Attached files

file filename
EX-23.2 - EXHIBIT 23.2 - Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd.panl-12x31x15ex232.htm
EX-31.1 - EXHIBIT 31.1 - Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd.panl-12312015ex311.htm
EX-10.29 - EXHIBIT 10.29 - Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd.a1-nbhcxamendmentno2shaxex.htm
EX-23.1 - EXHIBIT 23.1 - Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd.panl-12x31x15ex231.htm
EX-32.2 - EXHIBIT 32.2 - Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd.panl-12312015xex322.htm
EX-32.1 - EXHIBIT 32.1 - Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd.panl-12312015xex321.htm
EX-31.2 - EXHIBIT 31.2 - Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd.panl-12312015xex312.htm
EX-10.28 - EXHIBIT 10.28 - Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd.nordicoasisltdloanagreement.htm


UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K
 
(Mark One)
 
ý
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015
 
¨
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: 001-36139
 
PANGAEA LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS, LTD.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
 
BERMUDA
 
98-1205464
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or
Organization)
 
(I.R.S. Employer Identification Number)
 
 
c/o Phoenix Bulk Carriers (US) LLC
 
 
109 Long Wharf, Newport, RI
 
02840
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
 
(Zip Code)
 
(401) 846-7790
(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
 
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
 
Title of each class
 
Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Shares, $0.0001 par value
 
The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC
 
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None.
 
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.     Yes ¨  No ý
 
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act.     Yes ¨  No ý
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934 during the past 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirement for the past 90 days.     Yes ý  No ¨

 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).                                                                                                                                                                            Yes ý No ¨
 




Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers in response to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the 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.  ý
 
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “accelerated filer” and “large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
 
Large accelerated filer ¨
 
Accelerated filer ¨
Non-accelerated filer ¨
 
Smaller reporting company x
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
 
 
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).     Yes ¨    No ý
 
The aggregate market value of the registrant's Common Stock held by non-affiliates at June 30, 2015 was approximately $10,002,776 based on the Nasdaq closing price for such shares on that date. The registrant has no non-voting common equity.
 
As of March 23, 2016, there were 36,503,837 shares of Common Shares, $.0001 par value per share, outstanding.
 
Documents Incorporated by Reference: See Item 15. 

2




 

PANGAEA LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS, LTD.
FORM 10-K
TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
PART I
 
 
 
ITEM 1.
 
ITEM 1A.
 
ITEM 1B.
 
ITEM 2.
 
ITEM 3.
 
ITEM 4.
PART II
 
 
 
ITEM 5.
 
ITEM 6.
 
ITEM 7.
 
ITEM 7A.
 
ITEM 8.
 
ITEM 9.
 
ITEM 9A.
 
ITEM 9B.
PART III
 
 
ITEM 10.
 
ITEM 11.
 
ITEM 12.
 
ITEM 13.
 
ITEM 14.
 
ITEM 15.


3



 In this Annual Report on Form 10-K (this “Form 10-K”), references to “the Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd and its subsidiaries.
  
SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
 
Our disclosure and analysis in this prospectus pertaining to our operations, cash flows and financial position, including, in particular, the likelihood of our success in developing and expanding our business, include forward-looking statements. Statements that are predictive in nature, that depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “forecasts,” “may,” “should” and similar expressions are forward-looking statements.
 
All statements in this Form 10-K that are not statements of either historical or current facts are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, such matters as:
 
our future operating or financial results;

our ability to charter-in vessels and to enter into COAs, voyage charters, time charters and forward freight agreements and the performance of our counterparties in such contracts

our financial condition and liquidity, including our ability to obtain financing in the future to fund capital expenditures, acquisitions and other general corporate activities;

our expectations of the availability of vessels to purchase, the time it may take to construct new vessels, and vessels’ useful lives;

competition in the drybulk shipping industry;

our business strategy and expected capital spending or operating expenses, including drydocking and insurance costs;

global and regional economic and political conditions, including piracy; and

statements about shipping market trends, including charter rates and factors affecting supply and demand.

Many of these statements are based on our assumptions about factors that are beyond our ability to control or predict and are subject to risks and uncertainties that are described more fully under the “Risk Factors” section of this prospectus. Any of these factors or a combination of these factors could materially affect our future results of operations and the ultimate accuracy of the forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause future results to differ include, but are not limited to, the following:
 
changes in governmental rules and regulations or actions taken by regulatory authorities;

changes in economic and competitive conditions affecting our business, including market fluctuations in charter rates and charterers’ abilities to perform under existing time charters;

potential liability from future litigation and potential costs due to environmental damage and vessel collisions;

the length and number of off-hire periods; and

other factors discussed under the “Risk Factors” section of this Form 10-K.

You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements contained in this prospectus, because they are statements about events that are not certain to occur as described or at all. All forward-looking statements in this Form 10-K are qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained in this prospectus. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of our future performance, and actual results and future developments may vary materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements.
 
Except to the extent required by applicable law or regulation, we undertake no obligation to release publicly any revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this prospectus or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated event.

4




PART I.

ITEM 1. BUSINESS
 
Introduction
 
Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd. and its subsidiaries (collectively, “Pangaea” or the “Company”) is a provider of seaborne drybulk transportation services. Pangaea utilizes its logistics expertise to service a broad base of industrial customers who require the transportation of a wide variety of drybulk cargoes, including grains, coal, iron ore, pig iron, hot briquetted iron, bauxite, alumina, cement clinker, dolomite and limestone. The Company addresses the transportation needs of its customers by undertaking a comprehensive set of services and activities, including cargo loading, cargo discharge, vessel chartering, voyage planning, and technical vessel management.
 
Completed Mergers
 
On April 30, 2014 the Company (formerly known as Quartet Holdco Ltd.), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization (the “Merger Agreement”) with Quartet Merger Corp. (“Quartet”), Quartet Merger Sub Ltd. (“Merger Sub”), Bulk Partners (Bermuda), Ltd. (at the time, Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd., now known as Bulk Partners (Bermuda), Ltd. “Bulk Partners”, or “Former Pangaea”), and the security holders of Bulk Partners (“Signing Holders”), which contemplated (i) Quartet merging with and into the Company, with the Company surviving such merger as the publicly-traded entity and (ii) Merger Sub merging with and into Bulk Partners with Bulk Partners surviving such merger as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (collectively, the “Mergers”).
 
On September 29, 2014, Quartet held a special meeting in lieu of its annual meeting of stockholders, at which time the Quartet stockholders considered and adopted, among other matters, the Merger Agreement and the Mergers. On September 26, 2014, Bulk Partners’ Board of Directors, acting by unanimous written consent, approved the Merger Agreement and the Mergers. On October 1, 2014, the parties consummated the Mergers.
 
In the merger, holders of 8,840,014 shares of Quartet common stock sold in its initial public offering (“public shares”) exercised their rights to convert those shares to cash at a conversion price of approximately $10.20 per share, or an aggregate of approximately $90.1 million. As a result of the number of public shares converted into cash, the Quartet initial stockholders forfeited 1,739,062 shares (the “Forfeited Shares”) of Quartet common stock immediately prior to the Closing.  Upon the Closing, the former security holders of Quartet were issued an aggregate of 3,130,844 common shares of the Company, including 1,026,813 common shares of the Registrant issued in exchange for Quartet’s then outstanding rights. 
 
In accordance with the terms of the convertible redeemable preferred stock of Former Pangaea, upon the Closing, 105,670 convertible redeemable preferred shares were converted into 115,352 common shares of Former Pangaea.  The Signing Holders received 29,411,765 shares of the Company in exchange for their Former Pangaea securities and an additional 1,739,062 Forfeited Shares, or 31,150,827 shares in aggregate. 
 
Further, in connection with the Mergers, Quartet entered into agreements with certain third-party advisors pursuant to which such parties agreed to accept shares of the Company in lieu of cash for certain amounts owed to them, resulting in the issuance of an aggregate of 291,953 common shares.  Additionally, 420,000 unit purchase options of Quartet were converted into 123,356 common shares of the Company, for a total of 415,309 issued to third-party advisors. 

The Company is a holding company incorporated under the laws of Bermuda as an exempted company on April 29, 2014. Bulk Partners, which following the Mergers is wholly owned by the Company, is a holding company that was incorporated under the laws of Bermuda as an exempted company on June 17, 2008 by three individuals who are collectively referred to as the “Founders.” The Company and its subsidiaries provide seaborne drybulk transportation services.
 
At December 31, 2015, there are 36,503,837 common shares of the Company issued and outstanding where the Signing Holders own approximately 85.4% of the common shares, the Quartet stockholders own approximately 3.7% of the common shares, and the Advisors to the Mergers own approximately 1.1% of the common shares.


5



Business
 
The Company utilizes its logistics expertise to service a broad base of industrial customers who require the transportation of a wide variety of drybulk cargoes, including grains, pig iron, hot briquetted iron, bauxite, alumina, cement clinker, dolomite and limestone. The Company derives substantially all of its revenue from contracts of affreightment, also known as COAs, voyage charters, and time charters. In particular, the Company has historically focused on backhaul routes. Backhaul routes or ballast legs, position vessels for discharge in loading areas. Backhaul routes allow us to reduce ballast days and instead, earn revenues at times and on routes that are typically traveled without paying cargo.
 
Contracts of affreightment (“COAs”), are contracts to transport multiple shipments of cargo during the term of the contract between specified load and discharge ports, at a fixed or variable price per metric ton of cargo. Voyage charters are revenue streams under which a vessel carries a shipment of cargo for a customer on a specified route for a fixed price per metric ton of cargo.Time charters are agreements during which the vessel is dedicated solely to the charterer for the term of the agreement. A majority of the Company’s revenue is from COAs and voyage charters, as our focus is on transporting cargo for our customers. The Company’s COAs typically extend for a period of one to five years, although some extend for longer periods. A time charter may vary from a single trip to longer-term charters, whenever we determine such use to be in our commercial interest. The length of a voyage depends on the number of load and discharge ports, the time spent in such ports and the distance between the ports. The Company attempts, through selecting COAs and voyage contracts on what would normally be backhaul or ballast legs, to enhance vessel utilization and its profitability because these contracts and charters position vessels at or near loading areas where spot cargoes are typically obtained. This reduces ballast time and expense as a percentage of the vessel’s total revenue and increases expected earnings for the vessel.
 
The Company uses a mix of owned and chartered-in motor vessels ("m/v") to transport more than 18.3 million deadweight tons (“dwt”) of cargo to more than 100 ports around the world, averaging over 40 vessels in service during 2015. The majority of our fleet is chartered-in on short-term charters of less than 9 months. The Company believes that these shorter-term charters afford us more flexibility to match our variable costs to our customers’ service requirements, allowing us to respond to changes in market demand and limiting our exposure to changes in prevailing charter rates. In addition to the Company’s chartered-in fleet, we currently have interests in 14 dry bulk carriers and have orders for the construction of two additional vessels. These vessels are and will be used to serve the Company’s customers’ cargo transportation needs. The Company believes that a combination of owned and chartered-in vessels helps it to more efficiently match its customer demand than it could with an entirely owned fleet or an entirely chartered-in fleet.
 
The Company’s Ice-Class 1A vessels are technically managed by a third-party manager with extensive expertise managing these vessel types and with ice pilotage. The technical management of the remainder of the Company’s owned fleet is performed in-house. The technical management for the Company’s chartered-in vessels is performed by each respective ship owner.
 
Active risk management is an important part of our business model. The Company believes its active risk management allows it to reduce the sensitivity of its revenues to market fluctuations and helps it to secure its long-term profitability. We manage our market risk primarily through chartering in vessels for periods of less than 9 months on average. We further manage our market exposure through a portfolio approach based upon owned vessels, chartered-in vessels, COAs, voyage charters, and time charters. The Company tries to identify routes and ports for efficient bunkering to minimize its fuel expense. The Company also seeks to hedge a portion of its exposure to changes in the price of marine fuels, or bunkers and to fluctuating future freight rates through forward freight agreements. We have also entered into interest rate swap agreements to fix a portion of our interest rate exposure.

Business Strategy
 
The Company’s principal business objectives are to profitably grow its business and increase shareholder value. The Company expects to achieve these objectives through the following strategies:
 
Focus on increasing strategic COAs.  The Company intends to increase its COA business, in particular, COAs for cargo discharge in traditional loading areas, by leveraging its relationships with existing customers and attracting new customers. The Company believes that its dedication to solving its customer’s transportation problems, reputation and experience in carrying a wide range of cargoes and transiting less common routes and ports increases its likelihood of securing strategic COAs.

Expand capacity and flexibility by increasing its owned fleet.  The Company is continually looking to acquire additional high-quality vessels suited for its business strategy, the needs of its customers and growth opportunities the Company identifies. The Company plans to increase its controlled fleet (the vessels that the Company owns or have an ownership interest in) from 14 to 16 by the beginning of 2017. The current fleet includes four Ice-Class 1A Panamax newbuildings

6



delivered between September 2014 and January 2016. The Company has shipbuilding contracts for the construction of two Ice-Class 1C Ultramax newbuildings scheduled for delivery in January 2017. The Company believes that its experience as a reliable and serious counterparty in the purchase and sale market for second-hand vessels positions it as a candidate for acquisition of high quality vessels.

Expand operations in Southeast Asia and the Middle East.  The Company intends to expand its operations and presence in Southeast Asia and the Middle East to better access customers in these high growth regions. The Company believes that expanding its network of offices will allow it to meet more regularly with existing and potential customers and increase its shipping days as a result. The Company facilitates this through its office in Singapore.

Increase backhaul focus and fleet efficiency.  The Company continues to focus on backhaul cargoes, including backhaul cargoes associated with COAs, to reduce ballast days and increase expected earnings for well-positioned vessels. In addition, the Company intends to continue to charter in vessels for periods of less than nine months, on average, to permit it to match its variable costs to demand. The Company believes that increased vessel utilization and positioning efficiency will enhance its profitability.

Maintain moderate balance sheet leverage.  In the future, the Company expects to incur additional indebtedness to expand its fleet and operations. The Company expects to repay existing and future debt from time to time with cash flow from operations or from the net proceeds of asset sales or future security issuances. The Company intends to limit the amount of indebtedness relative to its assets and cash flow and will seek to maintain indebtedness at levels lower than many publicly traded drybulk ship owning companies to reduce risks associated with high leverage.

Competitive Strengths
 
The Company believes that it possesses a number of competitive strengths in its industry, including:
 
Expertise in niche markets and routes.  The Company has developed expertise and a major presence in selected niche markets and less commoditized routes, especially the Baltic Sea in winter, the Northern Sea Route between Europe and Asia in summer, and the trade route between Jamaica and the United States, as well as selected ports, particularly in Newfoundland and Baffin Island. The Company believes that there is less competition to carry “minor,” as compared to traditional “major,” bulk cargoes, and, similarly, there is less competition on less commoditized routes. The Company believes that its experience in carrying a wide range of cargoes and transiting less common routes and ports increases its likelihood of securing higher rates and margins than those available for more commoditized cargoes and routes. The Company believes it operates assets well suited to certain of these routes, including its Japanese built ice-1A classed Panamax vessels and Korean built ice-1A classed Handymax vessels. The majority of its fleet is chartered in and the Company selects these vessels to match the cargo and port characteristics of their nominated voyages. The Company has experience operating in all regularly operating dry bulk loading and discharge ports globally.

Enhanced vessel utilization and profitability through strategic backhaul and triangulation methods.  The Company enhances vessel utilization and profitability through selecting COAs and other contracts to carry cargo on what would normally be backhaul or ballast legs. In contrast to the typical practice of incurring charter hire and bunker costs to position an empty vessel in a port or area where cargo is normally loaded, the Company instead actively works with its customers to secure cargoes for discharge in loading areas. The Company’s practice allows it to position vessels for loading at lower costs than it would bear if it positioned such vessels by traveling unladen or if the Company chartered in vessels in a loading area. The Company believes that this focus on backhaul cargoes permits them to benefit from ballast bonuses that are paid to position vessels for fronthaul cargoes or, alternatively, to collect a premium for delivering ships that are in position for fronthaul cargoes.

Strong relationships with major industrial customers.  The Company has developed strong commercial relationships with a number of major industrial customers. These customer relationships are based upon the Company’s industry reputation and specific history of service to the customer. The Company believes that these relationships help it generate recurring business with such customers which, in some cases, are formalized through contracts for repeat business. The Company also believes that these relationships can help create new opportunities. Although many of these relationships have extended over a period of years, there is no assurance that such relationships or business will continue in the future. Repeat customers, measured as having shipping days in three or more years of the trailing four years, represented nearly 59% of its total shipping days for the trailing four year period ended December 31, 2015 and 54% of its total shipping days for the trailing four year period ended December 31, 2014. In addition, the Company believes that its familiarity with local regulations and market conditions at its routinely serviced ports, particularly in Newfoundland and Jamaica, provides it with a strong competitive advantage and allows it to attract new customers and secure recurring business.

7




Strong Alignment and Transparency.  The Company observes that many publicly traded shipping companies rely on service providers affiliated with senior management or dominant shareholders for fundamental activities. Beyond the operational benefits to its customers of integrated commercial and technical management, the Company believes that its shareholders are benefited by its strategy of performing many of those activities in-house. Related to these efforts to maximize alignment of interest, the Company believes that the associated transparency of ownership and authority will be attractive to current and prospective shareholders. Consistent with the foregoing, the Company’s only related party transactions with senior management are principal and interest obligations for cash loaned to the Company by management, on terms approved by third parties not affiliated with management.

Experienced management team.  The day-to-day operations of a transportation logistics services company requires close coordination among customers, land-based transportation providers and port authorities around the world. Its efficient operation depends on the experience and expertise of management at all levels, from vessel acquisition and financing strategy to oversight of vessel technical operations and cargo loading and discharge. The Company has a management team of senior executive officers and key employees with extensive experience and relationships in the commercial, technical, and financial areas of the drybulk shipping industry. Members of its management team and key employees have on average over 26 years of shipping experience.

Risk-management discipline.  The Company believes its risk management allows it to reduce the sensitivity of its earnings to market changes and lower the risk of losses. The Company manages its risks primarily through short-term charter-in agreements of less than nine months, on average, FFAs, fuel hedges and modest leverage. The Company believes that shorter-term charters permit it to adjust its variable costs to match demand more rapidly than if it chartered in those vessels for longer periods. The Company may choose to manage the risks of higher rates for certain future voyages by purchasing and selling FFAs to limit the impact of changes in chartering rates. Similarly, the Company may choose to manage the risks of increasing fuel costs through bunker hedging transactions in order to limit the impact of changes in fuel prices on voyage results. Finally, the Company believes that its expected income related to COAs is sufficient to satisfy obligations related to its owned fleet.

Management
 
The Company’s management team consists of senior executive officers and key employees with decades of experience in the commercial, technical, management and financial areas of the logistics and shipping industries. The Company’s co-founder and Chief Executive Officer, Edward Coll, has over 37 years of experience in the drybulk shipping industry. Other members of its management team and key employees, Anthony Laura, Claus Boggild, Mads Boye Petersen, Peter Koken, Robert Seward, Fotis Doussopoulos, and Gianni Del Signore, have an average of more than 26 years of experience in the shipping industry. The Company believes its management team is well respected in the drybulk sector of the shipping industry and, over the years, has developed strong commercial relationships with industrial customers and lenders. The Company believes that the experience, reputation and background of its management team will continue to be key factors in its success.
 
The Company provides logistics transportation services and commercially manages its fleet primarily from offices in Newport, Rhode Island and Copenhagen, Denmark and Singapore. Logistics services and commercial management include identifying cargo for transportation, voyage planning, managing relationships, identifying vessels to charter in, and operating such vessels.
 
The Company’s Ice-Class 1A vessels are technically managed by a third-party manager with extensive expertise managing these vessel types and with ice pilotage. The technical management of the remainder of the Company’s owned fleet is performed in-house. The Company’s technical management personnel have experience in the complexities of oceangoing vessel operations, including the supervision of maintenance, repairs, improvements, drydocking and crewing. The technical management for the Company’s chartered-in vessels is performed by each respective ship owner.
 
Operations and Assets
 
The Company is a service business and its customers use its services because they believe the Company adds and creates value for them. To add value, the Company works with its customers to provide a range of logistics services beyond the traditional loading, carriage and discharge of cargoes. For example, the Company works with certain customers to review their contractual delivery terms and conditions, permitting those customers to reduce costs and risks while accelerating payments. As another example, one of its customers is heavily dependent upon a port that was insufficiently supported by port pilots for the approach to port. To permit a large expansion of its services for this client, the Company formed a separate pilots association to increase the number of available pilots and improve access to the port. As a result of efforts such as these, in some cases the Company is the de facto transportation department for certain clients.

8



 
The Company’s core offering is the safe, reliable, and timely loading, carriage, and discharge of cargoes for customers. This offering requires identifying customers, agreeing on the terms of service, selecting a vessel to undertake the voyage, working with port personnel to load and discharge cargo, and documenting the transfers of title upon loading or discharge of the cargo. As a result, the Company spends significant time and resources to identify and retain customers and source potential cargoes in its areas of operation. To further expand its customer base and potential cargoes, the Company has developed expertise in servicing ports and routes subject to severe ice conditions, including the Baltic Sea and the Northern Sea Route. The Company’s subsidiary, Nordic Bulk Carriers A/S (“NBC”), is an adviser to the European Commission on Arctic maritime issues.
 
To support its services, the Company operates a fleet of 14 owned or partially owned vessels. As of March 23, 2016, these vessels and the vessels currently under construction are described in the table below:
 
Vessel Name
Type
DWT
Year Built
Yard
Rightship Stars
Type of
Employment
Charter
Newbuild 5*
Ultramax (Ice Class 1C)
59,000

2016
Oshima Shipbuilding
N/A
N/A
Newbuild 6*
Ultramax (Ice Class 1C)
59,000

2016
Oshima Shipbuilding
N/A
N/A
m/v Nordic Oasis
Panamax (Ice Class 1A)
76,180

2016
Oshima Shipbuilding
5 star
NBC(1)
m/v Nordic Olympic
Panamax (Ice Class 1A)
76,180

2015
Oshima Shipbuilding
5 star
NBC(1)
m/v Nordic Odin
Panamax (Ice Class 1A)
76,180

2015
Oshima Shipbuilding
5 star
NBC(1)
m/v Nordic Oshima
Panamax (Ice Class 1A)
76,180

2014
Oshima Shipbuilding
5 star
NBC(1)
m/v Nordic Orion
Panamax (Ice Class 1A)
75,603

2011
Oshima Shipbuilding
5 star
NBC(1)
m/v Nordic Odyssey
Panamax (Ice Class 1A)
75,603

2010
Oshima Shipbuilding
5 star
NBC(1)
m/v Bulk Trident
Supramax
52,514

2006
Tsuneishi Heavy Industries (Cebu)
5 star
PBC(2)
m/v Bulk Newport
Supramax
52,587

2003
Shin Kurushima Toyohashi
5 star
PBC(2)
m/v Bulk Beothuk
Supramax
50,992

2002
Oshima Shipbuilding
4 star
PBC(2)
m/v Bulk Juliana
Supramax
52,510

2001
Shin Kurushima Toyohashi
5 star
PBC(2)
m/v Bulk Pangaea
Panamax
70,165

1996
Sumitomo Shipbuilding
4 star
PBC(2)
m/v Bulk Patriot
Panamax
73,700

1999
Sumitomo Shipbuilding
4 star
PBC(2)
m/v Nordic Bothnia
Handymax (Ice Class 1A)
43,706

1995
Daewoo
4 star
NBC(1)
m/v Nordic Barents
Handymax (Ice Class 1A)
43,702

1995
Daewoo
4 star
NBC(1)

* Name to be determined as these vessels are currently under construction with the expected delivery date listed in the build year column
 
(1)
This vessel is time-chartered to Nordic Bulk Carriers A/S (“NBC”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Nordic Bulk Holding ApS (“NBH”).
(2)
This vessel is operated by the Company's wholly-owned subsidiary, Phoenix Bulk Carriers (BVI) Ltd. (“PBC”).



The Company owns its vessels through separate wholly-owned subsidiaries and through joint venture entities with other owners, which the Company consolidates as variable interest entities in its consolidated financial statements.

The Company’s owns one-third of Nordic Bulk Holding Company Ltd., (“NBHC”), a corporation that was duly organized under the laws of Bermuda in October 2012. Bulk Orion Ltd. (“Bulk Orion”), Bulk Odyssey Ltd. (“Bulk Odyssey”), Bulk Nordic Oshima Ltd. (“Bulk Oshima”), Bulk Nordic Olympic Ltd. (“Bulk Olympic”), Bulk Nordic Odin Ltd. (“Bulk Odin”) and Bulk Nordic Oasis Ltd. (“Bulk Oasis”) are companies that were organized under the laws of Bermuda for the purpose of owning Ice Class 1A Panamax vessels and are all owned by NBHC. The m/v Nordic Orion (“Orion”), the m/v Nordic Odyssey (“Odyssey”), the m/v Nordic Oshima (“Oshima”), the m/v Nordic Olympic (“Olympic”), the m/v Nordic Odin (“Odin”) and the m/v Nordic Oasis (“Oasis”) are owned by these entities. All of these vessels are chartered to NBC at fixed rates.
 
The Company owns 50% of Nordic Bulk Ventures Holding Company Ltd., (“BVH”), a corporation that was duly organized under the laws of Bermuda. BVH was established in August 2013 for the purpose of owning Bulk Nordic Five Ltd. (“Five”) and Bulk Nordic Six Ltd. (“Six”). Five and Six are corporations that were duly organized under the laws of Bermuda in November 2013 for the purpose of owning ultramax newbuildings to be delivered early in 2017.
 
