Dawson Geophysical Co (DWSN) 2017 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Ladies and gentlemen, please stand by. We're about to begin.

Statements made by management during this call with respect to forecasts, estimates or other expectations regarding future events or which provide any information other than historical facts may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are based on management's current expectations and include known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which the company is unable to predict or control, that may cause the company's actual future results or performance to materially differ from any future results or performance expressed or implied by those statements.

These risks and uncertainties include the risk factors disclosed by the company from time to time in its filings with the SEC, including in the company's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 13, 2017.

Furthermore, as we start this call, please refer to the statement regarding forward-looking statements incorporated in the company's press release issued this morning. And please note that the contents of the company's conference call this morning is covered by those statements.

During this conference call, management will make references to EBITDA, which is a non-GAAP financial measure. A reconciliation of the non-GAAP measure to the applicable GAAP measure can be found in the company's current earnings release, a copy of which is located on the company's website, www.dawson3d.com. The call is scheduled for 30 minutes, and the company will not provide any guidance.

I would now like to turn the conference over to Steve Jumper, Chairman, President and CEO. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Shannon, and good morning, and welcome to Dawson Geophysical Company's First Quarter 2017 Earnings and Operations Update Conference Call. As Shannon said, my name is Steve Jumper, Chairman, President, and CEO of the company. Joining me on the call is Jim Brata, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer.

Before we start the call, we have a few items to cover. If you would like to listen to a replay of today's call, it will be available via webcast by going to the Investor Relations sections of the company's website at www.dawson3d.com.

Information reported on this call speaks only of today, Thursday, March 4 (sic) [May 4], 2017. Therefore, you should be advised that time-sensitive information may no longer be accurate at the time of any replay listening.

Turning to our preliminary first-quarter financial results, operating revenues and expenses decreased in the first quarter of 2017 as compared to the same period in 2016. While demand for seismic services in North America remains soft, early signs of strengthening in response to improving oil prices have begun to take hold. The recent oil price improvements have led to some increases in drilling and completion activity, primarily in concentrated areas of the Permian and Delaware basins of West Texas.

During the second quarter of 2017, we anticipate operating 4 to 6 crews in the U.S., including 2 to 4 of our crews in the Delaware and Permian Basin with variable utilization of these crews. Visibility beyond the second quarter of 2017 remains unclear. While further improvement in oil and gas prices will likely be necessary in order to meaningfully increased crew count outside of the Permian Delaware Basin, we continue to examine and implement strategies designed to increase the production economics to our clients.

Even in today's difficult environment, exploration and production operators continue to turn to Dawson for high-resolution 3D images, which help operators avoid geohazards, identify the most productive portions of the reservoir and lower their overall development cost.

I will now turn control of the call over to Jim Brata, who will review the financial results. I will then return with some final remarks about the outlook into the second quarter of '17. Jim?

Thank you, Steve, and good morning.

Revenues in the first quarter of 2017 were $41.9 million compared to $47.1 million in the same quarter of 2016. As Steve mentioned, we operated 3 crews early in the quarter and up to a maximum of 8 crews in the United States and Canada. During the second quarter of 2017, we anticipate operating 4 to 6 crews in the U.S. including 2 to 4 of our crews in the Delaware and Permian Basins, with variable utilization of those crews.

Cost of services in the first quarter of 2017 was $39.5 million compared to $40.1 million in the same quarter of 2016.

Gross profit was $2.4 million in the first quarter of 2017 compared to $7 million in the same quarter of 2016.

General and administrative expenses decreased to $4.4 million in the first quarter of this year compared to $5.6 million in the same quarter of 2016.

Depreciation and amortization expense in the first quarter of 2017 was $10.2 million compared to $12 million in the same quarter a year ago.

Net loss for the first quarter of 2017 was $9.2 million or $0.42 loss per share as compared to a net loss of $8.6 million or $0.40 loss per share in the same quarter last year. We recorded an income-tax benefit of $2.8 million in the first quarter of 2017, compared to an income-tax benefit of $1 million in the same quarter a year ago.

EBITDA in the first quarter of 2017 was negative $1.9 million compared to $2.5 million in the same period a year ago. An EBITDA reconciliation was provided in our earnings release issued this morning.

Now I'll highlight some balance-sheet items. Our balance sheet remains strong. As of the end of the first quarter of 2017, we had debt including obligations under capital leases of $1.5 million, cash and short-term investments of $43.8 million. Our current ratio was 4.2:1. And finally, working capital was approximately $55.9 million.

And with that, I'll turn the call back to Steve for some comments on our operations.

Well thank you, Jim.

As mentioned in our press release, while demand for seismic services in North America remains soft, early signs of strengthening in response to improving oil prices is beginning to take hold. We continue to implement processes and strategies designed to further strengthen our operational and financial performance.

In March 2017, we sold our dynamite energy source drilling operation, which was acquired as part of our February 2015 merger with TGC Industries. As part of our cost-control efforts, the sale decision was based primarily on the reduced level of activity and demand for services of that unit. We continue to evaluate levels of all in-house service offerings.

