As filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on June 9, 2011
Registration
No. 333-
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form F-4
REGISTRATION
STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF
1933
CAPITAL PRODUCT PARTNERS
L.P.
(Exact name of Registrant as
specified in its Charter)
Capital Product Partners L.P.
(Translation of
Registrants name into English)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Republic of the Marshall Islands
|
|
4412
|
|
N/A
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
|
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
Tel: +30 210
458-4950
(Address, including zip code,
and telephone number, including area code, of Registrants
principal executive offices)
CT Corporation System
111 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10011
+1 212
894-8440
(Name, address, including zip
code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for
service)
Copies of all communications to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Mark Metts, Esq.
Angela Olivarez, Esq.
Jones Day
717 Texas
Houston, TX 77002
+1 832
239-3939
|
|
J. Vincent Kendrick, Esq.
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer &
Feld LLP
1111 Louisiana Street
Houston, TX 77002
+1 713 220-5248
|
|
Jay Clayton, Esq.
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
125 Broad Street
New York, NY 10004
+1 212 558-4000
|
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale of the
securities to the public: As soon as practicable
after the effective date of this registration statement.
If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
check the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earlier effective registration statement
for the same
offering.
o
If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering.
o
CALCULATION
OF REGISTRATION FEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum
|
|
|
|
Title of Each Class of Securities
|
|
|
Amount to be
|
|
|
Offering Price per
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
Amount of
|
|
to be Registered
|
|
|
Registered (1)
|
|
|
Unit
|
|
|
Offering Price (2)
|
|
|
Registration Fee (3)
|
|
CPLP common units
|
|
|
|
13,899,400
|
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
$
|
173,881,494
|
|
|
|
$
|
20,187.64
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Calculated based on the maximum number of shares of Crude common
stock that the registrant currently expects to allocate to Crude
shareholders resident in the United States in connection with
the proposed merger described in this registration statement.
The shares to be allocated in connection with the proposed
merger outside the United States, which include all of the
shares of Crude Class B Stock, are not registered under
this registration statement.
|
|
(2)
|
Pursuant to Rules 457(f)(1) and 457(c) under the
U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the
Securities Act) and solely for the purpose of
calculating the registration fee, the proposed maximum aggregate
offering price is equal to the aggregate market value of the
approximate number of shares of Crude common stock and Crude
Class B stock to be exchanged for CPLP common units in the
proposed merger (calculated as set forth in note (1) above)
based upon a market value of $12.51 per shares of Crude common
stock, the average of the high and low sale prices per share of
Crude common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on
June 7, 2011.
|
|
(3)
|
Calculated at a rate equal to 0.0001161 multiplied by the
proposed maximum aggregate offering price.
|
THE REGISTRANT HEREBY AMENDS THIS REGISTRATION STATEMENT ON
SUCH DATE OR DATES AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO DELAY ITS EFFECTIVE
DATE UNTIL THE REGISTRANT SHALL FILE AN AMENDMENT WHICH
SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT THIS REGISTRATION STATEMENT SHALL
THEREAFTER BECOME EFFECTIVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 8(A)
OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED (THE SECURITIES
ACT), OR UNTIL THE REGISTRATION STATEMENT SHALL BECOME
EFFECTIVE ON SUCH DATE AS THE COMMISSION, ACTING PURSUANT TO
SAID SECTION 8(A), MAY DETERMINE.
The
information in this preliminary proxy statement/prospectus is
not complete and may be changed. CPLP may not sell these
securities until the registration statement filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, in which this proxy
statement/prospectus is included, is declared effective. This
preliminary proxy statement/prospectus is not an offer to sell
these securities and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these
securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale of these
securities is not permitted.
|
Subject to
Completion
Preliminary
Proxy Statement/Prospectus, dated June 9, 2011
Dear Shareholder:
On behalf of the Board of Directors (the Crude
Board) of Crude Carriers Corp. (Crude), we
would like to invite you to the Special Meeting of Crude
Shareholders to be held at Crudes offices located at 3
Iassonos Street, Piraeus, 18537 Greece
on , 2011 to consider and vote upon,
among other items described in the enclosed Notice of Special
Meeting, a proposal to approve the merger agreement that Crude
signed with Capital Product Partners L.P., a limited partnership
organized under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands
(CPLP), Capital GP L.L.C., a limited liability
company organized under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall
Islands (Capital GP), and Poseidon Project Corp., a
corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of the
Marshall Islands and a wholly-owned subsidiary of CPLP
(MergerCo), on May 5, 2011. Following
completion of the merger of MergerCo with and into Crude under
the Marshall Islands Business Corporations Act
(MIBCA), Crude will become a wholly-owned subsidiary
of CPLP (the merger or the proposed
transaction).
As defined and described in more detail under The Merger
Agreement Terms of the Merger; Merger
Consideration below, in the merger, each share of common
stock of Crude, par value $0.0001 per share (Crude common
stock) and each share of Class B stock of Crude, par
value $0.0001 per share (Crude Class B stock),
will be converted into the right to receive 1.56 common units of
CPLP (CPLP common units). CPLP will deliver up to an
aggregate of approximately 24,967,275 CPLP common units to Crude
shareholders in connection with the merger.
