form10-k.htm
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
_________________
FORM
10-K
(Mark
one)
þ ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
For
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007
OR
¨ 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 333-75899
_________________
TRANSOCEAN
INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Cayman
Islands
|
66-0582307
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
|
4
Greenway Plaza, Houston,
Texas
|
77046
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
code)
|
|
|
70
Harbour Drive, Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands
|
KYI-1003
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
code)
|
Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code: (713) 232-7500
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of
class
|
Exchange on which
registered
|
Ordinary
Shares, par value $0.01 per share
|
New
York Stock Exchange, Inc.
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
_________________
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined
in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes þ No ¨
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes ¨ 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 ¨
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 registrant's 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. ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller company. See
definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller
reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large
accelerated filer þ Accelerated
filer ¨
Non-accelerated filer ¨ (do not check if a
smaller reporting company) Smaller reporting company ¨
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined by Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No þ
As of
June 30, 2007, 289,280,582 ordinary shares were outstanding and the aggregate
market value of such shares held by non-affiliates was approximately
$30.6 billion (based on the reported closing market price of the ordinary
shares on such date of $105.98 and assuming that all directors and executive
officers of the Company are “affiliates,” although the Company does not
acknowledge that any such person is actually an “affiliate” within the meaning
of the federal securities laws). As of February 22, 2008, 317,748,270
ordinary shares were outstanding.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions
of the registrant's definitive Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission within 120 days of December 31, 2007, for its
2008 annual general meeting of shareholders, are incorporated by reference into
Part III of this Form 10-K.
TRANSOCEAN INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
INDEX
TO ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
FOR
THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007
Item
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
PART
I
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
PART
II
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
|
PART
III
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
|
PART
IV
|
|
|
|
108
|
Forward-Looking
Information
The
statements included in this annual report regarding future financial performance
and results of operations and other statements that are not historical facts are
forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities
Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Forward-looking statements in this annual report include, but are not limited
to, statements about the following subjects:
§
contract commencements,
§
contract option exercises,
§
revenues,
§
expenses,
§
results of operations,
§
commodity prices,
§
customer drilling programs,
§
supply and demand,
§
utilization rates,
§
dayrates,
§
contract backlog,
§
effects and results of the GlobalSantaFe merger and related
transactions,
§
planned shipyard projects and rig mobilizations and their
effects,
§
newbuild projects and opportunities,
§
the upgrade projects for the Sedco 700-series
semisubmersible rigs,
§
other major upgrades,
§
contract awards,
§
newbuild completion delivery and commencement of operations
dates,
§
expected downtime and lost revenue,
§
insurance proceeds,
§
cash investments of our wholly-owned captive insurance
company,
§
future activity in the deepwater, mid-water and the jackup market
sectors,
§
market outlook for our various geographical operating sectors and classes
of rigs,
§
capacity constraints for ultra-deepwater rigs and other rig
classes,
§
effects of new rigs on the market,
§
income related to and any payments to be received under the TODCO tax
sharing agreement,
|
|
§
refinancing of the Bridge Loan Facility, including timing and components
of the refinancing,
§
uses of excess cash,
§
share repurchases under our share repurchase program,
§
issuance of new debt,
§
debt reduction,
§
debt credit ratings,
§
planned asset sales,
§
timing of asset sales,
§
proceeds from asset sales,
§
our effective tax rate,
§
changes in tax laws, treaties and regulations,
§
tax assessments,
§
operations in international markets,
§
investments in joint ventures,
§
investments in recruitment, retention and personnel development
initiative,
§
the level of expected capital expenditures,
§
results and effects of legal proceedings and governmental audits and
assessments,
§
adequacy of insurance,
§
liabilities for tax issues, including those associated with our activities
in Brazil, Norway and the United States,
§
liabilities for customs and environmental matters,
§
liquidity,
§
cash flow from operations,
§
adequacy of cash flow for our obligations,
§
effects of accounting changes,
§
adoption of accounting policies,
§
pension plan and other postretirement benefit plan
contributions,
§
benefit payments, and
§
the timing and cost of completion of capital
projects.
|
Forward-looking
statements in this annual report are identifiable by use of the following words
and other similar expressions among others:
§
|
“anticipates”
|
|
§
|
“may”
|
§
|
“believes”
|
|
§
|
“might”
|
§
|
“budgets”
|
|
§
|
“plans”
|
§
|
“could”
|
|
§
|
“predicts”
|
§
|
“estimates”
|
|
§
|
“projects”
|
§
|
“expects”
|
|
§
|
“scheduled”
|
§
|
“forecasts”
|
|
§
|
“should”
|
§ |
“intends”
|
|
|
|
Such
statements are subject to numerous risks, uncertainties and assumptions,
including, but not limited to:
|
§
|
those
described under “Item 1A. Risk
Factors,”
|
|
§
|
the
adequacy of sources of liquidity,
|
|
§
|
our
inability to obtain contracts for our rigs that do not have
contracts,
|
|
§
|
the
effect and results of litigation, tax audits and contingencies,
and
|
|
§
|
other
factors discussed in this annual report and in the Company’s other filings
with the SEC, which are available free of charge on the SEC’s website at
www.sec.gov.
|
Should
one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying
assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those
indicated.
All
subsequent written and oral forward-looking statements attributable to the
Company or to persons acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their
entirety by reference to these risks and uncertainties. You should not place
undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Each forward-looking statement
speaks only as of the date of the particular statement, and we undertake no
obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking
statements.
PART
I
Transocean Inc.
(together with its subsidiaries and predecessors, unless the context requires
otherwise, “Transocean,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” or “our”) is a leading
international provider of offshore contract drilling services for oil and gas
wells. As of February 20, 2008, we owned, had partial ownership
interests in or operated 139 mobile offshore drilling units. As
of this date, our fleet included 39 High-Specification Floaters
(Ultra-Deepwater, Deepwater and Harsh Environment semisubmersibles and
drillships), 29 Midwater Floaters, 10 High-Specification Jackups,
57 Standard Jackups and four Other Rigs. We also have eight
Ultra-Deepwater Floaters contracted for or under construction.
We
believe our mobile offshore drilling fleet is one of the most modern and
versatile fleets in the world. Our primary business is to contract these
drilling rigs, related equipment and work crews primarily on a dayrate basis to
drill oil and gas wells. We specialize in technically demanding segments of the
offshore drilling business with a particular focus on deepwater and harsh
environment drilling services. We also provide oil and gas drilling management
services on either a dayrate basis or a completed-project, fixed-price (or
“turnkey”) basis, as well as drilling engineering and drilling project
management services, and we participate in oil and gas exploration and
production activities. Our ordinary shares are listed on the New York
Stock Exchange under the symbol “RIG.”
Transocean Inc.
is a Cayman Islands exempted company with principal executive offices in the
U.S. located at 4 Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas 77046. Our
telephone number at that address is (713) 232-7500. Our
principal executive offices outside of the U.S. are located at 70 Harbour Drive,
Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands KY1-1003. Our telephone number at that
address is (345) 745-4500.
Background
of Transocean
In
January 2001, we completed our merger transaction with R&B Falcon
Corporation (“R&B Falcon”). At the time of the R&B Falcon
merger, R&B Falcon operated a diverse global drilling rig fleet, consisting
of drillships, semisubmersibles, jackups and other units in addition to the Gulf
of Mexico Shallow and Inland Water segment fleet. R&B Falcon and
the Gulf of Mexico Shallow and Inland Water segment later became known as TODCO
(together with its subsidiaries and predecessors, unless the context requires
otherwise, “TODCO”). In preparation for the initial public offering
of TODCO, we transferred all assets and subsidiaries out of TODCO that were
unrelated to the Gulf of Mexico Shallow and Inland Water business.
In
February 2004, we completed an initial public offering (the “TODCO IPO”) of
approximately 23 percent of the outstanding shares of TODCO’s common
stock. In September 2004, December 2004 and May 2005,
respectively, we completed additional public offerings of TODCO common
stock. In June 2005, we completed the sale of our remaining
TODCO common stock pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended.
In
November 2007, we completed our merger transaction (the “Merger”) with
GlobalSantaFe Corporation (“GlobalSantaFe”). Immediately prior to the
effective time of the Merger, each of our outstanding ordinary shares was
reclassified by way of a scheme of arrangement under Cayman Islands law into
(1) 0.6996 of our ordinary shares and (2) $33.03 in cash (the
“Reclassification” and together with the Merger, the
“Transactions”). At the effective time of the Merger, each
outstanding ordinary share of GlobalSantaFe (the “GlobalSantaFe Ordinary
Shares”) was exchanged for (1) 0.4757 of our ordinary shares (after giving
effect to the Reclassification) and (2) $22.46 in cash. We
issued approximately 107,752,000 of our ordinary shares in connection with the
Merger and paid out $14.9 billion in cash in connection with the
Transactions. We funded the payment of the cash consideration in the
Transactions with $15.0 billion of borrowings under a $15.0 billion,
one-year senior unsecured bridge loan facility (the “Bridge Loan Facility”) and
have since refinanced a portion of those borrowings under the Bridge Loan
Facility. We have included the financial results of GlobalSantaFe in
our consolidated financial statements beginning November 27, 2007, the date
the GlobalSantaFe Ordinary Shares were exchanged for our ordinary
shares.
For
information about the revenues, operating income, assets and other information
relating to our business, our segments and the geographic areas in which we
operate, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” and Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements—Note 19—Segments, Geographical Analysis and Major
Customers.
Drilling
Fleet
We
principally operate three types of drilling rigs:
Also
included in our fleet are barge drilling rigs, a mobile offshore production unit
and a coring drillship.
Most of
our drilling equipment is suitable for both exploration and development
drilling, and we normally engage in both types of drilling
activity. Likewise, most of our drilling rigs are mobile and can be
moved to new locations in response to client demand. All of our
mobile offshore drilling units are designed for operations away from port for
extended periods of time and most have living quarters for the crews, a
helicopter landing deck and storage space for pipe and drilling
supplies.
We
categorize our fleet as follows: (i) “High-Specification Floaters,”
consisting of our “Ultra-Deepwater Floaters,” “Deepwater Floaters” and “Harsh
Environment Floaters,” (ii) “Midwater Floaters,”
(iii) “High-Specification Jackups,” (iv) “Standard Jackups” and
(v) “Other Rigs.” As of February 20, 2008, our fleet of 139 rigs,
which excludes assets held for sale that are not currently operating under a
contract and rigs contracted for or under construction, included:
|
·
|
39
High-Specification Floaters, which are comprised
of:
|
- 18
Ultra-Deepwater Floaters;
- 16
Deepwater Floaters; and
- five
Harsh Environment Floaters;
|
·
|
10
High-Specification Jackups;
|
|
·
|
57
Standard Jackups; and
|
|
·
|
four
Other Rigs, which are comprised of:
|
- two
barge drilling rigs;
- one
mobile offshore production unit; and
- one
coring drillship.
As of
February 20, 2008, our fleet was located in the Far East (21 units),
U.K. North Sea (19 units), Middle East (18 units), U.S. Gulf of Mexico
(16 units), Nigeria (13 units), India (12 units), Angola
(11 units), Brazil (eight units), Norway (five units), other West
African countries (five units), the Caspian Sea (three units),
Trinidad (three units), Australia (two units), the Mediterranean (two
units) and Canada (one unit).
High-Specification
Floaters are specialized offshore drilling units that we categorize into three
sub-classifications based on their capabilities. Ultra-Deepwater
Floaters have high-pressure mud pumps and a water depth capability of
7,500 feet or greater. Deepwater Floaters are generally those
other semisubmersible rigs and drillships that have a water depth capacity
between 7,500 and 4,500 feet. Harsh Environment Floaters have a water depth
capacity between 4,500 and 1,500 feet, are capable of drilling in harsh
environments and have greater displacement, resulting in larger variable load
capacity, more useable deck space and better motion
characteristics. Midwater Floaters are generally comprised of those
non-high-specification semisubmersibles with a water depth capacity of less than
4,500 feet. High-Specification Jackups consist of our harsh
environment and high-performance jackups, and Standard Jackups consist of our
remaining jackup fleet. Other Rigs consists of rigs that are of a
different type or use than those mentioned above.
Drillships
are generally self-propelled, shaped like conventional ships and are the most
mobile of the major rig types. All of our High-Specification
drillships are dynamically positioned, which allows them to maintain position
without anchors through the use of their onboard propulsion and station-keeping
systems. Drillships typically have greater load capacity than early
generation semisubmersible rigs. This enables them to carry more
supplies on board, which often makes them better suited for drilling in remote
locations where resupply is more difficult. However, drillships are
typically limited to calmer water conditions than those in which
semisubmersibles can operate. Our three existing Enterprise-class
drillships are and five of our seven additional newbuild drillships contracted
for or under construction will be equipped with our patented dual-activity
technology. Dual-activity technology includes structures, equipment
and techniques for using two drilling stations within a single derrick to
perform drilling tasks. Dual-activity technology allows our rigs to
perform simultaneous drilling tasks in a parallel rather than sequential
manner. Dual-activity technology reduces critical path activity and
improves efficiency in both exploration and development drilling.
Semisubmersibles
are floating vessels that can be submerged by means of a water ballast system
such that the lower hulls are below the water surface during drilling
operations. These rigs are capable of maintaining their position over
the well through the use of an anchoring system or a computer controlled dynamic
positioning thruster system. Some semisubmersible rigs are
self-propelled and move between locations under their own power when afloat on
pontoons although most are relocated with the assistance of
tugs. Typically, semisubmersibles are better suited than drillships
for operations in rougher water conditions. Our three Express-class
semisubmersibles are designed for mild environments and are equipped with the
unique tri-act derrick, which was designed to reduce overall well construction
costs. The tri-act derrick allows offline tubular and riser handling
operations to occur at two sides of the derrick while the center portion of the
derrick is being used for normal drilling operations through the rotary table.
Our two operating Development Driller-class semisubmersibles are, and one
that is under construction will be, equipped with our patented dual-activity
technology.
Jackup
rigs are mobile self-elevating drilling platforms equipped with legs that can be
lowered to the ocean floor until a foundation is established to support the
drilling platform. Once a foundation is established, the drilling
platform is then jacked further up the legs so that the platform is above the
highest expected waves. These rigs are generally suited for water
depths of 400 feet or less.
We
classify certain of our jackup rigs as High-Specification
Jackups. These rigs have greater operational capabilities than
Standard Jackups and are able to operate in harsh environments, have higher
capacity derricks, drawworks, mud systems and storage, and are typically capable
of drilling to deeper depths. Typically, these jackups also have
deeper water depth capacity than a Standard Jackup.
Depending
on market conditions, we may “warm stack” or “cold stack” non-contracted rigs.
“Warm stacked” rigs are not under contract and may require the hiring of
additional crew, but are generally ready for service with little or no capital
expenditures and are being actively marketed. “Cold stacked” rigs are not
actively marketed on short or near term contracts, generally cannot be
reactivated upon short notice and normally require the hiring of most of the
crew, a maintenance review and possibly significant refurbishment before they
can be reactivated. Cold stacked rigs and some warm stacked rigs
would require additional costs to return to service. The actual cost,
which could fluctuate over time, is dependent upon various factors, including
the availability and cost of shipyard facilities, cost of equipment and
materials and the extent of repairs and maintenance that may ultimately be
required. In certain circumstances, the cost could be
significant. We would take these factors into consideration together
with market conditions, length of contract and dayrate and other contract terms
in deciding whether to return a particular idle rig to service. We
may consider marketing cold stacked rigs for alternative uses, including as
accommodation units, from time to time until drilling activity increases and we
obtain drilling contracts for these units. As of February 20,
2008, GSF High Island I, which
is classified as held for sale, is warm stacked and is not included in
the tables below (see "–Warm Stacked and
Held for Sale").
We own
all of the drilling rigs in our fleet noted in the tables below except for the
following: (1) those specifically described as being owned wholly or in
part by unaffiliated parties, (2) GSF Explorer, which is
subject to a capital lease with a remaining term of 19 years, and (3) GSF Jack Ryan,
which is subject to a fully defeased capital lease with a remaining term of
13 years. None of our offshore drilling rigs are currently
subject to any liens or mortgages.
In the
tables presented below, the location of each rig indicates the current drilling
location for operating rigs or the next operating location for rigs in shipyards
with a follow-on contract, unless otherwise noted.
Rigs
Under Construction (8)
The
following table provides certain information regarding our High-Specification
Floaters contracted for or under construction as of February 20,
2008:
Name
|
|
Type
|
|
Expected completion
|
|
Water
depth
capacity (in feet)
|
|
Drilling
depth
capacity (in feet)
|
|
Contracted location
|
Ultra-Deepwater Floaters
(a) (8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discoverer
Americas (b)
|
|
HSD
|
|
Mid
2009
|
|
12,000
|
|
40,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Discoverer
Clear Leader (b)
|
|
HSD
|
|
2Q
2009
|
|
12,000
|
|
40,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Discoverer
Inspiration (b)
|
|
HSD
|
|
1Q
2010
|
|
12,000
|
|
40,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
GSF
Newbuild (b)
|
|
HSD
|
|
3Q
2010
|
|
12,000
|
|
40,000
|
|
(c)
|
Deepwater Pacific 1
(d)
|
|
HSD
|
|
2Q
2009
|
|
12,000
|
|
35,000
|
|
India
|
Deepwater Pacific 2
(d)
|
|
HSD
|
|
1Q
2010
|
|
10,000
|
|
35,000
|
|
(c)
|
Discoverer
Luanda (b)
|
|
HSD
|
|
3Q
2010
|
|
7,500
|
|
40,000
|
|
Angola
|
GSF
Development Driller III (b)
|
|
HSS
|
|
Mid-2009
|
|
7,500
|
|
30,000
|
|
Angola
|
________________________________
“HSD”
means high-specification drillship.
“HSS”
means high-specification semisubmersible.
(a)
|
Dynamically
positioned.
|
(c)
|
Currently
without contract.
|
(d)
|
Owned
through our 50 percent interest in a joint venture company with
Pacific Drilling Limited.
|
High-Specification
Floaters (39)
The
following table provides certain information regarding our High-Specification
Floaters as of February 20, 2008:
Name
|
|
Type
|
|
Year
entered service/upgraded(a)
|
|
Water
depth capacity (in
feet)
|
|
Drilling
depth capacity (in
feet)
|
|
Location
|
Ultra-Deepwater
Floaters (b) (18)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deepwater
Discovery
|
|
HSD
|
|
2000
|
|
10,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
Deepwater
Expedition
|
|
HSD
|
|
1999
|
|
10,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
Morocco
|
Deepwater
Frontier
|
|
HSD
|
|
1999
|
|
10,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
India
|
Deepwater
Horizon
|
|
HSS
|
|
2001
|
|
10,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Deepwater
Millennium
|
|
HSD
|
|
1999
|
|
10,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Deepwater
Pathfinder
|
|
HSD
|
|
1998
|
|
10,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
Discoverer
Deep Seas (c) (d)
|
|
HSD
|
|
2001
|
|
10,000
|
|
35,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Discoverer
Enterprise (c) (d)
|
|
HSD
|
|
1999
|
|
10,000
|
|
35,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Discoverer
Spirit (c) (d)
|
|
HSD
|
|
2000
|
|
10,000
|
|
35,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
GSF
C.R. Luigs
|
|
HSD
|
|
2000
|
|
10,000
|
|
35,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
GSF
Jack Ryan
|
|
HSD
|
|
2000
|
|
10,000
|
|
35,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
Cajun
Express (e)
|
|
HSS
|
|
2001
|
|
8,500
|
|
35,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Deepwater
Nautilus (e)
|
|
HSS
|
|
2000
|
|
8,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
GSF
Explorer
|
|
HSD
|
|
1972/1998
|
|
7,800
|
|
30,000
|
|
Angola
|
GSF
Development Driller I (d)
|
|
HSS
|
|
2004
|
|
7,500
|
|
37,500
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
GSF
Development Driller II (d)
|
|
HSS
|
|
2004
|
|
7,500
|
|
37,500
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Sedco
Energy (e)
|
|
HSS
|
|
2001
|
|
7,500
|
|
30,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
Sedco
Express (e)
|
|
HSS
|
|
2001
|
|
7,500
|
|
30,000
|
|
Angola
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deepwater
Floaters (16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deepwater
Navigator (b)
|
|
HSD
|
|
2000
|
|
7,200
|
|
25,000
|
|
Brazil
|
Discoverer
534 (b)
|
|
HSD
|
|
1975/1991
|
|
7,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
Discoverer
Seven Seas (b)
|
|
HSD
|
|
1976/1997
|
|
7,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
Transocean
Marianas
|
|
HSS
|
|
1979/1998
|
|
7,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Sedco
702 (b) (f)
|
|
HSS
|
|
1973/(f)
|
|
6,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
Sedco
706 (b) (f)
|
|
HSS
|
|
1976/(f)
|
|
6,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Brazil
|
Sedco
707 (b)
|
|
HSS
|
|
1976/1997
|
|
6,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Brazil
|
GSF
Celtic Sea
|
|
HSS
|
|
1982/1998
|
|
5,750
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Jack
Bates
|
|
HSS
|
|
1986/1997
|
|
5,400
|
|
30,000
|
|
Australia
|
M.G.
Hulme, Jr.
|
|
HSS
|
|
1983/1996
|
|
5,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
Sedco
709 (b)
|
|
HSS
|
|
1977/1999
|
|
5,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
Transocean
Richardson
|
|
HSS
|
|
1988
|
|
5,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
Angola
|
Jim
Cunningham
|
|
HSS
|
|
1982/1995
|
|
4,600
|
|
25,000
|
|
Angola
|
Sedco
710 (b)
|
|
HSS
|
|
1983/2001
|
|
4,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Brazil
|
Sovereign
Explorer
|
|
HSS
|
|
1984
|
|
4,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Trinidad
|
Transocean
Rather
|
|
HSS
|
|
1988
|
|
4,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harsh
Environment Floaters (5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transocean
Leader
|
|
HSS
|
|
1987/1997
|
|
4,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Norwegian
N. Sea
|
Henry
Goodrich
|
|
HSS
|
|
1985
|
|
2,000
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Paul
B. Loyd, Jr
|
|
HSS
|
|
1990
|
|
2,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
Transocean
Arctic
|
|
HSS
|
|
1986
|
|
1,650
|
|
25,000
|
|
Norwegian
N. Sea
|
Polar
Pioneer
|
|
HSS
|
|
1985
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Norwegian
N. Sea
|
_______________________________________
“HSD”
means high-specification drillship.
“HSS”
means high-specification semisubmersible.
(a)
|
Dates
shown are the original service date and the date of the most recent
upgrade, if any.
|
(b)
|
Dynamically
positioned.
|
(c)
|
Enterprise-class
rig.
|
(f)
|
The
Sedco 702
and Sedco 706 are
currently being upgraded from Midwater Floaters to Deepwater Floaters. The
water depth and drilling depth capacity information assumes the completion
of the upgrades. The Sedco 702 and
Sedco 706
are currently expected to complete their upgrades and commence
their contracts in the first quarter and the fourth quarter of 2008,
respectively.
|
Midwater
Floaters (29)
The
following table provides certain information regarding our Midwater Floaters as
of February 20, 2008:
Name
|
|
Type
|
|
Year
entered service/upgraded(a)
|
|
Water
depth capacity (in
feet)
|
|
Drilling
depth capacity (in
feet)
|
|
Location
|
Sedco
700
|
|
OS
|
|
1973/1997
|
|
3,600
|
|
25,000
|
|
E.
Guinea
|
Transocean
Amirante
|
|
OS
|
|
1978/1997
|
|
3,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
Transocean
Legend
|
|
OS
|
|
1983
|
|
3,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
China
|
GSF
Arctic I
|
|
OS
|
|
1983/1996
|
|
3,400
|
|
25,000
|
|
Brazil
|
C.
Kirk Rhein, Jr.
|
|
OS
|
|
1976/1997
|
|
3,300
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
Transocean
Driller
|
|
OS
|
|
1991
|
|
3,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
Brazil
|
GSF
Rig 135
|
|
OS
|
|
1983
|
|
2,800
|
|
25,000
|
|
Congo
|
Falcon
100
|
|
OS
|
|
1974/1999
|
|
2,400
|
|
25,000
|
|
Brazil
|
GSF
Rig 140
|
|
OS
|
|
1983
|
|
2,400
|
|
25,000
|
|
Angola
|
GSF
Aleutian Key
|
|
OS
|
|
1976/2001
|
|
2,300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Angola
|
Istiglal
(b)
|
|
OS
|
|
1995/1998
|
|
2,300
|
|
20,000
|
|
Caspian
Sea
|
Sedco
703
|
|
OS
|
|
1973/1995
|
|
2,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
Australia
|
GSF
Arctic III
|
|
OS
|
|
1984
|
|
1,800
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
Sedco
711
|
|
OS
|
|
1982
|
|
1,800
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
Transocean
John Shaw
|
|
OS
|
|
1982
|
|
1,800
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
Sedco
712
|
|
OS
|
|
1983
|
|
1,600
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
Sedco
714
|
|
OS
|
|
1983/1997
|
|
1,600
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
Actinia
|
|
OS
|
|
1982
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
Dada
Gorgud (b)
|
|
OS
|
|
1978/1998
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Caspian
Sea
|
GSF
Arctic IV (c)
|
|
OS
|
|
1983/1999
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
GSF
Grand Banks
|
|
OS
|
|
1984
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
East
Canada
|
Sedco
601
|
|
OS
|
|
1983
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Malaysia
|
Sedneth
701
|
|
OS
|
|
1972/1993
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Angola
|
Transocean
Prospect
|
|
OS
|
|
1983/1992
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
Transocean
Searcher
|
|
OS
|
|
1983/1988
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Norwegian
N. Sea
|
Transocean
Winner
|
|
OS
|
|
1983
|
|
1,500
|
|
25,000
|
|
Norwegian
N. Sea
|
J.
W. McLean
|
|
OS
|
|
1974/1996
|
|
1,250
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
GSF
Arctic II (c)
|
|
OS
|
|
1982
|
|
1,200
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
Sedco
704
|
|
OS
|
|
1974/1993
|
|
1,000
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
_______________________________________
“OS”
means other semisubmersible.
(a)
|
Dates
shown are the original service date and the date of the most recent
upgrade, if any.
|
(b)
|
Owned
by the State Oil Company of the Azerbaijan
Republic.
|
(c)
|
On
February 15, 2008, we announced our intent to proceed with
divestitures of the GSF Arctic II
and the GSF Arctic IV
semisubmersible rigs and the hiring of a third-party advisor. The
divestitures are in furtherance of our previously announced proposed
undertakings to the Office of Fair Trading in the U.K. made in connection
with the Merger. As a result, we classified these rigs as held
for sale.
|
High-Specification
Jackups (10)
The
following table provides certain information regarding our High-Specification
Jackups as of February 20, 2008:
Name
|
|
Year
entered service/upgraded(a)
|
|
Water
depth capacity (in
feet)
|
|
Drilling
depth capacity (in
feet)
|
|
Location
|
GSF
Constellation I
|
|
2003
|
|
400
|
|
30,000
|
|
Trinidad
|
GSF
Constellation II
|
|
2004
|
|
400
|
|
30,000
|
|
Egypt
|
GSF
Galaxy I
|
|
1991/2001
|
|
400
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
GSF
Galaxy II
|
|
1998
|
|
400
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
GSF
Galaxy III
|
|
1999
|
|
400
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
GSF
Baltic
|
|
1983
|
|
375
|
|
25,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
GSF
Magellan
|
|
1992
|
|
350
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
GSF
Monarch
|
|
1986
|
|
350
|
|
30,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
GSF
Monitor
|
|
1989
|
|
350
|
|
30,000
|
|
Trinidad
|
Trident
20
|
|
2000
|
|
350
|
|
25,000
|
|
Caspian
Sea
|
_______________________________________
|
(a)
|
Dates
shown are the original service date and the date of the most recent
upgrades, if any.
|
Standard
Jackups (57)
The
following table provides certain information regarding our Standard Jackups as
of February 20, 2008:
Name
|
|
Year
entered service/upgraded(a)
|
|
Water
depth capacity (in
feet)
|
|
Drilling
depth capacity (in
feet)
|
|
Location
|
Trident
IX
|
|
1982
|
|
400
|
|
21,000
|
|
Vietnam
|
Trident
17
|
|
1983
|
|
355
|
|
25,000
|
|
Malaysia
|
GSF
Adriatic II
|
|
1981
|
|
350
|
|
25,000
|
|
Angola
|
GSF
Adriatic III (b)
|
|
1982
|
|
350
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
GSF
Adriatic IX
|
|
1981
|
|
350
|
|
20,000
|
|
Gabon
|
GSF
Adriatic X
|
|
1982
|
|
350
|
|
25,000
|
|
Egypt
|
GSF
Key Manhattan
|
|
1980
|
|
350
|
|
25,000
|
|
Egypt
|
GSF
Key Singapore
|
|
1982
|
|
350
|
|
25,000
|
|
Egypt
|
GSF
Adriatic VI
|
|
1981
|
|
328
|
|
20,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
GSF
Adriatic VIII
|
|
1983
|
|
328
|
|
25,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
C.
E. Thornton
|
|
1974
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
D.
R. Stewart
|
|
1980
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Italy
|
F.
G. McClintock
|
|
1975
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
George
H. Galloway
|
|
1984
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Italy
|
GSF
Adriatic I
|
|
1981
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Angola
|
GSF
Adriatic V
|
|
1979
|
|
300
|
|
20,000
|
|
Angola
|
GSF
Adriatic XI
|
|
1983
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Vietnam
|
GSF
Compact Driller
|
|
1992
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Thailand
|
GSF
Galveston Key
|
|
1978
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Vietnam
|
GSF
Key Gibraltar
|
|
1976/1996
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Thailand
|
GSF
Key Hawaii
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Qatar
|
GSF
Labrador
|
|
1983
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
GSF
Main Pass I
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Arabian
Gulf
|
GSF
Main Pass IV
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Arabian
Gulf
|
GSF
Parameswara
|
|
1983
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Indonesia
|
GSF
Rig 134
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
20,000
|
|
Malaysia
|
GSF
Rig 136
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Indonesia
|
Harvey
H. Ward
|
|
1981
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Malaysia
|
J.
T. Angel
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
Randolph
Yost
|
|
1979
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
Roger
W. Mowell
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Malaysia
|
Ron
Tappmeyer
|
|
1978
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
Shelf
Explorer
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Vietnam
|
Interocean III
|
|
1978/1993
|
|
300
|
|
20,000
|
|
Egypt
|
Transocean
Nordic
|
|
1984
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Sakhalin
Island
|
Trident
II
|
|
1977/1985
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
Trident
IV
|
|
1980/1999
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
Trident
VIII
|
|
1981
|
|
300
|
|
21,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
Trident
XII
|
|
1982/1992
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
India
|
Trident
XIV
|
|
1982/1994
|
|
300
|
|
20,000
|
|
Angola
|
Trident
15
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Thailand
|
Trident
16
|
|
1982
|
|
300
|
|
25,000
|
|
Thailand
|
GSF
High Island II
|
|
1979
|
|
270
|
|
20,000
|
|
Arabian
Gulf
|
GSF
High Island IV
|
|
1980/2001
|
|
270
|
|
20,000
|
|
Arabian
Gulf
|
GSF
High Island V
|
|
1981
|
|
270
|
|
20,000
|
|
Gabon
|
GSF
High Island VII
|
|
1982
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
Cameroon
|
GSF
High Island VIII (b)
|
|
1981
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.S.
Gulf
|
GSF
High Island IX
|
|
1983
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
Nigeria
|
GSF
Rig 103
|
|
1974
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.A.E.
|
GSF
Rig 105
|
|
1975
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
Egypt
|
GSF
Rig 124
|
|
1980
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
Egypt
|
GSF
Rig 127
|
|
1981
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
Qatar
|
GSF
Rig 141
|
|
1982
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
Egypt
|
Transocean
Comet
|
|
1980
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
Egypt
|
Transocean
Mercury
|
|
1969/1998
|
|
250
|
|
20,000
|
|
Egypt
|
GSF
Britannia
|
|
1968
|
|
230
|
|
20,000
|
|
U.K.
North Sea
|
Trident
VI
|
|
1981
|
|
220
|
|
21,000
|
|
Vietnam
|
______________________________
(a)
|
Dates
shown are the original service date and the date of the most recent
upgrade, if any.
|
(b)
|
On
February 15, 2008, we entered into a definitive agreement with
Hercules Offshore, Inc. to sell GSF Adriatic III,
GSF High Island I
(see "––Warm Stacked and Held for Sale") and
GSF High Island VIII.
As a result, we classified these rigs as held for
sale.
|
Other
Rigs
In
addition to our floaters and jackups, we also own or operate several other types
of rigs as follows: two drilling barges, a mobile offshore production unit and a
coring drillship.
Warm
Stacked and Held for Sale
As of
February 20, 2008, GSF High Island I
was warm stacked. We classified this rig as held for sale in
connection with a definitive agreement executed on February 15, 2008 with
Hercules Offshore, Inc. to sell this rig, together with GSF Adriatic III
and GSF High Island VIII,
which continue to operate under contract.
Markets
Our
operations are geographically dispersed in oil and gas exploration and
development areas throughout the world. Rigs can be moved from one region to
another, but the cost of moving a rig and the availability of rig-moving vessels
may cause the supply and demand balance to vary between regions. However,
significant variations between regions do not tend to exist long-term because of
rig mobility. Consequently, we operate in a single, global offshore drilling
market. Because our drilling rigs are mobile assets and are able to be moved
according to prevailing market conditions, we cannot predict the percentage of
our revenues that will be derived from particular geographic or political areas
in future periods.
In recent
years, there has been increased emphasis by oil companies on exploring for
hydrocarbons in deeper waters. This deepwater focus is due, in part, to
technological developments that have made such exploration more feasible and
cost-effective. Therefore, water-depth capability is a key component in
determining rig suitability for a particular drilling project. Another
distinguishing feature in some drilling market sectors is a rig’s ability to
operate in harsh environments, including extreme marine and climatic conditions
and temperatures.
The
deepwater and mid-water market sectors are serviced by our semisubmersibles and
drillships. While the use of the term “deepwater” as used in the drilling
industry to denote a particular sector of the market can vary and continues to
evolve with technological improvements, we generally view the deepwater market
sector as that which begins in water depths of approximately 4,500 feet and
extends to the maximum water depths in which rigs are capable of drilling, which
is currently approximately 12,000 feet. We view the mid-water market sector
as that which covers water depths of about 300 feet to approximately
4,500 feet.
The
global jackup market sector begins at the outer limit of the transition zone and
extends to water depths of about 400 feet. This sector has been developed
to a significantly greater degree than the deepwater market sector because the
shallower water depths have made it much more accessible than the deeper water
market sectors.
The
“transition zone” market sector is characterized by marshes, rivers, lakes, and
shallow bay and coastal water areas. We operate in this sector using
our two drilling barges located in Southeast Asia.
Contract
Backlog
We have
been successful in building contract backlog in 2007 within all of our asset
classes. Prior to the Merger, our contract backlog at October 30, 2007 was
approximately $23 billion, a 15 percent and 109 percent increase
compared to our contract backlog at December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. Our contract backlog at December 31, 2007 was
approximately $32 billion including the effect of the
Merger. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Outlook−Drilling Market” and “Item
7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations—Performance and Other Key Indicators.”
Operating
Revenues and Long-Lived Assets by Country
Operating
revenues and long-lived assets by country are as follows
(in millions):
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Operating
revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
$ |
1,259 |
|
|
$ |
806 |
|
|
$ |
648 |
|
United
Kingdom
|
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
439 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
India
|
|
|
761 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
296 |
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
447 |
|
|
|
218 |
|
Other
countries (a)
|
|
|
2,922 |
|
|
|
1,899 |
|
|
|
1,395 |
|
Total
operating revenues
|
|
$ |
6,377 |
|
|
$ |
3,882 |
|
|
$ |
2,892 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As
of December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-lived
assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
$ |
5,856 |
|
|
$ |
2,504 |
|
|
|
|
|
United
Kingdom
|
|
|
2,301 |
|
|
|
457 |
|
|
|
|
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
1,902 |
|
|
|
856 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other
countries (a)
|
|
|
10,871 |
|
|
|
3,509 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total
long-lived assets
|
|
$ |
20,930 |
|
|
$ |
7,326 |
|
|
|
|
|
______________________
(a) Other
countries represents countries in which we operate that individually had
operating revenues or long-lived assets representing less than 10 percent
of total operating revenues earned or total long-lived assets for any of the
periods presented.
Contract
Drilling Services
Our
contracts to provide offshore drilling services are individually negotiated and
vary in their terms and provisions. We obtain most of our contracts
through competitive bidding against other contractors. Drilling
contracts generally provide for payment on a dayrate basis, with higher rates
while the drilling unit is operating and lower rates for periods of mobilization
or when drilling operations are interrupted or restricted by equipment
breakdowns, adverse environmental conditions or other conditions beyond our
control.
A dayrate
drilling contract generally extends over a period of time covering either the
drilling of a single well or group of wells or covering a stated
term. These contracts typically can be terminated or suspended by the
client without paying a termination fee under various circumstances such as the
loss or destruction of the drilling unit or the suspension of drilling
operations for a specified period of time as a result of a breakdown of major
equipment. Many of these events are beyond our
control. The contract term in some instances may be extended by the
client exercising options for the drilling of additional wells or for an
additional term. Our contracts also typically include a provision
that allows the client to extend the contract to finish drilling a
well-in-progress. During periods of depressed market conditions, our
clients may seek to renegotiate firm drilling contracts to reduce their
obligations or may seek to suspend or terminate their contracts. Some
drilling contracts permit the customer to terminate the contract at the
customer’s option without paying a termination fee. Suspension of
drilling contracts will result in the reduction in or loss of dayrate for the
period of the suspension. If our customers cancel some of our
significant contracts and we are unable to secure new contracts on substantially
similar terms, or if contracts are suspended for an extended period of time, it
could adversely affect our consolidated statement of financial position, results
of operations or cash flows.
Drilling
Management Services
As a
result of the Merger, we provide drilling management services primarily on a
turnkey basis through our wholly owned subsidiary, Applied Drilling
Technology Inc. (“ADTI”), and through ADT International, a division of one
of our U.K. subsidiaries. ADTI operates primarily in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico, and ADT International operates primarily in the North
Sea. Under a typical turnkey arrangement, we will assume
responsibility for the design and execution of a well and deliver a logged or
cased hole to an agreed depth for a guaranteed price, with payment contingent
upon successful completion of the well program. As part of our
turnkey drilling services, we provide planning, engineering and management
services beyond the scope of our traditional contract drilling business and
thereby assume greater risk. In addition to turnkey arrangements, we
also participate in project management operations. In our project
management operations, we provide certain planning, management and engineering
services, purchase equipment and provide personnel and other logistical services
to customers. Our project management services differ from turnkey
drilling services in that the customer retains control of the drilling
operations and thus retains the risk associated with the
project. These drilling management services did not represent a
material portion of our revenues for the year ended December 31,
2007.
Integrated
Services
From time
to time, we provide well and logistics services in addition to our normal
drilling services through third party contractors and our
employees. We refer to these other services as integrated
services. The work generally consists of individual contractual
agreements to meet specific client needs and may be provided on either a
dayrate, cost plus or fixed price basis depending on the daily
activity. As of February 27, 2008, we were performing such
services in India. These integrated service revenues did not
represent a material portion of our revenues for any period
presented.
Oil
and Gas Properties
As a
result of the Merger, we conduct oil and gas exploration, development and
production activities through our oil and gas subsidiaries. We
acquire interests in oil and gas properties principally in order to facilitate
the awarding of turnkey contracts for our drilling management services
operations. Our oil and gas activities are conducted primarily in the
United States offshore Louisiana and Texas and in the U.K. sector of the North
Sea. These oil and gas properties did not represent a material
portion of our revenues for the year ended December 31, 2007.
Joint
Venture, Agency and Sponsorship Relationships and Other Investments
In some
areas of the world, local customs and practice or governmental requirements
necessitate the formation of joint ventures with local participation, which we
may or may not control. We are an active participant in several joint
venture drilling companies, principally in Azerbaijan, Indonesia, Malaysia,
Angola, Libya and Nigeria.
We hold a
50 percent interest in Overseas Drilling Limited (“ODL”), which owns the
drillship Joides Resolution. The
drillship is contracted to perform drilling and coring operations in deep waters
worldwide for the purpose of scientific research. We manage and
operate the vessel on behalf of ODL.
In early
October 2007, we exercised our option to purchase a 50 percent equity
interest in Transocean Pacific Drilling Inc. (“TPDI”), a joint venture
company formed by us and Pacific Drilling Limited (“Pacific Drilling”), a
Liberian company, whereby we acquired exclusive marketing rights for two
ultra-deepwater drillships to be named Deepwater Pacific 1
and Deepwater Pacific 2,
which are currently under construction. See “Item 7. Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations—Outlook−Drilling Market.”
In
Azerbaijan, the semisubmersibles Istiglal and Dada Gorgud operate under
long-term bareboat charters between (a) Caspian Drilling Company
Limited (“CDC”), a joint venture in which we hold a 45 percent ownership
interest, and (b) the owner of both rigs, the State Oil Company of the
Azerbaijan Republic (“SOCAR”), our sole equity partner in CDC. SOCAR
has granted exclusive bareboat charter rights to CDC for the life of the joint
venture. During 2005, these bareboat charter rights were extended
through October 2011, pursuant to an amendment to the agreement
establishing CDC.
A joint
venture in which we hold a passive minority interest operates primarily in
Libya, and to a limited extent in Syria. Syria is identified by the
U.S. State Department as a state sponsor of terrorism. In addition,
Syria is subject to a number of economic regulations, including sanctions
administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control
(“OFAC”), and comprehensive restrictions on the export and re-export of
U.S.-origin items to Syria. On June 30, 2006, Libya was removed
from the U.S. government’s list of state sponsors of terrorism and is no longer
subject to sanctions or embargoes. We believe our passive minority
investment has been maintained in accordance with all applicable laws and
regulations. Potential investors could view our passive minority
interest in our Libyan joint venture negatively, which could adversely affect
our reputation and the market for our ordinary shares. In addition,
certain U.S. states have recently enacted legislation regarding investments by
their retirement systems in companies that have business activities or contacts
with countries that have been identified as terrorist-sponsoring states, and
similar legislation may be pending or introduced in other states. As
a result, certain investors may be subject to reporting requirements with
respect to investments in companies such as ours or may be subject to limits or
prohibitions with respect to those investments.
Local
laws or customs in some areas of the world also effectively mandate
establishment of a relationship with a local agent or sponsor. When
appropriate in these areas, we enter into agency or sponsorship
agreements.
Significant
Clients
We engage
in offshore drilling for most of the leading international oil companies (or
their affiliates), as well as for many government-controlled and independent oil
companies. Our most significant clients in 2007 were Chevron, Shell
and BP accounting for 12 percent, 11 percent and 10 percent,
respectively, of our 2007 operating revenues. No other client
accounted for 10 percent or more of our 2007 operating
revenues. The loss of any of these significant clients could, at
least in the short term, have a material adverse effect on our results of
operations.
Environmental
Regulation
For a
discussion of the effects of environmental regulation, see “Item 1A. Risk
Factors—Compliance with or breach of environmental laws can be costly and could
limit our operations.” We have made and will continue to make expenditures to
comply with environmental requirements. To date we have not expended
material amounts in order to comply and we do not believe that our compliance
with such requirements will have a material adverse effect upon our results of
operations or competitive position or materially increase our capital
expenditures.
Employees
We
require highly skilled personnel to operate our drilling units. As a
result, we conduct extensive personnel recruiting, training and safety
programs. At December 31, 2007, we had approximately
21,100 employees, and we also utilized approximately 3,400 persons
through contract labor providers. Some of
our employees, most of whom work in the U.K., Nigeria and Norway, are
represented by collective bargaining agreements. In addition, some of our
contracted labor work under collective bargaining agreements. Many
of these represented individuals are working under agreements that are subject
to salary negotiation in 2008. These negotiations could result in
higher personnel expenses, other increased costs or increased operation
restrictions. Additionally, the unions in the U.K. have sought an
interpretation of the application of the Working Time Regulations to the
offshore sector. The Tribunal has recently issued its decision and we are
currently reviewing the decision to determine its potential impact on our
operations and expenses as well as to determine whether the decision should be
appealed. The application of the Working Time Regulations to the
offshore sector could result in higher labor costs and could undermine our
ability to obtain a sufficient number of skilled workers in the
U.K.
Available
Information
Our
website address is www.deepwater.com. We make our
website content available for information purposes only. It should
not be relied upon for investment purposes, nor is it incorporated by reference
in this Form 10-K. We make available on this website under
“Investor Relations-SEC Filings,” free of charge, our annual reports on
Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on
Form 8-K and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable
after we electronically file those materials with, or furnish those materials
to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The SEC also
maintains a website at www.sec.gov that contains reports,
proxy statements and other information regarding SEC registrants, including
us.
You may
also find information related to our corporate governance, board committees and
company code of business conduct and ethics at our website. Among the
information you can find there is the following:
|
§
|
Audit
Committee Charter;
|
|
§
|
Corporate
Governance Committee Charter;
|
|
§
|
Executive
Compensation Committee Charter;
|
|
§
|
Finance
and Benefits Committee Charter;
|
|
§
|
Code
of Business Conduct and Ethics, including our anti-corruption policy;
and
|
|
§
|
Corporate
Governance Guidelines.
|
We intend
to satisfy the requirement under Item 5.05 of Form 8-K to disclose any
amendments to our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and any waiver from a
provision of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics by posting such information
in the Corporate Governance section of our website at www.deepwater.com.
Our
business depends on the level of activity in the offshore oil and gas industry,
which is significantly affected by volatile oil and gas prices and other
factors.
Our
business depends on the level of activity in oil and gas exploration,
development and production in offshore areas worldwide. Oil and gas
prices and market expectations of potential changes in these prices
significantly affect this level of activity. However, higher
commodity prices do not necessarily translate into increased drilling activity
since customers' expectations of future commodity prices typically drive demand
for our rigs. Also, increased competition for customers' drilling
budgets could come from, among other areas, land-based energy markets in Africa,
Russia, Western Asian countries, the Middle East, the U.S. and
elsewhere. The availability of quality drilling prospects,
exploration success, relative production costs, the stage of reservoir
development and political and regulatory environments also affect customers'
drilling campaigns. Worldwide military, political and economic events
have contributed to oil and gas price volatility and are likely to do so in the
future.
Oil and
gas prices are extremely volatile and are affected by numerous factors,
including the following:
|
§
|
worldwide
demand for oil and gas including economic activity in the U.S. and other
energy-consuming markets;
|
|
§
|
the
ability of OPEC to set and maintain production levels and
pricing;
|
|
§
|
the
level of production in non-OPEC
countries;
|
|
§
|
the
policies of various governments regarding exploration and development of
their oil and gas reserves;
|
|
§
|
advances
in exploration and development technology;
and
|
|
§
|
the
worldwide military and political environment, including uncertainty or
instability resulting from an escalation or additional outbreak of armed
hostilities or other crises in the Middle East or other geographic areas
or further acts of terrorism in the United States, or
elsewhere.
|
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 has a dominant market share. 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 the quality and technical capability of service and equipment
may also be considered.
Our
industry has historically been cyclical and is impacted by oil and gas price
levels and volatility. There have been periods of high demand, short
rig supply and high dayrates, followed by periods of low demand, excess rig
supply and low dayrates. Changes in commodity prices can have a
dramatic effect on rig demand, and periods of excess rig supply intensify the
competition in the industry and often result in rigs being idle for long periods
of time. We may be required to idle rigs or enter into lower rate
contracts in response to market conditions in the future.
During
prior periods of high utilization and dayrates, industry participants have
increased the supply of rigs by ordering the construction of new
units. This has typically resulted in an oversupply of drilling units
and has caused a subsequent decline in utilization and dayrates, sometimes for
extended periods of time. There are numerous high-specification rigs
and jackups under contract for construction and several mid-water
semisubmersibles are being upgraded to enhance their operating
capability. The entry into service of these new and upgraded units
will increase supply and could curtail a further strengthening, or trigger a
reduction, in dayrates as rigs are absorbed into the active
fleet. Any further increase in construction of new drilling units
would likely exacerbate the negative impact on utilization and
dayrates. Lower utilization and dayrates could adversely affect our
revenues and profitability. Prolonged periods of low utilization and
dayrates could also result in the recognition of impairment charges on certain
classes of our drilling rigs or our goodwill balance if future cash flow
estimates, based upon information available to management at the time, indicate
that the carrying value of these rigs, or the goodwill balance, may not be
recoverable.
Our
business involves numerous operating hazards.
Our
operations are subject to the usual hazards inherent in the drilling of oil and
gas wells, such as blowouts, reservoir damage, loss of production, loss of well
control, punch-throughs, craterings, fires and natural disasters such as
hurricanes and tropical storms. In particular, the Gulf of Mexico
area is subject to hurricanes and other extreme weather conditions on a
relatively frequent basis, and our drilling rigs in the region may be exposed to
damage or total loss by these storms (some of which may not be covered by
insurance). The occurrence of these events could result in the
suspension of drilling operations, damage to or destruction of the equipment
involved and injury to or death of rig personnel. We are also subject
to personal injury and other claims by rig personnel as a result of our drilling
operations. 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 operations are subject to perils peculiar to marine
operations, including capsizing, grounding, collision and loss or damage from
severe weather. Damage to the environment could also result from our
operations, particularly through oil spillage or extensive uncontrolled
fires. We may also be subject to property, environmental and other
damage claims by oil and gas companies. Our insurance policies and
contractual rights to indemnity may not adequately cover losses, and we do not
have insurance coverage or rights to indemnity for all risks.
Consistent
with standard industry practice, our clients generally assume, and indemnify us
against, well control and subsurface risks under dayrate
contracts. These are risks associated with the loss of control of a
well, such as blowout or cratering, the cost to regain control of or redrill the
well and associated pollution. However, there can be no assurance
that these clients will be financially able to indemnify us against all these
risks.
We
maintain broad insurance coverage, including coverage for property damage,
occupational injury and illness, and general and marine third-party
liabilities. Property damage insurance covers against marine and
other perils, including losses due to capsizing, grounding, collision, fire,
lightning, hurricanes and windstorms (excluding named storms in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico and war perils worldwide, for which we generally have no coverage),
action of waves, punch-throughs, cratering, blowouts and
explosion. However, we maintain large self-insured deductibles for
damage to our offshore drilling equipment and third-party
liabilities.
With
respect to hull and machinery we generally maintain a $125 million
deductible per occurrence, subject to a $250 million annual aggregate
deductible. In the event that the $250 million annual aggregate
deductible has been exceeded, the hull and machinery deductible becomes
$10 million per occurrence. However, in the event of a total
loss or a constructive total loss of a drilling unit, then such loss is fully
covered by our insurance with no deductible. For general and marine
third-party liabilities we generally maintain a $10 million per occurrence
deductible on personal injury liability for crew claims ($5 million for
non-crew claims) and a $5 million per occurrence deductible on third-party
property damage. We also self insure the primary $50 million of
liability limits in excess of the $5 million and $10 million per
occurrence deductibles described in the prior sentence.
Pollution
and environmental risks generally are not totally insurable. If a
significant accident or other event occurs and is not fully covered by insurance
or an enforceable or recoverable indemnity from a client, it could adversely
affect our consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations
or cash flows.
