we did
not seek hedge accounting treatment under GAAP. Accordingly, prior to May 2009, all adjustments to
record the carrying value of our derivative financial instruments at fair value were reported as
Foreign currency transaction gain (loss) in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Realized gains or losses upon settlement of derivative contracts not designated as cash flow
hedges are reported as Foreign currency transaction gain (loss) in our Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Beginning in May 2009, we began a hedging strategy and designated certain of our qualifying
FOREX contracts as cash flow hedges. These hedges are expected to be highly effective, and
therefore, adjustments to record the carrying value of the effective portion of our derivative
financial instruments to their fair value is recorded as a component of Accumulated other
comprehensive gains, or AOCG, in our Consolidated Financial Statements. The effective portion
of the cash flow hedge will remain in AOCG until it is reclassified into earnings in the period or
periods during which the hedged transaction affects earnings or it is determined that the hedged
transaction will not occur. Adjustments to record the carrying value of the ineffective portion of
our derivative financial instruments to fair value are recorded as Foreign currency transaction
gain (loss) in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Realized gains or losses upon settlement of derivative contracts designated as cash flow
hedges are reported as a component of Contract drilling expense in our Consolidated Statements of
Operations to offset the impact of foreign currency fluctuations in our expenditures in local
foreign currencies in the countries in which we operate.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, we settled FOREX contracts with an aggregate notional
value of approximately $333.4 million, of which an aggregate notional value of $112.8 million was
designated as an accounting hedge. During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, we settled
FOREX contracts with an aggregate notional value of approximately $538.8 million and $144.4
million, respectively, none of which were designated as accounting hedges.
The following table presents the amounts recognized in our Consolidated Statements of
Operations related to our FOREX contracts designated as hedging instruments for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
Location of Gain (Loss) Recognized in Income | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Contract drilling expense |
$ | 8,895 | $ | | $ | |
The following table presents the amounts recognized in our Consolidated Statements of
Operations related to our FOREX contracts not designated as hedging instruments for the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
For the Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
Location of Gain (Loss) Recognized in Income | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Foreign currency transaction gain (loss)
|
$ | 8,856 | $ | (54,010 | ) | $ | 5,423 |
The amount presented in the table above for the year ended December 31, 2009 includes net
unrealized gains aggregating $37.3 million to record the carrying value of our derivative financial
instruments to their fair value. The amounts presented in the table above include net unrealized
losses of approximately $(37.2) million and $(2.7) million for the years ended December 31, 2008
and 2007, respectively, to record the carrying value of our derivative financial instruments to
their fair value.
As of December 31, 2009, we had FOREX contracts outstanding in the aggregate notional amount
of $114.0 million, consisting of $37.6 million in Australian dollars, $42.6 million in Brazilian
reais, $20.7 million in British pounds sterling, $5.3 million in Mexican pesos and $7.8 million in
Norwegian kroner. These contracts generally settle monthly through September 2010. As of December
31, 2009, all outstanding derivative contracts had been designated as cash flow hedges. See Note
6.
69
Table of Contents
The following table presents the fair values of our derivative financial instruments at
December 31, 2009.
Assets | Liabilities | |||||||||
Balance Sheet | Balance Sheet | |||||||||
Location | Fair Value | Location | Fair Value | |||||||
(In thousands) | (In thousands) | |||||||||
Derivatives
designated as
hedging
instruments: |
||||||||||
FOREX contracts |
Prepaid expenses and other current assets | $ 2,634 | Accrued liabilities | $(230) |
The following table presents the fair values of our derivative financial instruments at
December 31, 2008.
Assets | Liabilities | |||||||||
Balance Sheet | Balance Sheet | |||||||||
Location | Fair Value | Location | Fair Value | |||||||
(In thousands) | (In thousands) | |||||||||
Derivatives
not designated as
hedging
instruments: |
||||||||||
FOREX contracts |
Prepaid expenses and other current assets | $ | Accrued liabilities | $(37,301) |
The following table presents the amounts recognized in our Consolidated Balance Sheets and
Consolidated Statements of Operations related to our FOREX contracts designated as cash flow hedges
for the year ended December 31, 2009.
Location of Gain | ||||||||
Amount of | Location of | Recognized in Income | Amount of (Loss) | |||||
Pre-Tax Gain | Pre-Tax Gain | Amount of | on Derivative | Recognized in Income on | ||||
Recognized in | Reclassified from | Pre-Tax Gain | (Ineffective Portion | Derivative (Ineffective | ||||
AOCG on | AOCG into | Reclassified from | and Amount Excluded | Portion and Amount | ||||
Derivative | Income (Effective | AOCG into Income | from Effectiveness | Excluded from | ||||
(Effective Portion) | Portion) | (Effective Portion) | Testing) | Effectiveness Testing) | ||||
(In thousands) | (In thousands) | (In thousands) | ||||||
$9,838 | Contract drilling expense | $7,434 | Foreign currency transaction gain | $ |
As of December 31, 2009, the estimated amount of net unrealized gains associated with our
FOREX contracts that will be reclassified to earnings during the next twelve months was $2.4
million. The net unrealized gains associated with these derivative financial instruments will be
reclassified to contract drilling expense.
6. Financial Instruments and Fair Value Disclosures
Concentrations of Credit and Market Risk
Financial instruments which potentially subject us to significant concentrations of credit or
market risk consist primarily of periodic temporary investments of excess cash, trade accounts
receivable and investments in debt securities, including mortgage-backed securities. We place our
excess cash investments in high quality short-term money market instruments through several
financial institutions. At times, such investments may be in excess of the insurable limit. We
periodically evaluate the relative credit standing of these financial institutions as part of our
investment strategy.
Concentrations of credit risk with respect to our trade accounts receivable are limited
primarily due to the entities comprising our customer base. Since the market for our services is
the offshore oil and gas industry, this customer base consists primarily of major and independent
oil and gas companies and government-owned oil companies. In general, before working for a
customer with whom we have not had a prior business relationship
70
Table of Contents
and/or whose financial stability
may be uncertain to us, we perform a credit review on that company. Based on that analysis, we may
require that the customer present a letter of credit, prepay or provide other credit enhancements.
During the second quarter of 2009, one of our customers sought short-term financial relief
with respect to an existing contractual agreement with us for a six-well, one-year minimum contract
term, program that began in May 2009. As a result, we agreed to amend our existing contract with
this customer, and in consideration of this amendment, we are to receive a $20,000 per day increase
in the total contractual operating dayrate, to a total of $560,000 per day, for a minimum of the
first 240 days of the initial one-year contract. Under the terms of the amended agreement, the
customer is obligated to pay us $75,000 per day in accordance with our normal credit terms (due 30
days after receipt of invoice). The remainder of the dayrate for the six-well program (minimum of
240 days) will be paid through the conveyance of a 27% net profits interest, or NPI, in a minimum
of five developmental oil-and-gas producing properties covering six wells owned by the customer.
Based on the current production payout estimate, we anticipate that the first payment from the
conveyance of the NPI will commence in early 2010. Payment of such amounts, and the timing of such
payments, are contingent upon such production and upon energy sale prices.
At December 31, 2009, the $70.5 million portion of this trade receivable that is expected to
be paid from the NPI, is presented as Accounts Receivable in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. At
December 31, 2009, we believe that collectability of the amount owed pursuant to the NPI
arrangement is reasonably assured. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we earned a dayrate
totaling $560,000 per day and recognized revenue and interest income per day of $540,000 and
$20,000, respectively.