The CPLP common units are listed on Nasdaq under the symbol
CPLP. The closing price of the CPLP common units on
Nasdaq on June 7, 2011, the last practicable trading date
prior to the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) of the registration statement in which this
proxy statement/prospectus is included, was $8.35. The Crude
common stock is currently listed on the New York Stock Exchange
(NYSE) under the symbol CRU. The Crude
common stock will be delisted upon completion of the merger. The
closing price of the Crude common stock on the NYSE on
June 7, 2011 was $12.64.
The merger was negotiated by the Independent Directors
Committee of the Crude Board (the Crude Independent
Committee). After review and consultation with its
independent legal and financial advisors, the Crude Independent
Committee determined that the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger, are
fair and reasonable to, and in the best interests of, holders of
Crude common stock other than (i) CPLP, (ii) Capital
GP, (iii) the officers and directors of Crude that are also
officers or directors of CPLP or Capital GP, respectively, or
affiliates of any of the foregoing or of Crude (collectively,
the Unaffiliated Shareholders), and recommended to
the Crude Board that it approve the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger. Upon
such recommendation by the Crude Independent Committee, the
Crude Board, by a unanimous vote of the seven directors present,
determined that the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, including the merger, are fair and
reasonable to, and in the best interests of, Crude and its
shareholders, including the Unaffiliated Shareholders and
adopted and approved the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, including the merger.
The Crude Board
therefore recommends that you vote FOR approval of
the merger agreement and the transactions contemplated by the
merger agreement, including the merger.
The consummation of the merger is subject to approval by the
holders of a majority of the voting power of shares of Crude
common stock and Crude Class B stock outstanding and
entitled to vote at the special meeting, voting together as a
single class; by the sole holder of shares of Crude Class B
stock outstanding and entitled to vote at the special meeting,
voting as a separate class; and by holders of a majority of the
voting power of the shares of Crude common stock outstanding and
entitled to vote at the special meeting that are held by
Unaffiliated Shareholders, voting as a separate class. Evangelos
M. Marinakis, Chairman of the Crude Board and CEO of Crude,
Ioannis E. Lazaridis, President of Crude, Gerasimos G.
Kalogiratos, CFO of Crude, and Crude Carriers Investments Corp.
(CCIC), holder of all of the outstanding shares of
Crude Class B stock, have entered into a support agreement
pursuant to which they have agreed, subject to certain
conditions, to vote their shares in favor of the proposed
transaction.
This proxy statement/prospectus provides Crude shareholders with
detailed information about the special meeting of Crude
shareholders, the merger agreement and the proposed transaction.
You can also obtain information from publicly available
documents filed with or furnished to the SEC by Crude and CPLP.
We encourage you to read this entire document carefully.
In
particular, you should carefully consider the section entitled
Risk Factors beginning on page 22
.
We look forward to the successful combination of Crude and CPLP.
Sincerely yours,
Crude Carriers Corp.
/s/ Evangelos
M. Marinakis
Evangelos M. Marinakis
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Neither the SEC nor any state securities regulator has
approved or disapproved of the merger, passed upon the merits or
fairness of the merger or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy
of the disclosure in this document. Any representation to the
contrary is a criminal offense.
This proxy statement/prospectus is dated June 9, 2011
and is expected to first be mailed to Crude shareholders
on , 2011.
Crude
Carriers Corp.
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING OF
SHAREHOLDERS
TO BE HELD ON ,
[ ],
2011
NOTICE IS HEREBY given that a Special Meeting of Shareholders
(the Special Meeting) of Crude Carriers Corp., a
corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of the
Marshall Islands (Crude), is scheduled to be held
on , 2011
at (Athens, Greece time) at Crudes
offices at 3 Iassonos Street, Piraeus, 18537 Greece for the
following purposes:
1. To consider and vote upon a proposal to adopt an
agreement and plan of merger, dated as of May 5, 2011, by
and among Capital Product Partners L.P., a limited partnership
organized under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands
(CPLP), Capital GP L.L.C. (Capital GP),
a limited liability company organized under the laws of the
Republic of the Marshall Islands, Poseidon Project Corp., a
corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of the
Marshall Islands and a wholly-owned subsidiary of CPLP
(MergerCo), and Crude, pursuant to which each share
of Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock will be
automatically converted into the right to receive 1.56 CPLP
common units, and to approve the merger of MergerCo with and
into Crude, with Crude continuing as the surviving corporation,
as a result of which Crude will become a wholly-owned subsidiary
of CPLP (the merger).
2. To consider and vote upon any proposal to adjourn the
Special Meeting, if necessary, to permit further solicitation of
proxies if there are not sufficient votes at the time of the
Special Meeting to adopt the merger agreement and approve the
proposed merger.
This Notice and the proxy statement/prospectus describe the
merger agreement and the proposed transaction in detail, and the
proxy statement/prospectus includes, as Appendix A, the
complete text of the merger agreement. We urge you to read these
materials carefully for a complete description of the merger
agreement and the proposed transaction. The proxy
statement/prospectus forms a part of this Notice.
The Independent Directors Committee (the Crude
Independent Committee) of the Board of Directors of Crude
(the Crude Board) (i) determined that the
merger agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby,
including the merger, are fair and reasonable to, and in the
best interests of, the holders of Crude common stock other than
(a) CPLP, (b) Capital GP, (c) the officers and
directors of Crude that are also officers or directors of CPLP
or Capital GP, respectively, or (d) affiliates of any of
the foregoing or Crude (collectively, the Unaffiliated
Shareholders), (ii) recommended to the Crude Board
that it declare the advisability of, and approve, the merger
agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, including
the merger, and (iii) recommended to the Crude Board that
it recommend to the Crude shareholders that they adopt and
approve the merger agreement.