The
amount of our insurance may be less than the related impact on enterprise value
after a loss. We do not generally have hull and machinery coverage
for losses due to hurricanes in the U.S Gulf of Mexico and war perils
worldwide. Our insurance coverage will not in all situations provide
sufficient funds to protect us from all liabilities that could result from our
drilling operations. Our coverage includes annual aggregate policy
limits. As a result, we retain the risk through self-insurance for
any losses in excess of these limits. We do not carry insurance for
loss of revenue and certain other claims may also not be reimbursed by insurance
carriers. Any such lack of reimbursement may cause us to incur
substantial costs. In addition, we could decide to retain
substantially more risk through self-insurance in the
future. Moreover, no assurance can be made that we will be able to
maintain adequate insurance in the future at rates we consider reasonable or be
able to obtain insurance against certain risks. As of
February 27, 2008, all of the rigs that we owned or operated were covered
by existing insurance policies.
Failure
to retain key personnel could hurt our operations.
We
require highly skilled personnel to operate and provide technical services and
support for our business worldwide. Competition for the labor
required for drilling operations, including for turnkey drilling and drilling
management services businesses and construction projects, has intensified as the
number of rigs activated, added to worldwide fleets or under construction has
increased, leading to shortages of qualified personnel in the industry and
creating upward pressure on wages and higher turnover. If turnover
increases, we could see a reduction in the experience level of our personnel,
which could lead to higher downtime and more operating incidents, which in turn
could decrease revenues and increase costs. In response to these
labor market conditions, we are increasing efforts in our recruitment, training,
development and retention programs as required to meet our anticipated personnel
needs. If these labor trends continue, we may experience further
increases in costs or limits on operations.
Our
labor costs and the operating restrictions under which we operate could increase
as a result of collective bargaining negotiations and changes in labor laws and
regulations.
Some of
our employees, most of whom work in the U.K., Nigeria and Norway, are
represented by collective bargaining agreements. In addition, some of our
contracted labor work under collective bargaining agreements. Many
of these represented individuals are working under agreements that are subject
to ongoing salary negotiation in 2008. These negotiations could
result in higher personnel expenses, other increased costs or increased
operating restrictions. Additionally, the unions in the U.K. have
sought an interpretation of the application of the Working Time Regulations to
the offshore sector. The Tribunal has recently issued its decision
and we are currently reviewing the decision to determine its potential impact on
our operations and expenses as well as to determine whether the decision should
be appealed. The application of the Working Time Regulations to the
offshore sector could result in higher labor costs and could undermine our
ability to obtain a sufficient number of skilled workers in the
U.K.
Our
shipyard projects are subject to delays and cost overruns.
We have
committed to a total of eight deepwater newbuild rig projects and two Sedco 700-series rig
upgrades. We are also discussing other potential newbuild
opportunities with several of our oil and gas company and government-controlled
clients. We also have a variety of other more limited shipyard
projects at any given time. These shipyard projects are subject to
the risks of delay or cost overruns inherent in any such construction project
resulting from numerous factors, including the following:
|
§
|
shipyard
unavailability;
|
|
§
|
shortages
of equipment, materials or skilled
labor;
|
|
§
|
unscheduled
delays in the delivery of ordered materials and
equipment;
|
|
§
|
engineering
problems, including those relating to the commissioning of newly designed
equipment;
|
|
§
|
client
acceptance delays;
|
|
§
|
weather
interference or storm damage;
|
|
§
|
unanticipated
cost increases; and
|
|
§
|
difficulty
in obtaining necessary permits or
approvals.
|
These
factors may contribute to cost variations and delays in the delivery of our
upgraded and newbuild units and other rigs undergoing shipyard
projects. Delays in the delivery of these units would result in delay
in contract commencement, resulting in a loss of revenue to us, and may also
cause customers to terminate or shorten the term of the drilling contract for
the rig pursuant to applicable late delivery clauses. In the event of
termination of one of these contracts, we may not be able to secure a
replacement contract on as favorable terms.
Our
operations also rely on a significant supply of capital and consumable spare
parts and equipment to maintain and repair our fleet. We also rely on
the supply of ancillary services, including supply boats and
helicopters. Recently, we have experienced increased delivery times
from vendors due to increased drilling activity worldwide and the increase in
construction and upgrade projects and have also experienced a tightening in the
availability of ancillary services. We have recently replaced our
primary global logistics provider, which may result in delays and disruptions,
and potentially increased costs, in some operations. Shortages in
materials, delays in the delivery of necessary spare parts, equipment or other
materials, or the unavailability of ancillary services could negatively impact
our future operations and result in increases in rig downtime, and delays in the
repair and maintenance of our fleet.
Failure
to secure a drilling contract prior to deployment of two of our newbuild
drillships could adversely affect our results of operations.
In
September 2007, GlobalSantaFe entered into a contract with Hyundai Heavy
Industries, Ltd. for the construction of a new drillship the delivery of
which is scheduled for the third quarter of 2010. In addition, the drillship
Deepwater Pacific 2
that is being constructed by our joint venture with Pacific Drilling is
scheduled for delivery in the first quarter of 2010. We have not yet
secured a drilling contract for either drillship. Historically, the
industry has experienced prolonged periods of overcapacity, during which many
rigs were idle for long periods of time. Our failure to secure a
drilling contract for either rig prior to its deployment could adversely affect
our results of operations.
The
anticipated benefits of the Merger may not be realized, and there may be
difficulties in integrating our operations.
We merged
with GlobalSantaFe on November 27, 2007, with the expectation that the
Merger would result in various benefits, including, among other things,
synergies, cost savings and operating efficiencies. We may not
achieve these benefits at the levels expected or at all.
We may
not be able to integrate our operations with those of GlobalSantaFe without a
loss of employees, customers or suppliers, a loss of revenues, an increase in
operating or other costs or other difficulties. In addition, we may
not be able to realize the operating efficiencies, synergies, cost savings or
other benefits expected from the Merger. Any unexpected delays
incurred in connection with the integration could have an adverse effect on our
business, results of operations or financial condition.
Our
business has changed as a result of our recent combination with
GlobalSantaFe.
Our
business has changed as a result of our recent combination with
GlobalSantaFe. Following the Merger, our relative exposure to the
jackup market has increased. Portions of the jackup market, including
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, have in recent periods experienced lower dayrates than
in previous periods. Additionally, as a result of the Merger, we are
now engaged in drilling management services including turnkey drilling
operations and own interests in oil and gas properties, which, as described
below, will expose us to additional risks.
Our
overall debt level increased as a result of the Transactions, and we may lose
the ability to obtain future financing and suffer competitive
disadvantages.
We have a
substantial amount of debt. As a result of the Transactions, our
overall debt level increased from approximately $3 billion at
December 31, 2006, to approximately $17 billion at December 31,
2007. Our level of debt and other obligations could have significant
adverse consequences on our business and future prospects, including the
following:
|
§
|
we
may not be able to obtain financing in the future for working capital,
capital expenditures, acquisitions, debt service requirements or other
purposes;
|
|
§
|
we
may not be able to use operating cash flow in other areas of our business
because we must dedicate a substantial portion of these funds to service
the debt;
|
|
§
|
we
could become more vulnerable to general adverse economic and industry
conditions, including increases in interest rates, particularly given our
substantial indebtedness, some of which bears interest at variable
rates;
|
|
§
|
less
levered competitors could have a competitive advantage because they have
lower debt service requirements;
and
|
|
§
|
we
may be less able to take advantage of significant business opportunities
and to react to changes in market or industry conditions than our
competitors.
|
We
may not be successful in refinancing the remaining borrowings under our bridge
loan facility, and the terms of any refinancing may not be favorable to
us.
Our
bridge loan facility has a maturity of one year. Although we expect
to refinance the remaining portion of this debt on more favorable terms, such
refinancing is subject to conditions in the credit markets, which are currently
volatile, and there can be no assurance that we will be successful in
refinancing the remaining portion of debt or that the terms of the refinancing
will be favorable to us, which could adversely affect our results of operations
or financial condition.
Our
overall debt level and/or our inability to refinance the remaining borrowings
under our bridge loan facility on favorable terms could lead the credit rating
agencies to lower our corporate credit ratings below currently expected levels
and possibly below investment grade.
Market
conditions could prohibit us from refinancing the bridge loan facility at
favorable rates and on favorable terms, which could limit our ability to
efficiently repay debt and could cause us to maintain a high level of leverage
or issue debt with unfavorable terms and conditions. This leverage
level could lead the credit rating agencies to downgrade our credit ratings
below currently expected levels and possibly to non-investment grade
levels. Such ratings levels could negatively impact current and
prospective customers' willingness to transact business with
us. Suppliers may lower or eliminate the level of credit provided
through payment terms when dealing with us thereby increasing the need for
higher levels of cash on hand, which would decrease our ability to repay debt
balances.
A
loss of a major tax dispute or a successful tax challenge to our structure could
result in a higher tax rate on our worldwide earnings, which could result in a
significant negative impact on our earnings and cash flows from
operations.
We are a
Cayman Islands company and operate through our various subsidiaries in a number
of countries throughout the world. Consequently, we are subject to
tax laws, treaties and regulations in and between the countries in which we
operate. Our income taxes are based upon the applicable tax laws and
tax rates in effect in the countries in which we operate and earn income as well
as upon our operating structures in these countries.
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, particularly in the U.S., Norway or Brazil, our effective tax rate
on our worldwide earnings could increase substantially and our earnings and cash
flows from operations could be materially adversely affected. See
“Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations—Outlook–Tax Matters” and “—Critical Accounting Estimates–Income
Taxes.”
A
change in tax laws, treaties or regulations, or their interpretation, of any
country in which we operate could result in a higher tax rate on our worldwide
earnings, which could result in a significant negative impact on our earnings
and cash flows from operations.
A change
in applicable tax laws, treaties or regulations could result in a higher
effective tax rate on our worldwide earnings and such change could be
significant to our financial results. One of the income tax treaties
that we rely upon is currently in the process of being
renegotiated. This renegotiation will likely result in a change in
the terms of the treaty that is adverse to our tax structure, which in turn
would increase our effective tax rate, and such increase could be
material. We are monitoring the progress of the treaty renegotiation
with a view to determining what, if any, steps are appropriate to mitigate any
potential negative impact. One of these steps could include
transactions that would result in certain subsidiaries or the parent entity
of our group of companies having a different tax residency or different
jurisdiction of incorporation. We may not be able to fully, or
partially, mitigate any negative impact of this treaty renegotiation or any
other future changes in treaties that we rely upon.
Various
proposals have been made in recent years that, if enacted into law, could have
an adverse impact on us. Examples include, but are not limited to,
proposals that would broaden the circumstances in which a non-U.S. company would
be considered a U.S. resident and a proposal that could limit treaty benefits on
certain payments by U.S. subsidiaries to non-U.S. affiliates. Such
legislation, if enacted, could cause a material increase in our tax liability
and effective tax rate, which could result in a significant negative impact on
our earnings and cash flows from operations. In addition, our income
tax returns are subject to review and examination in various jurisdictions in
which we operate. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Outlook–Tax Matters” and
“—Critical Accounting Estimates–Income Taxes.”
We
may be limited in our use of net operating losses.
Our
ability to benefit from our deferred tax assets depends on us having sufficient
future earnings to utilize our net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards before
they expire. We have established a valuation allowance against the
future tax benefit for a number of our foreign NOL carryforwards, and we could
be required to record an additional valuation allowance against our foreign or
U.S. deferred tax assets if market conditions change materially and, as a
result, our future earnings are, or are projected to be, significantly less than
we currently estimate. Our NOL carryforwards are subject to review
and potential disallowance upon audit by the tax authorities of the
jurisdictions where the NOLs are incurred.
In 2007,
we utilized NOL carryforwards to reduce our 2007 U.S. taxable income. The NOL
carryforwards utilized in 2007 included NOL carryforwards of one of our
subsidiaries from periods prior to a
previous merger of two of our subsidiaries. The U.S. Internal
Revenue Service (“IRS”) may take the position that the 2001 merger subjected the
NOL carryforwards to various limitations under U.S. tax laws. If a
limitation were imposed, it could result in a portion of our NOL carryforwards
expiring unused or in our inability to fully offset taxable income with NOLs in
a particular year, even though our NOL carryforwards exceed our taxable income
for the year.
We
may be required to accrue additional tax liability on certain
earnings.
We have
not provided for deferred taxes on the unremitted earnings of certain
subsidiaries that are permanently reinvested. Should a distribution
be made of the unremitted earnings of these subsidiaries, we could be required
to record additional current and deferred taxes that, if material, could have an
adverse effect on our statement of financial position, results of operations and
cash flows.
Our
non-U.S. operations involve additional risks not associated with our U.S.
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;
|
|
§
|
expropriation
or nationalization of equipment;
and
|
|
§
|
the
inability to repatriate income or
capital.
|
We are
protected to some extent against loss of capital assets, but generally not loss
of revenue, from most of these risks through indemnity provisions in our
drilling contracts. Effective May 1, 2007, our assets are
generally not insured against risk of loss due to perils such as terrorist acts,
civil unrest, expropriation, nationalization and acts of war.
Many
governments favor or effectively require the awarding of drilling contracts to
local contractors or require foreign contractors to employ citizens of, or
purchase supplies from, a particular jurisdiction. These practices
may adversely affect our ability to compete.
Our
non-U.S. contract drilling operations are subject to various laws and
regulations in countries in which we operate, including laws and regulations
relating to the equipment and operation of drilling units, currency conversions
and repatriation, oil and gas exploration and development and taxation of
offshore earnings and earnings of expatriate personnel. We are also
subject to OFAC and other U.S. laws and regulations governing our international
operations. Potential investors could view any potential violation of
OFAC regulations negatively, which could adversely affect our reputation and the
market for our ordinary shares. In addition, certain U.S. states have
recently enacted legislation regarding investments by their retirement systems
in companies that have business activities or contacts with countries that have
been identified as terrorist-sponsoring states, and similar legislation may be
pending or introduced in other states. As a result, certain investors
may be subject to reporting requirements with respect to investments in
companies such as ours or may be subject to limits or prohibitions with respect
to those investments. Failure to comply with applicable laws and
regulations, including those relating to sanctions and export restrictions, may
subject us to criminal sanctions or civil remedies, including fines, denial of
export privileges, injunctions or seizures of assets. Our internal
compliance program has discovered a potential OFAC compliance
issue. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations—Outlook–Regulatory Matters.”
Governments
in some foreign countries have become increasingly active in regulating and
controlling the ownership of concessions and companies holding concessions, the
exploration for oil and gas and other aspects of the oil and gas industries in
their countries. In addition, government action, including
initiatives by OPEC, may continue to cause oil or gas price
volatility. In some areas of the world, this governmental activity
has adversely affected the amount of exploration and development work done by
major oil companies and may continue to do so.
Another
risk inherent in our operations is the possibility of currency exchange losses
where revenues are received and expenses are paid in nonconvertible
currencies. We may also incur losses as a result of an inability to
collect revenues because of a shortage of convertible currency available in the
country of operation.
Failure
to comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act could result in fines,
criminal penalties, drilling contract terminations and an adverse effect on our
business.
In June
2007, GlobalSantaFe's management retained outside counsel to conduct an internal
investigation of its Nigerian and West African operations, focusing on brokers
who handled customs matters with respect to its affiliates operating in those
jurisdictions and whether those brokers have fully complied with the U.S.
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) and local laws. GlobalSantaFe
commenced its investigation following announcements by other oilfield service
companies that they were independently investigating the FCPA implications of
certain actions taken by third parties in respect of customs matters in
connection with their operations in Nigeria, as well as another company's
announced settlement implicating a third party handling customs matters in
Nigeria. In each case, the customs broker was reported to be
Panalpina Inc., which GlobalSantaFe used to obtain temporary import permits
for its rigs operating offshore Nigeria. GlobalSantaFe voluntarily
disclosed its internal investigation to the U.S. Department of Justice (the
“DOJ”) and the SEC and, at their request, expanded its investigation to include
the activities of its customs brokers in other West African countries and the
activities of Panalpina Inc. worldwide. The investigation is
focusing on whether the brokers have fully complied with the requirements of
their contracts, local laws and the FCPA. In late November 2007,
GlobalSantaFe received a subpoena from the SEC for documents related to its
investigation. In this connection, the SEC advised GlobalSantaFe that
it had issued a formal order of investigation. After the completion
of the Merger, outside counsel began formally reporting directly to the audit
committee of our board of directors. Our legal representatives are
keeping the DOJ and SEC apprised of the scope and details of their investigation
and producing relevant information in response to their requests.
On
July 25, 2007, our legal representatives met with the DOJ in response to a
notice we received requesting such a meeting regarding our engagement of
Panalpina Inc. for freight forwarding and other services in the United
States and abroad. The DOJ has informed us that it is conducting an
investigation of alleged FCPA violations by oil service companies who used
Panalpina Inc. and other brokers in Nigeria and other parts of the
world. We began developing an investigative plan which would allow us
to promptly review and produce relevant and responsive information requested by
the DOJ and SEC. Subsequently, we expanded this investigation to
include one of our agents for Nigeria. This investigation and the
legacy GlobalSantaFe investigation are being conducted by outside counsel who
reports directly to the audit committee of our board of
directors. The investigation has focused on whether the agent and the
customs brokers have fully complied with the terms of their respective
agreements, the FCPA and local laws. We prepared and presented an
investigative plan to the DOJ and have informed the SEC of the ongoing
investigation. We have begun implementing the investigative plan
and
are keeping the DOJ and SEC apprised of the scope and details of our
investigation and are producing relevant information in response to their
requests.
We cannot
predict the ultimate outcome of these investigations, the effect of implementing
any further measures that may be necessary to ensure full compliance with
applicable laws or to what extent, if at all, we could be subject to fines,
sanctions or other penalties. Our investigation includes a review of
amounts paid to and by customs brokers in connection with the obtaining of
permits for the temporary importation of vessels and the clearance of goods and
materials. These permits and clearances are necessary in order for us
to operate our vessels in certain jurisdictions. There is a risk that
we may not be able to obtain import permits or renew temporary importation
permits in West African countries, including Nigeria, in a manner that complies
with the FCPA. As a result, we may not have the means to renew
temporary importation permits for rigs located in the relevant jurisdictions as
they expire or to send goods and equipment into those jurisdictions, in which
event we may be forced to terminate the pending drilling contracts and relocate
the rigs or leave the rigs in these countries and risk permanent importation
issues, either of which could have an adverse effect on our financial
results. In addition, termination of drilling contracts could result
in damage claims by customers.
Our
operating and maintenance costs will not necessarily fluctuate in proportion to
changes in operating revenues.
Our
operating and maintenance costs will not necessarily fluctuate in proportion to
changes in operating revenues. Operating revenues may fluctuate as a
function of changes in dayrate. However, costs for operating a rig
are generally fixed or only semi-variable regardless of the dayrate being
earned. In addition, should our rigs incur idle time between
contracts, we typically will not de-man those rigs because we will use the crew
to prepare the rig for its next contract. During times of reduced
activity, reductions in costs may not be immediate as portions of the crew may
be required to prepare rigs for stacking, after which time the crew members are
assigned to active rigs or dismissed. In addition, as our rigs are
mobilized from one geographic location to another, the labor and other operating
and maintenance costs can vary significantly. In general, labor costs
increase primarily due to higher salary levels and
inflation. Equipment maintenance expenses fluctuate depending upon
the type of activity the unit is performing and the age and condition of the
equipment. Contract preparation expenses vary based on the scope and
length of contract preparation required and the duration of the firm contractual
period over which such expenditures are amortized.
Our
drilling contracts may be terminated due to a number of events.
Our
customers may terminate or suspend many of our term drilling contracts without
paying a termination fee under various circumstances such as the loss or
destruction of the drilling unit, downtime or impaired performance caused by
equipment or operational issues, some of which will be beyond our control, or
sustained periods of downtime due to force majeure events. Suspension
of drilling contracts results in loss of the dayrate for the period of the
suspension. If our customers cancel some of our significant contracts
and we are unable to secure new contracts on substantially similar terms, it
could adversely affect our results of operations. In reaction to
depressed market conditions, our customers may also seek renegotiation of firm
drilling contracts to reduce their obligations.
We
are subject to litigation that, if not resolved in our favor and not
sufficiently insured against, could have a material adverse effect on
us.
We are
subject to a variety of litigation and may be sued in additional
cases. Certain of our subsidiaries are named as defendants in
numerous lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos
or toxic fumes or resulting from other occupational diseases, such as silicosis,
and various other medical issues that can remain undiscovered for a considerable
amount of time. Some of these subsidiaries that have been put on
notice of potential liabilities have no assets. Other subsidiaries
are subject to litigation relating to environmental damage. We cannot
predict the outcome of these cases involving those subsidiaries or the potential
costs to resolve them. Insurance may not be applicable or sufficient
in all cases, insurers may not remain solvent, and policies may not be
located. Suits against non-asset-owning subsidiaries have and may in
the future give rise to alter ego or successor-in-interest claims against us and
our asset-owning subsidiaries to the extent a subsidiary is unable to pay a
claim or insurance is not available or sufficient to cover the
claims. To the extent that one or more pending or future litigation
matters are not resolved in our favor and are not covered by insurance, a
material adverse effect on our financial results and condition could
result.
Turnkey
drilling operations expose us to additional risks, which can adversely affect
our profitability, because we assume the risk for operational problems and the
contracts are on a fixed-price basis.
We
conduct most of our drilling services under dayrate drilling contracts where the
customer pays for the period of time required to drill or work over a
well. However, we also enter into a significant number of turnkey
contracts each year. Our compensation under turnkey contracts depends
on whether we successfully drill to a specified depth or, under some of the
contracts, complete the well. Unlike dayrate contracts, where
ultimate control is exercised by the customer, we are exposed to additional
risks when serving as a turnkey drilling contractor because we make all critical
decisions. Under a turnkey contract, the amount of our compensation
is fixed at the amount we bid to drill the well. Thus, we will not be
paid if operational problems prevent performance unless we choose to drill a new
well at our expense. Further, we must absorb the loss if problems
arise that cause the cost of performance to exceed the turnkey
price. Given the complexities of drilling a well, it is not unusual
for unforeseen problems to arise. We do not generally insure against
risks of unbudgeted costs associated with turnkey drilling
operations. By contrast, in a dayrate contract, the customer retains
most of these risks. As a result of the additional risks we assume in
performing turnkey contracts, costs incurred from time to time exceed revenues
earned. Accordingly, in prior quarters, GlobalSantaFe incurred losses
on certain of its turnkey contracts, and we can expect that will continue to be
the case in the future. Depending on the size of these losses, they
may have a material adverse affect on the profitability of our drilling
management services business in a given period.
Turnkey
drilling operations are contingent on our ability to win bids and on rig
availability, and the failure to win bids or obtain rigs for any reason may have
a material adverse effect on the results of operations of our drilling
management services business.
Our
results of operations from our drilling management services business may be
limited by certain factors, including our ability to find and retain qualified
personnel, to hire suitable rigs at acceptable rates, and to obtain and
successfully perform turnkey drilling contracts based on competitive
bids. Our ability to obtain turnkey drilling contracts is largely
dependent on the number of these contracts available for bid, which in turn is
influenced by market prices for oil and natural gas, among other
factors. Furthermore, our ability to enter into turnkey drilling
contracts may be constrained from time to time by the availability of our or
third-party drilling rigs. Constraints on the availability of rigs
may cause delays in our drilling management projects and a reduction in the
number of projects that we can complete overall, which could have an adverse
effect on the results of operations of our drilling management services
business.
Public
health threats could have a material adverse effect on our operations and our
financial results.
Public
health threats, such as the bird flu, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, and
other highly communicable diseases, outbreaks of which have already occurred in
various parts of the world in which we operate, could adversely impact our
operations, the operations of our clients 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 materially impact operations and adversely
affect our financial results.
Compliance
with or breach of environmental laws can be costly and could limit our
operations.
Our
operations are subject to 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. For example, as an operator of mobile offshore drilling
units in navigable U.S. waters and some offshore areas, we 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 more stringent in recent years, and may in some cases impose strict
liability, rendering a person liable for environmental damage without regard to
negligence. These laws and regulations may expose us to liability for
the conduct of or conditions caused by others or for acts that were in
compliance with all applicable laws at the time they were
performed. The application of these requirements or the adoption of
new requirements could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated
statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
We have
generally been able to obtain some degree of contractual indemnification
pursuant to which our clients agree to protect and indemnify us against
liability for pollution, well and environmental damages; however, there is no
assurance that we can obtain such indemnities in all of our contracts or that,
in the event of extensive pollution and environmental damages, our clients will
have the financial capability to fulfill their contractual obligations to
us. Also, these indemnities may not be enforceable in all
instances.
Our
ability to operate our rigs in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico could be restricted by
governmental regulation.
Hurricanes
Ivan, Katrina and Rita caused damage to a number of rigs in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico fleet, and rigs that were moved off location by the storms may have
damaged platforms, pipelines, wellheads and other drilling rigs during their
movements. The Minerals Management Service of the U.S. Department of
the Interior (“MMS”) has conducted hearings and is undertaking studies to
determine methods to prevent or reduce the number of such incidents in the
future. In 2006, the MMS issued interim guidelines requiring that
semisubmersibles operating in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico assess their mooring
systems against stricter criteria. In 2007 additional guidelines were
issued which impose stricter criteria, requiring rigs to meet 25-year storm
conditions. Although all of our semisubmersibles currently operating
in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico meet the 2007 requirements, these guidelines may
negatively impact our ability to operate other semisubmersibles in the U.S. Gulf
of Mexico in the future. Moreover, the MMS may issue additional
regulations that could increase the cost of operations or reduce the area of
operations for our rigs in the future, thus reducing their
marketability. Implementation of additional MMS regulations may
subject us to increased costs or limit the operational capabilities of our rigs
and could materially and adversely affect our operations in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexico.
Acts
of terrorism and social unrest could affect the markets for drilling
services.
Acts of
terrorism and social unrest, brought about by world political events or
otherwise, have caused instability in the world’s financial and insurance
markets in the past and may occur in the future. Such acts could be
directed against companies such as ours. In addition, acts of
terrorism and social unrest could lead to increased volatility in prices for
crude oil and natural gas and could affect the markets for drilling
services. Insurance premiums could increase and coverages may be
unavailable in the future. 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.
We
are subject to anti-takeover provisions.
Our
articles of association contain provisions that could prevent or delay an
acquisition of the company by means of a tender offer, a proxy contest or
otherwise. These provisions may also adversely affect prevailing
market prices for our ordinary shares. These provisions, among other
things:
|
§
|
classify
our board into three classes of directors, each of which serve for
staggered three-year periods;
|
|
§
|
provide
that our board may designate the terms of any new series of preference
shares;
|
|
§
|
provide
that any shareholder who wishes to propose any business or to nominate a
person or persons for election as director at any annual meeting may only
do so if advance notice is given to the Secretary of
Transocean;
|
|
§
|
provide
that the exact number of directors on our board can be set from time to
time by a majority of the whole board of directors and not by our
shareholders, subject to a minimum of two and a maximum of
14;
|
|
§
|
provide
that directors can be removed from office only for cause, as defined in
our articles of association, by the affirmative vote of the holders of the
issued shares generally entitled to
vote;
|
|
§
|
provide
that any vacancy on the board of directors will be filled by the
affirmative vote of the remaining directors and not by the shareholders;
provided, however, that during the period until November 27, 2009, if
the vacancy relates to a director who was a Transocean director prior to
the Merger, then the vacancy will be filled by the other Transocean
directors, and if the vacancy relates to a director who was a
GlobalSantaFe director prior to the Merger, then the vacancy will be
filled by the other GlobalSantaFe
directors;
|
|
§
|
provide
that any action required or permitted to be taken by the holders of
ordinary shares must be taken at a duly called annual or extraordinary
general meeting of shareholders unless taken by written consent of all
holders of ordinary shares;
|
|
§
|
provide
that only a majority of the directors may call extraordinary general
meetings of the shareholders;
|
|
§
|
limit
the ability of our shareholders to amend or repeal some provisions of our
articles of association; and
|
|
§
|
limit
transactions between us and an "interested shareholder," which is
generally defined as a shareholder that, together with its affiliates and
associates, beneficially, directly or indirectly, owns 15 percent or
more of our issued voting shares.
|
Our board
of directors is comprised of seven persons who were designated by Transocean and
seven persons who were designated by GlobalSantaFe prior to completing the
Merger. Under our articles of association, at each annual general
meeting held during the two years following the completion of the Merger, each
such director whose term expires during such period will be nominated for
re-election (or another person selected by the applicable group of directors
will be nominated for election) to our board of directors.
ITEM
1B.
|
Unresolved Staff Comments
|
None
The
description of our property included under “Item 1. Business” is incorporated by
reference herein.
We
maintain offices, land bases and other facilities worldwide, including our
principal executive offices in Houston, Texas and regional operational offices
in the U.S., France and Singapore. Our remaining offices and bases
are located in various countries in North America, South America, the Caribbean,
Europe, Africa, Russia, the Middle East, India, the Far East and
Australia. We lease most of these facilities.
Through
the Merger, we acquired Challenger Minerals Inc. and Challenger Minerals
(North Sea) Limited (collectively, “CMI”), formerly wholly-owned subsidiaries of
GlobalSantaFe. CMI conducts oil and gas activities and holds property
interests primarily in the U.S. offshore Louisiana and Texas and in the U.K.
sector of the North Sea.
Several
of our subsidiaries have been named, along with numerous unaffiliated
defendants, in several complaints that have been filed in the Circuit Courts of
the State of Mississippi involving approximately 750 plaintiffs that allege
personal injury arising out of asbestos exposure in the course of their
employment by some of these defendants between 1965 and 1986. The
complaints also name as defendants certain of TODCO’s subsidiaries to which we
may owe indemnity. Further, the complaints name other unaffiliated
defendant companies, including companies that allegedly manufactured drilling
related products containing asbestos. The complaints allege that the
defendant drilling contractors used those asbestos-containing products in
offshore drilling operations, land based drilling operations and in drilling
structures, drilling rigs, vessels and other equipment and assert claims based
on, among other things, negligence and strict liability, and claims authorized
under the Jones Act. The plaintiffs generally seek awards of
unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. We have not been
provided with sufficient information to determine the number of plaintiffs who
claim to have been exposed to asbestos aboard our rigs, whether they were
employees, their period of employment, the period of their alleged exposure to
asbestos, or their medical condition, and we have not entered into any
settlements with any plaintiffs. Accordingly, we are unable to
estimate our potential exposure in these lawsuits. We historically
have maintained insurance which we believe will be available to address any
liability arising from these claims. We intend to defend these
lawsuits vigorously, but there can be no assurance as to their ultimate
outcome.
One of
our subsidiaries is involved in an action with respect to a customs matter
relating to the Sedco 710
semisubmersible drilling rig. Prior to our merger with
Sedco Forex, this drilling rig, which was working for Petrobras in Brazil
at the time, had been admitted into the country on a temporary basis under
authority granted to a Schlumberger entity. Prior to the
Sedco Forex merger, the drilling contract with Petrobras was transferred
from the Schlumberger entity to an entity that would become one of our
subsidiaries, but Schlumberger did not transfer the temporary import permit to
any of our subsidiaries. In early 2000, the drilling contract was
extended for another year. On January 10, 2000, the temporary
import permit granted to the Schlumberger entity expired, and renewal filings
were not made until later that January. In April 2000, the
Brazilian customs authorities cancelled the temporary import
permit. The Schlumberger entity filed an action in the Brazilian
federal court of Campos for the purpose of extending the temporary
admission. Other proceedings were also initiated in order to secure
the transfer of the temporary admission to our
subsidiary. Ultimately, the court permitted the transfer of the
temporary admission from Schlumberger to our subsidiary but did not rule on
whether the temporary admission could be extended without the payment of a
financial penalty. During the first quarter of 2004, the Brazilian
customs authorities issued an assessment totaling approximately
$133 million against our subsidiary.
The first
level Brazilian court ruled in April 2007 that the temporary admission granted
to our subsidiary had expired which allowed the Brazilian customs authorities to
execute on their assessment. Following this ruling, the Brazilian
customs authorities issued a revised assessment against our
subsidiary. As of February 15, 2008, the U.S. dollar equivalent of
this assessment was approximately $222 million in aggregate. We
are not certain as to the basis for the increase in the amount of the
assessment, and in September 2007, we received a temporary ruling in our favor
from a Brazilian federal court that the valuation method used by the Brazilian
customs authorities was incorrect. This temporary ruling was
confirmed in January 2008 by a local court, but it is still subject to
review at the appellate levels in Brazil. We intend to continue to
aggressively contest this matter and we have appealed the first level Brazilian
court’s ruling to a higher level court in Brazil. There may be
further judicial or administrative proceedings that result from this
matter. While the court has granted us the right to continue our
appeal without the posting of a bond, it is possible that we may be required to
post a bond for up to the full amount of the assessment in connection with these
proceedings. We have also put Schlumberger on notice that we consider
any assessment to be solely the responsibility of Schlumberger, not our
subsidiary. Nevertheless, we expect that the Brazilian customs
authorities will continue to seek to recover the assessment solely from our
subsidiary, not Schlumberger. Schlumberger has denied any
responsibility for this matter, but remains a party to the
proceedings. We do not expect the liability, if any, resulting from
this matter to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated statement of
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In the
third quarter of 2006, we received tax assessments of approximately
$130 million from the state tax authorities of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil
against one of our Brazilian subsidiaries for customs taxes on equipment
imported into the state in connection with our operations. The
assessments resulted from a preliminary finding by these authorities that our
subsidiary’s record keeping practices were deficient. We currently
believe that the substantial majority of these assessments are without
merit. We filed an initial response with the Rio de Janeiro tax
authorities on September 9, 2006 refuting these additional tax
assessments. In September 2007, we received confirmation from
the state tax authorities that they believe the additional tax assessments are
valid, and as a result, we filed an appeal on September 27, 2007 to the
state Taxpayer’s Council contesting these assessments. While we
cannot predict or provide assurance as to the final outcome of these
proceedings, we do not expect it to have a material adverse effect on our
consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
One of
our subsidiaries is involved in lawsuits arising out of the subsidiary’s
involvement in the design, construction and refurbishment of major industrial
complexes. The operating assets of the subsidiary were sold and its
operations discontinued in 1989, and the subsidiary has no remaining assets
other than the insurance policies involved in its litigation, fundings from
settlements with the primary insurers and funds received from the cancellation
of certain insurance policies. The subsidiary has been named as a
defendant, along with numerous other companies, in lawsuits alleging personal
injury as a result of exposure to asbestos. As of December 31,
2007, the
subsidiary was a defendant in approximately 1,041 lawsuits with 102 filed
during 2007. Some of these lawsuits include multiple plaintiffs and
we estimate that there are approximately 3,380 plaintiffs in these
lawsuits. For many of these lawsuits against the subsidiary, we have
not been provided with sufficient information from the plaintiffs to determine
whether all or some of the plaintiffs have claims against the subsidiary, the
basis of any such claims, or the nature of their alleged
injuries. The first of the asbestos-related lawsuits was filed
against this subsidiary in 1990. Through December 31, 2007, the
amounts expended to resolve claims (including both attorneys’ fees and
expenses, and settlement costs), have not been material, and all deductibles
with respect to the primary insurance have been satisfied. The subsidiary
continues to be named as a defendant in additional lawsuits and we cannot
predict the number of additional cases in which it may be named a defendant nor
can we predict the potential costs to resolve such additional cases or to
resolve the pending cases. However, the subsidiary has in excess of
$1 billion in insurance limits. Although not all of the policies
may be fully available due to the insolvency of certain insurers, we
believe that the subsidiary will have sufficient insurance and funds from the
settlements of litigation with insurance carriers available to respond to
these claims. While we cannot predict or provide assurance as to the
final outcome of these matters, we do not believe the current value of the
claims where we have been identified will have a material impact on our
consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
We are
involved in various tax matters as described in "Item 7. Management’s Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Outlook–Tax
Matters" and various regulatory matters as described in “Item 7. Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations—Outlook–Regulatory Matters.” We are involved in lawsuits relating to
damage claims arising out of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, all of which are
insured and which are not material to us. We are also involved in a
number of other lawsuits, including a dispute for municipal tax payments in
Brazil and a dispute involving customs procedures in India, neither of which is
material to us, and all of which have arisen in the ordinary course of our
business. We do not expect the liability, if any, resulting from
these other matters to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated
statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. We cannot predict with certainty the outcome or effect of any
of the litigation matters specifically described above or of any such other
pending or threatened litigation. There can be no assurance that our
beliefs or expectations as to the outcome or effect of any lawsuit or other
litigation matter will prove correct and the eventual outcome of these matters
could materially differ from management’s current estimates.
Environmental
Matters
We have
certain potential liabilities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) and similar state acts regulating
cleanup of various hazardous waste disposal sites, including those described
below. CERCLA is intended to expedite the remediation of hazardous
substances without regard to fault. Potentially responsible parties
(“PRPs”) for each site include present and former owners and operators of,
transporters to and generators of the substances at the
site. Liability is strict and can be joint and several.
We have
been named as a PRP in connection with a site located in Santa Fe Springs,
California, known as the Waste Disposal, Inc. site. We and other
PRPs have agreed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the
DOJ to settle our potential liabilities for this site by agreeing to perform the
remaining remediation required by the EPA. The form of the agreement
is a consent decree, which has now been entered by the court. The
parties to the settlement have entered into a participation agreement, which
makes us liable for approximately eight percent of the remediation and
related costs. The remediation is complete, and we believe our share
of the future operation and maintenance costs of the site is not
material. There are additional potential liabilities related to the
site, but these cannot be quantified, and we have no reason at this time to
believe that they will be material.
We have
also been named as a PRP in connection with a site in California known as the
Casmalia Resources Site. We and other PRPs have entered into an
agreement with the EPA and the DOJ to resolve potential
liabilities. Under the settlement, we are not likely to owe any
substantial additional amounts for this site beyond what we have already
paid. There are additional potential liabilities related to this
site, but these cannot be quantified at this time, and we have no reason at this
time to believe that they will be material.
We have
been named as one of many PRPs in connection with a site located in Carson,
California, formerly maintained by Cal Compact Landfill. On
February 15, 2002, we were served with a required 90-day notification that
eight California cities, on behalf of themselves and other PRPs, intend to
commence an action against us under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(“RCRA”). On April 1, 2002, a complaint was filed by the cities
against us and others alleging that we have liabilities in connection with the
site. However, the complaint has not been served. The site
was closed in or around 1965, and we do not have sufficient information to
enable us to assess our potential liability, if any, for this site.
One of
our subsidiaries has recently been ordered by the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board to develop a testing plan for a site known as Campus 1000
Fremont in Alhambra, California. This site was formerly owned and
operated by certain of our subsidiaries. It is presently owned by an
unrelated party, which has received an order to test the property, the cost of
which is expected to be in the range of $200,000. We have also been
advised that one or more of our subsidiaries is likely to be named by the EPA as
a PRP for the San Gabriel Valley, Area 3, Superfund site, which includes this
property. We have no knowledge at this time of the potential cost of
any remediation, who else will be named as PRPs, and whether in fact any of our
subsidiaries is a responsible party. The subsidiaries in question do
not own any operating assets and have limited ability to respond to any
liabilities.
One of
our subsidiaries has been requested to contribute approximately $140,000 toward
remediation costs of the Environmental Protection Corporation (“EPC”) Eastside
Disposal Facility near Bakersfield, California, by a company that has taken
responsibility for site remediation from the California Department of Toxic
Substances Control. Our subsidiary is alleged to have been a small
contributor of the wastes that were improperly disposed by EPC at the
site. We have undertaken an investigation as to whether our
subsidiary is a liable party, what the total remediation costs may be and the
amount of waste that may have been contributed by other
parties. Until that investigation is complete we are unable to assess
our potential liability, if any, for this site.
Resolutions
of other claims by the EPA, the involved state agency or PRPs are at various
stages of investigation. These investigations involve determinations
of:
|
§
|
the
actual responsibility attributed to us and the other PRPs at the
site;
|
|
§
|
appropriate
investigatory and/or remedial actions;
and
|
|
§
|
allocation
of the costs of such activities among the PRPs and other site
users.
|
Our
ultimate financial responsibility in connection with those sites may depend on
many factors, including:
|
§
|
the
volume and nature of material, if any, contributed to the site for which
we are responsible;
|
|
§
|
the
numbers of other PRPs and their financial viability;
and
|
|
§
|
the
remediation methods and technology to be
used.
|
It is
difficult to quantify with certainty the potential cost of these environmental
matters, particularly in respect of remediation
obligations. Nevertheless, based upon the information currently
available, we believe that our ultimate liability arising from all environmental
matters, including the liability for all other related pending legal
proceedings, asserted legal claims and known potential legal claims which are
likely to be asserted, is adequately accrued and should not have a material
effect on our financial position or ongoing results of
operations. Estimated costs of future expenditures for environmental
remediation obligations are not discounted to their present value.
Contamination Litigation―On July 11,
2005, one of our subsidiaries was served with a lawsuit filed on behalf of three
landowners in Louisiana in the 12th
Judicial District Court for the Parish of Avoyelles, State of
Louisiana. The lawsuit named nineteen other defendants, all of which
were alleged to have contaminated the plaintiffs’ property with naturally
occurring radioactive material, produced water, drilling fluids, chlorides,
hydrocarbons, heavy metals and other contaminants as a result of oil and gas
exploration activities. Experts retained by the plaintiffs issued a
report suggesting significant contamination in the area operated by the
subsidiary and another codefendant, and claimed that over $300 million
would be required to properly remediate the contamination. The
experts retained by the defendants conducted their own investigation and
concluded that the remediation costs would amount to no more than
$2.5 million.
The
plaintiffs and the codefendant threatened to add GlobalSantaFe Corporation as a
defendant in the lawsuit under the “single business enterprise” doctrine
contained in Louisiana law. The single business enterprise doctrine
is similar to corporate veil piercing doctrines. On August 16,
2006, our subsidiary and its immediate parent company, which is also an
entity that no longer conducts operations or holds assets, filed voluntary
petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. Later that day,
the plaintiffs dismissed our subsidiary from the
lawsuit. Subsequently, the codefendant filed various motions in the
lawsuit and in the Delaware bankruptcies attempting to assert alter ego and
single business enterprise claims against GlobalSantaFe Corporation and two
other subsidiaries in the lawsuit. We believe that these legal
theories should not be applied against GlobalSantaFe Corporation or these other
two subsidiaries, and that in any event the manner in which the parent and its
subsidiaries conducted their businesses does not meet the requirements of these
theories for imposition of liability. The codefendant also seeks to
dismiss the bankruptcies. The efforts to assert alter ego and single
business enterprise theory claims against GlobalSantaFe Corporation were
rejected by the Court in Avoyelles Parish and the lawsuit against the other
defendant went to trial on February 19, 2007. The action was
resolved at trial with a settlement by the codefendant that included a $20
million payment and certain cleanup activities to be conducted by the
codefendant. The settlement also purported to assign the plaintiffs’
claims in the lawsuit against our subsidiary and other parties, including
GlobalSantaFe Corporation and the other two subsidiaries, to the
codefendant.
In the
bankruptcy case, our subsidiary has filed suit to obtain declaratory and
injunctive relief against the codefendant concerning the matters described above
and GlobalSantaFe Corporation has intervened in the matter. The
codefendant is seeking to dismiss the bankruptcy case and a modification of the
automatic stay afforded under the Bankruptcy Code to our subsidiary and its
parent so that the codefendant may pursue the entities and GlobalSantaFe
Corporation for contribution and indemnity and the purported assigned rights
from the plaintiffs in the lawsuit including the alter ego and single business
enterprise claims and potential insurance rights. On
February 15, 2008, the Bankruptcy Court denied the codefendant’s request to
dismiss the bankruptcy case but modified the automatic stay to allow the
codefendant to proceed on its claims against the debtors, our subsidiary and its
parent, and their insurance companies. The Bankruptcy Court will hold
a hearing to determine the forum where these actions may proceed. The
Bankruptcy Court did not address the codefendant’s pending claims against
GlobalSantaFe Corporation and the other two subsidiaries, which will also be the
subject of a future hearing. The Bankruptcy Court also denied the
debtors’ requests for preliminary declaratory and injunctive
relief.
In
addition, the codefendant has filed proofs of claim against both our
subsidiary and its parent with regard to its claims arising out of the
settlement agreement, including recovery of the settlement funds and remediation
costs and damages for the purported assigned claims. A Motion for
Partial Summary Judgment seeking annulment and dismissal of the codefendant’s
proofs of claim has also been filed by the debtors and remains
pending. Our
subsidiary, its parent and GlobalSantaFe Corporation intend to continue
to vigorously defend against any action taken in an attempt to impose liability
against them under the theories discussed above or otherwise and believe they
have good and valid defenses thereto. We are unable to determine the
value of these claims as of the date of the Merger. We do not believe that these
claims will have a material impact on our consolidated statement of financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
At a
meeting of shareholders of Transocean Inc. held on November 9, 2007,
216,923,167 shares were presented in person or by proxy out of 290,802,547
shares outstanding and entitled to vote as of the record date, constituting a
quorum. The matters submitted to a vote of shareholders, as set forth
in our proxy statement relating to the meeting, and the corresponding voting
results were as follows:
|
(i)
|
With
respect to the approval of a scheme of arrangement providing for the
Reclassification, the following number of votes were
cast:
|
For
|
|
Against /
authority
withheld
|
|
Abstain
|
213,967,649
|
|
938,988
|
|
2,016,530
|
|
(ii)
|
With
respect to the approval of the issuance of our ordinary shares to
GlobalSantaFe shareholders in the Merger, the following number of votes
were cast:
|
For
|
|
Against /
authority
withheld
|
|
Abstain
|
213,970,926
|
|
1,038,212
|
|
1,914,029
|
|
(iii)
|
With
respect to the approval of the amendment and restatement of our memorandum
of association and articles of association, the following number of
votes were cast:
|
For
|
|
Against /
authority
withheld
|
|
Abstain
|
213,957,432
|
|
1,017,437
|
|
1,948,298
|
Executive
Officers of the Registrant
|
|
Age
as of
|
Officer
|
Office
|
February 27,
2008
|
Robert
L. Long
|
Chief
Executive Officer
|
62
|
Jon
A. Marshall
|
President
and Chief Operating Officer
|
56
|
Jean
P. Cahuzac
|
Executive
Vice President, Assets
|
54
|
Steven
L. Newman
|
Executive
Vice President, Performance
|
43
|
Eric
B. Brown
|
Senior
Vice President and General Counsel
|
56
|
Gregory
L. Cauthen
|
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
50
|
David
J. Mullen
|
Senior
Vice President, Marketing and Planning
|
50
|
Cheryl
D. Richard
|
SeSenior
Vice President, Human Resources and Information Technology
|
51
|
John
H. Briscoe
|
Vice
President and Controller
|
50
|
The
officers of the Company are elected annually by the board of
directors. There is no family relationship between any of the
above-named executive officers.
Robert L.
Long is Chief Executive Officer and a member of the board of directors of the
Company. Mr. Long served as President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company and a member of the board of directors from
October 2002 to October 2006, at which time he relinquished the
position of President. Mr. Long served as President of the
Company from December 2001 to October 2002. Mr. Long
served as Chief Financial Officer of the Company from August 1996 until
December 2001. Mr. Long served as Senior Vice President of
the Company from May 1990 until the time of the Sedco Forex merger, at
which time he assumed the position of Executive Vice
President. Mr. Long also served as Treasurer of the Company from
September 1997 until March 2001. Mr. Long has been
employed by the Company since 1976 and was elected Vice President in
1987.
Jon A.
Marshall is President and Chief Operating Officer and a member of the board of
directors of the Company. Mr. Marshall served as a director
and Chief Executive Officer of GlobalSantaFe from May 2003 until
November 2007, when GlobalSantaFe merged with a subsidiary of the
Company. Mr. Marshall served as the Executive Vice President and
Chief Operating Officer of GlobalSantaFe from November 2001 until May
2003. From 1998 to November 2001, Mr. Marshall was employed
with Global Marine Inc. (which merged into a subsidiary of Santa Fe
International Corporation, which was renamed GlobalSantaFe Corporation in the
merger), where he held the same position. Prior to that,
Mr. Marshall served as President of several Global Marine operating
subsidiaries. Mr. Marshall joined Global Marine in 1979 and held
numerous operational and managerial positions before his promotion to
President.
Jean P.
Cahuzac is Executive Vice President, Assets of the
Company. Mr. Cahuzac served as President of the Company from
October 2006 to November 2007, at which time he assumed his current
position. Mr. Cahuzac served as Executive Vice President and
Chief Operating Officer of the Company from October 2002 to
October 2006 and Executive Vice President, Operations of the Company from
February 2001 until October 2002. Mr. Cahuzac served
as President of Sedco Forex from January 1999 until the time of the
Sedco Forex merger, at which time he assumed the positions of Executive
Vice President and President, Europe, Middle East and Africa with the
Company. Mr. Cahuzac served as Vice President-Operations Manager
of Sedco Forex from May 1998 to January 1999, Region Manager-Europe,
Africa and CIS of Sedco Forex from September 1994 to May 1998 and Vice
President/General Manager-North Sea Region of Sedco Forex from
February 1994 to September 1994. He had been employed by
Schlumberger Limited since 1979.
Steven L.
Newman is Executive Vice President, Performance of the
Company. Mr. Newman served as Executive Vice President and Chief
Operating Officer from October 2006 to November 2007 and Senior Vice
President of Human Resources and Information Process Solutions from
May 2006 to October 2006. He served as Senior Vice
President of Human Resources, Information Process Solutions and Treasury from
March 2005 to May 2006. Mr. Newman served as Vice
President of Performance and Technology of the Company from August 2003
until March 2005. Mr. Newman served as Region Manager, Asia
Australia from May 2001 until August 2003. From December 2000 to
May 2001, Mr. Newman served as Region Operations Manager of the
Africa-Mediterranean Region of the Company. From April 1999 to
December 2000, Mr. Newman served in various operational and marketing
roles in the Africa-Mediterranean and U.K. region
offices. Mr. Newman has been employed by the Company since
1994.
Eric B.
Brown is Senior Vice President and General Counsel of the
Company. Mr. Brown served as Vice President and General Counsel
of the Company since February 1995 and Corporate Secretary of the Company
from September 1995 until October 2007. He assumed the
position of Senior Vice President in February 2001. Prior to
assuming his duties with the Company, Mr. Brown served as General Counsel
of Coastal Gas Marketing Company.
Gregory
L. Cauthen is Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company. He was also Treasurer of the Company until
July 2003. Mr. Cauthen served as Vice President, Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer from December 2001 until he was elected in
July 2002 as Senior Vice President. Mr. Cauthen served as
Vice President, Finance from March 2001 to
December 2001. Prior to joining the Company, he served as
President and Chief Executive Officer of WebCaskets.com, Inc., a provider
of death care services, from June 2000 until
February 2001. Prior to June 2000, he was employed at
Service Corporation International, a provider of death care services, where he
served as Senior Vice President, Financial Services from July 1998 to
August 1999, Vice President, Treasurer from July 1995 to
July 1998, was assigned to various special projects from August 1999
to May 2000 and had been employed in various other positions since
February 1991.
David J.
Mullen is Senior Vice President, Marketing and Planning of the
Company. Mr. Mullen served as Vice President of the Company’s
North and South America Unit from January 2005 to October 2006, when
he assumed his present position. From May 2001 to
January 2005, Mr. Mullen was President of Schlumberger Oilfield
Services for North and South America, and Mr. Mullen served as the
Company’s Vice President of Human Resources from January 2000 to
May 2001. Prior to joining the Company at the time of our merger
with Sedco Forex, Mr. Mullen served in a variety of roles with
Schlumberger Limited, where he had been employed since 1983.
Cheryl D.
Richard is Senior Vice President, Human Resources and Information Technology of
the Company. Ms. Richard served as Senior Vice President, Human
Resources of GlobalSantaFe from June 2003 until the date of the
Merger. Ms. Richard was Vice President, Human Resources, with
Chevron Phillips Chemical Company from 2000 to June 2003, prior to which
she served in a variety of positions with Phillips Petroleum Company (now
ConocoPhillips), including operational, commercial and international
positions.
John H.
