CMB.TECH NV (CMBT) 2020 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Good morning, and welcome to the Euronav Q1 2020 Earnings Conference Call. (Operator Instructions) Please also note today's event is being recorded.

早上好，歡迎來到 Euronav 2020 年第一季度收益電話會議。 （操作員說明）另請注意，今天的活動正在錄製中。

At this time, I'd like to turn the conference over to Brian Gallagher. Sir, please go ahead.

現在，我想將會議轉交給 Brian Gallagher。先生，請繼續。

Thank you. Good morning and afternoon to everyone, and thanks for joining Euronav's Q1 2020 Earnings Call.

謝謝。大家早上好，下午好，感謝您加入 Euronav 的 2020 年第一季度財報電話會議。

Before I start, I'd like to say a few words. The information discussed on this call is based on information as of today, Thursday, the 7th of May 2020, and may contain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties.

在開始之前，我想說幾句話。本次電話會議討論的信息基於截至今天（2020 年 5 月 7 日，星期四）的信息，可能包含涉及風險和不確定性的前瞻性陳述。

Forward-looking statements reflect current views with respect to future events and financial performance and may include statements concerning plans, objectives, goals, strategies, future events, performance, underlying assumptions and other statements, which are not statements of historical fact.

前瞻性陳述反映了當前對未來事件和財務業績的看法，可能包括有關計劃、目標、目標、戰略、未來事件、業績、基本假設和其他陳述的陳述，這些陳述不是歷史事實的陳述。

All forward-looking statements attributable to the company or to persons acting on its behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by reference to the risks, uncertainties and other factors discussed in the company's filings with the SEC, which are available free of charge on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov and on our own company's website at euronav.com.

所有歸因於公司或代表其行事的人的前瞻性陳述均參照公司向美國證券交易委員會提交的文件中討論的風險、不確定性和其他因素明確完全限定，這些文件可在美國證券交易委員會的網站上免費獲得網站 www.sec.gov 和我們自己公司的網站 euronav.com。

You should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of the particular statement, and the company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from these forward-looking statements. Please take a moment to read our safe harbor statement on Page 2 of the slide presentation.

您不應過分依賴前瞻性陳述。每份前瞻性聲明僅在特定聲明發布之日有效，公司不承擔公開更新或修改任何前瞻性聲明的義務。實際結果可能與這些前瞻性陳述存在重大差異。請花點時間閱讀幻燈片演示文稿第 2 頁上的安全港聲明。

I will now pass on to CEO, Hugo De Stoop, to start with agenda slide. Hugo, over to you.

我現在將請首席執行官 Hugo De Stoop 從議程幻燈片開始。雨果，交給你了。

Yes. Thank you, Brian.

是的。謝謝你，布萊恩。

We're going to do something a little bit different and more in depth with today's quarterly call, given the number of factors which are impacting on tankers markets currently.

考慮到目前影響油輪市場的因素眾多，我們將在今天的季度電話會議上做一些不同且更深入的事情。

So firstly, I will run through the Q1 highlights before passing on to Lieve, our CFO, to provide a full financial review of the income statement and balance sheet. Then we will look at the current themes in the tanker markets and Euronav's outlook before we take questions.

因此，首先，我將介紹第一季度的亮點，然後再轉交給我們的首席財務官 Lieve，對損益表和資產負債表進行全面的財務審查。然後，在我們提問之前，我們將看看油輪市場的當前主題和 Euronav 的前景。

So if we move to Slide 4, the highlights page. I think it's fair to say that the first quarter was an extraordinary quarter for many different reasons. Q1 was a very strong quarter building upon the solid foundations we experienced in Q4, but, of course, it was also a very volatile quarter, with events such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the oil price war between the OPEC+ members, influencing dramatically the market freight rates as we have seen them.

因此，如果我們轉到幻燈片 4，即亮點頁面。我認為可以公平地說，由於許多不同的原因，第一季度是一個非凡的季度。第一季度是一個非常強勁的季度，建立在我們在第四季度經歷的堅實基礎之上，但當然，它也是一個非常動蕩的季度，諸如 COVID-19 大流行和歐佩克+成員之間的石油價格戰等事件，影響巨大我們看到的市場運費。

The TCE were as high as $200,000 per day, but also as low as $30,000 in the latter part of Q1. The average delivered VLCC rate was very robust. And on average, we managed to book $72,000 or a little bit more than $72,000 per day for VLCCs and nearly $60,000 per day for Suezmax, quite a record.

TCE 高達每天 200,000 美元，但在第一季度後期也低至 30,000 美元。 VLCC 的平均交付率非常強勁。平均而言，我們為 VLCC 預訂了 72,000 美元或略高於 72,000 美元，為 Suezmax 預訂了近 60,000 美元，創下了歷史記錄。

This outstanding rate environment has pushed so far into the second quarter to higher levels with our VLCC fleet reporting so far $95,000 per day for VLCCs, as I said, and for the Suezmax $65,000 per day. So this allows us to pay a very strong dividend related to the first quarter of $0.81 per share. As we mentioned many times in the past, we will, as of this quarter, pay quarterly dividends to Euronav shareholders.

到目前為止，這種出色的費率環境已將我們的 VLCC 船隊推向了更高的水平，正如我所說，到目前為止，VLCC 每天 95,000 美元，而 Suezmax 每天 65,000 美元。因此，這使我們能夠支付與第一季度每股 0.81 美元相關的非常高的股息。正如我們過去多次提到的那樣，從本季度開始，我們將向 Euronav 股東支付季度股息。

But the good news is that we will also pay our final dividend related to 2019 after our next AGM in May. So Euronav shareholders will receive $1.10 in June in cash dividends, which represents at the current share price more than 10% dividend yield, and this is within the first 6 months of the year. So quite extraordinary, you will admit.

但好消息是，我們還將在 5 月的下一次年度股東大會後支付與 2019 年相關的末期股息。因此，Euronav 股東將在 6 月份獲得 1.10 美元的現金股息，這相當於當前股價超過 10% 的股息收益率，而且這是在今年前 6 個月內。如此非凡，你會承認。

I will return later with more commentary on the key themes in our business, but now I would like to hand over to our CFO, Lieve, to run through the financials on Slide 5. Lieve, over to you.

稍後我會回來對我們業務的關鍵主題進行更多評論，但現在我想交給我們的首席財務官 Lieve 來瀏覽幻燈片 5 上的財務數據。Lieve，交給你。

Thank you, Hugo. Good morning, good afternoon all. Allow me indeed to present the key figures of the first quarter.

謝謝你，雨果。大家早上好，下午好。請允許我介紹第一季度的關鍵數據。

So the revenues generated are $417 million, while EBITDA generated was $360 million. But if we add the gain on sale and the income from equity investees, this is $328 million. This resulted in the net income of $225 million.

因此產生的收入為 4.17 億美元，而產生的 EBITDA 為 3.6 億美元。但如果我們加上出售收益和股權投資收益，則為 3.28 億美元。這導致淨收入為 2.25 億美元。

As the company has touched upon the strong freight market, this illustrates clearly the operational leverage that tanker companies possesses, namely, every $5,000 a day revenue, Euronav generates over a quarter translates into $27 million net income, culminating in a dividend of about $0.10 per share for Q2.

由於公司觸及強勁的貨運市場，這清楚地說明了油輪公司擁有的運營槓桿，即每天每 5,000 美元的收入，Euronav 產生超過四分之一的收入轉化為 2700 萬美元的淨收入，最終產生約 0.10 美元的股息分享第二季度。

A key highlight that I want to mention is also for Q1 is related to our fuel procurement strategy, which generated gains of nearly $20 million, but which clearly came under pressure as the oil price and other related commodities fell as the COVID-19 virus and the related economic restrictions impacted. The company, we also assessed if a write-down should be accounted for the remaining compliant fuel inventory as the market value of the fuel that was not yet consumed was $56 million lower than its book value.

我想提到的一個重要亮點也是第一季度與我們的燃料採購戰略有關，該戰略產生了近 2000 萬美元的收益，但由於 COVID-19 病毒和石油價格及其他相關商品下跌，該戰略顯然面臨壓力相關的經濟限制受到影響。該公司還評估了是否應減記剩餘的合規燃料庫存，因為尚未消耗的燃料的市場價值比其賬面價值低 5600 萬美元。

The company concluded that no write-down was required at this time in view of the robust freight market for Q2 and possibly the rest of 2020, which will offset the higher weighted average consumption costs of the bunker oil consumed from that inventory. However, this assessment has to be performed each quarter.

該公司得出結論，鑑於第二季度乃至 2020 年剩餘時間的貨運市場強勁，目前不需要減記，這將抵消從該庫存中消耗的燃料油的較高加權平均消耗成本。但是，必須每季度執行此評估。

Moving on maybe to Slide 6 and the balance sheet. So the balance sheet at Euronav remains strong. We have increased the absolute level of cash at our disposal to over $300 million, even though we were active during the quarter in purchasing 4 VLCC's resales, requiring a down payment of $100 million.

繼續看幻燈片 6 和資產負債表。因此，Euronav 的資產負債表依然強勁。我們已將可支配現金的絕對水平增加到超過 3 億美元，儘管我們在本季度積極購買 4 艘 VLCC 的轉售，需要 1 億美元的首付款。

Our leverage is now below 40%. Cash and revolving credit facility liquidity are at $1.1 billion in total. This contributes, for sure, in managing our 2-year liquidity runway, which remains a core philosophy at Euronav.

我們的槓桿率現在低於 40%。現金和循環信貸額度的流動性總額為 11 億美元。這無疑有助於管理我們 2 年的流動性跑道，這仍然是 Euronav 的核心理念。

I will now hand back to Hugo to expand further on developments in the tanker space. Hugo, over to you.

我現在將交還給 Hugo，以進一步擴展油輪領域的發展。雨果，交給你了。

Thank you very much, Lieve.

非常感謝你，利夫。

We can now move on Slide 7, capital allocation at Euronav. Capital allocation is very important, especially when markets are so strong. At Euronav, we always make sure to be balanced, but especially consistent in our allocation. We do have some mandatory debt repayment as well as some revolving credit facilities reductions, which, as far as they are concerned, are noncash.

我們現在可以繼續幻燈片 7，Euronav 的資本配置。資本配置非常重要，尤其是在市場如此強勁的情況下。在 Euronav，我們始終確保平衡，但在分配方面尤其保持一致。我們確實有一些強制性的債務償還以及一些循環信貸額度的減少，就他們而言，這些都是非現金的。

But as we target a leverage of 50% or less, we do not need to repay more debt for the time being. We have designed our return to shareholders' policy, taking all aspects of the business into account. And indeed, we are very pleased to be in a position to pay $0.81 dividend related to the first quarter, in addition to $0.29 related to the year 2019, as I mentioned earlier.

但由於我們的目標是 50% 或更低的槓桿率，我們暫時不需要償還更多的債務。我們設計了股東回報政策，將業務的各個方面都考慮在內。事實上，我們很高興能夠支付與第一季度相關的 0.81 美元股息，此外還有與 2019 年相關的 0.29 美元股息，正如我之前提到的。

During the quarter, we haven't bought back shares. When we do so, we will always try to create long-term shareholder value rather than giving support to a share price that has been very volatile during the quarter. We also bought a very, very small portion of our bond back during March sell-off.

本季度，我們沒有回購股票。當我們這樣做時，我們將始終努力創造長期股東價值，而不是為本季度波動劇烈的股價提供支持。我們還在 3 月份的拋售中回購了非常非常小的一部分債券。

We wish we could have done more, but the value of our bonds bounce back very quickly to par or even above par as they're trading today. We also took advantage of the S&P market volatility, as illustrated on the next slide.

我們希望我們能做得更多，但我們的債券價值很快反彈至面值甚至高於面值，因為它們今天正在交易。我們還利用了標準普爾市場的波動性，如下一張幻燈片所示。

Slide 8. What seems a lifetime ago now, we picked up 4 VLCC resales of contract at -- on average, $93 million, a significant discount to the advertised sales price at that time or even when compared now. This expansion, though, is part of an active fleet management strategy as we also sold 3 older vessels so far this year for prices well above the index for same vintage ships. This recycling of capital and the rejuvenation of our fleet is key to managing tanker fleet and a feature we keep up as part of our long-term strategy.

幻燈片 8。這似乎是一生前的事，我們以平均 9300 萬美元的價格獲得了 4 艘 VLCC 轉售合同，這比當時甚至現在的廣告銷售價格都有很大折扣。不過，這種擴張是積極的船隊管理戰略的一部分，因為我們今年到目前為止還以遠高於相同老式船舶指數的價格出售了 3 艘舊船。這種資本循環和我們船隊的複興是管理油輪船隊的關鍵，也是我們長期戰略的一部分。

We can now move to Slide 9. The progressive moves in the freight market since early March, when the Saudi volume increases and price cuts were announced, have allowed tanker operators some optionality to lock in high rates for the upcoming 6 months.

我們現在可以轉到幻燈片 9。自 3 月初沙特宣布運量增加和降價以來，貨運市場的逐步變化使油輪運營商可以選擇鎖定未來 6 個月的高費率。

We have fixed a number of ships, taking advantage of these opportunities and have now 19% of our fleet, which is on time charter for various durations. You will remember that at the end of last year, we only had 10% of our fleet under fixed contracts.

我們已經固定了一些船隻，利用這些機會，現在我們船隊中有 19% 的船隊處於不同期限的期租。你會記得，去年年底，我們只有 10% 的機隊簽訂了固定合同。

It is important to know that when we take a decision to fix the ship for a 6-months' time charter, we will always compare the rate offered to what we can do in the spot market for our next voyage. Often, the shorter spot voyage offers you more than a 6-month time charter fixed contract.

重要的是要知道，當我們決定為 6 個月的定期租船修船時，我們將始終將提供的費率與我們在下一個航程的現貨市場上可以做的進行比較。通常，較短的即期航程為您提供超過 6 個月的定期租船固定合同。

Moving on to Slide 10. The fuel procurement strategy. When we look back at IMO 2020, our approach has been to purchase compliant fuel ahead of January 2020, primarily to reduce any potential risk on either the quality of the new compliant fuel or to avoid the big spread that was foreseen between LSFO and HSFO in the early stage of this new market regulation.

轉到幻燈片 10。燃料採購策略。當我們回顧 IMO 2020 時，我們的方法是在 2020 年 1 月之前購買合規燃料，主要是為了降低新合規燃料質量的任何潛在風險，或避免 LSFO 和 HSFO 之間可預見的巨大差異這種新的市場監管的早期階段。

This approach benefited our operations initially. And in the first quarter, as indeed upon the implementation of the regulation, the LSFO jumped to much higher levels than what we had procured over the course of 2019 and have consumed a little less than half of our stock of roughly 420,000 tonnes inventory that we purchased indeed in 2019.