Upon such recommendation by the Crude Independent Committee, the
Crude Board, by a unanimous vote of the seven directors present,
(i) determined that the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger, are
fair and reasonable to, and in the best interests of, Crude and
its shareholders, including the Unaffiliated Shareholders,
(ii) adopted and approved the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger, and
(iii) resolved to recommend to the Crude shareholders that
they approve the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, including the merger.
The Crude Board unanimously recommends that Crude
shareholders vote FOR adoption of the merger
agreement and approval of the transactions contemplated by the
merger agreement, including the merger, and FOR the
proposal to adjourn the Special Meeting, if necessary, to
solicit additional proxies if there are not sufficient votes to
adopt the merger agreement and approve the merger.
The merger must be approved by: (i) holders of a majority
of the voting power of the shares of Crude common stock and
Crude Class B stock outstanding and entitled to vote at the
Special Meeting, voting together as a single class; (ii) by
the sole holder of the shares of Crude Class B stock
outstanding and entitled
to vote at the Special Meeting, voting as a separate class; and
(iii) by the holders of a majority of the voting power of
the shares of Crude common stock outstanding and entitled to
vote at the Special Meeting that are held by the Unaffiliated
Shareholders, voting as a separate class.
With respect to the merger, Evangelos M. Marinakis, Chairman of
the Board and CEO of Crude, Ioannis E. Lazaridis, President of
Crude, Gerasimos G. Kalogiratos, CFO of Crude, and Crude
Carriers Investments Corp. (CCIC), holder of all of
the outstanding shares of Crude Class B stock, have entered
into a support agreement pursuant to which they have agreed to
vote their shares in favor of the merger.
The Crude Board has fixed the close of business
on , 2011 as the record date for
determining the shareholders entitled to notice of, and to vote
at, the Special Meeting and any adjournment of the Special
Meeting. Only shareholders of record as of the record date will
be entitled to notice of and to vote at the Special Meeting.
YOUR VOTE
IS VERY IMPORTANT.
Your proxy is being solicited by the Crude Board. The merger
agreement must be adopted and the merger must be approved by
Crude shareholders in order for the proposed transaction to be
consummated.
Whether or not you plan to attend the Special Meeting in
person, we urge you to vote your shares as promptly as possible
by proxy by completing, signing and dating your proxy card and
returning it in the postage-paid envelope provided, so that your
shares may be represented and voted at the Special Meeting. If
your shares are held in the name of a bank, broker or other
fiduciary, please follow the instructions furnished by the
record holder. You may revoke your proxy at any time before the
Special Meeting. If you attend the Special Meeting and vote in
person, your proxy vote will not be used.
Please do not send your Crude stock certificates at this
time. If the proposed transaction is completed, you will be sent
instructions regarding the surrender of your Crude stock
certificates.
If you have any questions about voting of your shares, please
contact Crudes proxy solicitor, Morrow & Co. LLC
(Morrow), at +1 800
662-5200.
By Order of the Board of Directors
Evangelos M. Marinakis
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
June 9, 2011
NOTICE OF INTERNET AVAILABILITY OF PROXY MATERIALS
Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy
Materials
for the Shareholder Meeting to Be Held
on , 2011:
The proxy statement/prospectus is
available at
http:// .
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
iv
|
|
|
|
|
|
v
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
ii
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
|
|
124
|
|
|
|
|
|
124
|
|
|
|
|
|
124
|
|
|
|
|
|
124
|
|
|
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
|
|
127
|
|
|
Appendix A Agreement and Plan of Merger
|
|
|
A-1
|
|
|
Appendix B Opinion of
Jefferies & Company, Inc.
|
|
|
B-1
|
|
iii
NOTE ON
REFERENCES TO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
This proxy statement/prospectus incorporates business and
financial information about Crude and CPLP from other documents
that have not been included in or delivered with this proxy
statement/prospectus. These documents are available to you
without charge upon your written or oral request. You can obtain
the documents incorporated by reference into this proxy
statement/prospectus by accessing the Internet website
maintained by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
SEC), at
www.sec.gov
, by accessing the
investor relations website of Crude at
www.crudecarrierscorp.com
or of CPLP at
www.capitalpplp.com
, or by requesting copies in writing
or by telephone from the appropriate company as follows:
|
|
|
|
Crude Carriers Corp.
Attention: Secretary
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
|
|
Capital Product Partners, L.P.
Attention: Secretary
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
|
If you are a Crude shareholder and you would like to request
any documents incorporated by reference into this proxy
statement/prospectus, please do so by ,
2011 in order to receive them before the Crude special meeting.
If you request any documents incorporated by reference into this
proxy statement/prospectus from Crude or CPLP, those documents
will be mailed to you promptly by first-class mail, or by
similar means.
