管理層發言
Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the First Quarter 2025 Golden Ocean Group Earnings Conference Call and Webcast. Please be advised today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to our speaker today, Peder Simonsen, CEO. Please go ahead.
Good afternoon, and welcome to the Golden Ocean Q1 2025 release. My name is Peder Simonsen, and I'm the CEO and CFO of Golden Ocean. Today, I will present the Q1 2025 numbers and our outlook moving forward. In the first quarter of 2025, we have several key highlights. Our adjusted EBITDA for the quarter was $12.7 million, a decrease from $69.9 million in the fourth quarter. We reported a net loss of $44.1 million, or a loss per share of $0.22, compared to a net income of $39 million and earnings per share of $0.20 in the preceding quarter. Our TCE rates were approximately $16,800 per day for Capesizes and $10,400 per day for Panamax vessels, resulting in a fleet-wide net TCE of about $14,400 per day for the quarter. We are actively engaged in our drydocking program, incurring drydocking costs of $38.3 million for 380 drydocking days in Q1, compared to $34.3 million in Q4 for 320 drydocking days. Following CMB.TECH's acquisition of nearly 50% of Golden Ocean shares, a proposed share-for-share merger between Golden Ocean and CMB.TECH was announced after the quarter ended. As part of our fleet renewal strategy, we have entered into agreements to sell two older Kamsarmax vessels at favorable prices. For Q2, we have fixed a net TCE of around $19,000 per day for 69% of our Capesize days and about $11,100 per day for 81% of our Panamax days. For Q3, we have secured a net TCE of approximately $20,900 per day for 16% of Capesize days and $12,900 per day for 38% of Panamax days. Finally, we declared a dividend of $0.05 per share for the first quarter of 2025. Let’s delve deeper into the numbers. As noted, our total fleet TCE for the quarter was $14,400, a decline from $20,800 in Q4. We are undergoing frequent drydocking. From Q4 to Q2 2025, we expect to dry-dock around 30 of our Capesizes and Newcastlemax vessels. We recorded a total of 445 days of off-hire in Q1, up from 364 days in Q4, with drydock accounting for 380 days in this quarter and 320 days in Q4. In addition to the nine dry-dockings in Q1, we had 93 days affected by delays from Q4. Seven ships are scheduled for dry dock in Q2 2025, with three vessels already completed as of today. The remaining vessels will enter the yard in June, leading to net revenues of $114.7 million, down from $174.9 million in Q4. Operating expenses were $95.3 million, slightly lower than $95.6 million in Q4. Our running expenses were $53.8 million, down $5.9 million from Q4 due to fewer Capesize days and reduced expenses for ballast water treatment in Q4. We expensed all drydock costs, which saw a quarter-on-quarter increase of $4.1 million, finishing at $38.4 million against the previous quarter's $34.3 million. OpEx reclassified from charter hire was $1 million, down from $2 million in Q4. In Q1, we incurred $2.1 million for fuel efficiency upgrades and other vessel improvements. Our G&A expenses were $5.4 million, down from $6.5 million in Q4, with daily G&A at $614, net of costs charged to affiliated companies, down by $95 from Q4. Charter hire expenses were $1.5 million compared to $4.2 million in Q4 due to fewer vessel days in our trading portfolio. Depreciation decreased by $3.6 million to $31.9 million in Q1, reflecting the exercise of purchase options for leased vessels, extending their useful life on our balance sheet. Net financial expenses came to $22 million, lowered from $23.3 million in Q4 due to reduced SOFR rates. We recorded a loss of $2.5 million from derivatives and other financial income, compared to a gain of $13.6 million in the previous quarter, with a derivatives loss of $3 million against a gain of $11.8 million in Q4. Included in derivatives was a $7 million mark-to-market loss on interest rate swaps, along with a $2.7 million realized cash gain, while FFA and FX derivatives yielded a positive result of $1.3 million. Regarding results and investments in associates, we posted a gain of $0.7 million, down from $1.6 million in Q4 due to investments in Swiss Marine, TFG, and UFC. This led to a net loss of $44.1 million or a loss of $0.22 per share, with a dividend of $0.05 per share declared for the quarter. Our cash flow from operations was negative $3.3 million, a decrease from $71.7 million in Q4. Cash flow used for financing amounted to $15.8 million, primarily due to net proceeds of $50 million from new financings under our revolving credit facility, $35.9 million in scheduled debt and lease repayments, and a dividend payment of $29.9 million from Q4 results, resulting in a total net cash decrease of $19.1 million. On our balance sheet, we had cash and cash equivalents of $112.6 million, which includes $5.9 million in restricted cash. Additionally, we had $100 million in undrawn available credit lines by the end of the quarter. Our debt and finance lease liabilities reached $1.44 billion by the end of Q1, increasing by approximately $73 million quarter-on-quarter. The average fleet-wide loan-to-value ratio under our debt facilities was 39.2% with book equity at $1.8 billion, leading to a total equity to total assets ratio of about 54%. In Q1, we observed seasonal trends for the main dry bulk commodities alongside a year-on-year reduction in sailing distances. Ton-miles decreased by 1.5%, primarily due to declines in grains and coal, with China cutting its imports by 14% and 25%, respectively, compared to Q1 2024. The smaller shipping segments were most impacted, though Panamaxes benefited from an increase in the relative