Historically, we have not experienced significant losses on our trade receivables. However,
in December 2008, we recorded a $31.9 million provision for bad debts to reserve the uncollected
balance of one of our customers in the United Kingdom, or U.K., that had entered into
administration (a U.K. insolvency proceeding similar to U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy). In December
2009, we recorded a $10.7 million provision for bad debts to reserve a portion of the uncollected
balance of receivables related to our operations in Egypt and recovered $0.9 million associated
with the reserve for bad debts recorded in 2008. We also provide allowances for potential credit
losses when necessary. No additional allowances were deemed necessary for the years presented.
A majority of our investments in debt securities are U.S. government securities with minimal
credit risk. However, we are exposed to market risk due to price volatility associated with
interest rate fluctuations.
Fair Values
The amounts reported in our Consolidated Balance Sheets for cash and cash equivalents,
marketable securities, accounts receivable, forward exchange contracts and accounts payable
approximate fair value. Fair values and related carrying values of our debt instruments are shown
below.
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||||||||||
Fair Value | Carrying Value | Fair Value | Carrying Value | |||||||||||||
(In millions) | ||||||||||||||||
Zero Coupon Debentures |
$ | 5.1 | $ | 4.2 | $ | 3.0 | $ | 4.0 | ||||||||
4.875% Senior Notes |
257.5 | 249.7 | 230.0 | 249.6 | ||||||||||||
5.15% Senior Notes |
263.3 | 249.7 | 237.0 | 249.6 | ||||||||||||
5.70% Senior Notes |
490.4 | 496.7 | | | ||||||||||||
5.875% Senior Notes |
530.6 | 499.3 | | |
We have estimated the fair value amounts by using appropriate valuation methodologies and
information available to management as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Considerable
judgment is required in developing these estimates, and accordingly, no assurance can be given that
the estimated values are indicative of the amounts that would be realized in a free market
exchange. The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each class
of financial instrument for which it was practicable to estimate that value:
| Cash and cash equivalents The carrying amounts approximate fair value because of the short maturity of these instruments. |
71
Table of Contents
| Marketable securities The fair values of the debt securities, including mortgage-backed securities, available for sale were based on the quoted closing market prices on December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. | ||
| Accounts receivable and accounts payable The carrying amounts approximate fair value based on the nature of the instruments. | ||
| Forward exchange contracts The fair value of our foreign currency forward exchange contracts is based on both quoted market prices and valuations derived from pricing models on December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. | ||
| Long-term debt The fair value of our 5.70% Senior Notes due 2039, or 5.70% Senior Notes, and 5.875% Senior Notes due 2019, or 5.875% Senior Notes, was based on the quoted closing market price on December 31, 2009 from brokers of these instruments. The fair value of our 4.875% Senior Notes due July 1, 2015, or 4.875% Senior Notes, and 5.15% Senior Notes due September 1, 2014, or 5.15% Senior Notes, was based on the quoted closing market price on December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, from brokers of these instruments. The fair value of our Zero Coupon Debentures was based on the closing market price of our common stock on December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, and the stated conversion rate for these debentures. |
Certain of our assets and liabilities are required to be measured at fair value in accordance
with GAAP. Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid
to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset
or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. The
fair value hierarchy prescribed by GAAP requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs
and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. There are three levels of
inputs that may be used to measure fair value:
Level 1
|
Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets. Level 1 assets include short-term investments such as money market funds and U.S. Treasury Bills. Our Level 1 assets at December 31, 2009 consisted of cash held in money market funds of $337.8 million and investments in U.S. Treasury Bills of $400.0 million. Our Level 1 assets at December 31, 2008 consisted of cash held in money market funds of $300.5 million and investments in U.S. Treasury Bills of $399.5 million. | |
Level 2
|
Quoted market prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs and significant value drivers are observable in active markets. Level 2 assets and liabilities include mortgage-backed securities and over-the-counter foreign currency forward exchange contracts that are valued using a model-derived valuation technique. | |
Level 3
|
Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable. Level 3 assets and liabilities generally include financial instruments whose value is determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, as well as instruments for which the determination of fair value requires significant management judgment or estimation or for which there is a lack of transparency as to the inputs used. |
Assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized below:
December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||||||
Fair Value Measurements Using | Assets at Fair | |||||||||||||||
Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Value | |||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||
Assets: |
||||||||||||||||
Short-term investments |
$ | 737,830 | $ | | $ | | $ | 737,830 | ||||||||
FOREX contracts |
| 2,634 | | 2,634 | ||||||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
| 857 | | 857 | ||||||||||||
Total assets |
$ | 737,830 | $ | 3,491 | $ | | $ | 741,321 | ||||||||
Liabilities: |
||||||||||||||||
FOREX contracts |
$ | | $ | (230 | ) | $ | | $ | (230 | ) | ||||||
72
Table of Contents
December 31, 2008 | ||||||||||||||||
Fair Value Measurements Using | Assets at Fair | |||||||||||||||
Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Value | |||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||
Assets: |
||||||||||||||||
Short-term investments |
$ | 700,038 | $ | | $ | | $ | 700,038 | ||||||||
Mortgage-backed securities |
| 1,043 | | 1,043 | ||||||||||||
Total assets |
$ | 700,038 | $ | 1,043 | $ | | $ | 701,081 | ||||||||
Liabilities: |
||||||||||||||||
FOREX contracts |
$ | | $ | (37,301 | ) | $ | | $ | (37,301 | ) | ||||||
7. Prepaid Expenses and Other Current Assets
Prepaid expenses and other current assets consist of the following:
December 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||
Rig spare parts and supplies |
$ | 49,122 | $ | 52,481 | ||||
Deferred mobilization costs |
45,502 | 28,924 | ||||||
Prepaid insurance |
11,478 | 11,845 | ||||||
Deferred tax assets |
7,235 | 9,350 | ||||||
Deposits |
3,562 | 3,846 | ||||||
Prepaid taxes |
26,109 | 11,589 | ||||||
FOREX contracts |
2,634 | | ||||||
Other |
9,435 | 5,011 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 155,077 | $ | 123,046 | ||||
8. Drilling and Other Property and Equipment
Cost and accumulated depreciation of drilling and other property and equipment are summarized
as follows:
December 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||
Drilling rigs and equipment |
$ | 6,950,303 | $ | 5,600,306 | ||||
Land and buildings |
44,640 | 35,069 | ||||||
Office equipment and other |
38,203 | 34,021 | ||||||
Cost |
7,033,146 | 5,669,396 | ||||||
Less accumulated depreciation |
(2,601,094 | ) | (2,255,023 | ) | ||||
Drilling and other property and equipment, net |
$ | 4,432,052 | $ | 3,414,373 | ||||
During 2009, we purchased two new-build, dynamically positioned, semisubmersible drilling
rigs, the Ocean Courage and Ocean Valor, for an aggregate cost of $950.0 million, exclusive of
final commissioning, initial mobilization, drill string and other necessary capital spares.