Please see the section captioned Where You Can Find More
Information beginning on page 125 for additional
information about the documents incorporated by reference into
this proxy statement/prospectus.
iv
QUESTIONS
AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE CRUDE SPECIAL MEETING
|
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
What is the purpose of this document?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
This document serves as Crudes proxy statement and as the
prospectus of CPLP. As a prospectus, CPLP is providing this
document to Crude shareholders because CPLP is offering its
common units in exchange for shares of Crude common stock and
Crude Class B stock. As a proxy statement, this document is
being provided to Crude shareholders because the Crude Board is
soliciting their proxies to vote to approve, at a special
meeting of shareholders, the merger agreement, pursuant to which
MergerCo will merge with and into Crude, with Crude continuing
as the surviving company, as a result of which Crude will become
a wholly-owned subsidiary of CPLP.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
What matters will Crude shareholders be asked to vote on at
the Crude special meeting?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
There are two proposals on which Crude shareholders are being
asked to vote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
a proposal to approve and adopt the merger agreement
and the transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger
(the Merger Proposal); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
a proposal to adjourn the special meeting in the
event Crude does not receive the requisite shareholder votes to
approve the Merger Proposal (the Adjournment
Proposal).
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
When and where is the special meeting of Crude
shareholders?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
The special meeting of Crude shareholders will take place at
Crudes offices located at 3 Iassonos Street, Piraeus,
18537 Greece, on , 2011,
at (Athens, Greece time).
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
How can I attend the Crude special meeting in person?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
If you wish to attend the meeting in person you must be present
before (Athens, Greece time)
on , 2011, at 3 Iassonos Street, Piraeus,
18537 Greece for your identification as a holder of record of
shares of Crude common stock. Doors open
at (Athens, Greece time).
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
Who may vote at the special meeting?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
Only holders of record of shares of Crude common stock and
Crude Class B stock entitled to vote in respect thereof as
of the close of business on ,
2011 may vote at the special meeting. As of June 8, 2011,
there were 13,899,400 shares of Crude common stock and
2,105,263 shares of Crude Class B stock outstanding
and entitled to vote.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
What is the quorum requirement for the special meeting?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
For purposes of the vote by the holders of shares of Crude
common stock and Crude Class B stock, considered as a
single class, the holders of a majority in total voting power of
the shares of Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock
issued and outstanding as of the record date entitled to vote at
the special meeting of the shareholders, present in person or
represented by proxy, shall constitute a quorum. For purposes of
the vote by the holder of all of the outstanding shares of Crude
Class B stock, the holders of a majority in total voting
power of the shares of Crude Class B stock issued and
outstanding as of the record date entitled to vote at the
special meeting of the shareholders, present in person or
represented by proxy, shall constitute a quorum. In the absence
of a quorum, the Chairman of the meeting or the holders of a
majority of the votes entitled to be cast by the shareholders of
Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock, considered as a
single class, who are present in person or by proxy may adjourn
the meeting.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
What is the required vote to approve and authorize the
Merger?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
The merger must be approved by: (i) holders of a majority
of the voting power of the shares of Crude common stock and
Crude Class B stock outstanding and entitled to vote at the
Special Meeting, voting together as a single class; (ii) by
the sole holder of the shares of Crude Class B stock
outstanding and entitled to vote at the Special Meeting, voting
as a separate class; and (iii) by the holders of a majority
|
v
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of the voting power of the shares of Crude common stock
outstanding and entitled to vote at the Special Meeting that are
held by the Unaffiliated Shareholders, voting as a separate
class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
With respect to the merger, Evangelos M. Marinakis, Chairman of
the Board and CEO of Crude, Ioannis E. Lazaridis, President of
Crude, Gerasimos G. Kalogiratos, CFO of Crude, and CCIC, holder
of all of the outstanding shares of Crude Class B stock,
have entered into a support agreement pursuant to which they
have agreed to vote their shares in favor of the merger.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
What is the required vote to approve the Adjournment
Proposal?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
Under our amended and restated bylaws, the Chairman of the
meeting or the holders of a majority of the votes entitled to be
cast by the holders of Crude common stock and Crude Class B
stock, considered as a single class, who are present in person
or by proxy may adjourn the meeting.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
Has the Crude Board recommended approval of the Merger
Proposal and the other Proposals?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
Yes. The Crude Board, acting on the recommendation of the Crude
Independent Committee, has recommended, by a unanimous vote of
the seven directors present, to Crude shareholders that they
vote FOR the approval of the Merger Proposal and the
Adjournment Proposal at the special meeting. After careful
deliberation of the terms and conditions of these proposals, the
Crude Board has determined that, the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, including the
merger, are fair and reasonable to, and in the best interests
of, Crude and its shareholders, including the Unaffiliated
Shareholders. Please see The Proposed
Transaction Background of the Proposed
Transaction and The Proposed Transaction
Recommendation of the Crude Independent Committee and the Crude
Board; Crudes Reasons for the Proposed Transaction
for a discussion of the factors that the Crude Board considered
in deciding to recommend the approval and authorization of the
merger.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
What will I receive in the merger?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
Pursuant to the merger agreement, each outstanding share of
Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock will be
converted into the right to receive 1.56 CPLP common units.