share of coal volumes. Iron ore volumes fell in line with seasonal weather-related trade disruptions, primarily in Australia. Interestingly, Brazilian exports remained slightly positive year-on-year, despite a wetter than usual season, suggesting improvements in infrastructure. Bauxite from Guinea, at its peak season in Q1, saw a 37% year-on-year increase in export growth, with 48.8 million tonnes shipped, around 85% of which went to China. In terms of iron ore, Australian exports faced a substantial seasonal decline in Q1, dropping by 9.7% from Q4 and 2.2% year-on-year. Despite geopolitical challenges and lower global growth forecasts, we’ve received encouraging signals from Australian and Brazilian miners regarding their expected annual export volumes. Both Rio Tinto and Vale anticipate 2025 full-year volumes between 325 million to 335 million tonnes, while BHP maintains a target of 255 million to 265 million tonnes, representing flat year-on-year projections for all three exporters. China remains the primary importer of iron ore. For coal and grains, Chinese import volumes dropped during this period due to geopolitical tensions. Chinese steel production fell quarter-on-quarter, consistent with seasonal trends and compared to Q1 2024. However, the Chinese government is stimulating the economy through interest rate cuts, and the China Iron & Steel Industry Association recently projected a 2% year-on-year growth in steel demand, supportive of further activity in the industrial sector, even with the sluggish property market. Domestic Chinese iron ore quality is declining, with an estimated FE content of only 20% to 30%. Given the increasing pressure to decarbonize the steel industry, the Chinese focus on high-quality coal and iron ore complements the ton-mile dynamics, as major new deposits have been discovered in Brazil and Guinea. The Simandou project in Guinea is set to commence exports in Q4 of this year, with expectations to increase production over two years, adding an additional 120 million tonnes of annual export capacity. Additionally, Brazil is expanding its capacity by 50 million tonnes in the coming years. Iron ore prices have remained strong, trading around $100 per tonne for an extended period, significantly above the break-even point for major miners, which is around $50 per tonne delivered to China. With new high-grade volumes coming online, we anticipate potential price declines, since domestic Chinese iron ore is on the higher end of the cost curve, implying that lower prices could favor more ton-mile intensive trading routes. With substantial Chinese investments in Guinea's mining and infrastructure, we foresee prioritization of these volumes as a replacement for domestic ore, reflecting a long-term positive outlook for Capesize vessels. The Guinean government has collaborated with Chinese conglomerates and global mining companies to develop critical infrastructure and port facilities in regions rich in high-quality bauxite and iron. Over the last five years, bauxite from Guinea has experienced an average growth rate of 22%. This bauxite, essential for aluminum production, is serving the expanding EV industry in China, among other sectors. Q1 export volumes from Guinea indicate solid capacity, with exports exceeding 48 million tonnes, marking a 37% increase from Q1 2024. This year’s high season for bauxite exports has surpassed expectations, reinforcing consensus estimates for 5% to 10% growth annually over the next two years. Since Guinean bauxite accounts for 12% to 15% of the total Capesize tonne-mile demand, anticipated volume growth would translate to a 1% to 1.5% increase in ton-mile demand, supporting the entire 2025 order book. Currently, we are witnessing some instability in Guinea, where mining licenses have been temporarily halted, potentially impacting exports. Given the critical role of iron and bauxite ore exports to the nation's economy, we expect a resolution soon. The order book for the Capesize fleet remains appealing, with an order book-to-fleet ratio of around 8%. Shipyard capacity for Capesizes and Newcastlemax is limited, with yards prioritizing orders for container ships, LNG, and tankers over dry bulk vessels. Despite historically high newbuilding prices, profit margins in dry bulk remain constrained relative to other vessel types. The competitive advantages for modern ships are rising, particularly concerning fuel efficiency, carrying capacity, and tightening safety, crew welfare, and emissions regulations. The Capesize fleet is aging rapidly, with projections indicating that by 2028, over half of the fleet will be more than 15 years old during a period of increased regulatory pressure. The global Capesize fleet is approaching a peak in drydocking compared to average five-year cycles. Many vessels will face significant investments to meet class requirements during their 15-year dry-dockings. Increased focus from major miners and traders on safety, technological enhancements, and emissions has significantly raised the investment necessary to maintain operational flexibility for older ships. The fleet operates with high efficiency, with port disruptions remaining at the lower end of historical levels. While we do not foresee significant improvements in conditions, we also do not expect any downside to fleet efficiency. Sailing speeds are still low and are anticipated to remain so, especially for the older, less efficient vessels. We are witnessing only marginal transits of Capesize ships through the Suez Canal; while a reopening would theoretically reduce ton-miles at face value, it could also reinstate ton-mile beneficial trades. I will now turn the call back over to the operator and welcome any questions.