In addition to its owned fleet, the Company operates chartered-in Panamax, Supramax, Handymax and Handysize drybulk carriers. On average, over the past three years, the Company has owned or employed a fleet of approximately 35 – 50 vessels at

9



any one time. In 2015, the Company owned interests in an average of 14 vessels and chartered in an additional 196 for one or more voyages. In 2014, the Company owned interests in an average of 13 vessels and chartered in an additional 203 for one or more voyages. The Company generally charters in third-party vessels for periods of less than six months and, in most cases, less than nine months. Chartered-in contracts are negotiated through brokers, who are paid commission on a percentage basis. The Company believes that shorter-term charters afford it flexibility to match its variable costs to its customers’ service requirements. The Company also believes that this combination of owned and chartered-in vessels helps it to more efficiently match its customer demand than the Company could with only owned vessels or an entirely chartered-in fleet. The Company does not charter-in any vessels under speculative arrangements.
 
Corporate Structure
 
The Company is a holding company incorporated under the laws of Bermuda as an exempted company on April 29, 2014. Bulk Partners, which following the Mergers is wholly owned by the Company, is also a holding company that was incorporated under the laws of Bermuda as an exempted company on June 17, 2008, by three individuals who are collectively referred to as the Founders.
 
The Company owns its vessels through separate wholly-owned subsidiaries and through joint venture entities, which the Company consolidates as variable interest entities, incorporated in Bermuda and Denmark. Certain of its wholly-owned subsidiaries that are organized in Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Panama, and Delaware provide it with vessel management services and administrative support.
 
The Company’s principal executives operate from the offices of Phoenix Bulk Carriers (US) LLC, which is located at 109 Long Wharf, Newport, Rhode Island 02840.The phone number at that address is (401) 846-7790. The Company also has offices in Copenhagen, Denmark, Athens, Greece, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and Singapore. The Company’s corporate website address is http://www.pangaeals.com.
 

10



The Company’s consolidated subsidiaries are as follows:
 
Company Name
Country of Organization
Proportion of
Ownership Interest
 
Phoenix Bulk Carriers (BVI) Limited (“PBC”)
British Virgin Islands
100
%
(A)
Phoenix Bulk Management Bermuda Limited
Bermuda
100
%
(B)
Americas Bulk Transport (BVI) Limited
British Virgin Islands
100
%
(C)
Bulk Ocean Shipping (Bermuda) Ltd.
Bermuda
100
%
(D)
Phoenix Bulk Carriers (US) LLC
Delaware
100
%
(E)
Allseas Logistics Bermuda Ltd.
Bermuda
100
%
(F)
Bulk Patriot Ltd. (“Bulk Patriot”)
Bermuda
100
%
(G)
Bulk Juliana Ltd. (“Bulk Juliana”)
Bermuda
100
%
(G)
Bulk Trident Ltd. (“Bulk Trident”)
Bermuda
100
%
(G)
Bulk Atlantic Ltd. (“Bulk Beothuk”)
Bermuda
100
%
(G)
Nordic Bulk Barents Ltd. (“Bulk Barents”)
Bermuda
100
%
(G)
Nordic Bulk Bothnia Ltd. (“Bulk Bothnia”)
Bermuda
100
%
(G)
Nordic Bulk Carriers A/S (“NBC”)
Denmark
100
%
(H)
Nordic Bulk Holding ApS (“NBH”)
Denmark
100
%
(H)
109 Long Wharf LLC (“Long Wharf”)
Delaware
100
%
(I)
Bulk Nordic Odyssey Ltd. (“Bulk Odyssey”)
Bermuda
33
%
(G)
Bulk Nordic Orion Ltd. (“Bulk Orion”)
Bermuda
33
%
(G)
Bulk Nordic Oshima Ltd. (“Bulk Oshima”)
Bermuda
33
%
(G)
Bulk Nordic Odin Ltd. (“Bulk Odin”)
Bermuda
33
%
(G)
Bulk Nordic Olympic Ltd. (“Bulk Olympic”)
Bermuda
33
%
(G)
Bulk Nordic Oasis Ltd. (“Bulk Oasis”)
Bermuda
33
%
(G)
Nordic Bulk Holding Company Ltd. (“NBHC”)
Bermuda
33
%
(J)
Bulk Nordic Five Ltd. (“Five”)
Bermuda
50
%
(G)
Bulk Nordic Six Ltd. (“Six”)
Bermuda
50
%
(G)
Nordic Bulk Ventures Holding Company Ltd. (“BVH”)
Bermuda
50
%
(K)
 
(A)
The primary purpose of this corporation is to manage and operate ocean going vessels.
(B)
The primary purpose of this entity is to perform certain administrative management functions that have been assigned by PBC.
(C)
The primary purpose of this corporation is to provide logistics services to customers by chartering, managing and operating ships.
(D)
The primary purpose of this corporation is to manage the fuel procurement of the chartered vessels.
(E)
The primary purpose of this corporation is to act as the U.S. administrative agent for the Company.
(F)
The primary purpose of this corporation is to act as the treasury agent for the Company.
(G)
The primary purpose of these entities is owning bulk carriers.
(H)
The primary purpose of NBC is to provide logistics services to customers by chartering, managing and operating ships. NBH is the holding company of NBC.
(I)
Long Wharf is a limited liability company previously owned by the Founders. Long Wharf was duly organized under the laws of Delaware for the purpose of holding real estate located in Newport, Rhode Island. Ownership of Long Wharf was transferred to the Company on September 1, 2014.
(J)
The primary purpose of this entity is to own bulk carriers through wholly-owned subsidiaries. The Company’s interest in Odyssey, Orion, Oshima, Olympic, Odin and Oasis is through its interest in NBHC.
(K)
The primary purpose of this entity is owning bulk carriers through wholly-owned subsidiaries. The Company’s interest in Five and Six is through its interest in BVH.




Crewing and Employees
 
Each of its vessels is crewed with 23-25 independently contracted officers and crew members and on certain vessels, directly contracted officers. Its technical managers are responsible for locating, contracting and retaining qualified officers for its vessels. The crewing agencies handle each crew member’s training, travel and payroll, and ensure that all the crew members on its vessels

11



have the qualifications and licenses required to comply with international regulations and shipping conventions. The Company typically has more crew members on board than are required by the country of the vessel’s flag in order to allow for the performance of routine maintenance duties.
 
As of March 23, 2016, the Company employed 72 shore-based personnel and had approximately 336 independently contracted seagoing personnel on its owned vessels. The shore-based personnel are employed in the United States, Athens, Copenhagen, Brazil and Singapore.
 
Competition
 
The Company operates in markets that are highly competitive and based primarily on supply and demand for ocean transport of drybulk commodities. The Company competes for COAs on the basis of service, price, route history, size, age and condition of the vessel and for charters on the basis of service, price, vessel availability, size, age and condition of the vessel, as well as on its reputation as an owner and operator. The Company principally competes with owners and operators of Panamax, Supramax and Handymax vessels.
 
Seasonality
 
Demand for vessel capacity has historically exhibited seasonal variations and, as a result, fluctuations in charter rates. This seasonality may result in quarter-to-quarter volatility in its operating results. The dry bulk carrier market is typically stronger in the fall and winter months in anticipation of increased consumption of coal and other raw materials in the northern hemisphere during the winter months. In addition, unpredictable weather patterns in these months tend to disrupt vessel scheduling and supplies of certain commodities.
 
Permits and Authorizations
 
The Company is required by various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits and certificates with respect to its vessels. The kinds of permits and certificates required depend upon several factors, including the commodity transported, the waters in which the vessel operates, the nationality of the vessel’s crew and the age of the vessel. The Company has been able to obtain all permits and certificates currently required to permit its vessels to operate. Additional laws and regulations, environmental or otherwise, may be adopted which could limit its ability to do business or increase the cost of doing business.
 
Environmental and Other Regulations
 
Government regulation significantly affects the ownership and operation of its vessels. The Company is subject to international conventions and treaties, national, state and local laws and regulations in force in the countries in which its vessels may operate or are registered relating to safety and health and environmental protection including the storage, handling, emission, transportation and discharge of hazardous and non-hazardous materials, and the remediation of contamination and liability for damage to natural resources. Compliance with such laws, regulations and other requirements entails significant expense, including vessel modifications and implementation of certain operating procedures.
 
A variety of government and private entities subject the Company’s vessels to both scheduled and unscheduled inspections. These entities include the local port authorities (such as the U.S. Coast Guard, harbor master or equivalent), classification societies, flag state administrations (countries of registry) and charterers, particularly terminal operators. Certain of these entities require them to obtain permits, certificates or approvals for the operation of its vessels. Failure to maintain necessary permits, certificates or approvals could require it to incur substantial costs or temporarily suspend the operation of one or more of its vessels.
 
The Company believes that the heightened level of environmental and quality concerns among insurance underwriters, regulators and charterers is leading to greater inspection and safety requirements on all vessels and may accelerate the scrapping of older vessels throughout the dry bulk shipping industry. Increasing environmental concerns have created a demand for vessels that conform to the stricter environmental standards. The Company is required to maintain operating standards for all of its vessels that emphasize operational safety, quality maintenance, continuous training of its officers and crews and compliance with United States and international regulations. The Company believes that the operation of its vessels is in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and that its vessels have all material permits, certificates or other approvals necessary for the conduct of its operations as of the date of this Form 10-K. However, because such laws and regulations are frequently changed and may impose increasingly strict requirements, the Company cannot predict the ultimate cost of complying with these requirements, or the impact of these requirements on the resale value or useful lives of its vessels. In addition, a future serious marine incident that results in significant oil pollution or otherwise causes significant adverse environmental impact could result in additional legislation or regulation that could negatively affect the Company’s profitability.

12



 
The laws and regulations discussed below may not constitute a comprehensive list of all such laws and regulations that are applicable to the operation of its vessels.
 
International Maritime Organization
 
The United Nations’ International Maritime Organization, or the IMO, has adopted the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (collectively referred to as MARPOL 73/78 and herein as “MARPOL”). MARPOL entered into force on October 2, 1983. It has been adopted by over 150 nations, including many of the jurisdictions in which the Company's vessels operate. MARPOL sets forth pollution-prevention requirements applicable to drybulk carriers, among other vessels, and is broken into six Annexes, each of which regulates a different source of pollution. Annex I relates to oil leakage or spilling; Annexes II and III relate to harmful substances carried, in bulk, in liquid or packaged form, respectively; and Annexes IV and V relate to sewage and garbage management, respectively. Annex VI, separately adopted by the IMO in September of 1997, relates to air emissions.
 
Air Emissions
 
In September of 1997, the IMO adopted Annex VI to MARPOL to address air pollution. Effective May 2005, Annex VI sets limits on nitrogen oxide emissions from ships whose diesel engines were constructed (or underwent major conversions) on or after January 1, 2000. It also prohibits “deliberate emissions” of “ozone depleting substances,” defined to include certain halons and chlorofluorocarbons. Deliberate emissions are not limited to times when the ship is at sea; they can for example include discharges occurring in the course of the ship’s repair and maintenance. Emissions of “volatile organic compounds” from certain tankers, and the shipboard incineration (from incinerators installed after January 1, 2000) of certain substances (such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)) are also prohibited. Annex VI also includes a global cap on the sulfur content of fuel oil (see below).
 
The IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee, or MEPC, adopted amendments to Annex VI on October 10, 2008, which amendments were entered into force on July 1, 2010. The Amended Annex VI seeks to further reduce air pollution by, among other things, implementing a progressive reduction of the amount of sulphur contained in any fuel oil used onboard ships. As of January 1, 2012, the Amended Annex VI required that fuel oil contain no more than 3.50% sulfur (from the current cap of 4.50%). By January 1, 2020, sulfur content must not exceed 0.50%, subject to a feasibility review to be completed no later than 2018.
 
Beginning January 1, 2015, ships operating within an emission control area ("ECA") were not permitted to use fuel with sulfur content in excess of 0.1% (from 1.0%). Amended Annex VI establishes procedures for designating new ECAs. Currently, the Baltic Sea and the North Sea have been so designated. Effective August 1, 2012, certain coastal areas of North America were designated ECAs, and effective January 1, 2014, applicable areas of the United States Caribbean Sea adjacent to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands were designated ECAs. Ocean-going vessels in these areas are subject to stringent emissions controls, which may cause the Company to incur additional costs. If other ECAs are approved by the IMO or other new or more stringent requirements relating to emissions from marine diesel engines or port operations by vessels are adopted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (the "EPA"), or the states where the Company operates, compliance with these regulations could entail significant capital expenditures or otherwise increase the costs of operations.
 
As of January 1, 2013, MARPOL made certain measures relating to energy efficiency for ships mandatory. It makes the Energy Efficiency Design Index, or EEDI, applicable to new ships and the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan, or SEEMP, applicable to all ships.
 
Amended Annex VI also establishes tiers of stringent nitrogen oxide emissions standards for new marine engines, depending on their date of installation. The promulgated equivalent (and in some senses stricter) emissions standards in late 2009.
 
Safety Management System Requirements
 
The IMO also adopted the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, or SOLAS, and the International Convention on Load Lines, or the LL Convention, which impose a variety of standards that regulate the design and operational features of ships. The IMO periodically revises the SOLAS and LL Convention standards. May 2012 SOLAS amendments entered into force as of January 1, 2014.
 
The operation of the Company’s ships is also affected by the requirements set forth in Chapter IX of SOLAS, which sets forth the IMO’s International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and Pollution Prevention, or the ISM Code. The ISM Code requires ship owners and ship managers to develop and maintain an extensive Safety Management System ("SMS"), that

13



includes the adoption of a safety and environmental protection policy setting forth instructions and procedures for safe operation and describing procedures for dealing with emergencies. The Company relies upon the safety management system that the Company and its technical managers have developed for compliance with the ISM Code. The failure of a ship owner to comply with the ISM Code may subject such party to increased liability, may decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports. As of the date of this filing, each of its vessels is ISM code-certified.
 
The ISM Code requires that vessel operators obtain a safety management certificate, or SMC, for each vessel they operate. This certificate evidences compliance by a vessel’s operators with the ISM Code requirements for an SMS. No vessel can obtain an SMC under the ISM Code unless its manager has been awarded a document of compliance, or DOC, issued in most instances by the vessel's flag state. The Company’s appointed ship managers have obtained documents of compliance for their offices and safety management certificates for all of its vessels for which the certificates are required by the IMO. The document of compliance, or the DOC, and ship management certificate, or the SMC, are renewed as required.
 
The IMO continues to review and introduce new regulations. It is impossible to predict what additional regulations, if any, may be passed by the IMO and what effect, if any, such regulations might have on the Company’s operations.
  
Pollution Control and Liability Requirements
 
The IMO has negotiated international conventions that impose liability for pollution in international waters and the territorial waters of the signatories to such conventions. For example, the IMO adopted the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, or the BWM Convention, in February 2004. The BWM Convention's implementing regulations call for a phased introduction of mandatory ballast water exchange requirements, to be replaced in time with mandatory concentration limits. The BWM Convention will not enter into force until 12 months after it has been adopted by 30 states, the combined merchant fleets of which represent not less than 35% of the gross tonnage of the world’s merchant shipping tonnage. Ratification of the Ballast Water Management (BWM) Convention by 47 countries, including Morocco, Indonesia and Ghana during November 2015 has brought the convention closer to meeting the requirements for entry into force, but whether the requirement for parties to hold 35% of the world’s tonnage has been met is still being calculated.

Upon entry into force of the BWM Convention, mid-ocean ballast exchange would be mandatory for its vessels. The cost of compliance could increase for ocean carriers, and these costs may be material. The Company’s vessels would be required to be equipped with a ballast water treatment system that meets mandatory concentration limits not later than the first intermediate or renewal survey, whichever occurs first, after the anniversary date of delivery of the vessel in 2014, for vessels with ballast water capacity of 1500 – 5000 cubic meters, or after such date in 2016, for vessels with ballast water capacity of greater than 5000 cubic meters. If mid-ocean ballast exchange or ballast water treatment requirements become mandatory, the cost of compliance could increase for ocean carriers. Although the Company does not believe the costs of compliance with mandatory mid-ocean ballast exchange would be material, it is difficult to predict the overall impact of such a requirement on its operations.
 
The IMO adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, or the Bunker Convention, to impose strict liability on ship owners for pollution damage in jurisdictional waters of ratifying states caused by discharges of bunker fuel. The Bunker Convention requires registered owners of ships over 1,000 gross tons to maintain insurance for pollution damage in an amount equal to the limits of liability under the applicable national or international limitation regime (but not exceeding the amount calculated in accordance with the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims of 1976, as amended). With respect to non-ratifying states, liability for spills or releases of oil carried as fuel in ship’s bunkers typically is determined by the national or other domestic laws in the jurisdiction where the events or damages occur.
 
In March 2006, the IMO amended Annex I to MARPOL, including a new regulation relating to oil fuel tank protection, which became effective August 1, 2007. The new regulation applies to various ships delivered on or after August 1, 2010. It includes requirements for the protected location of the fuel tanks, performance standards for accidental oil fuel outflow, a tank capacity limit and certain other maintenance, inspection and engineering standards.
 
Noncompliance with the ISM Code or other IMO regulations may subject the Company to increased liability, lead to decreases in available insurance coverage for affected vessels or result in the denial of access to, or detention in, some ports. As of the date of this report, each of the Company’s vessels is ISM Code certified. However, there can be no assurance that such certificate will be maintained.





14



International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters
 
The IMO in November 2014 adopted the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (the “Polar Code”), and related amendments to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (“SOLAS”) to make it mandatory.
 
The expected date of entry into force of the SOLAS amendments is January 1, 2017, under the tacit acceptance procedure. It will apply to new ships constructed after that date. Ships constructed before January 1, 2017 will be required to meet the relevant requirements of the Polar Code by the first intermediate or renewal survey, whichever occurs first, after January 1, 2018.
 
The Polar Code will be mandatory under both SOLAS and MARPOL because it contains both safety and environment related provisions. In October 2014, IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (“MEPC”) approved the necessary draft amendments to make the environmental provisions in the Polar Code mandatory under MARPOL. The MEPC adopted the Polar Code and associated MARPOL amendments in May 2015, with an entry-into-force date to be aligned with the SOLAS amendments.
 
The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
 
The Oil Pollution Act of 1990, ("OPA"), established an extensive regulatory and liability regime for the protection and cleanup of the environment from oil spills. OPA affects all “owners and operators” whose vessels trade with the United States, its territories and possessions or whose vessels operate in United States waters, which includes the United States’ territorial sea and its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone around the United States. The United States has also enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, or CERCLA, which applies to the discharge of hazardous substances other than oil, whether on land or at sea. OPA and CERCLA both define “owner and operator” in the case of a vessel as any person owning, operating or chartering by demise, the vessel. Both OPA and CERCLA impact the Company’s operations.

Under OPA, vessel owners and operators are “responsible parties” and are jointly, severally and strictly liable (unless the spill results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war) for all containment and clean-up costs and other damages arising from discharges or threatened discharges of oil from their vessels. OPA defines these other damages broadly to include:
 
injury to, destruction or loss of, or loss of use of, natural resources and related assessment costs;

injury to, or economic losses resulting from, the destruction of real and personal property;

net loss of taxes, royalties, rents, fees or net profit revenues resulting from injury, destruction or loss of real or personal property, or natural resources;

loss of subsistence use of natural resources that are injured, destroyed or lost;

lost profits or impairment of earning capacity due to injury, destruction or loss of real or personal property or natural resources; and

net cost of increased or additional public services necessitated by removal activities following a discharge of oil, such as protection from fire, safety or health hazards, and loss of subsistence use of natural resources.

OPA contains statutory caps on liability and damages; such caps do not apply to direct cleanup costs. Effective July 31, 2009, the U.S. Coast Guard adjusted the limits of OPA liability for non-tank vessels (e.g. drybulk) to the greater of $1,000 per gross ton or $854,400 (subject to periodic adjustment for inflation). These limits of liability do not apply if an incident was proximately caused by the violation of an applicable U.S. federal safety, construction or operating regulation by a responsible party (or its agent, employee or a person acting pursuant to a contractual relationship), or a responsible party’s gross negligence or willful misconduct. The limitation on liability similarly does not apply if the responsible party fails or refuses to (i) report the incident where the responsibility party knows or has reason to know of the incident; (ii) reasonably cooperate and assist as requested in connection with oil removal activities; or (iii) without sufficient cause, comply with an order issued under the Federal Water Pollution Act (Section 311 (c), (e)) or the Intervention on the High Seas Act.
 
CERCLA contains a similar liability regime whereby owners and operators of vessels are liable for cleanup, removal and remedial costs, as well as damages for injury to, or destruction or loss of, natural resources, including the reasonable costs associated with assessing same, and health assessments or health effects studies. There is no liability if the discharge of a hazardous substance results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war. Liability under CERCLA is limited to the greater of $300 per gross ton or $5.0 million for vessels carrying a hazardous substance as cargo and the greater of $300 per gross

15



ton or $500,000 for any other vessel. These limits do not apply (rendering the responsible person liable for the total cost of response and damages) if the release or threat of release of a hazardous substance resulted from willful misconduct or negligence, or the primary cause of the release was a violation of applicable safety, construction or operating standards or regulations. The limitation on liability also does not apply if the responsible person fails or refused to provide all reasonable cooperation and assistance as requested in connection with response activities where the vessel is subject to OPA.
 
OPA and CERCLA both require owners and operators of vessels to establish and maintain with the U.S. Coast Guard evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to meet the maximum amount of liability to which the particular responsible person may be subject. Vessel owners and operators may satisfy their financial responsibility obligations by providing a proof of insurance, a surety bond, qualification as a self-insurer or a guarantee.
 
The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico may also result in additional regulatory initiatives or statutes, including the raising of liability caps under OPA. Compliance with any new requirements of OPA may substantially impact the Company’s cost of operations or require it to incur additional expenses to comply with any new regulatory initiatives or statutes. Additional legislation or regulations applicable to the operation of its vessels that may be implemented in the future could adversely affect its business.
 
The Company currently maintains pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1.0 billion per incident for each of the Company’s vessels. If the damages from a catastrophic spill were to exceed the Company’s insurance coverage it could have an adverse effect on its business and results of operation.
 
OPA specifically permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to oil pollution incidents occurring within their boundaries, provided they accept, at a minimum, the levels of liability established under OPA and some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for oil spills. In some cases, states which have enacted such legislation have not yet issued implementing regulations defining vessel owners’ responsibilities under these laws. The Company intends to comply with all applicable state regulations in the ports where its vessels call. The Company believes that it is in substantial compliance with all applicable existing state requirements. In addition, the Company intends to comply with all future applicable state regulations in the ports where its vessels call.
 
Other Environmental Initiatives
 
The U.S. Clean Water Act, or CWA, prohibits the discharge of oil, hazardous substances and ballast water in U.S. navigable waters unless authorized by a duly-issued permit or exemption, and imposes strict liability in the form of penalties for any unauthorized discharges. The CWA also imposes substantial liability for the costs of removal, remediation and damages, and complements the remedies available under OPA and CERCLA. Furthermore, many U.S. states that border a navigable waterway have enacted environmental pollution laws that impose strict liability on a person for removal costs and damages resulting from a discharge of oil or a release of a hazardous substance. These laws may be more stringent than U.S. federal law.
 
The EPA regulates the discharge of ballast water and other substances in U.S. waters under the CWA. EPA regulations require vessels 79 feet in length or longer (other than commercial fishing and recreational vessels) to comply with a Vessel General Permit (the "VGP"), authorizing ballast water discharges and other discharges incidental to the operation of vessels. The VGP imposes technology and water-quality based effluent limits for certain types of discharges and establishes specific inspection, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements to ensure the effluent limits are met. On March 28, 2013, the EPA re-issued the VGP for another five years, which took effect December 19, 2013. The 2013 VGP contains numeric ballast water discharge limits for most vessels to reduce the risk of invasive species in US waters, more stringent requirements for exhaust gas scrubbers and the use of environmentally acceptable lubricants.
 
U.S. Coast Guard regulations adopted under the U.S. National Invasive Species Act, or NISA, also impose mandatory ballast water management practices for all vessels equipped with ballast water tanks entering or operating in U.S. waters. As of June 21, 2012, the U.S. Coast Guard implemented revised regulations on ballast water management by establishing standards on the allowable concentration of living organisms in ballast water discharged from ships in U.S. waters. The revised ballast water standards are consistent with those adopted by the IMO in 2004. Compliance with the EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard regulations requires the installation of a U.S. Coast Guard approved ballast water management system by the first scheduled drydocking after January 1, 2016. On September 10, 2015, the U.S Coast Guard issued new guidance that simplifies and clarifies the process by which vessels can seek extensions to come into compliance with the standards.
 




16



European Union Regulations
 
In October 2009, the European Union amended a directive to impose criminal sanctions for illicit ship-source discharges of polluting substances, including minor discharges, if committed with intent, recklessly or with serious negligence and the discharges, individually or in the aggregate, result in deterioration of the quality of water. Aiding and abetting the discharge of a polluting substance may also lead to criminal penalties. Member States were required to enact laws or regulations to comply with the directive by the end of 2010. Criminal liability for pollution may result in substantial penalties or fines and increased civil liability claims. The directive applies to all types of vessels, irrespective of their flag, but certain exceptions apply to warships or where human safety or that of the ship is in danger.

The European Union has adopted several regulations and directives requiring, among other things, more frequent inspections of high-risk ships, as determined by type, age, and flag as well as the number of times the ship has been detained. The European Union also adopted and then extended a ban on substandard ships and enacted a minimum ban period and a definitive ban for repeated offenses. The regulation also provided the European Union with greater authority and control over classification societies, by imposing more requirements on classification societies and providing for fines or penalty payments for organizations that failed to comply.
 
With effect from January 1, 2010, Directive 2005/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of July 6, 2005, amending Directive 1999/32/EC came into force. The objective of the directive is to reduce emission of sulfur dioxide and particulate matter caused by the combustion of certain petroleum derived fuels.