Briscoe is Vice President and Controller of the
Company. Mr. Briscoe served as Vice President, Audit and
Advisory Services from June 2007 to October 2007 and Director of
Investor Relations and Communications from January 2007 to
June 2007. From June 2005 to January 2007,
Mr. Briscoe served as Finance Director for the Company’s North and South
America Unit. Prior to joining the Company in June 2005,
Mr. Briscoe served as Vice President of Accounting for Ferrellgas Inc.
from July 2003 to June 2005, Vice President of Administration from
June 2002 to July 2003 and Division Controller from June 1997 to
June 2002. Prior to working for Ferrellgas, Mr. Briscoe
served as Controller for Latin America for Dresser Industries Inc., which
has subsequently been acquired by
Halliburton, Inc. Mr. Briscoe started his career with seven
years in public accounting beginning with the firm of KPMG and ending with Ernst
& Young as an Audit Manager.
PART
II
ITEM
5.
|
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Shareholder
Matters and
Issuer Purchases of Equity
Securities
|
Our
ordinary shares are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”) under the
symbol “RIG.” The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices of
our ordinary shares for the periods indicated as reported on the NYSE Composite
Tape.
|
|
Price
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
quarter (a)
|
|
$ |
84.29 |
|
|
$ |
70.05 |
|
Second
quarter (a)
|
|
|
90.16 |
|
|
|
70.75 |
|
Third
quarter (a)
|
|
|
81.63 |
|
|
|
64.52 |
|
Fourth
quarter (a)
|
|
|
84.23 |
|
|
|
65.57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
quarter (a)
|
|
$ |
83.20 |
|
|
$ |
72.47 |
|
Second
quarter (a)
|
|
|
109.20 |
|
|
|
80.50 |
|
Third
quarter (a)
|
|
|
120.88 |
|
|
|
92.61 |
|
Fourth
quarter
|
|
|
149.62 |
|
|
|
107.37 |
|
(a)
|
The
stock prices presented reflect the historical market prices and have not
been restated to reflect the effects of the Reclassification or the
Merger.
|
On
February 22, 2008, the last reported sales price of our ordinary shares on
the NYSE Composite Tape was $137.96 per share. On such date,
there were 5,250 holders of record of our ordinary shares and
317,748,270 ordinary shares outstanding.
On
November 27, 2007, each of our ordinary shares outstanding at the time of
the Reclassification was reclassified by way of a scheme of arrangement under
Cayman Islands law into 0.6996 of our ordinary shares and $33.03 in
cash. The closing price of our ordinary shares on November 26,
2007, the last trading day before the completion of the Transactions, was
$129.39. The opening price of our ordinary shares on
November 27, 2007, after the completion of the Transactions, was
$133.38.
Although
our shareholders received cash in the Reclassification, we did not declare or
pay a cash dividend in either of the two most recent fiscal
years. Any future declaration and payment of any cash dividends will
(1) depend on our results of operations, financial condition, cash
requirements and other relevant factors, (2) be subject to the discretion
of the board of directors, (3) be subject to restrictions contained in our
credit facilities and other debt covenants and (4) be payable only out of
our profits or share premium account in accordance with Cayman Islands
law.
There is
currently no reciprocal tax treaty between the Cayman Islands and the United
States. Under current Cayman Islands law, there is no withholding tax
on dividends.
We are a
Cayman Islands exempted company. Our authorized share capital is
$13,000,000, divided into 800,000,000 ordinary shares, par value $0.01, and
50,000,000 preference shares, par value $0.10, of which shares may be
designated and created as shares of any other classes or series of shares with
the respective rights and restrictions determined by action of our board of
directors. On February 27, 2008, no preference shares were
outstanding.
The
holders of ordinary shares are entitled to one vote per share other than on the
election of directors.
With
respect to the election of directors, each holder of ordinary shares entitled to
vote at the election has the right to vote, in person or by proxy, the number of
shares held by him for as many persons as there are directors to be elected and
for whose election that holder has a right to vote. The directors are
divided into three classes, with only one class being up for election each
year. Although our articles of association contemplate that directors
are elected by a plurality of the votes cast in the election, we have adopted a
majority vote policy in the election of directors as part of our Corporate
Governance Guidelines. This policy provides that the board may
nominate only those candidates for director who have submitted an irrevocable
letter of resignation which would be effective upon and only in the event that
(1) such nominee fails to receive a sufficient number of votes from
shareholders in an uncontested election and (2) the board accepts the
resignation. If a nominee who has submitted such a letter of
resignation does not receive more votes cast for than against the nominee’s
election, the Corporate Governance Committee must promptly review the letter of
resignation and recommend to the board whether to accept the tendered
resignation or reject it. The board must then act on the Corporate
Governance Committee’s recommendation within 90 days following the
certification of the shareholder vote. The board must promptly
disclose its decision regarding whether or not to accept the nominee’s
resignation letter in a Form 8-K furnished to the SEC or other broadly
disseminated means of communication. Cumulative voting for the
election of directors is prohibited by our articles of association.
There are
no limitations imposed by Cayman Islands law or our articles of association on
the right of nonresident shareholders to hold or vote their ordinary
shares.
The
rights attached to any separate class or series of shares, unless otherwise
provided by the terms of the shares of that class or series, may be varied only
with the consent in writing of the holders of all of the issued shares of that
class or series or by a special resolution passed at a separate general meeting
of holders of the shares of that class or series. The necessary
quorum for that meeting is the presence of holders of at least a majority of the
shares of that class or series. Each holder of shares of the class or
series present, in person or by proxy, will have one vote for each share of the
class or series of which he is the holder. Outstanding shares will
not be deemed to be varied by the creation or issuance of additional shares that
rank in any respect prior to or equivalent with those shares.
Under
Cayman Islands law, some matters, like altering the memorandum or articles of
association, changing the name of a company, voluntarily winding up a company or
resolving to be registered by way of continuation in a jurisdiction outside the
Cayman Islands, require approval of shareholders by a special
resolution. A special resolution is a resolution (i) passed by
the holders of two-thirds of the shares voted at a general meeting or
(ii) approved in writing by all shareholders entitled to vote at a general
meeting of the company.
The
presence of shareholders, in person or by proxy, holding at least a majority of
the issued shares generally entitled to vote at a meeting, is a quorum for the
transaction of most business. However, different quorums are required
in some cases to approve a change in our articles of association.
Our board
of directors is authorized, without obtaining any vote or consent of the holders
of any class or series of shares unless expressly provided by the terms of issue
of that class or series, to provide from time to time for the issuance of
classes or series of preference shares and to establish the characteristics of
each class or series, including the number of shares, designations, relative
voting rights, dividend rights, liquidation and other rights, redemption,
repurchase or exchange rights and any other preferences and relative,
participating, optional or other rights and limitations not inconsistent with
applicable law.
Our
articles of association contain provisions that could prevent or delay an
acquisition of our Company by means of a tender offer, proxy contest or
otherwise. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors—We are subject to anti-takeover
provisions.”
The
foregoing description is a summary. This summary is not complete and
is subject to the complete text of our memorandum and articles of
association. For more information regarding our ordinary shares and
our preference shares, see our Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 14,
1999, as amended by our Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed on
November 27, 2007, and our memorandum and articles of
association. Our memorandum and articles of association are filed as
exhibits to this annual report.
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
Total
Number
of
Shares
Purchased
(1)
|
|
|
Average
Price
Paid
Per Share
|
|
|
Total
Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs
(2)
|
|
|
Maximum
Number
(or
Approximate Dollar Value) of Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the
Plans or Programs (2)
(in
millions)
|
|
October 2007
|
|
|
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
600 |
|
November 2007
|
|
|
203,333 |
|
|
|
133.82 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
600 |
|
December 2007
|
|
|
1,636 |
|
|
|
136.61 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
600 |
|
Total
|
|
|
204,969 |
|
|
$ |
133.84 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
600 |
|
(1)
|
Total
number of shares purchased in the fourth quarter of 2007 consists of
shares withheld by us in satisfaction of withholding taxes due upon the
vesting of restricted shares granted to our employees under our Long-Term
Incentive Plan to pay withholding taxes due upon vesting of a restricted
share award.
|
(2)
|
In
May 2006, our board of directors authorized an increase in the amount of
ordinary shares which may be repurchased pursuant to our share repurchase
program to $4.0 billion from $2.0 billion, which was previously
authorized and announced in October 2005. The shares may
be repurchased from time to time in open market or private
transactions. The repurchase program does not have an
established expiration date and may be suspended or discontinued at any
time. Under the program, repurchased shares are retired and
returned to unissued status. From inception through
December 31, 2007, we have repurchased a total of
46.9 million of our ordinary shares at a total cost of
$3.4 billion. We do not currently expect to make any
additional share repurchases under the program in the near
future.
|
The
selected financial data as of December 31, 2007 and 2006 and for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007 has been derived from
the audited consolidated financial statements included in “Item 8. Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data.” The selected financial data as of
December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, and for the years ended December 31,
2004 and 2003 has been derived from audited consolidated financial statements
not included herein. The following data should be read in conjunction
with “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations” and the audited consolidated financial statements and the
notes thereto included under “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary
Data.”
We
consolidated TODCO in our financial statements as a business segment through
December 16, 2004 and that portion of TODCO that we did not own was
reported as minority interest in our consolidated statements of operations and
balance sheet. Our ownership and voting interest in TODCO declined to
approximately 22 percent on that date and we no longer consolidated TODCO
in our financial statements but accounted for our remaining investment using the
equity method of accounting.
In May
2005 and June 2005, respectively, we completed a public offering and a sale of
TODCO common stock pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended (respectively referred to as the “May Offering” and the “June
Sale”). After the May Offering, we accounted for our remaining
investment using the cost method of accounting. As a result of the
June Sale, we no longer own any shares of TODCO’s common stock.
In
November 2007, we completed our merger with GlobalSantaFe and identified
the Company as the acquirer in a purchase business combination for accounting
purposes. The balance sheet data as of December 31, 2007
represents the consolidated statement of financial position of the combined
company. The statement of operations and other financial data for the
year ended December 31, 2007 include approximately one month of operating
results and cash flows for the combined company. Per share amounts
for all periods have been adjusted for the Reclassification. The
Reclassification was accounted for as a reverse stock split and a dividend,
which requires restatement of historical weighted average shares outstanding and
historical earnings per share for prior periods.
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
(In
millions, except per share data)
|
|
Statement
of operations data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
revenues
|
|
$ |
6,377 |
|
|
$ |
3,882 |
|
|
$ |
2,892 |
|
|
$ |
2,614 |
|
|
$ |
2,434 |
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
3,239 |
|
|
|
1,641 |
|
|
|
720 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
240 |
|
Net
income (a)
|
|
|
3,131 |
|
|
|
1,385 |
|
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
14.65 |
|
|
$ |
6.32 |
|
|
$ |
3.13 |
|
|
$ |
0.68 |
|
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
14.14 |
|
|
$ |
6.10 |
|
|
$ |
3.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
sheet data (at end of period)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
34,364 |
|
|
$ |
11,476 |
|
|
$ |
10,457 |
|
|
$ |
10,758 |
|
|
$ |
11,663 |
|
Debt
due within one year
|
|
|
6,172 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Long-term
debt
|
|
|
11,085 |
|
|
|
3,203 |
|
|
|
1,197 |
|
|
|
2,462 |
|
|
|
3,612 |
|
Total
shareholders’ equity
|
|
|
12,566 |
|
|
|
6,836 |
|
|
|
7,982 |
|
|
|
7,393 |
|
|
|
7,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
financial data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
provided by operating activities
|
|
$ |
3,073 |
|
|
$ |
1,237 |
|
|
$ |
864 |
|
|
$ |
600 |
|
|
$ |
525 |
|
Cash
provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
(5,677 |
) |
|
|
(415 |
) |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
551 |
|
|
|
(445 |
) |
Cash
provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
|
|
(800 |
) |
|
|
(1,039 |
) |
|
|
(1,174 |
) |
|
|
(820 |
) |
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
1,380 |
|
|
|
876 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
494 |
|
Operating
margin
|
|
|
51 |
% |
|
|
42 |
% |
|
|
25 |
% |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
(a)
|
In
the year ended December 31, 2003, we recorded a cumulative effect of
an accounting change in the amount of $1 million, with no effect on basic
or diluted earnings per share.
|
ITEM
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
The
following information should be read in conjunction with the information
contained in “Item 1. Business,” “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and the audited
consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included under “Item 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” elsewhere in this annual
report.
Overview
Transocean Inc.
(together with its subsidiaries and predecessors, unless the context requires
otherwise, “Transocean,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” or “our”) is a leading
international provider of offshore contract drilling services for oil and gas
wells. As of February 20, 2008, we owned, had partial ownership
interests in or operated 139 mobile offshore drilling units. As
of this date, our fleet included 39 High-Specification Floaters
(Ultra-Deepwater, Deepwater and Harsh Environment semisubmersibles and
drillships), 29 Midwater Floaters, 10 High-Specification Jackups,
57 Standard Jackups and four Other Rigs. We also have
eight Ultra-Deepwater Floaters contracted for or under
construction.
We
believe our mobile offshore drilling fleet is one of the most modern and
versatile fleets in the world. Our primary business is to contract
these drilling rigs, related equipment and work crews primarily on a dayrate
basis to drill oil and gas wells. We specialize in technically
demanding segments of the offshore drilling business with a particular focus on
deepwater and harsh environment drilling services. We also provide
oil and gas drilling management services on either a dayrate basis or a
completed-project, fixed-price (or “turnkey”) basis, as well as drilling
engineering and drilling project management services, and we participate in oil
and gas exploration and production activities.
In
November 2007, we completed our merger transaction (the “Merger”) with
GlobalSantaFe Corporation (“GlobalSantaFe”). The Merger was accounted
for as a purchase, with the Company as the acquirer for accounting
purposes. See “—Significant Events.” At the time of the
Merger, GlobalSantaFe owned, had partial ownership interests in, operated, had
under construction or contracted for construction, 61 mobile offshore
drilling units and other units utilized in the support of offshore drilling
activities. The balance sheet data as of December 31, 2007
represents the consolidated statement of financial position of the combined
company. The statement of operations and other financial data for the
year ended December 31, 2007 include approximately one month of operating
results and cash flows for the combined company.
Key
measures of our total company results of operations and financial condition are
as follows:
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
millions, except average daily revenue and percentages)
|
|
Average daily revenue (a)(b)
|
|
$ |
211,900 |
|
|
$ |
142,100 |
|
|
$ |
69,800 |
|
Utilization (b)(c)
|
|
|
90 |
% |
|
|
84 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
Statement
of operations data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
revenues
|
|
$ |
6,377 |
|
|
$ |
3,882 |
|
|
$ |
2,495 |
|
Operating
and maintenance expenses
|
|
|
2,781 |
|
|
|
2,155 |
|
|
|
626 |
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
3,239 |
|
|
|
1,641 |
|
|
|
1,598 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
3,131 |
|
|
|
1,385 |
|
|
|
1,746 |
|
Balance
sheet data (at end of period)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
|
1,241 |
|
|
|
467 |
|
|
|
774 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
34,364 |
|
|
|
11,476 |
|
|
|
22,888 |
|
Total
debt
|
|
|
17,257 |
|
|
|
3,298 |
|
|
|
13,959 |
|
“n/a”
means not applicable.
(a)
|
Average
daily revenue is defined as contract drilling revenue earned per revenue
earning day. A revenue earning day is defined as a day for
which a rig earns dayrate after commencement of
operations.
|
(b)
|
Excludes
a drillship engaged in scientific geological coring activities, the Joides Resolution,
that is owned by a joint venture in which we have a 50 percent
interest and is accounted for under the equity method of
accounting.
|
(c)
|
Utilization
is the total actual number of revenue earning days as a percentage of
the total number of calendar days in the
period.
|
We
continue to experience strong demand, which has resulted in high utilization and
historically high dayrates. We are seeing leading dayrates at or near
record levels for most rig classes and customer interest for multi-year
contracts. Interest in High-Specification Floaters remains
particularly strong.
A
shortage of qualified personnel in our industry is driving up compensation costs
and suppliers are increasing prices as their backlogs grow. These
labor and vendor cost increases, while meaningful, are not expected to be
significant in comparison with our expected increase in revenue in 2008 and
beyond.
Our
revenues for the year ended December 31, 2007 increased from the prior year
period primarily as a result of increased activity, higher dayrates and the
addition of GlobalSantaFe’s operations for one month. Our operating
and maintenance expenses for the year increased primarily as a result of higher
labor and rig maintenance costs in connection with such increased activity as
well as inflationary cost increases and the addition of GlobalSantaFe’s
operations (see “—Outlook”). In addition, our financial results for
the year ended December 31, 2007 included the recognition of gains from the
sales of three rigs and other income recognized under the TODCO tax sharing
agreement. Total debt increased as a result of cash payments made in
the Reclassification and Merger, which were financed with borrowings under the
Bridge Loan Facility and refinanced with the issuance of the convertible senior
notes and the senior notes and borrowings under the 364-Day Revolving Credit
Facility. See “—Liquidity and Capital Resources–Sources and Uses of
Liquidity.”
Prior to
the Merger, we operated in one business segment. As a result of the
Merger, we have established two reportable segments: (1) Contract Drilling
and (2) Other. The Contract Drilling segment consists of
floaters, jackups and other rigs used in support of offshore drilling activities
and offshore support services on a worldwide basis. Our fleet
operates in a single, global market for the provision of contract drilling
services. The location of our rigs and the allocation of resources to
build or upgrade rigs are determined by the activities and needs of our
customers. The Other segment includes drilling management services
and oil and gas properties. Drilling management services are provided
through Applied Drilling Technology Inc. (“ADTI”), our wholly owned
subsidiary, and through ADT International, a division of one of our U.K.
subsidiaries. Drilling management services are provided primarily on
a turnkey basis at a fixed bid amount. Oil and gas properties consist
of exploration, development and production activities carried out through
Challenger Minerals Inc. and Challenger Minerals (North Sea) Limited
(collectively, “CMI”), our oil and gas subsidiaries.
Significant
Events
Merger with GlobalSantaFe—In
November 2007, we completed the Merger with GlobalSantaFe. See
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 4—Merger with GlobalSantaFe
Corporation.
Contract Backlog—We have been
successful in building contract backlog in 2007 within all of our asset
classes. Prior to the Merger, our contract backlog at
October 30, 2007 was approximately $23 billion, a 15 percent and
109 percent increase compared to our contract backlog at December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively. Our contract backlog at
December 31, 2007 was approximately $32 billion, which includes the
effect of the Merger. See “—Outlook–Drilling Market” and
“—Performance and Other Key Indicators.”
TODCO Tax Sharing Agreement
(“TSA”)—In July 2007, Hercules Offshore, Inc. (“Hercules”)
completed the acquisition of TODCO. The TSA requires Hercules to make
an accelerated change of control payment to our wholly-owned subsidiary,
Transocean Holdings Inc. within 30 days of the date of the acquisition as a
result of the deemed utilization of TODCO’s pre-IPO tax benefits. We
received a $118 million change of control payment from Hercules in
August 2007. We recognized $276 million as other income in
the third quarter of 2007 for this accelerated payment and payments received in
prior periods related to TODCO’s 2006 and 2007 tax years. See Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 15—Income Taxes.
Construction and Upgrade
Programs—During 2007, we were awarded a drilling contract requiring the
construction of a fourth enhanced Enterprise-class drillship. We
expect the rig to be contributed to a joint venture in which we expect to retain
a 65 percent ownership interest. The newbuild is expected to
commence operations during the third quarter of 2010. During 2006, we
were awarded drilling contracts requiring the construction of three enhanced
Enterprise-class drillships. The newbuilds are expected to commence
operations during the second quarter of 2009, mid-2009 and the first quarter of
2010, respectively. See “—Outlook–Drilling Market.”
In
connection with the Merger, we acquired one Ultra-Deepwater Floater under
construction and one contracted for construction. The newbuilds are
expected to commence operations in mid-2009 and the third quarter of
2010. See “—Outlook−Drilling Market.”
During
2005, we entered into agreements with clients to upgrade two of our Sedco 700-series
semisubmersible rigs in our Midwater Floaters fleet, the Sedco 702 and the Sedco 706, at a cost
expected to be approximately $300 million for each rig. The
upgraded rigs will be dynamically positioned and will have a water depth
drilling capacity of up to 6,500 feet. The Sedco 702 and Sedco 706 entered a
shipyard for the upgrade in early 2006 and the fourth quarter of 2007,
respectively. We have completed the upgrade of the Sedco 702 and expect the
rig to commence operations in the first quarter of 2008. We expect
the Sedco 706
upgrade to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2008.
Pacific Drilling Limited (“Pacific
Drilling”)—In October 2007, we exercised our option to purchase a
50 percent interest in a joint venture company through which we and Pacific
Drilling own two newbuild Ultra-Deepwater Floaters to be named Deepwater Pacific 1
and Deepwater Pacific 2. The
newbuilds are expected to commence operations during the second quarter of 2009
and first quarter of 2010. See “—Liquidity and Capital
Resources–Acquisitions, Dispositions and Capital Expenditures.”
Asset Dispositions—During
2007, we completed the sales of a Deepwater Floater (Peregrine I), a tender
rig (Charley Graves) and a
swamp barge (Searex VI) for net
proceeds of $344 million and recognized gains on the sales of
$264 million. See “—Liquidity and Capital
Resources–Acquisitions, Dispositions and Capital Expenditures.”
Bank Credit Agreements—In
September 2007, we entered into a $15.0 billion, one-year senior unsecured
bridge loan facility (“Bridge Loan Facility”). See “—Liquidity and
Capital Resources–Sources and Uses of Cash.”
In
November 2007, we entered into a $2.0 billion, five-year revolving
credit facility under the Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility Agreement dated
November 27, 2007 (“Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility”). See
“—Liquidity and Capital Resources–Sources and Uses of Cash.”
In
December 2007, we entered into a $1.5 billion, 364-Day revolving
credit facility under the 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility Agreement dated
December 3, 2007 (“364-Day Revolving Credit Facility”). See
“—Liquidity and Capital Resources–Sources and Uses of Cash.”
Debt Issuance—In
December 2007, we issued $6.6 billion aggregate principal amount of
1.625% Series A Convertible Senior Notes due 2037,
1.50% Series B Convertible Senior Notes due 2037 and
1.50% Series C Convertible Senior Notes due 2037. See
“—Liquidity and Capital Resources–Sources and Uses of Liquidity.”
In
December 2007, we issued $2.5 billion aggregate principal amount of
5.25% Senior Notes due 2013, 6.00% Senior Notes due 2018 and
6.80% Senior Notes due 2038. See “—Liquidity and Capital
Resources–Sources and Uses of Liquidity.”
Debt Repayments—In
August 2007, we
terminated our existing $1.0 billion two-year term credit facility due
August 2008 (“Term Credit Facility”). See “—Liquidity and
Capital Resources–Sources and Uses of Liquidity.”
In
connection with the Merger, we terminated our existing $1.0 billion
five-year revolving credit facility expiring July 2011 (“Former Revolving
Credit Facility”). See “—Liquidity and Capital Resources–Sources and
Uses of Liquidity.”
Debt Redemptions—During 2007,
we called our Zero Coupon Convertible Debentures due May 2020 and our
1.5% Convertible Debentures due May 2021 for redemption. See
“—Liquidity and Capital Resources–Sources and Uses of Liquidity.”
Repurchase of Ordinary
Shares—During 2007, we repurchased and retired 5.2 million of our
ordinary shares at a total cost of $400 million. See “—Liquidity
and Capital Resources–Sources and Uses of Liquidity.” We do not currently expect
to make any additional share repurchases under the program in the near
future.
Outlook
Drilling Market—Demand for
offshore drilling units continues to be strong, particularly for rigs capable of
drilling in deepwater. Our High-Specification Floater fleet is fully
committed in 2008 and only eight of our High-Specification Floater fleet have
any available uncommitted time in 2009. We have only five rigs
remaining in our Midwater Floater fleet that have any available uncommitted time
left in 2008 and only 16 rigs remaining in this fleet that have any
available uncommitted time left in 2009. We have two
High-Specification Jackups and 20 Standard Jackups that have uncommitted
time left in 2008, and eight High-Specification Jackups and 36 Standard
Jackups have uncommitted time left in 2009. Dayrates for new
contracts for both floaters and jackups continue to be strong. Our
contract backlog at February 20, 2008 was approximately $32 billion,
up from approximately $23 billion at October 30, 2007, with
approximately $9 billion of the increase due to the Merger.
In April
2007, we entered into a marketing and purchase option agreement with Pacific
Drilling that provided us with the exclusive marketing right for two newbuild
Ultra-Deepwater Floaters to be named Deepwater Pacific 1
and Deepwater Pacific 2,
as well as an option to purchase a 50 percent interest in a joint venture
company through which we and Pacific Drilling would own the
drillships. In October 2007, we obtained a firm commitment for
the Deepwater Pacific 1,
and we exercised our option and acquired a 50 percent interest in the joint
venture, TPDI. The Deepwater Pacific 1
was awarded a firm commitment for a four-year contract which may be converted by
the customer to a five-year drilling contract on or prior to October 31,
2008. The drilling contract is expected to commence in the second
quarter of 2009 following shipyard construction, sea trials, mobilization to
location and customer acceptance. The Deepwater Pacific 2
is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2010. We are in
advanced discussions with a customer regarding the award of a long-term contract
for the rig. We estimate total capital expenditures for the
construction of these rigs to be approximately $685 million and
$665 million, excluding capitalized interest, respectively. See
“—Liquidity and Capital Resources–Acquisitions, Dispositions and Capital
Expenditures.”
As of
December 31, 2007, we and Pacific Drilling had each paid $238 million
in documented costs for the two rigs since the formation of the joint venture in
October 2007.
We are
providing construction management services for the Pacific Drilling newbuilds
and have agreed to provide operating management services once the drillships
begin operations. Beginning on October 18, 2010, Pacific
Drilling will have the right to exchange its interest in the joint venture for
our ordinary shares or cash at a purchase price based on an appraisal of the
fair value of the drillships, subject to various adjustments.
In June
2007, we were awarded a five-year drilling contract for a fourth enhanced
Enterprise-class drillship. The enhanced Enterprise-class drillship,
to be named Discoverer Luanda, is
expected to be owned and operated by a joint venture which is expected to be
65 percent owned by us and 35 percent owned by an Angolan
partner. We estimate total capital expenditures for the construction
of the Discoverer Luanda to be
approximately $640 million, excluding capitalized interest. We
currently expect the Discoverer Luanda to
begin operations in Angola during the third quarter of 2010, after construction
in South Korea followed by sea trials, mobilization to Angola and customer
acceptance.
Prior to
the Merger, GlobalSantaFe had one Ultra-Deepwater Floater under construction,
the
GSF Development Driller III, and one contracted for
construction. The GSF Development Driller III
was awarded a seven-year drilling contract and is expected to be
completed in mid-2009. Construction on the other newbuild is expected
to be completed in the third quarter of 2010. We estimate total
capital expenditures for the construction of the
GSF Development Driller III to be approximately
$590 million. We estimate total capital expenditures for the
construction of the other newbuild to be approximately $740 million,
excluding capitalized interest. We currently expect the GSF Development Driller III
to begin operations in Angola in mid-2009, after construction in Singapore
followed by sea trials, mobilization to Angola and customer
acceptance.
We have
been successful in building contract backlog within our High-Specification
Floaters fleet with 23 of our 47 current and future High-Specification
Floaters, including six of the eight newbuilds and the two Sedco 700-series rig
upgrades, contracted into or beyond 2011 as of February 20,
2008. These 23 units also include 16 of our 26 current
Ultra-Deepwater Floaters. Our total contract backlog of approximately
$32 billion as of February 20, 2008 includes an estimated
$21 billion of backlog represented by our High-Specification
Floaters. We continue to believe that the long-term outlook for
deepwater capable rigs is favorable. In 2007 we saw successful
drilling efforts in the lower tertiary trend of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico; the
discovery of light oil and non-associated gas in the deepwaters of Brazil;
continued exploration success in the deepwaters offshore India; a discovery in
the deepwaters of the South China Sea; and exploration activity in the Orphan
Basin in Canada. Additionally, the continued exploration success in
the deepwaters of West Africa and the opening of additional deepwater acreage in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico supports our optimistic outlook for the deepwater
drilling market sector. In November 2007, we sold the Peregrine I as part of
our overall strategy to dispose of older rigs that are no longer technologically
advanced or otherwise not competitive in the international
marketplace. As of February 20, 2008, none of our
High-Specification Floater fleet contract days are uncommitted for the remainder
of 2008, while approximately 9 percent, 29 percent and 59 percent
are uncommitted in 2009, 2010 and 2011, respectively.
Our
Midwater Floaters fleet, comprising 29 semisubmersible rigs, is largely
committed to contracts that extend into 2009. We continue to see
customer demand for multi-year contracts for these units. We
completed the reactivation of the C. Kirk Rhein, Jr., which has been awarded a
two-year contract in India at a $340,000 dayrate and commenced operations in
February 2007. We are actively pursuing the sale of two Midwater
Floaters (GSF Arctic II and
GSF Arctic IV) in
the North Sea in connection with our previously announced proposed undertakings
to the Office of Fair Trading in the U.K. As of February 20,
2008, seven percent of our Midwater Floater fleet contract days are
uncommitted for the remainder of 2008, while approximately 41 percent,
70 percent and 92 percent are uncommitted in 2009, 2010 and 2011,
respectively.
We
continue to see steady growth in demand for Jackups, and we believe that the
increase in newbuild supply capacity can be absorbed over the short
term. We do not have the visibility to see beyond the second quarter
of 2008, and supply growth is a concern for the second half of
2008. As of February 20, 2008, 14 percent of our
High-Specification Jackup fleet contract days are uncommitted for the remainder
of 2008, while approximately 51 percent, 96 percent and
100 percent are uncommitted in 2009, 2010 and 2011,
respectively. In addition, 16 percent of our Standard Jackup
fleet contract days are uncommitted for the remainder of 2008, while
approximately 56 percent, 77 percent and 90 percent are
uncommitted in 2009, 2010 and 2011, respectively.
On
February 15, 2008, we entered into a definitive agreement with Hercules
Offshore, Inc. to sell three of our Standard Jackups (GSF Adriatic III,
GSF High Island I
and GSF High Island VIII)
for approximately $320 million. At February 27, 2008, these
assets were classified as held for sale.
We expect
our revenues to continue to increase in 2008 due to the inclusion of
GlobalSantaFe’s operations as well as the commencement of new contracts with
higher dayrates. The scheduled commencement of the Sedco 702 and Sedco 706 contracts at
the end of the rigs’ deepwater upgrade shipyard projects in the first and fourth
quarters of 2008, respectively, are also expected to increase our revenues in
2008. We expect these increases will be partially offset by a
decrease in revenue from the sale of the Peregrine I in
November 2007.
The
aggregate amount of out-of-service time we incur in 2008 is expected to increase
substantially due to the inclusion of GlobalSantaFe’s operations, partially
offset by a decrease in out-of-service time largely due to a decrease in
shipyard time for the legacy Transocean rigs. However, the shipyard
projects we intend to undertake in 2008 will involve rigs with higher dayrates
than those that underwent shipyard projects in 2007 and, consequently, we expect
lost revenue from shipyard projects in 2008 from legacy Transocean rigs to be
generally in line with lost revenue in 2007.
We expect
the inclusion of GlobalSantaFe’s operations, as well as industry inflation in
2008, to continue to increase our operating and maintenance costs including our
shipyard and major maintenance program expenditures. In addition, the
types of shipyard projects we forecast for 2008 are generally more costly, so we
expect shipyard project costs to increase from 2007 to 2008 with respect to the
legacy Transocean rigs despite the expected decrease in out-of-service
time. We expect our operating and maintenance costs in 2008 to
further increase as a result of the completion of the Sedco 702 and Sedco 706 deepwater
upgrades. We expect these increases to be partially offset by lower
operating costs due to the sale of the Peregrine I in
November 2007. Finally, we expect to continue to invest in a
number of recruitment, retention and personnel development initiatives in
connection with the manning of the crews of the deepwater upgrades and newbuild
rigs and our efforts to mitigate expected personnel attrition.
We expect
that a number of fixed-price contract options will be exercised by our customers
in 2008, which will preclude us from taking full advantage of any increased
market rates for rigs subject to these contract options. We have six
existing contracts with fixed-priced or capped options for dayrates that we
believe are less than current market dayrates. Well-in-progress or
similar provisions in our existing contracts may delay the start of higher
dayrates in subsequent contracts, and some of the delays have been and could be
significant.
Our
operations are geographically dispersed in oil and gas exploration and
development areas throughout the world. Rigs can be moved from one
region to another, but the cost of moving a rig and the availability of
rig-moving vessels may cause the supply and demand balance to vary somewhat
between regions. However, significant variations between regions do
not tend to persist long-term because of rig mobility. Consequently,
we operate in a single, global offshore drilling market.
Insurance Matters—We
periodically evaluate our hull and machinery and third-party liability insurance
limits and self-insured retentions. Effective May 1, 2007, we
renewed our hull and machinery and third-party liability insurance
coverages. Subject to large self-insured retentions, we carry hull
and machinery insurance covering physical damage to the rigs for operational
risks worldwide, and we carry liability insurance covering damage to third
parties. However, we do not generally have commercial market
insurance coverage for physical damage losses to our rigs due to hurricanes in
the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and war perils worldwide. Additionally, we do
not carry insurance for loss of revenue. In the opinion of
management, adequate accruals have been made based on known and estimated losses
related to such exposures.
Tax Matters—We are a Cayman
Islands company and we operate through our various subsidiaries in a number of
countries throughout the world. Consequently, our tax provision is
based upon the tax laws, regulations and treaties in effect in and between the
countries in which our operations are conducted and income is
earned. Our effective tax rate for financial reporting purposes will
fluctuate from year to year as our operations are conducted in different taxing
jurisdictions. We are subject to changes in tax laws, treaties and
regulations in and between the countries in which we operate and earn
income. A change in the tax laws, treaties or regulations in any of
the countries in which we operate could result in a higher or lower effective
tax rate on our worldwide earnings and, as a result, could have a material
effect on our financial results.
Our
income tax return filings in the major jurisdictions in which we operate
worldwide are generally subject to examination for periods ranging from three to
eight years. We have agreed to extensions beyond the statute of
limitations in three jurisdictions for up to 12 years. Tax
authorities in certain jurisdictions are examining our tax returns and in some
cases have issued assessments. We are defending our tax positions in
those jurisdictions. While we cannot predict or provide assurance as
to the final outcome of these proceedings, we do not expect the ultimate
liability to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated statement of
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In
February 2007, we entered into a settlement agreement with the U.S.
Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) regarding our U.S. federal income tax returns
for 2001 through 2003. The IRS agreed to settle all issues for this
period. This settlement resulted in no cash tax payment.
Our 2004
and 2005 U.S. federal income tax returns are currently under examination by the
IRS. In October 2007, we received from the IRS examination
reports setting forth proposed changes to the U.S. federal taxable income
reported for the years 2004 and 2005. The proposed changes would
result in a cash tax payment of approximately $413 million, exclusive of
interest. We filed a letter with the IRS protesting the proposed
changes on November 19, 2007. The protest letter puts forth our
position that we believe our returns are materially correct as
filed. We will continue to vigorously defend against these proposed
changes. The IRS audits of GlobalSantaFe’s 2004 and 2005 U.S. federal
income tax returns are still in the examination phase. We do not
expect the conclusion of these audits to give rise to a material tax
liability.
Certain
of our Brazilian income tax returns for the years 2000 through 2004 are
currently under examination. The Brazil tax authorities have issued
tax assessments totaling $112 million, plus a 75 percent penalty and
$70 million of interest through December 31, 2007. We
believe our returns are materially correct as filed, and we intend to vigorously
contest these assessments. We filed a protest letter with the
Brazilian tax authorities on January 25, 2008.
Norwegian
civil tax and criminal authorities are investigating various transactions
undertaken in 2001 and 2002. The authorities initiated inquiries into
these transactions in September 2004 and in March 2005 obtained
additional information on the transactions pursuant to a Norwegian court
order. In 2006 we filed a formal protest with respect to a
notification by the Norwegian tax authorities of their intent to propose
assessments that would result in increased tax of approximately
$287 million, plus interest, related to certain restructuring
transactions. The authorities indicated penalties imposed on the
assessment could range from 15 to 60 percent of the
assessment. In addition, the authorities issued a preliminary
notification in February 2008 of their intent to issue a separate tax
assessment of approximately $77 million related to a 2001 dividend payment,
plus interest and penalties, which could range from 15 to 60 percent of the
assessment. In the course of its investigations, the Norwegian
authorities secured certain records located in the United Kingdom related to a
Norwegian subsidiary that was previously subject to tax in
Norway. The authorities are assessing the need to impose additional
taxes on this Norwegian subsidiary. We have and will continue to
respond to all information requests from the Norwegian
authorities. We plan to vigorously contest any assertions by the
Norwegian authorities in connection with the various transactions being
investigated.
On
January 1, 2007, as part of our implementation of FIN 48, we recorded
a long-term liability of $142 million related to the Norwegian tax issues
described above. Since January 1, 2007, the long-term liability
has increased to $168 million due to the accrual of interest and exchange
rate fluctuations. While we cannot predict or provide assurance as to
the final outcome of these proceedings, we do not expect the ultimate resolution
of these matters to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated statement
of financial position or results of operations although it may have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated cash flows. See Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 15—Income Taxes.
Regulatory Matters—In June
2007, GlobalSantaFe's management retained outside counsel to conduct an internal
investigation of its Nigerian and West African operations, focusing on brokers
who handled customs matters with respect to its affiliates operating in those
jurisdictions and whether those brokers have fully complied with the U.S.
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) and local laws. GlobalSantaFe
commenced its investigation following announcements by other oilfield service
companies that they were independently investigating the FCPA implications of
certain actions taken by third parties in respect of customs matters in
connection with their operations in Nigeria, as well as another company's
announced settlement implicating a third party handling customs matters in
Nigeria. In each case, the customs broker was reported to be
Panalpina Inc., which GlobalSantaFe used to obtain temporary import permits
for its rigs operating offshore Nigeria. GlobalSantaFe voluntarily
disclosed its internal investigation to the U.S. Department of Justice (the
“DOJ”) and the SEC and, at their request, expanded its investigation to include
the activities of its customs brokers in other West African countries and the
activities of Panalpina Inc. worldwide. The investigation is
focusing on whether the brokers have fully complied with the requirements of
their contracts, local laws and the FCPA. In late November 2007,
GlobalSantaFe received a subpoena from the SEC for documents related to its
investigation. In this connection, the SEC advised GlobalSantaFe that
it had issued a formal order of investigation. After the completion
of the Merger, outside counsel began formally reporting directly to the audit
committee of our board of directors. Our legal representatives are
keeping the DOJ and SEC apprised of the scope and details of their investigation
and producing relevant information in response to their requests.
On July
25, 2007, our legal representatives met with the DOJ in response to a notice we
received requesting such a meeting regarding our engagement of
Panalpina Inc. for freight forwarding and other services in the United
States and abroad. The DOJ has informed us that it is conducting an
investigation of alleged FCPA violations by oil service companies who used
Panalpina Inc. and other brokers in Nigeria
and other parts of the world. We began developing an investigative
plan which would allow us to promptly review and produce relevant and responsive
information requested by the DOJ and SEC. Subsequently,
we expanded the investigation to include one of our agents for
Nigeria. This investigation and the legacy GlobalSantaFe
investigation are being conducted by outside counsel who reports directly to the
audit committee of our board of directors. The investigations have
focused on whether the agent and the customs brokers have fully complied with
the terms of their respective agreements, the FCPA and local laws. We
prepared and presented an investigative plan to the DOJ and have informed the
SEC of the ongoing investigation. We have
begun implementing the investigative plan and are
keeping the DOJ and SEC apprised of the scope and details of our investigation
and are producing relevant information in response to their
requests. We
cannot predict the
ultimate outcome of the investigations, the effect of implementing any further
measures that may be necessary to ensure full compliance with applicable laws or
to what extent, if at all, we could be subject to fines, sanctions or other
penalties.
Our
internal compliance program has detected a potential violation of U.S. sanctions
regulations in connection with the shipment of goods to our operations in
Turkmenistan. Goods bound for our rig in Turkmenistan were shipped
through Iran by a freight forwarder. Iran is subject to a number of
economic regulations, including sanctions administered by OFAC, and
comprehensive restrictions on the export and re-export of U.S.-origin items to
Iran. Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations relating
to sanctions and export restrictions may subject us to criminal sanctions
and civil remedies, including fines, denial of export privileges, injunctions or
seizures of our assets. See “Item 1A. Risk Factors–Our non-U.S. operations
involve additional risks not associated with our U.S.
operations.” We have self-reported the potential violation to
OFAC and have retained outside counsel to conduct a thorough investigation of
the matter.
Performance
and Other Key Indicators
Contract Backlog—The
following table presents our contract backlog, including firm commitments only,
for our Contract Drilling segment at the periods ended December 31, 2007
and 2006. Firm commitments are typically represented by signed
drilling contracts. Our contract backlog is calculated by multiplying
the full contractual operating dayrate by the number of days remaining in the
firm contract period, excluding revenues for mobilization, demobilization and
contract preparation, which are not expected to be significant to our contract
drilling revenues.
|
|
December
31, 2007
|
|
|
December
31, 2006
|
|
|
|
(In
millions)
|
|
Contract
backlog
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-Specification
Floaters
|
|
$ |
20,708 |
|
|
$ |
14,354 |
|
Midwater
Floaters
|
|
|
5,728 |
|
|
|
3,770 |
|
High-Specification
Jackups
|
|
|
768 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
Standard
Jackups
|
|
|
4,445 |
|
|
|
1,897 |
|
Other
Rigs
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
31,807 |
|
|
$ |
20,226 |
|
The firm
commitments that comprise the contract backlog for our Contract Drilling segment
as of December 31, 2007 are presented in the following table along with the
associated average contractual dayrates. The amount of actual revenue
earned and the actual periods during which revenues are earned will be different
than the amounts and periods shown in the tables below due to various factors,
including shipyard and maintenance projects, unplanned downtime and other
factors that result in lower applicable dayrates than the full contractual
operating dayrate, as well as the ability of our customers to terminate
contracts under certain circumstances. The contract backlog average
dayrate is defined as the contracted operating dayrate to be earned per revenue
earning day in the period. A revenue earning day is defined as a day
for which a rig earns dayrate during the firm contract period after commencement
of operations.
|
|
For
the years ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
(In
millions, except average dayrates)
|
|
Contract
backlog
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-Specification
Floaters
|
|
$ |
20,708 |
|
|
$ |
4,599 |
|
|
$ |
4,814 |
|
|
$ |
4,017 |
|
|
$ |
2,643 |
|
|
$ |
4,635 |
|
Midwater
Floaters
|
|
|
5,728 |
|
|
|
2,650 |
|
|
|
1,806 |
|
|
|
869 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
High-Specification
Jackups
|
|
|
768 |
|
|
|
478 |
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Standard
Jackups
|
|
|
4,445 |
|
|
|
2,322 |
|
|
|
1,229 |
|
|
|
592 |
|
|
|
297 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Other
Rigs
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
31,807 |
|
|
$ |
10,101 |
|
|
$ |
8,158 |
|
|
$ |
5,521 |
|
|
$ |
3,229 |
|
|
$ |
4,798 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
Dayrates
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
High-Specification
Floaters
|
|
$ |
404,000 |
|
|
$ |
353,000 |
|
|
$ |
393,000 |
|
|
$ |
416,000 |
|
|
$ |
443,000 |
|
|
$ |
439,000 |
|
Midwater
Floaters
|
|
|
301,000 |
|
|
|
294,000 |
|
|
|
315,000 |
|
|
|
298,000 |
|
|
|
323,000 |
|
|
|
249,000 |
|
High-Specification
Jackups
|
|
|
154,000 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
158,000 |
|
|
|
188,000 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Standard
Jackups
|
|
|
154,000 |
|
|
|
153,000 |
|
|
|
156,000 |
|
|
|
155,000 |
|
|
|
148,000 |
|
|
|
102,000 |
|
Other
Rigs
|
|
|
60,000 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
56,000 |
|
|
|
68,000 |
|
|
|
68,000 |
|
|
|
65,000 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
270,000 |
|
|
$ |
234,000 |
|
|
$ |
270,000 |
|
|
$ |
293,000 |
|
|
$ |
304,000 |
|
|
$ |
397,000 |
|
Fleet Average Daily Revenue and
Utilization—The following table shows our average daily revenue and
utilization for each of the three months ended December 31, 2007, September
30, 2007 and December 31, 2006 for our Contract Drilling
segment. Average daily revenue is defined as contract drilling
revenue earned per revenue earning day in the period. Utilization in
the table below is defined as the total actual number of revenue earning days in
the period as a percentage of the total number of calendar days in the period
for all drilling rigs in our fleet.
|
|
Three
months ended
|
|
|
|
December
31,
2007
|
|
|
September
30,
2007
|
|
|
December
31,
2006
|
|
Average
daily revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-Specification
Floaters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultra-Deepwater
Floaters
|
|
$ |
346,100 |
|
|
$ |
323,200 |
|
|
$ |
275,300 |
|
Deepwater
Floaters
|
|
$ |
265,300 |
|
|
$ |
251,600 |
|
|
$ |
216,500 |
|
Harsh
Environment Floaters
|
|
$ |
326,300 |
|
|
$ |
312,300 |
|
|
$ |
199,400 |
|
Total
High-Specification Floaters
|
|
$ |
311,600 |
|
|
$ |
291,900 |
|
|
$ |
237,800 |
|
Midwater
Floaters
|
|
$ |
274,600 |
|
|
$ |
254,000 |
|
|
$ |
184,600 |
|
High-Specification
Jackups
|
|
$ |
173,400 |
|
|
$ |
131,600 |
|
|
$ |
133,300 |
|
Standard
Jackups
|
|
$ |
130,800 |
|
|
$ |
120,000 |
|
|
$ |
95,300 |
|
Other
Rigs
|
|
$ |
48,600 |
|
|
$ |
54,900 |
|
|
$ |
48,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
fleet average daily revenue
|
|
$ |
224,000 |
|
|
$ |
219,700 |
|
|
$ |
171,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Utilization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-Specification
Floaters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultra-Deepwater
Floaters
|
|
|
97 |
% |
|
|
99 |
% |
|
|
92 |
% |
Deepwater
Floaters
|
|
|
75 |
% |
|
|
76 |
% |
|
|
78 |
% |
Harsh
Environment Floaters
|
|
|
80 |
% |
|
|
85 |
% |
|
|
97 |
% |
Total
High-Specification Floaters
|
|
|
85 |
% |
|
|
86 |
% |
|
|
86 |
% |
Midwater
Floaters
|
|
|
95 |
% |
|
|
92 |
% |
|
|
90 |
% |
High-Specification
Jackups
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
Standard
Jackups
|
|
|
91 |
% |
|
|
89 |
% |
|
|
89 |
% |
Other
Rigs
|
|
|
97 |
% |
|
|
98 |
% |
|
|
99 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
fleet average utilization
|
|
|
90 |
% |
|
|
89 |
% |
|
|
89 |
% |
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Sources
and Uses of Cash
Our
primary sources of cash in 2007 were our cash flows from operations, proceeds
from asset sales, proceeds from the issuance of the convertible notes and senior
notes in December 2007, borrowings under the Bridge Loan Facility and our
other credit facilities, cash received under our tax sharing agreement with
TODCO and proceeds from issuance of ordinary shares upon the exercise of stock
options. Our primary uses of cash were payment of the cash
consideration in connection with the Transactions, repurchases of our ordinary
shares, capital expenditures (including for newbuild construction) and
repayments of borrowings under our credit facilities. At
December 31, 2007, we had $1,241 million in cash and cash
equivalents.
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
millions)
|
|
Net
cash from operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
3,131 |
|
|
$ |
1,385 |
|
|
$ |
1,746 |
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
|
|
411 |
|
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Other
non-cash items
|
|
|
(231 |
) |
|
|
(480 |
) |
|
|
249 |
|
Working
capital changes
|
|
|
(238 |
) |
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
(169 |
) |
|
|
$ |
3,073 |
|
|
$ |
1,237 |
|
|
$ |
1,836 |
|
Net cash
provided by operating activities increased due to more cash generated from net
income, partially offset by higher use of cash for working capital
items.
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
millions)
|
|
Net
cash from investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
$ |
(1,380 |
) |
|
$ |
(876 |
) |
|
$ |
(504 |
) |
Consideration
paid to GlobalSantaFe shareholders
|
|
|
(5,129 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(5,129 |
) |
Cash
balances acquired in connection with the Merger
|
|
|
695 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
695 |
|
Proceeds
from disposal of assets, net
|
|
|
379 |
|
|
|
461 |
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
Joint
ventures and other investments, net
|
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
$ |
(5,677 |
) |
|
$ |
(415 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,262 |
) |
Net cash
used in investing activities increased primarily due to cash paid out in
connection with the Merger. Capital expenditures increased by
$504 million over the corresponding prior year period primarily due to the
construction of eight Ultra-Deepwater Floaters, the two Sedco 700-series
deepwater upgrades and other equipment replaced and upgraded on our existing
rigs. In addition, proceeds from asset sales were lower in 2007 during
which three units were sold as compared to 2006 during which eight drilling
units were sold.
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
millions)
|
|
Net
cash from financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings
under 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility
|
|
$ |
1,500 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
1,500 |
|
Borrowings
under other credit facilities
|
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
14,000 |
|
Repayments
under other credit facilities
|
|
|
(12,030 |
) |
|
|
(300 |
) |
|
|
(11,730 |
) |
Proceeds
from issuance of debt
|
|
|
9,095 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
8,095 |
|
Repayments
of debt
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Financing
costs
|
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(101 |
) |
Payment
to shareholders for Reclassification of ordinary shares
|
|
|
(9,859 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(9,859 |
) |
Proceeds
from issuance of ordinary shares upon exercise of warrants
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Proceeds
from issuance of ordinary shares under share-based compensation plans,
net
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Repurchase
of ordinary shares
|
|
|
(400 |
) |
|
|
(2,601 |
) |
|
|
2,201 |
|
Tax
benefit from issuance of ordinary shares under share-based compensation
plans
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
$ |
3,378 |
|
|
$ |
(800 |
) |
|
$ |
4,178 |
|
Net cash
provided by financing activities increased primarily due to net proceeds of
$14 billion from the issuance of the convertible notes and senior notes in
December 2007 and borrowings under the Bridge Loan Facility, the
Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility and the 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility,
compared to $2.0 billion from the issuance of the
Floating Rate Notes and borrowings under the Term Credit Facility in
2006. Partially offsetting these increases was the payment to
shareholders for the Reclassification of ordinary shares in connection with the
Transactions. In addition, we used less cash to repurchase our
ordinary shares under our share repurchase program in 2007 than in 2006, and we
received more cash from the issuance of our ordinary shares under our
share-based compensation program and associated tax benefit.
Acquisitions,
Dispositions and Capital Expenditures
Acquisitions—Following the
completion of the Transactions, we intend to focus on the repayment of debt in
2008 and 2009. Nevertheless, we could, from time to time, review
possible acquisitions of businesses and drilling rigs and may in the future make
significant capital commitments for such purposes. We may also
consider investments related to major rig upgrades or new rig
construction. Any such acquisition, upgrade or new rig construction
could involve the payment by us of a substantial amount of cash or the issuance
of a substantial number of additional ordinary shares or other
securities. In addition, from time to time, we review possible
dispositions of drilling units.
