Welcome to the Oil States International, Inc.’s Fourth Quarter 2020 Earnings Conference Call. My name is James, and I’ll be your operator for today’s call. All participants are in a listen-only mode. [Operator instructions] And I’d now turn the call over to Ellen Pennington. Ellen, you may begin.

Thanks, James. Good morning, and welcome to Oil States’ fourth quarter 2020 earnings conference call. Our call today will be led by our CEO, Cindy Taylor; and Lloyd Hajdik, Oil States’ Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, we would like to caution listeners regarding forward-looking statements. To the extent that our remarks today contain information other than historical information, please note that we are relying on the Safe Harbor protections afforded by federal law. No one should assume these forward-looking statements remain valid later in the quarter or beyond. Any such remarks should be weighed in the context of the many factors that affect our business, including those risks disclosed in our Form 10-K along with other SEC filings. This call is being webcast and can be accessed at Oil States’ website. A replay of the conference call will be available one and a half hours after the completion of this call and will be available for one month. I will now turn the call over to Cindy.

Thank you, Ellen. Good morning to each of you and thank you for joining us today to participate in our fourth quarter 2020 earnings conference call. First, I would like to extend my sincere hope that all of you have been able to safely navigate the horrendous weather that we’ve had over the last week, along with the associated power outages and impacted water supplies. Our prayers are extended to you for a speedy return to normalcy. December 31 marks the end of the year that we’ll go down into the record books for the oil and gas industry. Energy companies face the daunting challenges of excess supply, a demand crisis triggered by COVID and OPEC supply management problem and investor apathy toward the sector. Already, six years into an extended downturn, the industry took a notable turn for the worst in 2020, with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to epic levels of demand destruction for crude oil and associated products. With commodity prices and dangerous territory coupled with deteriorating activity and financial results, energy companies had to respond quickly. Rig counts and customer CapEx spending collapsed in the second and third quarters of 2020. In response to these events, we took immediate action to shore up and liquidity and stabilized cash flows. We will update you on these matters, give you our thoughts on near-term market conditions and summarize our continued efforts to mitigate costs both capital and operating as we navigate the early stages of a U.S.-led market recovery. As we discussed on our third quarter earnings call, we believed that U.S. shale-driven activity while at historic low levels was improving as we entered the fourth quarter with stronger crude oil prices. Activity in the U.S. shale basins has historically been the first market to decline…

Thank you, Cindy, and good morning, everyone. During the fourth quarter, we generated revenues of $137 million while reporting a net loss of $19 million or $0.31 per share. Our revenues increased 2% sequentially and our adjusted consolidated EBITDA improved significantly due to better cost absorption in our U.S. businesses. After generating significant free cash flow in prior quarters, we were essentially cash flow neutral after CapEx during the fourth quarter. For the fourth quarter of 2020, our net interest expense, total $2.6 million, of which the majority of $1.8 million was non-cash amortization of debt discount and debt issue costs. At December 31, our net debt to book capitalization ratio was 12.8% and our total net debt declined $128 million during 2020 through opportunistic open market purchases of our convertible senior notes and repayments of borrowings outstanding under our revolving credit facility. As Cindy mentioned on February 10, we announced that we had entered into a new $125 million asset-based revolving credit agreement with a group of our key commercial relationship banks. Our existing revolving credit facility was terminated upon entering into the new asset-based revolving credit facility. Borrowing availability under the new facility is based on a monthly borrowing base on eligible U.S. customer accounts receivable and inventory. Maturity date of the revolving credit facility is February 10, 2025, as Cindy mentioned, a four-year credit facility. With a springing maturity 91 days prior to the maturity of any outstanding debt with a principal amount in excess of $17.5 million, excluding the seller promissory note associated with our acquisition of GEODynamics. Borrowings outstanding under the new revolving credit facility will bear interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 2.75% to 3.25% based on our calculated availability under the facility. With a LIBOR flow of 50 basis points. We must also pay a quarterly commitment fee of 0.375% to 0.5% on the unused commitments. At the closing in the new facility, we had approximately $29 million available, which was net of $12 million in outstanding borrowings and $29 million of standby letters of credit. Together with $72 million of cash on hand at the end of December, pro forma liquidity would have been approximately $101 million. At December 31, our networking capital excluding cash and the current portion of debt and lease obligations total $215 million. In terms of our first quarter, 2021 consolidated guidance, we expect depreciation and amortization expense to total $23 million, net interest expense to total $2.1 million, of which approximately $1 million is non-cash. And our corporate expenses are projected to total $8.4 million. In this environment, we expect to invest approximately $15 million in total CapEx during 2021, which is essentially flat when compared to 2020 spending levels. At this time, I’d like to turn the call back over to Cindy, who will take you through the operating results for each of our business segments.