The directive imposes limits on the sulfur content of such fuels as a condition of their use within a Member State territory. The maximum sulfur content for marine fuels used by inland waterway vessels and ships at berth in ports in EU countries after January 1, 2010, is 0.1% by mass. As of January 1, 2015, all vessels operating within ECAs, worldwide must comply with 0.1% sulfur requirements. Currently, the only grade of fuel meeting 0.1% sulfur content requirement is low sulfur marine gas oil, or LSMGO. As of July 1, 2010, the reduction of applicable sulfur content limits in the North Sea, the Baltic Sea and the English Channel Sulfur Control Areas is 0.1%. The Company does not expect that it will be required to modify any of its vessels to meet any of the foregoing low sulfur fuel requirements. On July 15, 2011, the European Commission also adopted a proposal for an amendment to Directive 1999/32/EC which would align requirements with those imposed by the revised MARPOL Annex VI which introduced stricter sulfur limits.
 
Greenhouse Gas Regulation
 
In July 2011, MEPC adopted two new sets of mandatory requirements to address greenhouse gas emissions from ships, which entered into force in January 2013. Currently operating ships will be required to develop Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plans, and minimum energy efficiency levels per capacity mile, outlined in the Energy Efficiency Design Index, will apply to new ships. These requirements could cause the Company to incur additional compliance costs. The European Union has indicated that it intends to propose an expansion of the existing European Union emissions trading scheme to include emissions of greenhouse gases from marine vessels, and in January 2012 the European Commission launched a public consultation on possible measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. In the United States, the EPA has issued a finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public health and safety and has adopted regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from certain mobile sources and large stationary sources. Although the mobile source emissions regulations do not apply to greenhouse gas emissions from vessels, such regulation of vessels is foreseeable, and the EPA has in recent years received petitions from the California Attorney General and various environmental groups seeking such regulation. Any passage of climate control legislation or other regulatory initiatives by the IMO, European Union, the U.S. or other countries where the Company operates, or any treaty adopted at the international level to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, that restrict emissions of greenhouse gases could require the Company to make significant financial expenditures which the Company cannot predict with certainty at this time.
 
Vessel Security Regulations
 
Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States, there have been a variety of initiatives intended to enhance vessel security such as the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, or MTSA. To implement certain portions of the MTSA, in July 2003, the U.S. Coast Guard issued regulations requiring the implementation of certain security requirements aboard vessels operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The regulations also impose requirements on certain ports and facilities, some of which are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or the EPA.
 
Similarly, in December 2002, amendments to SOLAS created a new chapter of the convention dealing specifically with maritime security. The new Chapter V became effective in July 2004 and imposes various detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities, and mandates compliance with the International Ship and Port Facilities Security Code, or the ISPS Code. The ISPS

17



Code is designed to enhance the security of ports and ships against terrorism. To trade internationally, a vessel must attain an International Ship Security Certificate, or ISSC, from a recognized security organization approved by the vessel’s flag state. Among the various requirements are:
 
on-board installation of automatic identification systems to provide a means for the automatic transmission of safety-related information from among similarly equipped ships and shore stations, including information on a ship’s identity, position, course, speed and navigational status;

on-board installation of ship security alert systems, which do not sound on the vessel but only alert the authorities on shore;

the development of vessel security plans;

ship identification number to be permanently marked on a vessel’s hull;

a continuous synopsis record kept onboard showing a vessel’s history including the name of the ship, the state whose flag the ship is entitled to fly, the date on which the ship was registered with that state, the ship’s identification number, the port at which the ship is registered and the name of the registered owner(s) and their registered address; and

compliance with flag state security certification requirements.

Ships operating without a valid certificate may be detained at port until it obtains an ISSC, or it may be expelled from port, or refused entry at port.
 
Furthermore, additional security measures could be required in the future which could have a significant financial impact on the Company. The U.S. Coast Guard regulations, intended to be aligned with international maritime security standards, exempt non-U.S. vessels from MTSA vessel security measures, provided such vessels have on board a valid ISSC that attests to the vessel's compliance with SOLAS security requirements and the ISPS Code.
 
The Company intends to implement the various security measures addressed by MTSA, SOLAS and the ISPS Code, and the Company intends that its fleet will comply with applicable security requirements. The Company has implemented the various security measures addressed by the MTSA, SOLAS and the ISPS Code.

International Labor Organization
 
The International Labor Organization (ILO) is a specialized agency of the UN with headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. The ILO has adopted the Maritime Labor Convention 2006, or MLC 2006. A Maritime Labor Certificate and a Declaration of Maritime Labor Compliance is required to ensure compliance with the MLC 2006 for all ships above 500 gross tons in international trade. The MLC 2006 entered into force on August 20, 2013, at which time all of the Company’s vessels were in full compliance with its requirements.
 
Inspection by Classification Societies
 
Every oceangoing vessel must be “classed” by a classification society. The classification society certifies that the vessel is “in class,” signifying that the vessel has been built and maintained in accordance with the rules of the classification society and complies with applicable rules and regulations of the vessel's country of registry and the international conventions of which that country is a member. In addition, where surveys are required by international conventions and corresponding laws and ordinances of a flag state, the classification society will undertake them on application or by official order, acting on behalf of the authorities concerned.
 
The classification society also undertakes, as requested, other surveys that may be required by the vessel's flag state. These surveys are subject to agreements made with the vessel owner and/or to the regulations of the country concerned.
 
For maintenance of the class certification, annual, intermediate and special surveys of hull and machinery, including the electrical plant, and any special equipment, are required to be performed as follows:
 
Annual Surveys:  For seagoing ships, annual surveys are conducted within three months, before or after each anniversary of the class period indicated in the certificate.


18



Intermediate Surveys:  Extended surveys are referred to as intermediate surveys and are typically conducted two and one-half years after commissioning, and two and one-half years after each class renewal. Intermediate surveys are to be carried out at or between the occasion of the second or third annual survey.

Class Renewal Surveys:  Class renewal surveys, also known as special surveys, are carried out at the intervals indicated by the character of classification for the hull. At the special survey, the vessel is thoroughly examined, including audio-gauging to determine the thickness of the steel structures. If the steel thickness is found to be less than class requirements, the classification society would prescribe steel renewals which require drydocking of the vessel. The classification society may grant a one-year grace period for completion of the special survey. Substantial costs may be incurred for steel renewal in order to pass a special survey if the vessel experiences excessive wear and tear. In lieu of the special survey every four or five years, depending on whether a grace period was granted, a shipowner has the option of arranging with the classification society for the vessel’s hull or machinery to be on a continuous survey cycle, in which case every part of the vessel would be surveyed on a continuous five-year cycle. This process is referred to as continuous class renewal.

All areas subject to survey, as defined by the classification society, are required to be surveyed at least once per class period unless shorter intervals between surveys are prescribed elsewhere. The period between two subsequent surveys of each area must not exceed five years.
 
Most vessels undergo regulatory inspection of the underwater parts every 30 to 36 months. If any defects are found, the classification surveyor will issue a recommendation which must be rectified by the ship owner within prescribed time limits.

The Company expects to perform five special surveys in 2016 at an aggregate total cost of approximately $4.5 million. The Company expects to perform three intermediate surveys in 2017 at an aggregate total cost of approximately $1.1 million. The Company estimates that offhire related to the surveys and related repair work is ten to twenty days, depending on the size and condition of the vessel.
 
Most insurance underwriters make it a condition for insurance coverage that a vessel be certified as “in class” by a classification society which is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies. All of the Company’s vessels are certified by Det Norske Veritas, Nippon Kaiji Kiokai or Bureau Veritas. All new and second-hand vessels that the Company purchases must be certified prior to delivery under its standard purchase contracts, referred to as the memorandum of agreement. Certification of second-hand vessels must be verified by a Class Maintenance Certificate issued within 72 hours prior to delivery. If the vessel is not certified on the date of closing, the Company has the option to cancel the agreement on the basis of Seller’s default, and not take delivery of the vessel.
 
Risk of Loss and Insurance
 
General
 
The operation of any dry bulk vessel includes risks such as mechanical failure, collision, property loss, cargo loss or damage, and business interruption due to political circumstances in foreign countries, hostilities and labor strikes. In addition, there is an inherent possibility of marine disaster, including oil spills (e.g. fuel oil) and other environmental incidents, and the liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade. OPA, which imposes virtually unlimited liability for certain oil pollution accidents upon owners, operators and demise charterers of vessels trading in the United States exclusive economic zone, has made liability insurance more expensive for ship owners and operators trading in the U.S. market.
 
The Company maintains hull and machinery insurance, war risks insurance, protection and indemnity cover and freight, demurrage and defense cover for its owned fleet at amounts it believe address the normal risks of its operations. The Company may not be able to maintain this level of coverage throughout a vessel’s useful life. Furthermore, while the Company believes that its current insurance coverage is adequate, not all risks can be insured, and there can be no guarantee that any specific claim will be paid, or that the Company will always be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates.
 
Hull & Machinery and War Risks Insurance
 
The Company maintains marine hull and machinery and war risks insurances, which cover the risk of actual or constructive total loss, for all of its vessels. Vessels are insured for their fair market value, at a minimum, with a deductible of $100,000 per vessel per incident.
 



19



Protection and Indemnity Insurance
 
Protection and indemnity insurance is a form of mutual indemnity insurance provided by mutual protection and indemnity associations, or P&I Associations, which insure the Company’s third party liabilities in connection with its shipping activities. This includes third-party liability and other related expenses resulting from the injury, illness or death of crew, passengers and other third parties, the loss or damage to cargo, claims arising from collisions with other vessels, damage to other third-party property, pollution arising from oil or other substances and salvage, towing and other related costs, including wreck removal. Subject to the “capping” discussed below, the Company’s coverage, except for pollution, is unlimited.
 
The Company’s current protection and indemnity insurance coverage for pollution is $1.0 billion per vessel per incident. The thirteen P&I Associations that comprise the International Group insure approximately 90% of the world’s commercial tonnage and have entered into a pooling agreement to reinsure each association’s liabilities. As a member of a P&I Association, which is a member of the International Group, the Company is subject to calls payable to the associations based on the group’s claim records as well as the claim records of all other members of the individual associations and members of the pool of P&I Associations comprising the International Group.

Amendments to the Convention on Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims, or LLMC, went into effect on June 8, 2015. The amendments alter the limits of liability for loss of life or personal injury claims and property claims against ship-owners.
 
Exchange Controls
 
The Company is an exempted company organized under the Bermuda Companies Act. The Bermuda Companies Act differs in some material respects from laws generally applicable to United States companies and their stockholders. However, a general permission issued by the Bermuda Monetary Authority, ("BMA"), results in the Company’s common shares being freely transferable among persons who are residents and non-residents of Bermuda. Each shareholder, whether a resident or non-resident of Bermuda, is entitled to one vote for each share of stock held by the shareholder.

The Company's common shares are listed on NASDAQ under the symbol "PANL".
 
Although the Company is incorporated in Bermuda, the Company is classified as a non-resident of Bermuda for exchange control purposes by the BMA. Other than transferring Bermuda Dollars out of Bermuda, there are no restrictions on its ability to transfer funds into and out of Bermuda or to pay dividends in currency other than Bermuda Dollars to U.S. residents (or other non-residents of Bermuda) who are holders of its common shares.
 
In accordance with Bermuda law, share certificates may be issued only in the names of corporations, individuals or legal persons. In the case of an applicant acting in a special capacity (for example, as an executor or trustee), certificates may, at the request of the applicant, record the capacity in which the applicant is acting. Notwithstanding the recording of any such special capacity, the Company is not bound to investigate or incur any responsibility in respect of the proper administration of any such estate or trust.
 
The Company will take no notice of any trust applicable to any of its shares or other securities whether or not the Company had notice of such trust.
 

20



INDUSTRY AND MARKET CONDITIONS
 
Market Overview
 
Ocean going vessels represent the most efficient and often the only means of transporting large volumes of dry cargo over long distances. Dry bulk cargo includes both major and lesser commodities such as coal, iron ore, grain, bauxite, cement clinker, and limestone. Dry bulk trade is influenced by the underlying demand for the dry bulk commodities which in turn is influenced by the global economic activity.
 
The world’s fleet of vessels dedicated to carrying dry bulk cargoes is generally divided into six major categories, based on a vessel’s cargo carrying capacity. These categories are: Handysize, Supramax, Panamax, Post Panamax, Capesize and Very Large Ore Carrier. Certain routes and geographies are less accessible to certain vessel sizes. For example, Panamax and Supramax vessels are the main dry bulk vessel types deployed in the Baltic due to draft restrictions. Similarly, the main dry bulk vessel size deployed on the Northern Sea Route (NSR) along the coast of Russia is Panamax.
 
Dry bulk vessels are employed through a number of different chartering options. The most common are time charters, spot charters, and voyage charters. Historically, charter rates have been volatile as they are driven by the underlying balance between vessel supply and demand. Since 2011, rates have generally been low as a result of the excess of dry bulk carrier supply over the demand for dry bulk vessels. Ice class vessels, when operating in ice-bound areas, usually command a rate premium to conventional trades.
 
Dry Bulk Shipping — the Main Participants
 
In the dry bulk shipping industry there are multiple functions, with individual parties carrying out one or more of such functions. In general, the principal functions within dry bulk shipping are as follows:
 
Ship Owner or Registered Owner — Generally, this is an entity retaining the legal title of ownership over a vessel.

Ship Operator — Generally, this is an entity seeking to generate profit either through the chartering of ships (owned or chartered-in) to others, or from the transportation of cargoes. Entities focusing on the transportation of cargoes may engage in chartering of ships to other entities, but those companies focusing on chartering ships to other entities rarely act to carry cargoes for customers.

Shipmanager/Commercial Manager — This is an entity designated to be responsible for the day to day commercial management of the ship and the best contact for the ship regarding commercial matters, including post fixture responsibilities, such as laytime, demurrage, insurance and charter clauses. These companies undertake the activities of ship operators but, unlike a ship operator, they do not own or charter-in the vessels at their own risk.

Technical Manager — This is an entity specifically responsible for the technical operation and technical superintendence of a ship. This company may also be responsible for hiring, training and supervising ship officers and crew, and for all aspects of the day to day operation of the fleet, including repair work, spare parts inventory, re-engineering, surveys and dry-docking.

Cargo Owner — This is normally a producer (e.g., a miner), consumer (e.g., a steel mill) or trading house who requires transportation of cargo by a cargo focused ship operator.

The Freight Market
 
Dry bulk vessels are employed in the market through a number of different chartering options. The general terms typically found in these types of contracts are described below.
 
Time Charter.  A charter under which the vessel owner or operator is paid charterhire on a per-day basis for a specified period of time. Typically, the shipowner receives semi-monthly charterhire payments on a U.S. dollar-per-day basis and is responsible for providing the crew and paying vessel operating expenses, while the charterer is responsible for paying the voyage expenses and additional voyage insurance. The ship owner is also responsible for the vessel’s intermediate and special survey (heavy mandatory maintenance) costs. Under time charters, including trip time charters, the charterer pays all voyage expenses including port, canal and bunker (fuel) costs.

Trip Charter.  A time charter for a trip to carry a specific cargo from a load port to a discharge port at a set daily rate.

21




Voyage Charter.  A charter to carry a specific amount and type of cargo on a load-port to discharge-port basis, subject to various cargo handling terms. Most of these charters are of a single voyage nature, as trading patterns do not encourage round trip voyage trading. The ship operator receives payment based on a price per ton of cargo loaded on board the vessel. The ship operator is responsible for the payment of all voyage expenses, as well as the costs of owning or hiring the vessel.

Spot Charter.  A spot charter generally refers to a voyage charter or a trip charter, which generally last from 10 days to three months.

Contract of Affreightment.  A contract of affreightment, or COA, relates to the carriage of multiple cargoes over the same route and enables the service provider to nominate different vessels to perform the individual voyages. Essentially, it constitutes a series of voyage charters to carry a specified amount of cargo during the term of the CoA, which usually spans a number of months or years. Freight normally is agreed on a U.S. dollar-per-ton carried basis with bunker cost escalation or de-escalation adjustments.

Bareboat Charter.  A bareboat charter involves the use of a vessel, usually over longer periods of time (several years). In this case, all voyage expenses and vessel operating expenses, including maintenance, crewing and insurance, are for paid by the charterer. The owner of the vessel receives monthly charterhire payments on a U.S. dollar per day basis and is responsible only for the payment of capital costs related to the vessel. A bareboat charter is also known as a “demise charter” or a “time charter by demise.”

Charter Rates

As noted above, the bulk carrier market operates at two levels — period and spot. The former sees the charter commitment and income stream fixed over a period. The latter sees ships regularly open for new business and so most frequently exposed to the immediate volatility of market sentiment.
 
In the time charter market, rates vary depending on the length of the charter period and vessel specific factors such as age, speed, size and fuel consumption. In the voyage charter market, rates are influenced by cargo size, commodity, port dues and canal transit fees, as well as delivery and redelivery regions. In general, a larger cargo size is quoted at a lower rate per ton than a smaller cargo size. Routes with costly ports or canals generally command higher rates. Voyages loading from a port where vessels usually discharge cargo, or discharging at a port where vessels usually load cargo, are generally quoted at lower rates. These voyages are known as “backhaul” voyages.
 
In some cases charters will include an additional payment known as a ballast bonus. A ballast bonus is a lump sum payment made to a shipowner or operator (by the charterer) as compensation for delivering a ship in a particular loading region of the world. For a ship to enter a loading region, an empty (ballast) leg may be required because there are no inbound cargoes. Normally the charterer will pay for this leg. The ballast bonus should reflect the cost of the empty ballast in terms of time and fuel. A typical fixture that involves a ballast bonus might be expressed as “freight hire of $10,000 per day, plus a ballast bonus of $100,000 lump sum”.
 
Within the dry bulk shipping industry, the freight rate indices issued by the Baltic Exchange in London are the references most likely to be monitored. These references are based on actual charter hire rates under charters entered into by market participants as well as daily assessments provided to the Baltic Exchange by a panel of major shipbrokers. The Baltic Exchange, an independent organization comprised of shipbrokers, shipping companies and other shipping players, provides daily independent shipping market information and has created freight rate indices reflecting the average freight rates for the major bulk vessel trading routes. These indices include the Baltic Panamax Index, or BPI, the index with the longest history and, more recently, the Baltic Capesize Index, or BCI.
 
Dry Bulk Trades Requiring Ice Class Tonnage
 
Ice class vessels are required to serve ports accessed by routes crossing seasonal or year-round ice-covered oceans, lakes, seas or rivers. Ice class vessels are mainly deployed in the Baltic Sea, the Northern Sea Route (NSR) and the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway. These regions have experienced strong trade growth in dry bulk cargoes, driven in particular by increased mining activities supported by strong commodity demand in Asia, decreased level of ice, and technology advancement in shipping. However, the NSR experienced a steep drop in tons of cargo transported between Asia and Europe during 2014 and 2015, as low fuel prices made the NSR less attractive for ship-owners. Cargo traffic to and from Russian ports is expected to increase in the coming years, mainly representing supplies and cargo for new industrial projects.


22



ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
 
An investment in our securities involves a high degree of risk. You should consider carefully the material risks described below, which we believe represent the material risks related to our business and our securities, together with the other information contained in this Form 10-K, before making a decision to invest in our securities. This Form 10-K also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. In connection with such forward looking statements, you should also carefully review the cautionary statements referred to under “Special Note Regarding Forward Looking Statements.” Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of specific factors, including the risks described below.
 
Risks Relating to the Company’s Industry
 
The cyclical and volatile nature of the seaborne drybulk transportation industry may lead to decreases in charter and freight rates, which may have an adverse effect on the Company’s revenues, earnings and profitability and its ability to comply with its loan covenants. Demand remains weak, rates are at the lowest point since 1985 and asset values for modern tonnage continue to decline due to the over-supply of dry bulk carriers.
 
The seaborne drybulk transportation industry is cyclical and volatile, and the downturn in the drybulk charter market has severely affected the entire drybulk shipping industry. There can be no assurance that drybulk charter rates will increase and rates could decline further. The decline in and volatility of charter and freight rates has been due to various factors, including lower crude oil prices, falling demand from China, a strong U.S. Dollar and the associated weakening of other world currencies and the deflationary cycle being experienced in many commodities such as iron ore, coal and agricultural products. Concurrently, with these factors, vessel supply continues to increase.
 
Although our operating fleet is primarily chartered-in on a short term basis and though lower charter rates result in lower charter hire costs, low charter and freight rates in the drybulk market could have an adverse effect on our vessel values and earnings on our owned fleet, and similarly, could affect our cash flows, liquidity and ability to comply with the financial covenants in our loan agreements. In addition, the decline in the drybulk carrier market has had and may continue to have additional adverse consequences for the drybulk shipping industry, including an absence of financing for vessels and little or no active secondhand market for the sale of vessels. Accordingly, the value of our common shares could be substantially reduced.
 
Because we employ our vessels under a mix of voyage charters and time charters and contracts of affreightment (COA’s), which typically extend for varying lengths of time of from one month to ten years, we are exposed to changes in market rates for drybulk carriers and such changes may affect our earnings and the value of our owned drybulk carriers at any given time. A COA relates to the carriage of multiple cargoes over the same route and enables the COA holder to nominate different vessels to perform individual voyages. We may not be able to successfully employ our vessels in the future or renew existing contracts at rates sufficient to allow us to meet our obligations. We are also exposed to volatility in the market rates we pay to charter-in vessels. Fluctuations in charter and freight rates result from changes in the supply of and demand for vessel capacity and changes in the demand for seaborne carriage of commodities. Because the factors affecting the supply of and demand for vessels are outside of our control and are unpredictable, the nature, timing, direction and degree of changes in industry conditions are also unpredictable.
 
Factors that influence demand for vessel capacity include:
 
supply of and demand for energy resources, commodities, semi-finished and finished consumer and industrial products;

changes in the exploration or production of energy resources, commodities, semi-finished and finished consumer and industrial products;

the location of regional and global exploration, production and manufacturing facilities;

the location of consuming regions for energy resources, commodities, semi-finished and finished consumer and industrial products;

the globalization of production and manufacturing;

global and regional economic and political conditions, including armed conflicts, terrorist activities, embargoes and strikes;

natural disasters and other disruptions in international trade;

23




developments in international trade;

changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns, including the distance cargo is transported by sea;

environmental and other regulatory developments;

currency exchange rates;

bunker (fuel) prices; and

weather.

The factors that influence the supply of vessel capacity include:

the number of newbuilding deliveries;

port and canal congestion;

the scrapping rate of older vessels;

vessel casualties;

the number of vessels that are out of service.

In addition to the prevailing and anticipated charter and freight rates, factors that affect the rate of newbuilding, scrapping and laying-up include newbuilding prices, secondhand vessel values in relation to scrap prices, costs of bunker fuels and other operating costs, costs associated with classification society surveys, normal maintenance and insurance coverage, the efficiency and age profile of the existing drybulk fleet in the market and government and industry regulation of maritime transportation practices, particularly environmental protection laws and regulations. These factors influencing the supply of and demand for shipping capacity are outside of our control, and we may not be able to correctly assess the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions.
 
We anticipate that the future demand for our drybulk carriers and our transportation services will be dependent upon economic growth in world economies and its associated industrial production, seasonal and regional changes in demand, changes in the capacity of the global drybulk carrier fleet and the sources and supply of drybulk cargoes to be transported by sea. Given the large number of new drybulk carriers currently on order with shipyards, the capacity of the global drybulk carrier fleet seems likely to increase even if economic growth does not similarly increase. Adverse economic, political, social or other developments could have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.
 
An over-supply of drybulk carrier capacity may prolong or further depress the current low charter and freight rates and, in turn, adversely affect our profitability.
 
The market supply of drybulk carriers has been increasing as a result of the delivery of numerous newbuilding orders over the last few years. Newbuildings have been delivered in significant numbers since the beginning of 2006 and vessel supply growth has been outpacing vessel demand growth, causing downward pressure on charter rates. Until the new supply is fully absorbed by the market, charter rates may continue to be under pressure due to vessel supply in the near to medium term. Although the Company typically enters into back-haul COAs to offset the large uncompensated cost of positioning vessels for front–haul voyages, if market conditions persist or worsen, upon the expiration or termination of our COAs, we may only be able to re-employ our vessels at reduced or unprofitable rates, or we may not be able to employ our vessels at all. The occurrence of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends.
 
The market values of our owned vessels may decrease, which could limit the amount of funds that we can borrow or cause us to breach certain covenants in our credit facilities and we may incur a loss if we sell vessels following a decline in their market value.
 
The fair market values of our owned vessels have generally experienced high volatility, and you should expect the market values of our vessels to fluctuate depending on a number of factors including:
 

24



prevailing level of charter and freight rates;

general economic and market conditions affecting the shipping industry;

types and sizes of vessels;

supply of and demand for vessels;

other modes of transportation;

cost of newbuildings;

governmental and other regulations; and

technological advances.

In addition, as vessels grow older, they generally decline in value. If the market values of our owned vessels decrease, we may not be in compliance with certain covenants in our credit facilities secured by mortgages on our drybulk vessels unless we provide additional collateral or prepay a portion of the loan to a level where we are again in compliance with our loan covenants. As of December 31, 2015, we were not in compliance with certain covenants contained in our debt agreements and therefore obtained waivers from the facility agents. Please read “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Borrowing Activities.”
 
In addition, if we sell one or more of our vessels at a time when vessel prices have fallen and before we have recorded an impairment adjustment to our consolidated financial statements, the sale proceeds may be less than the vessel’s carrying value on our consolidated financial statements, resulting in a loss and a reduction in earnings.
 
The carrying amounts of vessels held and used by us are reviewed for potential impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of a particular vessel may not be fully recoverable. In such instances, an impairment charge would be recognized if the estimate of the undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of the vessel and its eventual disposition is less than the vessel’s carrying amount. This assessment is made at the asset group level which represents the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of other groups of assets. The asset groups are defined by vessel size and classification. At December 31, 2015, we identified a potential impairment indicator by reference to industry-wide estimated market values of all vessels of the same size range and age. As a result, we evaluated each asset group for impairment by estimating the total undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset group and its eventual disposal. At December 31, 2015, the carrying amount of the m/v Nordic Barents and the m/v Nordic Bothnia were determined to be higher than their estimated undiscounted future cash flows due to the decline in market rates expected to be earned for the remaining estimated useful life of the vessels. As a result, a loss on impairment of approximately $3.5 million is included in the consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2015.