In April
2007, we entered into a marketing and purchase option agreement with Pacific
Drilling that provided us with the exclusive marketing right for two newbuild
Ultra-Deepwater Floaters to be named Deepwater Pacific 1
and Deepwater Pacific 2,
as well as an option to purchase a 50 percent interest in a joint venture
company through which we and Pacific Drilling would own the
drillships. In October 2007, we obtained a firm commitment for
the Deepwater Pacific 1,
and we exercised our option and acquired a 50 percent interest in the joint
venture, TPDI. See “—Outlook–Drilling Market.” The Deepwater Pacific 1
was awarded a firm commitment for a four-year contract which may be converted to
a five-year drilling contract by the customer on or prior to October 31,
2008. The drilling contract is expected to commence in the second
quarter of 2009 following shipyard construction, sea trials, mobilization to
location and customer acceptance. The Deepwater Pacific 2
is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2010 and we are currently in
active discussions with several customers regarding the award of a long-term
contract for the rig. We estimate total capital expenditures for the
construction of these rigs to be approximately $685 million and
$665 million, excluding capitalized interest, respectively. As
of December 31, 2007, we and Pacific Drilling had each paid
$238 million in documented costs for the two rigs.
We are
providing construction management services for the Deepwater Pacific newbuilds
and have agreed to provide operating management services once these drillships
begin operations. Beginning on October 18, 2010, Pacific
Drilling will have the right to exchange its interest in the joint venture for
our ordinary shares or cash based on an appraisal of the fair value of the
drillships, subject to various adjustments.
Dispositions—During 2007, we
sold a Deepwater Floater (Peregrine I), a tender
rig (Charley Graves) and a
swamp barge (Searex VI). We
received net proceeds from these sales of $344 million and recognized gains
on the sales of $264 million. On February 15, 2008, we
entered into a definitive agreement with Hercules to sell three of our Standard
Jackups (GSF Adriatic III,
GSF High Island I
and GSF High Island VIII)
for approximately $320 million. In addition, on
February 15, 2008, we announced our intent to proceed with divestitures of
the GSF Arctic II and
the GSF Arctic IV
semisubmersible rigs and the hiring of a third-party advisor. The
divestitures are in furtherance of our previously announced proposed
undertakings to the Office of Fair Trading in the U.K. made in connection with
the Merger. See “—Outlook–Drilling Market.”
Capital Expenditures—Capital
expenditures, including capitalized interest of $76 million, totaled
$1.4 billion during the year ended December 31, 2007, substantially
all of which related to the Contract Drilling segment. The following
table summarizes actual capital expenditures including capitalized interest, for
our major construction and conversion projects incurred in 2007 and expected in
future years (in millions):
|
|
Total
costs through December 31, 2007
|
|
|
Expected
costs for the year ending December 31, 2008
|
|
|
Estimated
costs
thereafter
|
|
|
Total
estimated cost at
completion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discoverer
Clear Leader
|
|
$ |
409 |
|
|
$ |
210 |
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
649 |
|
Sedco
700-series upgrades
|
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
596 |
|
GSF
Development Driller III (a)
|
|
|
369 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
589 |
|
Discoverer
Americas
|
|
|
301 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
621 |
|
Deepwater Pacific 1
(b)
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
679 |
|
Discoverer
Inspiration
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
668 |
|
Deepwater Pacific 2
(b)
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
659 |
|
GSF
Newbuild (a)
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
739 |
|
Discoverer
Luanda
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
637 |
|
Capitalized
Interest
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
372 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
2,489 |
|
|
$ |
1,760 |
|
|
$ |
1,960 |
|
|
$ |
6,209 |
|
(a)
|
These
costs include our initial investments in the GSF Development Driller III
and GSF Newbuild of $356 million and $109 million,
respectively, representing the estimated fair values of the rigs at the
time of the Merger.
|
(b)
|
The
costs for Deepwater Pacific 1
and Deepwater Pacific 2
represent 100 percent of expenditures incurred prior to our
investment in the joint venture ($277 million and $178 million,
respectively), 100 percent of expenditures incurred since our
investment in the joint venture and 100 percent of expenditures to be
incurred. However, Pacific Drilling shares 50 percent of
these costs.
|
During
2008, we expect capital expenditures to be approximately $2.5 billion,
including approximately $1.8 billion for our major construction and
conversion projects, as detailed in the above table. The level of our
capital expenditures is partly dependent upon the actual level of operational
and contracting activity and the level of capital expenditures for which our
customers agree to reimburse us. Our expected capital expenditures
during 2008 do not include amounts that would be incurred as a result of other
possible newbuild opportunities.
As with
any major shipyard project that takes place over an extended period of time, the
actual costs, the timing of expenditures and the project completion date may
vary from estimates based on numerous factors, including actual contract terms,
weather, exchange rates, shipyard labor conditions and the market demand for
components and resources required for drilling unit construction. See
“Item 1A. Risk Factors—Our shipyard projects are subject to delays and cost
overruns.”
We intend
to fund the cash requirements relating to our capital expenditures through
available cash balances, cash generated from operations and asset
sales. We also have available credit under the Five-Year Revolving
Credit Facility and the 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility (see “—Sources and
Uses of Liquidity”) and may utilize other commercial bank or capital market
financings.
Sources
and Uses of Liquidity
We expect
to use existing cash balances, internally generated by cash flows, proceeds from
the issuance of new debt and proceeds from asset sales to fulfill anticipated
obligations such as scheduled debt maturities, capital expenditures and working
capital needs. From time to time, we may also use bank lines of
credit to maintain liquidity for short-term cash needs.
Our
access to debt and equity markets may be reduced or closed to us due to a
variety of events, including among others, credit rating agency downgrades of
our debt, industry conditions, general economic conditions, market conditions
and market perceptions of us and our industry.
Our
internally generated cash flow is directly related to our business and the
market sectors in which we operate. Should the drilling market
deteriorate, or should we experience poor results in our operations, cash flow
from operations may be reduced. We have, however, continued to
generate positive cash flow from operating activities over recent years and
expect that cash flow will continue to be positive over the next
year.
Bank Credit Agreements—In
September 2007, we entered into the Bridge Loan Facility. In
connection with the Transactions, we borrowed $15 billion under the Bridge Loan
Facility at the reserve-adjusted LIBOR plus the applicable margin, which is
based upon our Debt Rating. As of February 27, 2008, the
applicable margin was 0.4 percent. We may prepay the Bridge Loan
Facility in whole or in part without premium or penalty. In addition,
this facility requires mandatory prepayments of outstanding borrowings in an
amount equal to 100 percent of the net cash proceeds resulting from any of
the following (in each case subject to certain agreed exceptions): (1) the
sale or other disposition of any of our property or assets above a predetermined
threshold; (2) the receipt of certain net insurance or condemnation
proceeds; (3) certain issuances of our equity securities; and (4) the
incurrence of indebtedness for borrowed money by us. The Bridge Loan
Facility contains a maximum leverage ratio of no greater than 350 percent
as of June 30, 2008, and 300 percent thereafter. Borrowings
under the Bridge Loan Facility are subject to acceleration upon the occurrence
of events of default. At February 27, 2008, we had
$3.1 billion outstanding under this facility at a weighted-average interest
rate of 3.61 percent.
In
November 2007, we entered into the Five-Year Revolving Credit
Facility. Under the terms of the Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility,
we may make borrowings at either (1) a base rate, determined as the greater
of (a) the prime loan rate or (b) the federal funds effective rate plus
0.5 percent, or (2) the reserve-adjusted LIBOR plus the applicable
margin, which is based upon our Debt Rating. A facility fee, varying
from 0.07 percent to 0.17 percent depending on our Debt Rating, is
incurred on the daily amount of the underlying commitment, whether used or
unused, throughout the term of the facility. A utilization fee,
varying from 0.05 percent to 0.10 percent depending on our Debt
Rating, is payable if amounts outstanding under the Five-Year Revolving Credit
Facility are greater than or equal to 50 percent of the total underlying
commitment. At February 27, 2008, the applicable margin,
facility fee and utilization fee were 0.26 percent, 0.09 percent and
0.10 percent, respectively. The Five-Year Revolving Credit
Facility may be prepaid in whole or in part without premium or
penalty. At February 27, 2008, no borrowings were outstanding
under the Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility.
In
December 2007, we entered into the 364-Day Revolving Credit
Facility. The 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility bears interest, at
our option, at either (1) a base rate, determined as the greater of
(a) the prime loan rate or (b) the federal funds effective rate plus
0.50 percent, or (2) the reserve-adjusted LIBOR plus the applicable
margin, which is based upon our Debt Rating. A facility fee, varying
from 0.05 percent to 0.15 percent depending on our Debt Rating, is
incurred on the daily amount of the underlying commitment, whether used or
unused, throughout the term of the facility. A utilization fee,
varying from 0.05 percent to 0.10 percent depending on our Debt
Rating, is payable if amounts outstanding under the 364-Day Revolving Credit
Facility are greater than or equal to 50 percent of the total underlying
commitment. At February 27, 2008, the applicable margin,
facility fee and utilization fee were 0.28 percent, 0.07 percent and
0.10 percent, respectively. The 364-Day Revolving Credit
Facility may be prepaid in whole or in part without premium or
penalty. At February 27, 2008, we had $688 million
outstanding under this facility at a weighted-average interest rate
of 3.43 percent.
The
Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility and 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility
require compliance with various covenants and provisions customary for
agreements of this nature, including a debt to total tangible capitalization
ratio, as defined by the credit agreements, not greater than 60 percent at
December 31, 2009, and the end of each quarter thereafter and a maximum
leverage ratio of no greater than 350 percent as of June 30, 2008, and
300 percent as of the end of each quarter thereafter through September 30,
2009.
Other
provisions of the Bridge Loan Facility, the Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility
and the 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility include limitations on creating liens,
incurring subsidiary debt, transactions with affiliates, sale/leaseback
transactions and mergers and sale of substantially all assets. Should
we fail to comply with these covenants, we would be in default and may lose
access to these facilities. We are also subject to various covenants
under the indentures pursuant to which our public debt was issued, including
restrictions on creating liens, engaging in sale/leaseback transactions and
engaging in certain merger, consolidation or reorganization
transactions. A default under our public debt could trigger a default
under our credit agreements and, if not waived by the lenders, could cause us to
lose access to these facilities.
In
December 2007, we entered into a commercial paper program (the “Program”),
the proceeds of which we are required to use to repay outstanding borrowings
under the 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility or the Bridge Loan
Facility. The 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility and the Five-Year
Revolving Credit Facility provide liquidity for the Program. At
February 27, 2008, $813 million was outstanding under the
Program.
Debt Issuance—In
December 2007, we issued $0.5 billion aggregate principal amount of
5.25% Senior Notes due March 2013 (the “5.25% Senior Notes”),
$1.0 billion aggregate principal amount of 6.00% Senior Notes due
March 2018 (the “6.00% Senior Notes”) and $1.0 billion aggregate
principal amount of 6.80% Senior Notes due March 2038 (the
“6.80% Senior Notes,” and together with the 5.25% Senior Notes and the
6.00% Senior Notes, the “Senior Notes”). We are required to pay
interest on the Senior Notes on March 15 and September 15 of each
year, beginning March 15, 2008. We may redeem some or all
of the notes at any time at a redemption price equal to 100 percent of the
principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, and a make whole
premium. At February 27, 2008, $500 million,
$1.0 billion and $1.0 billion principal amount of the 5.25%, 6.00% and
6.80% Senior Notes, respectively, were outstanding.
In
December 2007, we issued $2.2 billion aggregate principal amount of
1.625% Series A Convertible Senior Notes due December 2037 (the
“Series A Notes”), $2.2 billion aggregate principal amount of
1.50% Series B Convertible Senior Notes due December 2037 (the
“Series B Notes”) and $2.2 billion aggregate principal amount of
1.50% Series C Convertible Senior Notes due December 2037 (the
“Series C Notes,” and together with the Series A Notes and the
Series B Notes, the “Convertible Notes”). We are required to pay
interest on the Convertible Notes on June 15 and December 15 of
each year, beginning June 15, 2008. The Convertible Notes
may be converted at an initial rate of 5.9310 ordinary shares per
$1,000 note. The initial conversion rate is subject to
adjustment upon the occurrence of certain corporate events but not for accrued
interest. Upon conversion, we will deliver, in lieu of ordinary
shares, cash up to the aggregate principal amount of notes to be converted and
ordinary shares in respect of the remainder, if any, of our conversion
obligation in excess of the aggregate principal amount of the notes being
converted. In addition, if certain fundamental changes occur on or
before December 20, 2010, with respect to Series A Notes,
December 20, 2011, with respect to Series B Notes or December 20,
2012, with respect to Series C Notes, we will in some cases increase the
conversion rate for a holder electing to convert notes in connection with such
fundamental change. We may redeem some or all of the notes at any
time after December 20, 2010, in the case of the Series A Notes,
December 20, 2011, in the case of Series B Notes and December 20,
2012 in the case of the Series C Notes, in each case at a redemption price
equal to 100 percent of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid
interest, if any. Holders of Series A Notes and Series B
Notes will have the right to require us to repurchase their notes on
December 15, 2010 and December 15, 2011, respectively. In
addition, holders of any series of notes will have the right to require us to
repurchase their notes on December 14, 2012, December 15, 2017,
December 15, 2022, December 15, 2027 and December 15, 2032, and
upon the occurrence of a fundamental change, at a repurchase price in cash equal
to 100 percent of the principal amount of the notes to be repurchased plus
accrued and unpaid interest, if any. At February 27, 2008,
$2.2 billion principal amount of each of the Series A Notes,
Series B Notes and Series C Notes were outstanding,
respectively.
Holders
may convert their notes only under the following circumstances: (1) during
any calendar quarter after March 31, 2008 if the last reported sale price
of our ordinary shares for at least 20 trading days in a period of
30 consecutive trading days ending on the last trading day of the preceding
calendar quarter is more than 130 percent of the conversion price,
(2) during the five business days after the average trading price per
$1,000 principal amount of the notes is equal to or less than 98 percent of
the average conversion value of such notes during the preceding five trading-day
period as described herein, (3) during specified periods if specified
distributions to holders of our ordinary shares are made or specified corporate
transactions occur, (4) prior to the close of business on the business day
preceding the redemption date if the notes are called for redemption or
(5) on or after September 15, 2037 and prior to the close of business
on the business day prior to the stated maturity of the notes. Upon
conversion, we will deliver, in lieu of ordinary shares, cash up to the
aggregate principal amount of notes to be converted and ordinary shares in
respect of the remainder, if any, of our conversion obligation in excess of the
aggregate principal amount of the notes being converted.
In
November 2007, Transocean Worldwide Inc. executed a supplemental
indenture to assume the obligations related to the 5% Notes due 2013 (the
“5% Notes”) issued by GlobalSantaFe under an indenture dated as of
February 1, 2003. Additionally, as a result of the Merger, we
acquired Global Marine Inc., formerly a subsidiary of GlobalSantaFe and now
our subsidiary, which is the obligor on the 7% Notes due 2028 (the
“7% Notes”), which were issued under an indenture dated as of September 1,
1997. The 5% Notes are the obligation of Transocean
Worldwide Inc. and the 7% Notes are the obligation of Global
Marine Inc., and we have not guaranteed either obligation. The
respective obligor may redeem the 5% Notes and the 7% Notes in whole
or in part at a price equal to 100 percent of the principal amount plus
accrued and unpaid interest, if any, and a make-whole premium. The
indentures related to the 5% Notes and the 7% Notes contain
limitations on the obligor’s ability to incur indebtedness for borrowed money
secured by certain liens and on its ability to engage in certain sale/leaseback
transactions. At February 27, 2008, $250 million and
$300 million aggregate principal amount of the 5% Notes and the
7% Notes, respectively, remained outstanding.
Debt Repayments and
Refinancing—In December 2007, we refinanced a total of
$10.5 billion of borrowings under the Bridge Loan Facility using proceeds
from borrowings under the 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility and the issuance of
the Senior Notes and the Convertible Notes. We recognized a loss on
the retirement of the Bridge Loan Facility borrowings of
$6 million. We also repaid $820 million of borrowings under
the Bridge Loan Facility using internally generated cash flow. We
will likely seek to refinance a portion of the remaining borrowings under the
Bridge Loan Facility prior to the expiration of its one-year
term. Such refinancing may be effected through additional borrowings
under bank credit facilities, issuance of debt securities, including floating
rate notes, or through other financing transactions. We expect to
repay the remaining borrowings under the Bridge Loan Facility not refinanced
using cash on hand or cash generated during 2008.
In August
2007, we repaid the then outstanding balance of $470 million under our Term
Credit Facility and terminated the facility. We recognized a loss on
the termination of this debt of $1 million.
Concurrent
with our entry into the Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility in
November 2007, we terminated the Former Revolving Credit
Facility. We recognized a loss on the termination of this debt of
$1 million.
Debt Redemptions—In
October 2007, we called our Zero Coupon Convertible Debentures due
May 15, 2020. Between the notice of redemption and the trading
day prior to the redemption date, holders retained the right to convert the
debentures into our ordinary shares at a rate of 8.1566 ordinary shares per
$1,000 debenture. During this period, we issued 148,244 ordinary
shares upon conversion of $18 million aggregate principal amount of
debentures. In November 2007, we redeemed the remaining
debentures at an approximate cost of $18,000, plus accrued and unpaid
interest.
In
October 2007, we also called our 1.5% Convertible Debentures due
May 15, 2021. Between the notice of redemption and the fourth
trading day prior to the redemption date, holders retained the right to convert
the debentures into our ordinary shares at a rate of 13.8627 ordinary
shares per $1,000 debenture. During this period, we issued
5,499,613 ordinary shares upon conversion of $397 million aggregate
principal amount of debentures. In November 2007, we redeemed
the remaining debentures at an approximate cost of $3 million, plus accrued
and unpaid interest.
Repurchase of Ordinary
Shares—In May 2006, our board of directors authorized an increase in
the amount of ordinary shares which may be repurchased pursuant to our share
repurchase program to $4.0 billion from $2.0 billion, which was
previously authorized and announced in October 2005. The
ordinary shares may be repurchased from time to time in open market or private
transactions. Decisions to repurchase shares are based upon our
ongoing capital requirements, the price of our shares, regulatory
considerations, cash flow generation, general market conditions and other
factors. We plan to fund any future share repurchases under the
program from current and future cash balances and we could also use debt to fund
those share repurchases. The repurchase program does not have an
established expiration date and may be suspended or discontinued at any
time. There can be no assurance regarding the number of shares that
will be repurchased under the program. Under the program, repurchased
shares are retired and returned to unissued status.
During
2006, we repurchased and retired $2.6 billion of our ordinary shares, which
amounted to approximately 35.7 million ordinary shares at an average
purchase price of $72.78 per share. Total consideration paid to
repurchase the shares was recorded in shareholders equity as a reduction in
ordinary shares and additional paid-in capital. Such consideration
was funded with existing cash balances, borrowings under our Former Revolving
Credit Facility and our Term Credit Facility and proceeds from the issuance of
our Floating Rate Notes. During 2007, we repurchased approximately
$400 million of our ordinary shares, which amounted to approximately
5.2 million ordinary shares. At February 27, 2008, after
prior repurchases, we had authority to repurchase an additional
$600 million of our ordinary shares under the program. We do not
currently expect to make any additional share repurchases under the program in
the near future.
Contractual Obligations—Our
contractual obligations included in the table below are at face
value.
|
|
For
the years ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
2009-2010 |
|
|
|
2011-2012 |
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
Contractual
obligations
|
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
$ |
17,230 |
|
|
$ |
6,170 |
|
|
$ |
2,200 |
|
|
$ |
4,566 |
|
|
$ |
4,294 |
|
Interest
on debt
|
|
|
5,651 |
|
|
|
686 |
|
|
|
782 |
|
|
|
659 |
|
|
|
3,524 |
|
Operating
leases
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Capital
lease
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Stock
warrant consideration payable
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Purchase
obligations
|
|
|
2,589 |
|
|
|
1,164 |
|
|
|
1,425 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Defined
benefit pension plans
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
25,673 |
|
|
$ |
8,060 |
|
|
$ |
4,504 |
|
|
$ |
5,248 |
|
|
$ |
7,861 |
|
Bondholders
may, at their option, require us to repurchase the Series A Notes and the
Series B Notes in December 2010 and 2011, respectively. In
addition, holders of any series of the Convertible Notes may, at their option,
require us to repurchase their notes in December 2012, 2017, 2022, 2027 and
2032. The chart above assumes that the holders of the notes exercise
the options at the first available date.
As of
December 31, 2007, the total unrecognized tax benefit related to uncertain
tax positions, net of prepayments was $424 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 have
an obligation to make contributions in 2008 to our funded U.S. and Norway
defined benefit pension plans. See “—Retirement Plans and Other
Postemployment Benefits” for a discussion of expected contributions for pension
funding requirements and expected benefit payments for our unfunded defined
benefit pension plans.
At
December 31, 2007, we had other commitments that we are contractually
obligated to fulfill with cash should the obligations be
called. These obligations include standby letters of credit and
surety bonds that guarantee our performance as it relates to our drilling
contracts, insurance, customs, tax and other obligations in various
jurisdictions. Letters of credit are issued under a number of
facilities provided by several banks. The obligations that are the
subject of these surety bonds and letters of credit are geographically
concentrated in Nigeria and India. These letters of credit and surety
bond obligations are not normally called as we typically comply with the
underlying performance requirement.
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
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
2009-2010 |
|
|
|
2011-2012 |
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
Other
commercial commitments
|
|
|
|
Standby
letters of credit
|
|
$ |
532 |
|
|
$ |
389 |
|
|
$ |
102 |
|
|
$ |
31 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
Surety
bonds
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
556 |
|
|
$ |
412 |
|
|
$ |
103 |
|
|
$ |
31 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
We have
established a wholly-owned captive insurance company which insures various risks
of our operating subsidiaries. Access to the cash investments of the
captive insurance company may be limited due to local regulatory
restrictions. These cash investments totaled $34 million at
December 31, 2007 and are expected to rise to approximately
$110 million by the end of 2008 as the level of premiums paid to the
captive insurance company continues to increase.
Derivative
Instruments
We have
established policies and procedures for derivative instruments that have been
approved by our board of directors. These policies and procedures
provide for the prior approval of derivative instruments by our Chief Financial
Officer. From time to time, we may enter into a variety of derivative
financial instruments in connection with the management of our exposure to
fluctuations in foreign exchange rates and interest rates. We do not
enter into derivative transactions for speculative purposes; however, for
accounting purposes, certain transactions may not meet the criteria for hedge
accounting. At December 31, 2007, we had no outstanding foreign
exchange or interest rate derivative instruments.
Results
of Operations
Historical
2007 compared to 2006
Following
is an analysis of our operating results. See “—Overview” for a
definition of revenue earning days, utilization and average daily
revenue.
|
|
Years
ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
%
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
millions, except day amounts and percentages)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
earning days
|
|
|
28,074 |
|
|
|
26,361 |
|
|
|
1,713 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
Utilization
|
|
|
90 |
% |
|
|
84 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
Average
daily revenue
|
|
$ |
211,900 |
|
|
$ |
142,100 |
|
|
$ |
69,800 |
|
|
|
49 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
drilling revenues
|
|
$ |
5,948 |
|
|
$ |
3,745 |
|
|
$ |
2,203 |
|
|
|
59 |
% |
Contract
intangible revenues
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
Other
revenues
|
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
|
|
|
6,377 |
|
|
|
3,882 |
|
|
|
2,495 |
|
|
|
64 |
% |
Operating
and maintenance expense
|
|
|
(2,781 |
) |
|
|
(2,155 |
) |
|
|
(626 |
) |
|
|
29 |
% |
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
|
|
(499 |
) |
|
|
(401 |
) |
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
24 |
% |
General
and administrative expense
|
|
|
(142 |
) |
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
58 |
% |
Gain
from disposal of assets, net
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
(121 |
) |
|
|
30 |
% |
Operating
income
|
|
|
3,239 |
|
|
|
1,641 |
|
|
|
1,598 |
|
|
|
97 |
% |
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
income
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
43 |
% |
Interest
expense, net of amounts capitalized
|
|
|
(172 |
) |
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
50 |
% |
Loss
on retirement of debt
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(100 |
)% |
Other,
net
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
(253 |
) |
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
14 |
% |
Net
income
|
|
$ |
3,131 |
|
|
$ |
1,385 |
|
|
$ |
1,746 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
_________________
“n/a”
means not applicable
“n/m”
means not meaningful
Contract
drilling revenues increased primarily due to higher average daily revenue across
the fleet and as a result of the inclusion of approximately one month of
GlobalSantaFe’s operations. Revenues from 14 rigs that were out of
service for a portion of 2006 contributed $648 million, higher revenues
attributable to the Merger contributed $344 million and reactivation of
three rigs during 2006 contributed to higher utilization and increased revenue
by $245 million. Partially offsetting these increases were lower
revenues of $113 million on eight rigs that were out of service for a
portion of 2007 for shipyard, mobilization or maintenance projects and lower
revenues of $19 million from three rigs sold in 2007.
Contract
intangible revenues of $88 million were recognized as a result of the fair
market valuation of GlobalSantaFe drilling contracts in effect at the time of
the Merger with no corresponding revenue in the prior year.
Other
revenues for the year ended December 31, 2007 increased $204 million
primarily due to an increase of $143 million in integrated services
revenue, a $49 million increase in non-drilling revenue primarily as a
result of the inclusion of approximately one month of GlobalSantaFe’s
operations and a $11 million increase in client reimbursable
revenue.
Operating
and maintenance expenses increased by $626 million primarily from expenses
related to higher labor costs, vendor price increases, increased integrated
service costs of $127 million, higher reimbursable expenses in line with
the higher level of reimbursable revenues, $151 million as a result of the
inclusion of approximately one month of GlobalSantaFe’s operations and
$59 million of accelerated share-based compensation and incremental bonus
expense incurred as a result of the Merger. These increases were
partially offset by the costs incurred in 2006 of $81 million for the
reactivation of three of our rigs with no corresponding expense in 2007 and
$19 million of costs incurred to repair damage sustained during hurricanes
Katrina and Rita in 2006 with no corresponding expense in 2007.
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization increased primarily due to $81 million of
depreciation of property and equipment acquired in the Merger and with the
inclusion of approximately one month of GlobalSantaFe’s operations, including
$7 million of amortization of intangible assets from our drilling
management services and $4 million of depletion of intangible costs from
our oil and gas properties.
The
increase in general and administrative expenses was due primarily to
$45 million higher personnel related expenses, which included
$14 million of accelerated share-based compensation expense and
$6 million of incremental bonus expense incurred as a result of the Merger,
and $4 million from the inclusion of approximately one month of
GlobalSantaFe’s operations. In addition, there was a $6 million
increase in general operating costs, which included rent, utilities, advertising
and public relations expenses.
During
2007, we recognized net gains of $284 million related to rig sales and
disposal of other assets. During 2006, we recognized net gains of
$405 million related to rig sales and disposal of other
assets.
The
increase in interest income was primarily due to higher average cash balances in
2007 compared to 2006.
The
increase in interest expense was primarily attributable to $63 million
resulting from the issuance of new debt, of which $43 million was from
borrowings under the Bridge Loan Facility executed in conjunction with the
Merger. In addition, $3 million was debt assumed in
connection with the Merger and $47 million was from higher borrowings under
our other credit facilities in 2007, compared to 2006. Partially
offsetting this increase was $59 million related to increased capitalized
interest in 2007 compared to 2006.
During
2007, we recognized an $8 million loss related to the early termination of
$12.8 billion aggregate principal amount of our debt, with no comparable
activity in 2006.
The
increase in other, net was primarily due to $277 million in income
recognized in 2007 in connection with the TODCO Tax Sharing Agreement compared
to $51 million recognized in 2006.
We
operate internationally and provide for income taxes based on the tax laws and
rates in the countries in which we operate and earn income. There is
no expected relationship between the provision for income taxes and income
before income taxes. The annual effective tax rate for 2007 and 2006
was 12.5 percent and 18.5 percent, respectively, based on 2007 and
2006 income before income taxes and minority interest after adjusting for
certain items such as a portion of net gains on sales of assets, losses on
retirement of debt and merger-related costs. The tax effect, if any,
of the excluded items as well as settlements of prior year tax liabilities and
changes in prior year tax estimates are all treated as discrete period tax
expenses or benefits. The tax impact of the various discrete items
was a net benefit of $113 million in 2007, resulting in an effective tax
rate of 7.5 percent on earnings before income taxes and minority
interest. The discrete items in 2007 included a benefit of
$43 million resulting from changes in prior year estimates,
$58 million for the reduction of a valuation allowance related to U.S.
foreign tax credits and $15 million from merger-related
costs. For the year ended December 31, 2006, the tax impact of
the various discrete period tax items, which related to the net gains on rig
sales and changes in prior year tax estimates, was a net expense of
$10 million, resulting in an effective tax rate of 13.8 percent on
earnings before income taxes and minority interest.
2007
Pro Forma Operating Results
Our
historical financial operating results include approximately one month of
operating results for the combined company. Although the Merger did
not materially impact 2007 results, it is expected to have a significant impact
on our future results of operations and financial condition.
The
purchase price is comprised of the following (in millions):
Value
of Transocean shares issued to GlobalSantaFe shareholders
|
|
$ |
12,229 |
|
Cash
consideration to GlobalSantaFe shareholders
|
|
|
5,094 |
|
Fair
value of converted GlobalSantaFe stock options and stock appreciation
rights
|
|
|
157 |
|
Transocean
transaction costs
|
|
|
35 |
|
Total
purchase price
|
|
$ |
17,515 |
|
Our
unaudited pro forma consolidated results for the year ended December 31,
2007, reflected income from continuing operations of $3.8 billion or $16.95
per diluted share on pro forma operating revenues of
$10.0 billion. The pro forma operating results assume the
Transactions were completed as of January 1, 2007 (see Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements—Note 4―Merger with GlobalSantaFe
Corporation). These pro forma results do not reflect the
effects of reduced depreciation expense related to conforming the estimated
lives of GlobalSantaFe rigs and the elimination of certain allocated costs from
GlobalSantaFe. The pro forma financial data should not be relied on
as an indication of operating results that we would have achieved had the
Transactions taken place earlier or of the future results that we may
achieve.
The
purchase price allocation for the Merger included the following
(in millions):
Historical
net book value of GlobalSantaFe
|
|
$ |
5,776 |
|
Fair
value adjustment of property and equipment—contract drilling services,
net
|
|
|
7,385 |
|
Fair
value adjustment of property and equipment—oil and gas properties,
net
|
|
|
55 |
|
Fair
value adjustment of materials and supplies, net
|
|
|
138 |
|
Fair
value adjustment of defined benefit plans, net
|
|
|
31 |
|
Elimination
of historical deferred revenues associated with contract drilling
services
|
|
|
107 |
|
Elimination
of historical deferred expenses associated with contract drilling
services
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
Adjustment
to deferred income taxes resulting from various pro forma adjustments,
net
|
|
|
(530 |
) |
Severance
costs for legacy GlobalSantaFe affected employees.
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
Adjustment
to goodwill—contract drilling services
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
Adjustment
to goodwill—drilling management services
|
|
|
260 |
|
Adjustment
to goodwill— oil and gas properties
|
|
|
23 |
|
Drilling
contract intangibles, net
|
|
|
(1,303 |
) |
Other
intangible items, net
|
|
|
239 |
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
Total
purchase price
|
|
$ |
17,515 |
|
We
recorded additional goodwill of approximately $6.0 billion, representing the
excess of the purchase price over estimated fair value of net assets acquired
after eliminating $333 million of historical goodwill existing in the historical
net book value of GlobalSantaFe at the time of the Merger. At
December 31, 2007, this goodwill represented
approximately 16 percent of total assets and 45 percent of total
shareholders' equity. The goodwill will be tested for impairment at
least annually at the reporting unit level (see Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements—Note 2—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies).
In
connection with the Merger, we acquired drilling contracts for future contract
drilling services of GlobalSantaFe. These contracts include fixed
dayrates and dayrates that may be above or below dayrates as of the date of the
Merger for similar contracts. We adjusted these drilling contracts to
fair value as of the date of the Merger, and after amortizing $88 million in
contract intangible revenues in December 2007, the remaining carrying values
were $179 million recorded in other assets and
$1,394 million recorded in other long-term liabilities on our
consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2007. We recognize
the contract intangible revenues over the respective contract period,
amortizing the balances using the straight-line method. The following
table provides our forecast of amortization of non-cash contract intangible
revenues.
Years ending December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
689 |
|
2009
|
|
|
281 |
|
2010
|
|
|
98 |
|
2011
|
|
|
45 |
|
2012
|
|
|
42 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
60 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,215 |
|
Additionally,
we identified other intangible assets associated with drilling management
services, including the trade name, customer relationships and contract
backlog. We consider the ADTI trade name to be an indefinite life
intangible asset, which will not be amortized and will be subject to an annual
impairment test. The customer relationships and contract backlog have
definite lifespans and will each be amortized over their useful lives of
15 years and three months, respectively.
Historical
2006 compared to 2005
Following
is an analysis of our operating results. See “—Overview” for a
definition of revenue earning days, utilization and average daily
revenue.
|
|
Years
ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
%
Change
|
|
|
|
(In
millions, except day amounts and percentages)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
earning days
|
|
|
26,361 |
|
|
|
26,224 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
Utilization
|
|
|
84 |
% |
|
|
79 |
% |
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
Average
daily revenue
|
|
$ |
142,100 |
|
|
$ |
105,100 |
|
|
$ |
37,000 |
|
|
|
35 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
drilling revenues
|
|
$ |
3,745 |
|
|
$ |
2,757 |
|
|
$ |
988 |
|
|
|
36 |
% |
Other
revenues
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
3,882 |
|
|
|
2,892 |
|
|
|
990 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
Operating
and maintenance expense
|
|
|
(2,155 |
) |
|
|
(1,720 |
) |
|
|
(435 |
) |
|
|
25 |
% |
Depreciation
|
|
|
(401 |
) |
|
|
(406 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(1 |
)% |
General
and administrative expense
|
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
(75 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
20 |
% |
Gain
from disposal of assets, net
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
376 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
1,641 |
|
|
|
720 |
|
|
|
921 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
income
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
Interest
expense, net of capitalized interest
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
(111 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
4 |
% |
Gain
from TODCO stock sales
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
(165 |
) |
|
|
(100 |
)% |
Loss
on retirement of debt
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
(100 |
)% |
Other,
net
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
n/m |
|
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
(87 |
) |
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
n/m |
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
1,385 |
|
|
$ |
716 |
|
|
$ |
669 |
|
|
|
93 |
% |
_________________
“n/a”
means not applicable
“n/m”
means not meaningful
The
increase in contract drilling revenues was primarily due to higher average daily
revenue in all asset classes and to the reactivation of four Midwater Floaters
and one High-Specification Floater in 2005 and 2006. Partially
offsetting this increase were lower revenues on four rigs that were out of
service in 2006 for shipyard or maintenance projects and lower revenues from one
rig which was sold in 2006.
Other
revenues for the year ended December 31, 2006 increased $2 million due
to a $23 million increase in client reimbursable revenue partially offset
by decreased integrated services revenue of $21 million.
Operating
and maintenance expenses increased by $435 million primarily from shipyard
projects, rig reactivations, higher labor costs and vendor price increases
resulting in higher labor and rig maintenance costs. This increase
included $76 million for reactivation costs associated with the Transocean Prospect,
Transocean Winner
and C. Kirk Rhein, Jr.
and $19 million of costs incurred to repair damages sustained during
hurricanes Katrina and Rita on the Transocean Marianas and
the Deepwater Nautilus.
The
increase in general and administrative expenses of $15 million was due
primarily to $12 million higher personnel related expenses and
$4 million higher legal fees, including costs related to the TODCO dispute
and patent litigation with GlobalSantaFe.
During
2006, we recognized net gains of $405 million related to rig sales and
disposal of other assets. During 2005, we recognized net gains of
$29 million related to rig sales and disposal of other assets.
The
increase in interest expense was primarily attributable to $39 million
resulting from higher debt levels arising from the issuance of debt and
borrowings under credit facilities in 2006, with no comparable activity in
2005. Partially offsetting this increase were reductions of
$19 million associated with debt that was redeemed, retired or repurchased
in 2005 and $16 million related to capitalized interest in
2006.
During
2005, we recognized gains of $165 million from the disposition of our then
remaining investment in TODCO with no comparable activity in 2006.
During
2005, we recognized a $7 million loss related to the early redemption and
repurchase of $782 million aggregate principal amount of our debt, with no
comparable activity in 2006.
The
increase in other, net was primarily due to $40 million more income
recognized in 2006 as compared to 2005 related to the tax sharing agreement with
TODCO and $6 million related to extension fees on the sale of the Transocean Wildcat in
2006.
We
operate internationally and provide for income taxes based on the tax laws and
rates in the countries in which we operate and earn income. There is
no expected relationship between the provision for income taxes and income
before income taxes. The annual effective tax rate for 2006 and 2005
was 18.5 percent and 16.8 percent, respectively, based on 2006 and
2005 income before income taxes and minority interest after adjusting for
certain items such as a portion of net gains on sales of assets, items related
to the disposition of TODCO and losses on retirements of debt. The
tax effect, if any, of the excluded items as well as settlements of prior year
tax liabilities and changes in prior year tax estimates are all treated as
discrete period tax expenses or benefits. The tax impact of the
various discrete period tax items, which related to the net gains on rig sales
and changes in prior year tax estimates, was a net tax expense of
$10 million in 2006, resulting in an effective tax rate of
13.8 percent on earnings before income taxes and minority
interest. The tax impact of the various discrete items was a net tax
benefit of $14 million in 2005, resulting in an effective tax rate of
10.8 percent on earnings before income taxes and minority
interest. The discrete items in 2005 included a benefit of
$17 million for the reduction in a valuation allowance related to U.K. net
operating losses and a benefit related to the resolution of various tax audits,
partially offset by expenses related to asset dispositions, a deferred tax
charge attributable to the restructuring of certain non-U.S. operations and
items related to the disposition of TODCO.
Critical
Accounting Estimates
Our
discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are
based upon our consolidated financial statements. This discussion
should be read in conjunction with disclosures included in the notes to our
consolidated financial statements related to estimates, contingencies and new
accounting pronouncements. Significant accounting policies are
discussed in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements. The
preparation of our financial statements requires us to make estimates and
judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues,
expenses and related disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates,
including those related to bad debts, materials and supplies obsolescence,
investments, property and equipment, intangible assets and goodwill, income
taxes, workers insurance, share-based compensation, pensions and other
post-retirement and employment benefits and contingent
liabilities. We base our estimates on historical experience and on
various other assumptions that we believe are reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about
the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from
other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under
different assumptions or conditions.
We
believe the following are our most critical accounting
policies. These policies require significant judgments and estimates
used in the preparation of our consolidated financial
statements. Management has discussed each of these critical
accounting policies and estimates with the audit committee of the board of
directors.
Income taxes—We are a Cayman
Islands company. As such, our earnings are not subject to income tax
in the Cayman Islands because the country does not levy a corporate tax on
income. We operate through our various subsidiaries in a number of
countries throughout the world. Income taxes have been provided based
upon the tax laws and rates in the countries in which operations are conducted
and income is earned. There is no expected relationship between the
provision for or benefit from income taxes and income or loss before taxes
because the countries have taxation regimes that vary not only with respect to
the nominal tax rate, but also in terms of the availability of deductions,
credits and other benefits. Variations also arise when income earned
and taxed in a particular country or countries fluctuates from year to
year.
Our
annual tax provision is based on expected taxable income, statutory rates and
tax planning opportunities available to us in the various jurisdictions in which
we operate. The determination and evaluation of our annual tax
provision and tax positions involves the interpretation of the tax laws in the
various jurisdictions in which we operate and requires significant judgment and
the use of estimates and assumptions regarding significant future events such as
the amount, timing and character of income, deductions and tax
credits. Changes in tax laws, regulations, agreements, and treaties,
foreign currency exchange restrictions or our level of operations or
profitability in each jurisdiction would impact our tax liability in any given
year. We also operate in many jurisdictions where the tax laws
relating to the offshore drilling industry are not well
developed. While our annual tax provision is based on the best
information available at the time, a number of years may elapse before the
ultimate tax liabilities in the various jurisdictions are
determined.
We
maintain liabilities for estimated tax exposures in jurisdictions of
operation. Our annual tax provision includes the impact of income tax
provisions and benefits for changes to liabilities that we consider appropriate,
as well as related interest. Tax exposure items primarily include
potential challenges to permanent establishment positions, intercompany pricing,
disposition transactions and the applicability or rate of various withholding
taxes. These exposures are resolved primarily through the settlement
of audits within these tax jurisdictions or by judicial means, but can also be
affected by changes in applicable tax law or other factors, which could cause us
to conclude a revision of past estimates is appropriate. We are
currently undergoing examinations in a number of taxing jurisdictions for
various fiscal years. We believe that an appropriate liability has
been established for estimated exposures. However, actual results may
differ materially from these estimates. We review these liabilities
quarterly and to the extent the audits or other events result in an adjustment
to the liability accrued for a prior year, the effect will be recognized in the
period of the event.
We do not
believe it is possible to reasonably estimate the potential impact of changes to
the assumptions and estimates identified because the resulting change to our tax
liability, if any, is dependent on numerous factors which cannot be reasonably
estimated. These include, among others, the amount and nature of
additional taxes potentially asserted by local tax authorities; the willingness
of local tax authorities to negotiate a fair settlement through an
administrative process; the impartiality of the local courts; and the potential
for changes in the tax paid to one country to either produce, or fail to
produce, an offsetting tax change in other countries.
Judgment,
assumptions and estimates are required in determining whether deferred tax
assets will be realized in full or in part. When it is estimated to
be more likely than not that all or some portion of specific deferred tax
assets, such as foreign tax credit carryovers or net operating loss
carryforwards, will not be realized, a valuation allowance must be established
for the amount of the deferred tax assets that are considered at the time to be
unrealizable. As of December 31, 2005, the valuation allowance
against certain deferred tax assets, primarily U.S. foreign tax credit
carryforwards and certain net operating losses, was in the amount of
$48 million, and we increased the valuation allowance to $59 million
at the end of 2006. Due to a change of circumstances in 2007, we now
believe that we will realize the benefits of our foreign tax credits in the
U.S. As such, we released the entire associated valuation allowance
against U.S. foreign tax credits of approximately
$58 million. See “Results of Operations—Historical 2007 compared
to 2006” and “Results of Operations—Historical 2006 compared to 2005.” We
continually evaluate strategies that could allow for the future utilization of
our deferred tax assets.
We have
not provided for deferred taxes on the unremitted earnings of certain
subsidiaries that are permanently reinvested. Should we make a
distribution from the unremitted earnings of these subsidiaries, we may be
required to record additional taxes. Because we cannot predict when,
if at all, we will make a distribution of these unremitted earnings, we are
unable to make a determination of the amount of unrecognized deferred tax
liability.
We have
not provided for deferred taxes in circumstances where we expect that, due to
the structure of operations and applicable law, the operations in that
jurisdiction will not give rise to future tax consequences. Should
our expectations change regarding the expected future tax consequences, we may
be required to record additional deferred taxes that could have a material
effect on our consolidated statement of financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
Goodwill impairment—We
perform a test for impairment of our goodwill annually as of October 1 as
prescribed by SFAS 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets. Because our business is cyclical in nature, goodwill
could be significantly impaired depending on when the assessment is performed in
the business cycle. The fair value of our reporting units is based on
a blend of estimated discounted cash flows, publicly traded company multiples
and acquisition multiples. Estimated discounted cash flows are based
on projected utilization and dayrates. Publicly traded company
multiples and acquisition multiples are derived from information on traded
shares and analysis of recent acquisitions in the marketplace, respectively, for
companies with operations similar to ours. Changes in the assumptions
used in the fair value calculation could result in an estimated reporting unit
fair value that is below the carrying value, which may give rise to an
impairment of goodwill. In addition to the annual review, we also
test for impairment should an event occur or circumstances change that may
indicate a reduction in the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying
value.
Property and equipment—Our
property and equipment represents approximately 61 percent of our total
assets. We determine the carrying value of these assets based on our
property and equipment accounting policies, which incorporate our estimates,
assumptions, and judgments relative to capitalized costs, useful lives and
salvage values of our rigs.
Our
property and equipment accounting policies are designed to depreciate our assets
over their estimated useful lives. The assumptions and judgments we
use in determining the estimated useful lives of our rigs reflect both
historical experience and expectations regarding future operations, utilization
and performance of our assets. The use of different estimates,
assumptions and judgments in the establishment of property and equipment
accounting policies, especially those involving the useful lives of our rigs,
would likely result in materially different net book values of our assets and
results of operations.
In
addition, our policies are designed to appropriately and consistently capitalize
costs incurred to enhance, improve and extend the useful lives of our assets and
expense those costs incurred to repair and maintain the existing condition of
our rigs. Capitalized costs increase the carrying values and
depreciation expense of the related assets, which would also impact our results
of operations.
Useful
lives of rigs are difficult to estimate due to a variety of factors, including
technological advances that impact the methods or cost of oil and gas
exploration and development, changes in market or economic conditions, and
changes in laws or regulations affecting the drilling industry. We
evaluate the remaining useful lives of our rigs when certain events occur that
directly impact our assessment of the remaining useful lives of the rig and
include changes in operating condition, functional capability and market and
economic factors. We also consider major capital upgrades required to
perform certain contracts and the long-term impact of those upgrades on the
future marketability when assessing the useful lives of individual
rigs. A one-year increase in the useful lives of all of our rigs
would cause a decrease in our annual depreciation expense of approximately
$154 million while a one-year decrease would cause an increase in our
annual depreciation expense of approximately $211 million.
We review
our property and equipment for impairment when events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets or asset groups
may be impaired or when reclassifications are made between property and
equipment and assets held for sale as prescribed by Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 144, Accounting for Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. Asset impairment evaluations
are based on estimated undiscounted cash flows for the assets being
evaluated. Supply and demand are the key drivers of rig idle time and
our ability to contract our rigs at economical rates. During periods
of an oversupply, it is not uncommon for us to have rigs idled for extended
periods of time, which could be an indication that an asset group may be
impaired. Our rigs are equipped to operate in geographic regions
throughout the world. Because our rigs are mobile, we may move rigs
from an oversupplied market sector to one that is more lucrative and
undersupplied when it is economical to do so. As such, our rigs are
considered to be interchangeable within classes or asset groups and accordingly,
our impairment evaluation is made by asset group. We consider our
asset groups to be High-Specification Floaters, Midwater Floaters,
High-Specification Jackups, Standard Jackups and Other Rigs.
An
impairment loss is recorded in the period in which it is determined that the
aggregate carrying amount of assets within an asset group is not
recoverable. This requires us to make judgments regarding long-term
forecasts of future revenues and costs related to the assets subject to
review. In turn, these forecasts are uncertain in that they require
assumptions about demand for our services, future market conditions and
technological developments. Significant and unanticipated changes to
these assumptions could require a provision for impairment in a future
period. Given the nature of these evaluations and their application
to specific asset groups and specific times, it is not possible to reasonably
quantify the impact of changes in these assumptions.
Fair Value of Assets
Acquired—The Merger has been accounted for using the purchase method of
accounting as defined under SFAS No. 141, Business
Combinations. Accounting for this acquisition has resulted in
the capitalization of the cost in excess of fair value of the net assets
acquired as goodwill. We estimated the fair values of the assets
acquired in the Merger as of the date of acquisition, and these estimates are
subject to adjustment based on our final assessments of the fair value of
property and equipment, intangible assets, liabilities, evaluation of tax
positions and contingencies. We expect to complete these assessments
within one year of the date of the Merger. See Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements—Note 4―Merger with
GlobalSantaFe Corporation.
Our
estimates of fair value of property and equipment are subjective based on the
age and condition of rigs acquired and the determination of the remaining useful
lives of the rigs. We estimated the fair values of rigs acquired
based on input from a third-party broker, and values were appraised based on
perceptions of potential buyers and sellers in the market, which generally
renders a low trading volume of rigs in the secondary market. The
valuation of a rig can also vary based on the rig design, condition and
particular equipment configuration, and it can be difficult to determine the
fair value based on the cyclicality of our business, demand for offshore
drilling rigs in different markets and changes in economic
conditions. We have currently classified several rigs as held for
sale, and the ultimate value received may differ from our estimate of the fair
values. Changes in the values of rigs or the useful lives would
affect our calculations of depreciation and our recorded goodwill.
In
connection with the Merger, we acquired drilling contracts for future contract
drilling services at fixed dayrates that may be above or below market dayrates
for similar contracts as of the date of the Merger. We adjusted these
drilling contracts to fair value based on the discounted cash flow associated
with each contract and the estimated market expectations for dayrates that could
be charged over the same contractual terms. The market for drilling
contracts is limited, identifying comparable contract rates in the market and
determining the fair value is subjective and assumptions used to estimate market
value and the discounted cash flow associated with the contract can affect the
assigned value. These assumptions include differences in capabilities
of rigs, cost differentials between locations for similar rigs, cost escalations
or tax reimbursements that may or may not be included in the dayrate and
assumptions of rig efficiency. Differences in estimated market values
of the contracts could have a material impact on the amortization of the
contract intangible recognized in contract intangible revenues on our
consolidated statement of operations.
Pension and other postretirement
benefits—Our defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit
(retiree life insurance and medical benefits) obligations and the related
benefit costs are accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 158, Employers’ Accounting for Defined
Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans, an amendment of FASB Statements
No. 87, 88, 106 and 132(R) (“SFAS 158”), SFAS No. 87,
Employers’ Accounting for
Pensions (“SFAS 87”) and SFAS No. 106, Employers’ Accounting for
Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions. Pension and
postretirement costs and obligations are actuarially determined and are affected
by assumptions including expected return on plan assets, discount rates,
compensation increases, employee turnover rates and health care cost trend
rates. We evaluate our assumptions periodically and make adjustments
to these assumptions and the recorded liabilities as necessary.
Two of
the most critical assumptions are the expected long-term rate of return on plan
assets and the assumed discount rate. We periodically evaluate our
assumptions regarding the estimated long-term rate of return on plan assets
based on historical experience and future expectations on investment returns,
which are calculated by our third-party investment advisor utilizing the asset
allocation classes held by the plans’ portfolios. As of
January 1, 2008, based on market conditions and investment strategies, we
reduced our expected long-term rate of return for our U.S. plans from
9.00 percent to 8.50 percent, which will result in an increase of
approximately $3 million in our expected pension expense for
2008. For determining the discount rate for our U.S. plans, we
utilize a yield curve approach based on Aa corporate bonds and the expected
timing of future benefit payments. Changes in these and other
assumptions used in the actuarial computations could impact our projected
benefit obligations, pension liabilities, pension expense and other
comprehensive income. We base our determination of pension expense on
a market-related valuation of assets that reduces year-to-year
volatility. This market-related valuation recognizes investment gains
or losses over a five-year period from the year in which they
occur. Investment gains or losses for this purpose are the difference
between the expected return calculated using the market-related value of assets
and the actual return based on the market-related value of assets.
For each
percentage point the expected long-term rate of return assumption is lowered,
pension expense would increase by approximately $9 million. For
each one-half percentage point the discount rate is lowered, pension expense
would increase by approximately $7 million. See “―Retirement Plans
and Other Postemployment Benefits.”
Contingent liabilities—We
establish reserves for estimated loss contingencies when we believe a loss is
probable and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Our
contingent liability reserves relate primarily to litigation, personal injury
claims and potential tax assessments (see “―Income
Taxes”). Revisions to contingent liability reserves are reflected in
income in the period in which different facts or information become known or
circumstances that affect our previous assumptions with respect to the
likelihood or amount of loss change. Reserves for contingent
liabilities are based upon our assumptions and estimates regarding the probable
outcome of the matter. Should the outcome differ from our assumptions
and estimates or other events result in a material adjustment to the accrued
estimated reserves, revisions to the estimated reserves for contingent
liabilities would be required and would be recognized in the period the new
information becomes known.