Thank you, Lloyd. In our Offshore/Manufactured Product segment, we generated revenues of $76 million and Adjusted Segment EBITDA of $7.5 million during the fourth quarter. revenues decreased 4% sequentially due primarily to continued slow connector product sales. adjusted Segment EBITDA margin of 10% compared to 12% margins achieved in the third quarter, reflecting lower revenues and reduced cost absorption. As I mentioned earlier, orders booked in the fourth quarter totaled $65 million with a quarterly book-to-bill ratio of 0.9 times. at December 31, our backlog totaled $219 million. for over 75 years, our Offshore/Manufactured Product segment has endeavored to develop leading-edge technologies while cultivating the specific expertise required for working in highly technical, deep water and offshore environments. Recent product developments should help us leverage our capabilities and support a more diverse base of energy customers going forward. We continue to bid on potential award opportunities supporting our traditional subsea floating and fixed production systems, drilling and military clients while experiencing an increase in bidding to support multiple new clients actively involved in subsea mining, offshore wind developments and other alternative energy systems globally. While our 2020 bookings were lower than the levels achieved in 2019. Our book-to-bill ratio for the year average 0.8 times, providing visibility as we progress into 2021. in our Downhole Technology segment, our revenues accelerated for the second quarter in a row increasing 24% while generating incremental Adjusted Segment EBITDA margins of 68% sequentially due primarily to cost savings measures implemented at the segment level. sales trends for our STRATX integrated gun systems and addressable switches continue to gain improved customer acceptance and we experienced a 49% sequential improvement in international sales of our traditional perforating products. We also continue to focus on the commercialization of ancillary perforating products; including a new wireline release tool…

[Operator Instructions] Our first question is from George O'Leary of TPH & Company.

That’s close enough. Good morning, Cindy. Good morning, Lloyd.

Hi, George.

Hopefully, you guys can hear me, kind of intermittently losing power as everybody is in Houston. I just wanted to start off with, I thought it was interesting. You mentioned you guys are focused on new completion technology, that’s obviously a big part of the Oil States’ story historically. One of you could kind of peel back the onion a little bit more there and what your customers are in need of help with or what areas of efficiencies you guys are looking to enhance moving forward?

Well, yes, I think I was pretty detailed in terms of our Downhole Technology focus and investments through integrated gun systems. Again, addressable switches, wireline release tools. There’s a number of things that working in close collaboration with our customers had yielded the opportunity for obviously, some new technology advancements and newer products if you will bringing to the market. In the case of our Well Site Services segment, we’ve been very focused, really on enhancing operational efficiencies and certain customer needs, including expansions. I will have our extended reach technology equipment as well as some investments in valve technology that will help us be more efficient cost-effective and obviously, more reliable at the end of the day. Those are all goals that we are looking for. In the case of offshore products, we’ve got a number of initiatives underway, both in terms of our subsea production infrastructure, some of our longstanding products on the drilling rig equipment side. And then of course, as you know, we’re doing some initial R&D type work with new customers around both deep water, if you will, subsea mining activity, as well as clearly, we have a longstanding presence in a fixed platform business globally. And so wind also offers some interesting opportunities for the longer-term.

Great, that’s very helpful. And it flows into my next question. You mentioned just kind of the subsea mining opportunity and wind opportunities. I wonder if you could frame up as you look at 2021, what that order book looks like either on a 2021 versus 2020 ballpark, just given most of the folks on the call, that’s not their area of expertise, and I’m sure you guys have been doing a lot of market research. So, any help with just market size increase year-over-year importance to the business would be incredibly helpful.