分析師問答
And the question comes from the line of Peter from ABG Sundal Cole. Your line is open. Please ask your question.
I was wondering if you could provide some details about the timing for the planned merger, specifically what to expect in this regard.
No. I think as of it, it's really hard to say. We are working in accordance with the plan that was announced in the press release. And there are, obviously, in such processes, a lot of different work streams. So it's hard to be more specific than what has been announced.
It seems there is a disconnect between the market prices and the agreed 0.95 exchange ratio. Should we take this to mean that the market doesn’t expect the merger to happen with that exchange ratio, or are there other factors at play that I’m missing?
I have to say, that's something that you should probably interpret on my behalf, at least. I mean, it's priced in a way it's priced and for whatever reason. I guess some of it has to do with liquidity in the stock, but I leave that to you to interpret.
I understand Peder. I do understand that it's probably closer to my profession to try to explain as you understand. It's quite difficult to grasp that now, so 15%, 16%, 17% discount. Okay. But towards the market then, we've had sort of, I would say, a conventional sort of Q1, perhaps somewhat on the low end. If you go back a few weeks, we had some good momentum here. But over the past few trading days, it's stagnant again. In terms of near-term expectations here, should we think that we need to see Simandou volumes coming and trying to get covered with ships, or are there significant or sort of meaningful catalysts in the marketplace to be expected prior to that?
I think what has happened in the recent couple of weeks is that we've seen some disruptions on the Guinea export side. There's been some turmoil on force majeure being declared on some of the mines and export facilities there. And also, we saw a breakdown of some technical equipment in Peru that has disrupted some of the market. And these things do not necessarily give a lot of less volumes into the market, but they impact the sentiment. Given the sort of general economic sentiment, that can impact the FFA curve, which is what prices freight. So I think incidents like that will impact the market, given the nervousness in general, but the volumes are picking up in line with seasonality. We see that Vale is now approaching 900,000 tonnes per day, which is very solid. And I don't see that gravity will find its way here as well. So I don't think we need to wait for Simandou. We are still very positive for the second half. I expect volumes to be healthy for the Capes. So that's our expectation, but it may take some time given the way the sentiment works as of now.
Okay. Considering that the first quarter was not a strong one and current rates are also not very high, asset prices remain robust. Is it reasonable to expect that we’ll continue to see resale Newcastlemax prices around $79 million to $80 million if the rates for Capes stay in the mid-teens? Doesn’t something need to change here, either with rates increasing or asset prices facing some pressure?
Yes. You've asked this question now for quite a long time and there's been a disconnect between asset prices and the rates. I think new building prices are high as a function of both supportive long-term fundamentals for the market and also lack of yard capacity. I think those are very well supported. We see that also on the secondhand values, which we don't expect to come down. I mean we have Simandou, we have a lot of the demand fundamentals to be positive for the big ships. And not least, there's historically good visibility on the supply side. So I don't really see what's going to bring values down. I think it is a matter of time before this gravity trickles into the freight market as well. There are a lot of one-offs that impact this market as of now. We had obviously good Q1 last year; it was unusually good. This year, it was more in line with seasonality. The big miners are still very much guiding positively for full year volumes in line with last, which means they would need to ramp up their exports significantly for the second half. So I don't think fundamentally there's anything that has changed that picture, and it's obviously supported by risk-constrained shipyard capacity and a willingness to build Capesizes and Kamsarmax. I think that's not going to change in the near term.
Speaker, there are no further questions. I would now like to hand the conference over to Peder Simonsen for any closing remarks.
Thank you. I just want to thank you for joining in, and have a great rest of the week.
This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect. Have a nice day.