73
Table of Contents
9. Accrued Liabilities
Accrued liabilities consist of the following:
December 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||
Accrued project/upgrade expenses |
$ | 115,778 | $ | 107,502 | ||||
Payroll and benefits |
69,065 | 69,326 | ||||||
Deferred revenue |
46,666 | 39,307 | ||||||
Rig operating expenses |
29,141 | 29,749 | ||||||
Interest payable |
22,710 | 10,385 | ||||||
Personal injury and other claims |
10,018 | 10,489 | ||||||
FOREX contracts |
230 | 37,301 | ||||||
Hurricane related expenses |
| 5,080 | ||||||
Other |
8,263 | 20,387 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 301,871 | $ | 329,526 | ||||
10. Long-Term Debt
Long-term debt consists of the following:
December 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||
Zero Coupon Debentures (due 2020) |
$ | 4,179 | $ | 4,036 | ||||
5.15% Senior Notes (due 2014) |
249,682 | 249,623 | ||||||
4.875% Senior Notes (due 2015) |
249,671 | 249,621 | ||||||
5.875% Senior Notes (due 2019) |
499,292 | | ||||||
5.70% Senior Notes (due 2039) |
496,730 | | ||||||
1,499,554 | 503,280 | |||||||
Less: Current maturities |
4,179 | | ||||||
Total |
$ | 1,495,375 | $ | 503,280 | ||||
Certain of our long-term debt payments may be accelerated due to rights that the holders
of our debt securities have to put the securities to us. The holders of our outstanding Zero
Coupon Debentures have the right to require us to purchase all or a portion of their outstanding
debentures on June 6, 2010. See Zero Coupon Debentures for further discussion of the rights that
the holders of these debentures have to put the securities to us.
The aggregate maturities of long-term debt for each of the five years subsequent to December
31, 2009, are as follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | ||||
2010 |
$ | 4,179 | ||
2011 |
| |||
2012 |
| |||
2013 |
| |||
2014 |
249,682 | |||
Thereafter |
1,245,693 | |||
1,499,554 | ||||
Less: Current maturities |
4,179 | |||
Total |
$ | 1,495,375 | ||
74
Table of Contents
$285 Million Revolving Credit Facility
In November 2006, we entered into a $285 million syndicated, senior unsecured revolving credit
facility, or Credit Facility, for general corporate purposes, including loans and performance or
standby letters of credit, that will mature on November 2, 2011.
Loans under the Credit Facility bear interest at a rate per annum equal to, at our election,
either (i) the higher of the prime rate or the federal funds rate plus 0.5% or (ii) the London
Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR, plus an applicable margin, varying from 0.20% to 0.525%, based on
our current credit ratings. Under our Credit Facility, we also pay, based on our current credit
ratings, and as applicable, other customary fees, including, but not limited to, a facility fee on
the total commitment under the Credit Facility regardless of usage and a utilization fee that
applies if the aggregate of all loans outstanding under the Credit Facility equals or exceeds 50%
of the total commitment under the facility. Changes in credit ratings could lower or raise the
fees that we pay under the Credit Facility.
The Credit Facility contains customary covenants, including, but not limited to, the
maintenance of a ratio of consolidated indebtedness to total capitalization, as defined in the
Credit Facility, of not more than 60% at the end of each fiscal quarter and limitations on liens,
mergers, consolidations, liquidation and dissolution, changes in lines of business, swap
agreements, transactions with affiliates and subsidiary indebtedness.
Based on our current credit ratings at December 31, 2009, the applicable margin on LIBOR loans
would have been 0.24%. As of December 31, 2009, there were no loans outstanding under the Credit
Facility. See Note 12 for a discussion of letters of credit issued under the Credit Facility.
5.70% Senior Notes
On October 8, 2009, we issued $500.0 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.70% Senior
Notes for general corporate purposes. The 5.70% Senior Notes were issued at an offering price of
99.344% of the principal and resulted in net proceeds to us of approximately $496.7 million. We
incurred issuance costs of $4.8 million related to this transaction.
These notes bear interest at 5.70% per year, payable semiannually in arrears on April 15 and
October 15 of each year, beginning April 15, 2010, and mature on October 15, 2039. The 5.70%
Senior Notes are unsecured and unsubordinated obligations of Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and
rank equal in right of payment to its existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated
indebtedness, and will be effectively subordinated to all existing and future obligations of our
subsidiaries. We have the right to redeem all or a portion of these notes for cash at any time or
from time to time, on at least 15 days but not more than 60 days prior written notice, at the
redemption price specified in the governing indenture plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date
of redemption.
5.875% Senior Notes
On May 4, 2009, we issued $500.0 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.875% Senior Notes
for general corporate purposes. The 5.875% Senior Notes were issued at an offering price of
99.851% of the principal and resulted in net proceeds to us of approximately $499.3 million. We
incurred issuance costs of $4.0 million related to this transaction.
These notes bear interest at 5.875% per year, payable semiannually in arrears on May 1 and
November 1 of each year, and mature on May 1, 2019. The 5.875% Senior Notes are unsecured and
unsubordinated obligations of Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and rank equal in right of payment to
its existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated indebtedness, and will be effectively
subordinated to all existing and future obligations of our subsidiaries. We have the right to
redeem all or a portion of these notes for cash at any time or from time to time, on at least 15
days but not more than 60 days prior written notice, at the redemption price specified in the
governing indenture plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption.
4.875% Senior Notes
Our 4.875% Senior Notes, in the aggregate principal amount of $250.0 million, bear interest at
4.875% per year, payable semiannually in arrears on January 1 and July 1 of each year, and mature
on July 1, 2015. Our 4.875% Senior Notes are unsecured and unsubordinated obligations of Diamond
Offshore Drilling, Inc. and rank equal in
75
Table of Contents
right of payment to its existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated indebtedness, and
will be effectively subordinated to all existing and future obligations of our subsidiaries. We
have the right to redeem all or a portion of the 4.875% Senior Notes for cash at any time or from
time to time, on at least 15 days but not more than 60 days prior written notice, at the redemption
price specified in the governing indenture plus accrued and unpaid interest to the date of
redemption.
5.15% Senior Notes
Our 5.15% Senior Notes, in the aggregate principal amount of $250.0 million, bear interest at
5.15% per year, payable semiannually in arrears on March 1 and September 1 of each year, and mature
on September 1, 2014. The 5.15% Senior Notes are unsecured and unsubordinated obligations of
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. and rank equal in right of payment to its existing and future
unsecured and unsubordinated indebtedness, and will be effectively subordinated to all existing and
future obligations of our subsidiaries. We have the right to redeem all or a portion of the 5.15%
Senior Notes for cash at any time or from time to time, on at least 15 days but not more than 60
days prior written notice, at the redemption price specified in the governing indenture plus
accrued and unpaid interest to the date of redemption.
Zero Coupon Debentures
We issued our Zero Coupon Debentures on June 6, 2000 at a price of $499.60 per $1,000
principal amount at maturity, representing a yield to maturity of 3.50% per year, and they mature
on June 6, 2020. We will not pay interest prior to maturity unless we elect to convert the Zero
Coupon Debentures to interest-bearing debentures upon the occurrence of certain tax events. The
Zero Coupon Debentures are convertible at the option of the holder at any time prior to maturity,
unless previously redeemed, into our common stock at a fixed conversion rate of 8.6075 shares of
common stock per $1,000 principal amount at maturity of Zero Coupon Debentures, subject to
adjustments in certain events. In addition, holders may require us to purchase, for cash, all or a
portion of their Zero Coupon Debentures upon a change in control (as defined in the governing
indenture) for a purchase price equal to the accreted value through the date of repurchase. The
Zero Coupon Debentures are senior unsecured obligations of Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc.