At December 31, 2014, the carrying amount of the m/v Bulk Discovery was determined to be higher than its estimated undiscounted future cash flows because of the higher than expected estimate of upcoming drydocking costs. At December 31, 2014, the carrying amount of the m/v Nordic Barents and m/v Nordic Bothnia were determined to be higher than their estimated undiscounted future cash flows because the TCE rates anticipated in the Company’s annual budget for 2015, which were used to calculate such cash flows, were lower than the rates forecasted as of the third quarter due to deteriorated market conditions in the fourth quarter. As a result, a loss on impairment of approximately $10.0 million is included in the consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2014. In addition, the Company sold the m/v Bulk Cajun in February 2015. A loss on impairment of approximately $1.5 million is included in the consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2014 because the vessel was sold for its scrap value, which was less than its carrying amount.
 
The Company has relied on financial support from its founders and investors through related party loans, which may not be available to the Company in the future.
 
From time to time, we have obtained loans from our founders, Edward Coll, Anthony Laura, and Lagoa Investments, an entity beneficially owned by Claus Boggild, to meet vessel purchase, newbuilding deposit, and other obligations of the Company. These loans have been historically available to the Company on an as needed basis, and payable as cash flow reasonably permitted. These loans may not be available to the Company in the future. We may seek to refinance such related party loans with the net proceeds of future debt and equity offerings, but we cannot be sure that we will be able to do so on acceptable terms. If we are not able to find additional sources of financing on acceptable terms, we may have to dedicate a larger portion of our cash flow from operations

25



to pay the principal and interest of these loans and facilities than we would if we were able to refinance on superior terms. Even if we are able to borrow money from such parties, such borrowing could create a conflict of interest of management to the extent they also act as lenders to the Company.
 
The current state of the global financial markets and current economic conditions may adversely impact our ability to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms and otherwise negatively impact our business.
 
Global financial markets and economic conditions have been, and continue to be, volatile. In recent years, operating businesses in the global economy have faced tightening credit, weakening demand for goods and services, deteriorating international liquidity conditions, and declining markets. There has been a general decline in the willingness of banks and other financial institutions to extend credit, particularly in the shipping industry. As the shipping industry is highly dependent on the availability of credit to finance and expand operations, it has been negatively affected by this decline.
 
Also, as a result of concerns about the stability of financial markets generally, and the solvency of counterparties specifically, the cost of obtaining money from the credit markets may increase if lenders increase interest rates, enact tighter lending standards, refuse to refinance existing debt at all or on terms similar to current debt, and reduce, or cease to provide funding to borrowers. Due to these factors, additional financing may not be available if needed and to the extent required, on acceptable terms or at all. If additional financing is not available when needed, or is available only on unfavorable terms, we may be unable to expand or meet our obligations as they come due or we may be unable to enhance our existing business, complete additional vessel acquisitions or otherwise take advantage of business opportunities as they arise.
 
Our revenues are subject to seasonal fluctuations, which could affect our operating results and our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future.
 
We operate our drybulk vessels in markets that have historically exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, in charter and freight rates. This seasonality may result in quarter-to-quarter volatility in our operating results, which could affect our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future. The drybulk carrier market is typically stronger in the fall and winter months due to demand increases arising from agricultural harvest and increased coal demand in preparation for winter in the Northern Hemisphere. In addition, unpredictable weather patterns in these months tend to disrupt vessel scheduling and supplies of certain commodities. This seasonality may adversely affect our operating results and our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future.
 
Risks associated with operating ocean-going vessels could affect our business and reputation, which could adversely affect our revenues and price of our common shares.
 
The operation of ocean-going vessels carries inherent risks. These risks include the possibility of:
 
marine disaster;

environmental accidents;

cargo and property losses or damage;

business interruptions caused by mechanical failure, human error, war, terrorism, political action in various countries, labor strikes or adverse weather conditions; and

piracy.

The involvement of our vessels in an environmental disaster may harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator. Any of these circumstances or events could increase our costs or lower our revenues.
 

26



The operation of drybulk carriers entails certain unique operational risks.
 
The operation of certain ship types, such as drybulk carriers, has certain unique risks. With a drybulk carrier, the cargo itself and its interaction with the ship can be a risk factor. By their nature, drybulk cargoes are often heavy, dense, easily shifted, and react badly to water exposure. In addition, drybulk carriers are often subjected to battering treatment during unloading operations with grabs, jackhammers (to pry encrusted cargoes out of the hold), and small bulldozers. This treatment may cause damage to the vessel. Vessels damaged due to treatment during unloading procedures may be more susceptible to breach at sea. Furthermore, any defects or flaws in the design of a drybulk carrier may contribute to vessel damage. Hull breaches in drybulk carriers may lead to the flooding of the vessels holds. If a drybulk carrier suffers flooding in its holds, the bulk cargo may become so dense and waterlogged that its pressure may buckle the vessel's bulkheads, leading to the loss of the vessel. If we are unable to adequately maintain our vessels, we may be unable to prevent these events. Any of these circumstances or events could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and our ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future. In addition, the loss of any of our vessels could harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator.
 
Our vessels may call on ports located in countries that are subject to restrictions imposed by the U.S. or other governments, which could adversely affect our reputation and the market for our common shares.
 
On our charterers' instructions, notwithstanding contractual restrictions agreed with us, our vessels may call on ports or operate in countries subject to sanctions and embargoes imposed by the U.S. government and other authorities or countries identified by the U.S. government or other authorities as state sponsors of terrorism, such as Iran, Sudan and Syria. The U.S. sanctions and embargo laws and regulations vary in their application, as they do not all apply to the same covered persons or proscribe the same activities, and such sanctions and embargo laws and regulations may be amended or strengthened over time. In 2010, the U.S. enacted the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions Accountability and Divestment Act, or CISADA, which amended the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations, ("ITSR"). Among other things, CISADA introduced limits on the ability of companies and persons to do business or trade with Iran when such activities relate to the investment, supply or export of refined petroleum or petroleum products. In 2012, President Obama signed Executive Order 13608 which prohibits foreign persons from violating or attempting to violate, or causing a violation of any sanction in effect against Iran or facilitating any deceptive transactions for or on behalf of any person subject to U.S. sanctions. Any persons found to be in violation of Executive Order 13608 will be deemed a foreign sanctions evader and will be banned from all contacts with the United States, including conducting business in U.S. dollars. Also in 2012, President Obama signed into law the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012, or the Iran Threat Reduction Act, which created new sanctions and strengthened existing sanctions. Among other things, the Iran Threat Reduction Act intensified existing sanctions regarding the provision of goods, services, infrastructure or technology to Iran's petroleum or petrochemical sector. On January 16, 2015, the United States lifted the nuclear-related secondary sanctions, however, such sanctions generally are directed toward non-U.S. persons for specified conduct involving Iran that occurs entirely outside of U.S. jurisdiction.

During 2014, several Executive Orders were signed which authorize and subsequently expand sanctions on individuals and entities responsible for violating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, or for stealing the assets of the Ukrainian people. These sanctions put in place restrictions on the travel of certain individuals and officials. Such a person could be subject to a variety of sanctions, including exclusion from U.S. capital markets, exclusion from financial transactions subject to U.S. jurisdiction, and exclusion of that person's vessels from U.S. ports for up to two years. In 2015, an Executive Order was issued against seven officials from Venezuela which blocks access to their assets and the use of U.S. financial systems. Declaring any country a threat to national security is the first step in starting a U.S. sanctions program.
 
Although we believe that we have been in compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations, and intend to maintain such compliance, there can be no assurance that we will be in compliance in the future, particularly as the scope of certain laws may be unclear and may be subject to changing interpretations. Any such violation could result in fines, penalties or other sanctions that could severely impact our ability to access U.S. capital markets and conduct our business, and could result in some investors deciding, or being required, to divest their interest, or not to invest, in us. Moreover, our charterers may violate applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations as a result of actions that do not involve us or our vessels, and those violations could in turn negatively affect our reputation. In addition, our reputation and the market for our securities may be adversely affected if we engage in certain other activities, such as entering into permissible charters with individuals or entities in countries subject to U.S. sanctions and embargo laws that are not controlled by the governments of those countries, or engaging in permissible operations associated with those countries pursuant to contracts with third parties that are unrelated to those countries or entities controlled by their governments. Investor perception of the value of our common shares may be adversely affected by the consequences of war, the effects of terrorism, civil unrest and governmental actions in these and surrounding countries.
 

27



We are subject to international safety regulations and the failure to comply with these regulations may subject us to increased liability, may adversely affect our insurance coverage and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.
 
The operation of our vessels is affected by the requirements set forth in the United Nations’ International Maritime Organization’s International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and Pollution Prevention, or ISM Code. The ISM Code requires ship owners and ship managers to develop and maintain an extensive “Safety Management System” that includes the adoption of a safety and environmental protection policy setting forth instructions and procedures for safe operation for dealing with emergencies. The failure of a shipowner to comply with the ISM Code may subject it to increased liability, may invalidate existing insurance or decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports. Each of the vessels owned or operated by the Company is ISM Code-certified.
 
In addition, vessel classification societies impose significant safety and other requirements on our vessels. In complying with current and future environmental requirements, vessel owners and operators may incur significant additional costs for maintenance and inspection requirements, in developing contingency arrangements for potential spills and in obtaining insurance coverage. Government regulation of vessels, particularly in the areas of safety and environmental protection requirements, can be expected to become stricter in the future and may require us to incur significant capital expenditures to keep our vessels in compliance.
 
We are subject to complex laws and regulations, including environmental regulations that can adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of doing business.
 
Our operations are subject to numerous laws and regulations in the form of international conventions and treaties, national, state and local laws and national and international regulations in force in the jurisdictions in which our vessels operate or are registered, which can significantly affect the ownership cost and operation of our vessels. These requirements include, but are not limited to, European Union Regulations, the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1975, the International Maritime Organization, or IMO, International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution of 1973, the IMO International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974, the International Convention on Load Lines of 1966, the U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, the U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, or CERCLA, the U.S. Clean Air Act, U.S. Clean Water Act and the U.S. Marine Transportation Security Act of 2002.
 
Compliance with such laws, regulations and standards, where applicable, may require installation of costly equipment or operational changes and may affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels. We may also incur additional costs in order to comply with other existing and future regulatory obligations, including, but not limited to, costs relating to air emissions including greenhouse gases, the management of ballast waters, maintenance and inspection, development and implementation of emergency procedures and insurance coverage or other financial assurance of our ability to address pollution incidents. These costs could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. A failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in administrative and civil penalties, criminal sanctions or the suspension or termination of our operations. Environmental laws often impose strict liability for remediation of spills and releases of oil and hazardous substances, which could subject us to liability without regard to whether we were negligent or at fault.
 
We are required to satisfy insurance and financial responsibility requirements for potential oil (including marine fuel) spills and other pollution incidents. Although we have arranged insurance to cover certain environmental risks, there can be no assurance that such insurance will be sufficient to cover all such risks or that any claims will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends.
 
Increased inspection procedures and tighter import and export controls could increase costs and disrupt our business.
 
International shipping is subject to various security and customs inspections and related procedures in countries of origin, destination and trans-shipment points. Inspection procedures may result in the seizure of the contents of our vessels, delays in the loading, offloading or delivery of our vessels and the levying of customs duties, fines or other penalties against us.
 
It is possible that changes to inspection procedures could impose additional financial and legal obligations on us. Changes to inspection procedures could also impose additional costs and obligations on our customers and may, in certain cases, render the shipment of certain types of cargo uneconomical or impractical. Any such changes or developments may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
 
Maritime claimants could arrest one or more of our vessels, which could interrupt our cash flow.
 
Crew members, suppliers of goods and services to a vessel, shippers of cargo and other parties may be entitled to a maritime lien against a vessel for unsatisfied debts, claims or damages. In many jurisdictions, a claimant may seek to obtain security for its

28



claim by arresting a vessel through foreclosure proceedings. The arrest or attachment of one or more of our vessels could interrupt our cash flow and require us to pay large sums of money to have the arrest or attachment lifted. In addition, in some jurisdictions, such as South Africa, under the “sister ship” theory of liability, a claimant may arrest both the vessel which is subject to the claimant's maritime lien and any “associated” vessel, which is any vessel owned or controlled by the same owner. Claimants could attempt to assert “sister ship” liability against a vessel in our fleet for claims relating to another of our vessels.
 
Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency, resulting in a loss of earnings.
 
A government could requisition one or more of our vessels for title or for hire. Requisition for title occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and becomes her owner, while requisition for hire occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and effectively becomes her charterer at dictated charter rates. Generally, requisitions occur during periods of war or emergency, although governments may elect to requisition vessels in other circumstances. Although we would be entitled to compensation in the event of a requisition of one or more of our vessels, the amount and timing of payment would be uncertain. Government requisition of one or more of our vessels may negatively impact our revenues and reduce the amount of dividends, if any, in the future.
 
Changes in fuel prices may adversely affect profits.
 
Fuel, or bunkers, is typically the largest expense in our shipping operations for our vessels. Changes in the price of fuel may adversely affect our profitability. When we operate vessels under COAs or voyage charters, we are responsible for all voyage costs, including bunkers. The price and supply of fuel is unpredictable and fluctuates based on events outside our control, including geopolitical developments, supply and demand for oil and gas, actions by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC, and other oil and gas producers, war and unrest in oil producing countries and regions, regional production patterns and environmental concerns. Further, fuel may become much more expensive in the future, which may reduce our profitability. We continually monitor the market volatility associated with bunker prices and seek to hedge our exposure to changes in the price of marine fuels with our bunker hedging program. However, falling fuel prices resulted in mark to market adjustments of open fuel swaps in the fourth quarter of 2015 and in the third and fourth quarters of 2014. Please see “The Company’s Management and Discussion Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risks — Fuel Swap Contracts.”
 
In the highly competitive international shipping industry, we may not be able to compete successfully for time-charter vessels or for vessel employment with new entrants or established companies with greater resources and, as a result, we may be unable to employ our vessels profitably or to charter-in vessels at reasonable rates.
 
We charter-in and employ our vessels in a highly competitive market that is capital intensive and highly fragmented. Competition arises primarily from other vessel owners and operators, some of whom have substantially greater resources than we do. Competition for seaborne transportation of drybulk cargo by sea is intense and depends on the charter or freight rate and on the location, size, age, condition and acceptability of the vessel and its operators. Due to the highly fragmented market, competitors with greater resources are able to operate larger fleets through consolidations or acquisitions and may be able to offer lower charter or freight rates and higher quality vessels than we are able to offer. If we are unable to successfully compete with other drybulk shipping operators, we may be unable to retain customers or attract new customers, which would have an adverse impact on our results of operations.

Labor interruptions could disrupt our business.
 
Our vessels are manned by masters, officers and crews that are contracted by our technical managers. If not resolved in a timely and cost-effective manner, industrial action or other labor unrest could prevent or hinder our operations from being carried out normally and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, and on our ability to pay dividends.
 
Acts of piracy on ocean-going vessels have had and may continue to have an adverse effect on our industry.
 
Acts of piracy have historically affected ocean-going vessels trading in regions of the world such as the South China Sea, the Indian Ocean, Asia and in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia. Although the frequency of sea piracy continued to decrease during 2015, sea piracy incidents continue to occur, predominantly in Asia, in and around the Singapore Strait and the Gulf of Guinea off the West African coast. Dry bulk vessels and small tankers are particularly vulnerable to such attacks. If these piracy attacks result in regions in which our vessels are deployed being characterized as “war risk” zones by insurers, as the Gulf of Aden temporarily was in May 2008, or Joint War Committee “listed areas,” premiums payable for such coverage could increase significantly and such insurance coverage may be more difficult to obtain. In addition, crew costs, including costs to employ

29



onboard security guards, could increase in such circumstances. Furthermore, the obligations for charter hire payments and determination of on-hire days is unclear with respect to piracy. We may not be adequately insured to cover losses from these incidents, which could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, any detention hijacking as a result of an act of piracy against our vessels, or an increase in cost, or unavailability, of insurance for our vessels, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
 
Political instability, terrorist attacks and international hostilities can affect the seaborne transportation industry, which could adversely affect our business.
 
We conduct most of our operations outside of the United States, and our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends, if any, in the future may be adversely affected by changing economic, political and government conditions in the countries and regions where our vessels are employed or registered. Moreover, we operate in a sector of the economy that is likely to be adversely impacted by the effects of political conflicts, including the current political instability in the Middle East, Ukraine, North Africa, North Korea and other geographic countries and areas, terrorist or other attacks, war or international hostilities. Terrorist attacks and the continuing response of the United States and others to these attacks, as well as the threat of future terrorist attacks around the world, continues to cause uncertainty in the world's financial markets and may affect our business, operating results and financial condition. Continuing conflicts and recent developments in the Middle East, Ukraine and North Africa, and the presence of U.S. or other armed forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and various other regions, may lead to additional acts of terrorism and armed conflict around the world, which may contribute to further economic instability in the global financial markets. These uncertainties could also adversely affect our ability to obtain additional financing on terms acceptable to us or at all. In the past, political conflicts have also resulted in attacks on vessels, mining of waterways and other efforts to disrupt international shipping, particularly in the Arabian Gulf region. Acts of terrorism and piracy have also affected vessels trading in regions such as the South China Sea and the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on our operating results, revenues and costs.
 
Our insurance may not be adequate to cover our losses that may result from our operations due to the inherent operational risks of the seaborne transportation industry.
 
We carry insurance to protect us against most of the accident-related risks involved in the conduct of our business, including marine hull and machinery insurance, protection and indemnity insurance, which include pollution risks, crew insurance and war risks insurance. However, we may not be adequately insured to cover all of our potential losses, which could have a material adverse effect on us. Additionally, our insurers may refuse to pay particular claims, and our insurance may be voidable by the insurers if we take, or fail to take, certain action, such as failing to maintain certification of our vessels with the applicable maritime regulatory organizations. Any significant uninsured or under-insured loss or liability could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and our ability to pay dividends. In addition, we may not be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates in the future during adverse insurance market conditions.
 
In addition, we do not carry loss-of-hire insurance, which covers the loss of revenues during extended vessel off-hire periods, such as those that occur during an unscheduled drydocking due to damage to the vessel from accidents. Accordingly, any loss of a vessel or extended vessel off-hire, due to an accident or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and our ability to pay dividends.
 
Risks Relating to Our Company
 
Our business strategy includes chartering-in vessels, and we may not be able to charter-in suitable vessels.
 
Our business strategy depends, in large part, on our ability to charter-in vessels. If we are not able to find suitable vessels to charter-in, or to charter-in vessels at what we deem to be a reasonable rate, we may not be able to operate profitably or perform our contractual obligations. As a result, we may need to adjust our business strategy, and we may experience material adverse effects on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, if we charter in a vessel and shipping rates were to subsequently decrease or we were unable to secure employment for that vessel, our obligation under the charter to pay above-market rates may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
 
We depend upon a few significant customers for a large part of our revenues and cash flow, and the loss of one or more of these customers could adversely affect our financial performance.
 
We expect to derive a significant part of our revenue and cash flow from a relatively small number of repeat customers. For the year ended December 31, 2015, one customer accounted for 13% of our revenues. For the fiscal years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, our top two customers accounted for 22% and 15% of our revenues, respectively. If one or more of our significant

30



customers is unable to perform under one or more charters or COAs with us and we are not able to find a replacement charter or COA, or if a customer exercises certain rights to terminate the charter or COA, we could suffer a loss of revenues that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash available for distribution as dividends to our shareholders.
 
We could lose a customer or the benefits of a charter or COA if, among other things:
 
the customer fails to make charter payments because of its financial inability, disagreements with us or otherwise; or

the customer terminates the charter because we do not perform in accordance with such charter and do not cure such failures within a specified period.

If we lose a key customer, we may be unable to obtain replacement charters or COAs on comparable terms or at all. The loss of any of our customers, COAs, charters or vessels, or a decline in payments under our agreements, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends to our shareholders.

On February 8, 2016, the party to one of the Company’s COAs filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. This customer accounted for 13% of total revenue in 2015. The Company continues to provide logistics services to this customer post-petition and has been compensated for services provided post-petition. The majority of pre-petition accounts receivable has been reserved for in accordance with the Company’s policy regarding allowances for doubtful accounts. The Company will continue to closely monitor the developments in the bankruptcy proceedings; however, as of the time of this filing, we do not expect any disruption to the services we provide under this contract.

We are a holding company, and depend on the ability of our subsidiaries, through which we operate our business, to distribute funds to us in order to satisfy our financial obligations or to make dividend payments.
 
We are a holding company, and our subsidiaries conduct all of our operations and own all of our operating assets. The equity interests in our vessel-owning subsidiaries represent a significant portion of our operating assets. As a result, our ability to satisfy our financial obligations and to pay dividends to our shareholders depends on the ability of our subsidiaries to generate profits available for distribution to us and, to the extent that they are unable to generate profits, we will be unable to pay dividends to our shareholders.
 
We are subject to certain risks with counterparties on contracts and the failure of such counterparties to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or otherwise adversely affect our business and ability to comply with covenants in our loan agreements.
 
We enter into various contracts that are material to the operation of our business, including COAs, time charters and voyage charters under which we employ our vessels, and charter agreements under which we charter-in vessels. We also enter into loan agreements and hedging agreements, such as interest rate swap agreements, bunker swap agreements, and forward freight agreements, or FFAs. Such agreements subject us to counterparty risks. The ability and willingness of each of our counterparties to perform its obligations under a contract with us will depend on a number of factors that are beyond our control, including, among other things, general economic conditions, the condition of the drybulk shipping industry, the overall financial condition of our counterparty, prevailing prices for drybulk cargoes, rates received for specific types of vessels and voyages, and various expenses. In addition, in depressed market conditions, our customers may no longer need us to carry a cargo that is currently under contract or may be able to obtain carriage at a lower rate. If our customers fail to meet their obligations to us or attempt to renegotiate our employment agreements it may be difficult to secure suitable substitute employment for such vessel, and any new charter arrangements we secure may be at lower rates or, if our counterparties fail to deliver a vessel we have agreed to charter-in, or if a counterparty otherwise fails to honor its obligations to us under a contract, we could sustain significant losses which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, ability to pay dividends to holders of our common shares in the amounts anticipated or at all and compliance with covenants in our secured loan agreements.
 
Additionally, we are subject to certain risks as a result of using our vessels as collateral. If we are in breach of financial covenants contained in our loan agreements, we may not be successful in obtaining waivers and amendments. If our indebtedness is accelerated, it may be difficult in the current financing environment for us to refinance our debt or obtain additional financing and we could lose our vessels if our lenders foreclose on their liens. Please see “— We may be unable to comply with covenants in our credit facilities or any future financial obligations that impose operating and financial restrictions on us.”
 



31



We may be unable to comply with covenants in our credit facilities or any future financial obligations that impose operating and financial restrictions on us.
 
Our credit facilities, which are secured by mortgages on our vessels, impose certain operating and financial restrictions on us, mainly to ensure that the market value of the mortgaged vessel under the applicable credit facility does not fall below a certain percentage of the outstanding amount of the loan, which we refer to as the collateral maintenance or loan to value ratio. In addition, certain of our credit facilities include other financial covenants, which require us to, among other things, maintain:
 
a consolidated leverage ratio of not more than 200%;

a consolidated debt service ratio of not less than 125%;

Minimum consolidated net worth of $45 million;

consolidated minimum liquidity of not less than $16 million plus $1 million for each additional vessel we acquire

In general, the operating restrictions that are contained in our credit facilities may prohibit or otherwise limit our ability to, among other things:
 
effect changes in management of our vessels;

sell or dispose of any of our assets, including our vessels;

declare and pay dividends;

incur additional indebtedness;

mortgage our vessels; and

incur and pay management fees or commissions.

Non-compliance with any of our financial covenants or operating restrictions contained in our credit facilities may constitute an event of default under our credit facilities, which, unless cured within the grace period set forth under the applicable credit facility, if applicable, or waived or modified by our lenders, provides our lenders with the right to, among other things, require us to post additional collateral, enhance our equity and liquidity, increase our interest payments, pay down our indebtedness to a level where we are in compliance, sell vessels in our fleet, reclassify our indebtedness as current liabilities, accelerate our indebtedness, or foreclose their liens on our vessels and the other assets securing the credit facilities, which would impair our ability to continue to conduct our business.
 
As of December 31, 2015, we were in not in compliance with certain covenants contained in our debt agreements and had to obtain waivers from the facility agents. Please read “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Borrowing Activities.”
 
Furthermore, certain of our credit facilities contain a cross-default provision that may be triggered by a default under one of our other credit facilities. A cross-default provision means that a default on one loan would result in a default on certain other loans. Because of the presence of cross-default provisions in certain of our credit facilities, the refusal of any one lender under our credit facilities to grant or extend a waiver could result in certain of our indebtedness being accelerated. If our secured indebtedness is accelerated in full or in part, it would be very difficult in the current financing environment for us to refinance our debt or obtain additional financing and we could lose our vessels and other assets securing our credit facilities if our lenders foreclose their liens, which would adversely affect our ability to conduct our business.
 
Moreover, in connection with any waivers of or amendments to our credit facilities that we may obtain, our lenders may impose additional operating and financial restrictions on us or modify the terms of our existing credit facilities. These restrictions may further restrict our ability to, among other things, pay dividends, make capital expenditures or incur additional indebtedness, including through the issuance of guarantees. In addition, our lenders may require the payment of additional fees, require prepayment of a portion of our indebtedness to them, accelerate the amortization schedule for our indebtedness and increase the interest rates they charge us on our outstanding indebtedness. For more information, please read “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Borrowing Activities.”
 