Our current employee count stands below 700, with our ongoing cost control initiatives, strong balance sheet and experienced personnel, we continue to maintain our position as a leading onshore seismic-data acquisition company in North America.

The company anticipates a capital budget for fiscal 2016 to be at maintenance level below the $10 million capital budget approved by our Board of Directors. As Jim said, our balance sheet remains strong with approximately $43.8 million of cash and short-term investments, $55.9 million of working capital and $1.5 million of debt and capital-lease obligations as of March 31, 2017.

In closing, while market conditions remain difficult, we believe we are well positioned to withstand the commodity-cycle downturn. Our strong balance sheet, diverse client base and experienced management team provides us with the tools and resources to navigate today's market and quickly respond when market conditions improve.

And with that, Shannon, we are finalized with formal remarks and are ready to take questions.

(Operator Instructions) And we'll first move to Max [Yaris] with Raymond James.

So, if you can help me out in the quarter. It looked like the 3 to 8 range was pretty big. Can you help me out more on what was the kind of average? And what was the weather and seasonal breakup in Canada like for you guys?

Well, the Canadian season, which concluded around the 1st of April -- as we've talked about in the past, the Canadian market typically is seasonal, primary activity being from freeze to thaw, November to April. And that market actually was better for us than originally anticipated. I believe, our crew count up in that area might have reached 5, 6 at -- for short periods of time. Probably operated 4 to 5 in the U.S. particularly late in the quarter.

Early in the quarter, we were -- U.S. utilization was well down related to land-access agreements, some weather and then projects just not being ready. That's probably the primary thing we're dealing with in the U.S. market, in particular, is having projects in the order book that are not quite ready to go on a timely fashion to keep utilization running high. And so, we were probably 3 early in the quarter, ramped up to a number of around 8 late in the quarter.

This quarter, we've started off a little softer. The Canadian season has come down, as we've talked about. U.S. utilization was impacted negatively in April, improving in May, looks like it will be better in June; it should be in the 4 to 6 range. We are somewhat encouraged that there seemed to be a little bit of interest in Canadian activity in the summertime.

So, having said all that, the issue still remains that demand remains relatively soft; most of the demand is in the Permian and Delaware. We have some one-offs in other basins. Permian and Delaware are fairly concentrated areas, and so we anticipate 2 to 4 in those areas and some one-offs in others. And so until we see a further increase in commodity prices, I think we'll continue to be in the state that we're in.

Okay, that's fair. Just a follow-up on the Permian and Delaware, is there a possibility to go past the 2 to 4? Or what are the main drivers of demand there for you guys?

We've actually been fairly active in the Permian and Delaware over the last 18 to 24 months. And so, some of the areas that are currently drawing some attention in the investment community concerning increased drilling and completion activity, we've already been a part of some of that.

It still remains to be a fairly concentrated geographical area. And so, I think we can keep 2 to 4; I think there'll be times where the potential is to ramp up to 5 maybe in those regions, in particular. But just due to the geographic concentration, the timing of getting projects ready, I think is going to be the major factor for us in the Permian and Delaware basins.

Okay. And just to be clear, that's reshooting some seismic that was already shot a while ago? Or is this some new edge stuff or what is it?

You know that's a great question.

The Permian and Delaware had several stages of activity. Of course, in the '90s there was a tremendous amount of work done in the Permian but it was lower-resolution images, lower-density surveys, lower channel count, conventional driven geographic -- geologic objectives. Did a little bit in the 2006, '07 range on the edge of the Delaware and had intermittent activity in the 2006, 2007 range. But for all intents and purposes, the basins -- those 2 basins went close to 20 years without a lot of serious activity.

We moved -- well probably closer to 15 years. We moved back in, in 2011 and '12, where we were shooting over old surveys. The objective has continued to be on the unconventionals. The channel counts increased, the size of the projects have increased, the density of the projects have increased. And so, what we're trying to do now is get even more detailed images inside these unconventionals. So, there has been a -- some portion of the basin that has already been, for lack of a better word, reshot. But there's still some running room out there left to go. So, I think there'll be some -- enough activity to keep 2 to 4 busy for -- certainly into the near future.

(Operator Instructions) And we next move to John Potratz with Researched Investments.

I was very interested in the data that you're acquiring. What was interesting -- there was an article on March 31 in the Wall Street Journal on EOG, talking about how their -- as they are drilling, they will modify how they're going -- the drilling and as they're going up maybe 500 feet per hour. Does -- and they talked about the detailed data they need. Is that the detailed data that you are currently providing and that other people drilling through the Permian are going to have to come to you for the data? Does this indicate that a lot of this area will be reshot?

John, first of all, it's good to hear from you. Second of all, we're not always privileged to the exact data and the method by which the E&P companies are implementing data. I think they're using a wide variety of petrophysical, maybe microseismic, various forms of data. But I believe that the baseline for those decisions and those guide -- the well guiding will begin at seismic-data level.