We also have the right to redeem the Zero Coupon Debentures, in whole or in part, for a price
equal to the issuance price plus accrued original issue discount through the date of redemption.
Holders have the right to require us to repurchase the Zero Coupon Debentures on June 6, 2010 and
June 6, 2015, at the accreted value through the date of repurchase. We may pay any such repurchase
price with either cash or shares of our common stock or a combination of cash and shares of common
stock.
At December 31, 2009, the aggregate accreted value of our outstanding Zero Coupon Debentures
was $4.2 million and has been presented as Current portion of long-term debt in our Consolidated
Balance Sheets. The aggregate principal amount at maturity of these outstanding debentures would
be $6.0 million assuming no additional conversions or redemptions occur prior to the maturity date.
During 2008, holders of $33,000 in accreted, or carrying, value through the date of conversion
of our Zero Coupon Debentures elected to convert their outstanding debentures into 430 shares of
our common stock. The aggregate principal amount at maturity of our Zero Coupon Debentures
converted during 2008 was $50,000. There were no conversions of our Zero Coupon Debentures to
common stock during 2009.
1.5% Debentures
On April 11, 2001, we issued $460.0 million principal amount of 1.5% Debentures, which were
due April 15, 2031. The 1.5% Debentures were convertible into shares of our common stock at the
option of the holders of such debentures, and, during the period from January 1, 2008 to April 14,
2008, the holders of $3.5 million in aggregate principal amount of our 1.5% Debentures elected to
convert their outstanding debentures into 71,144 shares of our common stock.
In addition, we had the option to redeem all or a portion of the 1.5% Debentures at any time
on or after April 15, 2008, at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and
unpaid interest. On April 15, 2008, we completed the redemption of all of our then remaining 1.5%
Debentures for $73,000 in cash.
76
Table of Contents
11. Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
The components of our other comprehensive income (loss) and the associated income tax effects
allocated to such components are as follows:
Year Ended December 31, 2009 | ||||||||||||
Before Tax | Tax Effect | Net-of-Tax | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
FOREX contracts: |
||||||||||||
Unrealized holding gain |
$ | 9,838 | $ | (3,443 | ) | $ | 6,395 | |||||
Reclassification adjustment for gain included in net income |
(7,434 | ) | 2,602 | (4,832 | ) | |||||||
Net unrealized gain on FOREX contracts |
2,404 | (841 | ) | 1,563 | ||||||||
Investments in marketable securities: |
||||||||||||
Unrealized holding gain |
63 | (22 | ) | 41 | ||||||||
Reclassification adjustment for gain included in net income |
(783 | ) | 274 | (509 | ) | |||||||
Net unrealized loss on marketable securities |
(720 | ) | 252 | (468 | ) | |||||||
Other comprehensive income |
$ | 1,684 | $ | (589 | ) | $ | 1,095 | |||||
Year Ended December 31, 2008 | ||||||||||||
Before Tax | Tax Effect | Net-of-Tax | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Investments in marketable securities: |
||||||||||||
Unrealized holding gain |
$ | 780 | $ | (273 | ) | $ | 507 | |||||
Reclassification adjustment for gain included in net income |
(18 | ) | 6 | (12 | ) | |||||||
Net unrealized gain on marketable securities |
762 | (267 | ) | 495 | ||||||||
Other comprehensive income |
$ | 762 | $ | (267 | ) | $ | 495 | |||||
Year Ended December 31, 2007 | ||||||||||||
Before Tax | Tax Effect | Net-of-Tax | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Investments in marketable securities: |
||||||||||||
Unrealized holding gain |
$ | 289 | $ | (101 | ) | $ | 188 | |||||
Reclassification adjustment for gain included in net income |
(434 | ) | 152 | (282 | ) | |||||||
Net unrealized loss on marketable securities |
(145 | ) | 51 | (94 | ) | |||||||
Pension plan termination |
6,963 | (2,437 | ) | 4,526 | ||||||||
Other comprehensive income |
$ | 6,818 | $ | (2,386 | ) | $ | 4,432 | |||||
The components of our accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) included in our
Consolidated Balance Sheets are as follows:
Unrealized Gain (Loss) on | Total Other | |||||||||||||||
Pension Plan | FOREX | Marketable | Comprehensive | |||||||||||||
Termination | Contracts | Securities | Income (Loss) | |||||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||
Balance at January 1, 2008 |
$ | | $ | | $ | 15 | $ | 15 | ||||||||
Other comprehensive gain |
| | 495 | 495 | ||||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2008 |
| | 510 | 510 | ||||||||||||
Other comprehensive gain |
| 1,563 | (468 | ) | 1,095 | |||||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
$ | | $ | 1,563 | $ | 42 | $ | 1,605 | ||||||||
77
Table of Contents
12. Commitments and Contingencies
Various claims have been filed against us in the ordinary course of business, including claims
by offshore workers alleging personal injuries. We have assessed each claim or exposure to
determine the likelihood that the resolution of the matter might ultimately result in an adverse
effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. When we determine that an
unfavorable resolution of a matter is probable and such amount of loss can be determined, we record
a reserve for the estimated loss at the time that both of these criteria are met. Our management
believes that we have established adequate reserves for any liabilities that may reasonably be
expected to result from these claims.
Litigation. We were a defendant in a lawsuit filed in January 2005 in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana on behalf of Total E&P USA, Inc. and several oil companies
alleging that our semisubmersible rig, the Ocean America, damaged a natural gas pipeline in the
Gulf of Mexico during Hurricane Ivan. During the second quarter of 2009, the U.S. District Court
ruled in our favor and dismissed the lawsuit. The plaintiffs initially appealed the judgment but,
in November 2009, filed a motion instructing the Court to withdraw and dismiss their appeal. The
Court dismissed the appeal and ordered the plaintiffs to reimburse approximately $172,000 of our
costs incurred at trial.
We are one of several unrelated defendants in lawsuits filed in the Circuit Courts of the
State of Mississippi alleging that defendants manufactured, distributed or utilized drilling mud
containing asbestos and, in our case, allowed such drilling mud to have been utilized aboard our
offshore drilling rigs. The plaintiffs seek, among other things, an award of unspecified
compensatory and punitive damages. We expect to receive complete defense and indemnity from Murphy
Exploration & Production Company pursuant to the terms of our 1992 asset purchase agreement with
them. We are unable to estimate our potential exposure, if any, to these lawsuits at this time but
do not believe that ultimate liability, if any, resulting from this litigation will have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Various other claims have been filed against us in the ordinary course of business. In the
opinion of our management, no pending or known threatened claims, actions or proceedings against us
are expected to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of
operations and cash flows.
We intend to defend these matters vigorously; however, we cannot predict with certainty the
outcome or effect of any litigation matters specifically described above or any other pending
litigation or claims. There can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome of these lawsuits.