32



We may be unable to effectively manage our growth strategy.
 
One of our principal business strategies is to continue to expand capacity and flexibility by increasing our owned fleet as we secure additional demand for our services. Our growth strategy will depend upon a number of factors, some of which may not be within our control. These factors include our ability to:
 
enter into new contracts for the transportation of cargoes;

locate and acquire suitable vessels for acquisitions at attractive prices;

obtain required financing for our existing and new operations;

integrate any acquired vessels successfully with our existing operations, including obtaining any approvals and qualifications necessary to operate vessels that we acquire;

enhance our customer base;

hire, train and retain qualified personnel and crew to manage and operate our growing business and fleet;

identify additional new markets; and

improve our operating, financial and accounting systems and controls.

We intend to finance our growth with the funds that were made available to the Company upon consummation of the Mergers, and may undertake future financings. Our failure to effectively identify, purchase, develop and integrate any vessels could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. The number of employees that perform services for us and our current operating and financial systems may not be adequate as we implement our plan to expand the size of our fleet, and we may not be able to effectively hire more employees or adequately improve those systems. Finally, acquisitions may require additional equity issuances or debt issuances (with amortization payments), both of which could lower our available cash. If any such events occur, our financial condition may be adversely affected.
 
Growing any business presents numerous risks such as difficulty in obtaining additional qualified personnel and managing relationships with customers and suppliers. The expansion of our fleet may impose significant additional responsibilities on our management and staff, and may necessitate that we increase the number of personnel. We cannot give any assurance that we will be successful in executing our growth plans or that we will not incur significant expenses and losses in connection with our future growth.
 
Investment in Forward Freight Agreements and other derivative instruments could result in losses.
 
We manage our market exposure using forward freight agreements, or FFAs, and other derivative instruments, such as bunker hedging contracts and interest rate swap agreements. FFAs are cash-settled derivative contracts based on future freight delivery rates and other derivative instruments. FFAs may be used to hedge exposure to the charter markets by providing for the purchase or sale of a contracted charter rate along a specified route or combination of routes and over a specified period of time. Upon settlement, if the contracted charter rate is less than the settlement rate, the seller of the FFA is required to pay the buyer an amount equal to the difference between the contracted rate and the settlement rate, multiplied by the number of days in the specified period. Conversely, if the contracted rate is greater than the settlement rate, the buyer is required to pay the seller the settlement sum. If we take positions in FFAs and do not correctly anticipate rate movements for the specified vessel route or routes and relevant time period or our assumptions regarding the relative relationships of certain vessels’ earnings, routes and other factors relevant to the FFA markets are incorrect, we could suffer losses in settling or terminating our FFAs. In addition, we cannot guarantee that such hedges will qualify for special hedge accounting and, as such, our use of such derivatives may lead to material fluctuations in our results of operations. 

We also seek to manage our exposure to volatility in the market price of bunkers and interest rate fluctuations by entering into bunker hedging contracts and interest rate swap agreements. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully limit our risks, leaving us exposed to unprofitable contracts and we may suffer significant losses from these hedging activities.
 



33



Our long-term COAs, single charter bookings and time-charter agreements may result in significant fluctuations in our quarterly results, which may adversely affect our liquidity, as well as our ability to satisfy our financial obligations.
 
As part of our business strategy, we enter into long-term COAs, single charter bookings and time-charter agreements. We evaluate entering into long-term positions based on the expected return over the full term of the contract. However, long-term contracts that we believe provide attractive returns over their full term may produce losses over portions of the contract period. We may be required to provide additional margin collateral in connection with FFA positions that are settled through clearinghouses, depending upon movements in the FFA markets. These interim losses, fluctuations in our quarterly results or incremental collateral requirements may adversely affect our financial liquidity, as well as our ability to satisfy our financial obligations.
 
We depend on COAs, which could require us to operate at unfavorable rates for a certain amount of time or subject us to other operating risks.
 
A significant portion of our revenues are derived from COAs. While COAs provide a relatively stable and predictable source of revenue, they typically fix the rate we are paid for our drybulk shipping services. Once we have entered into a COA, if we have not correctly anticipated vessel rates, location and availability for our owned or chartered-in fleet to fulfill the COA, we could suffer losses. Moreover, factors beyond our control may cause the rates we are paid under that COA to become unprofitable. Nevertheless, we would be obligated to continue to perform at these rates for the term of the COA. In addition, factors beyond our control, such as vessel availability, port delays or congestion, changes in government or industry rules or regulation, industrial actions or acts of terrorism or war, could affect our ability to perform our obligations under our COAs, which could result in breach of contract or other claims by our COA counterparties. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and financial condition.
 
We are a “smaller reporting company” and we cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies will make our common shares less attractive to investors.
 
We are a “smaller reporting company,” as defined in the Securities Act of 1934, and we may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies. These exemptions include not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Sarbanes-Oxley and reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements. Such exemptions may be available until the our public float exceeds $75 million as of the last day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter. Investors may find our common shares and the price of our common shares less attractive because we rely, or may rely, on these exemptions. If some investors find our common shares less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common shares and the price of our common shares may be more volatile.
 
Obligations associated with being a public company require significant company resources and management attention, and we will incur increased costs as a result of being a public company.
 
We will continue to be subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and the other rules and regulations of the SEC, including Sarbanes-Oxley, and requirements of the NASDAQ Global Select Market. These requirements and rules may place a strain on our systems and resources. For example, the Exchange Act requires that we file annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition and Sarbanes-Oxley requires that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. These reporting and other obligations will place significant demands on our management, administrative, operational and accounting resources and will cause us to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we had not previously incurred. The expenses incurred by public companies, generally, for reporting and corporate governance purposes have been increasing and the costs we will incur for such purposes may strain our resources. We expect these rules and regulations to increase our legal and financial compliance costs, divert management's attention to ensure compliance and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly. We may need to upgrade our systems or create new systems, implement additional financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures, create or outsource an internal audit function, and hire additional accounting and finance staff. If we are unable to accomplish these objectives in a timely and effective fashion, our ability to comply with the financial reporting requirements and other rules that apply to reporting companies could be impaired. In addition, our limited management resources may exacerbate the difficulties in complying with these reporting and other requirements while focusing on executing our business strategy. Our incremental general and administrative expenses as a publicly traded corporation will include costs associated with reports to shareholders, tax returns, investor relations, registrar and transfer agent’s fees, incremental director and officer liability insurance costs and director compensation. We cannot predict or estimate the amount of the additional costs we may incur, the timing of such costs or the degree of impact that our management’s attention to these matters will have on our business. Any failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects,

34



liquidity, results of operations and financial condition. Furthermore, if we are unable to satisfy our obligations as a public company, we could be subject to delisting of our common shares, fines, sanctions and other regulatory action.
 
We are required to comply with certain provisions of Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley, although as a smaller reporting company, we will be exempt from certain of its requirements for so long as we remain as such. For example, Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley requires that we and our independent auditors report annually on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, however, as a smaller reporting company, we may take advantage of an exemption from the auditor attestation requirement. Once we are no longer a smaller reporting company or, if prior to such date, we opt to no longer take advantage of the applicable exemption, we will be required to include an opinion from our independent auditors on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. Management, however, is not exempt from this requirement, and is required to, among other things, maintain and periodically evaluate our internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. In particular, we will need to perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow us to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, as required.
 
A failure to pass inspection by classification societies could result in one or more vessels being unemployable unless and until they pass inspection, resulting in a loss of revenues from such vessels for that period and a corresponding decrease in earnings.
 
The hull and machinery of every commercial vessel must be classed by a classification society authorized by its country of registry. The classification society certifies that a vessel is safe and seaworthy in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the country of registry of the vessel and the United Nations Safety of Life at Sea Convention. Our owned fleet is currently enrolled with Bureau Veritas (BV), De Norske Veritas (DNV), and Nippon Kaiji Kyokai (NK).
 
A vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys and special surveys. In lieu of a special survey, a vessel’s machinery may be on a continuous survey cycle, under which the machinery would be surveyed periodically over a five-year period. Our vessels are on special survey cycles for hull inspection and continuous survey cycles for machinery inspection. Every vessel must undergo regulatory surveys of its underwater parts every 30 to 60 months.
 
If a vessel fails any annual survey, intermediate survey or special survey, the vessel may be unable to trade between ports and, therefore, would be unemployable, potentially causing a negative impact on our revenues due to the loss of revenues from such vessel until it was able to trade again.
 
If we purchase and operate secondhand vessels, we may be exposed to increased operating costs which could adversely affect our earnings and, as our fleet ages, the risks associated with older vessels could adversely affect our ability to obtain profitable charters.
 
As part of our current business strategy to increase our owned fleet, we may acquire new and secondhand vessels. While we typically inspect secondhand vessels prior to purchase, this does not provide us with the same knowledge about their condition that we would have had if these vessels had been built for and operated exclusively by us. Even if we physically inspect a secondhand vessel, an inspection does not provide us with the same knowledge about its condition that we would have if the vessel had been operated exclusively by us. Accordingly, we may not discover defects or other problems with secondhand vessels prior to purchase or charter, or may incur costs to terminate a purchase agreement. Any such hidden defects or problems, when detected, may be expensive to repair, and if not detected, may result in accidents or other incidents for which we may become liable to third parties.
 
In general, the costs to maintain a vessel in good operating condition increase with the age of the vessel. Older vessels are typically less fuel-efficient than more recently constructed vessels due to improvements in engine technology. Cargo insurance rates increase with the age of a vessel, making older vessels less desirable to charterers.
 
Furthermore, governmental regulations, safety or other equipment standards related to the age of vessels may require expenditures for alterations, or the addition of new equipment, to our vessels and may restrict the type of activities in which the vessels may engage. As our vessels age, market conditions may not justify those expenditures or enable us to operate our vessels profitably during the remainder of their useful lives.
 
Unless we set aside reserves or are able to borrow funds for vessel replacement, we will be unable to replace the vessels in our fleet at the end of their useful lives.
 
We estimate the useful life of most of our vessels to be 25 years to 30 years from the date of initial delivery from the shipyard. The remaining estimated useful lives of our fleet range from 4 to 25 years, depending on the type of vessel and market conditions. The average age of our owned drybulk carriers at the time of this filing is approximately 10 years. A portion of our cash flows and income are dependent on the revenues earned by employing our vessels. If we are unable to replace the vessels in our fleet

35



upon the expiration of their useful lives, our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to pay dividends could be materially and adversely affected. We currently do not maintain reserves for vessel replacements. We intend to finance vessel replacements from internally generated cash flow, borrowings under our credit facilities or additional equity or debt offerings.

Our ability to obtain additional debt financing, or refinance any existing indebtedness, may be dependent on the performance and length of our COAs and charters and the creditworthiness of our contract counterparties.
 
The performance and length of our COAs and charters and the actual or perceived credit quality of our contract counterparties, and any defaults by them, may materially affect our ability to obtain the additional capital resources required to purchase additional vessels or may significantly increase our costs of obtaining such capital. Our inability to obtain additional financing on acceptable terms or at all may materially affect our results of operations and our ability to implement our business strategy.
 
We intend to partially finance acquisitions of vessels with borrowings drawn under credit facilities. While we may refinance amounts drawn under our credit facilities with the net proceeds of future debt and equity offerings, we cannot assure you that we will be able to do so at interest rates and on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. If we are not able to refinance these amounts with the net proceeds of debt and equity offerings at an interest rate or on terms acceptable to us or at all, we will have to dedicate a larger portion of our cash flow from operations to pay the principal and interest of this indebtedness. If we are not able to satisfy these obligations, we may have to undertake alternative financing plans. The actual or perceived credit quality of our contract counterparties, any defaults by them and the market value of our fleet, among other things, may materially affect our ability to obtain alternative financing. In addition, debt service payments under our credit facilities or alternative financing may limit funds otherwise available for working capital, capital expenditures, the payment of dividends and other purposes. If we are unable to meet our debt obligations, or if we otherwise default under our credit facilities or alternative financing arrangements, our lenders could declare the debt, together with accrued interest and fees, to be immediately due and payable and foreclose on our fleet, which could result in the acceleration of other indebtedness that we may have at such time and the commencement of similar foreclosure proceedings by other lenders.
 
We depend on our Chief Executive Officer, our Chief Financial Officer and other key employees, and the loss of their services would have a material adverse effect on our business, results and financial condition.
 
We depend on the efforts, knowledge, skill, reputations and business contacts of our Chief Executive Officer, Edward Coll, and our Chief Financial Officer, Anthony Laura, and other key employees including Claus Boggild, Mads Boye Petersen, Peter Koken, Robert Seward, Fotis Doussopoulos, and Gianni Del Signore. Accordingly, our success will depend on the continued service of these individuals. We do not have employment agreements with our executive officers. We may experience departures of senior executive officers and other key employees, and we cannot predict the impact that any of their departures would have on our ability to achieve our financial objectives. The loss of the services of any of them could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
 
We may be subject to litigation, arbitration and other proceedings that could have an adverse effect on our business
 
We may be, from time to time, involved in various litigation matters arising in the ordinary course of business, or otherwise. These matters may include, among other things, contract disputes, personal injury claims, environmental matters, governmental claims for taxes or duties, securities, or maritime matters. The potential costs to resolve any claim or other litigation matter, or a combination of these, may have a material adverse effect on us because of potential negative outcomes, the costs associated with asserting our claims or defending such lawsuits, and the diversion of management's attention to these matters.
 
United States tax authorities could treat us as a “passive foreign investment company,” which could have adverse United States federal income tax consequences to U.S. holders
 
A foreign corporation will be treated as a “passive foreign investment company,” or PFIC, for United States federal income tax purposes if either (1) at least 75% of its gross income for any taxable year consists of certain types of “passive income” or (2) at least 50% of the average value of the corporation's assets produce or are held for the production of those types of “passive income.” For purposes of these tests, “passive income” includes dividends, interest, and gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. For purposes of these tests, income derived from the performance of services does not constitute “passive income.” United States shareholders of a PFIC are subject to a disadvantageous United States federal income tax regime with respect to the income derived by the PFIC, the distributions they receive from the PFIC and the gain, if any, they derive from the sale or other disposition of their shares in the PFIC.
 

36



Based on our proposed method of operation, we do not believe that we will be a PFIC with respect to any taxable year. In this regard, we intend to treat the gross income we derive or are deemed to derive from our time chartering activities as services income, rather than rental income. Accordingly, we believe that our income from our time chartering activities does not constitute “passive income,” and the assets that we own and operate in connection with the production of that income do not constitute passive assets.
 
There is, however, no direct legal authority under the PFIC rules addressing our proposed method of operation. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that the United States Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, or a court of law will accept our position, and there is a risk that the IRS or a court of law could determine that we are a PFIC. Moreover, no assurance can be given that we would not constitute a PFIC for any future taxable year if there were to be changes in the nature and extent of our operations.
 
If the IRS were to find that we are or have been a PFIC for any taxable year, our United States shareholders will face adverse United States tax consequences. Under the PFIC rules, unless those shareholders make an election available under the Code (which election could itself have adverse consequences for such shareholders), such shareholders would be liable to pay United States federal income tax at the then prevailing income tax rates on ordinary income plus interest upon excess distributions and upon any gain from the disposition of our common shares, as if the excess distribution or gain had been recognized ratably over the shareholder’s holding period of our common shares.
 
We may have to pay tax on United States source income, which would reduce our earnings
 
Under sections 863(c)(3) and 887(a) of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the “Code,” 50% of the gross shipping income of a vessel owning or chartering corporation, such as ourselves and our subsidiaries, that is attributable to transportation that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States may be subject to a 4% United States federal income tax without allowance for deduction, unless that corporation qualifies for exemption from tax under section 883 of the Code and the applicable Treasury Regulations recently promulgated thereunder.
 
We expect that we and each of our subsidiaries qualify for this statutory tax exemption and we will take this position for United States federal income tax return reporting purposes. However, there are factual circumstances beyond our control that could cause us to lose the benefit of this tax exemption and thereby become subject to United States federal income tax on our United States source income. Due to the factual nature of the issues involved, we can give no assurances on our tax-exempt status or that of any of our subsidiaries.
 
If we or our subsidiaries are not entitled to exemption under Code section 883 for any taxable year, we or our subsidiaries could be subject for those years to an effective 2% United States federal income tax on the shipping income these companies derive during the year that are attributable to the transport of cargoes to or from the United States. The imposition of this taxation would have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased earnings available for distribution to our shareholders.
 
We have had and in the future may identify material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting that may cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations or result in material misstatements of our financial statements
 
Our management team is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. 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 in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

Prior to the Mergers, the Company was not a public reporting company and did not have a sufficient number of accounting personnel or adequate systems to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting. We and our independent registered public accounting firm identified material weaknesses during the preparation of our financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014. During 2015, we made significant improvements to our internal controls and remediated the material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting identified in 2014. While these measures correct the material weaknesses identified by us or our independent registered public accounting firm, we cannot assure that there will not be other material weaknesses that we or our independent registered public accounting firm will identify. If additional material weaknesses in our internal controls are discovered in the future, they may adversely affect our ability to record, process, summarize, and report financial information timely and accurately.

 



37



Risks Related To Our Common Shares
 
Future sales of our common shares could cause the market price of our common shares to decline.
 
The market price of our common shares could decline due to sales of a large number of shares in the market, including sales of shares by our large shareholders, or the perception that these sales could occur.  These sales could also make it more difficult or impossible for us to sell equity securities in the future at a time and price that we deem appropriate to raise funds through future offerings of common shares. 
 
We may need to raise additional capital in the future, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all or which may dilute our common shares or adversely affect its market price.
 
We may require additional capital to expand our business and increase revenues, add liquidity in response to negative economic conditions, meet unexpected liquidity needs caused by industry volatility or uncertainty and reduce our outstanding indebtedness under our existing facilities. To the extent that our existing capital and borrowing capabilities are insufficient to meet these requirements and cover any losses, we will need to raise additional funds through debt or equity financings, including offerings of our common shares, securities convertible into our common shares, or rights to acquire our common shares, or curtail our growth and reduce our assets or restructure arrangements with existing security holders. Any equity or debt financing, or additional borrowings, if available at all, may be on terms that are not favorable to us. Equity financings could result in dilution to our shareholders, as described further below, and the securities issued in future financings may have rights, preferences and privileges that are senior to those of our common shares. If our need for capital arises because of significant losses, the occurrence of these losses may make it more difficult for us to raise the necessary capital. If we cannot raise funds on acceptable terms if and when needed, we may not be able to take advantage of future opportunities, grow our business or respond to competitive pressures or unanticipated requirements.
 
Future issuances of our common shares could dilute our shareholders’ interests in our company.
 
We may, from time to time, issue additional common shares to support our growth strategy, reduce debt or provide us with capital for other purposes that our Board of Directors believes to be in our best interest.  To the extent that an existing shareholder does not purchase additional shares that we may issue, that shareholder’s interest in our company will be diluted, which means that its percentage of ownership in our company will be reduced.  Following such a reduction, that shareholder’s common shares would represent a smaller percentage of the vote in our Board of Directors’ elections and other shareholder decisions.
 
Volatility in the market price and trading volume of our common shares could adversely impact the trading price of our common shares.
 
The stock market in recent years has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of companies like us. These broad market factors may materially reduce the market price of our common shares, regardless of our operating performance. The market price of our common shares, which has experienced significant price and volume fluctuations in recent months, could continue to fluctuate significantly for many reasons, including in response to the risks described herein or for reasons unrelated to our operations, such as reports by industry analysts, investor perceptions or negative announcements by our competitors or suppliers regarding their own performance, as well as industry conditions and general financial, economic and political instability. A decrease in the market price of our common shares would adversely impact the value of your common shares.
 
Classified Board of Directors.
 
Our Board of Directors are divided into three classes of directors serving staggered, three-year terms beginning upon the expiration of the initial term for each class. This classified board provision could discourage a third party from making a tender offer for our shares or attempting to obtain control of us.  It could also delay shareholders who do not agree with the policies of our Board of Directors from removing a majority of our Board of Directors for up to two years.
 
Our senior executive officers and directors may not be able to successfully organize and manage a publicly traded company.
 
Not all of our senior executive officers or directors have previously organized and managed a publicly traded company, and they may not be successful in doing so. The demands of organizing and managing a publicly traded company, like ours, is much greater as compared to those of a private company, and some of our senior executive officers and directors may not be able to successfully meet those increased demands.
 

38



We are incorporated in Bermuda and it may not be possible for our investors to enforce U.S. judgments against us.
 
We are incorporated in Bermuda and substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States. In addition, one of our directors is a non-resident of the United States, and all or a substantial portion of such director’s assets are located outside the United States. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for U.S. investors to serve process within the United States. upon us or our directors and executive officers, or to enforce a judgment against us for civil liabilities in United States courts.
 
In addition, you should not assume that courts in the countries in which we are incorporated or where our assets are located would enforce judgments of United States courts obtained in actions against us based upon the civil liability provisions of applicable United States federal and state securities laws or would enforce, in original actions, liabilities against us based on those laws.
 
Because we are a foreign corporation, you may not have the same rights that a shareholder in a U.S. corporation may have.
 
We are a Bermuda exempted company. Our memorandum of association and bye-laws and the Companies Act, 1981 of Bermuda, or the Companies Act, govern our affairs. The Companies Act does not as clearly establish your rights and the fiduciary responsibilities of our directors as do statutes and judicial precedent in some United States jurisdictions. Therefore, you may have more difficulty in protecting your interests as a shareholder in the face of actions by the management, directors or controlling shareholders than would shareholders of a corporation incorporated in a United States jurisdiction. There is a statutory remedy under Section 111 of the Companies Act which provides that a shareholder may seek redress in the courts as long as such shareholder can establish that our affairs are being conducted, or have been conducted, in a manner oppressive or prejudicial to the interests of some part of the shareholders, including such shareholder. However, you may not have the same rights that a shareholder in a United States corporation may have.
 
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS.
 
Not applicable.
 
 ITEM 2. PROPERTIES.

Phoenix Bulk Carriers (US) LLC, the administrative agent for the Company, maintains office space at 109 Long Wharf, Newport, Rhode Island 02840. The building is owned by 109 Long Wharf LLC (“Long Wharf”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company since September 1, 2014. Long Wharf was previously owned by certain of the Company’s Executive Officers and Directors. The Company leases office space in Copenhagen, Athens and Singapore.
 
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
 
We have not been involved in any legal proceedings which we believe are likely to have, or have had a significant effect on our business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows, nor are we aware of any proceedings that are pending or threatened which we believe are likely to have a significant effect on our business, financial position, results of operations or liquidity.  From time to time, we may be subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business, principally personal injury and property casualty claims.  We expect that these claims would be covered by insurance, subject to customary deductibles.  Those claims, even if lacking merit, could result in the expenditure of significant financial and managerial resources. 

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
 
Not applicable.


39



PART II.

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.
 
Market Information
 
Our common shares are traded on The Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol PANL. The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices for our common shares for the periods indicated since our common shares began public trading (as PANL) on October 3, 2014.
 
2015
High
Low
 
 
 
Fourth Quarter
$3.65
$2.57
Third Quarter
$3.68
$2.72
Second Quarter
$3.77
$2.22
First Quarter
$4.70
$2.70
 
 
 
2014
High
Low
 
 
 
Fourth Quarter
$10.09
$4.51


Holders
 
As of March 23, 2016, there were approximately 446 holders of record of our common shares.
 
Dividends 

Under our Bye-laws, our board of directors may declare dividends or distributions out of contributed surplus and may also pay interim dividends to be paid in cash, shares of the Company’s stock or any combination thereof. Our board of directors’ objective is to generate competitive returns for our shareholders. Any dividends declared will be in the sole discretion of the board of directors and will depend upon earnings, restrictions in our debt agreements described later in this prospectus, market prospects, current capital expenditure programs and investment opportunities, the provisions of Bermuda law affecting the payment of distributions to shareholders and other factors. Under Bermuda law, the board of directors has no discretion to declare or pay a dividend if there are reasonable grounds for believing that the Company is, or would after the payment be, unable to pay its liabilities as they become due or the realizable value of the Company’s assets would thereby be less than its liabilities.
 
In addition, since we are a holding company with no material assets other than the shares of our subsidiaries through which we conduct our operations, our ability to pay dividends will depend on our subsidiaries’ distributing to us their earnings and cash flows. During the year ended December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, we did not declare any dividends on our common shares. We cannot assure you that we will be able to pay regular quarterly dividends, and our ability to pay dividends will be subject to the limitations set forth above and in the section of this Form 10-K titled “Risk Factors.”
 
Use of Proceeds
 
Not applicable
 
Purchases of Equity Securities by Issuer and Affiliates
 
Not applicable

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plan
 
See Part III, Item 12 for information regarding securities authorized for issuance under our equity compensation plan.


40




 ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA.

