Good morning. My name is Tanya, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to Noble Corporation Reports First Quarter 2016 Results Call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speakers' remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. Thank you. Jeff Chastain, Noble Corporation, Vice President of Investor Relations, you may begin your conference. Jeffrey L. Chastain - Vice President-Investor Relations & Corporate Communications: Okay. Well thank you, Tanya, and welcome, everyone, to Noble Corporation's first quarter 2016 earnings conference call. We appreciate your interest in the company. And in case you missed it, a copy of Noble's earnings report issued last evening, along with the supporting statements and schedules, can be found on the Noble website. And again, that's noblecorp.com. Before I turn the call over to David Williams, I'd like to remind everyone that we may make statements about our operations, opportunities, plans, operational or financial performance, the drilling business or other matters that are not historical facts and are forward-looking statements that are subject to certain risks and uncertainties. Our filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which are posted on our website, discuss the risks and uncertainties in our business and industry and the various factors that could keep outcomes of any forward-looking statements from being realized. This includes the price of oil and gas, customer demand, operational and other risks. Our actual results could differ materially from these forward-looking statements, and Noble does not assume any obligation to update these statements. Also note, we are referencing non-GAAP financial measures in the call today. You will find the required supplemental disclosure for these measures, including the most directly comparable GAAP measure and an associated reconciliation on the Noble website.…

Thank you, David, and good morning to everyone. As David noted, highlights for the first quarter 2016 results included lower fleet downtime and further reduction in contract drilling services costs, as both were below guidance ranges offered in January. I will begin today with a quick review of our first quarter revenues along with a focus on the areas of our operation which fell outside of the guided range, including fleet downtime, contract drilling service costs, effective tax rate and capital expenditures. I will also provide updated guidance on certain P&L line items for the remainder of 2016 and the second quarter. I'm happy to address other questions you may have regarding first quarter financial performance during the question-and-answer segment of the call. For the first quarter, Noble reported net income attributable to the company of $105 million or $0.42 per diluted share on total revenues of $612 million. Contract drilling services revenue of $591 million declined 15% compared to the fourth quarter revenue figure of $693 million, which excluded the $145 contract termination payment on the Noble Discoverer. When compared to adjusted revenues in the fourth quarter, the quarter-over-quarter revenue decline was driven by a 216-day reduction in operating days following the completion of contracts on five rigs and the fourth quarter retirement of the Noble Discoverer. We also experienced lower dayrate adjustments on the jackups Noble Sam Turner operating in the North Sea and the Noble Scott Marks and Noble Roger Lewis in the Middle East region. Lower fleet downtime, fewer shipyard days and the commencement of operations of the newbuild jackup Noble Sam Hartley in Southeast Asia helped partially offset the quarterly revenue decline. Total fleet downtime in the first quarter was 3.8%, below our 2016 guidance of 6% and the average downtime experienced for the full-year…

Your first question comes from the line of Ian Macpherson with Simmons. Your line is open. Ian Macpherson - Simmons & Company International: Hey. Thank you. David, we've been fascinated and impressed by how well received Ensco's equity raise was. Just curious what your thoughts are on reflecting on that. And what you think if you had reasonable assurance of an equally or similarly well-received offering, is it something that would make sense for you? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Thanks, Ian. We've been watching that as well. I would say that while you love to have the cash, our view of the market is that we have plenty of liquidity and we have good financial capability, good contract cover and plenty of capacity. I think diluting your shareholders is something that doesn't appeal to us at this point. We're certainly watching what Weatherford and what Ensco did. But I think at this point, diluting our shareholders is probably not in the cards for us. Ian Macpherson - Simmons & Company International: Okay. My follow-up is unrelated. I thought you might have a comment on this. And since you didn't in the prepared remarks, you might not want to answer it now. But there's been increasing focus on the re-pricing of the Globetrotter I. You have other market index repricings following that, but that will be your first one. And I wonder if you could share any insights on the mechanics behind that or frame the expectations for next summer when that happens. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Ian, it's an index and it's based on current prices of rigs of similar capacity. Beyond that, I don't think that we could give a whole lot more clarity to it. I…

Your next question comes from the line of Jeffrey Campbell with Tuohy Brothers. Your line is open.