Personal Injury Claims. Our deductible for liability coverage for personal injury claims,
which primarily result from Jones Act liability in the Gulf of Mexico, is $5.0 million per
occurrence, with no aggregate deductible. The Jones Act is a federal law that permits seamen to
seek compensation for certain injuries during the course of their employment on a vessel and
governs the liability of vessel operators and marine employers for the work-related injury or death
of an employee. We engage outside consultants to assist us in estimating our aggregate reserve for
personal injury claims based on our historical losses and utilizing various actuarial models. At
December 31, 2009, our estimated liability for personal injury claims was $32.1 million, of which
$9.2 million and $22.9 million were recorded in Accrued liabilities and Other liabilities,
respectively, in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. At December 31, 2008, we had recorded loss
reserves for personal injury claims aggregating $30.1 million, of which $9.5 million and $20.6
million were recorded in Accrued liabilities and Other liabilities, respectively, in our
Consolidated Balance Sheets. The eventual settlement or adjudication of these claims could differ
materially from our estimated amounts due to uncertainties such as:
| the severity of personal injuries claimed; |
| significant changes in the volume of personal injury claims; |
| the unpredictability of legal jurisdictions where the claims will ultimately be litigated; |
| inconsistent court decisions; and |
| the risks and lack of predictability inherent in personal injury litigation. |
Purchase Obligations. As of December 31, 2009, we had no purchase obligations for major rig
upgrades or any other significant obligations, except for those related to our direct rig
operations, which arise during the normal course of business.
78
Table of Contents
Operating Leases. We lease office and yard facilities, housing and equipment under operating
leases, which expire at various times through the year 2013. Total rent expense amounted to $5.5
million, $5.7 million and $4.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007,
respectively. Future minimum rental payments under leases are approximately $1.2 million, $0.8
million, $0.2 million and nil for the years ending December 31, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013,
respectively. There are no minimum future rental payments under leases after 2013.
Letters of Credit and Other. We were contingently liable as of December 31, 2009 in the
amount of $166.6 million under certain performance, bid, supersedeas and custom bonds and letters
of credit, including $63.3 million in letters of credit issued under our Credit Facility. At
December 31, 2009, we had purchased eight of our outstanding bonds, totaling $103.1 million, from a
related party after obtaining competitive quotes. Agreements relating to approximately $95.7
million of performance bonds can require collateral at any time. As of December 31, 2009, we had
not been required to make any collateral deposits with respect to these agreements. The remaining
agreements cannot require collateral except in events of default. On our behalf, banks have issued
letters of credit securing certain of these bonds.
13. Related-Party Transactions
Transactions with Loews. We are party to a services agreement with Loews, or the Services
Agreement, pursuant to which Loews performs certain administrative and technical services on our
behalf. Such services include personnel, internal auditing, accounting, and cash management
services, in addition to advice and assistance with respect to preparation of tax returns and
obtaining insurance. Under the Services Agreement, we are required to reimburse Loews for (i)
allocated personnel costs (such as salaries, employee benefits and payroll taxes) of the Loews
personnel actually providing such services and (ii) all out-of-pocket expenses related to the
provision of such services. The Services Agreement may be terminated at our option upon 30 days
notice to Loews and at the option of Loews upon six months notice to us. In addition, we have
agreed to indemnify Loews for all claims and damages arising from the provision of services by
Loews under the Services Agreement unless due to the gross negligence or willful misconduct of
Loews. We were charged $1.1 million, $0.5 million and $0.4 million by Loews for these support
functions during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
In addition, since 2006 we have purchased performance and appeal bonds in support of our
drilling operations offshore Mexico and workers compensation claims, respectively, from affiliates
of a majority-owned subsidiary of Loews after obtaining competitive quotes. At December 31, 2009,
six performance and two appeal bonds totaling $103.1 million were outstanding. Premiums and fees
associated with bonds purchased from affiliates totaled $213,000, $74,000 and $45,000 in 2009, 2008
and 2007, respectively.
Transactions with Other Related Parties. We hire marine vessels and helicopter transportation
services at the prevailing market rate from subsidiaries of SEACOR Holdings Inc. The Chairman of
the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer of SEACOR Holdings Inc. is also a
member of our Board of Directors. For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, we paid
$3.6 million, $0.5 million and $4.6 million, respectively, for the hire of such vessels and such
services.
During the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 we made payments of $2.1 million,
$2.0 million and $1.1 million, respectively, to Ernst & Young LLP for tax and other consulting
services. The wife of our President and Chief Executive Officer is an audit partner at this firm
14. Income Taxes
Our income tax expense is a function of the mix between our domestic and international pre-tax
earnings or losses, respectively, as well as the mix of international tax jurisdictions in which we
operate. Certain of our international rigs are owned and operated, directly or indirectly, by
Diamond Offshore International Limited, or DOIL, a Cayman Islands subsidiary which we wholly own.
Since forming this subsidiary in 2002, it has been our intention to indefinitely reinvest the
earnings of the subsidiary to finance foreign activities. Consequently, no U.S. federal income
taxes were provided on these earnings in years subsequent to 2002 except to the extent that such
earnings were immediately subject to U.S. federal income taxes. In December 2007, DOIL made a
non-recurring distribution of $850.0 million to its U.S. parent, a portion of which consisted of
earnings of the subsidiary that had not previously been subjected to U.S. federal income tax. We
recognized $58.6 million of U.S. federal income tax expense in 2007 as a result of the
distribution. Notwithstanding the non-recurring distribution made in December 2007, it remains our
intention to indefinitely reinvest future earnings of DOIL to finance foreign activities except for
the earnings of Diamond East Asia Limited, or DEAL, a wholly-owned subsidiary of DOIL formed in
December
79
Table of Contents
2008. It is our intention to repatriate the earnings of DEAL and, accordingly, U.S. income
taxes are provided on its earnings.
Although we do not intend to repatriate the earnings of DOIL, these foreign earnings could
become subject to U.S. federal tax if remitted, or if deemed remitted as a dividend; however, it is
not practicable to estimate this tax liability.
We have certain other foreign subsidiaries for which U.S. taxes have been provided to the
extent a U.S. tax liability could arise upon remittance of earnings from the foreign subsidiaries.
As of December 31, 2009, we provided $24,000 for U.S. taxes attributable to undistributed earnings
of the foreign subsidiaries. On actual remittance, certain countries may impose withholding taxes
that, subject to certain limitations, are then available for use as tax credits against a U.S. tax
liability, if any.
The components of income tax expense (benefit) are as follows:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Federal current |
$ | 255,753 | $ | 346,796 | $ | 338,426 | ||||||
State current |
131 | (282 | ) | 950 | ||||||||
Foreign current |
150,804 | 128,581 | 58,638 | |||||||||
Total current |
406,688 | 475,095 | 398,014 | |||||||||
Federal deferred |
80,258 | 52,624 | 6,718 | |||||||||
Foreign deferred |
5,266 | 8,780 | (5,824 | ) | ||||||||
Total deferred |
85,524 | 61,404 | 894 | |||||||||
Total |
$ | 492,212 | $ | 536,499 | $ | 398,908 | ||||||
80
Table of Contents
The difference between actual income tax expense and the tax provision computed by applying
the statutory federal income tax rate to income before taxes is attributable to the following:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Income before income tax expense: |
||||||||||||
U.S. |
$ | 1,250,094 | $ | 1,375,857 | $ | 944,369 | ||||||
Foreign |
618,337 | 471,189 | 299,003 | |||||||||
Worldwide |
$ | 1,868,431 | $ | 1,847,046 | $ | 1,243,372 | ||||||
Expected income tax expense at
federal statutory rate |
$ | 653,951 | $ | 646,466 | $ | 435,180 | ||||||
Foreign earnings of foreign
subsidiaries (not taxed at the
statutory federal income tax rate) net
of related foreign taxes |
(115,793 | ) | (87,278 | ) | (70,780 | ) | ||||||
Foreign taxes domestic subsidiaries
and foreign subsidiaries for which U.S.