Well, and I’m one, let’s just be realistic. These are very early stage developments. Wind obviously could be earlier, just because it’s more of in stat offshore wind; it’s obviously not new; at this point in time, whereas rarer [ph] minerals mining off the seabed is. And so I view this as kind of long-term opportunity. We probably had in the range of – yes, I’m going to say just a small amount of bookings and mostly technology related R&D type bookings and 2020, does set the stage for a little better contribution in 2021, but I’m not going to try to oversell this opportunity in the near-term. It’s a much longer term prospect, as in my view, all of these alternative energy investments. But with that being said, we are bidding and quoting quite a lot more particularly well, it’s really both wind, but also on – there just aren’t that many players doing research yet on rare earth minerals mining offshore at this point. But I do see that as an opportunity. Again, the assumption is we’re going to progress alternative energy development. If you do that, we’re going to be heavily reliant on rare earth minerals in those developments.

Thank you very much, Cindy. I’ll turn it back over.

Thank you, George and thanks for dialing in today.

Our next question is from Sean Meakim of JPMorgan.

Thank you. Good morning.

Good morning, Sean.

Yes. Hope you guys are doing well.

Yes, Sean.

So Cindy, you all did a lot in 2020 in the face of what was a pre-crude oil macro. So, just in terms of the balance sheet operating costs, a lot, they’re not unique, you guys made a lot of headway. So looking forward, if the cycle remains directionally getting better as you expect, but let’s say the magnitude of opportunities ends up being more lukewarm. Are you working on more dramatic strategies to boost EBITDA cash flow ultimately returns? In other words, I guess, can you help us think about the opportunity set for more dramatic moves to the portfolio, whether it’s organic or inorganic, just how you think about more than just kind of the meat and potatoes blocking and tackling depending on what the cycle gives you the next couple of years?

Well, you’re absolutely focused on the right question, and I reflect on the year 2020, and I just think of what we’ve been through. And our clear, obvious immediate focus was on reducing costs, mitigating margin pressure through all of our operations and business lines. and importantly, preserving liquidity, but we stand here and of course, booking backlog, but as we stand today, we are beginning to see that, well; I’ll call the early stages of a market recovery. Certainly, the macro fundamentals of global supply demand for crude oil has improved dramatically at ports it had two from the extreme events of 2020. but we’ve been going through really a robust planning process to respond to a recovering market. Anything that we do is going to be done from the lens of focusing on return on net capital employed. Obviously, we’ve got to come back to positive net income and positive returns on invested capital. Our primary focus is going to be in areas, where we think we can have larger share, scale. Some of our product lines depend on niche, dominance, if you will. but we have some of that, particularly in our Offshore/Manufactured Products. And then we look to what can we do? We’re not going to expend the excessive amounts of capital. We’re going to be very cautious about that CapEx allocation, whether that is our equipment or whether it’s responsive to R&D spending on unique new technology. I always favor what we can do internally through our own product initiatives and R&D initiatives. Those tend to generate the greatest returns. that being said, there will be opportunities and we have seen some, where there are M&A optionalities out there. Our very clear stance on that is they have to be highly strategic. And honestly, right…

It’s a very thoughtful response. Thanks, Cindy. And then maybe, just transition to talk a little bit more about some of these emerging opportunities. You’ve always focused on building product and service portfolios that have core differentiated products with more concentrated market positions. And then you seem to kind of build around those other tangential services and products that may end up being a bit more competitive. So, in terms of these emerging revenue opportunities, whether it’s offshore wind, or even the subsea rare earth mining, could you just talk about the competitive landscape, maybe, how you’d characterize your potential positioning and how you can maybe, enhance that positioning as these opportunities more fully manifest themselves?

Well, we’re bidding quite a lot of opportunities and just I always say do be differentiated and do what you do well. And so we have been fixed platform industry specialists now for 50 plus years. A wind installation is an offshore fixed platform in deep water applications. So, our reputation allows us and our history allows us to bid very effectively on that. Now, you’re bidding to a different group of customers, but because of our history, it really makes no sense for a wind installer or developer to try to create from scratch. They’re going to draw from industry expertise that is already out there. And of course, it only makes sense for us to find all of those bidding opportunities and bid on those accordingly, which were a bit successful in getting to see those opportunities at this point in time. And as you know, Sean, all the capital in the market wants to flow towards alternative investments right now. So, customer funding is not going to be the issue as to whether these projects proceed or not. Again, these are unique opportunities that on rare earth mining and deep water fields and applications again, do what you do well. We are experts and riser technology. We are experts in stabilizing facilities from the seabed to the surface of the water. And so again, those are what we’re trying to draw on, as opposed to trying to go into a lab with no immediate knowledge of what you’re going to create at the end of the day that would be a luxury, we quite frankly don’t have. when it comes to R&D, we were very, very focused on the market set of opportunities and we’ve kind of issued a guideline that we think you have to have revenue opportunities in 18 months or less, or we’re going to reprioritize R&D initiatives elsewhere in the company.