(in thousands, except shipping days data)
As of and for the years ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
Selected Data from the Consolidated Statements of Operations
 
Voyage revenue
$
266,673

 
$
345,236

Charter revenue
20,660

 
53,040

Total revenue
287,333

 
398,276

Expenses:
 

 
 

Charter expense
125,635

 
189,475

Voyage expense
75,922

 
149,654

Vessel operating expenses
31,560

 
29,583

General and administrative
14,966

 
12,831

Depreciation and amortization
12,731

 
11,668

Loss on impairment of vessels
5,354

 
11,507

Loss (gain) on sale of vessels
639

 
(3,948
)
Total expenses
266,807

 
400,770

Income from operations
20,526

 
(2,494
)
Total other expense, net
(7,159
)
 
(11,154
)
Net income
13,367

 
(13,648
)
Income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(2,091
)
 
1,519

Net income (loss) attributable to Pangaea Logistics Solutions Ltd.
$
11,276

 
$
(12,129
)
 
 
 
 
Selected Data from the Consolidated Balance Sheets
 

 
 

Cash
$
37,520

 
$
29,818

Total assets
$
366,963

 
$
331,659

Total third-party debt (current and long-term)
$
148,995

 
$
107,434

Total preferred equity and shareholders' equity
$
165,316

 
$
101,198

 
 
 
 
Selected Data from the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
 

 
 
Net cash provided by operating activities
$
26,009

 
$
19,715

Net cash used in investing activities
$
(64,049
)
 
$
(34,297
)
Net cash provided by financing activities
$
45,742

 
$
25,472

Adjusted EBITDA(1)
$
38,611

 
$
20,681

 
 
 
 
Shipping Days(2)
 

 
 

Voyage days
11,671

 
13,056

Time charter days
2,423

 
3,896

Total shipping days
14,094

 
16,952

 
 
 
 
TCE Rates ($/day)(3)
$
11,473

 
$
12,317


(1)
Adjusted EBITDA represents operating earnings before interest expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, loss on impairment of vessels and other non-operating income and/or expense, if any. Adjusted EBITDA is included because it is used by management and certain investors to measure operating performance and is also reviewed periodically as a measure of financial performance by Pangaea's Board of Directors. Adjusted EBITDA is not an item recognized by the generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America, or U.S. GAAP, and should not be considered as an alternative to net income, operating income, or any other indicator of a company's operating performance required by U.S. GAAP. Pangaea’s definition of Adjusted EBITDA used here may not be comparable to the definition of EBITDA used by other companies. A reconciliation of income from operations to Adjusted EBITDA is as follows:

41



Income from operations
 
$
20,526

 
$
(2,494
)
Depreciation and amortization
 
12,731

 
11,668

Loss on impairment of vessels
 
5,354

 
11,507

Adjusted EBITDA
 
$
38,611

 
$
20,681

 
(2)
Shipping days are defined as the aggregate number of days in a period during which its owned or chartered-in vessels are performing either a voyage charter (voyage days) or time charter (time charter days).

(3)
Pangaea defines time charter equivalent, or “TCE,” rates as total revenues less voyage expenses divided by the length of the voyage, which is consistent with industry standards. TCE rate is a common shipping industry performance measure used primarily to compare daily earnings generated by vessels on time charters with daily earnings generated by vessels on voyage charters, because rates for vessels on voyage charters are generally not expressed in per-day amounts while rates for vessels on time charters generally are expressed in such amounts.


42



ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS.
 
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto contained in this report.
 
Forward Looking Statements
 
All statements other than statements of historical fact included in this Form 10-K including, without limitation, statements under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” regarding our financial position, business strategy and the plans and objectives of management for future operations, are forward looking statements. When used in this Form 10-K, words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend” and similar expressions, as they relate to us or our management, identify forward looking statements. Such forward looking statements are based on the beliefs of management, as well as assumptions made by, and information currently available to, our management. Actual results could differ materially from those contemplated by the forward looking statements as a result of the risk factors and other factors detailed in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the risk factors set forth in Part I, Item 1A, above. All subsequent written or oral forward looking statements attributable to us or persons acting on our behalf are qualified in their entirety by this paragraph.
 
Overview 
 
Critical Accounting Policies
 
The discussion and analysis of the Company’s financial condition and results of operations is based upon the Company’s consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of those financial statements requires the Company to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, revenues, expenses and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of its financial statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions and conditions. Significant estimates include the establishment of the allowance for doubtful accounts and the estimate of salvage value used in determining vessel depreciation expense.
 
Critical accounting policies are those that reflect significant judgments or uncertainties and potentially result in materially different results under different assumptions and conditions. The critical accounting policies are revenue recognition, deferred revenue, allowance for doubtful accounts, vessels and depreciation and long-lived assets impairment considerations.
 
Revenue Recognition. Voyage revenues represent revenues earned by the Company, principally from voyage charters. A voyage charter involves the carriage of a specific amount and type of cargo on a load port to discharge port basis, subject to various cargo handling terms. Under a voyage charter, the revenues are earned and recognized ratably over the duration of the voyage. Estimated losses under a voyage charter are provided for in full at the time such losses become probable. Demurrage, which is included in voyage revenues, represents payments by the charterer to the vessel owner when loading and discharging time exceed the stipulated time in the voyage charter. Demurrage is measured in accordance with the provisions of the respective charter agreements and the circumstances under which demurrage revenues arise, and is also earned and recognized ratably over the duration of the voyage to which it pertains. Voyage revenue recognized is presented net of address commissions.

Charter revenues relate to a time charter arrangement under which the Company is paid charter hire on a per day basis for a specified period of time. Revenues from time charters are earned and recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the charter, as the vessel operates under the charter. Revenue is not earned when vessels are offhire.
 
Deferred Revenue. Billings for services for which revenue is not recognized in the current period are recorded as deferred revenue. All deferred revenue recognized in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets is expected to be realized within 12 months of the balance sheet date.
 
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts. The Company provides a specific reserve for significant outstanding accounts that are considered potentially uncollectible in whole or in part. In addition, the Company establishes a reserve equal to approximately 25% of accounts receivable balances that are 30 − 180 days past due and approximately 50% of accounts receivable balances that are 180 or more days past due, and which are not otherwise reserved. The reserve estimates are adjusted as additional information becomes available, or as payments are made.
 
Vessels and Depreciation. Vessels are stated at cost, which includes contract price and acquisition costs. Significant betterments to vessels are capitalized; maintenance and repairs that do not improve or extend the lives of the vessels are expensed as incurred.

43



Depreciation is provided using the straight-line method over the remaining estimated useful lives of the vessels based on cost less salvage value. Each vessel’s salvage value is equal to the product of its lightweight tonnage and an estimated scrap rate of $375 per lightweight ton which was determined by reference to quoted rates and is reviewed annually. The Company estimates the useful life of its vessels to be 25 years to 30 years from the date of initial delivery from the shipyard. The remaining estimated useful lives of the current fleet are 4 − 25 years. The Company does not incur depreciation expense when vessels are taken out of service for drydocking. 
  
Drydocking Expenses and Amortization. Significant upgrades made to the vessels during drydocking are capitalized when incurred and amortized on a straight-line basis over the five year period until the next drydocking. Costs capitalized as part of the drydocking include direct costs incurred to meet regulatory requirements that add economic life to the vessel, that increase the vessel’s earnings capacity or which improve the vessel’s efficiency. Direct costs include the shipyard costs, parts, inspection fees, steel, blasting and painting. Expenditures for normal maintenance and repairs, whether incurred as part of the drydocking or not, are expensed as incurred. Unamortized drydocking costs of vessels that are sold are written off and included in the calculation of the resulting gain or loss on sale.
 
Long-lived Assets Impairment Considerations. The carrying values of the Company’s vessels may not represent their fair market value or the amount that could be obtained by selling the vessel at any point in time because the market prices of second-hand vessels tend to fluctuate with changes in charter rates and the pricing of new vessels. Historically, both charter rates and vessel values tend to be cyclical. The carrying value of each group of vessels (allocated by size, age and major characteristic or trade), which are classified as held and used by the Company, are reviewed for potential impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of a particular group may not be fully recoverable. In such instances, an impairment charge would be recognized if the estimate of the undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of the group and its eventual disposition is less than its carrying value. This assessment is made at the group level, which represents the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of other groups of assets. The asset groups established by the Company are defined by vessel size and major characteristic or trade.
 
The significant factors and assumptions used in the undiscounted projected net operating cash flow analysis include the Company’s estimate of future TCE rates based on current rates under existing charters and contracts or an index TCE rate applicable to the size of the ship. When existing contracts expire, the Company uses an estimated TCE based on actual results and extends these rates out to the end of the vessel’s useful life. TCE rates can be highly volatile, may affect the fair value of the Company’s vessels and may have a significant impact on the Company’s ability to recover the carrying amount of its fleet. Accordingly, the volatility is contemplated in the undiscounted projected net operating cash flow by using a sensitivity analysis based on percent changes in the TCE rates. The Company prepares a series of scenarios in an attempt to capture the range of possible trends and outcomes. For example, in the event that TCE rates over the estimated useful lives of the entire fleet are 10% lower than expected, the impact on the total undiscounted projected net operating cash flow would be a decrease of 22%. Projected net operating cash flows are net of brokerage and address commissions and assume no revenue on scheduled offhire days. The Company uses the current vessel operating expense budget, estimated costs of drydocking and historical general and administrative expenses as the basis for its expected outflows, and applies an inflation factor it considers appropriate. The net of these inflows and outflows, plus an estimated salvage value, constitutes the projected undiscounted future cash flows. If these projected cash flows do not exceed the carrying value of the asset group, an impairment charge would be recognized.
 
At December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company identified a potential impairment indicator by reference to industry-wide estimated market values of its vessel groups. As a result, the Company evaluated each group for impairment by estimating the total undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use of the group and its eventual disposal.

At December 31, 2105, the carrying amount of the m/v Nordic Barents and m/v Nordic Bothnia were determined to be higher than their estimated undiscounted future cash flows because estimated TCE rates anticipated in the analysis have declined. The decrease in TCE rates is due to the fact that these vessels are older and are not preferable in a weakening market where there is an oversupply of newer tonnage. As a result, a loss on impairment of these vessels totaling approximately $5.4 million is included in the consolidated statements of operations.

At December 31, 2014, the carrying amount of the m/v Bulk Discovery was determined to be higher than its estimated undiscounted future cash flows because of the higher than expected estimate of upcoming drydocking costs. At December 31, 2014, the carrying amount of the m/v Nordic Barents and m/v Nordic Bothnia were determined to be higher than their estimated undiscounted future cash flows because the TCE rates anticipated in the Company’s annual budget for 2015, which were used to calculate such cash flows, were lower than the rates forecasted as of the third quarter due to deteriorated market conditions in the fourth quarter. As a result, a loss on impairment of approximately $10.0 million is included in the consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2014. In addition, the Company sold the m/v Bulk Cajun in February 2015. A loss on

44



impairment of approximately $1.5 million was included in the consolidated statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2014 because the vessel was sold for its scrap value, which was less than its carrying amount.
 
The table set forth below indicates the purchase price of the Company’s vessels and the carrying value of each vessel as of December 31, 2015.
 
(In thousands of U.S. dollars)
Vessel Name
 
Date Acquired
 
Size
 
Purchase Price
 
Carrying
Value
m/v Nordic Orion
 
April 2012
 
PMX-1A
 
$
32,363

 
$
29,243

m/v Nordic Odyssey
 
April 2012
 
PMX-1A
 
32,691

 
28,537

m/v Nordic Oshima
 
September 2014
 
PMX-1A
 
33,709

 
32,540

m/v Nordic Odin
 
February 2015
 
PMX-1A
 
32,625

 
32,972

m/v Nordic Olympic
 
February 2015
 
PMX-1A
 
32,600

 
32,781

m/v Bulk Pangaea
 
December 2009
 
PMX
 
26,500

 
19,556

m/v Bulk Patriot
 
October 2011
 
PMX
 
15,350

 
13,733

m/v Bulk Juliana
 
April 2012
 
SMX
 
14,750

 
13,096

m/v Bulk Trident
 
September 2012
 
SMX
 
17,010

 
15,697

m/v Bulk Beothuk
 
February 2013
 
SMX
 
14,197

 
12,653

m/v Bulk Newport
 
September 2013
 
SMX
 
15,546

 
14,109

m/v Nordic Bothnia
 
January 2014
 
HMX-1A
 
7,640

 
3,700

m/v Nordic Barents
 
March 2014
 
HMX-1A
 
7,640

 
3,700

Total
 
 
 
 
 
$
239,556

 
$
252,317

 
The table set forth below indicates the total cost of the Company’s newbuildings on order. As of December 31, 2015, the Company made deposit payments of $42.5 million for the purchase of these newbuildings.
 
(In thousands of U.S. dollars) 
Vessel Name
 
Date Acquired
 
Size
 
Purchase Price
 
Carrying
Value
m/v Nordic Oasis (1)
 
January 2016
 
PMX-1A
 
32,600

 
N/A
Newbuild 5(2)
 
Q1 2017
 
UMX-1C
 
28,950

 
N/A
Newbuild 6(2)
 
Q1 2017
 
UMX-1C
 
28,950

 
N/A
Total
 
 
 
 
 
$
155,725

 
N/A
 
(1)
The m/v Nordic Oasis was delivered to the Company on January 5, 2016.
(2)
The name of the vessel will be determined at the delivery date.

 
Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
 
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
 
In April 2015, the FASB issued an update Accounting Standards Update for Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs. The amendments are intended to simplify the presentation of debt issuance costs. These amendments require that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. The recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs are not affected by the amendments in this ASU. The new standard is effective for interim and annual reporting periods in fiscal years that begin after December 15, 2015 and earlier adoption is permitted. The Company adopted this guidance for the year ended December 31, 2015, and retroactively applied this guidance for the year ended December 31, 2014. Such application did not have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

45




In May 2014, the FASB issued an update Accounting Standards Update for Revenue from Contracts with Customers. The core principle of the guidance is that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The new standard is effective for interim and annual reporting periods in fiscal years that begin after December 15, 2018. The Company is evaluating the impact of the adoption of this guidance to determine whether or not it has a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.
 
In August 2014, the FASB issued an Accounting Standards Update for Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern. Under this new guidance, if conditions or events raise substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern, but the substantial doubt is alleviated as a result of consideration of management’s plans, the entity should disclose information that enables users of the financial statements to understand all of the following:
 
a.
Principal conditions or events that raised substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern (before consideration of management’s plans)

b.
 Management’s evaluation of the significance of those conditions or events in relation to the entity’s ability to meet its obligations

c.
Management’s plans that alleviated substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern.
 
The new standard is effective for annual periods ending after December 15, 2016. The Company does not expect a material impact on its consolidated financial statements as a result of the adoption of this standard.
 
Important Financial and Operational Terms and Concepts
 
The Company uses a variety of financial and operational terms and concepts when analyzing its performance.

These include revenue recognition, deferred revenue, allowance for doubtful accounts, vessels and depreciation and long-lived assets impairment considerations, as defined above as well as the following:
 
Voyage Expenses. The Company incurs expenses for voyage charters, including bunkers (fuel), port charges, canal tolls, brokerage commissions and cargo handling operations, which are expensed as incurred.
 
Charter Expenses. The Company charters in vessels to supplement its owned fleet to support its voyage charter operations. The Company hires vessels under time charters with third party vessel owners, and recognizes the charter hire payments as an expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the charter. Charter hire payments are typically made in advance, and the unrecognized portion is reflected as advance hire in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Under the time charters, the vessel owner is responsible for the vessel operating costs such as crews, maintenance and repairs, insurance, and stores.
 
Vessel Operating Expenses. Vessel operating expenses represent the cost to operate the Company’s owned vessels. Vessel operating expenses include crew hire and related costs, the cost of insurance, expenses relating to repairs and maintenance, the cost of spares and consumable stores, tonnage taxes, other miscellaneous expenses, and technical management fees. These expenses are recognized as incurred. Technical management services include day-to-day vessel operations, performing general vessel maintenance, ensuring regulatory and classification society compliance, arranging the hire of crew, and purchasing stores, supplies, and spare parts.
 
Fleet Data. The Company believes that the measures for analyzing future trends in its results of operations consist of the following:
 
Shipping days. The Company defines shipping days as the aggregate number of days in a period during which its owned or chartered-in vessels are performing either a voyage charter (voyage days) or a time charter (time charter days).
 
Daily vessel operating expenses. The Company defines daily vessel operating expenses as vessel operating expenses divided by ownership days for the period. Vessel operating expenses include crew hire and related costs, the cost of insurance, expenses relating to repairs and maintenance, the costs of spares and consumable stores, tonnage taxes, other miscellaneous expenses, and technical management fees.
 
Chartered in days. The Company defines chartered in days as the aggregate number of days in a period during which it chartered in vessels from third party vessel owners.

46



 
Time Charter Equivalent ‘‘TCE’’ rates. The Company defines TCE rates as total revenues less voyage expenses divided by the length of the voyage, which is consistent with industry standards. TCE rate is a common shipping industry performance measure used primarily to compare daily earnings generated by vessels on time charters with daily earnings generated by vessels on voyage charters, because rates for vessels on voyage charters are generally not expressed in per-day amounts while rates for vessels on time charters generally are expressed in per-day amounts.
 
Overview
 
The seaborne drybulk transportation industry is cyclical and volatile. Demand for drybulk tonnage remains weak, rates are at the lowest point since 1985 and asset values for modern tonnage continue to decline due to the over-supply of dry bulk carriers. The decline in and volatility of charter and freight rates has been due to various factors, including lower crude oil prices, falling demand from China , a strong U.S. Dollar and the associated weakening of other world currencies and the deflationary cycle being experienced in many commodities such as iron ore, coal and agricultural products. Concurrently, with these factors, vessel supply continues to increase. However, this falling rate environment highlighted the differentiation of our business model. Reduced rates mean reduced fronthaul margins, and given our strategy to charter in vessels to serve only contracted business, we deemed it best to reduce our carried volume of chartered-in vessels. This shielded us from excessive losses as compared to a long-term charter-in strategy.
 
Moreover, consistent with our approach to continually optimize our fleet, the Company sold the 30 year old m/v Bulk Cajun on February 26, 2015 and the 1989 built m/v Bulk Discovery on August 17, 2015. We took advantage of the strong secondhand market in the first quarter of 2014 to sell two vessels that no longer fit our overall fleet profile.

Results of Operations
 
Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2015 Compared to Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2014 
 
Revenues
 
Pangaea’s revenues are derived predominantly from voyage charters and time charters. Total revenue for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, was $287.3 million, compared to $398.3 million for the same period in 2014. The number of shipping days decreased 17% from 16,953 in the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014, to 14,094 for the same period in 2015. Pangaea’s strategy is to optimize the number of days a third party vessel is chartered in specifically to match existing cargo commitments in a weak market or to provide excess available days when market conditions improve. The revenue decrease was due to this decrease in the number of shipping days and to the significant decline in market rates stemming from weak demand and an oversupply of drybulk tonnage.The average TCE rate was $11,473 per day for the year ended December 31, 2015, compared to $12,317 per day in 2014.
 
Components of revenue are as follows:

Voyage revenues for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, decreased 23% to $266.7 million from $345.2 million for the same period in 2014. The decrease in voyage revenues was driven by an 11% decrease in voyage days from 13,056 days for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014, to 11,671 days for the same period in 2015; and to the weak market for drybulk transportation. The reduction in voyage days reflects the Company's disciplined strategy of focusing on its core COA business and reducing its exposure to weak market rates. The Baltic Dry Index (“BDI”), a measure of dry bulk market performance, was at its lowest since inception of the index.
 
Charter revenues decreased 61%, from $53.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, to $20.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The decrease in charter revenues was driven by the 38% decrease in time charter days and to the decline in market rates. The number of time charter days decreased to 2,423 days for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, compared to 3,896 days for the same period in 2014. The Company continued to focus on limiting its exposure to decreasing rates by chartering in vessels only to meet the demands of specific COAs and voyage contracts, which reduces the days available to produce time-charter revenue but also reduces the risk that this additional capacity may result in operating losses in a turbulent market.

Voyage Expenses
 
Voyage expenses for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 were $125.6 million, compared to $189.5 million for the same period in 2014, a decrease of approximately 34%. The decrease in voyage expenses was primarily due to the decrease in voyage days as well as the decrease in bunker fuel expenses that resulted from the decline in oil prices. Bunker fuel prices were 65% of

47



total voyage expenses in 2014, but only 48% in 2015. On a per day basis, bunker fuel expense was 44% lower, at $5,224 per day in 2015 as compared to $9,369 in 2014.
 
Charter Expenses
 
Charter expenses paid to third party shipowners decreased to $75.9 million for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 from $149.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. The 49% decrease in charter expenses was due to lower market rates and 26% fewer chartered-in days. In response to lower front haul demand, the Company chartered in ships only to meet committed cargo days to reduce the likelihood of incurring operating losses on chartered-in tonnage.
 
Vessel Operating Expenses
 
Vessel operating expenses for the year ended December 31, 2015 were $31.6 million, compared to $29.6 million in the comparable period in 2014, an increase of approximately 7%.The increase in vessel operating expenses was due to the increase in ownership days. Ownership days are the aggregate number of days in a period the Company has owned each vessel. The increase in ownership days was due to the acquisition of interests in two vessels during 2015, net of the impact of selling two vessels, and to the acquisition of three vessels in 2014 which were owned for the full year. Ownership days increased 5% from 4,721 in 2014 to 4,949 in 2015. The vessel operating expense expressed on a per day basis increased to $6,377 for the year ended December 31, 2015 from $6,268 for the same period in 2014.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses increased $2.1 million to $15.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, from $12.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, most of which is attributable to being a public company. Professional fees increased $0.4 million, predominantly consulting costs incurred for public relations and advisory services. In addition, there was an increase in salary and related expenses, including employee stock compensation, of $0.6 million. Fees paid to directors increased $0.3 million, legal fees increased $0.4 million, partly for review of public company filings, for the defense of a lawsuit brought by a shareholder and for the modification of certain loan agreements, and audit fees increased $0.2 million. This was offset by a decrease of $0.1 million in miscellaneous expenses.
  
Loss on Impairment
 
The Company determined that there was an impairment indicator and performed an analysis of estimated undiscounted cash flows for each of its asset groups (vessels by size, age and special classification). See “Long-lived Assets Impairment Considerations,” above, for details regarding the Company’s accounting for impairment. At December 31, 2015, the carrying amount of the m/v Nordic Barents and m/v Nordic Bothnia were determined to be higher than their estimated undiscounted future cash flows because estimated TCE rates anticipated in the analysis have declined. The decrease in TCE rates is due to the fact that these vessels are older and are not preferable in a weakening market where there is an oversupply of newer tonnage. As a result, a loss on impairment of these vessels totaling approximately $5.4 million is included in the consolidated statements of operations. At December 31, 2014, the carrying amount of the m/v Bulk Discovery was determined to be higher than its estimated undiscounted future cash flows because of the higher than expected estimate of upcoming drydocking costs. Also at December 31, 2014, the carrying amounts of the m/v Nordic Barents and m/v Nordic Bothnia were determined to be higher than their estimated undiscounted future cash flows because the TCE rates anticipated in the Company’s annual budget for 2015, which were used to calculate such cash flows, were lower than the rates forecasted as of the third quarter due to deteriorated market conditions in the fourth quarter. As a result, a loss on impairment of these vessels totaling approximately $10.0 million is included in the consolidated statements of operations. In addition, the Company recorded a loss on impairment of the m/v Bulk Cajun of approximately $1.5 million, because the vessel was sold in February 2015 for its scrap value.
 
Loss (Gain) on Sale of Vessels
 
Consistent with our approach to continually optimize our fleet, we sold our two oldest vessels in 2015 and incurred an aggregate loss of approximately $0.6 million.

We took advantage of the strong secondhand market in the first quarter of 2014 to sell two vessels that no longer fit our overall fleet profile. The sale of m/v Bulk Providence resulted in a gain of approximately $2.2 million and the sale of the m/v Bulk Liberty resulted in a gain of approximately $1.7 million.
 



48




Income (loss) from Operations
 
Income from operations was $20.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, compared to losses from operations of $2.5 million for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014. The increase reflects the Company's disciplined strategy of focusing on its core COA business and reducing its exposure to weak market rates. Higher margins on this core business were made possible by the decrease in bunker fuel cost and to the decrease in the cost to hire third party owned vessels to support these operations. In addition, the charge for losses on impairment of owned vessels was $5.4 million in 2015, as compared to $11.5 million in 2014.  

Unrealized Loss on Derivative Instruments
 
The unrealized loss on derivative instruments represents the decrease in the fair value of bunker swaps. The decline in the value of fuel swaps is due to the decrease in oil prices since the contracts were executed.
 
Other (Expense) Income
 
The decrease in other expense is due to losses in 2014 of approximately $2.1 million incurred in connection with the bankruptcy of the counterparty to certain of the Company’s bunker fuel swaps for positions that had not settled at the time of the bankruptcy filing. In addition, the Company recorded approximately $1.5 million of expenses resulting from legal actions in 2014. No such charges were incurred in 2015.
 
Income Attributable to Non-controlling Interests
 
This amount represents the net income attributable to non-controlling interest in NBH, NBHC, BVH, and Bulk Cajun. Net income attributable to non-controlling interest for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was a gain of $2.1 million and a loss of $1.5 million, respectively. The decrease was predominantly due to the fact that NBH had income of $2.5 million in 2015 as compared to $6.2 million of losses for the year ended December 31, 2014.
 
Liquidity and Capital Resources
 
Liquidity and Cash Needs
 
The Company has historically financed its capital requirements with cash flow from operations, the issuance of convertible redeemable preferred stock, proceeds from related party debt, and proceeds from long-term debt. The Company has used its funds primarily to fund its operations, vessel acquisitions, and the repayment of debt and the associated interest expense. The Company may consider debt or additional equity financing alternatives from time to time. However, if market conditions are negative, the Company may be unable to raise additional debt or equity financing on acceptable terms or at all. As a result, the Company may be unable to pursue opportunities to expand its business.
 
BVH, a 50% owned subsidiary of the Company, has made all of its newbuilding deposits required to date by using funds from related party loans from its shareholders, the Company and ST Shipping and Transport Ltd. (“ST Shipping”) (see the Related Party Transactions section below). The Company believes that ST Shipping will continue to meet the deposit schedule for the newbuildings by making additional related party loans, and will not call any existing related party loans. However, if BVH's shareholders do not provide required funds, BVH would likely need to seek replacement financing, which may not be available on acceptable terms. In such case, the Company may not be able to pursue opportunities to expand its business or meet its other commitments.
 
At December 31, 2015, the Company has a working capital deficit of $2.8 million, due primarily to dividends payable to the Founders and their affiliated entities which will only be paid when cash flow is sufficiently in excess of normal operating requirements. At December 31, 2014, the Company had a working capital deficit of $59.8 million and a net loss of $12.1 million. This working capital deficit was predominantly due to the $49.4 million of related party loans (most of which were converted to equity on December 15, 2015), and loans of approximately $9.7 million payable to the Founders and their affiliated entities. The net loss was due primarily to non-cash loss on impairment of vessels and to other non-operating expenses.
 