這種方法最初有利於我們的運營。在第一季度，確實在實施該法規後，LSFO 躍升至比我們在 2019 年期間採購的水平高得多的水平，並且消耗了我們大約 420,000 噸庫存的不到一半的庫存。確實是2019年買的。

However, as Lieve mentioned, the market has not developed as anyone expected in terms of fuel pricing or in terms of stress between LSFO and HSFO during 2020 and certainly recently. And the prices as well as the spreads between those 2 products have now fallen to a level below our entry cost.

然而，正如 Lieve 所提到的，在 2020 年以及最近，在燃料定價或 LSFO 和 HSFO 之間的壓力方面，市場並沒有像任何人預期的那樣發展。現在，這兩種產品的價格和價差已降至低於我們的入門成本的水平。

We have not taken an impairment in the first quarter, as Lieve explained earlier, and we will continue to look at opportunities around the ULCC Oceania, where the fuel is being sold to create value around this operation. Let's all remember that if we had chosen a strategy of retrofitting scrubbers on our fleet, we would have had to deploy more than $350 million.

正如 Lieve 之前解釋的那樣，我們在第一季度沒有減值，我們將繼續尋找 ULCC 大洋洲周圍的機會，在那裡出售燃料以圍繞這項業務創造價值。讓我們都記住，如果我們選擇了在我們的機隊上改裝洗滌器的策略，我們將不得不部署超過 3.5 億美元。

I will now hand over to Brian Gallagher, our Head of Research and Investor Relations to talk about current market themes, and I will be back for the questions. Thank you. Brian, over to you.

我現在將交給我們的研究和投資者關係主管 Brian Gallagher 來談談當前的市場主題，我會回來回答問題。謝謝。布賴恩，交給你了。

Thank you, Hugo.

謝謝你，雨果。

Slide 11, as Hugo says, looks at a number of different features and illustrates, in particular, why the storage of crude in ships has come into play so quickly. With 90% of us on some form of lockdown over the past 45 days in March and April, the IEA forecasted demand for crude has fallen by around 25 million barrels per day during that period.

正如 Hugo 所說，幻燈片 11 著眼於許多不同的特徵，並特別說明了為什麼在船上儲存原油如此迅速地發揮作用。在 3 月和 4 月的過去 45 天裡，我們中有 90% 的人處於某種形式的封鎖狀態，國際能源署預測，在此期間原油需求每天下降約 2500 萬桶。

Yet during that same period, we've seen production actually being maintained at similar levels. This disconnect, we believe, has produced somewhere around about 1.1 billion barrels of excess crude, the same level as the EIA and others estimate is the global onshore capacity for storage. Indeed, earlier today, Reuters reported that the storage facilities onshore in Europe are already full.

然而在同一時期，我們看到生產實際上保持在相似的水平。我們認為，這種脫節已經產生了大約 11 億桶的過剩原油，與 EIA 和其他人估計的全球陸上儲存能力的水平相同。事實上，今天早些時候，路透社報導說，歐洲陸上的儲存設施已經滿了。

This is reflected in the recent move to use ships to store oil, in particular, over the last 3 to 4 weeks. We believe then that despite the OPEC cuts, which has started to bite in the last week or so, and production shut-ins by commercial players, any additional excess production from here is likely to have to find some form of home in storage and, most likely, on ships. This will be a key driver for our market over the summer months, but we believe, as Slide 12 shows, that not all storage is created equal.

這反映在最近使用船舶儲存石油的舉措中，尤其是在過去 3 至 4 週內。我們認為，儘管石油輸出國組織的減產在上週左右開始產生影響，並且商業參與者停產，但這裡任何額外的過剩產量都可能不得不找到某種形式的存儲空間，並且，最有可能在船上。這將是我們夏季市場的主要驅動力，但我們相信，正如幻燈片 12 所示，並非所有存儲都是平等的。

On Slide 12, we believe it's important to take a step back and look as this process has only just begun. It's important to remember that we've got the Iranian fleet, with around 38 VLCCs, and a permanent number of around about 20 to 22 VLCCS, which are always storing oil and is part of the infrastructure chain. This has nothing to do with the current COVID-19-related issues.

在幻燈片 12 上，我們認為重要的是退後一步，看看這個過程才剛剛開始。重要的是要記住，我們擁有伊朗艦隊，擁有大約 38 艘 VLCC，永久數量約為 20 至 22 艘 VLCCS，它們一直在儲存石油，並且是基礎設施鏈的一部分。這與當前與 COVID-19 相關的問題無關。

Therefore, around about 8% of the VLCC fleet in the world has always been otherwise employed before this disconnect between consumption and production started. What is also interesting from Slide 12 is that unlike other periods, when we've had storage requirement, this is not just a VLCC show. Traders, for instance, estimate that 61 Suezmax are currently used for what we would say market storage reasons.

因此，在消費與生產開始脫節之前，世界上大約 8% 的 VLCC 船隊一直在從事其他工作。 Slide 12 同樣有趣的是，與其他時期不同，當我們有存儲需求時，這不僅僅是 VLCC 表演。例如，貿易商估計目前有 61 艘蘇伊士型油輪用於我們所謂的市場儲存原因。

That's already 11% of that particular fleet and that there are 65 VLCCs in market storage at the end of April. The true scale and impact of storage, we believe, therefore, has not yet fully been revealed, given the speed and scale of the changes that are ongoing in the disconnect between production and consumption.

這已經是該特定船隊的 11%，並且在 4 月底市場上有 65 艘 VLCC。因此，我們認為，考慮到生產和消費之間的脫節正在發生變化的速度和規模，存儲的真正規模和影響尚未完全揭示。

So how do we see this developing? We look at this on Slide 13 with a very simple schematic. We look at the demand for storage that is not just driven by those seeking to derive profit via contango, but also increasingly by logistical players, who are forced, either involuntary or voluntarily, to use ships in order to transit oil or store oil.

那麼我們如何看待這種發展呢？我們在幻燈片 13 上用一個非常簡單的原理圖來看這個。我們看到對存儲的需求不僅受到那些尋求通過期貨溢價獲利的人的推動，而且越來越多地受到物流參與者的推動，他們被迫（無論是非自願還是自願）使用船隻來運輸石油或儲存石油。

We believe that this phase will persist well into the second half of 2020. Clearly, while the market focus has been very acute on this, there will be a transition phase in the midterm, as we say, on Slide 13, into a different phase.

我們相信這一階段將持續到 2020 年下半年。顯然，雖然市場對此非常關注，但中期將有一個過渡階段，正如我們在幻燈片 13 中所說的那樣，進入另一個階段.

As the inventory draw starts, if it's slow, then we believe the disruption to stripping will also be slow. If it is more rapid and accelerated, then past experience suggests that the contango price structure can remain in place for a prolonged period of time. In 2015, for instance, we still had 20-plus VLCCs used for storage, even when the market went into backwardation in 2016.

隨著庫存抽取開始，如果它很慢，那麼我們相信剝離的中斷也將很慢。如果它更快和加速，那麼過去的經驗表明，期貨價格結構可以在很長一段時間內保持不變。例如，在 2015 年，我們仍然有 20 多艘 VLCC 用於存儲，即使 2016 年市場進入現貨溢價。

Many commentators believe that this midterm phase will kick in sooner rather than later, and that the inventory drawdown will be rapid and, therefore, will impact on shipping much quicker. We find it difficult to envisage a shipping sector that works in real time, however. Our voyages take off in days, months, and are often spill over quarter end periods, and often take longer than the simple calculation of how long those voyages will take. There is planning. There is congestion, and there are a lot of external factors that impact on our business.

許多評論員認為，這個中期階段會早日開始而不是晚些時候開始，而且庫存會迅速減少，因此會更快地影響航運。然而，我們發現很難設想一個實時運作的航運部門。我們的航程在幾天、幾個月內起飛，並且經常在季度末期間溢出，並且通常比簡單計算這些航程需要多長時間需要更長的時間。有規劃。擁堵，還有很多外部因素影響我們的業務。

However, we are not complacent. Management at Euronav do recognize that this middle phase will provide challenges for the tanker sector. And when the inventory drawdown starts, that is likely to accelerate and bring pressure on our business in terms of freight rates. But it will also bring what we believe is the last phase in Slide 14 and 15, sustained pressure for a resizing of the global tanker fleet, which we looked at in the last couple of slides.

然而，我們並不自滿。 Euronav 的管理層確實認識到，這個中間階段將為油輪行業帶來挑戰。當庫存開始減少時，這可能會加速並給我們的業務帶來運費方面的壓力。但它也將帶來我們認為是幻燈片 14 和 15 的最後階段，即調整全球油輪船隊規模的持續壓力，我們在最後幾張幻燈片中看到了這一點。

Slide 14 shows the large tanker fleet, we believe, is right for resizing. Financing is becoming ever harder and with increased regulation from areas like Basel IV and environmental pressure from the EU and the IMO, this is only going to intensify.

幻燈片 14 顯示，我們認為大型油輪船隊適合調整規模。融資變得越來越困難，隨著巴塞爾協議 IV 等領域監管的加強以及來自歐盟和國際海事組織的環境壓力，這種情況只會加劇。

Contracting of new orders is prevented by the requirement for the new propulsion system in order to meet these new stringent environmental requirements. And with an 18- to 20-year life on average for a VLCC or a Suezmax, ordering a new vessel is also having the additional challenge that the likely medium-term trajectory oil demand is also going to be a negative pressure. All of this is severely restricting the new supply of tankers, reflected in the 23-year low that we see in the order book.

為了滿足這些新的嚴格環境要求，新推進系統的要求阻止了新訂單的簽訂。由於 VLCC 或 Suezmax 的平均壽命為 18 至 20 年，訂購新船還面臨著額外的挑戰，即可能的中期石油需求軌跡也將成為負壓。所有這些都嚴重限制了油輪的新供應，這反映在我們在訂單簿中看到的 23 年低點。

On Slide 15 to sum up, we look at the continued grounds for optimism at the existing fleet in which the large end of the tanker space, in terms of VLCCs and Suezmax, has an awful lot of potential change coming. On average, for every quarter between now and the end of 2021, there were 27 VLCC equivalents due for special survey on vessels aged over 15 years of age.

在幻燈片 15 上總結一下，我們看到了對現有船隊持樂觀態度的持續理由，其中油輪空間的大端，就 VLCC 和蘇伊士型油輪而言，有很多潛在的變化即將到來。平均而言，從現在到 2021 年底，每個季度都有 27 艘 VLCC 當量船齡超過 15 年的船舶需要進行特別檢驗。

Why does this matter? The surveys will require several million dollars' worth of investment to be spent in order to give your ship certification for the following 30 months. Owners will have to have confidence and visibility that they'll be able to make a return in this time frame, which, with low freight rates, is going to be harder to justify.

為什麼這很重要？調查將需要花費數百萬美元的投資，以便為您的船舶提供接下來 30 個月的認證。船東必須有信心和可見性，他們將能夠在這個時間範圍內獲得回報，而在低運費的情況下，這將更難證明其合理性。

For want of a better phrase, this pinch point is critical and historically has often been so. This is usually a catalyst for ships leaving the fleet to an alternative lease or to the scrapyard. To put this into context, though, if 2/3 of the vessels that we see on this final slide were to leave the fleet on Slide 14, the global tanker fleet would resize almost instantly to an oil consumption level of 95 million barrels a day, which is where a lot of commentators believe that even on a bearish scenario, that's where the consumption levels will move off.

換句話說，這個夾點很關鍵，而且歷史上經常如此。這通常是船舶離開船隊轉而另行租賃或前往廢品場的催化劑。不過，為了說明這一點，如果我們在這張最後一張幻燈片上看到的 2/3 的船隻離開幻燈片 14 上的船隊，全球油輪船隊的規模幾乎會立即調整到每天 9500 萬桶的石油消耗水平，許多評論員認為，即使在看跌的情況下，這也是消費水平將會下降的地方。

It's time now. We probably can move on to some questions. That concludes the end of the prepared remarks, and I'll now pass it back to the operator. Thank you.

現在是時候了。我們可能可以繼續討論一些問題。準備好的發言到此結束，我現在將它傳回給接線員。謝謝。

(Operator Instructions) Our first question today comes from Amit Mehrotra from Deutsche Bank.

（操作員說明）我們今天的第一個問題來自德意志銀行的 Amit Mehrotra。

Congrats on a good quarter. I wanted to check your temperature on the commitment to the dividend. In the event that the public equity markets don't give the company full credit for what you guys are paying out, I mean, the strategy itself is quite clear. I believe it also gives you a little bit of wiggle room to reallocate or repurpose the funds for share repurchases.

祝賀一個好的季度。我想檢查一下您對股息承諾的態度。如果公共股票市場沒有對你們支付的資金給予公司充分的信任，我的意思是，戰略本身是非常明確的。我相信這也為您提供了一些迴旋餘地，可以重新分配或重新利用資金進行股票回購。

And then, obviously, you have that AGM meeting coming up on a vote on that aspect. So I just wanted to talk about under what circumstances the company will not pay at least 80% of its net earnings. I think that would just be helpful in trying to understand where your mind is at with respect to that specific item.

然後，很明顯，您將召開 AGM 會議就該方面進行投票。所以我只想說說在什麼情況下公司不會支付至少80%的淨收益。我認為這將有助於嘗試了解您對該特定項目的想法。

Yes, Amit, very good question. You're absolutely right. I mean, when we were thinking about our return to shareholders' policy initially, so more than 4 years ago, and then when we put the guidance out in January, we were thinking about when to apply dividends and went to apply share buyback. I think that in the first quarter, our line of thoughts were very much geared towards dividends because we wanted to show the market that we can distribute 80% of our earnings in dividends.

是的，阿米特，很好的問題。你是絕對正確的。我的意思是，當我們最初考慮我們的股東政策回報時，所以 4 年多以前，然後當我們在 1 月份發布指導意見時，我們正在考慮何時申請股息併申請股票回購。我認為在第一季度，我們的思路非常傾向於股息，因為我們想向市場展示我們可以將 80% 的收益分配為股息。

I think that we heard that some people were skeptic about it. And I think it was important to demonstrate that when we say something, we will follow that policy. Obviously, we're not satisfied with the share price, where it is right now. That doesn't say that we have not been satisfied with the share price throughout the quarter. It has been a very volatile quarter, not only in terms of rates, but also in terms of share price.

我想我們聽說有些人對此持懷疑態度。我認為重要的是要證明，當我們說些什麼時，我們將遵循該政策。顯然，我們對目前的股價並不滿意。這並不是說我們對整個季度的股價不滿意。這是一個非常不穩定的季度，不僅在利率方面，而且在股價方面。

And as I said in my prepared remarks, our goal is not to chase the share price and not to support the share price at every single point in time. So if we feel that the share price is weak for a prolonged period of time, then, obviously, we will prefer share buybacks than dividends.