That’s very helpful. Thanks, Cindy.

Thank you.

And our next question comes from Stephen Gengaro of Stifel.

Good morning, Stephen.

Thanks. Good morning. I hope you guys are all doing well in Texas. Two things; Cindy, first, just to follow up on the theme right now, you’ve been talking about when you think about these new investments, and I know you’ve been very, very returned focused since the company went public. How do you think about sort of the timeframe that those returns have to show up, but is it a elongated as – because technologies take a little longer to gain traction and how do we figure out that type investment from the timing of returns necessary?

One of the beauties of what we’re doing right now, this is existing technology to a large degree adapted to a different demand environment. So, we have the facilities, we have the engineering capabilities, all the requisite machining capabilities, et cetera, to deliver products and services to kind of a new customer base. So, those are a bit easier as I think we progress this. There will be opportunities as an example in offshore mining for a more complete product portfolio, because this is brand-new technology. And so rather than just relying as an example on some of the riser technology opportunities that are out there, you may expand those products further as this market develops. I don’t want to oversell this at this stage. We had one contract last year that is very much a research-based opportunity. But we have multiple bidding opportunities this year. So, the prayer is these technologies prove up, this transition to alternative at a heavier weighting. I’m not going to say a full transition to alternative, but a heavier weighting to alternatives will be long to develop. And I don’t want to mislead anyone on this call. I think these are 20-year, 30-year type development over time. I’m just pleased that we have the background capabilities and technology to be able to use some of that in newer applications. But again, it is for the long-term. we are bidding a lot now, but I’m not counting. when I do a plan, I’m not counting on tons and tons of bookings coming from this. I hope they come at play out.

Great. Thank you. And then two other questions just about your commentary on 2021, you provided some full-year numbers, which is helpful. I haven’t done the math yet. When you look at the incremental margins, does that sort of suggest sort of normal historical incrementals for Well Site and Offshore/Manufactured Products?

As you know, I kind of manage life based on our incrementals, but I expect them to be quite frankly, exceedingly strong and we witnessed that in the fourth quarter. Sometimes it’s hard with the depth of the downturn to see the strength of the incrementals. I did call those out, I believe on the conference call, but going back to this U.S.-led recovery in 2021. Again, we lost 80% of the completion count from – in about 60 days from Q2 – Q1 to Q2. So with that context, obviously we’re seeing some improvement, but with that Downhole, we’ll do well, it’s in my notes. but I believe their adjusted EBITDA incrementals they were certainly north of 50%, which is historically a strong, incremental margin as you know. In the case of Well Site, they were north of 80%, and those are not going to sustain over the long-term, but we do believe that what we have done on the cost front will allow greater than historic incrementals. Now, we’re going to temper that, because it all sounds good. We all talk about book-to-bill ratios. and in Offshore/Manufactured Products; we had one of the best on the street. Nonetheless, my backlog is down about 22% year-over-year. It would be full-hearted of made aside that we can do better in the first half of 2021 in that segment with a 22% downtime or reduction in my beginning backlog. The good news is, of the bookings we got in the fourth quarter, we had two that we kind of call out that are north of $10 million in terms of size. The other good news is this is our very critical subsea production infrastructure, won’t surprise you that a lot of that activity is in Guiana, in Brazil right now. That mix is good for us. And our expectations are that we will exceed a one-time book-to-bill in 2021, which again, is what we need that’s number one, coupled with number two, a recovery in the short cycle products in that segment. So, what I’m speaking to is, while we’re enthusiastic about the U.S.-led incrementals, no that particularly in the first half, we will be trying to manage decremental margins in our Offshore/Manufactured Products segment.

