Tech News, Magazine & Review WordPress Theme 2017
  • Home
  • Supply Chain Updates
  • Global News
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Supply Chain Updates
  • Global News
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
No Result
View All Result
Home Supply Chain Updates

Rags to riches to rags to occasional riches

usscmc by usscmc
January 31, 2021
Rags to riches to rags to occasional riches
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Container line ZIM just pulled off something extraordinary in ocean shipping: It priced a U.S. initial public offering (IPO).

That doesn’t sound like much of an achievement. The U.S. IPO market is booming; proceeds surged 69% in 2020, according to Renaissance Capital. Yet prior to ZIM (NYSE: ZIM), there hadn’t been a U.S. shipping IPO since Barack Obama was in the Oval Office, when Peter Georgiopoulos-led Gener8 Maritime, a company that no longer exists, went public.

ZIM got its IPO done Thursday — but it was ugly. Pre-IPO, it targeted a market cap of $2 billion. It had to downsize the deal, then shares plunged over 20% at the open. By the end of its first trading session, ZIM was valued at $1.6 billion — $400 million short of its goal.

Shipping IPOs weren’t always this rare and painful to pull off. There have been multiple waves of offerings during the past 20 years. 

In honor of the first U.S. shipping IPO in over a half-decade, American Shipper looks back at the rags-to-riches-to-rags-to-occasional-riches tale of ocean shipping on Wall Street.

Pre-2000: Junk bonds, not stocks

Only a handful of shipowners went public before the turn of the century. Among them: tanker company Overseas Shipholding Group, which listed in 1994; Teekay Corp. (NYSE: TK) and Nordic American Tankers (NYSE: NAT) in 1995; Knightsbridge Tankers in 1997; and OMI Corp — with a familiar face to today’s investors, Robert Bugbee, in management — in 1999.

The big shipping action pre-2000 was in junk bonds, not stocks. Over 30 high-yield bonds were issued by shipping companies in the 1990s, primarily in 1997-98, raising over $6 billion. Then came the Asian Crisis and a sudden collapse of rates. Virtually all of the shipping bonds defaulted.

The debacle gave shipowners a taste of the public capital markets, and investors a taste of shipping. Owners didn’t like the control bondholders had over their assets in the event of a default. But they did like “other people’s money.” If they could raise capital by selling equity, not bonds, they’d maintain more control over their fleets when rates inevitably turned south.  

Not surprisingly, some of the same owners behind the doomed 1990s shipping bonds set their sights on a Wall Street IPO just a few years later.

Riding the China boom

The shipping IPO ball got rolling in 2001 with Stelios Hajiouannou’s Stelmar Shipping and Georgiopoulos’ General Maritime. In 2004 came Evangelos Pistiolis’ Top Tankers, now Top Ships (NASDAQ: TOPS). In 2005, George Economou’s DryShips debuted. Many others followed.

Seward & Kissel partner Gary Wolfe — who has worked on public shipping offerings from the 1990s till today —  once told the shipping magazine Fairplay: “You had bankers going to Greece and telling owners: ‘Do an IPO! It’s like selling your ship for twice the price!’” The Greeks took the bankers’ advice.

The rapid ascent of China in world trade caused an unprecedented spike in spot rates. The rate froth drove shipping stock pricing higher — which attracted ever more shipowners to Wall Street.

former Wall Street star George Economou Dryships
DryShips’s George Economou was a mid-2000s Wall Street star (Photo: John Galayda/Marine Money).

In the mid-2000s boom, many of the hottest stocks were dry bulk companies. According to Clarksons Research, earnings for Capesizes (bulkers with capacity of around 180,000 deadweight tons) reached $110,000 per day in August 2007. In 2007-2008, Capesizes sold for over $140 million each. They’re worth around $36 million each today.

On Oct. 29, 2007, the stock of Economou’s DryShips traded at $131.34 per share, more than seven times its 2005 IPO price of $18 per share.

Economou’s personal stake in DryShips was worth $1.6 billion on that particular day.

It wasn’t just dry bulk. In 2008, very large crude carriers (VLCCs, tankers that carry 2 million barrels of crude oil) sold for over $160 million each. They’re worth around $65 million each today. VLCC rates topped $150,000 per day in mid-2008.

The consequence of the multisector boom was a massive ordering spree paid for with extremely cheap bank debt. Both the tanker and container-ship orderbook-to-fleet ratio rose to an astoundingly high 60% in 2008. For dry bulk, it was almost 40% in 2007.

Timing the crash: Winners and losers

And then the financial crisis struck. Rates and asset values collapsed.

After Robert Bugbee’s OMI home run, he re-emerged at Scorpio (Photo: John Galayda/Marine Money)

OMI gets the prize for best timing. It sold its fleet to Teekay and TORM (NASDAQ: TRMD) for $2.2 billion in April 2007 at the very peak of the boom. Bugbee and CEO Craig Stevenson cashed out. After their noncompetes ended, Stevenson emerged as CEO of Diamond S (NYSE: DSSI) and Bugbee as president of Scorpio Tankers (NYSE: STNG) and Scorpio Bulkers (NYSE: SALT).

The booby prize for worst timing goes to dry bulk company Britannia Bulk. 

Britannia went public on June 18, 2008, selling $125 million worth of stock and listing on NYSE. CNBC’s Jim Cramer touted the stock on his show “Mad Money.” Britannia went bankrupt just four months later. Shareholders were wiped out.

Amend and extend, loan to own

Combining extremely high financial leverage (debt) with extremely high operating leverage (spot-rate exposure) in an extremely cyclical business (ocean shipping) is a recipe for disaster. It happened to shipping bond investors in the late 1990s and to shipping equity investors in the late 2000s.