正如我在準備好的發言中所說，我們的目標不是追逐股價，也不是在每個時間點都支持股價。因此，如果我們認為股價長期疲軟，那麼很明顯，我們更願意回購股票而不是派息。

I don't think that you will ever see us cutting completely dividends. That's not something that we will ever do and, anyway, we have a policy for a minimum fixed dividend. But the balance between share buyback and dividends will very much depend on share price weakness.

我不認為你會看到我們完全削減股息。這不是我們永遠會做的事情，無論如何，我們有一個最低固定股息的政策。但股票回購和股息之間的平衡在很大程度上取決於股價疲軟。

And as I said, at the moment, it doesn't look good. I mean, I don't think it's normal that we are distributing a dividend which represent only for the first 6 months of the year. In fact, only the first 3 months and then a little bit from last year, 11% yield. I mean this is crazy, clearly abnormal.

正如我所說，目前看起來不太好。我的意思是，我認為我們分配僅代表今年前 6 個月的股息是不正常的。事實上，僅前 3 個月和去年相比略有 11% 的收益率。我的意思是這太瘋狂了，顯然不正常。

Right. Okay. I appreciate that. That's pretty clear. I wanted to just pivot on my follow-up to just maybe a more fundamental question about just the oil markets.

正確的。好的。我很感激。這很清楚。我只想關注我的後續行動，也許只是關於石油市場的一個更基本的問題。

And I want to understand, from your perspective, what the eventual -- the impact will be from kind of the eventual destocking of inventories and how you think that plays out in terms of absorption of the tanker fleet.

我想了解，從你的角度來看，最終的影響將來自最終的庫存去庫存，以及你認為這將如何影響油輪船隊的吸收。

Obviously, it's right to assume there's going to be some weakness in rates as vessels are kind of released from floating storage. I think we're already kind of starting to see that in some respects. But how quickly after that do you think the tanker market rebalances?

顯然，隨著船隻從浮動存儲中釋放出來，假設費率會出現一些疲軟是正確的。我認為我們已經開始在某些方面看到這一點。但您認為油輪市場恢復平衡的速度有多快？

You talked a lot about an aging fleet, but, typically, fleets aren't scrapped unless rates are below OpEx levels. And obviously, there's quite a bit of leg down to get there. So if you can just talk to us how quickly do you think the market can rebalance? How long do you think the weakness in the tanker markets could last if we do get a bigger destocking of inventories?

你談了很多關於老化機隊的問題，但通常情況下，除非費率低於運營支出水平，否則機隊不會報廢。顯然，要到達那裡還有很多路要走。那麼，如果你能和我們談談，你認為市場能多快重新平衡？如果我們確實進行更大規模的庫存去庫存，您認為油輪市場的疲軟會持續多久？

Yes. We've tried to explain that on Slide 13, I believe, some future market developments and we have split that between short-term, mid-term, long-term. Short-term is clearly what we are living through now.

是的。我相信，我們已經嘗試在幻燈片 13 上解釋一些未來的市場發展，我們已經將其分為短期、中期和長期。短期顯然是我們現在所經歷的。

And we see that we have continued demand for both trading, transportation, but also storage. As Brian said, we believe that storage demand will continue to increase and influence our markets assuming we support our markets. It's a little bit of a pity that when people say, yes, the rates have halved in the last 2 weeks, yes, right. But you know what? We're still fixing vessels between $60,000 and $75,000 a day.

我們看到我們對貿易、運輸和存儲都有持續的需求。正如 Brian 所說，如果我們支持我們的市場，我們相信存儲需求將繼續增加並影響我們的市場。有點遺憾的是，當人們說，是的，過去 2 週內利率減半時，是的，沒錯。但你知道嗎？我們每天仍在修理船隻，費用在 60,000 美元到 75,000 美元之間。

You look at the TI app, and I think that a vessel was just fixed at $90,000 a day. It doesn't mean that's the average, but I'm just trying to say when we're making good money, but we are coming from extraordinary territory, then people are not happy and I wonder why. Because personally, or at Euronav, we are very happy with the market at $60,000, $65,000 or $70,000 a day.

你看看 TI 應用程序，我認為一艘船的固定價格僅為每天 90,000 美元。這並不意味著那是平均水平，但我只是想說當我們賺了很多錢，但我們來自非凡的領域時，人們就不高興了，我想知道為什麼。因為就個人而言，或者在 Euronav，我們對每天 60,000 美元、65,000 美元或 70,000 美元的市場感到非常滿意。

When it comes to specifically your question of destocking, I think that there are 2 scenarios. There is a quick draw and a slow draw. The quick draw is basically where people are just dumping the oil that have been stored onboard the ships, and ships are returning quickly to the market, which will lead very quickly to the column called long-term, and I'm going to come back to that a minute.

具體說到你的去庫存問題，我認為有兩種情況。有快抽和慢抽。快速提款基本上是人們只是在傾銷儲存在船上的石油，而船舶正在迅速返回市場，這將很快導致稱為長期的專欄，我會回來的到那一分鐘。

What is likely to happen is the slow draw. And why do I say that? Well, simply because the last time we had contango, it took about 12 months for the ships that had been taken on storage and potentially prolonged in their contract to come back fully into the trading fleet.

可能會發生的是緩慢的抽籤。我為什麼這麼說？好吧，僅僅因為我們上次出現期貨溢價，已經入庫並可能延長合同的船隻花了大約 12 個月的時間才完全返回貿易船隊。

And when you think about it, there is a reason for that. If tomorrow all the oil that has been stored is coming back to the market at a point where the market is demanding 95 million or potentially 100 million barrels of consumption per day, well, obviously, the oil price will be negatively impacted.

當您考慮它時，這是有原因的。如果明天所有儲存的石油都在市場需要每天 9500 萬桶或可能 1 億桶的消費量時返回市場，那麼很明顯，油價將受到負面影響。

And if it's negatively impacted by the draw on the inventory, it means that there is a contango being created because the oil price will be at $15 or $20, but everybody knows that when the draw is done, the oil price will be higher, creating the contango curve. When you create the contango curve, you obviously ask more ships to play that game and to store the oil for that contango story.

如果它受到庫存抽取的負面影響，這意味著會產生期貨溢價，因為油價將達到 15 美元或 20 美元，但每個人都知道抽取完成後，油價會更高，創造期貨溢價曲線。當您創建期貨溢價曲線時，您顯然會要求更多的船隻玩該遊戲並為該期貨溢價故事儲存石油。

So that's a little bit what we believe is going to happen. It's not going to be as supportive as what we have seen in the last month and what we are expecting to see probably in the not-too-distant future but it will not be a catastrophe.

所以這就是我們相信會發生的事情。它不會像我們在上個月看到的那樣提供支持，也不會像我們期望在不久的將來看到的那樣提供支持，但這不會是一場災難。

I think that when we will hit weakness in the market is probably when all the ships are coming back to the market. And again, it could be quick, but we don't believe that. And when they are all back, we will need to see what sort of consumption that is out there because many predictions are set for below 100 million barrels of consumption, which is the consumption we had prior to COVID.

我認為，當我們遇到市場疲軟時，可能是所有船舶都返回市場時。再一次，它可能很快，但我們不相信。當他們全部回來時，我們將需要看看那裡的消費量是多少，因為許多預測都設定為低於 1 億桶的消費量，這是我們在 COVID 之前的消費量。

As Brian said, what is interesting is then to look at the older part of the fleet. And people will take the decision to scrap their ships way, way, way before it hits OpEx level. As a matter of fact, you cannot find one tanker market, I'm talking here VLCC, which on average has printed less than $18,000 per day in the last 20 years.

正如布賴恩所說，有趣的是看看艦隊的老部分。在達到 OpEx 水平之前，人們將決定以多種方式報廢他們的船隻。事實上，你找不到一個油輪市場，我在這裡說的是 VLCC，它在過去 20 年中平均每天印刷不到 18,000 美元。

And nevertheless, we have had incredible years in terms of scrapping, the last one being 2018. So it's $8,000, $9,000 above OpEx and, nevertheless, it motivates people to scrap. And why is that? Because people need to spend a big amount of capital, and nowadays even more because of the ballast water treatment system, which is costing $1.5 million.

儘管如此，我們在報廢方面經歷了令人難以置信的幾年，最後一年是 2018 年。所以它比 OpEx 高出 8,000 美元，9,000 美元，儘管如此，它仍然激勵人們報廢。為什麼是這樣？因為人們需要花費大量的資金，而現在更需要花費150萬美元的壓載水處理系統。

So you will need to return in the next 2.5 years when you're taking a ship to dry dock, which is more than 15 years of age. In the next 2.5 years after your dry dock, you will need to get $4 million, $5 million, sometimes $6 million back before you even contemplate the first cent of profit.

因此，當您將船齡超過 15 年的船駛往幹船塢時，您需要在接下來的 2.5 年內返回。在幹船塢之後的 2.5 年內，您需要收回 400 萬美元、500 萬美元，有時甚至需要 600 萬美元才能收回第一筆利潤。

So I don't know a lot of owners who will do that, especially, especially after a period where we have earned so much money. Do you think that we are earning money only to waste it in older assets and passing dry docks? I don't believe so. So the minute the feed is oversupplied, we have the perfect solution.

所以我不知道有多少業主會這樣做，尤其是在我們賺了這麼多錢之後。您是否認為我們賺錢只是為了將其浪費在舊資產和路過乾船塢上？我不這麼認為。因此，一旦飼料供應過剩，我們就有了完美的解決方案。

And as you can see on Slide 15, every single quarter, there's a collection of ships that will need to face that critical question of, do I spend capital? Or do I receive $15 million, $16 million, $17 million, $18 million, whatever the scrap is giving you? I think I know the answer.

正如您在幻燈片 15 中看到的那樣，每個季度，都有一批船舶需要面對這個關鍵問題，即我是否要花錢？或者我會收到 1500 萬美元、1600 萬美元、1700 萬美元、1800 萬美元，無論廢品給你什麼？我想我知道答案了。

Our next question comes from Randy Giveans from Jefferies LLC.

我們的下一個問題來自 Jefferies LLC 的 Randy Giveans。

Yes. I think we can all get bogged down on some details, but congrats on the record quarter. It's clear that the second quarter will be another record quarter. So keep the good work going.

是的。我認為我們都可以在一些細節上陷入困境，但祝賀創紀錄的季度。很明顯，第二季度將是另一個創紀錄的季度。因此，繼續做好工作。

Now looking at Slide 9, on your charters, can you give a little more details around that? How many VLCCS, average duration, average rate? When do they begin? We need some details here.

現在看幻燈片 9，關於你的章程，你能提供更多細節嗎？有多少 VLCCS、平均持續時間、平均速率？他們什麼時候開始？我們需要一些細節。

Yes. Well, it's obviously on purpose that we didn't give too many details. I can tell you that it's both VLCCs and Suezmax. I can tell you that it's not only a contract for 6 months. As a matter of fact, the last 1 is a 2-year contract on a non-eco vessel and we will continue to look at opportunities.

是的。好吧，我們顯然是故意沒有提供太多細節。我可以告訴你，它既是 VLCC 又是 Suezmax。我可以告訴你，這不僅僅是一份 6 個月的合同。事實上，最後一份是非生態船的 2 年合同，我們將繼續尋找機會。

I think that when it's a 6-month contract, quite frankly, we shouldn't differentiate between spot and 6-months contract because you will look at the spots. You will look at the next voyage. You are being asked to deliver the ship promptly, which means that you can completely compare and assess what is more lucrative, leaving it into the spot market or pulling it on a 6-months charter.

我認為當它是一份 6 個月的合同時，坦率地說，我們不應該區分現貨和 6 個月的合同，因為你會看現貨。你會看看下一次航行。您被要求及時交付船舶，這意味著您可以完全比較和評估哪個更有利可圖，將其留在現貨市場或將其拖至 6 個月的租船合同中。

So supposing that percentage, we have 3 or 4 vessels that are on 6-months charter but we only accept to book them because at that time, there might have been a little bit of weakness in the spot market, and at that time, the 6-months contract was paying more.

所以假設這個百分比，我們有 3 或 4 艘租期為 6 個月的船隻，但我們只接受預訂它們，因為當時現貨市場可能有點疲軟，那時， 6個月的合同支付更多。

We've had plenty of other opportunities that we passed on because when you compare $75,000 a day, which is on average what we were offered for 6 months, and a voyage that can give you $130,000, then, obviously, you take the $130,000 for 90 days. So that's a little bit how we assessed this. We have doubled the number of ships on the time charter. That's correct.

我們放棄了很多其他機會，因為當你比較每天 75,000 美元（平均我們提供 6 個月的費用）和一次航程可以給你 130,000 美元時，那麼，很明顯，你將 130,000 美元用於90 天。這就是我們對此的評估方式。我們將定期租船的船隻數量增加了一倍。這是正確的。

We are hopeful that we will see more opportunities for longer duration than 6 months because, as I said, 6 months is very much like the spot market. And whenever we see those opportunities, we are likely to try to grab them because it's good to have a sort of a balanced approach.

我們希望看到更多持續時間超過 6 個月的機會，因為正如我所說，6 個月非常像現貨市場。每當我們看到這些機會時，我們都可能會嘗試抓住它們，因為採用一種平衡的方法是件好事。

Okay. And I guess touching on that, we saw some 1-year time charters above $70,000 a day a few weeks ago. Where is that market now? How robust or liquid is that market for the 1 year? And then any inquiries for 3 years?

好的。我想關於這一點，幾週前我們看到一些 1 年期的定期租船合同每天超過 70,000 美元。那個市場現在在哪裡？該市場在 1 年內有多強勁或流動性如何？然後有3年的查詢嗎？

No. We just did 2 years, option one. And that was something, I would say, unrelated to the current environment. It's an oil major that has a program. And then every year, they come with inquiries for 2 years, option 1, or even 3 years. So we just participated at that tender, and we happen to have a good relationship with them and we have serviced that contract already.

不，我們只做了 2 年，選項一。我想說，那是與當前環境無關的事情。這是一個有程序的石油專業。然後每年，他們都會詢問 2 年，選項 1，甚至 3 年。所以我們剛剛參加了那個招標，我們恰好與他們有良好的關係，我們已經為該合同提供服務。

So I would say we had a head start. The rest that we have seen was more like 6 months. We've seen that others have picked up 1-year contract. At that time, we decided to pass on, either because it would have meant for us committing an eco ship vessel, and we didn't think that there was value into doing that, i.e., we had no other ships in position to do it or because we thought that the rate was a little bit weak for that matter.

所以我想說我們有一個良好的開端。我們看到的其餘時間更像是 6 個月。我們已經看到其他人已經獲得了 1 年的合同。當時，我們決定放棄，要么是因為這意味著我們要建造一艘生態船，但我們認為這樣做沒有任何價值，也就是說，我們沒有其他船隻可以這樣做或者因為我們認為就此而言利率有點低。

At the moment, we're not seeing many 1-year contract. And the majority of the contract that we are seeing is indeed 6 months. The difference with maybe 5, 6 weeks ago is that what we call the Phase 1 of the contango was very much the traders.