And one thing that we have to keep in mind when it comes to the unconventional is, we are acquiring higher-resolution images -- higher-resolution images in terms of both spatial, lateral and vertical resolution. And so, I believe people are beginning to see more and more things in a reservoir rock than they were able to see in the past.

But the thing we have to keep in mind is that the unconventional long-lateral drilling programs are relatively new. And so, there's not a large analog database to draw back on. And what I mean by that, if you looked at the conventional models that go way back into the '30s, '40s, and '50s, you had some level of well-log information and seismic data that you could correlate back and forth to.

Correlating long laterals, looking for how different rocks respond to drilling and completion techniques and what those looks like seismically, we're just at the early stages of building the analytics to understand how those models become predictors. And so there's still quite a bit of work to be done with, not just our technologies and others -- and there is improvement to be made.

You know, the key to seismic data is seismic data has to become a predictor. In order to become a predictor, you have to have a background base of models' lookalikes. Here's what the rocks did, here's what the well logs did, here's what happened, here's what it looks like seismically. And so the more detail we get, and the more drilling that there's going to be, I think the more information will be extracted.

Now, one of things we do deal with is, we cover very large areas. We cover hundreds of square miles in a typical 3D shoot in West Texas. And so that covers a large acreage position for, not just one but multiple companies at one time.

And so to answer your questions John, yes, I think we're part of some of that for sure. To what level within each E&P, and speaking specifically to the article that you referenced, I have not read that article so I don't have a whole lot of information to comment on.

So you are acquiring that -- have you worked with EOG or some of these other firms to try to enhance that overall data that you're collecting with what they are drilling?

Yes, we work with a wide variety of companies, sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly. Sometimes we work through a third-party provider. And so the answer to the question is yes, we're involved with many of the publicly traded names as well as some of the private companies and the majors, all 3. And we do work with them on designing a survey that will hopefully produce the attributes that they will need to do further analytics.

But once we are finished with that phase, the analytical stages and the integration of other data volumes are being done in-house by those companies. And many times we're not, due to confidentiality or proprietary information, we're not a part of that directly. But we do believe that we are providing data to those names that aid them in full data integration into what they're looking for in the reservoir.

So it sounds like you have not yet have a program whereby you work with them individually to say, "Hey, this is the data we have. This is how we can enhance it even further. So the next job that we shoot, we'd have even better data."

Yes, from the front, we do that from the front side, from the survey design, parameter selection. For example, we've just recently conducted some tests with a group of companies concerning energy-source configuration and parameter selection. And so, we're continually working on the front side to improve lateral resolution, vertical resolution and a survey that has a full suite of attributes that they can intake and do the analytics from.

And so, we're very involved with client bases upfront. But once it gets to actual integration of the processed data into drilling programs and further integration into other data formats -- or integration of other forms of data is what I'm trying to say, we're not in that part of the operation at this point.

Not yet. Okay. And the other thing is the -- several articles in The Wall Street Journal talked about BP and other majors getting into the Permian and Delaware basins. I think you mentioned in the past, it takes them a while to put together a program, they're a lot slower in implementation. Have you seen any major shifts from the majors like the British Petroleum, other, Exxon that have indicated they bought $1 billion dollars' worth of oil rights in the Permian?

Here again, we have seen some increased activity by some of the majors, either directly with the major brand or the influence through a name that they've acquired.

As we've said, sometimes that work is done directly but sometimes that work is done indirectly. And so it's difficult for me to answer that question with extreme accuracy because what we will see -- and many times, particularly in the Permian and Delaware, is our client will be a third-party multiclient provider, that has multiple clients underwriting that survey as part of their business model. And so, we're not always aware of who's involved. We oftentimes have knowledge of that but not always.

And then even on the -- when we're working for an independent publicly traded name, we're working in an area that will cover more than one company's leasehold. And so, what their involvement is with other leaseholders as a participant in that survey, we are not always directly involved -- we may cover 3 or 4 E&P companies of various levels in a survey, and we may be dealing with one of them and they may be -- they might be dealing on the backside with the other 3. It just kind of depends on who's the operator of the particular survey that we are shooting. And so, we believe they're involved. We have some knowledge that they're involved. But, we're not always directly involved with every operator that's a participant in a shoot that we may complete.

(Operator Instructions) And gentlemen, no one else has queued up at this time. I'll turn it back over to you for closing or additional remarks.

Well, thank you, Shannon. And I want to thank everybody for participating in our call this morning and those that might listen at a later time.

We continue to be in a tough market. I think we still have some tough days ahead. We are looking at some cost-control initiatives and some strategies to help us reduce operating costs as well as increase our efficiencies, both from a production standpoint and a financial standpoint.

I want to thank our shareholders for their support, and want to thank our clients for their trust, and I want to thank our employees for their continued dedication and hard work in a tough environment. We just recently had our annual meeting and reelected our Board of Directors and I want to thank our Board of Directors that I believe do an outstanding job of looking out for shareholder interests and they're a good, well-diversified group of folks to work with. And so, we're going to continue battling and we look forward to talking to you in the next quarter. Thank you very much.

Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude today's conference. We thank you for your participation and you may now disconnect.