The
estimation of the liability for personal injury claims includes the application
of a loss development factor to reserves for known claims in order to estimate
our ultimate liability for claims incurred during the period. The
loss development method is based on the assumption that historical patterns of
loss development will continue in the future. Actual losses may vary
from the estimates computed with these reserve development factors as they are
dependent upon future contingent events such as court decisions and
settlements.
Share-Based
Compensation
On
January 1, 2006, we adopted the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(“FASB”) SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment
(“SFAS 123R”), which is a revision of SFAS No.123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation (“SFAS 123”). We previously accounted for
share-based compensation in accordance with SFAS 123. Adoption
of the new standards did not have a material effect on our consolidated
statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Retirement
Plans and Other Postemployment Benefits
On
December 31, 2006, we adopted the recognition and disclosure provisions of
SFAS 158, which require the recognition of the funded status of the Defined
Benefit and Postretirement Benefits Other Than Pensions (“OPEB”) plans on the
December 31, 2006 balance sheet with a corresponding adjustment to
accumulated other comprehensive income. The adjustment to accumulated
other comprehensive income at adoption represents the net unrecognized actuarial
losses, unrecognized prior service costs, and unrecognized transition obligation
remaining from the initial application of SFAS 87, all of which were
previously netted against the plans' funded status in the balance
sheet. These amounts will be subsequently recognized as net periodic
pension cost pursuant to our historical accounting policy for amortizing such
amounts. Further, actuarial gains and losses that arise in subsequent
periods and are not recognized as net periodic pension cost in the same periods
will be recognized as a component of other comprehensive
income. Those amounts will be subsequently recognized as a component
of net periodic pension cost on the same basis as the amounts recognized in
accumulated other comprehensive income.
The
incremental effects of adopting SFAS 158 on the consolidated balance sheet
at December 31, 2006 are presented in the following table. The
adoption of SFAS 158 did not affect the consolidated statement of
operations for the year ended December 31, 2006, or any prior period
presented, and it will not affect our operating results in future
periods. The incremental effects of adopting the provisions of
SFAS 158 on the consolidated balance sheet are presented as
follows:
|
|
At
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
Prior
to adopting SFAS 158
|
|
|
Effect
of adopting SFAS 158
|
|
|
As
reported
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
assets
|
|
$ |
322 |
|
|
$ |
(23 |
) |
|
$ |
299 |
|
Other
current liabilities
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
54 |
|
Other
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
343 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Defined Benefit Pension
Plans—We maintain a qualified defined benefit pension plan (the
“Retirement Plan”) covering substantially all U.S. employees, and an unfunded
plan (the “Supplemental Benefit Plan”) to provide certain eligible employees
with benefits in excess of those allowed under the Retirement
Plan. In conjunction with the R&B Falcon merger, we acquired
three defined benefit pension plans two funded and one unfunded (the “Frozen
Plans”), that were frozen prior to the merger for which benefits no longer
accrue but the pension obligations have not been fully paid out. We
refer to the Retirement Plan, the Supplemental Benefit Plan and the Frozen Plans
collectively as the “U.S. Plans.”
In
connection with the Merger, we assumed four defined benefit plans covering
substantially all legacy GlobalSantaFe U.S. employees and a frozen defined
benefit plan that provides retirement benefits to four former members of the
board of directors of Global Marine Inc. (the “Assumed U.S. Pension
Plans”). The frozen defined benefit plan is closed to additional
participants and no additional benefits are being accrued under this
plan. In addition, we assumed a defined benefit plan in the U.K. (the
“Assumed U.K. Pension Plan,” and together with the Assumed U.S. Pension Plans,
the “Assumed Pension Plans”), covering substantially all non-U.S. legacy
GlobalSantaFe employees.
In
connection with the Merger, the Supplemental Benefit Plan was amended to provide
employees terminated under a severance plan with age, earnings and service
benefits described in the Severance Plan, as defined below, and similar
severance arrangements (“Severance Credits”). The Supplemental
Benefit Plan provides credit for age, service and earnings during the period of
time after termination during which severance is paid (the “Salary Continuation
Period”), or if an eligible employee receives severance in a lump sum, the lump
sum is considered to be paid out over the Salary Continuation Period in order to
provide the value of the Severance Credits. The Supplemental Benefit
Plan was also amended to provide for a lump-sum form of payment within 90 days
after a participant’s termination of employment and a six-month delay on
benefits payable to “specified employees” under Section 409A of the Internal
Revenue Code.
Effective
November 27, 2007, one of the Assumed Pension Plans, the GlobalSantaFe
Pension Equalization Plan (the “PEP”), was also amended to provide certain
terminated employees under the Severance Plan with Severance
Credits. The PEP provides credit for age, service and earnings during
the Salary Continuation Period, or if an eligible employee receives severance in
a lump sum, the lump sum is considered to be paid out over the Salary
Continuation Period in order to provide the value of the Severance
Credits. The PEP was also amended to provide for a lump-sum form of
payment within 90 days after a participant’s termination of employment and a
six-month delay on benefits payable to “specified employees” under Section 409A
of the Internal Revenue Code. In addition, the amendment specifies
that terminated employees who are ineligible to receive Severance Credits under
the legacy GlobalSantaFe qualified defined benefit plan will receive Severance
Credits under the PEP.
In
addition, we provide several defined benefit plans, primarily group pension
schemes with life insurance companies covering our Norway operations and two
unfunded plans covering certain of our employees and former employees (the
“Norway Plans”). Our contributions to the Norway Plans are determined
primarily by the respective life insurance companies based on the terms of the
plan. For the insurance-based plans, annual premium payments are
considered to represent a reasonable approximation of the service costs of
benefits earned during the period. We also have unfunded defined
benefit plans (the “Other Non-U.S. Plans”) that provide retirement and severance
benefits for certain of our Indonesian, Nigerian and Egyptian
employees. The benefits we provide under defined benefit pension
plans are comprised of the U.S. Plans, the Norway Plans, the Other Non-U.S.
Plans and the Assumed Pension Plans (collectively, the “Transocean
Plans”).
|
|
U.S. Plans
|
|
|
Norway Plans
|
|
|
Other Non- U.S. Plans
|
|
|
Assumed U.S. Pension Plans
|
|
|
Assumed U.K. Pension Plans
|
|
|
Total Transocean Plans
|
|
|
Accumulated
Benefit Obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At
December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
265 |
|
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
404 |
|
|
$ |
207 |
|
|
$ |
939 |
|
|
At
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected
Benefit Obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At
December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
313 |
|
|
$ |
71 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
444 |
|
|
$ |
228 |
|
|
$ |
1,065 |
|
|
At
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
351 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
Value of Plan Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At
December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
235 |
|
|
$ |
60 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
397 |
|
|
$ |
247 |
|
|
$ |
939 |
|
|
At
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded
Status
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At
December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
(78 |
) |
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
(9 |
) |
|
$ |
(47 |
) |
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
(126 |
) |
|
At
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
(53 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Periodic Benefit Cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
1
|
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
(a)
|
Year
ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
26 |
|
(a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change
in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
$ |
(9 |
) |
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employer
Contributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
Assumptions – Benefit Obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount
rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
6.02 |
% |
|
|
5.30 |
% |
|
|
12.90 |
% |
|
|
6.19 |
% |
|
|
5.90 |
% |
|
|
6.07 |
% |
(b)
|
At
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
5.79 |
% |
|
|
4.80 |
% |
|
|
12.21 |
% |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
5.72 |
% |
(b)
|
Rate
of compensation increase
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
4.18 |
% |
|
|
4.50 |
% |
|
|
11.17 |
% |
|
|
4.74 |
% |
|
|
4.40 |
% |
|
|
4.57 |
% |
(b)
|
At
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
4.19 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
10.29 |
% |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
4.27 |
% |
(b)
|
|
|
U.S.
Plans
|
|
|
Norway
Plans
|
|
|
Other
Non- U.S. Plans
|
|
|
Assumed
U.S. Pension Plans
|
|
|
Assumed
U.K. Pension Plans
|
|
|
Total
Transocean Plans
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
Assumptions – Net Periodic Benefit Cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount
rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2007
|
|
|
5.79 |
% |
|
|
4.80 |
% |
|
|
13.27 |
% |
|
|
6.06 |
% |
|
|
5.90 |
% |
|
|
5.90 |
% |
(b)
|
Year
ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
5.58 |
% |
|
|
5.50 |
% |
|
|
13.00 |
% |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
5.69 |
% |
(b)
|
Expected
long-term rate of return on plan assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2007
|
|
|
9.00 |
% |
|
|
5.40 |
% |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
9.00 |
% |
|
|
7.50 |
% |
|
|
8.40 |
% |
(c)
|
Year
ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
9.00 |
% |
|
|
6.00 |
% |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
8.49 |
% |
(c)
|
Rate
of compensation increase
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2007
|
|
|
4.18 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
11.17 |
% |
|
|
4.75 |
% |
|
|
4.40 |
% |
|
|
4.59 |
% |
(b)
|
Year
ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
4.71 |
% |
|
|
3.50 |
% |
|
|
10.29 |
% |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
4.54 |
% |
(b)
|
______________
(a)
|
Pension
costs were reduced by expected returns on plan assets of $26 million
and $20 million for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively.
|
(b)
|
Weighted-average based on
relative average projected benefit obligation for the
year.
|
(c)
|
Weighted-average based on
relative average fair value of plan assets for the
year.
|
For the
funded U.S. Plans, our funding policy consists of reviewing the funded status of
these plans annually and contributing an amount at least equal to the minimum
contribution required under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(“ERISA”). Employer contributions to the funded U.S. Plans are based
on actuarial computations that establish the minimum contribution required under
ERISA and the maximum deductible contribution for income tax
purposes. We contributed $14 million and $5 million to the
funded U.S. Plans during 2007 and 2006, respectively. We contributed
less than $1 million to the unfunded U.S. Plans during each of 2007 and
2006 to fund benefit payments.
Our
contributions to the Transocean Plans in 2007 and 2006, respectively, were
funded from our cash flows from operations.
Net
periodic benefit cost for the Transocean Plans included the following components
(in millions):
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Components
of Net Periodic Benefit Cost (a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service
cost
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
$ |
20 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Expected
return on plan assets
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
Recognized
net actuarial losses
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Amortization
of prior service cost
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Amortization
of net transition obligation
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
SFAS 88
settlements/curtailments
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
– |
|
Benefit
cost
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
26 |
|
______________
(a) Amounts
are before income tax effect.
Plan
assets of the funded Transocean Plans have been favorably impacted by a rise in
world equity markets during 2007 and an allocation of approximately
60 percent of plan assets to equity securities. Debt securities
and other investments also experienced increased values, but to a lesser
extent. During 2007, the market value of the investments in the
Transocean Plans increased by $12 million, or
1.2 percent. The increase is due to net investment gains of
$10 million, primarily in the funded U.S. Plans, resulting from the
favorable performance of equity markets in 2007 and $22 million of employer
contributions. These increases were offset by benefit plan payments
of $17 million from these plans and $3 million of unfavorable foreign
currency exchange rate changes. We expect to contribute
$26 million to the Transocean Plans in 2008. These contributions
are comprised of an estimated $10 million to meet minimum funding
requirements for the funded U.S. Plans, $2 million to fund expected benefit
payments for the unfunded U.S. Plans and Other Non-U.S. Plans and an estimated
$7 million each for the funded Norway Plans and the Assumed U.K.
Plans. We expect the required contributions will be funded from cash
flow from operations.
The
following pension benefits payments are expected to be paid by the Transocean
Plans (in millions):
Years ending December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
2009
|
|
|
38 |
|
2010
|
|
|
39 |
|
2011
|
|
|
42 |
|
2012
|
|
|
44 |
|
2013-2017
|
|
|
285 |
|
We
account for the Transocean Plans in accordance with SFAS 87 as amended by
SFAS 158. These statements require us to calculate our pension
expense and liabilities using assumptions based on a market-related valuation of
assets, which reduces year-to-year volatility using actuarial
assumptions. Changes in these assumptions can result in different
expense and liability amounts, and future actual experience can differ from
these assumptions.
In
accordance with SFAS 87, changes in pension obligations and assets may not
be immediately recognized as pension costs in the statement of operations but
generally are recognized in future years over the remaining average service
period of plan participants. As such, significant portions of pension
costs recorded in any period may not reflect the actual level of benefit
payments provided to plan participants.
Two of
the most critical assumptions used in calculating our pension expense and
liabilities are the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets and the
assumed discount rate. In 2006, the increase in fair value of plan
assets resulted in a decrease in the minimum pension liability of
$25 million. At December 31, 2006, there was no minimum
pension liability included in accumulated other comprehensive income due to our
adoption of SFAS 158. The minimum pension liability adjustment
did not impact our results of operations during the years ended
December 31, 2005, or 2006, nor did these adjustments affect our ability to
meet any financial covenants related to our debt.
Our
expected long-term rate of return on plan assets for funded U.S. Plans was
9.0 percent as of December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively. The expected long-term rate of return on plan assets
was developed by reviewing each plan’s target asset allocation and asset class
long-term rate of return expectations. We regularly review our actual
asset allocation and periodically rebalance plan assets as
appropriate. For the U.S. Plans, we discounted our future pension
obligations using a rate of 6.02 percent at December 31, 2007,
5.8 percent at December 31, 2006 and 5.5 percent at
December 31, 2005.
We expect
pension expense related to the Transocean Plans for 2008 to increase by
approximately $13 million primarily due to the assumption of seven defined
benefit plans in conjunction with the Merger, offset by a change in the
demographic assumptions for future periods and plan asset growth realized in
2007.
Future
changes in plan asset returns, assumed discount rates and various other factors
related to the pension plans will impact our future pension expense and
liabilities. We cannot predict with certainty what these factors will
be in the future.
Postretirement Benefits Other Than
Pensions—We have several unfunded
contributory and noncontributory OPEB plans covering substantially all of our
U.S. employees. Funding of benefit payments for plan participants
will be made as costs are incurred. In connection with the Merger, we
assumed a contributory OPEB plan covering substantially all legacy GlobalSantaFe
U.S. employees (the “Assumed OPEB Plan”).
Net
periodic benefit cost for these other postretirement plans and their components,
including service cost, interest cost, amortization of prior service cost and
recognized net actuarial losses were less than $2 million for each of the
years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006.
The
following postretirement benefits payments are expected to be paid by our
postretirement benefits plans (in millions):
Years ending December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
2009
|
|
|
2 |
|
2010
|
|
|
2 |
|
2011
|
|
|
2 |
|
2012
|
|
|
2 |
|
2013-2017
|
|
|
11 |
|
Deferred Compensation Plan—In
connection with the Merger, we assumed a deferred compensation plan of
GlobalSantaFe (the “Assumed Deferred Plan”). Eligible employees who
enrolled in this plan could defer any or all of the amount of their annual
salary in excess the annual IRS maximum recognizable compensation limit and up
to 100 percent of their awards under GlobalSantaFe’s annual incentive
plan. Effective January 1, 2008, this plan was
frozen.
Severance Plan—In connection
with the Merger, we established a special transition severance plan for certain
employees on the U.S. payroll involuntarily terminated during the period from
November 27, 2007 through November 27, 2009 (the “Severance
Plan”).
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
We had no
off-balance sheet arrangements as of December 31, 2007.
Related
Party Transactions
TPDI—In April 2007, we
entered into an agreement with Pacific Drilling, whereby we acquired exclusive
marketing rights for two Ultra-Deepwater drillships to be named Deepwater Pacific 1
and Deepwater Pacific 2,
which are currently under construction, as well as an option to purchase a
50 percent interest in a newly formed joint venture company through which
we and Pacific Drilling would own the drillships.
In early
October 2007, we obtained a firm commitment to enter into a drilling
contract for the first drillship and exercised our option to purchase a
50 percent equity interest in TPDI, a joint venture company, formed by us
and Pacific Drilling, and received a promissory note issued by TPDI for
approximately $238 million, representing 50 percent of the documented
costs of the drillships at the time of exercise. Concurrently, TPDI
issued a note to Pacific Drilling for approximately $238 million, which is
reflected in long-term debt in our consolidated balance sheet. TPDI
in turn owns two subsidiary companies: Deepwater Pacific 1 Inc.
and Deepwater Pacific 2 Inc. The Deepwater Pacific 1
and Deepwater Pacific 2
are scheduled to be delivered in the second quarter of 2009 and the first
quarter of 2010, respectively. We have consolidated TPDI in our
financial statements for 2007. See “—Outlook−Drilling
Market.”
ODL—We own a 50 percent
interest in an unconsolidated joint venture company, Overseas Drilling Limited
(“ODL”). ODL owns the Joides Resolution, for
which we provide certain operational and management services. In
2007, we earned $1 million for those services. Siem
Offshore Inc. owns the other 50 percent interest in
ODL. Our director, Kristian Siem, is the chairman of Siem
Offshore Inc. and is also a director and officer of
ODL. Mr. Siem is also chairman and chief executive officer of
Siem Industries, Inc., which owns an approximate 34 percent interest
in Siem Offshore Inc.
In
November 2005, we entered into a loan agreement with ODL pursuant to which
we may borrow up to $8 million. ODL may demand repayment at any
time upon five business days prior written notice given to us and any amount due
to us from ODL may be offset against the loan amount at the time of
repayment. As of December 31, 2007, $3 million was
outstanding under this loan agreement and was reflected as long-term debt in our
consolidated balance sheet. See “—Outlook–Drilling
Market.”
New
Accounting Pronouncements
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements
(“SFAS 157”). SFAS 157 defines fair value,
establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted
accounting principles, and expands disclosures about fair value
measurements. SFAS 157 does not require any new fair value
measurements, but rather provides guidance for the application of fair value
measurements required in other accounting pronouncements and seeks to eliminate
inconsistencies in the application of such guidance among those other
standards. SFAS 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007. We will be required to adopt
SFAS 157 in the first quarter of fiscal year 2008. We do not
expect SFAS 157 to have a material effect on our consolidated statement of
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
(“SFAS 159”). SFAS 159 provides companies with an option to
report selected financial assets and liabilities at fair value. It
also establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to facilitate
comparisons between companies that choose different measurement attributes for
similar types of assets and liabilities. SFAS 159 is effective
as of the beginning of the first fiscal year beginning after November 15,
2007. We will be required to adopt SFAS 159 in the first quarter
of fiscal year 2008. We do not expect SFAS 159 to have a
material effect on our consolidated statement of financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements
(“SFAS 160”). SFAS 160 establishes accounting and
reporting standards for noncontrolling interests, also known as minority
interests, in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a
subsidiary. It requires that a noncontrolling interest in a
subsidiary be reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements and
requires that consolidated net income attributable to the parent and to the
noncontrolling interests be shown separately on the face of the income
statement. SFAS 160 also requires, among other things, that
noncontrolling interests in formerly consolidated subsidiaries be measured at
fair value. SFAS 160 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008. We will be required to adopt
SFAS 160 in the first quarter of 2009. Management is currently
evaluating the requirements of SFAS 160 and has not yet determined the
impact on our consolidated statement of financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141R, Business Combinations
(“SFAS 141R”). SFAS 141R replaces SFAS No. 141,
Business Combinations,
and among other things, (1) provides more specific guidance with respect to
identifying the acquirer in a business combination, (2) broadens the scope
of business combinations to include all transactions in which one entity gains
control over one or more other businesses, and (3) requires costs incurred
to effect the acquisition (acquisition-related costs) and anticipated
restructuring costs of the acquired company to be recognized separately from the
acquisition. SFAS 141R applies prospectively to business
combinations for which the acquisition date occurs in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008. We would be required to apply the
principles of SFAS 141R to business combinations with acquisition dates in
calendar year 2009. Due to the prospective application requirements,
it is not possible to determine what effect, if any, SFAS 141R would have
on our consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or
cash flows.
ITEM
7A.
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk
|
Interest
Rate Risk
Our
exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates relates primarily to our
long-term and short-term debt. The table below presents scheduled
debt maturities in U.S. dollars and related weighted-average interest rates for
each of the years ended December 31 relating to debt obligations as of
December 31, 2007 (in millions, except interest rate
percentages):
|
|
Scheduled
Maturity Date (a) (b)
|
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
12/31/07
|
|
Total
debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
rate
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
2,200 |
|
|
$ |
2,366 |
|
|
$ |
2,201 |
|
|
$ |
4,067 |
|
|
$ |
10,836 |
|
|
$ |
11,524 |
|
Average
interest rate
|
|
|
9.8 |
% |
|
|
9.8 |
% |
|
|
1.6 |
% |
|
|
1.9 |
% |
|
|
1.5 |
% |
|
|
6.5 |
% |
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Variable
rate
|
|
$ |
6,170 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
238 |
|
|
$ |
6,408 |
|
|
$ |
6,408 |
|
Average
interest rate
|
|
|
5.4 |
% |
|
|
— |
% |
|
|
— |
% |
|
|
— |
% |
|
|
— |
% |
|
|
6.6 |
% |
|
|
5.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
__________________________
(a)
|
Maturity
dates of the face value of our debt assume the put options on the Series A
Notes, the Series B Notes and the Series C Notes will be exercised in
December 2010, December 2011 and December 2012,
respectively.
|
(b)
|
Expected
maturity amounts are based on the face value of
debt.
|
At
December 31, 2007, we had approximately $6 billion of variable rate
debt at face value (37.2 percent of total debt at face
value). This variable rate debt primarily represented the Floating
Rate Notes and borrowings under the Bridge Loan Facility and the 364-Day
Revolving Credit Facility. At December 31, 2006, the
variable-rate debt represented the Floating Rate Notes and borrowings under the
Term Credit Facility. Based upon the December 31, 2007 and 2006
variable rate debt outstanding amounts, a one percentage point change in
interest rates would result in a corresponding change in interest expense of
approximately $64 million and $17 million, respectively. In
addition, a large part of our cash investments would earn commensurately higher
rates of return if interest rates increase. Using December 31,
2007 and 2006 cash investment levels, a one percentage point change in
interest rates would result in a corresponding change in interest income of
approximately $8 million and $3 million per year,
respectively.
The fair
market value of our debt at December 31, 2007 was $17.9 billion
compared to $3.5 billion at December 31, 2006. The increase
in fair value of $14.4 billion was primarily due to the issuance and
retirement of debt during the year and the redemption of convertible debentures,
as well as changes in the corporate bond market.
In
connection with the Merger, we acquired the GSF Jack Ryan,
which is subject to a fully defeased financing lease arrangement with a
remaining term of 13 years. As a result, we have assumed the
rights and obligations under the terms of the defeasance arrangement executed by
GlobalSantaFe with three financial institutions, whereby we are required to make
additional payments if the defeasance deposit does not earn a rate of return of
at least 8.00 percent per year, the interest rate expected at the inception
of the agreement. The defeasance deposit earns interest based on the
British pound three-month LIBOR, which was 6.02 percent as of
December 31, 2007. If the interest rate were to remain fixed at
this rate for the next five years, we would be required to make an additional
payment of approximately $11 million during that period. We do
not expect that, if required, any additional payments made under this defeasance
arrangement would be material to our statement of financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
Foreign
Exchange Risk
Our
international operations expose us to foreign exchange risk. We use a
variety of techniques to minimize the exposure to foreign exchange risk,
including customer contract payment terms and the possible use of foreign
exchange derivative instruments. Our primary foreign exchange risk
management strategy involves structuring customer contracts to provide for
payment in both U.S. dollars, which is our functional currency, and local
currency. The payment portion denominated in local currency is based
on anticipated local currency requirements over the contract
term. Due to various factors, including customer acceptance, local
banking laws, other statutory requirements, local currency convertibility and
the impact of inflation on local costs, actual foreign exchange needs may vary
from those anticipated in the customer contracts, resulting in partial exposure
to foreign exchange risk. Fluctuations in foreign currencies
typically have not had a material impact on overall results. In
situations where payments of local currency do not equal local currency
requirements, foreign exchange derivative instruments, specifically foreign
exchange forward contracts, or spot purchases, may be used to mitigate foreign
currency risk. A foreign exchange forward contract obligates us to
exchange predetermined amounts of specified foreign currencies at specified
exchange rates on specified dates or to make an equivalent U.S. dollar payment
equal to the value of such exchange. We do not enter into derivative
transactions for speculative purposes. At December 31, 2007, we
had no open foreign exchange derivative contracts.
MANAGEMENT’S
REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Management
of Transocean Inc. (the “Company” or “our”) is responsible for establishing
and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting for the
Company as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934. The Company’s internal control system was
designed to provide reasonable assurance to the Company’s management and Board
of Directors regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
Internal
control over financial reporting includes the controls themselves, monitoring
(including internal auditing practices), and actions taken to correct
deficiencies as identified.
There are
inherent limitations to the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting, however well designed, including the possibility of human error and
the possible circumvention or overriding of controls. The design of
an internal control system is also based in part upon assumptions and judgments
made by management about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no
assurance that an internal 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.
Management
assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2007. In making this assessment,
management used the criteria for internal control over financial reporting
described in Internal
Control–Integrated Framework by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). Management’s assessment included
an evaluation of the design of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting and testing of the operating effectiveness of its internal control
over financial reporting.
On
November 27, 2007, we completed our merger transaction with
GlobalSantaFe. Due to the close proximity of the merger date to
December 31, 2007, the date of the most recent financial statements,
management has excluded GlobalSantaFe from its assessment of the effectiveness
of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting. GlobalSantaFe accounted for 60 percent and 14 percent
of the Company’s total assets and liabilities, respectively, as of
December 31, 2007, and eight percent and seven percent of the Company’s
revenues and net income, respectively, for the year then
ended.
Management
reviewed the results of its assessment with the Audit Committee of the Company’s
Board of Directors. Based on this assessment, management has
concluded that, as of December 31, 2007, the Company’s internal control
over financial reporting was effective.
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER
FINANCIAL REPORTING
The Board
of Directors and Shareholders of Transocean Inc.
We have
audited Transocean Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in Internal
Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the Treadway Commission (the COSO
criteria). Transocean Inc.’s management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
the company’s 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
company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s 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 company’s assets that could have a
material effect on the financial statements.
Because
of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not
prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation
of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may
become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of
compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
As
indicated in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting, management’s assessment of and conclusion on the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting did not include the
internal controls of GlobalSantaFe Corporation, which is included in the 2007
consolidated financial statements of Transocean Inc. and constituted 60
percent and 14 percent of total assets and total liabilities,
respectively, as of December 31, 2007 and eight percent and seven
percent of revenues and net income, respectively, for the year then
ended. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting of
Transocean Inc. also did not include an evaluation of the internal control
over financial reporting of GlobalSantaFe Corporation.
In our
opinion, Transocean Inc. maintained, in all material respects, effective
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based
on the COSO
criteria.
We also
have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of
Transocean Inc. as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, equity, and cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007 and
our report dated February 27, 2008 expressed an unqualified opinion
thereon.
/s/ Ernst
& Young LLP
Houston,
Texas
February 27,
2008
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board
of Directors and Shareholders of Transocean Inc.
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Transocean Inc. and
Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, comprehensive income, equity, and cash flows for each
of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007. Our
audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in the Index at
Item 15(a). These financial statements and schedule are the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on these financial statements and schedule based on our
audits.
We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit
includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis
for our opinion.
In our
opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
material respects, the consolidated financial position of Transocean Inc.
and Subsidiaries at December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the consolidated
results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2007, in conformity with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related
financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial
statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the
information set forth therein.
As
discussed in Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements, effective
January 1, 2007, the Company adopted FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes. Also discussed in Note 2, effective January 1,
2006, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment and, as
discussed in Note 18, effective December 31, 2006, the Company adopted
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158, Employers’ Accounting for Defined
Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans, an amendment of FASB Statements
No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R).
We also
have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), Transocean Inc.'s internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, based on criteria established
in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 27,
2008 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst
& Young LLP
Houston,
Texas
February 27,
2008
TRANSOCEAN INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In
millions, except per share data)
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
drilling revenues
|
|
$ |
5,948 |
|
|
$ |
3,745 |
|
|
$ |
2,757 |
|
Contract
intangible revenues
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
− |
|
|
|
− |
|
Other
revenues
|
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
|
6,377 |
|
|
|
3,882 |
|
|
|
2,892 |
|
Costs
and expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
and maintenance
|
|
|
2,781 |
|
|
|
2,155 |
|
|
|
1,720 |
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
|
|
499 |
|
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
3,422 |
|
|
|
2,646 |
|
|
|
2,201 |
|
Gain
from disposal of assets, net
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
3,239 |
|
|
|
1,641 |
|
|
|
720 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
income
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Interest
expense, net of amounts capitalized
|
|
|
(172 |
) |
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
(111 |
) |
Gain
from TODCO stock sales
|
|
|
− |
|
|
|
− |
|
|
|
165 |
|
Loss
on retirement of debt
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
− |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
Other,
net
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
before income tax expense
|
|
|
3,384 |
|
|
|
1,607 |
|
|
|
803 |
|
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
3,131 |
|
|
$ |
1,385 |
|
|
$ |
716 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
14.65 |
|
|
$ |
6.32 |
|
|
$ |
3.13 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
14.14 |
|
|
$ |
6.10 |
|
|
$ |
3.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
See
accompanying notes.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(In
millions)
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
3,131 |
|
|
$ |
1,385 |
|
|
$ |
716 |
|
Other
comprehensive income (loss), net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum
pension liability adjustments (net of tax expense (benefit) of $9 and $2
for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively)
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Amortization
of periodic pension benefit cost
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Other
comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Total
comprehensive income
|
|
$ |
3,135 |
|
|
$ |
1,401 |
|
|
$ |
720 |
|
See
accompanying notes.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(In
millions, except share data)
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
1,241 |
|
|
$ |
467 |
|
Accounts
receivable, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade
|
|
|
2,209 |
|
|
|
929 |
|
Other
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Materials
and supplies, net
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Other
current assets
|
|
|
233 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
4,296 |
|
|
|
1,656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and equipment
|
|
|
24,545 |
|
|
|
10,539 |
|
Less
accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
3,615 |
|
|
|
3,213 |
|
Property
and equipment, net
|
|
|
20,930 |
|
|
|
7,326 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
8,219 |
|
|
|
2,195 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
919 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
34,364 |
|
|
$ |
11,476 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
$ |
805 |
|
|
$ |
477 |
|
Accrued
income taxes
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
Debt
due within one year
|
|
|
6,172 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
Other
current liabilities
|
|
|
826 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
7,902 |
|
|
|
1,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
debt
|
|
|
11,085 |
|
|
|
3,203 |
|
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
|
|
681 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
Other
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
2,125 |
|
|
|
340 |
|
Total
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
13,891 |
|
|
|
3,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority
interest
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preference
shares, $0.10 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized, none issued and
outstanding
|
|
|
− |
|
|
|
− |
|
Ordinary
shares, $0.01 par value; 800,000,000 shares authorized, 317,222,909 and
204,609,973 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
10,799 |
|
|
|
8,045 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Retained
earnings (accumulated deficit)
|
|
|
1,806 |
|
|
|
(1,181 |
) |
Total
shareholders’ equity
|
|
|
12,566 |
|
|
|
6,836 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders’ equity
|
|
$ |
34,364 |
|
|
$ |
11,476 |
|
See
accompanying notes.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF EQUITY
(In
millions)
|
|
Ordinary
shares
|
|
|
Additional
paid-in
|
|
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive
|
|
|
Retained
earnings (accumulated
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
capital
|
|
|
income
(loss)
|
|
|
deficit)
|
|
|
equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
225 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
10,697 |
|
|
$ |
(24 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,282 |
) |
|
$ |
7,393 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
716 |
|
Repurchase
of ordinary shares
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(400 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(400 |
) |
Issuance
of ordinary shares under
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
share-based
compensation plans
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
260 |
|
Minimum
pension liability
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Other
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
10,566 |
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(2,566 |
) |
|
|
7,982 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
− |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,385 |
|
|
|
1,385 |
|
Repurchase
of ordinary shares
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2,600 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(2,600 |
) |
Issuance
of ordinary shares under
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
share-based
compensation plans
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
67 |
|
Minimum
pension liability
|
|
|
− |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Adjustment
to initially apply SFAS 158, net of tax
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
8,045 |
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(1,181 |
) |
|
|
6,836 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
3,131 |
|
|
|
3,131 |
|
Repurchase
of ordinary shares
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(400 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(400 |
) |
Issuance
of ordinary shares under
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
share-based
compensation plans
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
191 |
|
Accelerated
share-based compensation due to the Merger
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Amortization
of periodic pension benefit cost
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Change
in funded status of defined benefit plans
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
Issuance
of ordinary shares upon conversion of convertible debentures and
notes
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
414 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
414 |
|
Consideration
paid to GlobalSantaFe shareholders
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
12,385 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
12,386 |
|
Payment
to shareholders for Reclassification of ordinary shares
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(9,859 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(9,859 |
) |
Adjustment
to initially apply FIN 48, net of tax
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(144 |
) |
|
|
(144 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Balance
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
317 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
10,799 |
|
|
$ |
(42 |
) |
|
$ |
1,806 |
|
|
$ |
12,566 |
|
See
accompanying notes.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In
millions)
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Cash
flows from operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
3,131 |
|
|
$ |
1,385 |
|
|
$ |
716 |
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization
of drilling contract intangibles
|
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
|
|
499 |
|
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
Share-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Gain
from disposal of assets, net
|
|
|
(284 |
) |
|
|
(405 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
Gain
from TODCO stock sales
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(165 |
) |
Tax
benefit from exercise of stock options to purchase and vesting of ordinary
shares under share-based compensation plans
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
22 |
|
Deferred
income taxes
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
27 |
|
Deferred
revenue, net
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
Deferred
expenses, net
|
|
|
(55 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
18 |
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
(238 |
) |
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
(113 |
) |
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
3,073 |
|
|
|
1,237 |
|
|
|
864 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures
|
|
|
(1,380 |
) |
|
|
(876 |
) |
|
|
(182 |
) |
Consideration
paid to GlobalSantaFe shareholders
|
|
|
(5,129 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Cash
balances acquired in connection with the Merger
|
|
|
695 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Proceeds
from disposal of assets, net
|
|
|
379 |
|
|
|
461 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
Proceeds
from TODCO stock sales, net
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
272 |
|
Joint
ventures and other investments, net
|
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Net
cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
(5,677 |
) |
|
|
(415 |
) |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings
under 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility
|
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Borrowings
under other credit facilities
|
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Repayments
under other credit facilities
|
|
|
(12,030 |
) |
|
|
(300 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
Proceeds
from issuance of debt
|
|
|
9,095 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Repayments
of debt
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(880 |
) |
Financing
costs
|
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Repurchase
of ordinary shares
|
|
|
(400 |
) |
|
|
(2,601 |
) |
|
|
(400 |
) |
Proceeds
from issuance of ordinary shares under share-based compensation plans,
net
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
Proceeds
from issuance of ordinary shares upon exercise of warrants
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Payment
to shareholders for Reclassification of ordinary shares
|
|
|
(9,859 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Tax
benefit from issuance of ordinary shares under share-based compensation
plans
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
|
|
(800 |
) |
|
|
(1,039 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
774 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
467 |
|
|
|
445 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$ |
1,241 |
|
|
$ |
467 |
|
|
$ |
445 |
|
See
accompanying notes.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Note
1—Nature of Business and Principles of Consolidation
Transocean Inc.
(together with its subsidiaries and predecessors, unless the context requires
otherwise, “Transocean,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” or “our”) is a leading
international provider of offshore contract drilling services for oil and gas
wells. Our mobile offshore drilling fleet is considered one of the
most modern and versatile fleets in the world. We specialize in
technically demanding sectors of the offshore drilling business with a
particular focus on deepwater and harsh environment drilling
services. We contract our drilling rigs, related equipment and work
crews primarily on a dayrate basis to drill oil and gas wells. We
also provide oil and gas drilling management services on either a dayrate basis
or a completed-project, fixed-price (or “turnkey”) basis, as well as drilling
engineering and drilling project management services, and we participate in oil
and gas exploration and production activities. At December 31,
2007, we owned, had partial ownership interests in or operated 140 mobile
offshore drilling units. As of this date, our fleet consisted of
39 High-Specification Floaters (Ultra-Deepwater, Deepwater and Harsh
Environment semisubmersibles and drillships), 29 Midwater Floaters,
10 High-Specification Jackups, 58 Standard Jackups and four Other
Rigs. We also have eight Ultra-Deepwater Floaters contracted for
or under construction (see Note 5—Drilling Fleet Expansion, Upgrades and
Acquisitions).
On
January 31, 2001, we completed a merger transaction with R&B Falcon
Corporation (“R&B Falcon”). At the time of the merger, R&B
Falcon operated a diverse global drilling rig fleet consisting of drillships,
semisubmersibles, jackup rigs and other units including the Gulf of Mexico
Shallow and Inland Water segment fleet. R&B Falcon and the Gulf
of Mexico Shallow and Inland Water segment later became known as TODCO (together
with its subsidiaries and predecessors, unless the context requires otherwise,
“TODCO”) and the TODCO segment, respectively. In preparation for the
initial public offering discussed below, we transferred all assets and
subsidiaries out of R&B Falcon that were unrelated to the TODCO
segment. In February 2004, we completed an initial public
offering (the “TODCO IPO”) of approximately 23 percent of TODCO’s
outstanding shares of its common stock. In September 2004,
December 2004 and May 2005, respectively, we completed additional public
offerings of TODCO common stock. In June 2005, we completed a sale of
our remaining TODCO common stock pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended.
In
November 2007, we completed our merger transaction (the “Merger”) with
GlobalSantaFe Corporation (“GlobalSantaFe”). Immediately prior to the
effective time of the Merger, each of our outstanding ordinary shares was
reclassified by way of a scheme of arrangement under Cayman Islands law into
(1) 0.6996 of our ordinary shares and (2) $33.03 in cash (the
“Reclassification” and, together with the Merger, the
“Transactions”). At the effective time of the Merger, each
outstanding ordinary share of GlobalSantaFe (the “GlobalSantaFe Ordinary
Shares”) was exchanged for (1) 0.4757 of our ordinary shares (after giving
effect to the Reclassification) and (2) $22.46 in cash. We have
included the financial results of GlobalSantaFe in our consolidated financial
statements beginning November 27, 2007, the date GlobalSantaFe Ordinary
Shares were exchanged for our ordinary shares.
For
investments in joint ventures and other entities that do not meet the criteria
of a variable interest entity or where we are not deemed to be the primary
beneficiary for accounting purposes of those entities that meet the variable
interest entity criteria, we use the equity method of accounting where our
ownership is between 20 percent and 50 percent or where our ownership
is more than 50 percent and we do not have significant control over the
unconsolidated affiliate. We use the cost method of accounting for
investments in unconsolidated affiliates where our ownership is less than
20 percent and where we do not have significant influence over the
unconsolidated affiliate. We consolidate those investments that meet
the criteria of a variable interest entity where we are deemed to be the primary
beneficiary for accounting purposes and for entities in which we have a majority
voting interest. Intercompany transactions and accounts are
eliminated.
In
October 2007, we exercised our option to purchase a 50 percent interest in
Transocean Pacific Drilling Inc. (“TPDI”), a joint venture company formed by us
and Pacific Drilling Limited (“Pacific Drilling”), a Liberian company, whereby
we acquired exclusive marketing rights for two ultra-deepwater drillships to be
named Deepwater Pacific
1 and Deepwater Pacific
2, which are currently under construction. We are providing
construction management services for the newbuilds and have agreed to provide
operating management services once the drillships begin
operations. Beginning on October 18, 2010, Pacific Drilling will have
the right to exchange its interest in the joint venture for our ordinary
shares or cash at a purchase price based on an appraisal of the fair value of
the drillships, subject to various adjustments.
We have
evaluated our interest in TPDI under the standards of Financial Accounting
Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest
Entities (“FIN 46”). FIN 46 requires the consolidation of
variable interest entities in which an enterprise absorbs a majority of the
entity’s expected losses, receives a majority of the entity’s expected residual
returns, or both, as a result of ownership, contractual or other financial
interests in the entity. TPDI is considered a variable interest
entity as its equity is not sufficient to absorb its possible losses, and we are
the primary beneficiary for accounting purposes of TPDI. As a result,
we consolidate TPDI in our financial statements, the note to us is eliminated
and the interest that is not owned by us is reflected as minority interest on
our consolidated balance sheet and consolidated statement of
operations.
We
recognized investments in and advances to unconsolidated affiliates of
$15 million and $9 million for the years ended December 31, 2007
and 2006, respectively, and reported these amounts in other assets in our
consolidated balance sheet.
We
recognized equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates of
$(2) million, $5 million and $10 million for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and reported these amounts
in other, net in our consolidated statement of operations.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Note
2—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Accounting Estimates—The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the U.S. requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues,
expenses and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an
ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to bad debts,
materials and supplies obsolescence, investments, intangible assets and
goodwill, property and equipment and other long-lived assets, income taxes,
workers’ insurance, share-based compensation, pensions and other postretirement
benefits, other employment benefits and contingent liabilities. We
base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions we
believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the
basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities
that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results
could differ from such estimates.
Cash and Cash
Equivalents—Cash equivalents are stated at cost plus accrued interest,
which approximates fair value. Cash equivalents are highly liquid
debt instruments with an original maturity of three months or less and may
consist of time deposits with a number of commercial banks with high credit
ratings, Eurodollar time deposits, certificates of deposit and commercial
paper. We may also invest excess funds in no-load, open-end,
management investment trusts (“management trusts”). The management
trusts invest exclusively in high quality money market
instruments. We record restricted cash in other assets in our
consolidated balance sheet. At December 31, 2007, we had
$7 million classified as restricted cash related to collateral for surety
bonds to satisfy certain Venezuelan tax requirements.
Allowance for Doubtful
Accounts—We establish reserves for doubtful accounts on a case-by-case
basis when we believe the required payment of specific amounts owed is unlikely
to occur. In establishing these reserves, we consider changes in the
financial position of a major customer and restrictions placed on the conversion
of local currency to U.S. dollars as well as disputes with our customers
regarding the application of contract provisions to our drilling
operations. This allowance was $50 million and $26 million
at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Uncollectible
accounts receivable are written off when a settlement is reached for an amount
that is less than the outstanding historical balance or the balance is
determined to be uncollectible. We derive a majority of our revenue
from services to international oil companies and government-owned and
government-controlled oil companies, and we do not generally require collateral
or other security to support client receivables.
Materials and
Supplies—Materials and supplies are carried at average cost less an
allowance for obsolescence. Such allowance was $22 million and
$19 million at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
Property and
Equipment—Property and equipment, consisting primarily of offshore
drilling rigs and related equipment, represented approximately 61 percent
of our total assets at December 31, 2007. The carrying values of
these assets are based on estimates, assumptions and judgments relative to
capitalized costs, useful lives and salvage values of our rigs. These
estimates, assumptions and judgments reflect both historical experience and
expectations regarding future industry conditions and operations. We
compute depreciation using the straight-line method after allowing for salvage
values. Expenditures for renewals, replacements and improvements are
capitalized. Maintenance and repairs are charged to operating expense
as incurred. Upon sale or other disposition, the applicable amounts
of asset cost and accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and the
net amount, less proceeds from disposal, is charged or credited to gain from
disposal of assets, net.
Estimated
original useful lives of our drilling units range from 18 to 35 years,
reflecting maintenance history and market demand for these drilling units,
buildings and improvements from 10 to 30 years and machinery and equipment from
four to 12 years. From time to time, we may review the estimated
remaining useful lives of our drilling units and may extend the useful life when
events and circumstances indicate the drilling unit can operate beyond its
original or current useful life. During the first quarter of 2006, we
extended the useful life to 35 years for one rig, which had an estimated useful
life of 30 years. During 2007, we extended the useful lives to
between 35 and 45 years for six rigs, which had estimated useful lives of
between 30 to 35 years. We determined the years were appropriate for
each of these rigs based on the then current contracts these rigs were operating
under as well as the additional life-extending work, upgrades and inspections we
performed on these rigs. In 2007, 2006 and 2005, the impact of the
change in estimated useful life of these rigs was a reduction in depreciation
expense of $25 million ($0.11 per diluted share), $2 million ($0.01
per diluted share) and $16 million ($0.05 per diluted share), respectively,
which had no tax effect.
Assets Held for Sale—Assets
are classified as held for sale when we have a plan for disposal and those
assets meet the held for sale criteria of Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (“SFAS”) No. 144, Accounting for Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. At December 31, 2006, we
had assets held for sale in the amount $11 million that were included in
other current assets. At December 31, 2007, there were no assets
held for sale (see Note 6—Asset Dispositions and Note 24—Subsequent
Events).
Impairment of Long-Lived
Assets—The carrying value of long-lived assets, principally property and
equipment, is reviewed for potential impairment when events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of such assets may not be
recoverable. For property and equipment held for use, the
determination of recoverability is made based upon the estimated undiscounted
future net cash flows of the related asset or group of assets being
evaluated. Property and equipment held for sale are recorded at the
lower of net book value or fair value.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Goodwill—We test goodwill for
impairment at least annually, on October 1, at the reporting unit level,
which is defined as an operating segment or a component of an operating segment
that constitutes a business for which financial information is available and is
regularly reviewed by management. Prior to the Merger, we operated in
one operating segment, contract drilling services, which we considered to be our
sole reporting unit. Since it met all the necessary criteria, we
carried forward the results of the goodwill impairment test performed at
October 1, 2004 to evaluate goodwill at October 1, 2005, 2006 and
2007. As a result of these tests for impairment, we concluded that
goodwill was not impaired in any of the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006
and 2005.
As a
result of the Merger, we established two additional reporting units:
(1) drilling management services and (2) oil and gas properties (see
Note 1—Nature of Business and Principles of Consolidation). For
purposes of our annual goodwill impairment testing, we will calculate the
estimated fair value of these reporting units based upon the present value of
their estimated future net cash flows, utilizing a discount rate based upon our
cost of capital.
Our
goodwill balance and changes in the carrying amount of goodwill are as follows
(in millions):
|
|
Balance
at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
Other
(a)
|
|
|
Balance
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract
drilling services
|
|
$ |
2,195 |
|
|
$ |
5,741 |
|
|
$ |
7,936 |
|
Drilling
management services
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
260 |
|
Oil
and gas properties
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
2,195 |
|
|
$ |
6,024 |
|
|
$ |
8,219 |
|
______________________
|
(a)
|
Primarily
represents the excess of the purchase price over the estimated fair value
of net assets acquired as a result of the Merger, our investment in TPDI
of $22 million and net adjustments of $14 million recorded
during 2007 related to income tax-related pre-acquisition
contingencies.
|
Operating Revenues and
Expenses—Operating revenues are recognized as earned, based on
contractual daily rates or on a fixed price basis. In connection with
drilling contracts, we may receive revenues for preparation and mobilization of
equipment and personnel or for capital improvements to rigs. In
connection with new drilling contracts, revenues earned and incremental costs
incurred directly related to contract preparation and mobilization are deferred
and recognized over the primary contract term of the drilling project using the
straight-line method. Our policy to amortize the fees related to
contract preparation, mobilization and capital upgrades on a straight-line basis
over the estimated firm period of drilling is consistent with the general pace
of activity, level of services being provided and dayrates being earned over the
life of the contract. For contractual daily rate contracts, we
account for loss contracts as the losses are incurred. Costs of
relocating drilling units without contracts to more promising market areas are
expensed as incurred. Upon completion of drilling contracts, any
demobilization fees received are reported in income, as are any related
expenses. Capital upgrade revenues received are deferred and
recognized over the primary contract term of the drilling
project. The actual cost incurred for the capital upgrade is
depreciated over the estimated useful life of the asset. We incur
periodic survey and drydock costs in connection with obtaining regulatory
certification to operate our rigs on an ongoing basis. Costs
associated with these certifications are deferred and amortized over the period
until the next survey on a straight-line basis.
Contract Intangible
Revenues—In connection with the Merger, we acquired drilling contracts
for future contract drilling services of GlobalSantaFe. These
contracts include fixed dayrates and are at dayrates that may be above or below
dayrates as of the date of the Merger for similar contracts. We
adjusted these drilling contracts to fair value as of the date of the Merger,
and as a result, we have recorded $179 million in other assets and $1.4
billion in other long-term liabilities on our consolidated balance sheet for the
year ended December 31, 2007. We recognize the intangible
revenues over the respective contract period, amortizing the balances using the
straight-line method.
Other Revenues—Our other
revenues represent drilling management services revenues, oil and gas properties
revenues, client reimbursable revenues, integrated services revenues and other
miscellaneous revenues. For fixed priced contracts, revenues and
expenses are recognized on completion of the well and acceptance by the
customer. Events occurring after the date of the financial statements
and before the financial statements are issued that are within the normal
exposure and risk aspects of the turnkey contracts are considered refinements of
the estimation process of the prior year and are recorded as adjustments at the
date of the financial statements. Provisions for losses are made on
contracts in progress when losses are anticipated. We consider client
reimbursable revenues to be billings to our client for reimbursement of certain
equipment, materials and supplies, third party services, employee bonuses and
out-of-pocket expenses that we incur and recognize in operating and maintenance
expense, which results in little or no effect on operating income. We
refer to integrated services as those services we provide through third-party
contractors and our employees under certain contracts that include well and
logistics services in addition to our normal drilling services.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Capitalized Interest—We
capitalize interest costs for qualifying construction and upgrade
projects. We capitalized interest costs on construction work in
progress of $76 million and $16 million for the years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. There was no
capitalized interest for the year ended December 31, 2005.
Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities—We account for our derivative instruments and hedging
activities in accordance with SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities. See Note 8—Financial
Instruments and Risk Concentration and Note 9—Interest Rate Swaps.
Foreign Currency—The majority
of our revenues and expenditures are denominated in U.S. dollars to limit our
exposure to foreign currency fluctuations, resulting in the use of the U.S.
dollar as the functional currency for all of our operations. Foreign
currency exchange gains and losses are primarily included in other income
(expense) as incurred. Net foreign currency gains losses included in
other income (expense) were $10 million, $3 million and
$4 million, for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
Income Taxes—Income taxes
have been provided based upon the tax laws and rates in effect in the countries
in which operations are conducted and income is earned. There is no
expected relationship between the provision for or benefit from income taxes and
income or loss before income taxes because the countries in which we operate
have taxation regimes that vary not only with respect to nominal rate, but also
in terms of the availability of deductions, credits and other
benefits. Variations also arise because income earned and taxed in
any particular country or countries may fluctuate from year to
year. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the
anticipated future tax effects of temporary differences between the financial
statement basis and the tax basis of our assets and liabilities using the
applicable tax rates in effect at year end. A valuation allowance for
deferred tax assets is recorded when it is more likely than not that some or all
of the benefit from the deferred tax asset will not be realized. See
Note 15—Income Taxes.
Share-Based Compensation—On
January 1, 2006, we adopted SFAS No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment (“SFAS 123R”),
which is a revision of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation
(“SFAS 123”). SFAS 123R supersedes Accounting Principles
Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees (“APB 25”), and
amends SFAS No. 95, Statement of Cash Flows (“SFAS 95”). Although
the approaches in SFAS 123R and SFAS 123 are similar, SFAS 123R
requires income statement recognition of all share-based payments to employees,
including grants of employee stock options, based on their fair values and does
not permit pro forma disclosure as an alternative. In March 2005, the
Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued Staff Accounting Bulletin
(“SAB”) No. 107, Share-Based Payment (“SAB 107”), relating to
SFAS 123R. We have applied the provisions of SAB 107 in our
adoption of SFAS 123R.