目前，我們沒有看到很多 1 年期合同。我們看到的大部分合同確實是 6 個月。與 5、6 週前的不同之處在於，我們所說的期貨溢價的第一階段主要是交易員。

They were just buying physically the oil, storing in our ship, hedging themselves on paper. And they are usually the first movers. So what we are -- the inquiries that we are receiving now is really from people lacking space. I don't know where to put my oil. I need to rent a ship, and that's what I'm going to do.

他們只是在實際購買石油，儲存在我們的船上，在紙面上對沖自己。他們通常是先行者。所以我們是什麼——我們現在收到的詢問實際上是來自缺乏空間的人。我不知道把我的油放在哪裡。我需要租一艘船，這就是我要做的。

It is always a time charter contract for trading with an option to store, but there is -- the way they're going to use the ship is very much as a storage. And you can see -- there are different function on Bloomberg, where you can see the number of ships that have been completely standstill for more than 2 weeks. That's how you can identify the number of ships that have been taken for storage. And you can see that it's growing by the day. And in fact, that's what brokers are reporting also on a daily basis.

它始終是一個帶有存儲選項的定期租船合同，但是有——他們使用這艘船的方式非常像一個存儲。你可以看到——彭博社有不同的功能，在那裡你可以看到完全停滯超過 2 週的船隻數量。這就是您如何確定已被存放的船隻數量的方法。你可以看到它每天都在增長。事實上，這也是經紀人每天報告的內容。

Last, but not least, and Brian mentioned that, we're seeing Suezmax being taken as well. In other contango cycle, it was very rare that there was so many Suezmax being taken. That's a demonstration that clearly people are looking for spaces.

最後但同樣重要的是，Brian 提到，我們也看到 Suezmax 也被收購。在其他期貨溢價週期中，如此多的蘇伊士型油輪被收購是非常罕見的。這表明人們顯然正在尋找空間。

Okay. And then just quickly, in terms of the 6-month charter that you mentioned, you're getting a lot of -- that market is very liquid. What kind of rates are you seeing for 6-month inquiries?

好的。然後很快，就你提到的 6 個月租約而言，你得到了很多——那個市場流動性很強。您看到 6 個月查詢的費率是多少？

Anywhere between $65,000 and still $80,000. It depends a little bit where you're doing it. It depends if the ship is going to move, or if you believe that the ship is going to move, at the start or at the end of the voyage. So there are a couple of details that will influence the rate. But I think that it's maybe a little bit weaker than what we saw in the first phase, but not that much for the time being.

在 65,000 美元到 80,000 美元之間的任何地方。這有點取決於你在哪裡做。這取決於船是否會移動，或者您是否相信船會移動，是在航行開始時還是在航行結束時。因此，有幾個細節會影響匯率。但我認為它可能比我們在第一階段看到的要弱一點，但暫時不會那麼弱。

Perfect. Sounds good. And yes, just public service announcement for the shareholders. They have to hold the shares on May 28 and, I guess, June 15 to get these dividends. So selling this month is not going to get them any dividends.

完美的。聽起來不錯。是的，只是針對股東的公共服務公告。他們必須在 5 月 28 日持有股票，我猜，6 月 15 日才能獲得這些股息。因此，本月出售不會讓他們獲得任何股息。

That's for sure. Thank you for the reminder, Randy.

這是肯定的。謝謝你的提醒，蘭迪。

Our next question comes from Greg Wasikowski from Webber Research.

我們的下一個問題來自 Webber Research 的 Greg Wasikowski。

It's actually Mike on with Greg. So Hugo, if we could just go to Slide 11 in your deck, I think this kind of sums up where the market is in a pretty concise way. And so obviously, I want to dig in the storage bit. First and foremost, if you look at the demand recovery that's implied by the IEA numbers, right, you're talking about the $20 million to $25 million spike in demand between now and July.

實際上是 Mike 和 Greg 在一起。所以 Hugo，如果我們可以轉到幻燈片 11 中的幻燈片，我認為這以非常簡潔的方式總結了市場所在的位置。很明顯，我想挖掘存儲位。首先，如果你看一下 IEA 數據所暗示的需求復蘇，你說的是從現在到 7 月期間 2000 萬至 2500 萬美元的需求激增。

Given the lead time associated with international transport, are you guys seeing the green shoots of that kind of demand recovery? Yet, considering that based on most of the published international estimated recovery data, it would have been starting at this point?

鑑於與國際運輸相關的交貨時間，你們是否看到了這種需求復甦的萌芽？然而，考慮到根據大多數已公佈的國際估計恢復數據，它會在此時開始嗎？

No. But I don't think that we're the best people to see that because, indeed, if there is a recovery in demand, I mean, let's not forget that there is quite a lot of product that have been stalled and that's very much where you see the demand.

不，但我不認為我們是看到這一點的最佳人選，因為事實上，如果需求復蘇，我的意思是，我們不要忘記有相當多的產品已經停滯非常多的地方你看到的需求。

So the demand will come from the consumers of petroleum products, which will then send a signal to the refiners, and the refiners will then take more crude oil. And if they take more crude oil, they will probably process the stuff that they have put on storage themselves nearby their facilities before touching either strategic facilities or even what is onboard the vessels.

所以石油產品的消費者會有需求，然後會向煉油廠發出信號，然後煉油廠就會拿走更多的原油。而且，如果他們獲取更多原油，他們可能會在接觸戰略設施甚至船上的東西之前，先處理自己在設施附近儲存的東西。

Yes. Maybe I can frame it a bit differently. Like we can use rate as an indicator there, but there can be a lot of momentum when you get into rates that are 2 and 3x your reference rate, right, when you're getting into the -- closer to $100,000 a day, a lot of that is based on owner momentum and, frankly, kind of the individual negotiating. So I was just curious whether you've seen anything from an operational standpoint that would suggest it.

是的。也許我可以用不同的方式來構建它。就像我們可以在那裡使用利率作為指標一樣，但是當您進入參考利率的 2 倍和 3 倍的利率時，可能會有很大的動力，當您進入 - 接近每天 100,000 美元時，其中很多是基於所有者的動力，坦率地說，是一種個人談判。所以我很好奇你是否從運營的角度看到了任何暗示它的東西。

If I look at the -- that implied here -- shows kind of a peak in June at about 300 million to 400 million barrels of storage. Based on what you're seeing right now, do you think that's the right month we see a peak in storage?

如果我看一下——這裡暗示的——顯示出 6 月份的峰值，約為 3 億至 4 億桶的存儲量。根據您現在看到的情況，您認為這是我們看到存儲高峰的正確月份嗎？

And obviously, this can change quite a bit, but where would you peg a cumulative voting storage peak for the market right now? I think that would help everybody quite a bit if you could just weigh in knowing everything could change very quickly, but I'm not holding you to it, but where is the peak?

顯然，這可能會發生很大變化，但您現在將市場的累積投票存儲峰值掛在何處？我認為，如果你能權衡一下，知道一切都會很快改變，那會對每個人都有很大幫助，但我不堅持，但高峰在哪裡？

Let's -- I don't think that when we -- when Brian was kind enough to read the forward-looking statement or the few words that we always said at the beginning of this call, I was thinking, this has never been so true. The information discussed on this call is based on information as of today.

讓我們——我不認為當我們——當布賴恩友好地閱讀前瞻性聲明或我們在電話會議開始時總是說的幾句話時，我在想，這從未如此真實.本次電話會議上討論的信息基於截至今日的信息。

So absolutely right, things can change very quickly. I think that the reason why we've put this graph on Page 11 is because we believe that's a very likely scenario. So yes, indeed, we see the storage onboard vessels peaking. The storage is everywhere, but certainly onboard the vessels peaking in June '20, whether it's at the start of the month, middle of the month or the end of the month, don't ask me.

所以絕對正確，事情會很快改變。我認為我們將此圖表放在第 11 頁的原因是因為我們認為這是一種非常可能的情況。所以是的，確實，我們看到船上的存儲量達到頂峰。存儲無處不在，但肯定是在 20 年 6 月達到峰值的船上，無論是在月初、月中還是月底，不要問我。

And then let's not forget that most of those contracts will last 6 months and so it will take 6 months before you release that oil into the market. And we believe that the first oil that will be grabbed from the storages as from the land storage and the ones that are near the facilities, but I think that it is good to monitor that and to monitor what happens until the end of this month and certainly in June.

然後我們不要忘記，這些合同中的大部分將持續 6 個月，因此需要 6 個月的時間才能將石油投放市場。我們相信，第一批石油將從陸上儲存和設施附近的儲存中提取，但我認為監測這一點並監測到本月底發生的事情是很好的，當然在六月。

And as we've seen, the number of vessels that are being taken at the moment on storage is evolving almost every day. You see that through different reports. You can monitor that on Bloomberg and it's a number that continues to creep up at the moment.

正如我們所見，目前存放的船隻數量幾乎每天都在變化。您可以通過不同的報告看到這一點。你可以在 Bloomberg 上監控它，這個數字目前還在繼續攀升。

Mike, if I can interject. It's Brian Gallagher here. In terms of the numbers, just so everyone is clear on the call as well, I think it'd be helpful. We're taking an extraordinarily -- what we think a very extremely conservative view, the buildup we've got for May, we're assuming 14, 1-4, million barrels a day of disconnect, and then we see that -- and we're pricing in a very conservative, I think, 2 million additional barrels being the disconnect in June.

邁克，如果我可以插話的話。我是 Brian Gallagher。就數字而言，為了讓每個人都清楚電話會議，我認為這會有所幫助。我們正在採取一個非常 - 我們認為非常保守的觀點，我們在 5 月份獲得的積累，我們假設每天有 14、1-4、百萬桶斷開連接，然後我們看到 -我認為，我們的定價非常保守，6 月份將額外增加 200 萬桶。

So that's why you have that flattening out. I know what the research that you've written and others have written would suggest that, that would actually be quite an aggressive outcome on the positive side, and things returning back to normal very, very quickly.

所以這就是為什麼你把它弄平了。我知道你和其他人寫的研究表明，從積極的方面來看，這實際上是一個非常積極的結果，而且事情會非常、非常快地恢復正常。

So if anything, we would say the risk from the charts we're putting here are actually not trying to sort of back our case that we believe that the storage is going to continue to be an issue. We're not doing it because of just the barrels. There's a sense that this could actually sort of drift further to the right.

因此，如果有的話，我們會說我們放在這裡的圖表中的風險實際上並沒有試圖支持我們認為存儲將繼續成為一個問題的論點。我們不這樣做只是因為桶。有一種感覺，這實際上可能會進一步向右漂移。

And that's before we look at what we said in our prepared remarks, that this shipping doesn't work in real time, as Hugo said just there or was alluding to, we don't anticipate that if this thing finishes in the middle of June, that all the barrels will be redistributed in the third week of June. Shipping doesn't work like that.

那是在我們查看我們在準備好的評論中所說的話之前，正如 Hugo 所說或暗示的那樣，這種運輸不是實時的，我們預計如果這件事在 6 月中旬完成，所有桶將在 6 月的第三週重新分配。航運不是這樣的。

And like I say, we believe there's a latent amount of storage capacity, which is yet to sort of emerge because ships are on their way to take these contracts that then go into storage. So this is going to be a very fast-moving and dynamic market, as we know, but we've tried to be very conservative on this slide.

就像我說的那樣，我們相信存在潛在的存儲容量，這種存儲容量尚未出現，因為船隻正在前往接收這些合同然後進入存儲的途中。因此，正如我們所知，這將是一個非常快速和充滿活力的市場，但我們試圖在這張幻燈片上非常保守。

Great. And I guess that is kind of what I'm getting at. So there's always a difference between natural conservatism and an aversion to the mean any time you're talking about variables this big and you're stretching out for a number of quarters. So what -- I think that there's a lot of -- there's obviously a lot of ambiguity because we're on unchartered territory.

偉大的。我想這就是我要表達的意思。因此，每當您談論這麼大的變量並且要延長多個季度時，自然保守主義和對均值的厭惡之間總是存在差異。那麼 - 我認為有很多 - 顯然存在很多歧義，因為我們處於未知領域。

So what I'm asking is if you were to overlay your estimates in terms of where you actually think, the implication is that we're not -- your implications were not done building yet, and that, that could persist for a while, and the slope of that recovery, probably a bit shallower than what kind of the IEA data would suggest.

所以我要問的是，如果你要根據你的實際想法來疊加你的估計，這意味著我們沒有——你的影響還沒有完成構建，而且，這可能會持續一段時間，以及復甦的斜率，可能比 IEA 數據所暗示的類型要淺一些。

So I guess what I'm asking is if you could put a vague number on where you think that peak ends up being based on what you can see in front of you right now, and what month do you think that ends up being? I think a degree of clarity around that would be helpful just considering we're all dealing with some pretty vague and smoothed out slopes here.

所以我想我要問的是，你是否可以根據你現在可以看到的情況，在你認為峰值最終出現的地方加上一個模糊的數字，你認為最終是哪一個月？考慮到我們都在這里處理一些非常模糊和平滑的斜坡，我認為一定程度的清晰度會有所幫助。

Yes. We are a little bit on the same camp because who knows? But if -- the number that Brian mentioned, the 14 million barrels to be built up in May, and God knows that we are early May and only 2 million barrels in June, then I think as you -- I mean, clearly, you could see twice as many VLCC and twice as many Suezmax being taken for storage.

是的。我們有點在同一個陣營，因為誰知道呢？但是，如果——布賴恩提到的數字，即 5 月份將增加的 1400 萬桶，上帝知道我們現在是 5 月初，而 6 月份只有 200 萬桶，那麼我和你一樣認為——我的意思是，很明顯，你可以看到兩倍的 VLCC 和兩倍的蘇伊士型油輪被用於存儲。

And then, obviously, that would happen before the end of June. So you will clearly see that. And that would have a positive impact for the ships that are trading because there's still a lot of demand for transporting the oil. So the spot market should be a reflection of the diminishing supply side of the world fleet. As far as the other side of the trade is concerned, i.e., when are we going to see that -- the oil being drawn from those ships?

然後，很明顯，這將在 6 月底之前發生。所以你會清楚地看到這一點。這將對進行貿易的船舶產生積極影響，因為運輸石油的需求仍然很大。因此，現貨市場應該反映出世界船隊供應量的減少。就貿易的另一方而言，即我們什麼時候才能看到——從這些船上抽取石油？

I'm not going to repeat what I said to an earlier question on Page 13. And there are different scenarios. It seems that a slow draw is more likely to happen than a quick draw because the impact on the oil price itself will mean that then you are being asked again to store just for commercial reasons, not for capacity reasons.

