DryShips Inc. (NASDAQ:DRYS) (the "Company" or "DryShips"), a global provider of marine transportation services for drybulk and petroleum cargoes, and through its subsidiary, Ocean Rig UDW Inc., of off-shore contract drilling oil services, announced today the agreement with one of its charterers to write-off about $16.5 million in overdue receivables related to charter hire payments due on 11 vessels on time charter. As part of the transaction, the charterer has agreed to forgo the exercise of certain “in-the-money” purchase options related to 7 vessels on time charter and provide new charters for 11 vessels at $12,500/day gross with 50-50 profit sharing starting as of June 1, 2015 and for an average period of about 4.5 years.
we must as investors must pick the strongest companies.
Does your "strong buy" mean you consider AUY to be a strong company?
Thanks for clearing that up. Good to see Clinton is not shut down. It's not the facility that is the problem, as Jim6b claims.
I'm a bagholder, purchasing several thousand sh during the class period between 2/27/2014 and 11/5/2014. I've not reviewed all the posts on the lawsuit, so if this is old news, pass on. The complaint alleges a series of false statements and omissions of adverse information prior to, during and subsequent to a public offering on 3/27/2014, relating to the progress, development and production capacity at Moema. The issues will be whether there was a reasonable and diligent investigation prior to issuing the statements and whether the failure to disclose the electricity and utility problems causing construction delays was reasonable. The Complaint also alleges that there were design and construction issues and that Moema could not scale its production in a cost-effective manner.
As example, the statements made during the offering as alleged in the Complaint included, "the commissioning of the facility at Moema is underway. As such we are now expanding into large-scale, high-volume commercial production ...." I don't see how that was not a true statement. The company was doing exactly that. It didn't say the commissioning was done or that they HAD expanded. The forecast was that they would be up and running by the end of the second quarter. The issue will be whether this was reasonable when made or did the company already know there were utility problems, as was disclosed on 5/5/2014, when it was stated that Moema was, "experiencing intermittent power and steam availability." The Complaint alleges that Wolfson had previously stated the Moema was "online" with "everything functioning as expected." It's difficult to make any sense of this without the full statement. The Complaint also inferred the disclosure on 7/30/2014 was somehow a positive statement when Wolfson said the "utility problems had yet to be resolved" but that they were "making great progress addressing the utility issues."
I'll continue to hold.