Great. That’s very helpful color. And then just one final, and I know it’s a hard question given what’s going on in Texas recently, given the disruptions we’re seeing and given your full-year guidance on 2021, are you thinking that just to kind of calibrate the first quarter kind of being plus or minus flat with the fourth quarter and sort of company-wide EBITDA?

Absolutely. But I’m going to also say that before this week, we really kind of expected to see sequential improvement. I will temper that as you have suggested insight flat to modestly down, there’s great uncertainty. We still don’t have power and water in most of the state of Texas. And while we are not a Texas-based company, by any means, 50% roughly. The U.S. land rig count is in Texas or New Mexico. Everybody on this call knows that. And so I certainly, have not really quantified the impact, but I can tell you while we are in a downtown office today in Houston, it is the first day that just got, anybody’s been able to get out and drive. So, those are realities. That’s why I really wanted to give broader guidance. our full year right now it’s setting up a bit more favorably that probably, the street has projected. And of course, we will update that, but like everybody, we pulled any semblance of manual guidance last year, but I think the market needs it. And that’s the best information we have, but I’ve been a little caution on Q1, because now, it’s not just Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Louisiana, it’s been all over the nation quite frankly, pretty harsh winter weather.

Great. Now, this is great call. I appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you, Steve and good talking to you.

Bye-bye.

And our next question from Chris Voie of Wells Fargo.

Thanks. Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. First maybe, on the guidance stand for 2021, if we take out the backlog driven business in offshore, what kind of year-over-year revenue growth do you expect for Downhole and Well Site compared to the overall consolidated guidance?

We’re trying to work through that. I would just generally say that Well Site will be up year-over-year, and maybe, I should back up. First of all, I worry a little bit about giving year-over-year guidance and I try to put that in my notes. Remember – everybody, please remember the strength of the first quarter pre-pandemic. And so your year-over-year revenue growth may look a bit muted, always, look – you look at it two ways, what’s year-over-year? And what is either 4Q annualized or second half annualized? And you get a very different answer. Well Site, I would say can be up year-over-year, probably 5% to 10%. But if I do Q4 annualize is probably up more like 20%, if that makes sense. Downhole Technologies is recovering sooner and again, it’s a Downhole consumable business, very much driven by the frac fleet count. And so we’re expecting higher growth there. It could be up roughly 20% year-over-year, maybe 30% from either 4Q annualized, those types of numbers, but we are expecting pretty strong growth. Offshore/Manufactured Products going to have a weaker first half pick up steam. Again, we got too good bookings in Q4. We’re bidding a lot in Q1. So, we’ll build backlog in my opinion, but that starts turning to revenues a little bit later in the year. We will get some offset from short cycle products, but it’s not going to necessarily rescue the day and bring revenues up year-over-year. It’s going to be a little bit of a lag effect. but in totality, I don’t think you’re going to have it down materially, probably 5% to 10% in revenues, but again, up from the fourth quarter.

It’s up from the fourth quarter, and I think is very important from Cindy’s point, you got to look at the how strong first quarter of 2020 was. We’ll take that out of your analysis as you annualize either the second, third and fourth, fourth quarter, or the second half of 2020.

Yes. And that’s true for all your activity drivers, average rig count, average frac spread count. You almost have to pull it out of the mix, and pull Q2 out, when you collapse rig count and a completion count to the degree that we did. It just has less meaning to look year-over-year averages.

Right. Okay. That makes tons of sense. Thank you. And then to follow-up maybe, touch on price for a little bit. Does the EBITDA guidance for the year contemplate any pricing improvement in U.S. land? And secondly, do you think that you can get to kind of normalize margins, absence, price improvement, maybe just with efficiency gains and lower costs of manufacturing for some of your products, or do you think you need some price improvement to get back to normalized margins?