federal income taxes have been provided |
114,596 | 66,435 | 22,111 | |||||||||
Foreign tax credits |
(174,735 | ) | (72,205 | ) | (27,238 | ) | ||||||
$850.0 million distribution from
foreign subsidiary |
| | 58,562 | |||||||||
Reduction of deferred tax liability
related to Arethusa goodwill
deduction |
(8,850 | ) | (8,850 | ) | (8,850 | ) | ||||||
Domestic production activities deduction |
(804 | ) | (14,351 | ) | (12,740 | ) | ||||||
Uncertain tax positions |
8,003 | 4,446 | 4,466 | |||||||||
Nondeductible deferred arrangement fee |
| 3,212 | | |||||||||
Revision of estimated tax balance |
446 | (2,022 | ) | (130 | ) | |||||||
Amortization of deferred tax liability
and other charges related to transfer
of drilling rigs to different taxing
jurisdictions |
12,319 | (1,480 | ) | (1,580 | ) | |||||||
Long-term capital gain on dividend
distribution |
2,450 | | | |||||||||
Other |
629 | 2,126 | (93 | ) | ||||||||
Income tax expense |
$ | 492,212 | $ | 536,499 | $ | 398,908 | ||||||
81
Table of Contents
Significant components of our deferred income tax assets and liabilities are as follows:
December 31, | ||||||||
2009 | 2008 | |||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||
Deferred tax assets: |
||||||||
Net operating loss carryforwards, or NOLs |
$ | 1,681 | $ | 1,181 | ||||
Goodwill |
4,198 | 7,346 | ||||||
Workers compensation and other current accruals (1) |
15,000 | 14,122 | ||||||
Disputed receivables reserved |
873 | 4,599 | ||||||
Deferred compensation |
4,377 | 6,233 | ||||||
Foreign tax credits |
107 | | ||||||
Nonqualified stock options and SARs |
4,150 | 2,526 | ||||||
Other |
3,252 | 2,047 | ||||||
Total deferred tax assets |
33,638 | 38,054 | ||||||
Valuation allowance for foreign tax credits or NOLs |
(1,708 | ) | (281 | ) | ||||
Net deferred tax assets |
31,930 | 37,773 | ||||||
Deferred tax liabilities: |
||||||||
Depreciation |
(551,437 | ) | (486,933 | ) | ||||
Unbilled revenue |
(8,141 | ) | | |||||
Mobilization |
(11,095 | ) | (3,068 | ) | ||||
Undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries |
(24 | ) | (321 | ) | ||||
Other |
(22 | ) | (127 | ) | ||||
Total deferred tax liabilities |
(570,719 | ) | (490,449 | ) | ||||
Net deferred tax liability |
$ | (538,789 | ) | $ | (452,676 | ) | ||
(1) | $7.2 million and $9.4 million reflected in Prepaid expenses and other current assets in our Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. See Note 7. |
Our income tax returns are subject to review and examination in the various jurisdictions
in which we operate and we are currently contesting various tax assessments. We accrue for income
tax contingencies, or uncertain tax positions, that we believe are more likely than not exposures.
A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits, excluding
interest and penalties, is as follows:
Long term | Net Liability | |||||||||||
Tax | Long term Tax | for Uncertain Tax | ||||||||||
Receivable | Payable | Positions | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Balance at January 1, 2007 |
$ | 2,642 | $ | (19,277 | ) | $ | (16,635 | ) | ||||
Additions based on tax
positions related to the
current year |
785 | (4,479 | ) | (3,694 | ) | |||||||
Balance at December 31, 2007 |
$ | 3,427 | $ | (23,756 | ) | $ | (20,329 | ) | ||||
Reduction based on tax
positions related to a prior
year |
| 307 | 307 | |||||||||
Additions based on tax
positions related to the
current year |
2,418 | (7,941 | ) | (5,523 | ) | |||||||
Reductions as a result of a
lapse of the applicable
statute of limitations |
(311 | ) | 2,159 | 1,848 | ||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2008 |
$ | 5,534 | $ | (29,231 | ) | $ | (23,697 | ) | ||||
Additions based on tax
positions related to a prior
year |
| (4,557 | ) | (4,557 | ) | |||||||
Additions based on tax
positions related to the
current year |
2,441 | (6,781 | ) | (4,340 | ) | |||||||
Reductions as a result of a
lapse of the applicable
statute of limitations |
(1,504 | ) | 7,090 | 5,586 | ||||||||
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
$ | 6,471 | $ | (33,479 | ) | $ | (27,008 | ) | ||||
82
Table of Contents
At December 31, 2009 all $27.0 million of the net unrecognized tax benefits would affect the
effective tax rate if recognized.
We record interest related to accrued unrecognized tax positions in interest expense and
recognize penalties associated with uncertain tax positions in our tax expense. During the year
ended December 31, 2009, we recorded a net reduction to interest expense of $3.4 million. During
the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, we recognized $0.8 million and $1.7 million of interest
expense related to uncertain tax positions, respectively. Penalty related tax expense for
uncertain tax positions during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $4.7 million,
$1.1 million and $0.8 million, respectively. Accruals for the payment of interest and penalties in
our Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2009 and 2008 were $17.4 million and $16.1 million,
respectively.
In several of the international locations in which we operate, certain of our wholly-owned
subsidiaries enter into agreements with other of our wholly-owned subsidiaries to provide
specialized services and equipment in support of our foreign operations. We apply a transfer
pricing methodology to determine the amount to be charged for providing the services and equipment.
In most cases, there are alternative transfer pricing methodologies that could be applied to these
transactions and, if applied, could result in different chargeable amounts. Taxing authorities in
the various foreign locations in which we operate could apply one of the alternative transfer
pricing methodologies that could result in an increase to our income tax liabilities with respect
to tax returns that remain subject to examination. During 2010 certain income tax returns will no
longer be subject to examination due to a lapse in the applicable statute of limitations. As a
result, we anticipate that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits attributable to transfer pricing
methodology will decrease by approximately $1.3 million through December 31, 2010.
We file income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, various state jurisdictions and
various foreign jurisdictions. Tax years that remain subject to examination by these jurisdictions
include years 2000 to 2008. During 2009 we reached an agreement with the U.S. Internal Revenue
Service to settle the audits of the tax years 2004 through 2006 for total additional income tax
expense of $55,000.
The Brazilian tax authorities are auditing our income tax returns for the periods 2000, 2004
and 2005. We received an initial audit report for tax year 2000 disallowing various deductions
claimed in the tax return. The tax auditors have issued an assessment for tax year 2000 of
approximately $1.5 million, including interest and penalty. We have appealed the tax assessment
and are awaiting the outcome of the appeal. In December 2009, we received an assessment of
approximately $26 million for the years 2004 and 2005, including interest and penalties. We
contested the tax assessment in January 2010 and are awaiting the outcome of the appeal. As
required by GAAP, only the portion of the tax benefit that has a greater than 50% likelihood of
being realized upon settlement is to be recognized. Consequently, we have accrued approximately $7
million of expense attributable to the portion of the tax assessment we determined to be an
uncertain tax position in our 2009 Consolidated Statements of Operations, of which approximately $2
million was interest related and approximately $2 million was penalty related. We do not
anticipate that any adjustments resulting from the tax audit of any of these years will have a
material impact on our consolidated results of operations, financial position and cash flows.