We
adopted SFAS 123R using the modified prospective method (“Prospective
Method”), which requires the application of SFAS 123R as of January 1,
2006. Our consolidated financial statements as of and for the years
ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 reflect the application of
SFAS 123R. In accordance with the Prospective Method, our
consolidated financial statements for prior periods have not been restated to
reflect, and do not include, the application of
SFAS 123R. Share-based compensation expense for the years ended
December 31 is as follows (in millions):
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Share-based
compensation expense
|
|
$ |
78 |
|
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
$ |
16 |
|
Income
tax benefit on share-based compensation expense
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
SFAS 123R
requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if
necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those
estimates. Additionally, SFAS 123R requires the estimated
forfeiture rate be applied and the cumulative effect determined for all prior
periods in which share-based compensation costs have been
recorded. The cumulative effect of applying the expected forfeiture
rate has been included in operating and maintenance expense and general and
administrative expense, the impact of which had no material effect on our
consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
We
adopted SFAS 123 effective January 1, 2003 and accounted for
share-based compensation prospectively for all share-based awards granted or
modified on or subsequent to that date. As such, adoption of
SFAS 123R using the Prospective Method had no material impact on our
consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. In addition to the compensation cost recognition requirements,
SFAS 123R also requires the tax deduction benefits for an award in excess
of recognized compensation cost to be reported as a financing cash flow rather
than as an operating cash flow.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Under
SFAS 123, we recognized compensation cost on a straight-line basis over the
vesting period up to the date of actual retirement. As a result of
the adoption of SFAS 123R, we now recognize compensation cost on a
straight-line basis for time-based awards granted or modified after
January 1, 2006 through the date the employee is no longer required to
provide service to earn the award (“service period”). For
performance-based awards with graded vesting conditions that are granted or
modified after January 1, 2006, compensation expense is recognized on a
straight-line basis over the service period for each separately vesting portion
of the award as if the award was, in substance, multiple awards. If
we had amortized compensation cost over the service period prior to adoption of
SFAS 123R, share-based compensation expense would not have been materially
different for any of the periods presented.
Prior to
January 1, 2003, we accounted for share-based awards to employees under the
provisions of SFAS 123 using the intrinsic value method prescribed by
APB 25 and related interpretations. If compensation expense for
grants to employees under our long-term incentive plan prior to January 1,
2003 had been recognized using the fair value method of accounting under
SFAS 123, net income and earnings per share for the year ended
December 31, 2005 would have been reduced by the pro forma amount of
approximately $2 million, which was not material.
The fair
value of each option grant under our long-term incentive plan was estimated on
the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model with the
following weighted-average assumptions:
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
Dividend
yield
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
Expected
price volatility
|
31%
|
|
33%-37%
|
|
26%-38%
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
4.88%-5.09%
|
|
4.52%-5.00%
|
|
2.86%-4.57%
|
Expected
life of options
|
3.2
years
|
|
4.7
years
|
|
4.4
years
|
Weighted-average
fair value of options granted
|
$40.69
|
|
$31.30
|
|
$21.92
|
The fair
value of each option grant under the ESPP was estimated using the following
weighted-average assumptions:
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
Dividend
yield
|
–
|
|
–
|
|
–
|
Expected
price volatility
|
33%
|
|
33%
|
|
28%
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
4.91%
|
|
4.42%
|
|
2.81%
|
Expected
life of options
|
1.0
year
|
|
1.0
year
|
|
1.0
year
|
Weighted-average
fair value of options granted
|
$23.01
|
|
$21.48
|
|
$7.10
|
New Accounting
Pronouncements—In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements
(“SFAS 157”). SFAS 157 defines fair value,
establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted
accounting principles, and expands disclosures about fair value
measurements. SFAS 157 does not require any new fair value
measurements, but rather provides guidance for the application of fair value
measurements required in other accounting pronouncements and seeks to eliminate
inconsistencies in the application of such guidance among those other
standards. SFAS 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007. We will be required to adopt
SFAS 157 in the first quarter of fiscal year 2008. We do not
expect SFAS 157 to have a material effect on our consolidated statement of
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities
(“SFAS 159”). SFAS 159 provides companies with an
option to report selected financial assets and liabilities at fair
value. It also establishes presentation and disclosure requirements
designed to facilitate comparisons between companies that choose different
measurement attributes for similar types of assets and
liabilities. SFAS 159 is effective as of the beginning of the
first fiscal year beginning after November 15, 2007. We will be
required to adopt SFAS 159 in the first quarter of fiscal year
2008. We do not expect SFAS 159 to have a material effect on our
consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements
(“SFAS 160”). SFAS 160 establishes accounting and
reporting standards for noncontrolling interests, also known as minority
interests, in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a
subsidiary. It requires that a noncontrolling interest in a
subsidiary be reported as equity in the consolidated financial statements and
requires that consolidated net income attributable to the parent and to the
noncontrolling interests be shown separately on the face of the income
statement. SFAS 160 also requires, among other things, that
noncontrolling interests in formerly consolidated subsidiaries be measured at
fair value. SFAS 160 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008. We will be required to adopt
SFAS 160 in the first quarter of 2009. Management is currently
evaluating the requirements of SFAS 160 and has not yet determined the
impact on our consolidated statement of financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141R, Business Combinations
(“SFAS 141R”). SFAS 141R replaces SFAS No. 141,
Business
Combinations. SFAS 141R, among other things,
(1) provides more specific guidance with respect to identifying the
acquirer in a business combination, (2) broadens the scope of business
combinations to include all transactions in which one entity gains control over
one or more other businesses, and (3) requires costs incurred to effect the
acquisition (acquisition-related costs) and anticipated restructuring costs of
the acquired company to be recognized separately from the
acquisition. SFAS 141R applies prospectively to business
combinations for which the acquisition date occurs in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2008. We would be required to apply the
principles of SFAS 141R to business combinations with acquisition dates in
calendar year 2009. Due to the prospective application requirements,
it is not possible to determine what effect, if any, SFAS 141R would have
on our consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or
cash flows.
Reclassifications—Certain
reclassifications have been made to prior period amounts to conform with the
current year presentation. These reclassifications did not have a
material effect on our consolidated statement of financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
Note
3—Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
The
components of accumulated other comprehensive loss at December 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005, net of tax, are as follows (in millions):
|
|
Gain
on terminated interest
rate
swaps
|
|
|
Minimum
pension
liability
|
|
|
SFAS
158 pension adjustment
|
|
|
Total
other
comprehensive
income
(loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
(27 |
) |
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
(24 |
) |
Other
comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Balance
at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
Other
comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Adjustment
to initially apply SFAS 158, net of tax
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
7 |
(a) |
|
|
(33 |
)
(a) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
Balance
at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Other
comprehensive income
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Change
in funded status of deferred benefit plans
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
Balance
at December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
(45 |
) |
|
$ |
(42 |
) |
__________________
(a)
Adjustment to initially apply SFAS 158 resulting in a net adjustment of
$26 million.
Note
4—Merger with GlobalSantaFe Corporation
In
November 2007, we completed the Merger. We believe the Merger
adds to and expands upon relationships with significant customers, expands our
existing floater and jackup fleet and expands our presence in the major offshore
drilling provinces. In connection with the Merger, we established a
severance plan. See Note 18—Retirement Plans, Other Postemployment
Benefits and Other Benefit Plans.
We issued
approximately 107,752,000 of our ordinary shares and paid out $5 billion in
cash in connection with the Merger. We accounted for the
Merger using the purchase method of accounting with the Company treated as the
accounting acquirer. As a result, the assets and liabilities of
Transocean remain at historical amounts. The assets and liabilities
of GlobalSantaFe are recorded at their estimated fair values at
November 27, 2007, the date of completion of the Transactions, with the
excess of the purchase price over the sum of these fair values recorded as
goodwill, and we have included the results of operations and cash flows for
approximately one month of 2007 in our consolidated financial
statements.
The
purchase price is comprised of the following (in millions):
Value
of Transocean shares issued to GlobalSantaFe shareholders
|
|
$ |
12,229 |
|
Cash
consideration to GlobalSantaFe shareholders
|
|
|
5,094 |
|
Fair
value of converted GlobalSantaFe stock options and stock appreciation
rights
|
|
|
157 |
|
Transocean
transaction costs
|
|
|
35 |
|
Total
purchase price
|
|
$ |
17,515 |
|
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
The
purchase price allocation for the Merger included the following
(in millions):
Historical
net book value of GlobalSantaFe (a)
|
|
$ |
5,776 |
|
Fair
value adjustment of property and equipment—contract drilling services,
net
|
|
|
7,385 |
|
Fair
value adjustment of property and equipment—oil and gas properties,
net
|
|
|
55 |
|
Fair
value adjustment of materials and supplies, net
|
|
|
138 |
|
Fair
value adjustment of defined benefit plans, net
|
|
|
31 |
|
Elimination
of historical deferred revenues associated with contract drilling
services
|
|
|
107 |
|
Elimination
of historical deferred expenses associated with contract drilling
services
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
Adjustment
to deferred income taxes resulting from various pro forma adjustments,
net
|
|
|
(530 |
) |
Adjustment
to goodwill – contract drilling services
|
|
|
5,400 |
|
Adjustment
to goodwill – drilling management services
|
|
|
260 |
|
Adjustment
to goodwill – oil and gas properties
|
|
|
23 |
|
Adjustment
to drilling contract intangibles, net
|
|
|
(1,303 |
) |
Adjustment
to other intangible items, net
|
|
|
239 |
|
Severance
costs for legacy GlobalSantaFe affected employees
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
Other,
net
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
Total
purchase price
|
|
$ |
17,515 |
|
____________
|
(a)
|
Historical
net book value of GlobalSantaFe includes goodwill of $333 million
associated with prior business combinations, which was eliminated in the
purchase price allocation.
|
The
purchase price included, at estimated fair value, current assets of $2.1
billion, drilling and other property and equipment of $12.3 billion, intangible
assets of $430 million, other assets of $112 million and the assumption of
current liabilities of $439 million, other net long-term liabilities of $2.1
billion and long-term debt of $575 million. The excess of the
purchase price over the estimated fair value of net assets acquired was $5.7
billion, which has been accounted for as goodwill.
Certain
purchase price allocations have not been finalized and the purchase price
allocation is preliminary. Due to the number of assets acquired and
the closing of the Merger close to our year-end, we are continuing our review of
the valuation of property and equipment, intangible assets, liabilities,
evaluation of tax positions and contingencies.
In
connection with the Merger, we acquired drilling contracts for future contract
drilling services of GlobalSantaFe. These contracts include fixed
dayrates and dayrates that may be above or below dayrates as of the date of the
Merger for similar contracts. We adjusted these drilling contracts to
fair value as of the date of the Merger, and after amortizing $88 million in
contract intangible revenues in December 2007, the remaining balances
were $179 million recorded in other assets and
$1,394 million recorded in other long-term liabilities on our
consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2007. We will
recognize contract intangible revenues over nine years, amortizing the balances
using the straight-line method over the respective contract
periods.
Additionally,
we identified other intangible assets associated with drilling management
services, including the trade name, customer relationships and contract
backlog. We consider the ADTI trade name to be an indefinite life
intangible asset, which will not be amortized and will be subject to an annual
impairment test. The customer relationships and contract backlog have
definite lifespans and will each be amortized over their useful lives of
15 years and three months, respectively. At year
end, the carrying values of these intangibles were $76 million, $145
million, and $11 million for the trade name, customer relationships and contract
backlog, respectively.
The
unaudited pro forma condensed combined statements of operations have not been
adjusted for additional charges and expenses or for other potential cost savings
and operational efficiencies that may be realized as a result of the
Transactions. Unaudited pro forma combined operating results of the
Company and GlobalSantaFe assuming the Transactions were completed as of
January 1, 2007 and 2006, respectively, are as follows (in millions,
except per share data):
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Operating
revenues
|
|
$ |
11,022 |
|
|
$ |
7,934 |
|
Operating
income
|
|
|
4,967 |
|
|
|
2,845 |
|
Income
from continuing operations
|
|
|
3,756 |
|
|
|
1,614 |
|
Earnings
per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
17.55 |
|
|
$ |
4.85 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
16.95 |
|
|
$ |
4.69 |
|
The pro
forma financial information includes adjustments for additional depreciation
based on the fair market value of the drilling and other property and equipment
acquired, amortization of intangibles arising from the Merger, increased
interest expense for debt assumed in the Merger and related adjustments for
income taxes. The pro forma information is not necessarily indicative
of the result of operations had the Transactions been completed on the assumed
dates or the results of operations for any future periods.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Note
5—Drilling Fleet Expansion, Upgrades and Acquisitions
Construction
work in progress, recorded in property and equipment, was $3.1 billion,
$1.0 billion and $111 million at December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively. The following table summarizes actual capital
expenditures, including capitalized interest, for our major construction and
conversion projects (in millions):
|
|
Year
ended
December
31, 2007
|
|
|
Year
ended
December
31, 2006
|
|
|
Total
Costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GSF
Development Driller III (a)
|
|
$ |
369 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
369 |
|
Deepwater Pacific 1
(b)
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
279 |
|
Sedco
700-series upgrades
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
396 |
|
Discoverer
Clear Leader
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
409 |
|
Discoverer
Americas
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
301 |
|
Deepwater Pacific 2
(b)
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
179 |
|
Discoverer
Inspiration
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
248 |
|
GSF
Newbuild (a)
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
109 |
|
Discoverer
Luanda
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
107 |
|
Capitalized
Interest
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,879 |
|
|
$ |
610 |
|
|
$ |
2,489 |
|
______________________
|
(a)
|
These
costs include our initial investments in the GSF Development Driller III
and GSF Newbuild of $356 million and $109 million,
respectively, representing the estimated fair values of the rigs at the
time of the Merger.
|
|
(b)
|
The
costs for Deepwater Pacific 1
and Deepwater Pacific 2
represent 100 percent of expenditures incurred prior to our
investment in the joint venture ($277 million and $178 million,
respectively) and 100 percent of expenditures incurred since our
investment in the joint venture. However, Pacific Drilling
shares 50 percent of these
costs.
|
No major
construction or conversion projects occurred during the year ended
December 31, 2005.
In April
2007, we entered into a marketing and purchase option agreement with Pacific
Drilling that provided us with the exclusive marketing right for two
newbuild Ultra-Deepwater Floaters to be named Deepwater Pacific 1
and Deepwater Pacific 2,
as well as an option to purchase a 50 percent interest in a joint venture
company through which we and Pacific Drilling would own the
drillships. In October 2007, we obtained a firm commitment for
the Deepwater Pacific 1,
and we exercised our option and acquired a 50 percent interest in the joint
venture, TPDI.
In June
2007, we were awarded a drilling contract for a fourth enhanced Enterprise-class
drillship to be named the
Discoverer Luanda. As a result of the Merger, we acquired
one Ultra-Deepwater Floater under construction, the GSF Development Driller III,
and one contracted for construction.
Note
6—Asset Dispositions
During
2007, we sold a Deepwater Floater (Peregrine I), a tender
rig (Charley Graves) and a
swamp barge (Searex VI). We
received net proceeds from these sales of $344 million and recognized gains
on the sales of $264 million ($261 million, or $1.16 per diluted
share, net of tax).
During
2006, we sold three of our Midwater Floaters (Peregrine III,
Transocean Explorer and Transocean Wildcat),
three of our tender rigs (W.D. Kent,
Searex IX and
Searex X), a swamp barge (Searex XII) and a
platform rig. We received net proceeds from these sales of
$464 million and recognized gains on the sales of $411 million
($386 million, or $1.19 per diluted share, net of tax).
During
2005, we sold a Midwater Floater (Sedco 600), a Jackup rig
(Transocean Jupiter) and
a land rig. We received net proceeds from these sales of
$49 million and recognized gains on the sales of $33 million
($28 million, or $0.08 per diluted share, net of tax).
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Note
7—Debt
Debt, net
of unamortized discounts, premiums and fair value adjustments, is comprised of
the following (in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term
Credit Facility due August 2008
|
|
$ |
– |
|
|
$ |
700 |
|
Floating
Rate Notes due September 2008 (a)
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
Bridge
Loan Facility due November 2008 (a)
|
|
|
3,670 |
|
|
|
– |
|
364-Day
Revolving Credit Facility due December 2008 (a)
|
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
– |
|
6.625%
Notes due April 2011
|
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
5%
Notes due February 2013
|
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
– |
|
5.25%
Senior Notes due March 2013
|
|
|
499 |
|
|
|
– |
|
6.00%
Senior Notes due March 2018
|
|
|
997 |
|
|
|
– |
|
7.375%
Senior Notes due April 2018
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
Zero
Coupon Convertible Debentures due May 2020
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
18 |
|
1.5%
Convertible Debentures due May 2021
|
|
|
– |
|
|
|
400 |
|
Capital
lease obligation due July 2026 (b)
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
– |
|
8%
Debentures due April 2027
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
7.45%
Notes due April 2027 (c)
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
7%
Senior Notes due June 2028
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
– |
|
7.5%
Notes due April 2031
|
|
|
598 |
|
|
|
598 |
|
1.625%
Series A Convertible Senior Notes due December 2037
|
|
|
2,200 |
|
|
|
– |
|
1.50%
Series B Convertible Senior Notes due December 2037
|
|
|
2,200 |
|
|
|
– |
|
1.50%
Series C Convertible Senior Notes due December 2037
|
|
|
2,200 |
|
|
|
– |
|
6.80%
Senior Notes due March 2038
|
|
|
999 |
|
|
|
– |
|
Debt
to affiliates
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Total
debt
|
|
|
17,257 |
|
|
|
3,298 |
|
Less
debt due within one year (a)(b)(c)
|
|
|
6,172 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
Total
long-term debt
|
|
$ |
11,085 |
|
|
$ |
3,203 |
|
______________________
|
(a)
|
The
Floating Rate Notes, Bridge Loan Facility and 364-Day Revolving Credit
Facility were classified as debt due within one year at December 31,
2007.
|
|
(b)
|
The
capital lease obligation had $2 million classified as debt due within
one year at December 31, 2007.
|
|
(c)
|
The
7.45% Notes were classified as debt due within one year at
December 31, 2006 since the holders had the option to require us to
repurchase the notes in April 2007. At March 31, 2007, we
reclassified these notes as long-term debt, as no holders had notified us
of their intent to exercise their option by the required notification date
of March 15, 2007.
|
The
scheduled maturity of our debt assumes the bondholders exercise their options to
require us to repurchase the 1.625% Series A, 1.50% Series B and
1.50% Series C Convertible Senior Notes in December 2010, 2011
and 2012, respectively. All amounts are at face value. The
scheduled maturities are as follows (in millions):
Years
ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
6,172 |
|
2009
|
|
|
– |
|
2010
|
|
|
2,200 |
|
2011
|
|
|
2,366 |
|
2012
|
|
|
2,201 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
4,308 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
17,247 |
|
Commercial Paper Program—In
December 2007, we entered into a commercial paper program (the
“Program”). The 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility and the Five-Year
Revolving Credit Facility provide liquidity for the Program. At
December 31, 2007, no amounts were outstanding under the
Program. See Note 24—Subsequent Events.
Former Revolving Credit
Facility—In July 2005, we entered into a $500 million,
five-year revolving credit agreement (“Former Revolving Credit
Facility”). In May 2006, we increased the credit limit on the
facility from $500 million to $1.0 billion and extended the maturity
date by one year from July 2010 to July 2011, and in June 2007,
we extended the maturity on the facility by another year to
July 2012. At our election, the Former Revolving Credit Facility
bore interest at either a base rate or at LIBOR plus a margin that could vary
from 0.19 percent to 0.58 percent depending on our non-credit enhanced
senior unsecured long-term debt rating (“Debt Rating”). In
September 2007, we repaid the then outstanding balance and terminated this
facility. See “—Debt Redemptions, Refinancings and
Repayments.”
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Term Credit Facility—In
August 2006, we entered into a two-year term credit facility under the Term
Credit Agreement dated August 30, 2006 (“Term Credit
Facility”). Under the terms of the Term Credit Facility, we were able
to request borrowings up to $1.0 billion over the first six months of the
term. After six months, any unused capacity was
cancelled. Once repaid, the funds could not be
reborrowed. At our election, borrowings could be made under the Term
Credit Facility at either (1) the base rate, determined as the greater of
(a) the prime loan rate or (b) the sum of the weighted average
overnight federal funds rate plus 0.50 percent, or (2) LIBOR plus
0.30 percent, based on current credit ratings. We terminated the
facility in August 2007. See “—Debt Redemptions, Refinancings and
Repayments.”
Floating Rate Notes—In
September 2006, we issued $1.0 billion aggregate principal amount of
floating rate notes, due September 2008 (“Floating Rate
Notes”). We are required to pay interest on the Floating Rate Notes
on March 5, June 5, September 5 and December 5 of each year,
beginning on December 5, 2006. The per annum interest rate on
the Floating Rate Notes is equal to the three month LIBOR, reset on each payment
date, plus 0.20 percent. We may redeem some or all of the notes
at any time after September 2007 at a price equal to 100 percent of
the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any. At
December 31, 2007, $1.0 billion principal amount of these notes was
outstanding at an interest rate of 5.14 percent.
Bridge Loan Facility—In
September 2007, we entered into the Bridge Loan Facility. In
connection with the Transactions, we borrowed $15 billion under the Bridge Loan
Facility at the reserve-adjusted LIBOR plus the applicable margin, which is
based upon our Debt Rating. As of December 31, 2007, the
applicable margin was 0.4 percent. We may prepay the Bridge Loan
Facility in whole or in part without premium or penalty. In addition,
this facility requires mandatory prepayments of outstanding borrowings in an
amount equal to 100 percent of the net cash proceeds resulting from any of
the following (in each case subject to certain agreed exceptions): (1) the
sale or other disposition of any of our property or assets above a predetermined
threshold; (2) the receipt of certain net insurance or condemnation
proceeds; (3) certain issuances of our equity securities; and (4) the
incurrence of indebtedness for borrowed money by us. The Bridge Loan
Facility also contains certain covenants that are applicable during the period
in which any borrowings are outstanding, including a maximum leverage
ratio. Borrowings under the Bridge Loan Facility are subject to
acceleration upon the occurrence of events of default. At
December 31, 2007, we had $3.7 billion outstanding under this facility
at a weighted-average interest rate of 5.41 percent. See Note
24—Subsequent Events.
364-Day Revolving Credit
Facility—In December 2007, we entered into a credit agreement for a
364-Day, $1.5 billion revolving credit facility (“364-Day Revolving Credit
Facility”). The 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility bears interest, at
our option, at either (1) a base rate, determined as the greater of
(a) the prime loan rate or (b) the federal funds effective rate plus
0.50 percent, or (2) the reserve-adjusted LIBOR plus the applicable margin,
which is based upon our Debt Rating. A facility fee, varying from
0.05 percent to 0.15 percent depending on our Debt Rating, is incurred on the
daily amount of the underlying commitment, whether used or unused, throughout
the term of the facility. A utilization fee, varying from
0.05 percent to 0.10 percent depending on our Debt Rating, is payable
if amounts outstanding under the 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility are greater
than or equal to 50 percent of the total underlying
commitment. At December 31, 2007, the applicable margin,
facility fee and utilization fee were 0.28 percent, 0.07 percent and
0.10 percent, respectively. The 364-Day Revolving Credit
Facility may be prepaid in whole or in part without premium or
penalty. The 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility requires compliance
with various covenants and provisions customary for agreements of this nature,
including a debt to total tangible capitalization ratio, as defined by the
364-Day Revolving Credit Facility, of not greater than 60 percent at
December 31, 2009 and at the end of each quarter thereafter and a maximum
leverage ratio of no greater than 350 percent as of June 30, 2008 and
300 percent at the end of each quarter thereafter through September 30,
2009. At December 31, 2007, we had $1.5 billion outstanding
under this facility at a weighted-average interest rate of
5.52 percent. See Note 24—Subsequent Events.
Five-Year Facility—In
November 2007, we entered into a $2.0 billion, five-year revolving
credit facility under the Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility Agreement dated
November 27, 2007 (“Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility”). Under
the terms of the Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility, we may make borrowings at
either (1) a base rate, determined as the greater of (a) the prime
loan rate or (b) the federal funds effective rate plus 0.5 percent, or
(2) the reserve-adjusted LIBOR plus the applicable margin, which is based
upon our Debt Rating. A facility fee, varying from 0.07 percent to
0.17 percent depending on our Debt Rating, is incurred on the daily amount of
the underlying commitment, whether used or unused, throughout the term of the
facility. A utilization fee, varying from 0.05 percent to
0.10 percent depending on our Debt Rating, is payable if amounts
outstanding under the Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility are greater than or
equal to 50 percent of the total underlying commitment. At
December 31, 2007, the applicable margin, facility fee and utilization fee
were 0.26 percent, 0.09 percent and 0.10 percent,
respectively. The Five-Year Revolving Credit Facility may be prepaid
in whole or in part without premium or penalty. The Five-Year
Revolving Credit Facility requires compliance with various covenants and
provisions customary for agreements of this nature, including a debt to total
tangible capitalization ratio, as defined by the Five-Year Revolving Credit
Facility, of not greater than 60 percent at December 31, 2009 and at
the end of each quarter thereafter and a maximum leverage ratio of no greater
than 350 percent as of June 30, 2008 and 300 percent at the end of
each quarter thereafter through September 30, 2009. At
December 31, 2007, no borrowings were outstanding under the Five-Year
Revolving Credit Facility.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
6.625% Notes and
7.5% Notes—In April 2001, we issued $700 million aggregate
principal amount of 6.625% Notes due April 2011 and $600 million
aggregate principal amount of 7.5% Notes due April 2031. At
December 31, 2007, $166 million and $600 million principal amount
of the 6.625% Notes and 7.5% Notes, respectively, were
outstanding.
5% Notes and
7% Notes—In November 2007, Transocean Worldwide Inc.
executed a supplemental indenture to assume the obligations related to the
5% Notes due 2013 (the “5% Notes”) issued by GlobalSantaFe under the
indenture dated as of February 1, 2003. Additionally, as a
result of the Merger, we acquired Global Marine Inc, formerly a subsidiary of
GlobalSantaFe and now our subsidiary, which is the obligor on the 7% Notes
due 2028 (the “7% Notes”), which were issued under the indenture dated as
of September 1, 1997. The 5% Notes are the obligation of
Transocean Worldwide Inc. and the 7% Notes are the obligation of
Global Marine Inc., and we have not guaranteed either
obligation. The respective obligor may redeem the 5% Notes and
the 7% Notes in whole or in part at a price equal to 100 percent of
the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, and a make-whole
premium. The indentures related to the 5% Notes and the
7% Notes contain limitations on the obligor’s ability to incur indebtedness
for borrowed money secured by certain liens and on its ability to engage in
certain sale/leaseback transactions. At December 31, 2007,
$250 million and $300 million aggregate principal amount of the
5% Notes and the 7% Notes, respectively, remained
outstanding
5.25%, 6.00% and
6.80% Senior Notes—In December 2007, we issued
$0.5 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.25% Senior Notes due
March 2013 (the “5.25% Senior Notes”), $1.0 billion aggregate
principal amount of 6.00% Senior Notes due March 2018 (the
“6.00% Senior Notes”) and $1.0 billion aggregate principal amount of
6.80% Senior Notes due March 2038 (the “6.80% Senior Notes,” and
together with the 5.25% Senior Notes and the 6.00% Senior Notes, the
“Senior Notes”). We are required to pay interest on the Senior Notes
on March 15 and September 15 of each year, beginning March 15,
2008. We may redeem some or all of the notes at any time, at a
redemption price equal to 100 percent of the principal amount plus accrued and
unpaid interest, if any, and a make-whole premium. At
December 31, 2007, $500 million, $1.0 billion and
$1.0 billion principal amount of the 5.25%, 6.00% and
6.80% Senior Notes, respectively, were outstanding.
Zero Coupon Convertible
Debentures—In May 2000, we issued Zero Coupon Convertible Debentures due
May 2020 with a face value at maturity of $865 million. The
debentures were issued to the public at a price of $579.12 per debenture
and accrued original issue discount at a rate of 2.75 percent per annum
compounded semiannually to reach a face value at maturity of $1,000 per
debenture. We paid no interest on the debentures prior to maturity
and, since May 2003, we had the right to redeem the debentures for a price equal
to the issuance price plus accrued original issue discount to the date of
redemption. Each holder had the right to require us to repurchase the
debentures on the third, eighth and thirteenth anniversary of issuance at the
issuance price plus accrued original issue discount to the date of
repurchase. We could pay this repurchase price with either cash or
ordinary shares or a combination of cash and ordinary shares. The
debentures were convertible into our ordinary shares at the option of the holder
at any time at a ratio of 8.1566 shares per debenture, which was equivalent to
an initial conversion price of $71.00 per share, subject to adjustments if
certain events took place. See “—Debt Redemptions, Refinancings and
Repayments.”
1.5% Convertible
Debentures—In May 2001, we issued $400 million aggregate principal
amount of 1.5% Convertible Debentures due May 2021. We had the
right to redeem the debentures for a price equal to 100 percent of the
principal. Each holder had the right to require us to repurchase the
debentures after five, 10 and 15 years at 100 percent of the principal
amount. We could pay this repurchase price with either cash or
ordinary shares or a combination of cash and ordinary shares. The
debentures were convertible into our ordinary shares at the option of the holder
at any time at a ratio of 13.8627 shares per $1,000 principal amount
debenture, which was equivalent to an initial conversion price of $72.136 per
share. This ratio was subject to adjustments if certain events took
place, and conversion could only occur if the closing sale price per ordinary
share exceeded 110 percent of the conversion price for at least 20 trading
days in a period of 30 consecutive trading days ending on the trading day
immediately prior to the conversion date or if other specified conditions were
met. See “—Debt Redemptions, Refinancings and
Repayments.”
Capital Lease Obligations—The
GSF Explorer is
held under a capital lease through 2026. The capital lease for the
GSF Explorer has a
remaining term of 19 years. See Note 16—Commitments and
Contingencies.
7.45% Notes and
8% Debentures—In April 1997, we issued $100 million
aggregate principal amount of 7.45% Notes due April 2027 (the
“7.45% Notes”) and $200 million aggregate principal amount of
8% Debentures due April 2027 (the
“8% Debentures”). The 7.45% Notes and the
8% Debentures are redeemable at any time at our option subject to a
make-whole premium. At December 31, 2007, $100 million and
$57 million principal amount of the 7.45% Notes and the
8% Debentures, respectively, were outstanding.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
1.625% Series A,
1.50% Series B and 1.50% Series C Convertible Senior Notes—In
December 2007, we issued $2.2 billion aggregate principal amount of
1.625% Series A Convertible Senior Notes due December 2037 (the
“Series A Notes”), $2.2 billion aggregate principal amount of
1.50% Series B Convertible Senior Notes due December 2037 (the
“Series B Notes”) and $2.2 billion aggregate principal amount of
1.50% Series C Convertible Senior Notes due December 2037 (the
“Series C Notes,” and together with the Series A and Series B Notes, the
“Convertible Notes”). We are required to pay interest on the
Convertible Notes on June 15 and December 15 of each year, beginning June
15, 2008. The Convertible Notes may be converted under the
circumstances specified below at an initial rate of 5.9310 ordinary shares per
$1,000 note. The initial conversion rate is subject to adjustments
upon the occurrence of certain corporate events but not for accrued
interest. Upon conversion, we will deliver, in lieu of ordinary
shares, cash up to the aggregate principal amount of notes to be converted and
ordinary shares in respect of the remainder, if any, of our conversion
obligation in excess of the aggregate principal amount of the notes being
converted. In addition, if certain fundamental changes occur on or
before December 20, 2010, with respect to Series A Notes,
December 20, 2011, with respect to Series B Notes or December 20,
2012, with respect to Series C Notes, we will in some cases increase the
conversion rate for a holder electing to convert notes in connection with such
fundamental change. We may redeem some or all of the notes at any
time after December 20, 2010, in the case of the Series A Notes,
December 20, 2011, in the case of the Series B Notes and
December 20, 2012, in the case of the Series C Notes, in each case at a
redemption price equal to 100 percent of the principal amount plus accrued
and unpaid interest, if any. Holders of the Series A Notes and
Series B Notes have the right to require us to repurchase their notes on
December 15, 2010 and December 15, 2011, respectively. In
addition, holders of any series of notes will have the right to require us to
repurchase their notes on December 14, 2012, December 15, 2017,
December 15, 2022, December 15, 2027 and December 15, 2032, and
upon the occurrence of a fundamental change, at a repurchase price in cash equal
to 100 percent of the principal amount of the notes to be repurchased plus
accrued and unpaid interest, if any. At December 31, 2007,
$2.2 billion principal amount of each of the Series A Notes,
Series B Notes and Series C Notes were outstanding.
Holders
may convert their notes only under the following circumstances: (1) during
any calendar quarter after March 31, 2008 if the last reported sale price
of our ordinary shares for at least 20 trading days in a period of
30 consecutive trading days ending on the last trading day of the preceding
calendar quarter is more than 130 percent of the conversion price,
(2) during the five business days after the average trading price per
$1,000 principal amount of the notes is equal to or less than 98 percent of
the average conversion value of such notes during the preceding five trading-day
period as described herein, (3) during specified periods if specified
distributions to holders of our ordinary shares are made or specified corporate
transactions occur, (4) prior to the close of business on the business day
preceding the redemption date if the notes are called for redemption or
(5) on or after September 15, 2037 and prior to the close of business
on the business day prior to the stated maturity of the notes. Upon
conversion, we will deliver, in lieu of ordinary shares, cash up to the
aggregate principal amount of notes to be converted and ordinary shares in
respect of the remainder, if any, of our conversion obligation in excess of the
aggregate principal amount of the notes being converted.
Debt to Affiliates—In
November 2005, we entered into a loan agreement with Overseas Drilling
Limited (“ODL”), a company in which we own a 50 percent interest, pursuant
to which we may borrow up to $8 million. ODL may demand
repayment at any time upon five business days prior written notice given to us
and any amount due to us from ODL may be offset against the loan amount at the
time of repayment. As of December 31, 2007, $3 million was
outstanding under this loan agreement.
In
October 2007, TPDI, a joint venture in which we own 50 percent, issued
a promissory note to us for approximately
$238 million. Concurrently, TPDI issued a note to Pacific
Drilling for approximately $238 million, which is reflected in long-term
debt in our consolidated balance sheet.
Debt Redemptions, Refinancings and
Repayments—In August 2007, we terminated our existing two-year Term
Credit Facility. Prior to the termination, we repaid the then
outstanding balance of $470 million. We recognized a loss on the
termination of this debt of $1 million, which had no tax
effect.
In
November 2007, we terminated our $1.0 billion Former Revolving Credit
Facility. We recognized a loss on the termination of this debt of
$1 million, which had no tax effect.
In
December 2007, we refinanced a total of $10.5 billion of borrowings under
the Bridge Loan Facility using proceeds from borrowings under the 364-Day
Revolving Credit Facility, the Senior Notes and the Convertible
Notes. We recognized a loss on the retirement of this debt of
$6 million ($0.03 per diluted share), which had no tax
effect. In addition, we repaid $820 million of borrowings under
the Bridge Loan Facility using internally generated cash flow. See
Note 24—Subsequent Events.
In
October 2007, we called our Zero Coupon Convertible Debentures due
May 15, 2020. Between the notification and the trading day prior
to the redemption date, holders retained the right to convert the debentures
into our ordinary shares at a rate of 8.1566 ordinary shares per $1,000
debenture. During this period, we issued 148,244 ordinary shares
upon conversion of $18 million aggregate principal amount of
debentures. In November 2007, we redeemed the remaining
debentures at an approximate cost of $18,000, plus accrued and unpaid
interest.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
In
October 2007, we also called our 1.5% Convertible Debentures due May
15, 2021. Between the notification date and the fourth trading day
prior to the redemption date, holders retained the right to convert the
debentures into our ordinary shares at a rate of 13.8627 ordinary shares
per $1,000 debenture. During this period, we issued 5,499,613
ordinary shares upon conversion of $397 million aggregate principal amount
of debentures. In November 2007, we redeemed the remaining
debentures at an approximate cost of $3 million, plus accrued and unpaid
interest.
Holders
of our 1.5% Convertible Debentures due May 15, 2021 had the option to
require us to repurchase their debentures in May 2006; however, no holders
exercised such right. In May 2006, holders of $101,000 aggregate
principal amount converted their debentures into ordinary shares at a conversion
rate of 13.8627 ordinary shares per $1,000 debenture, resulting in the
issuance of 1,399 ordinary shares.
In July
2005, we acquired, pursuant to a tender offer, a total of $534 million, or
approximately 76.3 percent, of the aggregate principal amount of our
6.625% Notes due April 2011 at 110.578 percent of face value, or
$591 million, plus accrued and unpaid interest.
In March
2005, we redeemed our outstanding 6.95% Senior Notes due April 2008 at the
make-whole premium price provided in the indenture. We recognized a
loss on the redemption of debt of $7 million ($0.02 per diluted share),
which had no tax effect.
Note
8—Financial Instruments and Risk Concentration
Foreign Exchange Risk—Our
international operations expose us to foreign exchange risk. This
risk is primarily associated with compensation costs denominated in currencies
other than the U.S. dollar, which is our functional currency, and with purchases
from foreign suppliers. We use a variety of techniques to minimize
the exposure to foreign exchange risk, including customer contract payment terms
and the possible use of foreign exchange derivative instruments.
Our
primary foreign exchange risk management strategy involves structuring customer
contracts to provide for payment in both U.S. dollars and local
currency. The payment portion denominated in local currency is based
on anticipated local currency requirements over the contract
term. Due to various factors, including customer acceptance, local
banking laws, other statutory requirements, local currency convertibility and
the impact of inflation on local costs, actual foreign exchange needs may vary
from those anticipated in the customer contracts, resulting in partial exposure
to foreign exchange risk. Fluctuations in foreign currencies
typically have not had a material impact on overall results. In
situations where payments of local currency do not equal local currency
requirements, foreign exchange derivative instruments, specifically foreign
exchange forward contracts, or spot purchases, may be used to mitigate foreign
currency risk. A foreign exchange forward contract obligates us to
exchange predetermined amounts of specified foreign currencies at specified
exchange rates on specified dates or to make an equivalent U.S. dollar payment
equal to the value of such exchange.
We do not
enter into derivative transactions for speculative purposes. Gains
and losses on foreign exchange derivative instruments, which qualify as
accounting hedges, are deferred as other comprehensive income and recognized
when the underlying foreign exchange exposure is realized. Gains and
losses on foreign exchange derivative instruments, which do not qualify as
hedges for accounting purposes, are recognized currently based on the change in
market value of the derivative instruments. At December 31, 2007
and 2006, we had no outstanding foreign exchange derivative
instruments.
Interest Rate Risk—Our use of
debt directly exposes us to interest rate risk. Floating rate debt,
where the interest rate can be changed every year or less over the life of the
instrument, exposes us to short-term changes in market interest
rates. Fixed rate debt, where the interest rate is fixed over the
life of the instrument and the instrument’s maturity is greater than one year,
exposes us to changes in market interest rates should we refinance maturing debt
with new debt.
In
addition, we are exposed to interest rate risk in our cash investments, as the
interest rates on these investments change with market interest
rates.
From time
to time, we may use interest rate swap agreements to manage the effect of
interest rate changes on future income. These derivatives are used as
hedges and are not used for speculative or trading purposes. Interest
rate swaps are designated as a hedge of underlying future interest
payments. These agreements involve the exchange of amounts based on
variable interest rates and amounts based on a fixed interest rate over the life
of the agreement without an exchange of the notional amount upon which the
payments are based. The interest rate differential to be received or
paid on the swaps is recognized over the lives of the swaps as an adjustment to
interest expense. Gains and losses on terminations of interest rate
swap agreements are deferred and recognized as an adjustment to interest expense
over the remaining life of the underlying debt. In the event of the
early retirement of a designated debt obligation, any realized or unrealized
gain or loss from the swap would be recognized in income.
We had no
interest rate swap transactions outstanding as of December 31, 2007 and
2006. See Note 9—Interest Rate Swaps.
Credit Risk—Financial
instruments that potentially subject us to concentrations of credit risk are
primarily cash and cash equivalents and trade receivables. It is our
practice to place our cash and cash equivalents in time deposits at commercial
banks with high credit ratings or mutual funds, which invest exclusively in high
quality money market instruments. In foreign locations, local
financial institutions are generally utilized for local currency
needs. We limit the amount of exposure to any one institution and do
not believe we are exposed to any significant credit risk.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
We derive
the majority of our revenue from services to international oil companies,
government-owned and government-controlled oil companies. Receivables
are dispersed in various countries. See Note 19—Segments,
Geographical Analysis and Major Customers. We maintain an allowance
for doubtful accounts receivable based upon expected collectibility and
establish reserves for doubtful accounts on a case-by-case basis when we believe
the required payment of specific amounts owed to us is unlikely to
occur. We are not aware of any significant credit risks relating to
our customer base and do not generally require collateral or other security to
support customer receivables.
Labor Agreements—We require
highly skilled personnel to operate our drilling units. As a result,
we conduct extensive personnel recruiting, training and safety
programs. At December 31, 2007, we had approximately
21,100 employees and we also utilized approximately 3,400 persons through
contract labor providers. Some of
our employees, most of whom work in the U.K., Nigeria and Norway, are
represented by collective bargaining agreements. In addition, some of our
contracted labor work under collective bargaining
agreements. Many of these represented individuals are working
under agreements that are subject to ongoing salary negotiation in
2008. These negotiations could result in higher personnel expenses,
other increased costs or increased operation restrictions. Additionally,
the unions in the U.K. have sought an interpretation of the application of the
Working Time Regulations to the offshore sector. The Tribunal has
recently issued its decision and we are currently reviewing the decision to
determine its potential impact on our operations and expenses as well as to
determine whether the decision should be appealed. The application of
the Working Time Regulations to the offshore sector could result in higher labor
costs and could undermine our ability to obtain a sufficient number of skilled
workers in the U.K.
Note
9—Interest Rate Swaps
In June
2001 and February 2002, we entered into interest rate swaps with various
banks related to certain notes in the aggregate notional amount of
$1.6 billion. In January 2003, we terminated all our
outstanding interest rate swaps, which were designated as fair value hedges, and
recorded $174 million as a fair value adjustment to the underlying
long-term debt in our consolidated balance sheet. We amortize this
amount as a reduction to interest expense over the remaining life of the
underlying debt. During the years ended December 31, 2007 and
2006, such reduction amounted to $3 million ($0.01 per diluted share)
for each year and $9 million ($0.04 per diluted share) for the year ended
December 31, 2005. As a result of the redemption of our
6.95% Senior Notes in March 2005, we recognized $13 million ($0.06 per
diluted share) of the unamortized fair value adjustment as a reduction to our
loss on redemption of debt during the year ended December 31, 2005 (see
Note 7—Debt). As a result of the repurchase of our
6.625% Notes in July 2005, we recognized $62 million of the
unamortized fair value adjustment as a reduction to our loss on repurchase of
debt, which resulted in a gain on the repurchase (see
Note 7—Debt). There were no tax effects related to these
reductions. At December 31, 2007 and 2006, the remaining balance
to be amortized was $12 million and $15 million, respectively, which
was entirely related to the 6.625% Notes due April 2011.
At
December 31, 2007 and 2006, we had no outstanding interest rate
swaps.
Note
10—Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The
following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each
class of financial instruments for which it is practicable to estimate that
value:
Cash and Cash Equivalents and
Accounts Receivable-Trade—The carrying amounts approximate fair value
because of the short maturity of those instruments.
Debt—The fair value of our
fixed rate debt is calculated based on market prices. The carrying
value of variable rate debt approximates fair value.
|
|
December
31, 2007
|
|
|
December
31, 2006
|
|
|
|
Carrying
amount
|
|
|
Fair
value
|
|
|
Carrying
amount
|
|
|
Fair
value
|
|
|
|
(in
millions)
|
|
|
(in
millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
$ |
17,257 |
|
|
$ |
17,935 |
|
|
$ |
3,298 |
|
|
$ |
3,476 |
|
Debt to Affiliates—The fair
value of long-term debt to affiliates with a carrying amount of
$241 million and $3 million at December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively, could not be determined because there is no available market price
for such debts.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Note
11—Other Current Liabilities
Other
current liabilities are comprised of the following
(in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
payroll and employee benefits
|
|
$ |
447 |
|
|
$ |
150 |
|
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
Accrued
taxes, other than income
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Accrued
interest
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Stock
warrant consideration payable
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Unearned
income
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
Other
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Total
other current liabilities
|
|
$ |
826 |
|
|
$ |
369 |
|
Note
12—Other Long-Term Liabilities
Other
long-term liabilities are comprised of the following
(in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Drilling
contract intangibles
|
|
$ |
1,394 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
Long-term
income taxes payable
|
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
141 |
|
Accrued
pension liabilities
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
Accrued
retiree life insurance and medical benefits
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Other
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
Total
other long-term liabilities
|
|
$ |
2,125 |
|
|
$ |
340 |
|
Note
13—Repurchase of Ordinary Shares
In
May 2006, our board of directors authorized an increase in the overall
amount of ordinary shares that may be repurchased under our share repurchase
program to $4.0 billion from $2.0 billion, which was previously
authorized and announced in October 2005. The repurchase program
does not have an established expiration date and may be suspended or
discontinued at any time. Under the program, repurchased shares are
constructively retired and returned to unissued status.
A summary
of the aggregate ordinary shares repurchased and retired for the years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006 is as follows (in millions, except per
share data):
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value
of shares
|
|
$ |
400 |
|
|
$ |
2,600 |
|
Number
of shares
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
35.7 |
|
Average
purchase price per share
|
|
$ |
77.39 |
|
|
$ |
72.78 |
|
Total
consideration paid to repurchase the shares was recorded in shareholders’ equity
as a reduction in ordinary shares and additional paid-in
capital. Such consideration was funded with existing cash balances
and borrowings under the Former Revolving Credit Facility. At
December 31, 2007, we had authority to repurchase $600 million of our
ordinary shares under our share repurchase program.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Note
14—Supplementary Cash Flow Information
Net cash
provided by (used in) operating activities attributable to the net change in
operating assets and liabilities is composed of the following
(in millions):
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase)
in accounts receivable
|
|
$ |
(274 |
) |
|
$ |
(347 |
) |
|
$ |
(150 |
) |
(Increase)
in other current assets
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
Increase
in accounts payable and other current liabilities
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Increase
in other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Change
in income taxes receivable / payable, net
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
$ |
(238 |
) |
|
$ |
(69 |
) |
|
$ |
(113 |
) |
Supplementary
cash flow information is as follows (in millions):
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Non-cash
activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures, accrued at end of period (a)
|
|
$ |
233 |
|
|
$ |
186 |
|
|
$ |
31 |
|
Merger
with GlobalSantaFe (b)
|
|
12,386
|
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Joint
ventures and other investments (c)
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
payments for interest
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
Cash
payments for income taxes
|
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
(a)
|
These
amounts represent additions to property and equipment for which we had
accrued a corresponding liability in accounts
payable.
|
|
(b)
|
In
connection with the Merger, we issued $12.4 billion of our ordinary
shares to GlobalSantaFe shareholders, acquired $20.6 billion in
assets and assumed $575 million of debt and $2.5 billion of other
liabilities. See Note 4—Merger with GlobalSantaFe
Corporation.
|
|
(c)
|
In
connection with our investment in and consolidation of TPDI, we recorded
additions to property and equipment of $457 million, of
which $238 million was in exchange for a note payable to
Pacific Drilling. See Note 1—Nature of Business and Principles
of Consolidation and Note 7—Debt.
|
Note
15—Income Taxes
We are a
Cayman Islands company. Our earnings are not subject to income tax in
the Cayman Islands because the country does not levy tax on corporate
income. We operate through our various subsidiaries in a number of
countries throughout the world. Income taxes have been provided based
upon the tax laws and rates in the countries in which operations are conducted
and income is earned. Due to the fact that the countries in which we
operate have taxation regimes with varying nominal rates, deductions, credits
and other tax attributes, there is no expected relationship between the
provision for or benefit from income taxes and income or loss before income
taxes.
The
components of the provision (benefit) for income taxes are as follows
(in millions):
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
provision
|
|
$ |
293 |
|
|
$ |
245 |
|
|
$ |
60 |
|
Deferred
provision (benefit)
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
27 |
|
Income
tax provision
|
|
$ |
253 |
|
|
$ |
222 |
|
|
$ |
87 |
|
Effective
tax rate
|
|
|
7.5 |
% |
|
|
13.8 |
% |
|
|
10.8 |
% |
Deferred
tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the anticipated future tax effects
of temporary differences between the financial statement basis and the tax basis
of our assets and liabilities at the applicable tax rates in
effect.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Significant
components of deferred tax assets and liabilities are as follows
(in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Deferred
tax assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Drilling
contract intangibles
|
|
$ |
303 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
Net
operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
Tax
credit carryforwards
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
Accrued
payroll expenses not currently deductible
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Deferred
income
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Valuation
allowance
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
Total
deferred tax assets
|
|
|
694 |
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
tax liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
(1,155 |
) |
|
|
(218 |
) |
Drilling
management services intangibles
|
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
Other
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
Total
deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(1,256 |
) |
|
|
(227 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
deferred tax liabilities
|
|
$ |
(562 |
) |
|
$ |
(38 |
) |
We have
not provided for deferred taxes in circumstances where we do not expect the
operations in a jurisdiction to give rise to future tax consequences, due to the
structure of operations and applicable law. Should our expectations
change regarding the expected future tax consequences, we may be required to
record additional deferred taxes that could have a material adverse effect on
our consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
The
$524 million increase in our net deferred tax liability is composed of
$599 million of net deferred tax liabilities assumed in connections with
the Merger partly offset by the deferred tax benefit of $40 million and
$35 million of net tax benefits charged to equity accounts as a result of
the tax effects of minimum pension liability adjustments and deductions taken
for employee option exercises.
We have
not provided for deferred taxes on the unremitted earnings of certain
subsidiaries that we consider to be permanently reinvested. Should we
make a distribution of the unremitted earnings of these subsidiaries, we may be
required to record additional taxes. Because we cannot predict when,
if at all, we will make a distribution of these unremitted earnings, we are
unable to make a determination of the amount of unrecognized deferred tax
liability.
A
valuation allowance for deferred tax assets is recorded when it is more likely
than not that some or all of the benefit from the deferred tax asset will not be
realized. We provide a valuation allowance to offset deferred tax
assets for net operating losses incurred during the year in certain
jurisdictions and for other deferred tax assets where, in the opinion of
management, it is more likely than not that the financial statement benefit of
these losses will not be realized. We provide a valuation allowance
for foreign tax credit carryforwards to reflect the possible expiration of these
benefits prior to their utilization. As of December 31, 2007,
the valuation allowance for non-current deferred tax assets decreased
$30 million to $29 million. The decrease resulted primarily
from a $58 million release of valuation allowance against our U.S. foreign
tax credits partly offset by a $28 million valuation allowance against
deferred tax assets acquired in connection with the Merger. As of
December 31, 2006, our valuation allowance was $59 million which
included an $11 million increase over the 2005 balance, primarily resulting
from an increase in foreign tax credits.
Our U.K.
net operating loss carryforwards do not expire. The tax effect of the
U.K. net operating loss carryforwards was $49 million at December 31,
2007 and $56 million at December 31, 2006. We have
generated additional net operating loss carryforwards in various worldwide tax
jurisdictions. Our U.S. foreign tax credit carryforwards of
$80 million, net of valuation allowances of $1 million,
which will expire between 2009 and 2016. Our U.S. alternative
minimum tax credits of $20 million do not expire.
