John,
I think everyone has given you plenty of numbers on the drilling fleets to mull over. My view is that everyone is trying to emphasis their "deepness". Some place the emphasis on the number of deep drilling rigs, some on the number of the deepest drilling rigs,some on the number of deep drilling rigs on order, some on the number of the most modern rigs, some on the percentage of cash flow from deep drilling. Clearly everyone is trying to call attention to their participation in deep drilling as a good thing. As John pointed out, I think there are qualitative differences between rigs. For example, several of RIGS units are harsh environment rigs that are in a special category that commands higher dayrates. This is something that just counting numbers of rigs in the broad categorizes doesn't reflect. To me looking to the contribution deep drilling activities make to the companies revenues or cash flow makes the most sense in evaluating companies Somewhere back in one of the old posts on this thread, First Albany's analyst pointed to RIG and DO as the two premier deep drilling companies based on the cash flow from deep drilling figures John provided. FLC is also heavily committed to deep drilling activities, but it is balanced by a very heavy involvement in shallow drilling. You may want to look at drilling fleets with a dynamic time perspective, since many have rigs on order that will be coming on line and impacting their overall drilling emphasis. In general the more deep, the higher the PE. That would generally be consistent with my ranking of the premium deep drillers RIG #1, DO #2, FLC or NE #3/4 and GLM #5. If possible, go to the company websites and look over their drilling fleets. I think it will give you a pretty good idea of where they are and where they are heading.
Perhaps others have a different take on it.
Baird |