During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the holders of certain of our debentures
elected to convert them into shares of our common stock. See Note 10. As a result of the
conversions of our 1.5% Debentures, we reversed a non-current deferred tax liability of $0.5
million and $54.2 million in 2008 and 2007, respectively, which was accounted for as an increase to
Additional paid-in capital. The reversal related to interest expense imputed on these debentures
for U.S. federal income tax return purposes.
As of December 31, 2009, we had NOL carryforwards of approximately $0.2 million available to
offset future taxable income. The NOL carryforwards consist entirely of losses that were acquired
in our merger with Arethusa (Off-Shore) Limited, or Arethusa, in 1996. The utilization of the NOL
carryforwards acquired in the Arethusa merger is limited pursuant to Section 382 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. We expect to fully utilize all of the NOL
carryforwards in 2010. During 2009, we were able to utilize approximately $2.3 million of the NOL
carryforwards.
83
Table of Contents
15. Employee Benefit Plans
Defined Contribution Plans
We maintain defined contribution retirement plans for our U.S., U.K. and third-country
national, or TCN, employees. The plan for our U.S. employees, or the 401k Plan, is designed to
qualify under Section 401(k) of the Code. Under the 401k Plan, each participant may elect to defer
taxation on a portion of his or her eligible earnings, as defined by the 401k Plan, by directing
his or her employer to withhold a percentage of such earnings. A participating employee may also
elect to make after-tax contributions to the 401k Plan. During the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008 and 2007, we contributed 5.00% of a participants defined compensation and matched 100% of the
first 6% of each employees compensation contributed to the 401k Plan. Participants are fully
vested immediately upon enrollment in the 401k Plan. For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008
and 2007, our provision for contributions was $26.0 million, $23.8 million and $20.9 million,
respectively.
The defined contribution retirement plan for our U.K. employees, or U.K. Plan, provides that
we make annual contributions in an amount equal to the employees contributions, generally up to a
maximum of 5.25% of the employees defined compensation per year for employees working in the U.K.
sector of the North Sea and up to a maximum of 9% of the employees defined compensation per year
for U.K. nationals working in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea. Our provision for
contributions was $1.4 million, $1.7 million and $1.5 million for the years ended December 31,
2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
The defined contribution retirement plan for our TCN employees, or International Savings Plan,
is similar to the 401k Plan. During 2009, 2008 and 2007 we contributed 5.00% of a participants
defined compensation and matched 100% of the first 6% of each employees compensation contributed
to the International Savings Plan. Our provision for contributions was $2.5 million, $2.3 million
and $2.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Deferred Compensation and Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan
Our Amended and Restated Diamond Offshore Management Company Supplemental Executive Retirement
Plan, or Supplemental Plan, provides benefits to a select group of our management or other highly
compensated employees to compensate such employees for any portion of our base salary contribution
and/or matching contribution under the 401k Plan that could not be contributed to that plan because
of limitations within the Code. Our provision for contributions to the Supplemental Plan for the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was approximately $241,000, $222,000 and $192,000,
respectively.
16. Casualty Loss
Casualty Loss
In September 2008, the Ocean Tower sustained significant damage during Hurricane Ike, which
impacted the Gulf of Mexico and the upper Texas and Louisiana Gulf coasts. The Ocean Tower lost
its derrick, drill floor and drill floor equipment during the hurricane. During the third quarter
of 2008, we wrote off the net book value of approximately $2.6 million of the derrick, drill floor
and drill floor equipment for the Ocean Tower and accrued $3.7 million in estimated salvage costs
for the recovery of equipment from the ocean floor. The aggregate of these items is reflected in
Casualty loss in our Consolidated Statements of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2008.
In December 2008, we transferred the $32.2 million net book value of the Ocean Tower to
Assets held for sale in our Consolidated Balance Sheets pursuant to entering into an agreement to
sell the rig for use in a non-drilling capacity at a price in excess of its carrying value. The
sale of the Ocean Tower was completed on October 26, 2009. We recognized a $6.7 million gain on
disposition, net of broker commission, which has been reported as
(Gain) on disposition of assets in our Consolidated Statements of Operations for the year ended
December 31, 2009.
84
Table of Contents
17. Segments and Geographic Area Analysis
Although we provide contract drilling services with different types of offshore drilling rigs
and also provide such services in many geographic locations, we have aggregated these operations
into one reportable segment based on the similarity of economic characteristics among all divisions
and locations, including the nature of services provided and the type of customers of such
services, in accordance with GAAP.
Revenues from contract drilling services by equipment-type are listed below:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
High-Specification Floaters |
$ | 1,380,771 | $ | 1,322,125 | $ | 1,030,892 | ||||||
Intermediate Semisubmersibles |
1,698,584 | 1,629,358 | 1,028,667 | |||||||||
Jack-ups |
457,224 | 524,934 | 446,104 | |||||||||
Total contract drilling revenues |
3,536,579 | 3,476,417 | 2,505,663 | |||||||||
Revenues related to reimbursable expenses |
94,705 | 67,640 | 62,060 | |||||||||
Total revenues |
$ | 3,631,284 | $ | 3,544,057 | $ | 2,567,723 | ||||||
Geographic Areas
At December 31, 2009, our drilling rigs were located offshore twelve countries in addition to
the United States. As a result, we are exposed to the risk of changes in social, political and
economic conditions inherent in international operations and our results of operations and the
value of our international assets are affected by fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates.
Revenues by geographic area are presented by attributing revenues to the individual country or
areas where the services were performed.
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
United States |
$ | 1,232,940 | $ | 1,443,200 | $ | 1,288,535 | ||||||
International: |
||||||||||||
South America |
716,448 | 583,876 | 256,236 | |||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
717,658 | 557,138 | 400,701 | |||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
641,180 | 634,033 | 473,665 | |||||||||
Mexico |
323,058 | 325,810 | 148,586 | |||||||||
2,398,344 | 2,100,857 | 1,279,188 | ||||||||||
Total revenues |
$ | 3,631,284 | $ | 3,544,057 | $ | 2,567,723 | ||||||
An individual international country may, from time to time, comprise a material
percentage of our total contract drilling revenues from unaffiliated customers. For the years
ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, individual countries that comprised 5% or more of our total
contract drilling revenues from unaffiliated customers are listed below.
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
Brazil |
18.2 | % | 13.0 | % | 9.1 | % | ||||||
Australia |
10.8 | % | 9.6 | % | 4.8 | % | ||||||
Mexico |
8.9 | % | 9.2 | % | 5.8 | % | ||||||
United Kingdom |
6.7 | % | 8.3 | % | 9.6 | % | ||||||
Egypt |
2.7 | % | 4.2 | % | 5.4 | % |
85
Table of Contents
The following table presents our long-lived tangible assets by geographic location as of
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. A substantial portion of our assets is mobile, and therefore
asset locations at the end of the period are not necessarily indicative of the geographic
distribution of the earnings generated by such assets during the periods. At December 31, 2009,
four of our drilling rigs were in transit (or preparing to mobilize) between geographic locations.
These assets have been presented in the tables below within the geographic area in which they are
expected to operate.