In
addition to our recognized tax attributes, we have an unrecognized U.S. capital
loss carryforward. We have not recognized a deferred tax asset for
the capital loss carryforward as it is not probable that we will realize the
benefit of this tax attribute. Our operations do not normally
generate capital gain income, which is the only type of income that may be
offset by capital losses. During the year ended December 31,
2005, we recognized a benefit of $67 million to record the utilization of the
capital loss carryforward to offset capital gain income resulting from certain
restructuring transactions. Certain payments from TODCO under the tax
sharing agreement also serve to increase or decrease the capital loss
carryforward. Should an opportunity to utilize the remaining capital
loss arise, the total potential tax benefit at December 31, 2007 was
$776 million. As of December 31, 2006, we had not
recognized a deferred tax asset for certain of our U.S. net operating loss
carryforwards as it was not probable that the benefit of the underlying tax
deduction would be realized. During 2007, we determined that it was
probable that the U.S. entity generating the previously unrecognized net
operating losses will generate sufficient taxable income to utilize all net
operating losses. As a result, we recognized the remaining amount of
these previously unrecognized net operating losses.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
We are
subject to changes in tax laws, treaties and regulations in and between the
countries in which we operate. A material change in these tax laws,
treaties or regulations could result in a higher or lower effective tax rate on
our worldwide earnings.
Transocean Inc.,
a Cayman Islands company, is not subject to income taxes in the Cayman Islands
because the Cayman Islands does not levy a tax on corporate
income. We have obtained assurance from the Cayman Islands government
under the Tax Concessions Law (as amended) that in the event that any
legislation is enacted in the Cayman Islands imposing tax computed on profits,
income, distributions or any capital assets, gain or appreciation, or any tax in
the nature of estate duty or inheritance tax, such tax shall not, until
June 1, 2019, be applicable to us or to any of our operations or to our
shares, debentures or other obligations.
Our
income tax returns are subject to review and examination in the various
jurisdictions in which we operate. We are currently contesting
various tax assessments. We accrue for income tax contingencies that
we believe are more likely than not exposures in accordance with the provisions
of FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes—an Interpretation
of FASB Statement No. 109 (“FIN 48”), as adopted on January 1,
2007.
The total
unrecognized tax benefits related to uncertain tax positions as of
January 1, 2007 was $303 million. During 2007, our
unrecognized tax benefits related to uncertain tax positions increased to
$424 million. If recognized, $349 million of this amount
would favorably impact the effective tax rate.
A
reconciliation of the unrecognized tax benefits, excluding interest and
penalties, for the year ended December 31, 2007 follows:
|
|
Unrecognized
tax benefits
|
|
Balance
at January 1, 2007
|
|
$ |
219 |
|
Unrecognized
tax benefits assumed in connection with the Merger
|
|
|
42 |
|
Additions
for current year tax positions
|
|
|
48 |
|
Additions
for prior year tax positions
|
|
|
22 |
|
Reductions
for prior year tax positions
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
Settlements
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
Reductions
related to statute of limitation expirations
|
|
|
― |
|
Balance
at December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
299 |
|
It is
reasonably possible that our existing liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits
may increase or decrease in the next twelve months primarily due to the
progression of open audits or the expiration of statutes of
limitation. However, we cannot reasonably estimate a range of
potential changes in our existing liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits due
to various uncertainties, such as the unresolved nature of various
audits.
We accrue
interest and penalties related to our liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits
as a component of income tax expense. In connection with the adoption
of FIN 48 we recognized approximately $84 million for the payment of
interest and penalties, which is included as a component of the January 1,
2007 $303 million liability for unrecognized tax
benefits. During the year ended December 31, 2007, we increased
the liability related to interest and penalties on our unrecognized tax benefits
by $41 million, which brought the interest and penalty component included
in the December 31, 2007 liability for unrecognized tax benefits balance to
$125 million. Included in the $41 million increase in
interest and penalties was a $10 million assumption of interest and penalty
liabilities in connection with the Merger, which did not impact the statement of
operations.
We, or
one of our subsidiaries, file federal and local tax returns in several
jurisdictions throughout the world. With few exceptions, we are no
longer subject to examinations of our U.S. and non-U.S. tax matters for years
prior to 1999. During 2006, we settled disputes with tax authorities
in several jurisdictions and the statute of limitations for income tax
contingencies for certain issues expired. As a result of the
resolution of these matters, we recognized a current tax benefit of
$30 million for the year ended December 31, 2006. The
amount of current tax benefit recognized in 2007 from the settlement of disputes
with tax authorities and the expiration of statute of limitations was
insignificant.
Our 2004
and 2005 U.S. federal income tax returns are currently under examination by the
IRS. In October 2007, we received from the IRS examination
reports setting forth proposed changes to the U.S. federal taxable income
reported for the years 2004 and 2005. The proposed changes would
result in a cash tax payment of approximately $413 million, exclusive of
interest. We filed a letter with the IRS protesting the proposed
changes on November 19, 2007. The protest letter puts forth our
position that we believe our returns are materially correct as
filed. We will continue to vigorously defend against these proposed
changes. The IRS audits of GlobalSantaFe’s 2004 and 2005 U.S. federal
income tax returns are still in the examination phase. We do not
expect the conclusion of these audits to give rise to a material tax
liability.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
In
February 2007, we entered into a settlement agreement with the IRS
regarding the 2001 to 2003 audit. The IRS agreed to settle all issues
for this period. This settlement resulted in no cash tax
payment.
During
the fourth quarter of 2005, we entered into a settlement agreement with the IRS
with respect to our 1999 and 2000 U.S. federal income tax returns, which
resulted in a payment of $36 million including interest. The IRS
agreed to settle all issues for this period. This settlement did not
result in a material effect on our consolidated statement of financial position,
results of operations or cash flows.
Norwegian
civil tax and criminal authorities are investigating various transactions
undertaken in 2001 and 2002. The authorities initiated inquiries into
these transactions in September 2004 and in March 2005 obtained
additional information on the transactions pursuant to a Norwegian court
order. In 2006 we filed a formal protest with respect to a
notification by the Norwegian tax authorities of their intent to propose
assessments that would result in increased tax of approximately
$287 million, plus interest, related to certain restructuring
transactions. The authorities indicated penalties imposed on the
assessment could range from 15 to 60 percent of the
assessment. In addition, the authorities issued a preliminary
notification in February 2008 of their intent to issue a separate tax
assessment of approximately $77 million related to a 2001 dividend payment,
plus interest and penalties, which could range from 15 to 60 percent of the
assessment. In the course of its investigations, the Norwegian
authorities secured certain records located in the United Kingdom related to a
Norwegian subsidiary that was previously subject to tax in
Norway. The authorities are assessing the need to impose additional
taxes on this Norwegian subsidiary. We have and will continue to
respond to all information requests from the Norwegian
authorities. We plan to vigorously contest any assertions by the
Norwegian authorities in connection with the various transactions being
investigated.
On
January 1, 2007, as part of our implementation of FIN 48, we recorded
a long-term liability of $142 million related to Norwegian tax issues
described above. Since January 1, 2007, the long-term liability
has increased to $168 million due to the accrual of interest and exchange
rate fluctuations. While we cannot predict or provide assurance as to
the final outcome of these proceedings, we do not expect the ultimate resolution
of these matters to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated statement
of financial position or results of operations although it may have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated cash flows.
Certain
of our Brazilian income tax returns for the years 2000 through 2004 are
currently under examination. The Brazil tax authorities have issued
tax assessments totaling $112 million, plus a 75 percent penalty and
$70 million of interest through December 31, 2007. We
believe our returns are materially correct as filed, and we are vigorously
contesting these assessments. We filed a protest letter with the
Brazilian tax authorities on January 25, 2008.
In
December 2005, we restructured certain of our non-U.S.
operations. As a result of the restructuring, we incurred a deferred
tax charge in the amount of $33 million.
As a
result of changes in our estimates of certain pre-acquisition tax contingencies
and liabilities arising prior to our merger with Sedco Forex Holdings
Limited (“Sedco Forex”) effective December 31, 1999, we recorded a
decrease of $4 million and $5 million in goodwill and an income tax
receivable of $4 million and $5 million in December 2007 and
2006, respectively.
In 2004,
we entered into a tax sharing agreement (the “TSA”) with TODCO in connection
with the TODCO IPO. The TSA governs the parties’ respective rights,
responsibilities and obligations with respect to taxes and tax benefits, the
filing of tax returns, the control of audits and other tax
matters. Under the TSA, most U.S. federal, state, local and foreign
income taxes and income tax benefits (including income taxes and income tax
benefits attributable to the TODCO business) that accrued on or before the
closing of the TODCO IPO will be for our account. Accordingly, we are
generally liable for any income taxes that accrued on or before the closing of
the TODCO IPO, but TODCO generally must pay us for the amount of any income tax
benefits created on or before the closing of the TODCO IPO (“pre-closing tax
benefits”) that it uses or absorbs on a return with respect to a period after
the closing of the TODCO IPO. Under this agreement, we are entitled
to receive from TODCO payment for most of the tax benefits TODCO generated prior
to the TODCO IPO that they utilize subsequent to the TODCO IPO.
In July
2007, Hercules Offshore, Inc. (“Hercules”) completed the acquisition of
TODCO (the “TODCO Acquisition”). The TSA required Hercules to make an
accelerated change of control payment due to a deemed utilization of TODCO’s
pre-IPO tax benefits to us. The amount of the accelerated payment
owed to Transocean Holdings was calculated by multiplying 80 percent by the
remaining pre-IPO tax benefits as of July 11, 2007. In August 2007,
we received a $118 million change of control payment from
Hercules. We believe that Hercules owes an additional
$11 million related to the change of control of TODCO.
The TSA
also requires Hercules to make additional payments to us based on a portion of
the tax benefit from the exercise of certain options to acquire our ordinary
shares by TODCO’s current and former employees and directors, when and if those
options are exercised. We estimate that the total amount of payments
related to options that remain outstanding at December 31, 2007 would be
approximately $25 million, assuming a price of $143.15 per ordinary
share at the time of exercise of the options (the actual price of our ordinary
shares at the close of trading on December 31, 2007). However,
there can be no assurance as to the amount and timing of any payment which
Transocean Holdings may receive. In addition, any future reduction of
the pre-IPO tax benefits by the U.S. taxing authorities upon examination of the
TODCO tax returns may require us to reimburse TODCO for some of the amounts
previously paid.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
In 2007,
2006 and 2005, respectively, we recognized $277 million ($1.24 per diluted
share), $51 million ($0.22 per diluted share) and $11 million
($0.05 per diluted share) of other income in our consolidated statement of
operations related to TODCO’s utilization of tax benefits and stock option
deductions. Through December 31, 2007, we received
$12 million in estimated payments pertaining to TODCO’s 2007 federal and
state income tax returns that is deferred in other current liabilities in our
consolidated balance sheet. We will recognize these estimated
payments as other income when TODCO finalizes and files its 2007 federal and
state income tax returns.
Note
16—Commitments and Contingencies
Lease Obligations¾We have
operating lease commitments expiring at various dates, principally for real
estate, office space and office equipment. In addition to rental
payments, some leases provide that we pay a pro rata share of operating costs
applicable to the leased property. At December 31, 2007, the GSF Explorer drillship,
recorded
in property and equipment, net in the amount of $223 million, is held
under a capital lease through 2026. As of December 31, 2007,
future minimum rental payments related to noncancellable operating leases and
the capital lease are as follows (in millions):
Years ending December
31,
|
|
Capital
Lease
|
|
|
Operating
Leases
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
30 |
|
2009
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
2010
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
2011
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
2012
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Total
future minimum rental payments
|
|
$ |
34 |
|
|
$ |
110 |
|
Less
amount representing imputed interest
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Present
value of future minimum rental payments under capital
leases
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less
current portion included in accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Long-term
capital lease obligation
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
Rental
expense for all leases, including leases with terms of less than one year, was
approximately $51 million, $32 million and $30 million for the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Purchase Obligations—At
December 31, 2007, our purchase obligations as defined by SFAS No. 47,
Disclosure of Long-Term
Obligations (as amended), related to our Sedco 700-series upgrade
shipyard projects and eight newbuilds are as follows
(in millions):
Years ending December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
1,164 |
|
2009
|
|
|
1,196 |
|
2010
|
|
|
229 |
|
2011
|
|
|
— |
|
2012
|
|
|
— |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
— |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
2,589 |
|
Legal Proceedings—Several of
our subsidiaries have been named, along with numerous unaffiliated defendants,
in several complaints that have been filed in the Circuit Courts of the State of
Mississippi involving approximately 750 plaintiffs that allege
personal injury arising out of asbestos exposure in the course of their
employment by some of these defendants between 1965 and 1986. The
complaints also name as defendants certain of TODCO’s subsidiaries to whom we
may owe indemnity. Further, the complaints name other unaffiliated
defendant companies, including companies that allegedly manufactured drilling
related products containing asbestos. The complaints allege that the
defendant drilling contractors used those asbestos-containing products in
offshore drilling operations, land based drilling operations and in drilling
structures, drilling rigs, vessels and other equipment and assert claims based
on, among other things, negligence and strict liability, and claims authorized
under the Jones Act. The plaintiffs generally seek awards of
unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. We have not been
provided with sufficient information to determine the number of plaintiffs who
claim to have been exposed to asbestos aboard our rigs, whether they were
employees, their period of employment, the period of their alleged exposure to
asbestos, or their medical condition, and we have not entered into any
settlements with any plaintiffs. Accordingly, we are unable to
estimate our potential exposure in these lawsuits. We historically
have maintained insurance which we believe will be available to address any
liability arising from these claims. We intend to defend these
lawsuits vigorously, but there can be no assurance as to their ultimate
outcome.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
One of
our subsidiaries is involved in an action with respect to a customs matter
relating to the Sedco 710
semisubmersible drilling rig. Prior to our merger with
Sedco Forex, this drilling rig, which was working for Petrobras in Brazil
at the time, had been admitted into the country on a temporary basis under
authority granted to a Schlumberger entity. Prior to the
Sedco Forex merger, the drilling contract with Petrobras was transferred
from the Schlumberger entity to an entity that would become one of our
subsidiaries, but Schlumberger did not transfer the temporary import permit to
any of our subsidiaries. In early 2000, the drilling contract was
extended for another year. On January 10, 2000, the temporary
import permit granted to the Schlumberger entity expired, and renewal filings
were not made until later that January. In April 2000, the
Brazilian customs authorities cancelled the temporary import
permit. The Schlumberger entity filed an action in the Brazilian
federal court of Campos for the purpose of extending the temporary
admission. Other proceedings were also initiated in order to secure
the transfer of the temporary admission to our
subsidiary. Ultimately, the court permitted the transfer of the
temporary admission from Schlumberger to our subsidiary but did not rule on
whether the temporary admission could be extended without the payment of a
financial penalty. During the first quarter of 2004, the Brazilian
customs authorities issued an assessment totaling approximately
$133 million against our subsidiary.
The first
level Brazilian court ruled in April 2007 that the temporary admission granted
to our subsidiary had expired which allowed the Brazilian customs authorities to
execute on their assessment. Following this ruling, the Brazilian
customs authorities issued a revised assessment against our
subsidiary. As of February 15, 2008, the U.S. dollar equivalent
of this assessment was approximately $222 million in
aggregate. We are not certain as to the basis for the increase in the
amount of the assessment, and in September 2007, we received a temporary ruling
in our favor from a Brazilian federal court that the valuation method used by
the Brazilian customs authorities was incorrect. This temporary
ruling was confirmed in January 2008 by a local court, but it is still
subject to review at the appellate levels in Brazil. We intend to
continue to aggressively contest this matter and we have appealed the first
level Brazilian court’s ruling to a higher level court in
Brazil. There may be further judicial or administrative proceedings
that result from this matter. While the court has granted us the
right to continue our appeal without the posting of a bond, it is possible that
we may be required to post a bond for up to the full amount of the assessment in
connection with these proceedings. We have also put Schlumberger on
notice that we consider any assessment to be solely the responsibility of
Schlumberger, not our subsidiary. Nevertheless, we expect that the
Brazilian customs authorities will continue to seek to recover the assessment
solely from our subsidiary, not Schlumberger. Schlumberger has denied
any responsibility for this matter, but remains a party to the
proceedings. We do not expect the liability, if any, resulting from
this matter to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated statement of
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In the
third quarter of 2006, we received tax assessments of approximately
$130 million from the state tax authorities of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil
against one of our Brazilian subsidiaries for customs taxes on equipment
imported into the state in connection with our operations. The
assessments resulted from a preliminary finding by these authorities that our
subsidiary’s record keeping practices were deficient. We currently
believe that the substantial majority of these assessments are without
merit. We filed an initial response with the Rio de Janeiro tax
authorities on September 9, 2006 refuting these additional tax
assessments. In September 2007, we received confirmation from
the state tax authorities that they believe the additional tax assessments are
valid, and as a result, we filed an appeal on September 27, 2007 to the
state Taxpayer’s Council contesting these assessments. While we
cannot predict or provide assurance as to the final outcome of these
proceedings, we do not expect it to have a material adverse effect on our
consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
One of
our subsidiaries is involved in lawsuits arising out of the subsidiary’s
involvement in the design, construction and refurbishment of major industrial
complexes. The operating assets of the subsidiary were sold and its
operations discontinued in 1989, and the subsidiary has no remaining assets
other than the insurance policies involved in its litigation, fundings from
settlements with the primary insurers and funds received from the cancellation
of certain insurance policies. The subsidiary has been named as a
defendant, along with numerous other companies, in lawsuits alleging personal
injury as a result of exposure to asbestos. As of December 31,
2007, the
subsidiary was a defendant in approximately 1,041 lawsuits, of
which 102 were filed during 2007. Some of these lawsuits include
multiple plaintiffs and we estimate that there are approximately
3,380 plaintiffs in these lawsuits. For many of these lawsuits,
we have not been provided with sufficient information from the plaintiffs to
determine whether all or some of the plaintiffs have claims against the
subsidiary, the basis of any such claims, or the nature of their alleged
injuries. The first of the asbestos-related lawsuits was filed
against this subsidiary in 1990. Through December 31, 2007, the
amounts expended to resolve claims (including both attorneys’ fees and
expenses, and settlement costs), have not
been material, and all deductibles with respect to the primary insurance have
been satisfied. The subsidiary continues to be named as a defendant
in additional lawsuits and we cannot predict the number of additional cases in
which it may be named a defendant nor can we predict the potential costs to
resolve such additional cases or to resolve the pending
cases. However, the subsidiary has in excess of $1 billion in
insurance limits. Although not all of the policies may be fully
available due to the insolvency of certain insurers, we believe that the
subsidiary will have sufficient insurance and funds from the settlements of
litigation with insurance carriers available to respond to
these claims. While we cannot predict or provide assurance as to the
final outcome of these matters, we do not believe that the current value of the
claims where we have been identified will have a material impact on our
consolidated statement of financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
We are
involved in various tax matters (see Note 15—Income Taxes). We are
also involved in lawsuits relating to damage claims arising out of hurricanes
Katrina and Rita, all of which are insured and which are not material to
us. We are also involved in a number of other lawsuits, including a
dispute for municipal tax payments in Brazil and a dispute involving customs
procedures in India, neither of which is material to us, and all of which have
arisen in the ordinary course of our business. We do not expect the
liability, if any, resulting from these other matters to have a material adverse
effect on our consolidated statement of financial position, results of
operations or cash flows. We cannot predict with certainty the
outcome or effect of any of the litigation matters specifically described above
or of any such other pending or threatened litigation. There can be
no assurance that our beliefs or expectations as to the outcome or effect of any
lawsuit or other litigation matter will prove correct and the eventual outcome
of these matters could materially differ from management’s current
estimates.
Environmental Matters—We have
certain potential liabilities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) and similar state acts regulating
cleanup of various hazardous waste disposal sites, including those described
below. CERCLA is intended to expedite the remediation of hazardous
substances without regard to fault. Potentially responsible parties
(“PRPs”) for each site include present and former owners and operators of,
transporters to and generators of the substances at the
site. Liability is strict and can be joint and several.
We have
been named as a PRP in connection with a site located in Santa Fe Springs,
California, known as the Waste Disposal, Inc. site. We and other
PRPs have agreed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the
U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) to settle our potential liabilities for this
site by agreeing to perform the remaining remediation required by the
EPA. The form of the agreement is a consent decree, which has now
been entered by the court. The parties to the settlement have entered
into a participation agreement, which makes us liable for approximately
eight percent of the remediation and related costs. The
remediation is complete, and we believe our share of the future operation and
maintenance costs of the site is not material. There are additional
potential liabilities related to the site, but these cannot be quantified, and
we have no reason at this time to believe that they will be
material.
We have
also been named as a PRP in connection with a site in California known as the
Casmalia Resources Site. We and other PRPs have entered into an
agreement with the EPA and the DOJ to resolve potential
liabilities. Under the settlement, we are not likely to owe any
substantial additional amounts for this site beyond what we have already
paid. There are additional potential liabilities related to this
site, but these cannot be quantified at this time, and we have no reason at this
time to believe that they will be material.
We have
been named as one of many PRPs in connection with a site located in Carson,
California, formerly maintained by Cal Compact Landfill. On
February 15, 2002, we were served with a required 90-day notification that
eight California cities, on behalf of themselves and other PRPs, intend to
commence an action against us under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(“RCRA”). On April 1, 2002, a complaint was filed by the cities
against us and others alleging that we have liabilities in connection with the
site. However, the complaint has not been served. The site
was closed in or around 1965, and we do not have sufficient information to
enable us to assess our potential liability, if any, for this site.
One of
our subsidiaries has recently been ordered by the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board to develop a testing plan for a site known as Campus 1000
Fremont in Alhambra, California. This site was formerly owned and
operated by certain of our subsidiaries. It is presently owned by an
unrelated party, which has received an order to test the property, the cost of
which is expected to be in the range of $200,000. We have also been
advised that one or more of our subsidiaries is likely to be named by the EPA as
a PRP for the San Gabriel Valley, Area 3, Superfund site, which includes this
property. We have no knowledge at this time of the potential cost of
any remediation, who else will be named as PRPs, and whether in fact any of our
subsidiaries is a responsible party. The subsidiaries in question do
not own any operating assets and have limited ability to respond to any
liabilities.
One of
our subsidiaries has been requested to contribute approximately $140,000 toward
remediation costs of the Environmental Protection Corporation (“EPC”) Eastside
Disposal Facility near Bakersfield, California, by a company that has taken
responsibility for site remediation from the California Department of Toxic
Substances Control. Our subsidiary is alleged to have been a small
contributor of the wastes that were improperly disposed by EPC at the
site. We have undertaken an investigation as to whether our
subsidiary is a liable party, what the total remediation costs may be and the
amount of waste that may have been contributed by other
parties. Until that investigation is complete we are unable to assess
our potential liability, if any, for this site.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Resolutions
of other claims by the EPA, the involved state agency or PRPs are at various
stages of investigation. These investigations involve determinations
of:
|
§
|
the
actual responsibility attributed to us and the other PRPs at the
site;
|
|
§
|
appropriate
investigatory and/or remedial actions;
and
|
|
§
|
allocation
of the costs of such activities among the PRPs and other site
users.
|
Our
ultimate financial responsibility in connection with those sites may depend on
many factors, including:
|
§
|
the
volume and nature of material, if any, contributed to the site for which
we are responsible;
|
|
§
|
the
numbers of other PRPs and their financial viability;
and
|
|
§
|
the
remediation methods and technology to be
used.
|
It is
difficult to quantify with certainty the potential cost of these environmental
matters, particularly in respect of remediation
obligations. Nevertheless, based upon the information currently
available, we believe that our ultimate liability arising from all environmental
matters, including the liability for all other related pending legal
proceedings, asserted legal claims and known potential legal claims which are
likely to be asserted, is adequately accrued and should not have a material
effect on our financial position or ongoing results of
operations. Estimated costs of future expenditures for environmental
remediation obligations are not discounted to their present value.
Contamination Litigation―On July 11,
2005, one of our subsidiaries was served with a lawsuit filed on
behalf of three landowners in Louisiana in the 12th Judicial
District Court for the Parish of Avoyelles, State of Louisiana. The
lawsuit named nineteen other defendants, all of which were alleged to have
contaminated the plaintiffs’ property with naturally occurring radioactive
material, produced water, drilling fluids, chlorides, hydrocarbons, heavy metals
and other contaminants as a result of oil and gas exploration
activities. Experts retained by the plaintiffs issued a report
suggesting significant contamination in the area operated by the subsidiary and
another codefendant, and claimed that over $300 million would be required
to properly remediate the contamination. The experts retained by the
defendants conducted their own investigation and concluded that the remediation
costs would amount to no more than $2.5 million.
The
plaintiffs and the codefendant threatened to add GlobalSantaFe Corporation as a
defendant in the lawsuit under the “single business enterprise” doctrine
contained in Louisiana law. The single business enterprise doctrine
is similar to corporate veil piercing doctrines. On August 16,
2006, our subsidiary and its immediate parent company, which is
also an entity that no longer conducts operations or holds assets, filed
voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in
the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of
Delaware. Later that day, the plaintiffs dismissed our subsidiary
from the lawsuit. Subsequently, the codefendant filed various motions
in the lawsuit and in the Delaware bankruptcies attempting to assert alter ego
and single business enterprise claims against GlobalSantaFe Corporation and two
other subsidiaries in the lawsuit. We believe that these legal
theories should not be applied against GlobalSantaFe Corporation or these other
two subsidiaries, and that in any event the manner in which the parent and its
subsidiaries conducted their businesses does not meet the requirements of these
theories for imposition of liability. The codefendant also seeks to
dismiss the bankruptcies. The efforts to assert alter ego and single
business enterprise theory claims against GlobalSantaFe Corporation were
rejected by the Court in Avoyelles Parish and the lawsuit against the other
defendant went to trial on February 19, 2007. The action was
resolved at trial with a settlement by the codefendant that included a
$20 million payment and certain cleanup activities to be conducted by the
codefendant. The settlement also purported to assign the plaintiffs’
claims in the lawsuit against our subsidiary and other parties, including
GlobalSantaFe Corporation and the other two subsidiaries, to the
codefendant.
In the
bankruptcy case, our subsidiary has filed suit to obtain declaratory and
injunctive relief against the codefendant concerning the matters described above
and GlobalSantaFe Corporation has intervened in the matter. The
codefendant is seeking to dismiss the bankruptcy case and a modification of the
automatic stay afforded under the Bankruptcy Code to our subsidiary and its
parent so that the codefendant may pursue the entities and GlobalSantaFe
Corporation for contribution and indemnity and the purported assigned rights
from the plaintiffs in the lawsuit including the alter ego and single business
enterprise claims and potential insurance rights. On
February 15, 2008, the Bankruptcy Court denied the codefendant’s request to
dismiss the bankruptcy case but modified the automatic stay to allow the
codefendant to proceed on its claims against the debtors, our subsidiary
and its parent, and their insurance companies. The Bankruptcy
Court will hold a hearing to determine the forum where these actions may
proceed. The Bankruptcy Court did not address the codefendant’s
pending claims against GlobalSantaFe Corporation and the other two subsidiaries,
which will also be the subject of a future hearing. The Bankruptcy
Court also denied the debtors’ requests for preliminary declaratory and
injunctive relief.
In
addition, the codefendant has filed proofs of claim against both our subsidiary
and its parent with regard to its claims arising out of the settlement
agreement, including recovery of the settlement funds and remediation costs and
damages for the purported assigned claims. A Motion for Partial
Summary Judgment seeking annulment and dismissal of the codefendant’s proofs of
claim has also been filed by the debtors and remains pending. Our
subsidiary, its parent and GlobalSantaFe Corporation intend to continue to
vigorously defend against any action taken in an attempt to impose liability
against them under the theories discussed above or otherwise and believe they
have good and valid defenses thereto. We are unable to determine the
value of these claims as of the date of the Merger. We do not believe that these
claims will have a material impact on our consolidated statement of financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Retained Risk—Our insurance
program is a 12-month policy period beginning May 1, 2007. Under
the program, we generally maintain a $125 million per occurrence deductible
on our hull and machinery, which is subject to an aggregate deductible of
$250 million. However, in the event of a total loss or a
constructive total loss of a drilling unit, such loss is fully covered by our
insurance with no deductible. Additionally, we maintain a
$10 million per occurrence deductible on crew personal injury liability and
$5 million per occurrence deductible on third-party property claims, which
together are subject to an aggregate deductible of $50 million that is
applied to any occurrence in excess of the per occurrence deductible until the
aggregate deductible is exhausted. We also carry $950 million of
third-party liability coverage exclusive of the personal injury liability
deductibles, third-party property liability deductibles and retention amounts
described above. We retain the risk through self-insurance for any
losses in excess of the $950 million limit.
At
present, the insured value of our drilling rig fleet is approximately
$34 billion in aggregate. We do not generally have commercial
market insurance coverage for physical damage losses to the Transocean fleet due
to hurricanes in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico and war perils worldwide. We
do not carry insurance for loss of revenue. In the opinion of
management, adequate accruals have been made based on known and estimated losses
related to such exposures.
Letters of Credit and Surety
Bonds—We had letters of credit outstanding totaling $532 million and
$405 million at December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively. These letters of credit guarantee various contract
bidding and performance activities under various uncommitted lines provided by
several banks.
As is
customary in the contract drilling business, we also have various surety bonds
in place that secure customs obligations relating to the importation of our rigs
and certain performance and other obligations. Surety bonds
outstanding totaled $24 million and $6 million at December 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively.
Note
17—Share-Based Compensation Plans
We have
(i) a long-term incentive plan (the “Long-Term Incentive Plan”) for
executives, key employees and outside directors under which awards can be
granted in the form of stock options, restricted shares, deferred units, stock
appreciation rights (“SARs”) and cash performance awards and (ii) other
incentive plans under which awards are currently outstanding. Awards
that may be granted under the Long-Term Incentive Plan include traditional
time-vesting awards (“time-based vesting awards”) and awards that are earned
based on the achievement of certain performance criteria (“performance-based
awards”). Our executive compensation committee of our board of
directors determines the terms and conditions of the awards under the Long-Term
Incentive Plan. Options and SARs issued to date under the incentive
plans have a 10-year term. Time-based vesting awards typically vest
in three equal annual installments beginning on the first anniversary date of
the grant. Performance-based awards issued to date under the
incentive plans have a two-year performance measurement period with the number
of options, shares or deferred units earned being determined following the
completion of the measurement period (the “determination date”) at which time
one-third of the options, shares or deferred units that have satisfied the
performance criteria vest. Additional vesting occurs on
January 1 of the two subsequent years following the determination
date. As of December 31, 2007, we had 22.9 million ordinary
shares authorized for future employee grants, including up to 6.0 million
for restricted share awards, and 0.6 million ordinary shares authorized
with respect to outside directors. We issue new shares when stock
options are exercised and when restricted shares and deferred units
vest.
We use
the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model to value stock options granted or
modified under SFAS 123. We determine the fair value of options
and SARs granted or modified based on the expected life, risk-free interest
rate, dividend yield and expected volatility. The expected life is
based on historical information of past employee behavior regarding exercises
and forfeiture of options. The risk-free interest rate assumption is
based upon the published U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of
grant for instruments with a similar life. The dividend yield
assumption is based on our history and expectation of dividend
payouts. See Note 2—Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies.
We use a
blended volatility that is comprised of two components. The first
component is derived from volatility computed from historical data for an amount
of time approximately equal to the expected life of the stock
option. The second component is the implied volatility derived from
our “at-the-money” long dated call options with a term of six months or
longer. The two components are equally weighted to create a blended
volatility.
The fair
value for restricted ordinary shares and deferred units is initially based on
the market price of our ordinary shares on the date of grant.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
As a
result of the Merger, we assumed all of the outstanding employee stock options
and stock appreciation rights of GlobalSantaFe. Each option and stock
appreciation right of GlobalSantaFe outstanding as of the Merger effective date,
to the extent not already fully vested and exercisable, became fully vested and
exercisable into an option or SAR with respect to 0.6368 shares of Transocean at
that time. The aggregate fair market value of options and SARs
assumed in the Merger, computed as of the Merger date, was $157 million or
$83.56 per option or SAR.
At the
effective time of the Reclassification, all outstanding options to acquire
our ordinary shares remained outstanding and became fully vested and
exercisable. The number and exercise prices of the options to
purchase our ordinary shares were adjusted based on the market price of our
ordinary shares immediately preceding the effective date of the Reclassification
and Merger in order to keep the aggregate intrinsic value of the options and
stock appreciation rights equal to the values immediately prior to such
date. Each option to acquire our ordinary shares that was
outstanding immediately prior to the Reclassification and Merger was converted
into options to purchase 0.9392 ordinary shares (rounded down to the nearest
whole share) with a per share exercise price equal to the exercise price of the
option immediately prior to the Reclassification and Merger divided by 0.9392
(rounded up to the nearest whole cent). Share amounts and related
share prices with respect to stock options have been retroactively restated for
all periods presented to give effect to the Reclassification.
All
Transocean deferred units and restricted shares were exchanged for the same
consideration for which each outstanding Transocean ordinary share was exchanged
in the Reclassification. As a result, holders of deferred units and
restricted shares received $33.03 in cash and 0.6996 ordinary shares for each
deferred unit or restricted share they held immediately prior to the
Reclassification. With respect to time-based deferred unit and
restricted share awards made prior to July 21, 2007, all such consideration
was fully vested as of the Merger date. However, with respect to
those awards made on or after July 21, 2007, only the cash component of the
consideration vested as of the Merger date, and the share consideration remained
subject to the vesting restrictions set forth in the applicable award
agreement. All performance-based awards for which the performance
determination occurred prior to the Merger date became fully vested at that
time. All unvested performance-based shares for which the performance
determination had not yet occurred as of the Merger date became vested at
50 percent on the Merger date. The remaining shares not vested
were forfeited in 2007. As a result, there were no performance-based
shares outstanding at December 31, 2007. The numbers of
restricted shares and deferred units in the tables and discussions below have
been retroactively restated for all periods presented to give effect to
reduction in shares that occurred in connection with the
Reclassification. Weighted-average grant-date fair values per share
for deferred units and restricted shares have not been restated.
As a
result of the accelerated vesting of options, deferred units and restricted
shares in connection with the Merger, we accelerated the recognition of
$38 million of previously unrecognized compensation expense in the fourth
quarter of 2007. Share-based compensation expense is recorded on the
same financial statement line item as cash compensation paid to the same
employees.
There
were no significant modifications during the years ended December 31, 2007,
2006 or 2005.
As of
December 31, 2007, total unrecognized compensation costs related to all
unvested share-based awards totaled $33 million, which is expected to be
recognized over a weighted average period of 2.6 years.
Time-Based
Vesting Awards
Stock Options—The following
table summarizes vested and unvested time-based vesting stock option
(“time-based options”) activity under the Incentive Plans during the year ended
December 31, 2007:
|
|
Number
of
shares under option
|
|
|
Weighted-average
exercise price per share
|
|
|
Weighted-average
remaining contractual term
(years)
|
|
|
Aggregate
intrinsic value
(in
millions)
|
|
Outstanding
at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
4,025,915 |
|
|
$ |
30.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
3,073 |
|
|
|
110.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed
in Merger
|
|
|
1,264,910 |
|
|
|
47.58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(2,112,853 |
) |
|
|
37.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(11,642 |
) |
|
|
44.11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
3,169,403 |
|
|
$ |
34.76 |
|
|
|
3.27 |
|
|
$ |
344 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested
and exercisable at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
3,169,403 |
|
|
$ |
34.76 |
|
|
|
3.27 |
|
|
$ |
344 |
|
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
The
weighted-average grant-date fair value of time-based options granted during the
year ended December 31, 2007 was $40.69 per share. There
were 2,132 and 50,200 time-based options granted during the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, with weighted-average grant-date
fair values of $34.08 and $18.98 per share, respectively.
The total
pretax intrinsic value of time-based options exercised during the year ended
December 31, 2007 was $156 million. There were 1,904,346
and 7,227,931 time-based options exercised during the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The total pretax
intrinsic value of time-based options exercised was $99 million and
$190 million during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
Restricted Ordinary
Shares—The following table summarizes unvested share activity for
time-based vesting restricted ordinary shares (“time-based shares”) granted
under the Incentive Plans during the year ended December 31,
2007:
|
|
Number
of shares
|
|
|
Weighted-average
grant-date fair value per share
|
|
Unvested
at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
270,743 |
|
|
$ |
76.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
380,653 |
|
|
|
109.92 |
|
Vested
|
|
|
(261,330 |
) |
|
|
77.12 |
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(20,140 |
) |
|
|
83.73 |
|
Unvested
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
369,926 |
|
|
$ |
109.98 |
|
The total
grant-date fair value of time-based shares that vested during the year ended
December 31, 2007 was $20 million. There were 258,313 and
24,647 time-based shares granted during the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively. The weighted-average grant-date fair value of
time-based shares granted was $78.40 and $49.01 per share for the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. There were 15,812 and
10,046 time-based shares that vested during the years ended December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively. The total grant-date fair value of
time-based shares that vested was less than $1 million for both years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005.
Deferred Units—A deferred
unit is a unit that is equal to one ordinary share but has no voting rights
until the underlying ordinary shares are issued. The following table
summarizes unvested activity for time-based vesting deferred units (“time-based
units”) granted under the Incentive Plans during the year ended
December 31, 2007:
|
|
Number
of units
|
|
|
Weighted-average
grant-date fair value per share
|
|
Unvested
at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
40,964 |
|
|
$ |
69.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
64,676 |
|
|
|
105.99 |
|
Vested
|
|
|
(53,086 |
) |
|
|
74.48 |
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(2,432 |
) |
|
|
98.20 |
|
Unvested
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
50,122 |
|
|
$ |
109.97 |
|
The total
grant-date fair value of the time-based units vested during the year ended
December 31, 2007 was $4 million. There were 29,641 and
13,013 time-based units granted during the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively. The weighted-average grant-date fair value of
time-based units granted was $81.55 and $45.02 per share for the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. There were 9,997 and
4,254 time-based units that vested during the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively. The total grant-date fair value of deferred
units that vested was less than $1 million for both years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Share-Settled SARs—Under an
incentive plan assumed in connection with the Merger, we assumed share-settled
SARs granted to key employees and to non-employee directors of GlobalSantaFe at
no cost to the grantee. The grantee receives a number of ordinary
shares upon exercise equal in value to the difference between the market value
of our ordinary shares at the exercise date and the Merger-adjusted exercise
price. The following table summarizes share-settled SARs activity
under the Incentive Plans during the year ended December 31,
2007:
|
|
Number
of
Awards
|
|
|
Weighted-average
exercise price per share
|
|
|
Weighted-average
remaining contractual term
(years)
|
|
|
Aggregate
intrinsic value
(in
millions)
|
|
Assumed
in the Merger at November 27, 2007
|
|
|
615,126 |
|
|
$ |
88.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(110,355 |
) |
|
|
84.65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
504,771 |
|
|
$ |
89.18 |
|
|
|
8.59 |
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested
and exercisable at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
504,771 |
|
|
$ |
89.18 |
|
|
|
8.59 |
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
The total
pretax intrinsic value of share-settled SARs exercised during the period ended
December 31, 2007 was $6 million.
Cash-Settled SARs—Under our
incentive plans, we have outstanding SARs previously granted to employees that
can be settled in cash for the difference between the market value of our
ordinary shares on the date of exercise and the exercise price. The
cash-settled SARs are recorded in other current liabilities in our consolidated
balance sheet until they are exercised. We have not granted any
cash-settled SARs in the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, and
all outstanding cash-settled SARs are fully vested. We had 21,669
SARs outstanding with a weighted average remaining contractual term of 1.29
years and an aggregate intrinsic value of $2 million as of
December 31, 2007. We had 30,598 SARs outstanding with a
weighted average remaining contractual term of 2.13 years and an aggregate
intrinsic value of $1 million as of December 31, 2006.
Performance-Based
Awards
Stock Options—We grant
performance-based stock options (“performance-based options”) that can be earned
depending on the achievement of certain performance targets. The
number of options earned is quantified upon completion of the performance period
at the determination date. The following table summarizes vested and
unvested performance-based option activity under the Incentive Plans during the
year ended December 31, 2007:
|
|
Number
of
shares under option
|
|
|
Weighted-average
exercise price per share
|
|
|
Weighted-average
remaining contractual term
(years)
|
|
|
Aggregate
intrinsic value
(in
millions)
|
|
Outstanding
at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
1,206,366 |
|
|
$ |
50.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
― |
|
|
|
― |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(661,988 |
) |
|
|
43.77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(152,276 |
) |
|
|
59.78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
392,102 |
|
|
$ |
58.29 |
|
|
|
8.15 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested
and exercisable at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
392,102 |
|
|
$ |
58.29 |
|
|
|
8.15 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
There
were 329,650 and 304,971 performance-based options granted during the years
ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The
weighted-average grant-date fair value of performance-based options granted was
$32.17 and $22.14 per share during the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively.
The total
pretax intrinsic value of performance-based options exercised during the year
ended December 31, 2007 was $52 million. There were 158,054
and 85,864 performance-based options exercised, with a total pretax intrinsic
value of $10 million and $3 million, during the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Restricted Ordinary Shares—We
grant performance-based restricted ordinary shares (“performance-based shares”)
that can be earned depending on the achievement of certain performance
targets. The number of shares earned is quantified upon completion of
the performance period at the determination date. The following table
summarizes unvested share activity for performance-based shares granted under
the Incentive Plans during the year ended December 31, 2007:
|
|
Number
of shares
|
|
|
Weighted-average
grant-date fair value per share
|
|
Unvested
at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
478,154 |
|
|
$ |
44.53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
― |
|
|
|
― |
|
Vested
|
|
|
(357,544 |
) |
|
|
38.57 |
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(120,610 |
) |
|
|
62.21 |
|
Unvested
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
― |
|
|
$ |
― |
|
Shares
forfeited include the adjustment of shares at the determination date due to the
application of the performance criteria.
The total
grant-date fair value of performance-based shares that vested during the year
ended December 31, 2007 was $14 million. There were 59,769
and 264,289 performance-based shares granted during the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The weighted-average
grant-date fair value was $77.56 and $57.90 per share during the years
ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. There were
175,695 and 190,930 performance-based shares that vested with a total
grant-date fair value of $6 million during each of the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Deferred Units—We grant
performance-based deferred units (“performance-based units”) that can be earned
depending on the achievement of certain performance targets. The
number of units earned is quantified upon completion of the performance period
at the determination date. The following table summarizes unvested
unit activity for performance-based units granted under the Incentive Plans
during the year ended December 31, 2007:
|
|
Number
of
units
|
|
|
Weighted-average
grant-date fair value per share
|
|
Unvested
at January 1, 2007
|
|
|
218,640 |
|
|
$ |
55.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
― |
|
|
|
― |
|
Vested
|
|
|
(150,762 |
) |
|
|
48.94 |
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(67,878 |
) |
|
|
68.44 |
|
Unvested
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
― |
|
|
$ |
― |
|
Units
forfeited include the adjustment of units at the determination date due to the
application of the performance criteria.
The total
grant-date fair value of performance-based units that vested during the year
ended December 31, 2007 was $7 million. There were 75,707
and 7,128 performance-based units granted during the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The weighted-average
grant-date fair value of performance-based units granted was $78.61 and
$57.90 per share during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. There were 41,236 and 10,647 performance-based
units that vested with a total grant-date fair value of $2 million and less
than $1 million during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
ESPP—We provide the ESPP for
certain full-time employees. Under the terms of the ESPP, employees
can choose each year to have between two and twenty percent of their annual
base earnings withheld to purchase up to $21,250 of our ordinary
shares. The purchase price of the stock is 85 percent of the
lower of the beginning-of-year or end-of-year market price of our ordinary
shares. At December 31, 2007, 183,363 ordinary shares were
available for issuance pursuant to the ESPP after taking into account the shares
to be issued for the 2007 plan year.
Note
18—Retirement Plans, Other Postemployment Benefits and Other Benefit
Plans
On
December 31, 2006, we adopted the recognition and disclosure provisions of
SFAS No.158, Employers’
Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans, an
amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R)
(“SFAS 158”), which requires the recognition of the funded status of
the Defined Benefit and Postretirement Benefits Other Than Pensions (“OPEB”)
plans on the December 31, 2006 balance sheet with a corresponding
adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income. The adjustment
to accumulated other comprehensive income at adoption represents the net
unrecognized actuarial losses, unrecognized prior service costs, and
unrecognized transition obligation remaining from the initial application of
SFAS No. 87, Employer's Accounting for
Pension (“SFAS 87”), all of which were previously netted against the
plans’
funded status on the balance sheet. These amounts will be
subsequently recognized as net periodic pension cost pursuant to our historical
accounting policy for amortizing such amounts. Further, actuarial
gains and losses that arise in subsequent periods and are not recognized as net
periodic pension cost in the same periods will be recognized as a component of
other comprehensive income. Those amounts will be subsequently
recognized as a component of net periodic pension cost on the same basis as the
amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
The
adoption of SFAS 158 did not affect the consolidated statement of
operations for the year ended December 31, 2006, or any prior period
presented, and it will not have a material affect on our operating results in
future periods. The incremental effects of adopting the provisions of
SFAS 158 on the consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2006 are as
follows:
|
|
At
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
Prior
to adopting SFAS 158
|
|
|
Effect
of adopting SFAS 158
|
|
|
As
reported
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
assets
|
|
$ |
322 |
|
|
$ |
(23 |
) |
|
$ |
299 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
11,499 |
|
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
11,476 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
current liabilities
|
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
1,036 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
54 |
|
Other
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
343 |
|
Total
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
3,597 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
3,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Total
shareholders’ equity
|
|
|
6,862 |
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
6,836 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders’ equity
|
|
$ |
11,499 |
|
|
$ |
(23 |
) |
|
$ |
11,476 |
|
Defined Benefit Pension
Plans—We maintain a qualified defined benefit pension plan (the
“Retirement Plan”) covering substantially all U.S. employees and an unfunded
plan (the “Supplemental Benefit Plan”) to provide certain eligible employees
with benefits in excess of those allowed under the Retirement
Plan. In conjunction with the R&B Falcon merger, we acquired
three defined benefit pension plans, two funded and one unfunded (the “Frozen
Plans”), that were frozen prior to the merger for which benefits no longer
accrue but the pension obligations have not been fully paid out. We
refer to the Retirement Plan, the Supplemental Benefit Plan and the Frozen Plans
collectively as the “U.S. Plans.”
In
connection with the Merger, we assumed four defined benefit plans covering
substantially all legacy GlobalSantaFe U.S. employees and a frozen defined
benefit plan that provides retirement benefits to four former members of the
board of directors of Global Marine Inc. (the “Assumed U.S. Pension
Plans”). The frozen defined benefit plan is closed to additional
participants and no additional benefits are being accrued under this
plan. In addition, we assumed a defined benefit plan in the U.K. (the
“Assumed U.K. Pension Plan,” and together with the Assumed U.S. Pension Plans,
the “Assumed Pension Plans”), covering substantially all non-U.S. legacy
GlobalSantaFe employees.
In
addition, we provide several other defined benefit plans, primarily group
pension schemes with life insurance companies covering our Norway operations and
two unfunded plans covering certain of our employees and former employees (the
“Norway Plans”). Our contributions to the Norway Plans are determined
primarily by the respective life insurance companies based on the terms of the
plan. For the insurance-based plans, annual premium payments are
considered to represent a reasonable approximation of the service costs of
benefits earned during the period. We also have unfunded defined
benefit plans (the “Other Non-U.S. Plans”) that provide retirement and severance
benefits for certain of our Indonesian, Nigerian and Egyptian
employees. The defined benefit pension benefits we provide are
comprised of the U.S. Plans, the Norway Plans, Other Non-U.S. Plans and the
Assumed Pension Plans (collectively, the “Transocean Plans”). For all
plans, we have historically and continue to use a January 1 measurement
date for net periodic benefit cost and a December 31 measurement date for
benefit obligations.
In
connection with the Merger, we amended the Supplemental Benefit Plan to provide
employees terminated under the severance plan with age, earnings and service
benefits described in the Severance Plan and similar severance arrangements
(“Severance Credits”). The Supplemental Benefit Plan provides credit for
age, service and earnings during the period of time after termination during
which severance is paid (the “Salary Continuation Period”), or if an eligible
employee receives severance in a lump sum, the lump sum is considered to be paid
out over the Salary Continuation Period in order to provide the value of the
Severance Credits. The Supplemental Benefit Plan was also amended to
provide for a lump-sum form of payment within 90 days after a participant’s
termination of employment and a six-month delay on benefits payable to
“specified employees” under Section 409A, of the Internal
Code.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Effective
November 27, 2007, one of the Assumed Pension Plans, the GlobalSantaFe
Pension Equalization Plan (the “PEP”), was also amended to provide certain
terminated employees under the Severance Plan with Severance
Credits. The PEP provides credit for age, service and earnings during
the Salary Continuation Period, or if an eligible employee receives severance in
a lump sum, the lump sum is considered to be paid out over the Salary
Continuation Period in order to provide the value of the Severance
Credits. The PEP was also amended to provide for a lump-sum form of
payment within 90 days after a participant’s termination of employment and a
six-month delay on benefits payable to “specified employees” under Section 409A
of the Internal Revenue Code. In addition, the amendment specifies
that terminated employees who are ineligible to receive Severance Credits under
the legacy GlobalSantaFe qualified defined benefit plan will receive Severance
Credits under the PEP.
The
change in projected benefit obligation, change in plan assets, funded status and
the amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets are shown in the table
below (in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Change
in projected benefit obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected
benefit obligation at beginning of year
|
|
$ |
351 |
|
|
$ |
338 |
|
Assumed
Pension Plans’ projected benefit obligations at Merger
date
|
|
|
686 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Service
cost
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Foreign
currency exchange rate changes
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Benefits
paid
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Actuarial
gains
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
Projected
benefit obligation at end of year
|
|
$ |
1,065 |
|
|
$ |
351 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change
in plan assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
value of plan assets at beginning of year
|
|
$ |
273 |
|
|
$ |
242 |
|
Assumed
Pension Plans’ fair value of plan assets at Merger date
|
|
|
655 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Actual
return on plan assets
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Employer
contributions
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Foreign
currency exchange rate changes
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
Benefits
paid
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Fair
value of plan assets at end of year
|
|
$ |
939 |
|
|
$ |
273 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded
status
|
|
$ |
(126 |
) |
|
$ |
(78 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts
recognized in the consolidated balance sheets consist of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension
asset, non-current
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
Accrued
pension liability, current
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Accrued
pension liability, non-current
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income (a)
|
|
|
(55 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
______________
|
(a)
|
Amounts
are before income tax effect of $12 million and $9 million for
December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively.
|
The
accumulated benefit obligation for all defined benefit pension plans was
$939 million and $290 million at December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively.
The
aggregate projected benefit obligation and fair value of plan assets for plans
with a projected benefit obligation in excess of plan assets are as follows
(in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected
benefit obligation
|
|
$ |
419 |
|
|
$ |
273 |
|
Fair
value of plan assets
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
The
aggregate accumulated benefit obligation and fair value of plan assets for plans
with an accumulated benefit obligation in excess of plan assets are as follows
(in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
benefit obligation
|
|
$ |
256 |
|
|
$ |
189 |
|
Fair
value of plan assets
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
Net
periodic benefit cost included the following components
(in millions):
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Components
of net periodic benefit cost (a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service
cost
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
$ |
18 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Expected
return on plan assets
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
Recognized
net actuarial losses
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Amortization
of prior service cost
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Amortization
of net transition obligation
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
— |
|
SFAS 88
settlements/curtailments
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Net
periodic benefit cost
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
26 |
|
|
$ |
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase
(decrease) in minimum pension liability included in other comprehensive
income
|
|
$ |
(b |
) |
|
$ |
(25 |
) |
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
______________
|
(a)
|
Amounts
are before income tax effect.
|
|
(b)
|
Disclosure
is not applicable for December 31, 2007 due to adoption of
SFAS 158.
|
No plan
assets are expected to be returned to us during the year ending
December 31, 2008.
There
were no amounts recognized in other comprehensive income as components of net
periodic benefit cost in the years ended December 31, 2006 and
2005.
For the
year ended December 31, 2007, our components of net periodic benefit cost
totaled $4 million, which was recognized in other comprehensive
income.