我不會重複我之前在第 13 頁上對一個問題所說的話。而且有不同的情況。似乎緩慢抽取比快速抽取更有可能發生，因為對油價本身的影響將意味著你再次被要求儲存只是出於商業原因，而不是出於產能原因。

Right. Okay. That's helpful. I think what you -- usually the equities is you're trading off on ambiguity in the notion that we're rolling over instead of putting a bit of a fine point on it because I think it would be helpful. But if I can follow up offline. I'll turn it over.

正確的。好的。這很有幫助。我認為你 - 通常股票是你在我們正在滾動而不是在它上面放一點點好點的概念中的模糊性進行權衡，因為我認為這會有所幫助。但如果我可以離線跟進。我會把它翻過來。

Our next question comes from Greg Lewis from BTIG.

我們的下一個問題來自 BTIG 的 Greg Lewis。

Yes. Just following up a little bit differently on Mike's question. I think the confusion is around the contango and the fact that, I guess, what you're saying is a lot of the storage is going to be related more to logistical bottlenecks, which is what we saw earlier this year. I guess the way I would like to ask it is, clearly, this won't be driven by traders. It will be driven by state oil companies.

是的。只是對 Mike 的問題進行了一些不同的跟進。我認為混亂是圍繞期貨溢價的，我想，你所說的很多存儲將更多地與物流瓶頸有關，這就是我們今年早些時候看到的。我想我想問的方式是，很明顯，這不會由交易員驅動。它將由國有石油公司推動。

Have you gotten any indications from them that this is happening? And asking it another way, if I'm a major oil company, and I'm going to take a ship, and I might not necessarily have any place to put the oil, do I even have to communicate that, that is a storage contract? Or could I just simply charter the vessel and then lay it out on demurrage and then just kind of wait?

你有沒有從他們那裡得到任何跡象表明這正在發生？換個方式問，如果我是一家大型石油公司，我要乘船，我可能不一定有任何地方放油，我什至需要傳達這一點，那就是儲存合同？還是我可以簡單地租船，然後支付滯期費，然後等待？

Normally, that's not what you -- because, of course, when you negotiate a rate, it's between a load port and a discharge port. And then you negotiate the world scale around that and you use the rates that are being published once a year, as you know, and you negotiate a premium discount. That's what we call the world scale, which is above 100% or below 100%.

通常情況下，這不是你想要的——因為當然，當你協商一個費率時，它是在裝貨港和卸貨港之間。然後你圍繞這個世界範圍進行談判，你使用每年發布一次的費率，正如你所知，然後你就保費折扣進行談判。也就是我們所說的世界規模，高於100%或低於100%。

So it's very difficult to play a game where you say, "I'm going to ask you to load the oil in the AG. And then I will pretend to go to China, but I won't deliver the oil in China." So what they do is usually they ask us for an option to store the oil. And then if we go to the option, then it's a rate per day. And very quickly, the contract is being turned into a time charter contract, where we have been paid in advance rather than paid at the end of the voyage.

所以很難玩這樣的遊戲，你說，“我要讓你把油裝到 AG 裡。然後我會假裝去中國，但我不會在中國運送油。”所以他們通常會要求我們提供儲存石油的選項。然後，如果我們選擇該選項，那麼它就是每天的費率。很快，合同就變成了定期租船合同，我們已經提前收到了付款，而不是在航程結束時付款。

It is true that some people, and I have no doubt that they didn't design that, have ended up having ships that were arriving at the discharge port and had to wait weeks, if not months, in some locations and, of course, they had to wait being paid the demurrage rate.

確實有些人，我相信他們沒有設計，最終讓船隻到達卸貨港，不得不在某些地方等待數週，甚至數月，當然，他們不得不等待支付滯期費。

Now you have to know that the demurrage rate is usually very close to the time charter equivalent that we calculate after agreeing the freight rates. So unless your ship is waiting at a pool freight -- at a pool demurrage rate because the TC was not that good, you are relatively happy about that rate as well. So I don't think there is any design.

現在您要知道，滯期費率通常非常接近我們在約定運費後計算的期租當量。因此，除非您的船正在以聯合運費等待——由於 TC 不是那麼好而以聯合滯期費率等待，否則您對這個費率也相對滿意。所以我認為沒有任何設計。

So when you ask me the question, do we see a difference between the -- what we call the first phase and the second phase? Yes, in the first phase, pretty much all the people asking for a storage option were traders. And I think that we have to accept that those guys also have some limits on the balance sheet because let's not forget that those guys are not only trading oil, they're trading all kinds of products and it's not pretty out there.

所以當你問我這個問題時，我們是否看到我們所說的第一階段和第二階段之間的區別？是的，在第一階段，幾乎所有要求存儲選項的人都是交易員。而且我認為我們必須接受這些人在資產負債表上也有一些限制，因為我們不要忘記這些人不僅在交易石油，他們還在交易各種產品，而且那裡的產品並不漂亮。

So the amount of balance sheet commitment they can do, I think, has reached the top. And what we're seeing today is more, I would say, the conventional oil people, who are looking for space indeed, but they will be relatively straightforward about it and will rent the ship under a TC contract, paying you a daily rate that is agreed between them and us.

因此，我認為他們可以做的資產負債表承諾量已經達到了頂峰。我想說，我們今天看到的更多是傳統石油人，他們確實在尋找空間，但他們對此會相對直截了當，會根據 TC 合同租用這艘船，每天支付給你的費用他們和我們之間達成一致。

Okay. Great. And then just what, I guess, my follow-up will be around your -- the fleet tab on the website. I guess, based on your comments, 20% of the fleet is fixed. But as I look at these -- the new time charter vessels on this tab, based on your comments, it's safe to -- should I be thinking that the incremental ones that have shown up are 1-year time charters, not 6 months? Is that kind of the right way to think about that?

好的。偉大的。然後，我想，我的後續行動將圍繞您的 - 網站上的艦隊標籤。我想，根據您的評論，20% 的機隊是固定的。但是當我看到這些——根據你的評論，這個選項卡上的新定期租船是安全的——我是否應該認為已經出現的增量是 1 年定期租船，而不是 6 個月？這種思考方式是否正確？

No. We have -- yes, you're right that we have this internal debate of whether we should treat 6-months' time charter contract as a spot or equivalent to the spot. And that's certainly what we view in our philosophy, in our mind and, therefore, what do we do on the website.

不，我們 - 是的，你是對的，我們有關於我們是否應該將 6 個月的定期租船合同視為現貨或等同於現貨的內部辯論。這當然是我們在我們的理念中、在我們的思想中所看到的，因此，我們在網站上做什麼。

So we're not trying to be cute about it. We're just trying to be -- well, transparent if we may be and trying to extract more value out of the market. But what we have done is very much 3 contracts -- on VLCC 3 contracts, 6 months, 1 of 2 years, option one. And on the Suezmax, I believe that we have done 1 for 4 months and then 2 for 8 or 9 months. That is in addition of what's overall.

所以我們並不是想表現得很可愛。我們只是在努力做到——好吧，如果可能的話，做到透明，並試圖從市場中獲取更多價值。但我們所做的是非常多的 3 份合同——VLCC 3 份合同，6 個月，2 年中的 1 份，選項一。在 Suezmax 上，我相信我們已經完成 1 次 4 個月，然後 2 次 8 或 9 個月。這是整體的補充。

Our next question comes from Joe Mares from Trium.

我們的下一個問題來自 Trium 的 Joe Mares。

And as a long-term Euronav shareholder and listener to these calls, it's interesting, nobody brings up your scrubbing decision today, but I just wanted to say I think you've shown a lot of wisdom in how you approach that issue and resisted a lot of short-term pressure. So as a long-term shareholder, I appreciate a long-term outlook.

作為 Euronav 的長期股東和這些電話的聽眾，有趣的是，今天沒有人提出您的清理決定，但我只想說，我認為您在處理該問題和抵制問題方面表現出了很多智慧短期壓力很大。因此，作為長期股東，我欣賞長期前景。

My question, if we can discuss in a bit more detail, there have been a lot of headlines about COVID-19 and impact on particular yards or quarantines or bringing things in and out of ports, et cetera.

我的問題是，如果我們可以更詳細地討論一下，有很多關於 COVID-19 的頭條新聞以及對特定庭院或隔離區或將物品進出港口等的影響。

And I'm wondering how that has impacted basically the special surveys, et cetera? Because it seems as though that's one of the thing, besides rates, which probably delays the ability of people to go back into special survey. And if you can discuss that from an operational and how that's played out perspective. If you have to go in for a survey now, kind of what do you do?

我想知道這基本上對特別調查等有何影響？因為這似乎是除了利率之外的其中一件事，這可能會延遲人們返回特殊調查的能力。如果你可以從運營的角度討論它，以及它是如何發揮作用的。如果你現在必須參加調查，你會怎麼做？

Well, Joe, first of all, thank you very much for being a long-term shareholder, and thank you very much for your remarks. It's -- we are also happy about the decision that we took. As far as COVID-19 is concerned, in fact, you've seen 3 phases. And you've seen the Asian phase very much dominated, at least in the news line, by China. Then it hit Europe and then it hit the U.S.

好吧，喬，首先，非常感謝你成為長期股東，非常感謝你的發言。這是 - 我們也對我們做出的決定感到高興。就 COVID-19 而言，事實上，您已經看到了 3 個階段。你已經看到亞洲階段在很大程度上由中國主導，至少在新聞界是這樣。然後它襲擊了歐洲，然後襲擊了美國。

As most of the shipyards, where we're doing repair and maintenance, i.e., our special surveys are concerned, they are in China and sort of Singapore region. China has completely reopened for those shipyards. But it is true that it has created a bit of a lag because for approximately 6 to 8 weeks, it was not possible to take a ship there.

與我們進行維修和保養的大多數造船廠一樣，即我們的特別調查所關注的，它們位於中國和新加坡地區。中國已經對這些造船廠完全重新開放。但確實造成了一些滯後，因為大約 6 到 8 週的時間裡，不可能在那裡乘船。

We took, at that time, one ship in Singapore and then Singapore decided to close down. We were fortunate enough to have finished the survey and to be able to leave that shipyard. But we also know that some other ship owners had their ships just being stuck there and with no work being conducted. The same thing happened to some people still retrofitting scrubbers and so some ships were affected there.

當時我們在新加坡拿了一艘船，然後新加坡決定關閉。我們很幸運地完成了調查，並能夠離開那個造船廠。但我們也知道，其他一些船東的船隻是被困在那裡，沒有進行任何工作。同樣的事情發生在一些仍在改裝洗滌器的人身上，因此那裡的一些船隻受到了影響。

Today, if you want to take your ship and do a special survey, you clearly can do that, mostly in China. Singapore is a little bit more restricted or still closed at the moment, but there are plenty of yards in China that will do it for the size of ships that we have.

今天，如果你想乘船做一次特別調查，你顯然可以做到，主要是在中國。新加坡目前受到更多限製或仍處於關閉狀態，但中國有很多船廠可以根據我們擁有的船舶尺寸進行這項工作。

It's still a little bit too early to assess the impact for the construction yard, the building yard where you're building your new buildings. Initially, what we heard from Korea, who's sourcing a lot of things from China, is that because China had closed down for 6 to 8 weeks, they were having delays. But it seems that the Koreans are so efficient that they have been able to recover these delays. And so they'll be in a position to deliver the ships that they can or want to deliver.

現在評估對建築場的影響還為時過早，建築場是您建造新建築物的建築場。最初，我們從從中國採購很多東西的韓國那裡聽到的是，由於中國關閉了 6 到 8 週，他們有延誤。但看起來韓國人的效率如此之高，以至於他們已經能夠挽回這些延誤。因此，他們將能夠交付他們能夠或想要交付的船隻。

Then last, but not least, and that's a rumor which is unconfirmed, but we heard that some new buildings order had been canceled in China during the COVID period, as the Chinese yards didn't know how long it would take to recover and they were facing specific clause in their contracts which allowed the owner to stop the contract as it was before the start of the construction. So I don't know if it's true. But Brian, if you help me, I think we heard that about 6 vessels, if I'm not mistaken.

最後但並非最不重要的一點是，這是一個未經證實的謠言，但我們聽說在 COVID 期間中國取消了一些新建築訂單，因為中國造船廠不知道需要多長時間才能恢復，他們他們面臨合同中的特定條款，允許業主在施工開始前停止合同。所以不知道是不是真的。但是布賴恩，如果你幫我的話，我想我們聽說過大約有 6 艘船，如果我沒記錯的話。

Correct, yes.

正確，是的。

Yes. So I mean, to be confirmed would be, again, a very good news for an order book, which already look very, very light.

是的。所以我的意思是，再次確認對於訂單簿來說是一個非常好的消息，訂單簿看起來已經非常非常輕。

Our next question comes from Jon Chappell from Evercore ISI.

我們的下一個問題來自 Evercore ISI 的 Jon Chappell。

Hugo, first question is for you. First question on S&P. So well times disposals of non-core tonnage, well time purchases of newer tonnage. Without asking exactly what the plans are next, as you see the market layout with the different possible scenarios to go out and looking at the asset values today, are you more of a buyer or a seller of assets for the next 6 months?

雨果，第一個問題是給你的。關於標準普爾的第一個問題。因此，及時處置非核心噸位，及時購買新噸位。不用問下一步的具體計劃是什麼，當您看到具有不同可能場景的市場佈局並查看今天的資產價值時，您在接下來的 6 個月內更像是資產的買家還是賣家？

I would tell you, and that's not going to surprise you, we are more of an opportunistic buyer and seller. And I think that that's a little bit what we've tried to demonstrate on this slide. But quite frankly, it may be time to praise the people who are looking after S&P at Euronav because they do a fantastic job really trying to find the good opportunities, be it on the selling side, be it on the buying side.

我會告訴你，這不會讓你感到驚訝，我們更像是一個機會主義的買家和賣家。我認為這就是我們試圖在這張幻燈片上展示的一點點。但坦率地說，可能是時候表揚在 Euronav 照看標準普爾的人了，因為他們確實在努力尋找好機會方面做得非常出色，無論是在賣方方面，還是在買方方面。

So I think that the -- what you see on the index, you are probably a little bit more of a seller. But again, we're not an asset trader. I mean we like to continue to operate a fairly large fleet. I think that's what -- where we're good at. But we also like to take care of our assets, and that means rejuvenation.

所以我認為——你在指數上看到的，你可能更像是一個賣家。但同樣，我們不是資產交易商。我的意思是我們希望繼續運營一個相當大的機隊。我認為這就是我們擅長的地方。但我們也喜歡照顧我們的資產，這意味著恢復活力。

And I think going forward, it's going to be very important to make sure that we have very, very economical ships. So swapping all our assets, which are typically consuming more, for more modern assets is certainly not a bad thing, especially when you can sell ahead of the index at the time of selling and below the index at time of buying. So if we find more opportunities there, we're going to continue.