Considerations made by management in assessing the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern are its ability to consistently generate positive cash flows from operations, which were approximately $26.0 million in 2015, $19.7 million in 2014 and $21.1 million in 2013; its excess of cash on hand over the current portion of secured long-term debt and its focus on contract employment (COAs). In addition, the Company has demonstrated its ability to adapt to changing market conditions by changing the chartered-in profile to meet its cargo commitments. This is evidenced by the increase in its gross margin (total revenue less

49



voyage, charter hire and vessel operating expenses) which increased to 18.5% in 2015 from 7.4% in 2014. For more information on the results of operations, see Part II. ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Results of Operations.

Capital Expenditures
 
The Company’s capital expenditures relate to the purchase of interests in vessels, and capital improvements to its vessels which are expected to enhance the revenue earning capabilities and safety of these vessels. The Company’s owned fleet includes eight Panamax drybulk carriers (six of which are Ice-Class 1A), four Supramax drybulk carriers and two Handymax drybulk carriers (both of which are Ice-Class 1A).
 
In addition to vessel acquisitions that the Company may undertake in future periods, its other major capital expenditures include funding its program of regularly scheduled drydockings necessary to make improvements to its vessels, as well as to comply with international shipping standards and environmental laws and regulations. The Company has some flexibility regarding the timing of drydocking, but the costs are unpredictable. Funding of these requirements is anticipated to be met with cash from operations. The Company anticipates that this process of recertification will require it to reposition these vessels from a discharge port to shipyard facilities, which will reduce the Company’s available days and operating days during that period. The Company expects to drydock three vessels during 2016 and three vessels during 2017, at an aggregate anticipated cost of $1.5 million and $1.1 million, respectively, not including any unanticipated repairs.
 
The following table summarizes Pangaea’s net cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014:
(In millions of U.S. dollars)
 
2015
 
2014
Net cash provided by operating activities
 
26.0

 
19.7

Net cash used in investing activities
 
(64.0
)
 
(34.3
)
Net cash provided by financing activities
 
45.7

 
25.5

 
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities.  Net cash provided by operating activities during the year ended December 31, 2015 was $26.0 million, compared to net cash provided by operating activities of $19.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2014. The increase is due to changes in operating assets and liabilities, predominantly accounts payable which declined dramatically over the period due to falling fuel prices and fewer voyages; accounts receivable which fluctuates significantly depending on the timing and number of voyages and the days outstanding; and inventory, which varies with the number of voyages in process and with bunker fuel prices.
 
Net Cash Used in Investing Activities.  Net cash used in investing activities during the year ended December 31, 2015 was $64.0 million, compared to $34.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. The Company invested $44.8 million in new vessels in 2015 and $27.2 million in deposits on newbuildings. This was offset by the sale of two vessels for $8.3 million. The Company invested $43.9 million in new vessels in 2014 and $13.1 million in deposits on newbuildings. This was offset by the sale of two vessels for $23.3 million.
 
Net Cash Provided by Financing Activities.  Net cash provided by financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2015 was $45.7 million, compared to $25.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. Joint venture partners provided net financing of $6.9 million in 2015 as compared to $24.3 million in 2014, predominantly for vessel acquisitions and deposits on newbuildings. During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, cash provided through long-term debt was $40.8 million and $5.2 million, respectively, net of payments and financing fees.
 

50



Borrowing Activities
 
 Long-term debt consists of the following:  
 
 
December 31, 2015
 
December 31, 2014
Bulk Pangaea Secured Note (1)
 
$
1,734,375

 
$
3,121,875

Bulk Discovery Secured Note (2)
 

 
3,780,000

Bulk Patriot Secured Note (1)
 
2,312,500

 
4,762,500

Bulk Cajun Secured Note (2)
 

 
853,125

Bulk Trident Secured Note (1)
 
6,375,000

 
7,650,000

Bulk Juliana Secured Note (1)
 
3,718,229

 
5,070,312

Bulk Nordic Odin Ltd., Bulk Nordic Olympic Ltd. Bulk Nordic Odyssey Ltd., Bulk Nordic Orion Ltd. and Bulk Nordic Oshima Ltd. - Amended and Restated Loan Agreement
 
89,625,000

 

Bulk Nordic Odyssey Ltd., Bulk Nordic Orion Ltd and Bulk Nordic Oshima Ltd. Loan Agreement
 

 
51,125,000

Bulk Atlantic Secured Note (2)
 
6,530,000

 
7,890,000

Bulk Phoenix Secured Note (1)
 
7,649,997

 
8,916,665

Term Loan Facility of USD 13,000,000 (Nordic Bulk Barents Ltd. and Nordic Bulk Bothnia Ltd.)
 
10,717,370

 
12,021,730

Bulk Nordic Oasis Ltd. Loan Agreement
 
21,500,000

 

Long Wharf Construction to Term Loan
 
978,210

 
998,148

Total
 
151,140,681

 
106,189,355

Less: current portion
 
(19,499,262
)
 
(17,807,674
)
Less: unamortized bank fees
 
(2,145,266
)
 
(1,755,530
)
Secured long-term debt
 
$
129,496,153

 
$
86,626,151


(1)
The Bulk Pangaea Secured Note, the Bulk Patriot Secured Note, the Bulk Trident Secured Note, the Bulk Juliana Secured Note, and the Bulk Phoenix Secured Note are cross-collateralized by the vessels m/v Bulk Juliana, m/v Bulk Patriot, m/v Bulk Trident, m/v Bulk Pangaea, and m/v Bulk Newport and are guaranteed by the Company.
(2)
The Bulk Atlantic Secured Note collateralized by the vessel m/v Bulk Beothuk and is guaranteed by the Company. The Bulk Discovery Secured Note and the Bulk Cajun Secured Note were repaid in conjunction with the sale of the m/v Bulk Discovery and the m/v Bulk Cajun during 2015.



The Senior Secured Post-Delivery Term Loan Facility
 
On April 15, 2013, the Company, through its wholly-owned subsidiaries, Bulk Pangaea, Bulk Patriot, Bulk Juliana and Bulk Trident, entered into a $30.3 million Senior Secured Post-Delivery Term Loan Facility (the “Post-Delivery Facility”) to refinance the Bulk Pangaea Secured Term Loan Facility dated December 15, 2009, the Bulk Patriot Secured Term Loan Facility dated September 29, 2011, the Bulk Juliana Secured Term Loan Facility dated April 18, 2012, and the Bulk Trident Secured Term Loan Facility dated August 28, 2012, the proceeds of which were used to finance the acquisitions of the m/v Bulk Pangaea, the m/v Bulk Patriot, the m/v Bulk Juliana and the m/v Bulk Trident, respectively. The Post-Delivery Facility was subsequently amended on May 16, 2013 by the First Amendatory Agreement, to increase the facility by $8.0 million to finance the acquisition of the m/v Bulk Providence and again on August 28, 2013, by the Second Amendatory Facility, to increase the facility by $10.0 million to finance the acquisition of the m/v Bulk Newport. The m/v Bulk Providence was sold on May 27, 2014.
 
The Post-Delivery Facility contains financial covenants that require the Company to maintain a minimum consolidated net worth, and requires the Company to maintain a consolidated debt service coverage ratio, tested annually, as defined. In addition, the facility contains other Company and vessel related covenants that, among other things, restricts changes in management and ownership of the vessel, declaration of dividends, further indebtedness and mortgaging of a vessel without the bank’s prior consent. It also requires minimum collateral maintenance, which is tested at the discretion of the lender. As of December 31, 2014 , the Company was not in compliance with the consolidated debt service coverage ratio. Accordingly, the Company obtained

51



a waiver from the Facility Agent through December 31, 2015. As a result, the Company is not required to test and is therefore in compliance with the consolidated debt service ratio at December 31, 2015.
 
The Post-Delivery Facility is divided into five tranches, as follows:
 
Bulk Pangaea Secured Note

Initial amount of $12,250,000, entered into in December 2009, for the acquisition of m/v Bulk Pangaea. The interest rate was fixed at 3.96% in April 2013, in conjunction with the post-delivery amendment discussed above. The amendment also modified the repayment schedule to 15 equal quarterly payments of $346,875 ending in January 2017.
 
Bulk Patriot Secured Note

Initial amount of $12,000,000, entered into in September 2011, for the acquisition of the m/v Bulk Patriot. Loan requires repayment in 24 equal quarterly installments of $500,000 beginning in January 2012. The interest rate was fixed at 4.01% in April 2013 in conjunction with the post-delivery amendment discussed above.
 
Bulk Trident Secured Note

Initial amount of $10,200,000, entered into in April 2012, for the acquisition of the m/v Bulk Trident. Loan requires repayment in 24 equal quarterly installments of $318,750 beginning in December 2012 with a balloon payment of $2,550,000 together with the last quarterly installment. Interest was fixed at 4.29% in April 2013 in conjunction with the post-delivery amendment discussed above.

Bulk Juliana Secured Note

Initial amount of $8,112,500, entered into in April 2012, for the acquisition of the m/v Bulk Juliana. Loan requires repayment in 24 equal quarterly installments of $338,021 beginning in October 2012. Interest was fixed at 4.38% in April 2013 in conjunction with the post-delivery amendment discussed above.
 
Bulk Phoenix Secured Note

Initial amount of $10,000,000, entered into in May 2013, for the acquisition of m/v Bulk Newport. Loan requires repayment in 7 equal quarterly installments of $216,667 and 16 equal quarterly installments of $416,667 with a balloon payment of $1,816,659 due in July 2019. Interest is fixed at 5.09%
 
Other secured debt:
 
Bulk Cajun Secured Note

Initial amount of $4,550,000, entered into in October 2011, for the acquisition of the m/v Bulk Cajun. Loan required repayment in 16 equal quarterly installments of $284,375 beginning in January 2012 with a balloon payment of $2,000,000 together the last quarterly installment. Interest was fixed at 6.51%. This note was repaid in February 2015 in conjunction with the sale of the m/v Bulk Cajun.
 
Bulk Discovery Secured Note

Initial amount of $9,120,000, entered into in February 2011, for the acquisition of the m/v Bulk Discovery. Loan required repayment in 20 equal quarterly installments of $356,000 beginning in June 2011 with a balloon payment of $2,000,000 together with the last quarterly installment. Interest was fixed at a rate of 8.16%. This note was repaid in July 2015. 

Bulk Atlantic Secured Note

Initial amount of $8,520,000, entered into on February 18, 2013, for the acquisition of m/v Bulk Beothuk. Loan requires repayment in 8 equal quarterly installments of $90,000 beginning in May 2013, 12 equal quarterly installments of $295,000 and a balloon payment of $4,260,000 due in February 2018. Interest is fixed at 6.46%. In November 2015, the Company paid an additional $385,000 of the note to remain in compliance with the collateral maintenance clause.


52



The other secured debt, as outlined above, contains a ratio of EBITDA to fixed charges clause and a collateral maintenance ratio clause. If the Company encountered a change in financial condition which, in the opinion of the lender, is likely to affect the Company’s ability to perform its obligations under the loan facility, the Company’s credit agreement could be cancelled at the lender’s sole discretion. The lender could then elect to declare the indebtedness, together with accrued interest and other fees, to be immediately due and payable, and proceed against any collateral securing such indebtedness. As of December 31, 2015, the Company is in compliance with these clauses. As December 31, 2014, the Company was not in compliance with the EBITDA to fixed charges ratio. Accordingly, the Company obtained a waiver from the Facility Agent.

The Bulk Nordic Odyssey and Bulk Nordic Orion Loan Agreement dated August 6, 2012

Initial amount of $40,000,000, was entered into in order to fund the acquisition of the m/v Nordic Odyssey and the m/v Nordic Orion. The loan was amended on September 17, 2014 in conjunction with the delivery of the m/v Nordic Oshima and repaid in conjunction with the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement dated September 18, 2015, which is discussed below.

Senior Secured Term Loan Facility of USD 45,000,000 (Bulk Nordic Odin Ltd. and Bulk Nordic Olympic Ltd.)

On January 28, 2015, Bulk Nordic Odin Ltd. and Bulk Nordic Olympic Ltd. entered into a senior secured term loan facility to finance the acquisition of the m/v Nordic Odin and the m/v Nordic Olympic. This agreement was amended and restated on September 18, 2015 as discussed below.

The Bulk Nordic Odin Ltd., Bulk Nordic Olympic Ltd., Bulk Nordic Odyssey Ltd., Bulk Nordic Orion Ltd. and Bulk Nordic Oshima Ltd. - Amended and Restated Loan Agreement dated September 18, 2015.

The amended agreement advanced $21,750,000 in respect of each the m/v Nordic Odin and the m/v Nordic Olympic, $13,500,000 in respect of each the m/v Nordic Odyssey and the m/v Nordic Orion and $21,000,000 in respect of the m/v Nordic Oshima.

The agreement requires repayment of the advances as follows:

In respect of the Odin and Olympic advances of $21,750,000 each, with repayment to be made in twenty-eight equal quarterly installments of $375,000 per borrower (one of which was paid prior to the amendment by each borrower) and balloon payments of $12,000,000 due with each of the final installments. Interest on these advances is floating at LIBOR plus 2.00% (2.61% at December 31, 2015).

In respect of the Odyssey and Orion advances of $13,500,000 each, with repayment to be made in twenty equal quarterly installments of $375,000 and balloon payments of $6,000,000 due with each of the final installments. Interest on these advances is floating at LIBOR plus 2.40% (3.01% at December 31, 2015).

In respect of the Oshima advance of $21,000,000, twenty-eight equal quarterly installments of $375,000 (four of which were paid prior to the amendment) and a balloon payment of $12,000,000 due with the final installment. Interest on this advance is floating at LIBOR plus 2.25% (2.86% at December 31, 2015).

The amended loan is secured by first preferred mortgages on the m/v Nordic Odin, the m/v Nordic Olympic, the m/v Nordic Odyssey, the m/v Nordic Orion and m/v Nordic Oshima, the assignment of earnings, insurances and requisite compensation of the five entities, and by guarantees of their shareholders.

Additionally, the agreement contains a collateral maintenance ratio clause which requires the aggregate fair market value of the vessel plus the net realizable value of any additional collateral previously provided to remain above defined ratios. As of December 31, 2015, the Company was in compliance with this covenant.

The Bulk Nordic Oasis Ltd. - Loan Agreement -- Dated December 11, 2015

The agreement advanced $21,500,000 in respect of the m/v Nordic Oasis. The agreement requires repayment of the advance in twenty-four equal quarterly installments of $375,000 beginning on March 28, 2016 and a balloon payment of $12,500,000 due with the final installment. Interest on this advance is floating at LIBOR plus 2.30% (2.91% at December 31, 2015).

The loan is secured by a first preferred mortgage on the m/v Nordic Oasis, the assignment of earnings, insurances and requisite compensation of the entity, and by guarantees of its shareholders. Additionally, the agreement contains a collateral maintenance ratio clause which requires the aggregate fair market value of the vessel plus the net realizable value of any additional collateral

53



previously provided to remain above defined ratios. As of December 31, 2015, the Company was in compliance with this covenant.
 
Term Loan Facility of USD 13,000,000 (Nordic Bulk Barents Ltd. and Nordic Bulk Bothnia Ltd.)

Nordic Bulk Barents and Nordic Bulk Bothnia entered into a secured Term Loan Facility of $13,000,000 in two tranches of $6,500,000 which were drawn in conjunction with the delivery of the m/v Nordic Bothnia on January 23, 2014 and the m/v Nordic Barents on March 7, 2014. The loan is secured by mortgages on these two vessels.
 
The facility bears interest at LIBOR plus 2.5% (3.11% at December 31, 2015). The loan requires repayment in 22 equal quarterly installments of $163,045 (per borrower) beginning in September 2014, one installment of $163,010 (per borrower) and a balloon payment of $2,750,000 (per borrower) due in December 2019. In addition, any cash in excess of $750,000 per borrower on any repayment date shall be applied toward prepayment of the relevant loan in inverse order, so the balloon payment is prepaid first. The agreement also contains a profit split in respect of the proceeds from the sale of either vessel, a minimum value clause ("MVC") of not less than 100% of the indebtedness and a minimum liquidity clause. The Company deposited additional cash collateral to cure MVC breaches of approximately $309,000 per vessel on August 4, 2015 and approximately $299,000 per vessel on December 22, 2015. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company was in compliance with all required covenants.

On February 22, 2016, the Company was notified by the facility agent of the need to deposit cash collateral totaling $3.3 million to cure an MVC breach. The Company anticipates making this deposit on or about March 25, 2016.
 
Long Wharf Construction to Term Loan

Initial amount of $1,048,000 entered into in January 2011. The loan is payable monthly based on a 25 year amortization schedule with a final balloon payment of all unpaid principal and accrued interest due January 2021. Interest is floating at LIBOR plus 2.85%. The Company entered into an interest rate swap which matures January 2021 and fixes the interest rate at 6.63%. The loan is collateralized by all real estate located at 109 Long Wharf, Newport, RI, as well as personal guarantees from the Founders and a corporate guarantee of the Company. The loan contains one financial covenant that requires the Company to maintain a minimum debt service coverage ratio. As of December 31, 2015, the Company was in compliance with this covenant. As of December 31, 2014 the Company was not in compliance with this covenant. Accordingly, the Company obtained a waiver from the lender.
 
The future minimum annual payments under the debt agreements are as follows:
 
 
Years ending December 31,
 
 

2016
$
19,499,262

2017
16,147,613

2018
21,004,294

2019
18,480,107

2020
20,277,444

Thereafter
55,731,961

 
$
151,140,681



Covenants
 
With the exception of the Company’s related party loans, certain debt agreements contain financial covenants, which require it, among other things, to maintain:
 
a consolidated leverage ratio of at least 200%;

a consolidated debt service ratio of at least 125%;


54



a minimum consolidated net worth of $45 million; plus 25% of the purchase price or (finance) lease amount of such vessels; and

a consolidated minimum liquidity of not less than $16.0 million plus $1 million for each additional vessel the Company acquires.

Certain debt agreements also contain restrictive covenants, which may limit it and its subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things:
  
effect changes in management of the Company’s vessels;

sell or dispose of any of the Company’s assets, including its vessels;

declare and pay dividends;

incur additional indebtedness;

mortgage the Company’s vessels; and

incur and pay management fees or commissions.

A violation of any of the Company’s financial covenants or operating restrictions contained in its credit facilities may constitute an event of default under its credit facilities, which, unless cured within the grace period set forth under the applicable credit facility, if applicable, or waived or modified by the Company’s lenders, provides its lenders with the right to, among other things, require the Company to post additional collateral, enhance its equity and liquidity, increase its interest payments, pay down its indebtedness to a level where it is in compliance with its loan covenants, sell vessels in its fleet, reclassify its indebtedness as current liabilities and accelerate its indebtedness and foreclose their liens on its vessels and the other assets securing the credit facilities, which would impair the Company’s ability to continue to conduct its business.
 
Certain of the Company’s credit facilities contain a cross-default provision that may be triggered by a default under one of its other credit facilities. A cross-default provision means that a default on one loan would result in a default on certain other loans. Because of the presence of cross-default provisions in certain of the Company’s credit facilities, the refusal of any one lender under its credit facilities to grant or extend a waiver could result in certain of the Company’s indebtedness being accelerated, even if its other lenders under the Company’s credit facilities have waived covenant defaults under the respective credit facilities. If the Company’s secured indebtedness is accelerated in full or in part, it would be very difficult in the current financing environment for the Company to refinance its debt or obtain additional financing and the Company could lose its vessels and other assets securing its credit facilities if the Company’s lenders foreclose their liens, which would adversely affect the Company’s ability to conduct its business.
 
In connection with any waivers of or amendments to the Company’s credit facilities that it may obtain, its lenders may impose additional operating and financial restrictions on the Company or modify the terms of its existing credit facilities. These restrictions may further restrict the Company’s ability to, among other things, pay dividends, make capital expenditures or incur additional indebtedness, including through the issuance of guarantees. In addition, the Company’s lenders may require the payment of additional fees, require prepayment of a portion of its indebtedness to them, accelerate the amortization schedule for the Company’s indebtedness and increase the interest rates they charge the Company on its outstanding indebtedness.
 

55



Related Party Transactions

Amounts and notes payable to related parties consist of the following:

 
 
December 31, 2014
 
Activity
 
December 31, 2015
Included in accounts payable and accrued expenses on the consolidated balance sheets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Affiliated companies (trade payables)
 
$
4,037,850

 
$
(2,400,433
)
 
$
1,637,417

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Included in current related party debt on the consolidated balance sheets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Loan payable – 2011 Founders Note
 
$
4,325,000

 
$

 
$
4,325,000

Interest payable in-kind – 2011 Founders Note (i)
 
334,605

 
219,314

 
553,919

Promissory Note
 
5,000,000

 
(1,000,000
)
 
4,000,000

Loan payable – BVH shareholder (STST) (ii)
 
4,442,500

 

 
4,442,500

Loan payable to NBHC shareholder (STST)
 
22,500,000

 
(22,500,000
)
 

Loan payable to NBHC shareholder (ASO2020) (iii)
 
22,499,972

 
(22,499,972
)
 

Total current related party debt
 
$
59,102,077

 
$
(45,780,658
)
 
$
13,321,419

 
i. 
Paid in cash
ii. 
ST Shipping and Transport Pte. Ltd. ("STST")
iii. 
ASO2020 Maritime S.A. ("ASO2020")



On October 1, 2011, the Company entered into a $10,000,000 loan agreement with the Founders, which was payable on demand at the request of the lenders (the 2011 Founders Note). The note bears interest at a rate of 5%. On January 1, 2012 the Company issued 5,675 shares of convertible redeemable preferred stock to the Founders, representing a partial repayment of the note (see Note 12). The outstanding balance of the note was $4,325,000 at December 31, 2015 and 2014.

In November 2014, the Company entered into a $5 million Promissory Note (the “Note”) with Bulk Invest Ltd., a company controlled by the Founders. The Note was amended in 2015 and is payable on demand. Interest on the Note is 5%.

BVH entered into an agreement for the construction of two new ultramax newbuildings in 2013. STST has provided a loans totaling of $4,442,500 used to make deposits on the contracts. The loans are payable on demand and do not bear interest.

Loans provided by NBHC shareholders to purchase four 1A ice-class panamax newbuildings were converted to ordinary shares of NBHC on December 15, 2015. The conversion was made by discharging all of NBHC obligations pursuant to the shareholder loans, through the issuance of ordinary share of NBHC at par value, with the number of additional shares to be issued equal to the outstanding principal of such shareholder loans (the "Equity Conversion"). Following the Equity Conversion, the shareholders' loans were terminated and the equity ownership percentage of each partner remained unchanged.
  
Under the terms of a technical management agreement between the Company and Seamar Management S.A. (Seamar), an equity method investee, Seamar is responsible for the day-to-day operation of some of the Company’s owned vessels. During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company incurred technical management fees of $2,262,000 and $2,356,500 under this arrangement, which is included in vessel operating expenses in the consolidated statements of income. The total amount payable to Seamar at December 31, 2015 and 2014 was $1,254,985 and $4,037,850, respectively, which includes amounts payable for vessel operating expenses.

On July 1, 2015, the Company entered into a conlusting agreement with Mark Filanowski, a member of the Board of Directors, under which Mr. Filanowski will be paid $120,000 per annum.



56




Contractual Obligations
 
The following table sets forth the Company’s contractual obligations and their maturity dates as of December 31, 2015. Purchase obligations reflect the Company’s agreements for:
 
The construction of the final Ice-Class 1A Panamax vessel from a Japanese shipyard through NBHC, a joint venture in which the Company owns a one-third interest. NBHC took delivery of the vessel in January 2016.

The construction of two Ice-Class 1C Ultramax vessels from a Japanese shipyard through BVH, a joint venture which the Company owns a 50% interest. BVH expects to take delivery of these vessels in 2017.

(USD in millions)
 
Total
 
Less than
One Year
 
One to
Three
Years
 
Three to
Five Years
 
More than
Five Years
 
 
 
Long-Term Debt
 
$
151.1

 
19.5

 
$
37.1

 
$
38.8

 
$
55.7

Purchase Obligations
 
$
49.2

 
$
7.4

 
$
41.8

 
$

 
$

 
 
$
200.3

 
$
26.9

 
$
78.9

 
$
38.8

 
$
55.7

 
 Effect of Inflation
 
We do not believe that inflation has had a material effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition in the past two years.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
 
We did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements as of December 31, 2015 or 2014.
 

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES
 
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risks
 
Interest Rate Risk
 
The international shipping industry is capital intensive, requiring significant amounts of investment provided in the form of long-term debt. Certain of the Company’s outstanding debt facilities are at floating interest rates that fluctuate with changes in the financial markets and in particular changes in LIBOR. Increasing interest rates could increase the Company’s interest expense and adversely impact its future earnings. The Company may manage this risk by entering into interest rate swap agreements in which the Company exchanged fixed and variable interest rates based on agreed upon notional amounts. The Company has used such derivative financial instruments as risk management tools and not for speculative or trading purposes. The counterparties to the Company’s derivative financial instruments are major financial institutions, which helps it manage its exposure to nonperformance of its counterparties under the Company’s debt agreements. As of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the Company was a party to one interest rate swap agreement which had an approximate fair value of $(0.1) million at both dates. The Company’s net effective exposure to floating interest rate fluctuations on its outstanding debt was $122.8 million and $63.1 million, respectively, at December 31, 2015 and 2014.
 
The Company’s interest expense is affected by changes in the general level of interest rates, particularly LIBOR. As an indication of the extent of the Company’s sensitivity to interest rate changes, an increase in LIBOR of 1% would have decreased the Company’s net income and cash flows during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 by approximately $0.8 million and $0.2 million, respectively, based on the debt levels for the beginning and ending balances of each period. The Company expects its sensitivity to interest rate changes to increase in the future if the Company enters into additional debt agreements in connection with its acquisition of additional vessels.
 