The
following table shows the amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income that
have not been recognized as components of net periodic benefit costs
(in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
(a), (b)
|
|
|
2006
(a), (b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
57 |
|
|
$ |
42 |
|
Net
prior service credit
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Net
transition obligation
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total
unrecognized accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
$ |
55 |
|
|
$ |
42 |
|
______________
|
(a)
|
Disclosure
is not applicable for December 31,
2005.
|
|
(b)
|
Amounts
are before income tax effect.
|
The
following table shows the amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income
expected to be recognized as components of net periodic benefit cost during the
next fiscal year (in millions):
|
|
Year
ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
Net
prior service cost
|
|
|
1 |
|
Net
transition obligation
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total
amount in accumulated other comprehensive income expected to be recognized
next year
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Pension
obligations are actuarially determined and are affected by assumptions including
expected return on plan assets, discount rates, compensation increases and
employee turnover rates. We evaluate our assumptions periodically and
make adjustments to these assumptions and the recorded liabilities as
necessary.
Two of
the most critical assumptions used in calculating our pension expense and
liabilities are the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets and the
assumed discount rate. We evaluate assumptions regarding the
estimated long-term rate of return on plan assets based on historical experience
and future expectations on investment returns, which are calculated by an
unaffiliated investment advisor utilizing the asset allocation classes held by
the plan’s portfolios. Beginning on December 31, 2005, we
utilized a yield curve approach based on Aa corporate bonds and the expected
timing of future benefit payments as a basis for determining the discount rate
for our U.S. Plans. Changes in these and other assumptions used in
the actuarial computations could impact our projected benefit obligations,
pension liabilities, pension expense and other comprehensive
income. We base our determination of pension expense on a
market-related valuation of assets that reduces year-to-year
volatility. This market-related valuation recognizes investment gains
or losses over a five-year period from the year in which they
occur. Investment gains or losses for this purpose are the difference
between the expected return calculated using the market-related value of assets
and the actual return based on the market-related value of assets.
The
following are the weighted-average assumptions used to determine benefit
obligations:
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount
rate
|
|
|
6.07 |
% |
|
|
5.72 |
% |
Rate
of compensation increase
|
|
|
4.57 |
% |
|
|
4.27 |
% |
The
following are the weighted-average assumptions used to determine net periodic
benefit cost:
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount
rate
|
|
|
5.90 |
% |
|
|
5.69 |
% |
|
|
5.63 |
% |
Expected
long-term rate of return on plan assets
|
|
|
8.40 |
% |
|
|
8.49 |
% |
|
|
8.70 |
% |
Rate
of compensation increase
|
|
|
4.59 |
% |
|
|
4.54 |
% |
|
|
4.52 |
% |
We have
determined the asset allocation of the plans that is best able to produce
maximum long-term gains without taking on undue risk. After modeling
many different asset allocation scenarios, we have determined that an asset
allocation mix of approximately 60 percent equity securities,
30 percent debt securities and 10 percent other investments is most
appropriate. Other investments are generally a diversified mix of
funds that specialize in various equity and debt strategies that are expected to
provide positive returns each year relative to U.S. Treasury
Bills. These strategies may include, among others, arbitrage,
short-selling, and merger and acquisition investment
opportunities. We review asset allocations and results quarterly to
ensure that managers are meeting specified objectives and policies as written
and agreed to by us and each manager. These objectives and policies
are reviewed each year.
The
plan’s investment managers have discretion in the securities in which they may
invest within their asset category. Given this discretion, the
managers may, from time-to-time, invest in our stock or debt. This
could include taking either long or short positions in such
securities. As these managers are required to maintain well
diversified portfolios, the actual investment in our ordinary shares or debt
would be immaterial relative to asset categories and the overall
plan.
Our
pension plan weighted-average asset allocations for funded Transocean Plans by
asset category are as follows:
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
securities
|
|
|
64.9 |
% |
|
|
60.3 |
% |
Debt
securities
|
|
|
28.4 |
% |
|
|
29.2 |
% |
Other
|
|
|
6.7 |
% |
|
|
10.5 |
% |
Total
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
We
contributed $22 million to our defined benefit pension plans in 2007, which
were funded from our cash flows from operations. During 2007,
contributions of $14 million were made to the funded U.S. Plans,
$6 million to the funded Norway Plans and $1 million each to the Other
Non-U.S. Plans and the Assumed U.K. Pension Plans.
We expect
to contribute a total of $26 million to the Transocean Plans in
2008. These contributions are comprised of an estimated
$10 million to meet the minimum funding requirements for the funded U.S.
Plans, $2 million to fund expected benefit payments for the unfunded U.S.
Plans and the Other Non-U.S. Plans and an estimated $7 million
each for the funded Norway Plans and the Assumed U.K. Pension
Plan.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
The
following pension benefits payments are expected to be paid by the Transocean
Plans (in millions):
Years ending December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
2009
|
|
|
38 |
|
2010
|
|
|
39 |
|
2011
|
|
|
42 |
|
2012
|
|
|
44 |
|
2013-2017
|
|
|
285 |
|
Postretirement Benefits Other Than
Pensions—We have several unfunded
contributory and noncontributory OPEB plans covering substantially all of our
U.S. employees. Funding of benefit payments for plan participants
will be made as costs are incurred. The postretirement health care
plans include a limit on our share of costs for recent and future
retirees. For all plans, we have historically and continue to use a
January 1 measurement date for net periodic benefit cost and a
December 31 measurement date for benefit obligations.
In
connection with the Merger, we assumed a contributory OPEB plan covering
substantially all legacy GlobalSantaFe U.S. employees (the “Assumed OPEB
Plan”).
Net
periodic benefit cost for these post retirement plans and their components,
including service cost, interest cost, amortization of prior service cost and
recognized net actuarial losses were less than $2 million for each of the
years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, and less than $3 million for
the year ended December 31, 2005.
The
change in benefit obligation, change in plan assets, funded status and amounts
recognized in the consolidated balance sheets are shown in the table below
(in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Change
in benefit obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
obligation at beginning of year
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
$ |
41 |
|
Assumed
OPEB Plan’s projected benefit obligations at Merger date
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Service
cost
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Interest
cost
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Actuarial
gains
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Participants’
contributions
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Benefits
paid
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Benefit
obligation at end of year
|
|
$ |
55 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change
in plan assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
value of plan assets at beginning of year
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
Employer
contributions
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Participants’
contributions
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Benefits
paid
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Fair
value of plan assets at end of year
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded
status
|
|
$ |
(55 |
) |
|
$ |
(36 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts
recognized in the consolidated balance sheets consist of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued
postretirement benefit liability, current
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
Accrued
postretirement benefit liability, non-current
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
There
were no amounts recognized in other comprehensive income as components of net
periodic benefit cost in the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
The
following table shows the amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income that
have not been recognized as components of net periodic benefit costs
(in millions):
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007(a)
|
|
|
2006(a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
prior service credit
|
|
$ |
(15 |
) |
|
$ |
(17 |
) |
Net
loss
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Net
transition obligation
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Total
unrecognized accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
— |
|
______________
|
(a)
|
Amounts
are before income tax effect.
|
The
amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income to be recognized as components
of net periodic benefit cost, including net loss and net prior service credit,
are expected to be less than $2 million during the year ending
December 31, 2008.
Our OPEB
obligations and the related benefit costs are accounted for in accordance with
SFAS No. 106, Employers’ Accounting for
Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions. Postretirement
costs and obligations are actuarially determined and are affected by assumptions
including expected discount rates, employee turnover rates and health care cost
trend rates. We evaluate our assumptions periodically and make
adjustments to these assumptions and the recorded liabilities as
necessary.
Two of
the most critical assumptions for postretirement benefit plans are the assumed
discount rate and the expected health care cost trend rates. We
utilize a yield curve approach based on Aa corporate bonds and the expected
timing of future benefit payments as a basis for determining the discount
rate. The accumulated postretirement benefit obligation and service
cost were developed using a health care trend rate of 9.73 percent for 2007
reducing on an average of approximately 0.68 percent per year to an
ultimate trend rate of 5 percent per year for 2014 and
later. The initial trend rate was selected with reference to recent
Transocean experience and broader national statistics. The ultimate
trend rate is a long-term assumption and was selected to reflect the
anticipation that the portion of gross domestic product devoted to health care
becomes constant. Changes in these and other assumptions used in the
actuarial computations could impact our projected benefit obligations, pension
liabilities and pension expense.
Weighted-average
discount rates used to determine benefit obligations were 5.96 percent and
5.64 percent for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006,
respectively.
Weighted-average
assumptions used to determine net periodic benefit cost were 5.80 percent,
5.37 percent and 5.50 percent for the years ended December 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Assumed
health care cost trend rates were as follows:
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Health
care cost trend rate assumed for next year
|
|
|
9.73 |
% |
|
|
10.25 |
% |
Rate
to which the cost trend rate is assumed to decline (the ultimate trend
rate)
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
5 |
% |
Year
that the rate reaches the ultimate trend rate
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2014
|
|
The
assumed health care cost trend rate could have a significant impact on the
amounts reported for postretirement benefits other than pensions. A
one-percentage point change in the assumed health care trend rate would result
in a change of $3 million in postretirement benefit obligations as of
December 31, 2007 and less than $1 million in total service and
interest cost components in 2007.
The
following postretirement benefits payments are expected to be paid
(in millions):
Years ending December
31,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
2009
|
|
|
2 |
|
2010
|
|
|
2 |
|
2011
|
|
|
2 |
|
2012
|
|
|
2 |
|
2013-2017
|
|
|
11 |
|
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Defined Contribution Plans—We
provide a defined contribution pension and savings plan covering senior non-U.S.
field employees working outside the United States. Contributions and
costs are determined to be 4.5 percent to 6.5 percent of each covered
employee’s salary, based on years of service. In addition, we sponsor
a U.S. defined contribution savings plan that covers certain employees and
limits our contributions to no more than 4.5 percent of each covered
employee’s salary, based on the employee’s contribution. We also
sponsor various other defined contribution plans worldwide. We
recorded approximately $33 million, $26 million and $21 million
of expense related to our defined contribution plans for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
In
connection with the Merger, we assumed two defined contribution plans for
employees in the U.S. (the “Assumed U.S. Defined Contribution Plans”) and two
defined contributions plans in the United Kingdom (the “Assumed U.K. Defined
Contribution Plans,” and together with the Assumed U.S. Defined Contribution
Plans, the “Assumed Defined Contribution Plans”), covering substantially all
U.S. and non-U.S. legacy GlobalSantaFe employees.
Deferred Compensation Plan—We
provided a deferred compensation plan (the “Deferred Plan”), which was amended
and effectively frozen as of December 31, 2004. The Deferred
Plan’s primary purpose was to provide tax-advantageous asset accumulation for a
select group of management, highly compensated employees and non-employee
members of the board of directors.
Eligible
employees who enrolled in the Deferred Plan could elect to defer up to a maximum
of 90 percent of base salary, 100 percent of any future performance
awards, 100 percent of any special payments and 100 percent of
directors meeting fees and annual retainers; however, the administrative
committee (seven individuals appointed by the finance and benefits committee of
the board of directors) could, at its discretion, establish minimum amounts that
must be deferred by anyone electing to participate in the Deferred
Plan. In addition, the executive compensation committee of the board
of directors could authorize employer contributions to participants and our
chief executive officer, with executive compensation committee approval, was
authorized to cause us to enter into “deferred compensation award agreements”
with such participants. There were no employer contributions to the
Deferred Plan during the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 or
2005. In addition, we had a liability of $8 million,
$6 million and $5 million for the years ended December 31, 2007,
2006 and 2005, respectively.
In
connection with the Merger, we assumed a deferred compensation plan for
employees of GlobalSantaFe (the “Assumed Deferred Plan”). Eligible
employees who enrolled in this plan could defer any or all of the amount of
their annual salary in excess of the annual IRS maximum recognizable
compensation limit and up to 100% of their awards under the GlobalSantaFe
annual incentive plan. Effective January 1, 2008, the Assumed
Deferred Plan was amended to freeze the Assumed Deferred Plan as of that
date. We had a liability of $9 million as of December 31,
2007 in relation to this plan.
Severance Plans—On
November 27, 2007, we established a special transition severance plan for
certain employees on the U.S. payroll involuntarily terminated during the period
from November 27, 2007 through November 27, 2009 (the “Severance
Plan”). The Severance Plan covers persons who (1) were
shore-based employees of Transocean and GlobalSantaFe immediately prior to the
date of the completion of the Transactions, (2) remain continuously
employed by Transocean until the date of their termination, (3) do not have
an individual employment or severance agreement with Transocean or
GlobalSantaFe, (4) are not eligible to participate in the Transocean
Executive Change of Control Severance Benefit policy, (5) are terminated
involuntarily and not for cause during the two-year period ending
November 27, 2009, and (6) timely execute a required form of waiver
and release.
The
amount of the severance benefit equals (1) one month of base pay for every
$20,000 of the employee’s annual base salary, plus (2) for employees with
10 or fewer years of service, one week of base pay for every year of
service; for employees with 10 or more years through 20 years of service,
10 weeks of base pay plus two weeks of base pay for every year of service
in excess of 10 years; and for employees with more than 20 years of
service, 30 weeks of base pay plus three weeks of base pay for every year
of service in excess of 20 years, plus (3) two weeks of base
pay. For this purpose, base salary in excess of a
$20,000 increment and partial years of service will be pro
rated. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event will the severance
benefit be less than 26 weeks or more than 104 weeks of the employee’s weekly
base pay. Additionally, any affected employee who is either a U.S.
citizen or working in the U.S. and over the age of 39 years on his
Termination Date is eligible for an additional $2,000 lump sum, when
applicable. This payment shall not be included in determination of
the minimum and maximum weeks of the severance benefits.
In
addition to the severance benefit, affected employees are eligible to elect
coverage under specified medical, retiree medical, dental and employee
assistance plans until the earlier of the date the employee becomes eligible for
other employer coverage and the expiration of the number of weeks that
corresponds to the number of weeks used to calculate the severance
benefit. Certain affected employees are also granted age, earnings
and service credit for retirement purposes. Also, any employee who
qualifies for the benefit will be treated as having been terminated for
convenience of Transocean pursuant to the terms of any benefit plan, award or
agreement in effect on November 27, 2007, to the extent
applicable.
In
connection with the Merger, we established a liability of $29 million for
the estimated severance-related costs associated with the involuntary
termination of 218 employees pursuant to management's plan to consolidate
operations and administrative functions post-Merger. Through
December 31, 2007, approximately $2 million in severance-related costs
have been paid to 11 employees whose positions were eliminated as a result
of the consolidation of operations and administrative functions
post-merger. We anticipate that substantially all of the remaining
amounts will be paid by the end of the first quarter of 2009.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Note
19—Segments, Geographical Analysis and Major Customers
Prior to
the Merger, we operated in one business segment. As a result of the
Merger, we have established two reportable segments: (1) Contract Drilling
and (2) Other. We have combined drilling management services and
oil and gas properties into the Other segment. The drilling
management services and oil and gas properties do not meet the quantitative
thresholds for determining reportable segments and are combined for reporting
purposes in the Other segment. Accounting policies of the segments
are the same as those described in the Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies (see Note 2—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies).
Our
Contract Drilling segment fleet operates in a single, global market for the
provision of contract drilling services. The location of our rigs and
the allocation of resources to build or upgrade rigs are determined by the
activities and needs of our customers.
Operating
revenues and long-lived assets by country were as follows
(in millions):
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
Operating
revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
$ |
1,259 |
|
|
$ |
806 |
|
|
$ |
648 |
|
United
Kingdom
|
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
439 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
India
|
|
|
761 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
296 |
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
447 |
|
|
|
218 |
|
Other
countries (a)
|
|
|
2,922 |
|
|
|
1,899 |
|
|
|
1,395 |
|
Total
operating revenues
|
|
$ |
6,377 |
|
|
$ |
3,882 |
|
|
$ |
2,892 |
|
|
|
As
of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Long-lived
assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
$ |
5,856 |
|
|
$ |
2,504 |
|
United
Kingdom
|
|
|
2,301 |
|
|
|
457 |
|
Nigeria
|
|
|
1,902 |
|
|
|
856 |
|
Other
countries (a)
|
|
|
10,871 |
|
|
|
3,509 |
|
Total
long-lived assets
|
|
$ |
20,930 |
|
|
$ |
7,326 |
|
______________________
(a)
|
Other
countries represents countries in which we operate that individually had
operating revenues or long-lived assets representing less than
10 percent of total operating revenues earned or total long-lived
assets.
|
A
substantial portion of our assets are mobile. Asset locations at the
end of the period are not necessarily indicative of the geographic distribution
of the revenues generated by such assets during the periods. Although
we are organized under the laws of the Cayman Islands, none of our rigs operate
in the Cayman Islands. As a result, we have no operating revenues or
long-lived assets in the Cayman Islands.
Our
international operations are subject to certain political and other
uncertainties, including risks of war and civil disturbances (or other events
that disrupt markets), expropriation of equipment, repatriation of income or
capital, taxation policies, and the general hazards associated with certain
areas in which operations are conducted.
For the
year ended December 31, 2007, Chevron, Shell and BP accounted for
approximately 12 percent, 11 percent and 10 percent,
respectively, of our operating revenues. For the year ended
December 31, 2006, Chevron, BP and Shell accounted for approximately
14 percent, 11 percent and 11 percent, respectively, of our
operating revenues. For the year ended December 31, 2005,
Chevron and BP each accounted for approximately 12 percent of our operating
revenues. The loss of these or other significant customers could have
a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Note
20—Related Party Transactions
ODL—In connection with the
management and operation of the Joides Resolution on
behalf of ODL, we earned $1 million, $2 million and $1 million
for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. Such amounts are included in other revenues in our
consolidated statements of operations. At December 31, 2007 and
2006, we had receivables due from ODL of $5 million and $1 million,
respectively, which were recorded as accounts receivable – other in our
consolidated balance sheets. Siem Offshore Inc. owns the other
50 percent interest in ODL. Our director, Kristian Siem, is the
chairman of Siem Offshore Inc. and is also a director and officer of
ODL. Mr. Siem is also chairman and chief executive officer of
Siem Industries, Inc., which owns an approximate 45 percent interest
in Siem Offshore Inc.
In
November 2005, we entered into a loan agreement with ODL pursuant to which
we may borrow up to $8 million. ODL may demand repayment at any
time upon five business days prior written notice given to us and any amount due
to us from ODL may be offset against the loan amount at the time of
repayment. As of December 31, 2007 and 2006, $3 million was
outstanding under this loan agreement for each year and was reflected as
long-term debt in our consolidated balance sheet (see Note
7—Debt). No dividend was declared in 2007. ODL declared a
dividend in the amount of $4 million in 2006. In addition, ODL
paid us cash dividends of $3 million in 2005.
TODCO—We entered into a
transition services agreement under which we provided specified administrative
support to TODCO during the transitional period following the closing of the
TODCO IPO. TODCO provides specified administrative support on our
behalf for rig operations in Trinidad and Venezuela. Amounts earned
under the transition services agreement were reflected in other revenues and
amounts incurred for administrative support were reflected in operating and
maintenance expense in our consolidated statement of
operations. While any amounts recorded between us and TODCO
subsequent to the deconsolidation of TODCO in mid-December 2004 were not
material, we incurred $1 million of costs related to service fees that
TODCO billed to us in 2005. At December 31, 2007 and 2006, we
had payables related to the agreements for the separation of TODCO of
$1 million for each year, which was included in accounts payable in our
consolidated balance sheet. At December 31, 2007 and 2006, we
had a long-term payable related to our indemnification of certain TODCO non-U.S.
income tax liabilities of $11 million for each year, which was included in
other long-term liabilities in our consolidated balance sheet.
Note
21—Earnings Per Share
In
connection with the Merger, we assumed all of GlobalSantaFe’s outstanding
employee stock options and stock appreciation rights. We accounted
for the Reclassification as a reverse stock split and a dividend, which require
restatement of historical weighted average shares outstanding, historical
earnings per share and other share-based calculations for prior
periods.
The
reconciliation of the numerator and denominator used for the computation of
basic and diluted earnings per share is as follows (in millions, except per
share data):
|
|
Years
ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator
for earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income for basic earnings per share
|
|
$ |
3,131 |
|
|
$ |
1,385 |
|
|
$ |
716 |
|
Add
back interest expense on the 1.5% Convertible
Debentures
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Net
income for diluted earnings per share
|
|
$ |
3,137 |
|
|
$ |
1,391 |
|
|
$ |
722 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator
for earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average
shares outstanding for basic earnings per share
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
Effect
of dilutive securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee
stock options and unvested stock grants
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Warrants
to purchase ordinary shares
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
1.5%
Convertible Debentures
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Adjusted
weighted-average shares and assumed conversions for diluted earnings per
share
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
14.65 |
|
|
$ |
6.32 |
|
|
$ |
3.13 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
14.14 |
|
|
$ |
6.10 |
|
|
$ |
3.03 |
|
Ordinary
shares subject to issuance pursuant to the conversion features of the Zero
Coupon Convertible Debentures and the Convertible Notes (see Note 7—Debt) are
included in the calculation of adjusted weighted-average shares for the year
ended December 31, 2007 and the Zero Coupon Convertible Debentures are
included in the calculation of adjusted weighted-average shares for the year
ended December 31, 2006; however, they did not have a material effect on
the calculation for each year. The Zero Coupon Convertible Debentures
are not included in the calculation of adjusted weighted-average shares and
assumed conversions for diluted earnings per share for the year ended
December 31, 2005 because the effect of including those shares is
anti-dilutive.
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
Note
22—Stock Warrants
In
connection with the R&B Falcon merger, we assumed the then outstanding
R&B Falcon stock warrants. Each warrant enabled the holder to
purchase 17.5 ordinary shares at an exercise price of $19.00 per
share. The warrants expire on May 1, 2009. On July
25, 2007, we issued 861,700 ordinary shares and we received $16 million in
cash related to the exercise of 49,240 warrants. In
November 2007, we issued 1,255,625 ordinary shares and we received
$24 million in cash related to the exercise of
71,750 warrants. At December 31, 2007, there were
82,910 warrants outstanding to purchase 1,015,067 ordinary
shares.
The
warrant agreement provided that, as a result of the Reclassification, each
warrant became exercisable for 12.243 ordinary shares at an adjusted
exercise price equal to $21.74 per share pursuant to formulas specified in
the warrant agreement. We believe that the adjustment of the number
of ordinary shares for which the warrants were exercisable and the exercise
price pursuant to the warrant agreement would not allow holders to receive the
full economic benefit of the Reclassification. In order to place the
warrantholders in a position more comparable to that of ordinary shareholders,
we modified the warrant agreement to allow warrantholders to receive, upon
exercise following the Reclassification, 0.6996 of our ordinary shares and
$33.03 for each ordinary share for which the warrants were previously
exercisable, at an exercise price of $19.00 per ordinary share for which
the warrants were exercisable prior to the Reclassification. As a
result, a holder of a warrant may elect to receive 12.243 ordinary shares
and $578.025 in cash at an exercise price of $332.50 upon
exercise. This modification represents the same consideration that a
warrantholder would have owned immediately after the Reclassification if the
warrantholder had exercised its warrant immediately before the
Reclassification.
The cash
payment feature provided for in the modification resulted in a reclassification
from permanent equity. As of December 31, 2007, $48 million
was recorded in other current liabilities in our consolidated balance
sheet.
Note
23—Quarterly Results (Unaudited)
Shown
below are selected unaudited quarterly data. Amounts are rounded for
consistency in presentation with no effect to the results of operations
previously reported on Form 10-Q or Form 10-K.
|
|
Three
months ended
|
|
|
|
March
31,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
September
30,
|
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
|
(in
millions, except per share data)
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
revenues
|
|
$ |
1,328 |
|
|
$ |
1,434 |
|
|
$ |
1,538 |
|
|
$ |
2,077 |
|
Operating
income (a)
|
|
|
657 |
|
|
|
676 |
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
1,153 |
|
Net
income (a)(b)
|
|
|
553 |
|
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
973 |
|
|
|
1,056 |
|
Earnings
per share (c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
2.72 |
|
|
$ |
2.73 |
|
|
$ |
4.80 |
|
|
$ |
4.27 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
2.62 |
|
|
$ |
2.63 |
|
|
$ |
4.63 |
|
|
$ |
4.17 |
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding (c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
revenues
|
|
$ |
817 |
|
|
$ |
854 |
|
|
$ |
1,025 |
|
|
$ |
1,186 |
|
Operating
income (d)
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
678 |
|
Net
income (d)
|
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
621 |
|
Earnings
per share (c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
0.90 |
|
|
$ |
1.10 |
|
|
$ |
1.42 |
|
|
$ |
3.04 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
0.87 |
|
|
$ |
1.07 |
|
|
$ |
1.37 |
|
|
$ |
2.92 |
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding (c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
_________________________
(a)
|
First
quarter included gain from disposal of assets of
$23 million. Third quarter included gain from disposal of
assets of $8 million. Fourth quarter included gain from
disposal of assets of $233 million. See Note 6—Asset
Dispositions.
|
(b)
|
Third
quarter included other income of $276 million recognized in
connection with the TODCO tax sharing agreement and
a tax benefit of $52 million from various discrete tax
items. Fourth quarter included loss on retirement of
debt of $8 million.
|
TRANSOCEAN
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — Continued
(c)
|
All
earnings per share amounts and weighted average shares outstanding have
been restated for the effect of the Reclassification. The
restatement adjusts shares outstanding in a manner similar to a reverse
stock split in the ratio of 0.6996 for each share
outstanding.
|
(d)
|
First
quarter included gain from disposal of assets of
$65 million. Second quarter included gain from disposal of
assets of $111 million. Third quarter included gain from
disposal of assets of $45 million. Fourth quarter included
gain from disposal of assets of $191 million. See Note
6—Asset Dispositions.
|
Note
24—Subsequent Events (Unaudited)
Commercial Paper Program—As
of February 27, 2008, we have issued $813 million in commercial paper
in 2008. The proceeds from the issuance of commercial paper were used
to repay borrowings outstanding under the 364-Day Revolving Credit
Facility.
Debt Repayments—As of
February 27, 2008, we have repaid $580 million of borrowings under the
Bridge Loan Facility in 2008 using internally generated cash flows.
Assets Held for Sale—On
February 15, 2008, we entered into a definitive agreement with Hercules
Offshore, Inc. to sell three of our Standard Jackups (GSF Adriatic III,
GSF High Island I
and GSF High Island VIII)
for approximately $320 million. At
February 27, 2008, GSF Adriatic III,
GSF High Island I and
GSF High Island VIII
were classified as assets held for sale in the amounts of $146 million, $92
million and $92 million, respectively.
In
addition, we are actively pursuing the sale of two Midwater Floaters, GSF Arctic II and
GSF Arctic IV,
which continue to operate under contract, in connection with our previously
announced proposed undertakings to the Office of Fair Trading in the
U.K. At
February 27, 2008, GSF Arctic
II and GSF Arctic
IV were classified as held for sale in the amounts at $280 million and
$285 million, respectively.
ITEM
9.
|
Changes in and
Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure
|
We have
not had a change in or disagreement with our accountants within 24 months prior
to the date of our most recent financial statements or in any period subsequent
to such date.
In
accordance with Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15, we carried out an
evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of management,
including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the
effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the
period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure
controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2007 to provide
reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in our reports
filed or submitted under the Exchange Act (i) accumulated and communicated
to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial
Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure and
(ii) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods
specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and
forms.
There
were no changes in these internal controls during the quarter ended
December 31, 2007 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely
to materially affect, our internal controls over financial
reporting.
See
“Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting” and “Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting” included in Item 8 of this Annual Report.
None
PART
III
ITEM
10.
|
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate
Governance
|
ITEM
13.
|
Certain Relationships, Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
ITEM
14.
|
Principal Accountant Fees and
Services
|
The
information required by Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 is incorporated herein by
reference to our definitive proxy statement for our 2008 annual general meeting
of shareholders, which will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 within 120
days of December 31, 2007. Certain information with respect to
our executive officers is set forth in Item 4 of this annual report under the
caption “Executive Officers of the Registrant.”
PART
IV
ITEM
15.
|
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
|
|
(a)
|
Index
to Financial Statements, Financial Statement Schedules and
Exhibits
|
(1)
Financial Statements
|
Page
|
Included
in Part II of this report:
|
|
Management’s
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
|
61
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on
|
|
Internal
Control over Financial Reporting
|
62
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
63
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations
|
64
|
Consolidated
Statements of Comprehensive Income
|
65
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets
|
66
|
Consolidated
Statements of Equity
|
67
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows
|
68
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
69
|
|
Financial
statements of unconsolidated subsidiaries are not presented herein because
such subsidiaries do not meet the significance
test.
|
(2)
Financial Statement Schedules
Transocean
Inc. and Subsidiaries
Schedule
II - Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
Charged to
Costs and Expenses
|
|
|
Charged to
Other Accounts Describe
|
|
|
|
Deductions Describe
|
|
Balance
at End of Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves
and allowances deducted from asset accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance
for doubtful accounts receivable
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
(a)(b)
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance
for obsolete materials and supplies
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
(b)(c)
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation
allowance on deferred tax assets
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
67 |
|
(d)
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves
and allowances deducted from asset accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance
for doubtful accounts receivable
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
(a)
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance
for obsolete materials and supplies
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
(e)
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation
allowance on deferred tax assets
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves
and allowances deducted from asset accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance
for doubtful accounts receivable
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
(a)
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance
for obsolete materials and supplies
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
(f)
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation
allowance on deferred tax assets
|
|
$ |
59 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
(g)
|
|
$ |
58 |
|
(h)
|
|
$ |
29 |
|
_____________________________
(a)
|
Uncollectible
accounts receivable written off, net of
recoveries.
|
(b)
|
Amount
includes $1 related to adjustments to the
provision.
|
(c)
|
Obsolete
materials and supplies written off, net of
scrap.
|
(d)
|
Amount
represents the utilization of the underlying deferred tax assets to offset
current year income.
|
(e)
|
Amount
represents $3 related to sale of
rigs/inventory.
|
(f)
|
Amount
represents $1 related to sale of
rigs/inventory.
|
(g)
|
Amount
represents the valuation allowances established in connection with
the
tax assets acquired and the liabilities assumed during the
Merger.
|
(h)
|
Amount
represents a change in estimate related to the expected utilization of our
U.S. foreign tax credits.
|
Other
schedules are omitted either because they are not required or are not applicable
or because the required information is included in the financial statements or
notes thereto.
(3) Exhibits
The
following exhibits are filed in connection with this Report:
Number
|
Description
|
|
|
2.1
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger dated as of August 19, 2000 by and among
Transocean Inc., Transocean Holdings Inc., TSF
Delaware Inc. and R&B Falcon Corporation (incorporated by
reference to Annex A to the Joint Proxy Statement/Prospectus dated
October 30, 2000 included in a 424(b)(3) prospectus filed by the
Company on November 1, 2000)
|
|
|
2.2
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger dated as of July 12, 1999 among Schlumberger Limited,
Sedco Forex Holdings Limited, Transocean Offshore Inc. and
Transocean SF Limited (incorporated by reference to Annex A to the Joint
Proxy Statement/Prospectus dated October 27, included in a 424(b)(3)
prospectus filed by the Company on November 1,
2000)
|
|
|
2.3
|
Distribution
Agreement dated as of July 12, 1999 between Schlumberger Limited and
Sedco Forex Holdings Limited (incorporated by reference to Annex B to
the Joint Proxy Statement/Prospectus dated October 27, included in a
424(b)(3) prospectus filed by the Company on November 1,
2000)
|
|
|
2.4
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger and Conversion dated as of March 12, 1999 between
Transocean Offshore Inc. and Transocean Offshore (Texas) Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Registration
Statement on Form S-4 of Transocean Offshore (Texas) Inc. filed
on April 8, 1999 (Registration No. 333-75899))
|
|
|
2.5
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger, dated as of July 21, 2007, among Transocean Inc.,
GlobalSantaFe Corporation and Transocean Worldwide Inc. (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on July 23, 2007)
|
|
|
3.1
|
Certificate
of Incorporation on Change of Name to Transocean Inc. (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 3.3 to the Company’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002)
|
|
|
3.2
|
Transocean
Amended and Restated Memorandum of Association (incorporated by reference
to Annex E to the Joint Proxy Statement of Transocean and GlobalSantaFe
filed on October 3, 2007)
|
|
|
3.3
|
Transocean
Amended and Restated Articles of Association (incorporated by reference to
Annex F to the Joint Proxy Statement of Transocean and GlobalSantaFe filed
on October 3, 2007)
|
|
|
4.1
|
Indenture
dated as of April 15, 1997 between the Company and Texas Commerce Bank
National Association, as trustee (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated
April 29, 1997)
|
|
|
4.2
|
First
Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 15, 1997 between the Company and
Texas Commerce Bank National Association, as trustee, supplementing the
Indenture dated as of April 15, 1997 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated
April 29, 1997)
|
|
|
4.3
|
Second
Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 14, 1999 between the Company and
Chase Bank of Texas, National Association, as trustee (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.5 to the Company’s Post-Effective Amendment
No. 1 to Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration
No. 333-59001-99))
|
|
|
4.4
|
Third
Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 24, 2000 between the Company and
Chase Bank of Texas, National Association, as trustee (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on May 24, 2000)
|
|
|
4.5
|
Fourth
Supplemental Indenture dated as of May 11, 2001 between the Company and
The Chase Manhattan Bank (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to
the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2001)
|
|
|
4.6
|
Form
of 7.45% Notes due April 15, 2027 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.3 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated
April 29, 1997)
|
|
|
4.7
|
Form
of 8.00% Debentures due April 15, 2027 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.4 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated
April 19, 1997)
|
|
|
4.8
|
Form
of Zero Coupon Convertible Debenture due May 24, 2020 between the Company
and Chase Bank of Texas, National Association, as trustee (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on May 24, 2000)
|
|
|
4.9
|
Form
of 1.5% Convertible Debenture due May 15, 2021 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.2 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K dated May 8, 2001)
|
|
|
4.10
|
Form
of 6.625% Note due April 15, 2011 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.3 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated
March 30, 2001)
|
|
|
4.11
|
Form
of 7.5% Note due April 15, 2031 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.3 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated
March 30, 2001)
|
|
|
4.12
|
Officers’
Certificate establishing the terms of the 6.50% Notes due 2003,
6.75% Notes due 2005, 6.95% Notes due 2008, 7.375% Notes
due 2018, 9.125% Notes due 2003 and 9.50% Notes due 2008
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.13 to the Company’s Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2001)
|
|
|
4.13
|
Officers’
Certificate establishing the terms of the 7.375% Notes due 2018
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.14 to the Company’s Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2001)
|
|
|
4.14
|
Warrant
Agreement, including form of Warrant, dated April 22, 1999 between R&B
Falcon and American Stock Transfer & Trust Company (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to R&B Falcon’s Registration Statement
No. 333-81181 on Form S-3 dated June 21,
1999)
|
|
|
4.15
|
Supplement
to Warrant Agreement dated January 31, 2001 among Transocean
Sedco Forex Inc., R&B Falcon Corporation and American Stock
Transfer & Trust Company (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.28 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2000)
|
|
|
4.16
|
Supplement
to Warrant Agreement dated September 14, 2005 between Transocean Inc.
and The Bank of New York (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to
the Company’s Post-Effective Amendment No. 3 on Form S-3 to
Form S-4 filed on November 18, 2005)
|
|
|
4.17
|
Amendment
to Warrant Agreement dated November 27, 2007 between
Transocean Inc. and The Bank of New York (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 4.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on December 3, 2007)
|
|
|
4.18
|
Registration
Rights Agreement dated April 22, 1999 between R&B Falcon and American
Stock Transfer & Trust Company (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 to R&B Falcons Registration Statement
No. 333-81181 on Form S-3 dated June 21,
1999)
|
|
|
4.19
|
Supplement
to Registration Rights Agreement dated January 31, 2001 between
Transocean Sedco Forex Inc. and R&B Falcon Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.30 to the Company’s Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2000)
|
|
|
4.20
|
Revolving
Credit Agreement, dated as of July 8, 2005, among Transocean Inc.,
the lenders from time to time party thereto, Citibank, N.A., Bank of
America, N.A., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., The Royal Bank of Scotland plc
and SunTrust Bank (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 13,
2005)
|
|
|
4.21
|
Amendment
No.1 to Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as of May 12, 2006, among
Transocean Inc., the lenders from time to time parties thereto,
Citibank., N.A., Bank of America, N.A., JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., the
Royal Bank of Scotland plc and SunTrust Bank (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
May 12, 2006)
|
|
|
4.22
|
Amendment
No. 2 to Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as of June 1, 2007, among
Transocean Inc., the lenders from time to time parties thereto,
Citibank, N.A., Bank of America, N.A., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., The
Royal Bank of Scotland plc and SunTrust Bank (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
June 4, 2007)
|
|
|
4.23
|
Term
Credit Agreement dated August 30, 2006 among Transocean Inc., the
lenders party thereto and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as Administrative
Agent, Citibank, N.A. as Syndication Agent, and The Bank of
Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., Calyon New York Branch and The Royal Bank of
Scotland plc (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on August 31,
2006)
|
|
|
4.24
|
Form
of Officers’ Certificate of Transocean Inc. establishing the form and
terms of the Floating Rate Notes due 2008 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
September 1, 2006)
|
|
|
4.25
|
Credit
Agreement dated as of September 28, 2007 among Transocean Inc., the
lenders party thereto and Goldman Sachs Credit Partners, L.P. as
Administrative Agent, Lehman Commercial Paper Inc. as Syndication
Agent, Citibank, N.A., Calyon Corporate and Investment Bank and JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A., as Co-Documentation Agents, and Goldman Sachs Credit
Partners, L.P. and Lehman Brothers Inc. as Joint Lead Arrangers and
Joint Bookrunners (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on October 1,
2007)
|
|
|
4.26
|
Amendment
No. 1, dated November 21, 2007, to Credit Agreement dated as of
September 28, 2007 among Transocean Inc., the lenders party thereto
and Goldman Sachs Credit Partners, L.P. as Administrative Agent, Lehman
Commercial Paper Inc. as Syndication Agent, Citibank, N.A., Calyon
Corporate and Investment Bank and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
Co-Documentation Agents, and Goldman Sachs Credit Partners, L.P. and
Lehman Brothers Inc. as Joint Lead Arrangers and Joint Bookrunners
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.11 to the Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on December 3, 2007)
|
|
|
4.27
|
Five-Year
Revolving Credit Agreement dated November 27, 2007 among
Transocean Inc., as borrower, the lenders from time to time parties
thereto, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent for the
lenders and as issuing bank of letters of credit, Citibank, N.A., as
syndication agent for the lenders and as an issuing bank of letters of
credit, Calyon Corporate and Investment Bank, as co-syndication agent, and
Credit Suisse, Cayman Islands Branch and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ,
Ltd., as co-documentation agents for the lenders (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on December 3, 2007)
|
|
|
4.28
|
Indenture
dated as of February 1, 2003, between GlobalSantaFe Corporation and
Wilmington Trust Company, as trustee, relating to debt securities of
GlobalSantaFe Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.9
to GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2002)
|
|
|
4.29
|
Supplemental
Indenture dated November 27, 2007 among Transocean
Worldwide Inc., GlobalSantaFe Corporation and Wilmington Trust
Company, as trustee, to the Indenture dated as of February 1, 2003 between
GlobalSantaFe Corporation and Wilmington Trust Company (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.4 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on December 3, 2007)
|
|
|
4.30
|
Form
of 7% Note Due 2028 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 of
Global Marine Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K (Commission File
No. 1-5471) dated May 20, 1998)
|
|
|
4.31
|
Terms
of 7% Note Due 2028 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of
Global Marine Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K (Commission File
No. 1-5471) dated May 20, 1998)
|
|
|
4.32
|
Indenture
dated as of September 1, 1997, between Global Marine Inc. and
Wilmington Trust Company, as Trustee, relating to Debt Securities of
Global Marine Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of
Global Marine Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-4
(No. 333-39033) filed with the Commission on October 30, 1997);
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of June 23, 2000 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.2 of Global Marine Inc.’s Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the quarter
ended June 30, 2000); Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of
November 20, 2001 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to
GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2004)
|
|
|
4.33
|
Form
of 5% Note due 2013 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.10
to GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2002)
|
|
|
4.34
|
Terms
of 5% Note due 2013 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.11
to GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2002)
|
4.35
|
364-Day
Revolving Credit Agreement dated December 3, 2007 among
Transocean Inc. and the lenders from time to time parties thereto,
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent for the lenders,
Citibank, N.A., as syndication agent for the lenders, Calyon New York
Branch, as co-syndication agent, and Credit Suisse, Cayman Islands Branch
and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., as co-documentation agents for
the lenders (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 5,
2007)
|
|
|
|
Senior
Indenture, dated as of December 11, 2007, between the Company and
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
|
|
|
|
First
Supplemental Indenture, dated as of December 11, 2007, between the
Company and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
|
|
|
|
Second
Supplemental Indenture, dated as of December 11, 2007, between the
Company and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
|
|
|
10.1
|
Tax
Sharing Agreement between Sonat Inc. and Sonat Offshore
Drilling Inc. dated June 3, 1993 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10-(3) to the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 1993)
|
|
|
*10.2
|
Performance
Award and Cash Bonus Plan of Sonat Offshore Drilling Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10-(5) to the Company’s
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
1993)
|
|
|
*10.3
|
Form
of Sonat Offshore Drilling Inc. Executive Life Insurance Program
Split Dollar Agreement and Collateral Assignment Agreement (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10-(9) to the Company’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
1993)
|
|
|
*10.4
|
Amended
and Restated Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Transocean Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K dated May 16, 2005)
|
|
|
*10.5
|
Amended
and Restated Long-Term Incentive Plan of Transocean Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Appendix B to the Company’s Proxy Statement
dated March 19, 2004)
|
|
|
*10.6
|
Amendment
to Amended and Restated Long-Term Incentive Plan of Transocean Inc.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on July 23, 2007)
|
|
|
*10.7
|
Deferred
Compensation Plan of Transocean Offshore Inc., as amended and
restated effective January 1, 2000 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.10 to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 1999)
|
|
|
*10.8
|
Amendment
to Transocean Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan (incorporate by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on December 29, 2005)
|
|
|
*10.9
|
Sedco Forex
Employees Option Plan of Transocean Sedco Forex Inc. effective
December 31, 1999 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 to
the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration
No. 333-94569) filed January 12, 2000)
|
|
|
*10.10
|
1992
Long-Term Incentive Plan of Reading & Bates Corporation (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit B to Reading & Bates’ Proxy Statement
dated April 27, 1992)
|
|
|
*10.11
|
1995
Long-Term Incentive Plan of Reading & Bates Corporation (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 99.A to Reading & Bates’ Proxy Statement
dated March 29, 1995)
|
|
|
*10.12
|
1995
Director Stock Option Plan of Reading & Bates Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.B to Reading & Bates’
Proxy Statement dated March 29, 1995)
|
|
|
*10.13
|
1997
Long-Term Incentive Plan of Reading & Bates Corporation (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 99.A to Reading & Bates’ Proxy Statement
dated March 18, 1997)
|
|
|
*10.14
|
1998
Employee Long-Term Incentive Plan of R&B Falcon Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.A to R&B Falcon’s Proxy
Statement dated April 23, 1998)
|
|
|
*10.15
|
1998
Director Long-Term Incentive Plan of R&B Falcon Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.B to R&B Falcon’s Proxy
Statement dated April 23, 1998)
|
|
|
*10.16
|
1999
Employee Long-Term Incentive Plan of R&B Falcon Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.A to R&B Falcon’s Proxy
Statement dated April 13, 1999)
|
|
|
*10.17
|
1999
Director Long-Term Incentive Plan of R&B Falcon Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.B to R&B Falcon’s Proxy
Statement dated April 13, 1999)
|
|
|
10.18
|
Master
Separation Agreement dated February 4, 2004 by and among
Transocean Inc., Transocean Holdings Inc. and TODCO
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.2 to the Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K dated March 2, 2004)
|
|
|
10.19
|
Tax
Sharing Agreement dated February 4, 2004 between Transocean
Holdings Inc. and TODCO (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 99.3 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated
March 2, 2004)
|
|
|
10.20
|
Amended
and Restated Tax Sharing Agreement effective as of February 4, 2004
between Transocean Holdings Inc. and TODCO (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 4.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on November 30, 2006)
|
|
|
*10.21
|
Executive
Severance Benefit of Transocean Inc. effective February 9, 2005
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on February 15, 2005)
|
|
|
*10.22
|
Form
of 2004 Performance-Based Nonqualified Share Option Award Letter
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on February 15, 2005)
|
|
|
*10.23
|
Form
of 2004 Employee Contingent Restricted Ordinary Share Award (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on February 15, 2005)
|
|
|
*10.24
|
Form
of 2004 Director Deferred Unit Award (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on February 15, 2005)
|
|
|
*10.25
|
Performance
Award and Cash Bonus Plan of Transocean Inc. (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.5 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on February 15, 2005)
|
|
|
|
Description
of Base Salaries of Named Executive Officers
|
|
|
*10.27
|
Executive
Change of Control Severance Benefit (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on July 19, 2005)
|
|
|
10.28
|
Commitment
Letter, dated July 21, 2007, among Transocean Inc., GlobalSantaFe
Corporation, Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P., Lehman Brothers
Commercial Bank, Lehman Commercial Paper Inc. and Lehman
Brothers Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 23,
2007)
|
|
|
*10.29
|
Terms
of July 2007 Employee Restricted Stock Awards (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 2007)
|
|
|
*10.30
|
Terms
of July 2007 Employee Deferred Unit Awards (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 2007
|
|
|
10.31
|
Put
Option and Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of October 18,
2007, among Pacific Drilling Limited, Transocean Pacific
Drilling Inc., Transocean Inc. and Transocean Offshore
International Ventures Limited (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on October 24, 2007)
|
|
|
10.32
|
Form
of Novation Agreement dated as of November 27, 2007 by and among
GlobalSantaFe Corporation, Transocean Offshore Deepwater
Drilling Inc. and certain executives (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on December 3, 2007)
|
|
|
*10.33
|
Form
of Severance Agreement with GlobalSantaFe Corporation Executive Officers
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to GlobalSantaFe
Corporation’s Current Report on Form 8 K/A filed on July 26,
2005)
|
|
|
*10.34
|
Transocean
Special Transition Severance Plan for Shore-Based Employees (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on December 3, 2007)
|
|
|
*10.35
|
Global
Marine Inc. 1989 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.6 of Global Marine Inc.’s Annual Report
on Form 10-K (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the year ended
December 31, 1988); First Amendment (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.6 of Global Marine Inc.’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the year ended
December 31, 1990); Second Amendment (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.7 of Global Marine Inc.’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the year ended
December 31, 1991); Third Amendment (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.19 of Global Marine Inc.’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the year ended
December 31, 1993); Fourth Amendment (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.16 of Global Marine Inc.’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the year ended
December 31, 1994); Fifth Amendment (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 of Global Marine Inc.’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the quarter ended
June 30, 1996); Sixth Amendment (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.18 of Global Marine Inc.’s Annual Report on
Form 10-K (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the year ended
December 31, 1996)
|
|
|
*10.36
|
Global
Marine Inc. 1990 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 of Global
Marine Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K (Commission File
No. 1-5471) for the year ended December 31, 1991); First
Amendment (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Global
Marine Inc.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (Commission File
No. 1-5471) for the quarter ended June 30, 1995); Second Amendment
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.37 of Global
Marine Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K (Commission File
No. 1-5471) for the year ended December 31,
1996)
|
|
|
*10.37
|
1997
Long-Term Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to GlobalSantaFe
Corporation’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-7070) filed
June 13, 1997); Amendment to 1997 Long Term Incentive Plan (incorporated
by reference to GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for
the calendar year ended December 31, 1998); Amendment to 1997 Long
Term Incentive Plan dated December 1, 1999 (incorporated by reference
to GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the calendar
year ended December 31, 1999)
|
|
|
*10.38
|
GlobalSantaFe
Corporation 1998 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Global Marine Inc.’s Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the quarter
ended March 31, 1998); First Amendment (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 of Global Marine Inc.’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q (Commission File No. 1-5471) for the quarter ended
June 30, 2000)
|
|
|
*10.39
|
GlobalSantaFe
Corporation 2001 Non-Employee Director Stock Option and Incentive Plan
(incorporated by reference to GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-73878) filed November 21,
2001)
|
|
|
*10.40
|
GlobalSantaFe
Corporation 2001 Long-Term Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2001)
|
|
|
*10.41
|
GlobalSantaFe
2003 Long-Term Incentive Plan (as Amended and Restated Effective June 7,
2005) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to GlobalSantaFe
Corporation’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
June 30, 2005)
|
|
|
*10.42
|
GlobalSantaFe
Pension Equalization Plan, as amended and restated, effective
November 27, 2007 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to
the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed on December 3,
2007)
|
|
|
*10.43
|
Transocean
U.S. Supplemental Retirement Benefit Plan, as amended and restated,
effective as of November 27, 2007 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.11 to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on December 3, 2007)
|
|
|
10.44
|
Commercial
Paper Dealer Agreement between Transocean Inc. and Lehman
Brothers Inc., dated as of December 20, 2007 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on December 21, 2007)
|
|
|
10.45
|
Commercial
Paper Dealer Agreement between Transocean Inc. and Morgan Stanley
& Co. Incorporated, dated as of December 20, 2007 (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on December 21, 2007)
|
|
|
10.46
|
Commercial
Paper Dealer Agreement between Transocean Inc. and J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc., dated as of December 20, 2007 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Company’s Current Report on
Form 8-K filed on December 21, 2007)
|
|
|
|
Subsidiaries
of the Company
|
|
|
|
Consent
of Ernst & Young LLP
|
|
|
|
Powers
of Attorney
|
|
|
|
CEO
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
|
|
CFO
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
|
|
CEO
Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
|
|
|
CFO
Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002
|
_______________________________
*Compensatory
plan or arrangement.
†Filed
herewith.
Exhibits
listed above as previously having been filed with the SEC are incorporated
herein by reference pursuant to Rule 12b-32 under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and made a part hereof with the same effect as if filed
herewith.
Certain
instruments relating to our long-term debt and our subsidiaries have not been
filed as exhibits since the total amount of securities authorized under any such
instrument does not exceed 10 percent of our total assets and our
subsidiaries on a consolidated basis. We agree to furnish a copy of each such
instrument to the SEC upon request.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by
the undersigned; thereunto duly authorized, on February 27, 2008.
|
TRANSOCEAN
INC.
|
|
|
By
|
/s/ Gregory L. Cauthen
|
|
|
|
Gregory
L. Cauthen
|
|
|
|
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant in the
capacities indicated on February 27, 2008.
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Chairman
of the Board of Directors
|
Robert
E. Rose
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Robert L. Long
|
|
Chief
Executive Officer
|
Robert
L. Long
|
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|
|
|
/s/ Gregory L. Cauthen
|
|
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
Gregory
L. Cauthen
|
|
(Principal
Financial Officer)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John H. Briscoe
|
|
Vice
President and Controller
|
John
H. Briscoe
|
|
(Principal
Accounting Officer)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
President,
Chief Operating Officer and
|
Jon
A. Marshall
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Director
|
W.
Richard Anderson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Director
|
Thomas
W. Cason
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Director
|
Richard
L. George
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Director
|
Victor
E. Grijalva
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Director
|
Martin
B. McNamara
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Director
|
Edward
R. Muller
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
Kristian
Siem
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
Robert
M. Sprague
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
Ian
C. Strachan
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
J.
Michael Talbert
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
John
L. Whitmire
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By
|
/s/ Chipman Earle
|
|
|
|
Chipman
Earle
|
|
|
|
(Attorney-in-Fact)
|
|
|
-118-