The big difference was that in 2009, U.S.-listed shipowners’ debt was largely in the hands of European banks, not U.S. bondholders. European banks had no interest in calling their loans and repossessing the ships, because if they did, it would crystallize the losses to their loan portfolios.

Instead, they pursued an “amend and extend” policy. This allowed maturities of shipowners’ loan payments to be pushed back and principal repayments to be suspended. Banks hoped rates would quickly rebound and get their borrowers back on track.

But banks couldn’t amend and extend indefinitely and they eventually became more willing to sell their distressed shipping debt in secondary markets to private-equity (PE) buyers.

PE owners bought distressed shipping debt as part of “loan to own” strategies. They forced the shipowners (who where now the borrowers of PE-owned loans) into a Chapter 11 restructurings in which the shipowners’ debt was converted into PE-owned equity. 

Some of today’s listed shipping companies trace back to loan-to-own deals. They include Genco Shipping & Trading (NYSE: GNK) and Eagle Bulk (NYSE: EGLE), both of which filed Chapter 11 in 2014 after banks sold their debt, and International Seaways (NYSE: INSW), which emerged from OSG’s bankruptcy in 2012. Star Bulk (NYSE: SBLK) bought the PE-controlled fleet of Excel Maritime, which went bankrupt in 2013. Gener8 Maritime — the last shipping IPO before ZIM — was a joint venture that included the PE-controlled fleet of General Maritime, which went bankrupt in 2011.

Yet more newbuildings

PE had another, even greater impact on shipping stocks during this era. It funded a major new wave of fuel-efficient “eco” newbuildings.

Funds had billions of dollars they collected prior to the financial crisis that had to be either deployed or returned. They reportedly looked at the 10-year trailing average of shipping rates and asset values and assumed they would revert to the mean. The fatal flaw in this thinking was that the prior 10 years included a one-off boom that skewed the mean far too high to revert to.

Private-fund money flowed to newly listed companies that ordered newbuildings, such as Scorpio Tankers, Ardmore Shipping (NYSE: ASC) and Scorpio Bulkers, as well as to private entities that ordered ships themselves.

So, not only did ocean freight markets have to digest all those ships ordered during the pre-2009 boom years, they now had to digest PE-driven newbuilds ordered post-2009.

Higher capacity put downward pressure on rates and values, neither of which never reverted to the mean as PE managers had predicted.

This era featured the occasional spikes and trading opportunities for shipping stocks (2015, for example, was a strong year for tankers). But overall, shipping market caps remained low.

The listings keep coming

A common theme at ship-finance conferences during the past decade was that U.S.-listed shipowners would someday mature. There would be fewer, bigger players — the kind of blue-chip vehicles coveted by the long-only funds of Boston and New York.

The trend still seems to be moving in the opposite direction. Despite only two IPOs in the past five-and-a-half years, there are more listed shipowners — and most of them are very small. A lot of the current action involves penny stocks.

Craig Stevenson rings the bell for 2019’s Diamond S listing (Photo: Diamond S Shipping)

During the long stretch between the Gener8 and ZIM IPOs, nine owners went public in the U.S. via direct listings, reverse mergers or spinoffs: Pyxis Tankers (NASDAQ: PXS) in late 2015; International Seaways in 2016; TORM in 2017; Castor Maritime (NASDAQ: CTRM), Grindrod (NASDAQ: GRIN), Navios Containers (NASDAQ: NMCI) and Eurodry (NASDAQ: EDRY) in 2018; and Diamond S and Flex LNG (NYSE: FLNG) in 2019.

There have also been some privatizations (such as DryShips) but additions have outweighed subtractions.

In general, private shipowners go public because they believe they’ll make more money than if they remain private. Owners got a good taste of U.S. public markets in the 1990s on the debt side. They went “all in” from 2001 to 2008 on the equity side. In 2010-2015, they parlayed PE and hedge-fund enthusiasm for shipping into still more listings.

Even in the past half-decade — with investor interest too weak to support many IPOs and market caps increasingly “micro” — the number of U.S.-listed shipowners has kept inching ever higher. Click for more FreightWaves/American Shipper articles by Greg Miller 

MORE ON SHIPPING STOCKS: Wall Street’s incredible shrinking shipping stocks: see story here. Lost decade for shipping shares: see story here. Shipowners with shares worth pennies rake in millions: see story here.

Wall Street NAT stock
Nordic American Tankers has been around since the late 1990s and remains listed today. Its stock chart traces the one-off peak in the mid-2000s and highlights the lack of recovery over the past decade (Chart: Barchart)

usscmc

usscmc

No Result
View All Result

Recent Posts

  • How Hapag Lloyd captured a major market share in the Container Shipping Industry in USA
  • Why USA’s East Coast is the Favorite Destination for Manufacturing Companies
  • How Trade Relations Between the USA and UK Improved After Keir Starmer Became Prime Minister
  • Tips and Tricks for Procurement Managers to Handle Their Supplier Woes
  • The Crazy Supply Chain of Walmart Spanning Across the Globe

Recent Comments

  • Top 5 Supply Chain Certifications that are in high demand | Top 5 Certifications on Top 5 Globally Recognized Supply Chain Certifications
  • 3 Best Procurement Certifications that are most valuable | Procurement Newz on Top 5 Globally Recognized Supply Chain Certifications

Archives

  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • September 2019

Categories

  • Global News
  • Supply Chain Updates

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
  • Antispam
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Home
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use

© 2025 www.usscmc.com

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Supply Chain Updates
  • Global News
  • Contact Us

© 2025 www.usscmc.com