Well, we certainly have always focused on this. What we really need in the near-term is just higher top-line revenue, which is activity-based. It gives – our product lines have always been individually positive margins. I don’t do work for negative margins sometimes. I think people do. So, give me the activity lever first. We’ve not predicated on a lot of price improvement in our model. I think we’re going to get some that may be mix oriented as much as it is. And I do expect some improvement from my international contributions, which can help me from a mixed perspective. We’ve not talked about that, but it stands to benefit both a Well Site Services and Downhole Technologies. And again, if we get pricing good, I just want to be clear. We are not going to continue to work at margins that don’t sustain our cost structure and certain competitors are starting to announce price increases. That’s probably fundamentally better for the market that it is stunning to me to continue to look at reports that come out with negative EBITDA. I mean, that has to stop in the service sector and the manufacturing sector. And I think we’ve done. We continue to have cost rationalization, probably some, but not too, by any means to what we call last year. We just need to learn to do more with less and as a good friend of mine has said, you’ve got to rip the band aid off, which I think we’ve done. And we’ve got to maintain those costs initiatives that we’ve put in place, not let them creep back into the system. I think if we do all those things, you will see sustained higher margins. And again, it’s got to have the fundamentals of the market behind you, but it looks like we do have that, I’d say as it relates to the U.S., what everybody is trying to – we’ve basically nearly hit 13 million barrels a day of production. We’re now teetering around 11 million barrels a day. We are 15-year lows on global CapEx investment. The same is true for the U.S. So, the real question is how much does the rig count and the frac fleet count need to expand to just to sustain that 11 million barrels a day, and I think everybody accepts and recognizes that the current levels, even though they’re up significantly from fourth quarter, they’re probably not adequate to sustain that 11 million barrels a day of production. So, I do see some upside from here. I don’t think you’ll see, “peak” is not factored in our planning till about Q3. And then as is typical, we may get a little fourth quarter softness, both from holiday downtime and budget exhaustion, but that is how we have come up with our plans for 2021.

All right. Thank you. Good luck with the weather.

Thank you, Chris.

[Operator Instructions] And we have a question from John Daniel of Daniel Energy Partners.

Hey, good morning. Thanks for putting me in.

Good morning, John. You bet.

I just have one question as bankers come to see you guys and pitch deals these days, what percent of them are sort of traditional OFS versus alternative?

We really haven’t seen a portfolio of alternative opportunities at this stage. They’re going to generally be more still conventional or traditional along with our business lines. And quite frankly, I just think 2020 was somewhat frozen in terms of opportunities generally, for two reasons. Number one, everybody was internally focused on trying to manage their own liquidity and financial results and outlook. Number two, many had too much debt, a lot declared bankruptcy, quite frankly, and went through restructuring and in to COVID. I mean, we hadn’t had a lot of investment bankers come by, although I welcomed them with any opportunities that they have. So, I think 2021 will be a different year. But there’s a whole lot of R&D out there right now, John, but there aren’t mature companies on alternative energy right now. So, I think everybody’s in the design phase of these things and so there’s just not a whole lot of things. I think that we’ll even see this year, other than what we can do internally.

Let me ask you this, in a world of all else being equal, you represented, company A, which is OFS something you know, very well and company B, which is alternative. Everything in excel says it’s going be exactly the same returns. What do you do?

I’ve always now – no I got to be totally honest with you. I have always tried to do what we are good at and what we are knowledgeable of and capable of. I don’t think this will be a pivot. I think, I will be long retired before this matures into a broad industry in my opinion, because people are forecasting 2040, 2050, it’s going to evolve that we’re not just going to jump off a ledge and say, I was one day conventional energy, and tomorrow I’m alternative. It will be ever evolving. And if nothing else convinces you of that, look at Texas will become a case study of exactly what has happened this week. America needs affordable, reliable energy that can be produced safely. We have failed. Anybody that when we have people dying of carbon monoxide poisoning in this state, because they’re too cold, somebody needs to step back and look at what can we do as I package to deliver affordable, reliable, safe energy to this country and stop the politics or we’re going to have to accept this as a norm, which in my view is completely unacceptable.

Well said. Thank you for your time and good luck for battling on the weather.

Thanks, John.

And there are no more questions.

All right. Thank you so much, James, for hosting our call today and to all of you that took the time to dial in today. We appreciate your participation today. I know it’s been tough. Many of you have connectivity issues, no power, no water, but your continued support of Oil States and importantly, this industry is so critical to us. I just thank you for your continued support. Let’s pray that the 2021 gets better from here. I think Lloyd said it best yesterday when he said, I don’t think we’re in the New Year yet. We’re in the 14th month of 2020. So maybe, next week is a better week. Take care and we’ll talk to you soon.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This concludes today’s conference. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.