December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
(In thousands) | ||||||||||||
Drilling and other property
and equipment, net: |
||||||||||||
United States |
$ | 2,222,810 | $ | 1,758,872 | $ | 1,616,212 | ||||||
International: |
||||||||||||
Australia/Asia/Middle East |
995,634 | 510,186 | 689,293 | |||||||||
South America |
854,142 | 803,793 | 440,208 | |||||||||
Europe/Africa/Mediterranean |
259,198 | 243,535 | 206,834 | |||||||||
Mexico |
100,268 | 97,987 | 103,753 | |||||||||
2,209,242 | 1,655,501 | 1,440,088 | ||||||||||
Total |
$ | 4,432,052 | $ | 3,414,373 | $ | 3,056,300 | ||||||
The following table presents countries where we had a material concentration of operating
assets as of December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007:
December 31, | ||||||||||||
2009 | 2008 | 2007 | ||||||||||
United States |
50.2 | % | 51.5 | % | 53.0 | % | ||||||
Brazil |
19.3 | % | 18.5 | % | 12.5 | % | ||||||
Singapore |
11.5 | % | | 11.4 | % | |||||||
Malaysia |
4.0 | % | 9.8 | % | 5.6 | % | ||||||
Argentina |
| 5.0 | % | |
As of December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, no other countries had more than a 5% concentration of
our operating assets.
Major Customers
Our customer base includes major and independent oil and gas companies and government-owned
oil companies. No one customer accounted for 10% or more of our total revenues for the year ended
December 31, 2007. Revenues from our major customers for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008
and 2007 that contributed more than 10% of our total revenues are as follows:
Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
Customer | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | |||||||||
Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. |
15.0 | % | 13.1 | % | 9.2 | % |
86
Table of Contents
18. Unaudited Quarterly Financial Data
Unaudited summarized financial data by quarter for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008
is shown below.
First | Second | Third | Fourth | |||||||||||||
Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | Quarter | |||||||||||||
(In thousands, except per share data) | ||||||||||||||||
2009 |
||||||||||||||||
Revenues |
$ | 885,720 | $ | 946,407 | $ | 908,375 | $ | 890,782 | ||||||||
Operating income (a) |
456,936 | 517,619 | 479,460 | 449,198 | ||||||||||||
Income before income tax expense |
453,337 | 520,838 | 475,285 | 418,971 | ||||||||||||
Net income (b) |
348,581 | 387,440 | 364,134 | 276,064 | ||||||||||||
Net income per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 2.51 | $ | 2.79 | $ | 2.62 | $ | 1.99 | ||||||||
Diluted |
$ | 2.51 | $ | 2.79 | $ | 2.62 | $ | 1.98 | ||||||||
2008 (c) |
||||||||||||||||
Revenues |
$ | 786,102 | $ | 954,372 | $ | 900,376 | $ | 903,207 | ||||||||
Operating income (d) |
401,044 | 577,245 | 475,825 | 456,080 | ||||||||||||
Income before income tax expense |
405,780 | 590,779 | 447,425 | 403,062 | ||||||||||||
Net income |
290,507 | 416,164 | 310,533 | 293,343 | ||||||||||||
Net income per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 2.09 | $ | 2.99 | $ | 2.23 | $ | 2.11 | ||||||||
Diluted |
$ | 2.09 | $ | 2.99 | $ | 2.23 | $ | 2.11 |
(a) | In December 2009, we recorded a $10.7 million provision for bad debts to reserve a portion of the uncollected balance of receivables related to our operations in Egypt and recovered $0.9 million associated with the reserve for bad debts recorded in 2008. See Note 6. | |
In addition, our results for the fourth quarter of 2009 include a $6.7 million gain on the sale of the Ocean Tower, which was presented as Assets held for sale in our Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2008. See Note 16. | ||
(b) | Results for the fourth quarter of 2009 reflect increased tax expense that arose from (i) a change in mix of domestic and international earnings during the year from that which was previously expected, (ii) impact of foreign exchange differences on foreign tax credits and (iii) an assessment from the Brazilian tax authorities for the years 2004 and 2005. See Note 14. | |
(c) | Historical data for the four quarterly periods in 2008 have been restated to reflect the effect thereon of the adoption on January 1, 2009 of an accounting standard related to convertible debt. See Note 1. | |
(d) | In December 2008, we recorded a $31.9 million provision for bad debts to reserve the uncollected balance due from one of our customers in the U.K. See Note 6. |
87
Table of Contents
Item 9. | Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure. |
Not applicable.
Item 9A. | Controls and Procedures |
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain a system of disclosure controls and procedures which are designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the federal
securities laws, including this report, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported on a timely
basis. These disclosure controls and procedures include controls and procedures designed to ensure
that information required to be disclosed by us under the federal securities laws is accumulated
and communicated to our management on a timely basis to allow decisions regarding required
disclosure.
Our Chief Executive Officer, or CEO, and Chief Financial Officer, or CFO, participated in an
evaluation by our management of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) as of December 31, 2009. Based on their
participation in that evaluation, our CEO and CFO concluded that our disclosure controls and
procedures were effective as of December 31, 2009.
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Managements Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over
financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for Diamond Offshore
Drilling, Inc. Our internal control system was designed to provide reasonable assurance to our
management and Board of Directors regarding the preparation and fair presentation of published
financial statements.
There are inherent limitations to the effectiveness of any control system, however well
designed, including the possibility of human error and the possible circumvention or overriding of
controls. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource
constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Management
must make judgments with respect to the relative cost and expected benefits of any specific control
measure. The design of a control system also is based in part upon assumptions and judgments made
by management about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that a control
will be effective under all potential future conditions. As a result, even an effective system of
internal controls can provide no more than reasonable assurance with respect to the fair
presentation of financial statements and the processes under which they were prepared.
Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2009. In making this assessment, our management used the criteria set forth by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control
Integrated Framework. Based on managements assessment our management believes that, as of December
31, 2009, our internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria.
Deloitte & Touche LLP, the registered public accounting firm that audited our financial
statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, has issued an attestation report on the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. The attestation report of Deloitte
& Touche LLP is included at the beginning of Item 8 of this Form 10-K.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified in
connection with the foregoing evaluation that occurred during our fourth fiscal quarter of 2009
that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control
over financial reporting.
88
Table of Contents
Item 9B. | Other Information. |
Not applicable.
PART III
Reference is made to the information responsive to Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of this Part
III contained in our definitive proxy statement for our 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which
is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 10. | Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance. |
Item 11. | Executive Compensation. |
Item 12. | Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters. |
Item 13. | Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence. |
Item 14. | Principal Accountant Fees and Services. |
PART IV
Item 15. | Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules. |
(a) Index to Financial Statements, Financial Statement Schedules and Exhibits
Page | ||||
(1) Financial Statements |
||||
52 | ||||
54 | ||||
55 | ||||
56 | ||||
57 | ||||
58 | ||||
59 | ||||
(2) Financial Statement Schedules |
||||
Schedule II Valuation and Qualifying Accounts for the Years Ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 |
90 | |||
(3) Exhibit Index |
92 |
See the Exhibit Index for a list of those exhibits filed herewith, which Exhibit Index also
includes and identifies management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements required to be
filed as exhibits to this Form 10-K by Item 601 of Regulation S-K.
89
Table of Contents
SCHEDULE II
DIAMOND OFFSHORE DRILLING, INC.
Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
Column A | Column B | Column C | Column D | Column E | ||||||||||||||||
Additions | ||||||||||||||||||||
Charged | ||||||||||||||||||||
Balance at | to Costs | Charged | Balance at | |||||||||||||||||
< |