Good morning. First question I wanted to ask was with the recent Schahin authorization for bankruptcy and Noble wiping out their backlog, what's your view of the Brazilian floater supply/demand market, particularly going forward into 2017? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Well, I'll make a comment and then I'll let Simon. Regardless of what's going on with Sete with Petrobras, Brazil is a bit of a mess. It's a place we've been involved with for a long, long time. And we're watching that market closely because historically it's been one of the swing markets in terms of being able to take in large numbers of rigs when the market's weak. And historically, Petrobras has been one of the best contractors of rigs in weak markets. I think their political situation and their – the other issues they have down there are going to inhibit their ability to do that this time. I'd just say just on the margin, I'm delighted that we only have one rig there and it's leaving. So we'll look forward to the opportunity to go back in the – when that market is more encouraging. And beyond that, I'll let Simon comment on the real state of affairs in terms of numbers of rigs and... Simon W. Johnson - Senior Vice President-Marketing & Contracts: Yeah. I mean I agree that the outlook is definitely contractionary. I mean the devaluation of the real, the changes within Petrobras are still playing out, the political complications David talked to. They're all going to take some time to give clarity on what Petrobras' way forward looks like. I think if there is a ray of light on the horizon – and it is several years out – it's going to be the involvement of the companies like Shell and Chevron and the role that they play in a return to activity. I think that'll be increasingly important in new rig requirements going forward.

Thank you. I appreciate that color and wanted to ask one more broader demand question, thinking of 2017 again. We recently had a prominent subsea equipment provider that spoke of 20 major global projects awaiting final investment decision; that seemed encouraged that many of those could receive investment beginning of 2017. I assume you guys look at similar data points, and I'm just wondering what your reaction was to that. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: I would say any positive comments from the service and supply sector that is engaged with the operating community is terrific, and we certainly watch those. I would echo what Simon said earlier. We're encouraged by the trajectory of oil price. As we've gone through the last two budget cycles, there's been so much turmoil in our – in product price and it's hard for our customers to give any – or with any confidence to project forward spending. So it's early in this year. But so far, I would say the trajectory of the market and the mood of our customers I would say is better now than it's been in last 18 months, in my opinion. There is a long way to go before I think we see real help in this business. This year's going to be tough; there is no question about it. The strength of next year is going to be determined on what the level of confidence that our customers have going forward, and it's certainly very early in the game to predict that. But again, I'll go back to what I like about where we're positioned. We've got good visibility this year. We've got reasonable visibility into next year. And so we're encouraged by all the signs we see right now, but we're not through the hard part yet. So we've still got rigs with big rates that are rolling off contract. We've idled a number of rigs this quarter. Happily, we kind of – the exposure we've got this year we've already dealt with, largely. So we're going to focus on running the company and look forward to the trajectory continuing going the right way, and we'll be ready to respond when it does. Right now, it's going to be a tough year.

Well, let me – if I could ask you one quick follow-up, just because I want to make sure I understood what you said earlier. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Sure.

Are you of the opinion that the level that we're at now – let's call it mid-$40s, that that actually – if we could just stay there with less volatility through the rest of the year that, that actually would be encouraging to the oil companies coming into 2017, or do we need another leg up? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Well I mean – I would say that I'm encouraged by some of the commentary that I've heard from some of our customers at recent conferences when they talk about making money in the Gulf of Mexico in the mid-$40s. Certainly, there is a repricing. As Simon talked about, there's a repricing and a restructuring if you will of the cost basis of the offshore service sector. We need our customers to be able to make money in order to thrive. Reality is, major oil companies and even large independents and national oil companies can't sit on the sidelines indefinitely. And so they've been on the sidelines for quite some time. So I would say what's more important in – than the real price at any given point is the trajectory of the market and the confidence that our customers have in that price or better price. So when the markets heading down, that's painful. When it's bumping along the bottom, could be painful. But when the trajectory is more positive as it is now, that's a very positive sign. So, yes, I'm encouraged by where we are.

Okay. That was great color. I really appreciate it. Thank you. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Sure. Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Robin Shoemaker with KeyBanc. Your line is open.