Following completion of the merger, CPLP unitholders will own
approximately 65% of the combined entity, with Crude
shareholders owning the remaining approximately 35%.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
How can I vote?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
Please vote your shares of Crude common stock as soon as
possible after carefully reading and considering the information
contained in this proxy statement/prospectus. You may vote your
shares prior to the special meeting by signing and returning the
enclosed proxy card. If you hold your shares in street
name (which means that you hold your shares through a
bank, brokerage firm or nominee), you must vote in accordance
with the instructions on the voting instruction card that your
bank, brokerage firm or nominee provides to you. If you want to
attend the special meeting and vote in person, we will give you
ballots when you arrive. However, if your shares are held in the
name of your broker, bank or another nominee, you must get a
proxy from such broker, bank or other nominee. That is the only
way we can be sure that the broker, bank or nominee has not
already voted your shares.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
What does it mean if I get more than one proxy card?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
It means you have multiple accounts at the transfer agent
and/or with brokers. Please sign and return all proxy cards to
ensure that all of your shares of Crude common stock are voted.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
If my shares are held in street name by my bank,
brokerage firm or nominee, will they automatically vote my
shares for me?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
No. Your bank, brokerage firm or nominee cannot vote your
shares without instructions from you. You should instruct your
bank, brokerage firm or nominee how to vote your shares,
following the instructions contained in the voting instruction
card that your bank, brokerage firm or nominee provides to you.
|
vi
|
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
What if I abstain from voting or fail to instruct my bank,
brokerage firm or nominee how to vote my shares?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
If you neither attend the meeting, return your proxy card or
instruct your bank, brokerage firm or nominee how to vote your
shares, and your bank, brokerage firm or nominee does not have
discretionary authority to vote on your behalf in the absence of
instructions, your shares will not be treated as shares present
for purposes of determining the presence of a quorum on any
matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you do attend the meeting, return your proxy card, instruct
your bank, brokerage firm or nominee how to vote your shares, or
if your bank, brokerage firm or nominee has discretionary
authority to vote on your behalf and either attend the meeting
or return the proxy card, your shares will be treated as shares
present for purposes of determining the presence of a quorum.
For purposes of determining the presence of a quorum, it makes
no difference whether you have instructed your bank, brokerage
firm or nominee to vote for, against or abstain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proxies that are marked abstain and proxies relating
to street name shares that are returned to us but
marked by brokers as not voted will be treated as
shares present for purposes of determining the presence of a
quorum on all matters. The latter will not be treated as shares
entitled to vote on the matter as to which authority to vote is
withheld by the broker.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
Why is my vote important?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
If you do not return your proxy card or vote in person at the
special meeting, it will be more difficult for Crude to obtain
the necessary quorum to hold the special meeting. In addition,
the adoption and approval of the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, including the
merger, require the affirmative votes of the holders of a
majority of the voting power of the shares of Crude common stock
and Crude Class B stock outstanding and entitled to vote at
the Special Meeting, voting as a single class; the sole holder
of the shares of Crude Class B stock outstanding and
entitled to vote at the Special Meeting, voting as a separate
class; and a majority of voting power of the shares of Crude
common stock outstanding and entitled to vote at the Special
Meeting that are held by the Unaffiliated Shareholders, voting
as a separate class. Because these three required votes are
based on a majority of all shares outstanding (i.e., not just a
majority of the shares present at the meeting and voting), if
you abstain from voting, or if you fail to vote or fail to
instruct your bank, brokerage firm or nominee how to vote, that
will make it more difficult to achieve the votes required to
approve the Merger Proposal.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
Can I change my vote after I have mailed my proxy card?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
Yes. You may change your vote at any time before your proxy is
voted at the special meeting. You may revoke your proxy by
executing and returning a proxy card dated later than the
previous one, or by attending the special meeting in person and
casting your vote by ballot or by submitting a written
revocation stating that you would like to revoke your proxy. If
you hold your shares through a bank, brokerage firm or nominee,
you should follow the instructions of your bank, brokerage firm
or nominee regarding the revocation of proxies. You should send
any notice of revocation or your completed new proxy card, as
the case may be, to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude Carriers Corp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investor Relations Representative
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nicolas Bornozis, President
Capital Link, Inc.
230 Park Avenue Suite 1536
New York, NY 10160, USA
Tel: +1 212
661-7566
E-mail:
crudecarriers@capitallink.com
|
vii
|
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
When is the merger expected to occur?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
Assuming the requisite shareholder approval is received, Crude
expects that the merger will occur during the third quarter of
2011.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
What happens if the merger is not consummated?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
If the merger agreement is not adopted by the shareholders of
Crude or if the merger is not consummated for any other reason,
the shareholders of Crude would not receive any payment for
their shares of Crude common stock or Crude Class B stock
in connection with the merger. Instead, Crude would remain an
independent public company, and the Crude common stock would
continue to be listed and traded on the NYSE. Under specified
circumstances, Crude may be required to pay to CPLP a fee with
respect to the termination of the merger agreement, as described
under The Merger Agreement Termination Fees
and Reimbursement of Expenses beginning on page 96.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
May I seek statutory appraisal rights with respect to my
shares?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
Under Marshall Islands law, a shareholder of a corporation has
the right to vote against any plan of merger to which the
corporation is a party. If such shareholders vote against the
plan of merger, they may have the right to seek payment from
their corporation of the appraised fair value of their shares
(instead of the contractual merger consideration). However, the
right of a dissenting shareholder to receive payment of the
appraised fair value of his shares is not available if the
shares of such class or series of stock are (i) listed on a
securities exchange or (ii) held of record by more than
2,000 holders. Since shares of Crude common stock are traded on
the NYSE, a dissenting holder of shares of Crude common stock
has no right to receive payment from Crude for the appraised
fair market value of his shares under Marshall Islands law.