而且我認為展望未來，確保我們擁有非常非常經濟的船隻將非常重要。因此，將我們所有通常消耗更多的資產換成更現代的資產當然不是一件壞事，尤其是當您可以在賣出時先於指數賣出並在買入時低於指數時賣出。因此，如果我們在那裡找到更多機會，我們將繼續。

As far as growth, because this is more a rejuvenation exercise, as far as growth is concerned, I think that Euronav will continue to be opportunistic. We'll continue to be there to try to further consolidate the market, further grow the platform. I think we have a platform which demonstrated it's working fairly well, very strong balance sheet. But that doesn't mean our operational leverage is not good.

就增長而言，因為這更像是一種複興運動，就增長而言，我認為 Euronav 將繼續投機取巧。我們將繼續努力進一步鞏固市場，進一步發展平台。我認為我們有一個平台可以證明它運作良好，資產負債表非常強大。但這並不意味著我們的運營槓桿不好。

It's, in fact, as demonstrated in this quarter, last quarter and hopefully the next one, phenomenal operational leverage and, at the same time, very, very solid company in case there are some weakness. And we know we are humble enough to never predict what the next quarter will be. We can exchange views. As I said earlier, everything that we say is true as far as today is concerned, but tomorrow maybe very different.

事實上，正如本季度、上個季度以及下一個季度所證明的那樣，它具有驚人的運營槓桿，同時，如果存在一些弱點，它是非常非常穩固的公司。而且我們知道我們很謙虛，永遠不會預測下一季度會發生什麼。我們可以交換意見。正如我之前所說，就今天而言，我們所說的一切都是正確的，但明天可能會大不相同。

So I think a big consolidation of big fleet acquisition, to the extent it's possible, will more likely take place in the down part of the cycle. But as far as picking up assets here and there, it will depend on what we can find and whether we see that there is value into them or not.

因此，我認為，在可能的範圍內，大型機隊收購的大規模整合更有可能發生在周期的下半部分。但就在這里和那裡挑選資產而言，這將取決於我們能找到什麼，以及我們是否認為它們有價值。

Okay. And the second one, I don't know if it's for Brian or for Hugo. And I think we've beaten the storage horse to death. And you guys had a really good presentation on it. But if we're trying to kind of figure out why the storage number keeps rising, all the good things you talked about and yet the rates have collapsed, I'm trying to put those 2 together.

好的。第二個，我不知道是給 Brian 還是給 Hugo。而且我認為我們已經擊敗了存儲馬。你們對此做了很好的介紹。但是，如果我們試圖弄清楚為什麼存儲數量不斷上升，你談到的所有好東西，但利率卻暴跌，我試圖把這兩個放在一起。

And the producers were going full bore in April, and now it seems like they're scaling back in May. So is there any way to kind of gauge the actual transport demand and the impact that that's having as producers scale back in May vis a vis the beneficial impact of the storage?

生產商在四月份全力以赴，現在看來他們在五月份縮減了規模。那麼，有沒有什麼方法可以衡量實際的運輸需求，以及生產商在 5 月份縮減規模時所產生的影響，以及儲存的有益影響？

Well, I...

嗯，我...

Maybe, Brian, you want to take that.

也許，布賴恩，你想接受它。

I'll take the question to Brian. Yes, go ahead.

我會把這個問題交給布賴恩。好，去吧。

Sure. Jonathan, yes, I mean, as we're all a little bit groping around in the dark a little bit, in a fast-moving dynamic situation, we're no different. I think we feel that as the industry does that there's another leg to the storage play to come short term from what we see from some of the plans and what we see from some of the forward cargo patterns.

當然。喬納森，是的，我的意思是，我們都在黑暗中摸索著，在快速變化的動態情況下，我們沒有什麼不同。我認為我們認為，隨著行業的發展，從我們從一些計劃中看到的和我們從一些遠期貨運模式中看到的，短期內存儲遊戲還有另一條腿。

But in terms of the demand side of things, yes, you're exactly right. I wish there was the one variable. But I think you have to remember that roughly 50% to 55% of oil in the demand and use is in transportation. So our view would be it's going to be more sluggish as a recovery.

但就事物的需求方面而言，是的，你是完全正確的。我希望只有一個變量。但我認為你必須記住，在需求和使用中，大約 50% 到 55% 的石油用於運輸。因此，我們的觀點是，隨著復甦的進行，它會更加緩慢。

But I know, and there are other views, and we've been very forthright in public this week in terms of the sentiment is, obviously, very important as well. And as we've seen this week with the oil price falling -- or in the last week or so, rather, the oil price falling and the contango coming down, that's obviously provided a level of support that we had for contango and for higher rates has dropped materially.

但我知道，還有其他觀點，本週我們在公開場合非常直率地表達了情緒，顯然，這也非常重要。正如我們本週看到的那樣，油價下跌——或者在上週左右，更確切地說，油價下跌，期貨溢價下降，這顯然為我們對期貨溢價和更高價提供了一定程度的支持利率大幅下降。

I think it's just -- we have to get, as Hugo said, right at the start of this call, the volatility is something which we're all used to on this call, and people who follow the stocks. But even someone who has experience as you in this space, it's been incredibly volatile on another level over the last 2 months.

我認為這只是——正如雨果所說，我們必須在這次電話會議開始時就明白，波動性是我們在這次電話會議上以及關注股票的人都習慣的。但即使是像您一樣在這個領域有經驗的人，在過去 2 個月裡，它在另一個層面上也出現了令人難以置信的波動。

I think it's just going to be a moving piece of the dynamic, and it wouldn't surprise us to see continued volatility in this space. I know it's not a very adequate answer maybe, but it is just very difficult -- until we get some -- until we get some tangible signs of lockdown finishing, I don't think there's a model out there.

我認為這將成為動態的一部分，看到這個領域的持續波動我們不會感到驚訝。我知道這可能不是一個非常充分的答案，但這只是非常困難——直到我們得到一些——直到我們得到一些鎖定結束的切實跡象，我認為那裡沒有模型。

In Europe, we're seeing Germany next week making -- start making moves. But we're going to have other economies like Spain and the U.K., which are going to take longer. So it's going to be, I think, a case-by-case basis, unfortunately.

在歐洲，我們將看到德國下週開始採取行動。但是我們將會有其他經濟體，例如西班牙和英國，這將需要更長的時間。不幸的是，我認為這將是一個個案的基礎。

Our next question comes from Chris Wetherbee from Citi.

我們的下一個問題來自花旗銀行的 Chris Wetherbee。

Yes, maybe a short-term one and then maybe a longer-term one. First, in terms of the coverage that you procured in 2Q, just kind of curious how much of that spills over into the third quarter.

是的，也許是短期的，然後是長期的。首先，就您在第二季度獲得的覆蓋範圍而言，有點好奇其中有多少會溢出到第三季度。

If you could talk a little bit about sort of how that sort of short-term as well as your term, obviously, we would know sort of the longer-term charters that you've signed up, but in terms of the shorter-term stuff, how much spills over into 3Q?

如果你能談談那種短期和你的期限，顯然，我們會知道你簽署的長期租約，但就短期而言東西，有多少溢出到第三季度？

Very little. I think that we've booked less than 5% of the third quarter at this point in time.

很少。我認為此時我們已經預訂了不到第三季度的 5%。

Okay. That's helpful. I appreciate that. And then I guess the bigger picture question that, I think, is probably important here is understanding how this sort of dynamic plays out. We've all been trying to get at it in different ways. You're talking about storage and then maybe sort of the unwind of this process.

好的。這很有幫助。我很感激。然後我想，我認為這裡可能重要的更大的問題是了解這種動態如何發揮作用。我們一直在嘗試以不同的方式實現它。你在談論存儲，然後可能是這個過程的放鬆。

But I think you bring up a very good point about the longer-term uncertainty, which prevents the order book from being added to in a material way. So I guess, as you start to think out beyond sort of the next impact of the storage drawdown and maybe how the fleet development looks beyond sort of that, I don't know if it's a 12-month period here that we're talking about, how do you think that plays out?

但我認為你提出了關於長期不確定性的一個很好的觀點，這阻止了訂單簿以實質性方式增加。所以我想，當你開始考慮存儲縮減的下一個影響以及船隊發展看起來如何超越這種影響時，我不知道我們在這裡談論的是否是 12 個月的時間關於，你認為結果如何？

What would the market look like in late '21 or '22 in a scenario with significantly depleted order book? I don't think we've seen that over the course of the last many decades. I guess I'm kind of curious how that plays out. And how do you think the sort of the ownership structure of the industry might look in terms of consolidation? We've all hoped for that. Is this a potential catalyst for that?

在訂單簿顯著耗盡的情況下，市場在 21 世紀末或 22 年會是什麼樣子？我認為在過去幾十年中我們沒有看到這一點。我想我有點好奇結果如何。您如何看待行業的所有權結構在整合方面的表現？我們都希望如此。這是一個潛在的催化劑嗎？

Many very good points that you mentioned or asking, Chris. Again, I'm not sure it's very straightforward for us to see where it's going to pan out, but some thing's got to give. At the moment, people are not buying ships or not ordering ships, I believe, for 2 reasons.

克里斯，你提到或詢問的許多非常好的觀點。再一次，我不確定我們是否能直接看到結果會如何，但有些東西必須付出代價。目前，人們不買船或不訂購船，我相信有兩個原因。

The first reason is because there is some sort of uncertainty. And you will remember that most orders are usually placed at the end of a sort of a downturn in our industry or at the very beginning of an uptick. And then people order ships, and they hope to get them before the next cycle, before the uptick cycle is over.

第一個原因是因為存在某種不確定性。你會記得，大多數訂單通常是在我們行業低迷結束時或在上升期開始時下達的。然後人們訂購船隻，他們希望在下一個週期之前，在上升週期結束之前得到它們。

We haven't seen that. We've had a good Q4, a good Q1. We're going to get a good Q2, and yet the order book is very flat. So that should tell you something. What it tells you is that, and we've said that many times over this call, there is too much uncertainty. There's too much volatility. I think it also explains partly where -- why our share price are not performing and here, I'm talking collectively better, given the amount of money we are creating.

我們還沒有看到。我們有一個很好的第四季度，一個很好的第一季度。我們將獲得一個不錯的第二季度，但訂單卻非常平淡。所以這應該告訴你一些事情。它告訴你的是，我們在這次電話會議上多次說過，不確定性太多了。波動太大了。我認為這也部分解釋了為什麼我們的股價表現不佳，在這裡，考慮到我們創造的資金量，我說的是集體更好。

The second leg to that is probably even more important. It's about the technology. So are you going to order a conventional ship? Or are you going to order a dual fuel LNG ship? Or are you going to wait for yet another technology to emerge? Which, clearly, nobody knows what it's going to be. And a lot of people are talking about hydrogen being carried on fuel cells or ammonia or you name it. And I think that, that technology will not be ready before 2023. So people may start ordering it in maybe '22, and that's very, very early stage.

第二站可能更為重要。這是關於技術。那麼你打算訂購一艘傳統的船嗎？或者您打算訂購雙燃料液化天然氣船？還是您要等待另一種技術的出現？很明顯，沒有人知道會發生什麼。很多人都在談論燃料電池或氨或你能想到的攜帶氫氣。而且我認為，該技術在 2023 年之前不會準備就緒。所以人們可能會在 22 世紀開始訂購它，那是非常非常早期的階段。

So if we try to draw a picture of what's going to happen, I think that any market weakness can be quickly resolved by a number of ships being old enough to hit the scrapyards, the recycling yards. Where we continue to see relatively low order -- because even if the prices go down for dual fuel LNG, it is not yet demonstrated that this is a future-proof ship because the technology may not be the right one compared to other technology, which are supposed to emerge.

因此，如果我們試圖描繪出將要發生的事情，我認為任何市場疲軟都可以通過一些足夠老的船舶進入廢品場、回收場來迅速解決。我們繼續看到訂單相對較低的地方——因為即使雙燃料液化天然氣的價格下降，也沒有證明這是一艘面向未來的船，因為與其他技術相比，該技術可能不是正確的技術，這應該出現。

And so I think that as far as our market is concerned, be it in growth in terms of oil consumption or in decline in terms of oil consumption, we will manage. And any period of weakness should not be lasting too long and certainly should last shorter than what we have seen in the past.

因此，我認為就我們的市場而言，無論是石油消費的增長還是石油消費的下降，我們都會進行管理。任何疲軟時期都不應該持續太久，當然應該比我們過去看到的更短。

So that's the reason why we are relatively optimistic about it. We have no more clues than you guys about the future, but we know that we have a couple of recipes to fix whatever problem we may face. So let's watch all these indicators in the future, and let's make sure that not too many orders are being placed.

所以這也是我們相對樂觀的原因。關於未來，我們沒有比你們更多的線索，但我們知道我們有一些方法可以解決我們可能面臨的任何問題。因此，讓我們在未來觀察所有這些指標，並確保不會下太多訂單。

And the last thing I would like to add there is, obviously, the yards -- for the yards, it's going to be a very difficult period of time. And I have no doubt that the yards, at some point, will make special offers, be it on unconventional ships or on dual fuel LNG ships.

顯然，我想補充的最後一件事是碼——對於碼來說，這將是一段非常困難的時期。而且我毫不懷疑，在某些時候，造船廠會提供特別優惠，無論是非常規船舶還是雙燃料液化天然氣船。

And I think at that time, it would be normal that you see a couple of orders, but it's not sustainable to do too many of those orders at discounted price, obviously. So let's not be panicking or alarming if we see a couple of orders being placed. That's not going to change the markets in a big way.

而且我認為在那個時候，你看到幾個訂單是正常的，但顯然以折扣價做太多這些訂單是不可持續的。因此，如果我們看到有幾個訂單被下達，請不要驚慌或驚慌。這不會在很大程度上改變市場。

And our next question comes from Ben Nolan from Stifel.

我們的下一個問題來自 Stifel 的 Ben Nolan。

Yes. It's been a long call, and I appreciate you guys fitting me in, but I wanted to ask about something that hasn't been asked yet. But thinking through the decision of holding back on consuming the fuel that you are currently storing on your own ship, could you maybe walk me through the idea of doing that rather than consuming it and, specifically, maybe the thinking around the possibility of generating cash flow from that asset by storage for third parties. You use what you have and then you can actually generate some revenue on it. How does that weigh into the calculation of using versus not using?

是的。這是一個漫長的電話，我感謝你們讓我適應，但我想問一些還沒有被問到的事情。但是考慮到停止消耗你目前儲存在自己船上的燃料的決定，你能否告訴我這樣做而不是消耗它的想法，具體來說，也許是關於產生現金的可能性的思考通過第三方存儲從該資產流出。你使用你所擁有的，然後你實際上可以從中產生一些收入。這如何影響使用與不使用的計算？

Yes. Ben, thank you very much for that question. It's very important for people to understand. So we have 2 ULCCs. We have the Europe, and we have the Oceania and the Europe is indeed being marketed for storage purposes. And I would say, it's always trading in storage purposes, and those ships are moving, but it's true that they tend to stay in location longer than conventional VLCCs.