Thank you. David, wanted to follow up with one question about the three rigs you mentioned earlier that go to market index contracts. When you cite your contract backlog – I think it was $6.9 billion at the end of 2015 – is that figure calculated with an assumption that the dayrate on those three rigs continues or has a – at the fixed rate level? Or kind of what's the assumption for the second five years of those 10-year contracts? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Robin, we have to make an assumption based on kind of where we think the market is going. We run a five-year model in Noble that we update every quarter. So I would say that there's – we've made some assumptions about what the near-term rates would be, and we've made some assumptions about what the long-term rates would be. And the backlog is based on those assumptions.

Okay. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: So whether or not our assumptions match yours, I don't know. I could tell you that we certainly are not making assumptions across the board that we're at the peak of the market. So those rates are going to be variable. And exactly where they're going to be is going to depend on the forward conventional market and those repricing opportunities. But they're based on our assumptions.

Okay. Understood. My other question had to do with, you know, Simon has talked about the strategy on the Adkins and the Day to get some short-term work in the Gulf of Mexico throughout this year. And I wonder if the current – currently, Simon feels like that is going to be possible. And given the warm stack cost of those rigs, if you really believe there will perhaps a series of short-term opportunities. Simon W. Johnson - Senior Vice President-Marketing & Contracts: Robin, it's Simon. There is a possibility in working 2016, but that seems slimmer today than it did yesterday. There may be opportunities in 2017 of greater interest. As we stated before, though, these are two of most capable semisubmersibles operating in the Gulf of Mexico. They're ideal choices for deepwater completion work; very stable hulls; great deck space; and most importantly, excellent performance records. So we think they're particularly well placed to compete for some of the high-end work that we think will be amongst the first to break free as the business environment improves. So that's why we've made that decision. Cold stalking entails a level of capital expenditure and the time out of the market that we didn't believe was warranted for those two assets.

Right. Okay. All right. Thank you. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Gregory Lewis with Credit Suisse. Your line is open. Gregory Lewis - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Yes. Thank you and good morning. Yeah, I just had one sort of big-picture question, just in regards to – just because it topical – in regards to the recent sale at auction of, I – it was six-gen drillship. Just – I guess, did Noble actually inspect and look at that rig? Do you have an assessment of the rig? And more importantly, as we look at book value and think about asset value across the industry, what type of impact do we think if any that this asset sale should have on book value assets? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Thanks for the question. I'm not going to comment on whether or not we actually inspected that rig or not. We have inspected some rigs, and that – I would say that's more to see what the condition of certain rigs might be versus other rigs and rigs coming out of other markets and kind of get a – kind of gauge. We certainly like to gain market intelligence by looking at different pieces of equipment. I would say in the context of the broader condition of the market and the theme of the market, we were not surprised by the sale level of that particular rig. Coming out of the market where it's been operated and under the operational control of that particular rig in that market, I would say that there's probably a good bit of capital that's got to be spent on that rig in addition to just the purchase price in order to make that rig an active competitor in today's fleet. Keep…

Your next question comes from the line of Jacob Ng with Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Jacob Ng - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Thank you and good morning. I wonder if you might be able to comment on how the latest BSEE BOP rules could impact Gulf of Mexico activity. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Good question. Appreciate you asking. It was a 500-page, around 500-page rule issue, so I mean we were able to delineate fairly quickly the guts of it. But we're still going through it in some detail and trying to evaluate the long-term impacts. I would say that just overall – generally speaking, that we were not altogether disappointed in the rules as they were originally proposed versus what was originally posted. The industry, I think, did a very good job of coalescing around a view – and it's unusual for – I would say it's not unusual – but I would say around these rules, the industry did a good job in terms of different industry associations, different companies and different perspectives. I mean they're coming together and advising government on what they thought was reasonable and appropriate. There have been some – I will say a number of post-commentary since the issue of rigs of how much it's going to cost the industry and how dramatic it's going to be. I don't think any of us yet knows exactly how much it's going to cost. I will say that in terms of what this means for late-generation newbuild equipment – and I'm particularly talking about Noble's – we don't see anything yet that causes us a lot of fear and concern about our ability to comply with the rules in the near-term. And the longer-term requirements, don't…

Your next question comes from the line of Matt Marietta with Stephens, Inc. Your line is open.

Hey. Thanks for taking the questions this morning, guys. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Sure.