Furthermore, pursuant to the Support Agreement, CCIC, as the
sole holder of the Crude Class B stock, has waived any
appraisal rights it might have under Marshall Islands law.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
Is the merger expected to be taxable to me?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
The merger has been structured to qualify as a reorganization
for United States federal income tax purposes, and it is a
condition to CPLPs and Crudes obligations to
complete the merger that CPLP receive a legal opinion from a
nationally recognized law firm, which is expected to be Akin
Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, and Crude receive a
legal opinion from Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, to the
effect that the merger should qualify as a
reorganization within the meaning of
Section 368(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended (the Code). Provided that the merger
qualifies as such, holders of Crude common stock generally will
not recognize any gain or loss for United States federal income
tax purposes on the exchange of their Crude common stock for
CPLP common units pursuant to the merger, except for any gain or
loss that may result from the receipt by such holders of cash
instead of fractional CPLP common units.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is important to note that the United States federal income
tax consequences described above may not apply to some holders
of Crude common stock, including certain holders specifically
referred to under Material United States Federal Income
Tax Consequences to Crude Shareholders beginning on
page 73. Your tax consequences will depend on your
individual situation. Accordingly, we strongly urge you to
consult your tax advisor for a full understanding of the tax
consequences of the merger in your particular circumstances, as
well as any tax consequences that may arise from the laws of any
other taxing jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
Q:
|
|
Where can I find more information about the companies?
|
|
|
|
A:
|
|
You can find more information about Crude and CPLP in the
documents described under Where You Can Find More
Information and Incorporation of Certain Documents
by Reference on page 125 and on the website of each
company at
www.crudecarrierscorp.com
for Crude and
www.capitalpplp.com
for CPLP.
|
viii
SUMMARY
This summary highlights selected information from this proxy
statement/prospectus and may not contain all the information
that is important to you. To understand the merger agreement and
the proposed transaction fully and for a more complete
description of the legal terms of the merger, you should
carefully read this entire proxy statement/prospectus and the
other documents to which CPLP refers you, including in
particular the copies of the merger agreement and the opinion of
Jefferies & Company, Inc. that are attached to this
proxy statement/prospectus and incorporated by reference into
this proxy statement/prospectus. Please see also Where You
Can Find More Information and Incorporation of
Certain Documents by Reference on page 125. CPLP has
included page references parenthetically to direct you to a more
complete description of many of the topics presented in this
summary.
The
Companies (page 43)
Crude Carriers Corp.
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
Crude Carriers Corp. is a corporation organized under the laws
of the Republic of the Marshall Islands focusing on the maritime
transportation of crude oil cargoes. It employs its vessels in
the spot tanker market or under spot related employment. Crude
owns a modern, high specification fleet of crude oil tankers,
comprising two VLCCs (Very Large Crude Carriers) and three
Suezmax tankers, with a weighted average age of 2.1 years
as of March 31, 2011, and a total carrying capacity of
approximately 1,058,344 dwt. Crudes vessels transport
mainly crude oil and fuel oil along worldwide shipping routes.
Capital Ship Management Corp., a subsidiary of Capital
Maritime & Trading Corp. (Capital
Maritime), an international shipping company, serves as
the manager of Crudes vessels. Currently three out of
Crudes five vessels are employed with Shell International
Trading & Shipping Co. Ltd. (Shell) under
spot index linked time charter arrangements, which are also
subject to a profit sharing arrangement. Shares of Crude common
stock have traded on the NYSE under the symbol CRU
since Crudes initial public offering in March 2010. As of
March 31, 2011, Crude had approximately $414.1 million
in total assets.
Capital Product Partners L.P.
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
Capital Product Partners L.P. is a limited partnership organized
under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, whose
vessels trade on a worldwide basis and are capable of carrying
crude oil, refined oil products, such as gasoline, diesel, fuel
oil and jet fuel, as well as edible oils and certain chemicals
such as ethanol. As of March 31, 2011, CPLPs fleet
consisted of 21 double-hull tankers with an average age of
approximately 4.7 years, including one of the largest Ice
Class 1A MR product tanker fleets in the world based on
number of vessels and carrying capacity, with 83% of the fleet
total days in the last nine months of 2011 secured under period
charter coverage. In June 2011 CPLP is expected to begin
operating one drybulk capesize vessel. Capital Ship Management
Corp., a subsidiary of Capital Maritime, serves as the manager
of CPLPs vessels. CPLP charters 19 of its 22 vessels
(including the capesize vessel) under medium- to long-term time
and bareboat charters to large charterers such as BP Shipping
Limited, Petroleo Brasileiro S.A., Capital Maritime and
subsidiaries of Overseas Shipholding Group Inc. CPLPs
common units trade on Nasdaq under the symbol CPLP.
CPLP unitholders also receive reports on Form 1099, as the
partnership is treated as a
1
corporation for U.S. tax purposes. As of March 31,
2011, CPLP had approximately $752.9 million in total assets.
Capital GP L.L.C.
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
Capital GP L.L.C. is a limited liability company organized under
the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. It is the
general partner of CPLP and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Capital
Maritime.
Poseidon Project Corp.
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
Poseidon Project Corp. is a corporation incorporated under the
laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands and is a
wholly-owned subsidiary of CPLP. This entity was recently formed
for the sole purpose of effecting the merger.
Structure
of the Proposed Transaction (page 44)
The merger agreement provides for the transaction described
below. The merger agreement is attached to this document as
Appendix A and is incorporated by reference into this proxy
statement/prospectus. We urge you to read the merger agreement
carefully and in its entirety, as it is the legal document that
governs the proposed transaction and your rights and obligations
in connection with the proposed transaction.