是的。本，非常感謝你提出這個問題。人們理解這一點非常重要。所以我們有 2 個 ULCC。我們有歐洲，我們有大洋洲，歐洲確實是為了存儲目的而銷售的。我要說的是，它總是以存儲為目的進行交易，那些船在移動，但它們確實比傳統的 VLCC 在原地停留的時間更長。

Because they are not conventional size or of a conventional size, they don't fit the same rate. And that is explained relatively easily by the fact that you need to play a market with the way the market is structured. The market is structured for 1 million barrel lot, 2 million barrel lot. So whenever you have a ship and you can offer space which is 3.2, it's a bit of an odd cargo size, and so you need to combine it. It's not easy and when you need to discharge, it's also not easy because you will need to sell it in 1, 2 or 3 -- sorry, in 2 or 3 lots or more. And when you look at, historically, those ships have performed with far less volatility than a VLCC. So yes, today, the Europe is under a contract for $50,000. The charter had an option to extend it last month for another 6 months at $50,000.

因為它們不是常規尺寸或常規尺寸，所以它們不適合相同的費率。這可以通過以下事實相對容易地解釋，即您需要按照市場結構的方式來玩市場。市場結構為 100 萬桶手，200 萬桶手。所以每當你有一艘船並且你可以提供 3.2 的空間時，它的貨物尺寸有點奇怪，所以你需要將它組合起來。這並不容易，當你需要卸貨時，也不容易，因為你需要分 1、2 或 3 批出售——對不起，分 2 或 3 批或更多。從歷史上看，這些船舶的表現波動性遠低於 VLCC。所以是的，今天，歐洲簽訂了一份價值 50,000 美元的合同。該章程上個月可選擇以 50,000 美元的價格將其再延長 6 個月。

We were expecting to do that, and it didn't. And so we have rented the ship to someone else at a slightly lower rate. Let's make sure that we don't -- we are not being confused with the lost opportunity on the Oceania and comparing her with VLCC because that's not the case.

我們期待這樣做，但它沒有。所以我們以稍低的價格把船租給了別人。讓我們確保我們不會——我們不會與大洋洲失去的機會混淆，也不會將她與 VLCC 進行比較，因為事實並非如此。

Secondly, why haven't we consumed or what if we stop consuming the fuel oil that is indeed parked on the Oceania? Simply because we wanted to see whether the market was very volatile, in other words, whether the oil price and the fuel oil price was going down very, very quickly and would rebound very quickly up. And obviously, that's not what we have seen. So now what we are doing is we continue to consume a little bit from the Oceania.

其次，我們為什麼不消費或停止消費確實停放在大洋洲上的燃料油呢？就是因為我們要看市場是不是波動很大，換句話說就是油價和燃料油價格是不是跌得非常非常快，會不會反彈得非常快。顯然，這不是我們所看到的。所以現在我們正在做的是繼續從大洋洲消費一點。

So we have a mix of procurement from the market from the Oceania. We are buying wholesale in large quantities. We benefit from a discount and then we distribute from the Oceania to our fleet. And most of it is coming from the market, but some of it is coming from the Oceania.

所以我們有來自大洋洲市場的混合採購。我們正在大量批發購買。我們從折扣中獲益，然後我們從大洋洲分發給我們的船隊。其中大部分來自市場，但也有一些來自大洋洲。

So we're trying to blend it down. And obviously, the figure that Lieve showed you, the $56 million, that was at the end of the quarter. And when you look at the price of gas oil or the price of LSFO, it's obviously higher than that today. So I think we were already right in a way not to consume it directly, but to wait until it bounces back, which is the case today.

所以我們正在嘗試將其混合。顯然，Lieve 向您展示的數字是本季度末的 5600 萬美元。當您查看汽油價格或 LSFO 的價格時，它明顯高於今天的價格。所以我認為我們在某種程度上已經是正確的，不直接消費它，而是等到它反彈，今天就是這種情況。

Will it bounce back to the level of which we acquired it? Probably not. But let's not forget that the game plan was really to assure the quality, to assure that we could smoothen out the exacerbation of the market because it was a new market. We did that. So even if we consume it at prices slightly above the market, I don't think that it's -- that people will notice it very strongly in our P&L.

它會反彈到我們獲得它時的水平嗎？可能不是。但我們不要忘記，遊戲計劃確實是為了確保質量，確保我們能夠平息市場的惡化，因為這是一個新市場。我們做到了。因此，即使我們以略高於市場的價格消費它，我也不認為人們會在我們的損益表中非常強烈地註意到它。

And again, I don't think that it's the end of that story. We have learned a lot of things about fuel procurement. And touch wood, we have not had any bad stems onboard the vessels, whereas we've heard a lot of horror stories of LSFO being obviously compliant, but creating a lot of problems in the engine room. We haven't had that because we have been able to test all the material.

再一次，我不認為這是故事的結局。我們學到了很多關於燃料採購的知識。摸摸木頭，我們船上沒有任何壞的莖幹，而我們聽說過很多關於 LSFO 顯然合規的恐怖故事，但在機艙裡造成了很多問題。我們沒有那個，因為我們已經能夠測試所有的材料。

So again, let's not focus too much on the money that is lost on paper at the moment. You can count on us to try to create value or at least limit the loss. And again, very, very happy not to have spent $350 million on scrubbers.

因此，我們不要過分關注目前在紙面上損失的錢。您可以指望我們努力創造價值或至少限制損失。再一次，非常非常高興沒有在洗滌器上花費 3.5 億美元。

Yes. I certainly would be, too. The -- my next question, and this is just really a clarification. It might have been a missed question, but you're talking through sort of the thinking of dividend payouts. And I just wanted to make sure that I understood clearly.

是的。我當然也會。我的下一個問題，這只是一個澄清。這可能是一個遺漏的問題，但你正在談論股息支付的想法。我只是想確保我理解清楚。

So as it relates to the second quarter and the earnings on the second quarter specifically, investors should expect for that 80% of the net income to be paid out. Is that correct, I guess?

因此，由於它涉及到第二季度，特別是第二季度的收益，投資者應該期望支付 80% 的淨收入。我猜這是正確的嗎？

So the policy is actually relatively simple. The policies that we -- we've targeted 80% of net income to be redistributed to shareholders. And you have 2 ways to redistribute that to shareholders. You have dividends and your share buyback.

所以政策其實比較簡單。我們的政策——我們的目標是將 80% 的淨收入重新分配給股東。您有兩種方法可以將其重新分配給股東。您有股息和股票回購。

Earlier in this call, as I mentioned, I said that we're not entirely happy with the share price. And I think that no one should be on this call even today. It's still a discount to NAV. And the reason why we haven't done any buyback in the first quarter is because it was very volatile and at times, it was at NAV and at times, it wasn't at the NAV.

正如我所提到的，在本次電話會議的早些時候，我說過我們對股價並不完全滿意。我認為即使在今天也不應該有人接聽這個電話會議。它仍然低於資產淨值。我們在第一季度沒有進行任何回購的原因是因為它非常不穩定，有時是在 NAV 上，有時又不是在 NAV 上。

And we're not going to constantly intervene like if we wanted to support the share price on any weakness. If the weakness is prolonged and we continue to see a very big discount compared to NAV, then I think that we will use that tool in the toolbox. So today, I cannot tell you what the level of dividends will be compared to the P&L because some of it -- some of those returns may come with a share buyback, which I think will create long-lasting values for shareholders.

而且我們不會像我們想在任何弱點支撐股價那樣不斷干預。如果弱勢持續，我們繼續看到與 NAV 相比有很大折扣，那麼我認為我們將使用工具箱中的該工具。所以今天，我無法告訴你股息水平與損益相比是多少，因為其中一些——其中一些回報可能伴隨著股票回購，我認為這將為股東創造持久的價值。

But again, it's not going to be all or nothing, right? I mean, dividends are important. We understand that in today's world, very few companies are capable of distributing dividends and certainly capable of distributing as much dividends as we are doing.

但同樣，這不會是全有或全無，對吧？我的意思是，股息很重要。我們明白，在當今世界，很少有公司有能力派發股息，而且肯定有能力派發與我們一樣多的股息。

We had a new guidance in January. We thought it was very important to commit to it and show that we are serious. Even under the current circumstances, we are very serious to distribute 80% of our net income after capital gains, of course, of dividend. We're showing you that this is a reality, and we hope that the market will take it as the reality. And if they don't, and the share price remains weak, then we may use other tools.

我們在一月份有了新的指導。我們認為承諾並表明我們是認真的非常重要。即使在目前的情況下，我們也非常認真地分配 80% 的資本利得後的淨收入，當然還有股息。我們正在向您展示這是一個現實，我們希望市場將其視為現實。如果他們不這樣做，並且股價仍然疲軟，那麼我們可能會使用其他工具。

Okay. All right. That helps a lot. I appreciate that. And I guess, I don't know if there -- well, at this point, I'll turn it over. Although I do -- it's been a fun market, but I'm looking forward to seeing some more traffic lights at some point there, Brian.

好的。好的。這很有幫助。我很感激。而且我想，我不知道是否 - 好吧，在這一點上，我會把它翻過來。雖然我知道 - 這是一個有趣的市場，但我期待在某個時候看到更多的紅綠燈，布賴恩。

We didn't do the traffic light because we thought that it would confuse people. Or in the 5 different segments, some of it would have been green, and some of it would have been red at the same time. And it can't be amber because it was too distinct, causes for being red or for being green. But we like the idea, and we'll certainly come back to it when times are a little bit more certain. Apologies for that.

我們沒有做紅綠燈，因為我們認為它會混淆人們。或者在 5 個不同的部分中，其中一些會是綠色的，而其中一些會同時是紅色的。它不可能是琥珀色，因為它太明顯了，導致紅色或綠色。但我們喜歡這個想法，當時間更加確定時，我們肯定會回到它。對此表示歉意。

Our next question comes from Omar Nokta from Clarksons.

我們的下一個問題來自 Clarksons 的 Omar Nokta。

Yes. I know it's quite late in the call, but I just had a couple of quick follow-ups. And maybe just as we think about the $95,000 a day number for the TI Pool average so far for 2Q, I know Brian discussed the lag effect in rates relative to the indexes we're seeing, and, obviously, bunker prices having come off is playing a role.

是的。我知道現在通話已經很晚了，但我只是進行了幾次快速跟進。也許就像我們考慮 TI Pool 平均每天 95,000 美元第二季度的數字一樣，我知道 Brian 討論了費率相對於我們所看到的指數的滯後效應，顯然，燃油價格已經下降發揮作用。

When we think about also the time charters that you've entered into, were those done in the TI Pool that maybe is kind of -- maybe is factored into the $95,000 and thus making it look or appear lower?

當我們還考慮您簽訂的定期租船合同時，在 TI Pool 中完成的租船合同是否有點——可能被計入 95,000 美元，從而使其看起來或看起來更低？

No. None of those time charters were done in the TI Pool. And that's not the reason. And it's -- but it's a very good question because we were surprised when we saw most of the analysts, so you're certainly not the only one out there, thinking that the market was a lot higher than what it was.

沒有。這些定期租船合同都不是在 TI Pool 中完成的。這不是原因。這是 - 但這是一個很好的問題，因為當我們看到大多數分析師時我們感到很驚訝，所以你肯定不是唯一一個認為市場比現在高得多的人。

And the only thing that we could say at that time is the market is always volatile. And every single fixture is a mini ocean in itself. But what we saw also during this quarter, and that usually is not the case, is that the market was very fragmented in the sense that if you were doing an AG Far East voyage, it would suddenly pay you way more than a U.S. Gulf Far East, which traditionally over the last 10-years -- 2 years, has been paying a lot more.

那時我們唯一能說的就是市場總是波動的。每一個固定裝置本身就是一個迷你海洋。但我們在本季度也看到的是，通常情況並非如此，市場非常分散，因為如果你進行 AG 遠東航程，它會突然比美國海灣遠航支付更高的費用傳統上過去 10 年 - 2 年的 East 支付的費用要高得多。

So when you assess the market as being, okay, it must be $120 a day, in fact, it was $80,000 on one side and $150 on the other side. But obviously, the 2 voyages not being the same length, the average was not $120. The average was probably much lower than that. So that is certainly one of the reasons.

所以當你評估市場時，好吧，它必須是每天 120 美元，事實上，一側是 80,000 美元，另一側是 150 美元。但很明顯，這 2 次航程的長度不同，平均不是 120 美元。平均值可能遠低於此。所以這當然是原因之一。

The second thing that I would like to mention here is we live in a world where the voyages, on average, are taking longer because in the voyages, you also need to take into account the delays in port. And what it means is that, very often, you're going to have the voyage that will last more than a quarter.

我想在這裡提到的第二件事是，我們生活在一個航程平均花費更長的時間的世界中，因為在航程中，您還需要考慮港口的延誤。這意味著，很多時候，您的航程將持續超過四分之一。

So you really need to combine Q1 with Q2, Q2 with Q3, Q3 with Q4 and so on, to have a better average picture of what the market is. I mean we are all sitting here dividing the year in 4, but does it make sense in the VLCC market? Probably not.

所以你確實需要將 Q1 與 Q2、Q2 與 Q3、Q3 與 Q4 等結合起來，以更好地了解市場的平均情況。我的意思是我們都坐在這裡將一年分成 4 年，但這在 VLCC 市場上有意義嗎？可能不是。

So let's take a sort of a deeper view. I think that we were much stronger than what the market or the analysts had predicted in Q1. We're very pleased, but we don't call that an outperformance.

因此，讓我們從更深層次的角度來看。我認為我們比市場或分析師在第一季度預測的要強大得多。我們非常高興，但我們並不認為這是表現出色。

So I think that you have to mix Q1 and Q2 to arrive to a sort of average performance for the fleet. And it's the same when you compare our results with the index or the index that you're using or when you compare our results with other companies. I think that you have to take more than 1 quarter to differentiate between companies.

所以我認為你必須混合使用 Q1 和 Q2 才能達到機隊的平均性能。當您將我們的結果與您正在使用的指數或指數進行比較時，或者當您將我們的結果與其他公司進行比較時，情況也是一樣的。我認為您必須花費超過 1 個季度的時間來區分公司。

No, that's fair. And it's a good point, Hugo. And then just finally, you -- and apologies if you've answered this to an extent, but on the VLSFO in storage, you -- by kind of staying away from it for some time here, one, is there any issues that it's degrading?