57




Forward Freight Agreements
 
The Company assesses risk associated with fluctuating future freight rates and, when appropriate, actively hedges identified economic risk related to long-term cargo contracts with forward freight agreements, or FFAs. The usage of such derivatives can lead to fluctuations in the Company’s reported results from operations on a period-to-period basis. During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company entered into various FFAs. There were no open positions at December 31, 2015 or 2014.
 
Fuel Swap Contracts
 
The Company monitors the market volatility associated with bunker prices and its impact on long-term contracts; and seeks to reduce the risk of such volatility through a bunker hedging program. During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company entered into various fuel swap contracts that were not designated for hedge accounting. The aggregate fair value of these fuel swaps at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, were liabilities of approximately $1.8 million and $1.3 million, respectively.
 

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA. 

This information appears following Item 15 of this Report and is included herein by reference.
 

ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
 
None.
 

ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES.
 
Management’s Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
 
As of December 31, 2015, 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 such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(e). 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, 2015.
 
Internal Control over Financial Reporting
 
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. We are actively preparing for full compliance with the requirements of Item 308 of Regulation S-K relating to internal control over financial reporting for our 2016 annual report on Form 10-K, but this report does not include a report of management’s assessment regarding internal control.
 
Prior to October 1, 2014, Pangaea was a private company that was not required to file with the SEC and therefore its management had no reason to make an assessment of, or consider the preparation of a management report on, internal control over financial reporting as required by Form 10-K. 
 
Notwithstanding the fact we are still reviewing and testing our internal controls and procedures, our management, based upon the substantive work performed during the financial reporting process, believes that our consolidated financial statements included in this report are fairly stated in all material respects in accordance with U.S. GAAP.
 
This annual report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s registered independent accounting firm due to a reduced requirements for smaller reporting companies under the Securities Exchange Act.
 

58



Limitations on the Effectiveness of Controls
 
A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. 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. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within a company have been detected. Our disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting are designed to provide reasonable assurance of achieving their objectives.
 
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
 
Changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting include the addition of an experienced accountant to the staff which allows further segregation of duties and another level of review, the implementation of an integrated public company reporting and filing software application and enhanced control procedural documentation.
 

ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION.
 
None.


59



PART III.
 

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
 
Directors and Executive Officers
 
Our current directors and executive officers are as follows:
 
Name
Age
Position
Edward Coll
59
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Carl Claus Boggild
59
President and Director
Anthony Laura
63
Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Director
Richard T. du Moulin
69
Director
Mark L. Filanowski
61
Director
Paul Hong
46
Director
Peter M. Yu
54
Director
Eric S. Rosenfeld
58
Director
David D. Sgro
39
Director
 
Edward Coll. Mr. Coll is the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Coll is a founder of Pangaea and has served as its Chief Executive Officer since its inception. Prior to co-founding Bulk Partners Ltd., the predecessor company to Pangaea, in 1996, Mr. Coll spent 10 years at Continental Grain Company with assignments in New York, New Orleans, Rome and Rotterdam. He joined Commodity Ocean Transport Corp (COTCO) in 1989 and became president of the company in 1993. In this position, Mr. Coll was responsible for the overall activities and businesses of three U.S public shipping companies. Mr. Coll is an elected member of the American Bureau of Shipping and has considerable expertise in the worldwide shipping and commodities markets and lectures regularly on these topics. He holds a B.S. in nautical science from the United States Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point and a master's degree in international business from Pace University. Mr. Coll’s qualifications to sit on our board include his operational experience and deep knowledge of the shipping industry.
 
Carl Claus Boggild. Mr. Boggild is the President (Brazil) of the Company. Mr. Boggild is a founder of Pangaea and has served as its President (Brazil) since its inception. Prior to co-founding Bulk Partners Ltd., the predecessor company to Pangaea, in 1996, Mr. Boggild was Director of Chartering and Operations at the Korf Group of Germany. He also was a partner at Trasafra Ltd, a Brazilian agent for the largest independent grain parcel operator from Argentina and Brazil to Europe. He worked for Hudson Trading and Chartering where he was responsible for Brazilian related transportation services. As President of Commodity Ocean Transport Corporation (COTCO) he was responsible for the operations of its affiliate Handy Bulk Carriers Corporation. Prior to becoming President of COTCO, Mr. Boggild was an Executive Vice President and was responsible for its Latin American operations. Mr. Boggild holds a diploma in International Maritime Law. Mr. Boggild’s qualifications to sit on our board include his operational experience and deep knowledge of the shipping industry.
 
Peter M. Yu. Mr. Peter M. Yu serves as a director of the Company. Mr. Yu will continue to serve as a director of Pangaea, a position he has held since 2008. Mr. Yu founded Cartesian Capital Group, LLC, a global private equity firm with more than $2 billion in commitments under management and the responsibility for more than 19 investments in a variety of fields and industries, in 2006. Prior to founding Cartesian, Mr. Yu founded AIG Capital Partners in 1996 and served as President and Chief Executive Officer. Under his leadership, AIGCP became a leading international private equity firm, with more than $4.5 billion in committed capital. Prior to founding AIGCP in 1996, Mr. Yu served President Clinton as Director to the National Economic Council, the White House office responsible for developing and coordinating economic policy. A graduate of Harvard Law School, Mr. Yu served as President of the Harvard Law Review and as a law clerk on the U.S. Supreme Court. Mr. Yu received a B.A. degree from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School. Mr. Yu is a director of Banco Daycoval, S.A., a publicly traded bank headquartered in Brazil. Mr. Yu is also a director of a number of private entities partly or wholly-owned by funds sponsored by Cartesian Capital Group. Mr. Yu’s qualifications to sit on our board include his substantial experience in the areas of business management and financial and investment expertise.

Paul Hong. Mr. Paul Hong serves as a director of the Company. Mr. Hong is a Senior Managing Director at Cartesian Capital Group. Prior to joining Cartesian, Paul served as Senior Vice President and General Counsel of AIG Capital Partners. Paul was previously an attorney in the corporate and tax departments of Kirkland & Ellis where he specialized in private equity transactions.

60



Paul holds an AB in Economics from Columbia College, a JD from Columbia Law School, and an LLM in Taxation from New York University Law School. Mr. Hong’s qualifications to sit on our board include his substantial experience in the areas of business management and financial and investment expertise.
 
Richard T. du Moulin. Mr. Richard T. du Moulin serves as a director of the Company. Mr. du Moulin is currently the President of Intrepid Shipping LLC, a position he has held since he founded Intrepid in 2002. From 1974, he spent 15 years with OMI Corporation, where he served as Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer, and as a member of the company's Board of Directors. From 1998 to 2002, Mr. du Moulin served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Marine Transport Corporation. From 1989 to 1998, Mr. du Moulin served as Chairman and CEO of Marine Transport Lines. Mr. du Moulin is a member of the Board of Trustees and Chairman of the Seamens Church Institute of New York and New Jersey. He currently serves as a Director of Teekay Tankers and, Tidewater Inc. Mr. du Moulin served as Chairman of Intertanko, the leading trade organization for the tanker industry, from 1996 to 1999. Mr. du Moulin served in the US Navy and is a recipient of the US Coast Guard's Distinguished Service Medal. He received a BA from Dartmouth College and an MBA from Harvard University. Mr. du Moulin’s qualifications to sit on our board include his operational experience and deep knowledge of the shipping industry.
 
Mark L. Filanowski. Mr. Mark L. Filanowski serves as a director of the Company. Mr. Filanowski formed Intrepid Shipping LLC with Richard du Moulin in 2002. He started his career at Ernst & Young from 1976 to 1984. Subsequently, Mr. Filanowski spent 4 years at Armtek Corporation, where he served as Vice President and Controller. From 1989 to 2002, he served as Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President at Marine Transport Corporation, which he helped take private from NASDAQ. Mr. Filanowski is a Director of ETRE REIT, LLC and is a member of the American Bureau of Shipping. Previously, he has served as the Chairman of the Board at Arvak and at Shoreline Mutual (Bermuda) Ltd., an insurance company. Mr. Filanowski was formerly a Certified Public Accountant. He earned a BS from University of Connecticut and an MBA from New York University. Mr. Filanowski’s qualifications to sit on our board include his operational experience and deep knowledge of the shipping industry and his qualifications to sit on the audit committee include his financial experience as a CPA with Ernst & Young as well as his positions as Controller at Armtek and as CFO at Marine Transport.
 
Anthony Laura. Mr. Laura is the Chief Financial Officer of the Company. Mr. Laura is a founder of Pangaea and has served as its Chief Financial Officer since its inception. Prior to co-founding Bulk Partners Ltd., the predecessor to Pangaea, in 1996, Mr. Laura spent 10 years as CFO of COTCO. Mr. Laura also served at Navinvest Marine Services from 1986 to 1996. Mr. Laura is a graduate of Fordham University. 
 
Eric S. Rosenfeld. Eric S. Rosenfeld serves as a director of the Company. Mr. Rosenfeld served as Quartet’s chairman of the board and chief executive officer from its inception through consummation of the Mergers. Mr. Rosenfeld has been the president and chief executive officer of Crescendo Partners, L.P. (“Crescendo”), a New York-based investment firm, since its formation in November 1998. Mr. Rosenfeld has formed and served as CEO and as a director of three prior special purpose acquisition companies, Arpeggio Acquisition Corporation (“Arpeggio”), Rhapsody Acquisition Corp. (“Rhapsody”) and Trio Merger Corp. (“Trio”). Mr. Rosenfeld presently serves or has served on the board of directors of Arpeggio, Rhapsody, Trio, CPI Aerostructures, Inc., Cott Corporation, Absolute Software Corporation, Primoris Services Corporation (“Primoris”), Hill International, Spar Aerospace Limited, Hip Interactive, AD OPT Technologies Inc., Pivotal Corporation, Sierra Systems Group, Inc., Geac Computer Corporation Limited, Emergis Inc., Matrikon Inc., Dalsa Corporation, Computer Horizons Corp. and SAExploration Holdings Inc. Prior to forming Crescendo Partners, Mr. Rosenfeld had been managing director at CIBC Oppenheimer and its predecessor company Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. since 1985. Mr. Rosenfeld is a regular guest lecturer at Columbia Business School and has served on numerous panels at Queen’s University Business Law School Symposia, McGill Law School, the World Presidents’ Organization and the Value Investing Congress. He is a senior faculty member at the Director’s College. He has also been a regular guest host on CNBC. Mr. Rosenfeld received an A.B. in economics from Brown University and an M.B.A. from the Harvard Business School.
 
David D. Sgro. David D. Sgro serves as a director of the Company. Mr. Sgro served as Quartet’s chief financial officer, secretary and a member of its board of directors from its inception through consummation of the Mergers. Mr. Sgro has been a Senior Managing Director of Crescendo from December 2013 to the present and has held various positions with Crescendo since May 2005. Mr. Sgro presently serves or has served on the board of directors of Trio, Primoris, Bridgewater Systems, Inc., SAExploration Holdings, Harmony Merger Corp., Imvescor Restaurant Group and COM DEV International Ltd. Mr. Sgro attended Columbia Business School and prior to that, Mr. Sgro worked as an analyst and then senior analyst at Management Planning, Inc., a firm engaged in the valuation of privately held companies. Simultaneously, Mr. Sgro worked as an associate with MPI Securities, Management Planning, Inc.’s boutique investment banking affiliate. From June 2004 to August 2004, Mr. Sgro worked as an analyst at Brandes Investment Partners. Mr. Sgro received a B.S. in Finance from The College of New Jersey and an M.B.A. from Columbia Business School. In 2001, he became a Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) Charterholder. Mr. Sgro is a regular guest lecturer at the College of New Jersey and Columbia Business School.
 

61



Our board of directors is divided into three classes with only one class of directors being elected in each year and each class serving a three-year term. Messrs. Eric Rosenfeld, Richard du Moulin, Laura and Mark Filanowski serve as Class I directors, whose term expires at the Registrant’s 2018 annual meeting. Messrs. Paul Hong, Claus Boggild and David Sgro serve as Class II directors, whose term expires at the Registrant’s 2016 annual meeting and Messrs. Peter Yu and Edward Coll serve as Class III directors, whose term expires at the Registrant’s 2017 annual meeting. Messrs. Rosenfeld, Hong and Sgro were appointed to serve on the Registrant’s audit committee. Messrs. du Moulin, Rosenfeld and Yu were appointed to serve on the Registrant’s compensation committee and nominating committee. 
 
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
 
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires our officers, directors and persons who own more than ten percent of a registered class of our equity securities to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Officers, directors and ten percent stockholders are required by regulation to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) reports they file. Based solely on a review of such reports received by us and written representations from certain reporting persons that no Form 5s were required for those persons, we believe that, during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, all reports required to be filed by our officers, directors and persons who own more than ten percent of a registered class of our equity securities were filed on a timely basis.
 
Code of Ethics
 
In October 2014, our board of directors adopted a code of ethics that applies to directors, officers, and employees of ours and of any subsidiaries we may have in the future (including our principal executive officer, our principal financial officer, our principal accounting officer or controller, and persons performing similar functions). We will provide, without charge, upon request, copies of our code of ethics. Requests for copies of our code of ethics should be sent in writing to Phoenix Bulk Carriers (US) LLC, 109 Long Wharf, Newport, RI 02840.

Corporate Governance
 
Audit Committee
 
Effective October 2014, we established an audit committee of the board of directors, which is comprised of Eric Rosenfeld, Paul Hong and David Sgro, each of whom is an independent director. The audit committee’s duties, which are specified in our Audit Committee Charter, include, but are not limited to: 

appoint and retain the independent auditor and approve the independent auditor’s compensation. The Committee shall have the sole authority to terminate the independent auditor;
pre-approve all audit services and permitted non-audit services to be performed for the Company by the independent auditor. The Committee may delegate authority to pre-approve audit services, other than the audit of the Company’s annual financial statements, and permitted non-audit services to one or more members, provided that decisions made pursuant to such delegated authority shall be presented to the full Committee at its next scheduled meeting;
evaluate the independent auditor’s qualification, performance and independence on an annual basis;
review with management and the independent auditor the audited financial statements to be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission;
review with the independent auditor any difficulties the auditor encountered in the course of the audit work, including any restrictions on the scope of the independent auditor’s activities and any significant disagreements with management and management’s response;
recommend to the full Board, based on the Committee’s review and discussion with management and the independent auditor, that the audited financial statements be included in the Company’s Form 10-K;
review the interim financial statements with management and the independent auditor prior to the filing of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10 Q;
discuss with management the disclosures under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations;”
prior to the filing of each quarterly report, the Committee shall discuss with management and the independent auditor the quality and adequacy of the Company’s (1) internal controls for financial reporting, including any audit steps adopted in light of internal control deficiencies and (2) disclosure controls and procedures;
discuss with the independent auditor the auditor’s judgment about the quality, not just the acceptability, of the Company’s accounting principles, as applied in its financial statements and as selected by management;

62



monitor the Company’s assessment and plan to manage any key enterprise risks assigned to the Committee by the Board from time to time and discuss the Company’s major financial risk exposures and the steps that management has taken to monitor and control such exposures;
establish procedures for the receipt, retention and treatment of complaints received by the Company regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters and the confidential, anonymous submission by employees of the Company of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters;
review no less than annually management’s programs governing codes of business conduct and ethics, conflicts of interest, legal, and environmental compliance and obtain reports from management regarding compliance with law and the Company’s code of business conduct and ethics;
discuss earnings press releases, as well as financial information and earnings guidance provided to analysts and rating agencies;
review analyses prepared by management setting forth significant financial reporting issues and judgments made in connection with the preparation of financial statements, including the effects of alternative GAAP measures and off-balance sheet structures, if any, on the Company’s financial statements; and
review and approve all changes in the selection or application of accounting principles other than those changes in accounting principles mandated by newly-adopted authoritative accounting pronouncements;

Financial Experts on Audit Committee
 
The audit committee is composed exclusively of “independent directors” who are “financially literate” as defined under the Nasdaq listing standards. The Nasdaq listing standards define “financially literate” as being able to read and understand fundamental financial statements, including a company’s balance sheet, income statement and cash flow statement.
 
In addition, we must certify to Nasdaq that the committee has, and will continue to have, at least one member who has past employment experience in finance or accounting, requisite professional certification in accounting, or other comparable experience or background that results in the individual’s financial sophistication. The board of directors has determined that David Sgro qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined under rules and regulations of the SEC.
  
Nominating Committee
 
Effective October 2014, we established a nominating committee of the board of directors, which consists of Richard du Moulin, Eric Rosenfeld and Peter Yu, each of whom is an independent director. The nominating committee is responsible for overseeing the selection of persons to be nominated to serve on our board of directors. The nominating committee considers persons identified by its members, management, stockholders, investment bankers and others. 

Guidelines for Selecting Director Nominees
 
The guidelines for selecting nominees, which are specified in our Nominating Committee Charter, generally provide that persons to be nominated:
 
should have demonstrated notable or significant achievements in business, education or public service;

should possess the requisite intelligence, education and experience to make a significant contribution to the board of directors and bring a range of skills, diverse perspectives and backgrounds to its deliberations; and

should have the highest ethical standards, a strong sense of professionalism and intense dedication to serving the interests of our stockholders.

The Nominating Committee will consider a number of qualifications relating to management and leadership experience, background, integrity and professionalism in evaluating a person’s candidacy for membership on the board of directors. The nominating committee may require certain skills or attributes, such as financial or accounting experience, to meet specific board needs that arise from time to time and will also consider the overall experience and makeup of its members to obtain a broad and diverse mix of board members. The nominating committee does not distinguish among nominees recommended by stockholders and other persons.
 
There have been no material changes to the procedures by which security holders may recommend nominees to our board of directors.
 


63



Compensation Committee
 
Effective October 2014, we established a Compensation Committee which is comprised of Richard du Moulin, Eric Rosenfeld and Peter Yu. The Compensation Committee reviews and approves compensation paid to the Company’s officers and directors and administers the Company’s incentive compensation plans, including authority to make and modify awards under such plans. The Compensation Committee Charter is available on the Company’s website at www.pangaeals.com.
 
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participations
 
As of December 31, 2015, none of the members of our compensation committee will be, or will have at any time during the past year been, one of our officers or employees. None of our executive officers currently serves or in the past year has served as a member of the board of directors or compensation committee of any entity that has one or more executive officers serving on our board of directors or compensation committee.
 

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
 
The Company’s senior executives are generally awarded merit increases and annual incentive compensation in December of each year, following completion of annual performance review cycle.
 
The Company does not have employment agreements with any of its senior executives, including its executive officers.
 
Summary Compensation Table of the Company’s Named Executive Officers
 
Smaller reporting companies meet the Regulation S-K Item 402 disclosure requirements by providing the shorter disclosures required under the Securities Act of 1934, specifically, the total compensation of the Company’s named executive officer’s which consists of (i) the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, (ii) each of the Company’s next two most highly compensation executive officers, other than its Chief Executive Officer, who served as an executive officer at December 31, 2015 and whose total compensation exceeded $100,000, and (iii) two individuals for whom disclosure would have been required but who were not serving as executive officers of the Company at December 31, 2015. The following table sets forth the total compensation for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014:
 
Name and Principal Position
 
Year
 
Salary
 
Bonus
 
All Other
Compensation(1)
 
Total
Edward Coll
 
2015
 
$
250,000

 
$
425,000

 
$
6,000

 
$
681,000

Chief Executive Officer
 
2014
 
$
200,000

 
$
425,000

 
$
5,750

 
$
630,750

(Principal Executive Officer)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Carl Claus Boggild
 
2015
 
$
200,000

 
$
200,000

 
$

 
$
400,000

President – Brazil
 
2014
 
$
200,000

 
$
200,000

 
$

 
$
400,000

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Anthony Laura
 
2015
 
$
200,000

 
$
150,000

 
$
6,000

 
$
356,000

Chief Financial Officer
 
2014
 
$
200,000

 
$
200,000

 
$
5,750

 
$
405,750

(Principal Financial Officer)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(1)
All other compensation includes employer matching contribution to the 401(k) plan.

Narrative Disclosure to Summary Compensation Table
 
The Company does not have employment agreements with any of its named executive officers and has not previously granted its named executive officers any share or share-based awards. Bonuses paid to our named executive officers are purely discretionary, as determined by our Compensation Committee, and may be paid in the year following the calendar year to which they relate.
 
The Company maintains, and the named executive officers (other than Mr. Boggild) participate in, a 401(k) retirement savings plan. Each participant who is a United States employee may contribute to the 401(k) plan, through payroll deductions, up to 90% of his or her salary limited to the maximum allowed by the Internal Revenue Service regulations. All amounts contributed by

64



employee participants and earnings on these contributions are fully vested at all times and are not taxable to participants until withdrawn. Employee participants may elect to invest their contributions in various established funds. The Company also makes matching contributions to the accounts of plan participants.
 
Except as set forth above, the Company’s named executive officers generally participate in the same programs as its other employees.

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End
 
As of December 31, 2015, none of the Company’s officers, including its named executive officers held any outstanding equity or equity-based awards.
 
Retirement Benefits, Termination, Severance and Change in Control Payments
 
As of December 31, 2015, none of the Company’s officers, including its named executive officers, have any retirement benefits (other than their right to participate in the Company’s 401(k) retirement plan, as described above) or have any rights to severance payments.
 
Compensation of Non-Employee Directors.

During the fiscal year ending December 31, 2014, our board of directors established a compensation program for our non-employee directors. Under the plan, these non-employee directors receive a combination of cash compensation and restricted shares of our common stock, pursuant to the 2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the "2014 Plan"), as payment for services rendered as such members. Restricted shares vest at the rate of 50% after one year and the remaining 50% after two years.

On September 22, 2015, the Company's shareholders approved an amendment and restatement of the 2014 Plan that was adopted by the Board on August 7, 2015. The PANGAEA LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS LTD. 2014 SHARE INCENTIVE PLAN (as amended and restated by the Board of Directors on August 7, 2015), (the "Amended Plan"), limits the value of awards that may be granted to non-employee directors in any calendar year to $150,000 (calculating the value of any award based in shares to be determined based on the grant date fair value of such awards for financial reporting purposes), which limitation under the 2014 Plan was 10,000 shares.
 
The following table sets forth compensation paid to or earned by our non-employee directors during 2015:
  
Name (1)
 
Fees Earned or
Paid in Cash
 
Stock
Awards(2)
 
Total
Mark Filanowski
 
$
25,000

 
$
52,501

 
$
77,501

Richard DuMoulin
 
$
25,000

 
$
52,501

 
$
77,501

Peter Yu
 
$
25,000

 
$
52,501

 
$
77,501

Paul Hong
 
$
25,000

 
$
52,501

 
$
77,501

Eric Rosenfeld
 
$
25,000

 
$
52,501

 
$
77,501

David Sgro
 
$
25,000

 
$
52,501

 
$
77,501

 
(1)
Information for Messrs. Coll, Boggild and Laura, who served as a members of our board of directors in 2015, is not included in this table because they did not receive additional compensation for services rendered as members of our board of directors.

(2)
This column represents the grant date fair value of 10,000 and 8,696 restricted shares of our common stock made to each of our non-employee directors on May 8, 2015 and September 22, 2015, respectively. The grant date fair value was determined under FASB ASC Topic 718 utilizing the assumptions contained in Note 14 of our financial statements contained herein, excluding the effect of service-based forfeitures. As of December 31, 2015 Messrs. Filanowski, Du Moulin, Rosenfeld and Sgro each held 28,696 restricted shares of our common stock. Messrs. Yu and Hong entered into transfer agreements through which shares issued to them were transferred to Pangaea One Acquisition Holdings XIV, LLC.


We also reimburse our directors for reasonable and necessary out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending Board and committee meetings or performing other services for us in their capacities as directors.
 

65




ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS. 

Equity Compensation Plan Information
 
Plan Category
(a) Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options,
warrants, and rights 
 
(b) Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding options,
warrants, and rights
 
(c) Number of securities
remaining available for
future issuance under
equity compensation
plans (excluding
securities reflected in
column (a)) 
Equity compensation plans approved by shareholders
 
 
 
 
 
93,143

Equity compensation plans not approved by shareholders
 
 
 
 
 

Total
 
 
 
 
 
93,143

 
During 2014, the Company adopted, and our shareholders approved, the 2014 Share Incentive Plan (the “2014 Plan”). The purpose of the 2014 Plan is to assist in attracting, retaining, motivating, and rewarding certain key employees, officers, directors, and consultants of the Company and its affiliates and promoting the creation of long-term value for our shareholders by closely aligning the interests of such individuals with those of such shareholders. The 2014 Plan authorizes the award of share-based incentives to encourage eligible employees, officers, directors, and consultants, as described below, to expend maximum effort in the creation of shareholder value.

On September 22, 2015, the Company's shareholders approved an amendment and restatement of the 2014 Plan that was adopted by the Board on August 7, 2015. The PANGAEA LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS LTD. 2014 SHARE INCENTIVE PLAN (as amended and restated by the Board of Directors on August 7, 2015), (the "Amended Plan"), limits the value of awards that may be granted to non-employee directors in any calendar year to $150,000 (calculating the value of any award based in shares to be determined based on the grant date fair value of such awards for financial reporting purposes), which limitation under the 2014 Plan was 10,000 shares.
 
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners
 
The following table sets forth information regarding the beneficial ownership of our common stock as of March 23, 2016 by:
 
each person known by us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5% of our outstanding shares of common stock;

each of our officers and directors; and

all of our officers and directors as a group.

Unless otherwise indicated, we believe that all persons named in the table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of common stock beneficially owned by them.
 

66



 Name and Address of Beneficial Owner (1)
Amount and
Nature of
Beneficial
Ownership
Approximate
Percentage of
Beneficial
Ownership (2)
Directors and Executive Officers:
 

 

Edward Coll
7,507,077

20.57