Pursuant to the merger agreement at the time the proposed
transaction is completed:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MergerCo will be merged with and into Crude, with Crude
continuing as the surviving corporation, as a result of which
Crude will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of CPLP; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
each share of Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock
will be automatically converted into the right to receive 1.56
CPLP common units (the Crude exchange ratio).
|
In addition, at the effective time of the proposed transaction:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crudes amended and restated articles of incorporation and
its amended and restated bylaws will be substantially in the
forms attached as Annex B and Annex C to
Appendix A of this proxy statement/prospectus;
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLPs current directors and one current member of the
Crude Independent Committee, which will be Dimitris
Christacopoulos, will be the directors of CPLP immediately after
the effective time of the proposed transaction, and Evangelos M.
Marinakis will continue to serve as Chairman of the Board of
CPLP, as described in the section captioned The Proposed
Transaction Continuing Board and Management
Positions beginning on page 71;
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLPs current officers will remain in their positions.
There will be additional officers as described in the section
captioned The Proposed Transaction Continuing
Board and Management Positions beginning on page 71;
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLPs current headquarters will be the combined
companys headquarters; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLPs common units will continue to be listed and traded
on Nasdaq under the trading symbol CPLP. As promptly
as practicable following completion of the transaction, CPLP
will cause all shares of Crude common stock to be delisted from
the NYSE.
|
Crude and CPLP expect to incur approximately $4.0 million
and $4.0 million, respectively, in fees and costs
associated with consummating the proposed transaction.
2
The structural organization of the companies before and after
completion of the proposed transaction is illustrated on the
following pages.
BEFORE
THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION
(as of March 31, 2011)
3
Recommendation
to Crudes Shareholders (page 56)
The Crude Board (consistent with the recommendation of the Crude
Independent Committee) believes the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated by the merger agreement, including the
merger, are fair and reasonable to, and in the best interests
of, Crude and its shareholders, including the Unaffiliated
Shareholders, and recommends that you vote FOR the
Merger Proposal. When you consider the Crude Boards
recommendation, you should be aware that Crudes directors
may have interests in the transaction that may be different
from, or in addition to, your interest. These interests are
described in The Proposed Transaction
Interests of Crudes Directors and Executive Officers in
the Proposed Transaction.
Crudes
Reasons for the Proposed Transaction (page 56)
In evaluating the proposed transaction, the Crude Independent
Committee consulted its legal and financial advisors and, in
making its recommendation, considered a number of factors,
including those factors described under The Proposed
Transaction Background of the Proposed
Transaction, and The Proposed
Transaction Recommendation of the Crude Independent
Committee and the Crude Board; Crudes Reasons for the
Proposed Transaction.
Opinion
of the Crude Independent Committees Financial Advisor
(page 60)
The Crude Independent Committee retained Jefferies &
Company, Inc. (Jefferies) to act as its financial
advisor in connection with the merger and to render to the Crude
Independent Committee an opinion as to the fairness of the Crude
exchange ratio to the Unaffiliated Shareholders. At the meeting
of the Crude Independent Committee on May 5, 2011,
Jefferies rendered its opinion to the Crude Independent
Committee, to the effect that, as of that date, and based upon
and subject to the assumptions made, procedures followed,
matters considered and limitations on the scope of the review
undertaken by Jefferies set forth in its opinion, the Crude
exchange ratio was fair, from a financial point of view, to the
Unaffiliated Shareholders.
Jefferies opinion sets forth, among other things, the
assumptions made, procedures followed, matters considered and
limitations on the scope of the review undertaken by Jefferies
in rendering its opinion. Jefferies opinion was directed
to the Crude Independent Committee and addresses only the
fairness, from a financial point of view and as of the date of
the opinion, of the Crude exchange ratio to the Unaffiliated
Shareholders. It does not address any other aspects of the
merger and does not constitute a recommendation as to how any
holder of Crude common stock or Crude Class B stock should
vote on the merger or any matter related thereto.
The full text of the written opinion of Jefferies is attached as
Appendix B to this proxy statement/prospectus. Crude
encourages its shareholders to read Jefferies opinion
carefully and in its entirety.
Crude
Special Meeting; Record Date; Required Vote
(page 39)
The special meeting of Crude shareholders is scheduled to be
held on , 2011 at
(Athens, Greece time) at . You are
entitled to vote at the Crude special meeting if you were a
holder of shares of Crude common stock at the close of business
on , 2011, which is the record date for
the Crude special meeting.
The proposed transaction will not be consummated unless the
merger agreement is approved and adopted, and the transactions
contemplated by the merger agreement, including the merger, are
approved, by the holders of a majority of the voting power of
shares of Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock
outstanding and entitled to vote at the Special Meeting, voting
together as a single class; by the sole holder of shares of
Crude Class B stock outstanding and entitled to vote at the
Special Meeting, voting as a separate class; and by a majority
of the voting power of the shares of Crude common stock
outstanding and entitled to vote at the Special Meeting that are
held by the Unaffiliated Shareholders, voting as a separate
class.
6
Shares Owned
by Directors and Executive Officers (page 71)
As of the record date for the Crude special meeting, the
directors and executive officers of Crude beneficially
owned shares of Crude common stock,
which represented approximately % of the
shares of Crude common stock outstanding on that date.
Interests
of Certain Persons in the Proposed Transaction
(page 71)
In considering the recommendations of the Crude Board
(consistent with the recommendation of the Crude Independent
Committee) with respect to the proposed transaction, you should
be aware of the benefits available to the executive officers and
directors of Crude in connection with the proposed transaction,
and the potential conflicts of interest which they may have with
Crudes shareholders. These individuals have certain
interests in the proposed transaction that may be different
from, or in addition to, the interests of Crudes
shareholders. The Crude Independent Committee and the Crude
Board were aware of these interests and considered them, among
other matters, in making their recommendations. Information
relating to the interests of Crudes directors and
executive officers is located beginning on page 71.