不，這很公平。這是一個很好的觀點，雨果。最後，你——如果你在一定程度上回答了這個問題，我深表歉意，但是在存儲中的 VLSFO 上，你——在這里遠離它一段時間，有沒有任何問題貶低？

And then, two, do you think there's an opportunity to maybe offload it, sell it into the market and then maybe make that vessel available for a floating storage contract for -- on a commercial basis?

然後，兩個，你認為有機會卸載它，把它賣到市場上，然後也許讓那艘船可用於商業基礎上的浮動存儲合同？

Yes. So I thought I answered the question with Ben earlier. And it's difficult to offload and sell it to someone. You would crystallize your losses, whereas what we've done so far is, quite frankly, well, not crystallizing the loss. And then, of course, you have to look at the opportunity cost.

是的。所以我想我之前已經回答了 Ben 的問題。而且很難將其卸載並出售給某人。你會具體化你的損失，而坦率地說，到目前為止我們所做的並沒有具體化損失。然後，當然，你必須看看機會成本。

And the opportunity cost, as I explained, for this particular type of vessel is not that great. So we're not losing a potential $80,000, $90,000, $100,000 a day contract. If that was the case, we would have done it on the other vessels, the Europe, and we haven't done that. And then, of course, we would have tried to get rid of that product as quickly as possible.

正如我所解釋的，這種特殊類型的船隻的機會成本並不是那麼高。所以我們不會失去每天 80,000 美元、90,000 美元、100,000 美元的潛在合同。如果是這樣的話，我們會在其他船隻上做到這一點，歐洲，但我們還沒有這樣做。然後，當然，我們會嘗試盡快擺脫該產品。

I think that we will continue to look at ways to create value. And when I say create value, we certainly try to decrease the paper loss that we have at the moment. The market is helping us. Everything from oil to all the products is going up. So it's okay. I would say it's okay.

我認為我們將繼續尋找創造價值的方法。當我說創造價值時，我們當然會努力減少目前的賬面損失。市場在幫助我們。從石油到所有產品，一切都在上漲。所以沒關係。我會說沒關係。

Can I just add something on your previous question? Because I forgot to say that one of the reason why the indexes are probably ahead of the physical market when it comes to time charter equivalent is also because there's been -- certainly in the last 3 months, there's been clearly an abuse of the subjects that are being put when you fix a vessel.

我可以在您之前的問題上添加一些內容嗎？因為我忘了說，在期租等價物方面，指數可能領先於實物市場的原因之一也是因為 - 當然在過去 3 個月裡，顯然濫用了這些主題修理船隻時正在放置。

So the subject is a concept that was invented to make sure that the vessel was technically acceptable to perform a contract and certainly not to be treated as an option to keep the vessels for 2 or 3 days in your fleet. And then if you think that -- if you see that market is going up, you take it. If you see the market is going down, you let it go.

因此，主題是一個概念，其發明是為了確保船舶在技術上可以接受以履行合同，當然不被視為將船舶在您的船隊中保留 2 或 3 天的選擇。然後，如果你認為——如果你看到市場正在上漲，你就會接受。如果你看到市場正在下跌，你就放手。

And there's been an abuse -- a clear abuse in the market because of that. And I think that the indexes are much more geared towards the ships on subs rather than fully fixed. So what you see on subs has been -- there's been a lot of failure, and, on average, more failures than in usual times, simply because there's been a lot of volatility. And that might be also a distortion that has created this false expectation for rates to be even higher.

並且存在濫用 - 因此在市場上存在明顯的濫用。而且我認為這些指數更適合潛艇上的船隻，而不是完全固定的。所以你在潛艇上看到的是——有很多失敗，平均而言，失敗比平時多，僅僅是因為波動很大。這也可能是一種扭曲，造成了對利率更高的錯誤預期。

Yes, Hugo. That's actually a very important point. And I guess it's something that really showed itself about 6 months ago after the COSCO sanction. And we've been hearing more about that. Is that something that has really developed here over the past year? Or is this just something that long term has always existed and should become much more visible now?

是的，雨果。這其實是非常重要的一點。我想這是大約 6 個月前中遠制裁後真正表現出來的事情。我們已經聽到了更多相關信息。這是過去一年這裡真正發展起來的東西嗎？或者這只是長期存在並且現在應該變得更加明顯的東西？

So it has certainly developed far more and the more volatility you will have in our markets, and here, I'm taking -- I'm speaking daily or weekly volatility, the more you will see this abuse continuing. And there's very little thing that we can do.

所以它肯定會發展得更多，我們市場的波動性越大，在這裡，我說的是——我說的是每天或每週的波動性，你越會看到這種濫用行為繼續存在。我們無能為力。

Obviously, we like to service our customers, but there's a little bit of a give and take that we're not seeing at the moment. But initially, as I said, the subjects were only because vessel could not be inspected physically, the certificates, the OCIMF or the vetting reports could not be done at the time of negotiating the rate.

顯然，我們喜歡為我們的客戶提供服務，但我們目前還沒有看到一些讓步。但最初，正如我所說，這些問題只是因為無法對船舶進行物理檢查，無法在談判費率時提供證書、OCIMF 或審查報告。

The terminals need to accept the vessels. So you need to check a number of things. But if your paper are in order, there's absolutely no reason why you should be failed. You have agreed a rate, and that rate should be ones that if your paper are in order, should be the ones that you fix. And unfortunately, at the moment, that's not how the market is playing this subject.

碼頭需要接受船隻。所以你需要檢查很多東西。但是，如果您的論文符合要求，那麼您絕對沒有理由不及格。你已經同意了一個費率，如果你的論文是有序的，這個費率應該是你確定的那個費率。不幸的是，目前市場並不是這樣玩這個主題的。

So I think that as an industry, this is something that we should address. I don't think that Euronav on its own can address it, but it's certainly something that has increased recently because the market has been more volatile. And so it's so easy to drop the vessels when the market is slightly going down and to keep the vessel when the market is going up.

所以我認為作為一個行業，這是我們應該解決的問題。我不認為 Euronav 本身可以解決這個問題，但它肯定是最近有所增加的，因為市場波動更大。因此，當市場略微下跌時，很容易放下船隻，而在市場上漲時，很容易保留船隻。

Yes. Yes, definitely. And DHT made those same comments yesterday. Okay. Well, I appreciate the dialogue.

是的。當然是。 DHT 昨天也發表了同樣的評論。好的。好吧，我很欣賞對話。

And our next question comes from J. Mintzmyer from Value Investor's Edge.

我們的下一個問題來自 Value Investor's Edge 的 J. Mintzmyer。

We got quite the marathon on the call today, but congratulations on an excellent result. Most of the questions -- of course, yes, most of the questions have been fantastic. I think we covered most of the points. One question I did have is on the nuances of repurchase. I get a lot of questions about that.

今天我們在電話會議上完成了馬拉松式的比賽，但祝賀我們取得了優異的成績。大多數問題——當然，是的，大多數問題都很棒。我認為我們涵蓋了大部分要點。我確實有一個問題是關於回購的細微差別。我對此有很多疑問。

And I know you kind of bounced back and forth between a 10% and a 20% authorization. So just to make things clear, when does that kick in officially? Are you in any sort of blackout or post earnings is that repurchase available?

我知道你在 10% 和 20% 的授權之間來回搖擺。因此，為了清楚起見，什麼時候正式開始？您是否處於任何形式的停電或收益後是否可以回購？

Yes. So until the next AGM, we still have authorization to do buybacks. And those authorizations are valid for 5 years. The last time we asked was 5 years ago and we got authority to get 20%. As we were preparing for this AGM and we asked it, but it is not an AGM, it is an SGM in fact, we have asked the question because we also need a quorum.

是的。因此，在下一次年度股東大會之前，我們仍然有權進行回購。這些授權有效期為 5 年。我們上次提出要求是在 5 年前，我們有權獲得 20%。當我們準備這次 AGM 時，我們提出了這個問題，但它不是 AGM，實際上是 SGM，我們提出這個問題是因為我們也需要法定人數。

I don't want to enter into too many technical details. But in other words, we have been able to test the waters. And to our surprise, most of the proxy agencies recommend to vote against more than 10% share buyback.

我不想涉及太多技術細節。但換句話說，我們已經能夠試水了。令我們驚訝的是，大多數代理機構建議投票反對超過 10% 的股票回購。

So when we asked 20%, it was refused with or without quorum. And we hope that the 10% will be accepted, but we believe that it will be accepted because on the one that we just organized, which -- where we didn't have a quorum, it was accepted. And so on the next one, we don't need a quorum. And so we hope that the agencies will vote in the same direction.

因此，當我們要求 20% 時，無論是否符合法定人數，都被拒絕了。我們希望 10% 會被接受，但我們相信它會被接受，因為在我們剛剛組織的會議上，在我們沒有達到法定人數的情況下，它被接受了。在下一個問題上，我們不需要法定人數。因此，我們希望各機構能朝著相同的方向投票。

I personally believe that it's very strange that you guys, you guys being all the investors out there, are being confident that the agencies represents truly what you want us to do. And clearly, we have never said that if we do share buyback, we won't do dividends. We've demonstrated that pretty much every other years where we did both. And I think that share buybacks are there to create long-term value for shareholders.

我個人認為，你們這些人，你們這些所有的投資者，都相信這些機構真正代表了你們希望我們做的事情，這很奇怪。很明顯，我們從未說過如果我們進行股票回購，我們就不會派息。我們幾乎每隔幾年都證明了這一點。而且我認為股票回購可以為股東創造長期價值。

So they are a great tool in the toolbox. And I'm not sure I understand why those voting, why those proxy agencies are recommending toward against more than 10%. But hopefully, we will get that 10% by the end of May, and that will be valid for the next 5 years.

所以它們是工具箱中的一個很好的工具。而且我不確定我是否理解為什麼那些人投票，為什麼那些代理機構建議反對超過 10%。但希望我們能在 5 月底之前獲得這 10%，這將在未來 5 年內有效。

And if we run out of that because we have bought already 10%, then we can ask at the next AGM, et cetera, et cetera. So I don't think it's a big subject, but it's true that I'm a bit frustrated with the recommendation from the proxy agencies.

如果我們因為已經購買了 10% 而用完了，那麼我們可以在下一次年度股東大會上詢問等等。所以我不認為這是一個大課題，但我確實對代理機構的推薦感到有點沮喪。

Excellent, Hugo. You know what they say, don't look a gift horse in the mouth, but it looks like most investors are taking the horse out behind the barn. And so if you can get that repurchase activated, I think it will do good things for you.

太好了，雨果。你知道他們在說什麼，不要在嘴裡看禮物馬，但看起來大多數投資者都在穀倉後面把馬帶出去。因此，如果你能激活回購，我認為它會對你有好處。

Last time we talked, we looked at your leverage. And look, your book leverage, you mentioned on the slides, is 42% booked after the dividend -- after the large dividend. And of course, your book is very conservative because of your depreciation policy, right, that goes to 20 years to 0 instead of maybe 20 or 25 to scrap. So if anything, your leverage is lower.

上次我們談過，我們研究了你的影響力。看，你在幻燈片上提到的賬面槓桿是在分紅後——在大額分紅後登記的 42%。當然，由於您的折舊政策，您的書非常保守，正確的是，20 年到 0，而不是 20 或 25 年報廢。因此，如果有的話，您的槓桿率較低。

Last time we talked, you mentioned that you agreed that your leverage is quite low, and you said there's actually room if you wanted to, to expand that leverage maybe up to 50% max. You have about $1 billion in liquidity. Is that still something you would look into if you wanted to maybe accelerate those repurchases or pick up some distressed tonnage? Or are you comfortable where you're at now with leverage?

上次我們談話時，您提到您同意您的槓桿率很低，並且您說如果您願意，實際上有空間將槓桿率擴大到最高 50%。你有大約 10 億美元的流動資金。如果你想加速這些回購或獲得一些不良噸位，那你仍然會考慮嗎？或者你對現在的槓桿感到滿意嗎？

Well, you're absolutely right in your analysis that you have to take into account all those elements at the same time in order to decide what you do with dividends, what you do with share buyback and, potentially, what you do with acquisitions, but we already commented earlier on this call that we feel that the values are probably a little bit too high, unless we see a sort of distressed opportunity or an interesting opportunity.

好吧，你的分析完全正確，你必須同時考慮所有這些因素，才能決定你如何處理股息，你如何處理股票回購，以及你可能如何處理收購，但是我們之前已經在這個電話會議上評論說，我們覺得這些價值可能有點太高了，除非我們看到某種令人沮喪的機會或有趣的機會。

Last year, we did share buyback, and, together with the dividend that we distribute, was indeed more than our target of 80%. This is a conversation that we are constantly having amongst ourselves, but also with our Board. And until the time we decide, I'm afraid I'm not going to be able to tell you much more about it. So you will hear about it after the events.

去年我們做了股票回購，加上我們派發的股息，確實超過了我們80%的目標。這是我們之間不斷進行的對話，也是與我們的董事會進行的對話。在我們做出決定之前，恐怕我無法告訴您更多相關信息。所以你會在事件發生後聽到它。

But it's true that with the kind of balance sheet, liquidity -- so balance sheet and leverage and the liquidity that we have, with the kind of outlook that we have for Q2, and let's see what -- how the market positions itself in Q3, we have a lot of flexibility to do a lot of things. And the idea is not to rush ourselves in one thing, but to see and analyze a little bit how things are developing. And I think we shouldn't be ashamed of what we have done so far.

但的確，通過這種資產負債表、流動性——我們擁有的資產負債表和槓桿以及流動性，以及我們對第二季度的展望，讓我們看看——市場如何在第三季度定位自己，我們有很大的靈活性來做很多事情。我們的想法不是急於做一件事，而是要觀察和分析事情的發展情況。我認為我們不應該為我們迄今為止所做的一切感到羞恥。

The fact that we are underlevered is also because the market has developed very, very strongly. And so keeping 20% is indeed quite a lot the more the market is generous with you. But it also builds up some reserves in order to continue the consolidation game when the market will be weaker. So one way or another, the shareholders will benefit from it.

我們槓桿不足的事實也是因為市場發展非常非常強勁。所以保持 20% 確實很多，市場對你越慷慨。但它也積累了一些儲備，以便在市場疲軟時繼續整合遊戲。因此，無論如何，股東將從中受益。

Excellent. I think that makes sense, Hugo. Well, thank you very much for your good leadership at Euronav, and we look forward to the next results.

出色的。我認為這是有道理的，雨果。非常感謝您在 Euronav 的出色領導，我們期待接下來的結果。

And ladies and gentlemen, with that, we will be concluding today's question-and-answer session and today's presentation. We do thank you for joining today's conference call. You may now disconnect your lines.

女士們先生們，我們將結束今天的問答環節和今天的演講。我們非常感謝您參加今天的電話會議。您現在可以斷開線路。

Thank you very much, everyone. See you next time.

非常感謝大家。下次見。