And kind of piggybacking on that dialogue that just concluded there, a lot of attention has been placed on that alliance between GE and Diamond on the BOPs. At the surface, at least it looks positive for your peer, competitor, I guess, or both. But can you maybe help us see your perspective on that specific alliance or that sort of alliance in general? And really more importantly, are there opportunities like this across all the supply and value chains here within the industry to help drive out inefficiencies, working more closely with partners, vendors? Maybe elaborate a little bit on the dynamic at work where everyone really needs to work together here to drive out these costs. And if there are more strategic alignment potential in the industry. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Sure. Thanks. Appreciate your question. And let me see if I can take it in chunks here. Certainly, working with our vendors strategically is a good thing I mean and certainly something that Noble has a long history of. We've got very close associations with a number of our very close vendors. We have aligned with some of our equipment providers to look into reliability and safety features for years and years and years. The goal of those is to drive safety and efficiency into the market. And look, the GE guys and the Diamond guys are smart – they're smart guys. We're watching that model with interest to see what kind of advantages or what kind of opportunities they might create out of it. Structurally, I will say that there are some I would say fundamental challenges I have with that model, and not the least of which is introducing a profit motive into maintaining a piece of equipment that…

That's very helpful. It sounds like it's something that if it moves the needle, to be determined at this point. And then moving on, another question I have – my last question here, as more and more rigs get stacked, do you mind just revisiting what the ballpark cost would be to reactivate the different types of rigs we have out there in the industry or the market right now? What would it cost, even a newer six-gen rig to get reactivated with BP systems and maybe down to what kind of a fourth, fifth-gen sort of semi would cost to reactivate without DPs? I mean obviously, this is going to be a major constraint from a supply standpoint as more and more rigs get stacked. But trying to put pen to paper on the math, and maybe if you can give us maybe just some examples or ballparks, that would be really helpful. I think... David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Matt, I wish we could. That is a little bit like how long is a line? There are so many variables that go – that come into play. I mean we certainly have a handle on ours. What's it going to take for us to reactivate, say, the Homer Ferrington? Or what's it going to take for us to put the Jim Day back to work? And we have not disclosed that number – or those numbers and we probably won't. I will say that if we think the number's too big, we have been ready to make harder decisions. And since – in the last 18 months, we've retired five additional rigs since we did the Paragon transaction. So we're looking at this in terms of how much cash it takes and what…

That's very helpful. That helps us kind of think about the other constraints beyond the numbers, too, that are going to limit that available potential supply. So thanks a lot for the color there. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: You bet.

Your last question comes from the line of Mark Brown with Seaport Global Securities. Your line is open.

Hi. Thank you. I was just wondering, you have a number of floaters that were built in the 1980s, maybe a half dozen or so. A lot of those were upgraded. But given what your commentary was regarding that the industry needs to stack and scrap or actually scrap more of the older fleet. I'm just curious is, is there any – why not go ahead and make that hard decision in the very near term rather than continuing to incur the cost of stacking those, some of those rigs? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Well Mark, I appreciate the question. There's a lot of smiles around the table because we thought we might get that question. We've taken the decision on four semis and one jackup over the last, again, I guess 18, 19, almost two years, I guess now since we completed the Paragon transaction. Post transaction, we have 35 rigs. We're now down to 30 active rigs. And the rigs that you refer to in the 1980s, we may have a difference in opinion on what those are. I would consider those to be the three EVAs and then four jackups. We have a couple of rigs that were (59:08) modifications wherein we took a 1980s vintage hull, completely refurbished that hull and put a larger, newer topsides on it. And those rigs were really stripped down to bare metal and bare deck. And so those rigs have been largely – completely refurbished. And I'm referring to the Dave Beard and the Clyde Boudreaux and, to a lesser extent, the Homer Ferrington, which has been laid up in Malta. But the three EVAs are purely 1980s vintage hulls. They were originally built as submersibles. Those companies are probably, in terms of engineering…

All right. Well that's all I had and I appreciate the commentary. Thank you. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Sure. Thank you very much.

Okay. Thanks, Mark. Jeffrey L. Chastain - Vice President-Investor Relations & Corporate Communications: And with that, we'll close todays call. Thank you for your participation and your continued interest in Noble. Please make a note, we expect to report our second quarter 2016 results on July the 27th, with a call to follow on the morning of the 28th. And we will confirm those dates as we get closer. Tanya, we appreciate your time in coordinating today's call and good day, everyone.

This concludes today's conference call. You may now disconnect.