M/V Cape
Agamemnon Acquisition
On May 5, 2011, CPLP agreed to acquire from Capital
Maritime 100% of the shares of capital stock of Patroklos Marine
Corp. a corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of
the Marshall Islands, that was the registered owner of the dry
cargo vessel M/V Cape Agamemnon (the Cape Agamemnon)
for a total consideration of approximately $98.5 million,
to be paid in a combination of CPLP common units and cash. CPLP
will issue 6,958,000 CPLP common units to Capital Maritime based
on a $10.35 price per unit, as part of the consideration for the
acquisition of the Cape Agamemnon, and pay approximately
$26.5 million in cash. In connection with the transaction,
Capital Maritime will cause Capital GP to contribute
approximately $1.5 million to CPLP in exchange for 142,000
general partner units.
Following the issuance of the CPLP common units in connection
with the acquisition of the Cape Agamemnon and assuming the
consummation of the merger, CPLP unitholders will own
approximately 65% of the combined company, with Crude
shareholders owning the remaining approximately 35% of the
combined company (including 3,284,210 common units to be issued
to CCIC). As a result of the two transactions, Capital Maritime,
the owner of Capital GP, will own approximately 27.1% of the
combined company, including ownership resulting from the general
partnership interest in the combined company held by Capital GP
and, collectively, Capital Maritime and CCIC would own
approximately 31.7% of the combined company. Under the CPLP
Partnership Agreement, Capital GP, which is owned by Capital
Maritime, also has the right to contribute CPLP common units in
return for general partner units in order to maintain a 2%
general partner interest in CPLP. If the proposed transaction is
consummated, shortly thereafter Capital GP expects to contribute
approximately 499,346 CPLP common units in return for general
partner units in order to maintain its 2% general partner
interest.
The acquisition of the Cape Agamemnon entails or will subject
CPLP to various risks. Please see the section captioned
Risk Factors beginning on page 22.
Treatment
of Crude Unvested Shares in the Proposed Transaction
(page 84)
Crude has issued shares of Crude common stock subject to certain
vesting requirements pursuant to the Crude 2010 Equity Incentive
Plan, adopted March 1, 2010 (the Crude Equity
Plan). The proposed transaction will not have a
substantial effect on any such outstanding shares under the
Crude Equity Plan. The shares under the plan will be converted
into equivalent grants with respect to CPLP common units and all
the vesting requirements will remain the same. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, the vesting requirements relating to the shares
held by those members of the Crude Independent Committee who are
not designated by Crude to serve as a member of the CPLP board
of directors (the CPLP Board) (an aggregate of
approximately 20,000 shares of Crude common stock or the
right to receive approximately 31,200 CPLP common units)
will lapse immediately prior to the effective time of the
merger, and such shares will vest in full immediately prior to
the effective time of the merger.
7
What
Crude Shareholders Will Receive in the Proposed Transaction
(page 44)
Crude shareholders will receive 1.56 CPLP common units for each
share of Crude common stock or Crude Class B stock they own.
Conditions
to Completion of the Proposed Transaction
(page 95)
The obligations of CPLP and Crude to complete the merger are
subject to the satisfaction of certain customary conditions,
including the adoption of the merger agreement by Crudes
shareholders, the accuracy of the representations and warranties
of the parties, and compliance by the parties with their
respective obligations under the merger agreement. The
obligations of CPLP and Crude to complete the merger are subject
to the satisfaction of certain other conditions, including
authorization for the listing on the Nasdaq of the CPLP common
units to be issued to Crude shareholders pursuant to the merger
and the effectiveness of the amendments contemplated in the
merger agreement to CPLPs second amended and restated
limited partnership agreement (the CPLP Partnership
Agreement) and CPLPs Omnibus Agreement (the
CPLP Omnibus Agreement).
Termination
of the Merger Agreement (page 96)
The merger agreement may be terminated under the following
circumstances:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by mutual written consent of Crude and CPLP;
|
|
|
|
|
|
by either Crude or CPLP upon written notice if:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the merger is not consummated by September 30, 2011;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the merger is enjoined or otherwise prohibited by law;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude fails to obtain the requisite approvals; or
|
|
|
|
|
|
the other party materially breaches certain provisions of the
merger agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by CPLP, upon written notice to Crude, in the event of a company
change in recommendation;
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Crude, upon written notice to CPLP, if Crude decides to
accept a superior proposal (as defined in the merger agreement),
as described in the merger agreement; or
|
|
|
|
|
|
by CPLP, should any permanent injunction or court order
(i) require or permit Crude to act or fail to act in a
manner that would, in the absence of the injunction or court
order, constitute a material violation of the non-solicitation
provision of the merger agreement or (ii) reduce or
otherwise limit the rights of CPLP, Capital GP or MergerCo in
any material respect under such non-solicitation provision.
|
Subject to certain procedural requirements, the Crude Board may
withdraw or change its recommendation to the Crude shareholders
with respect to the merger if the Crude Board determines that to
do otherwise would be inconsistent with its fiduciary duties. In
addition, subject to certain procedural requirements (including
the ability of CPLP to revise its offer) and payment of the
termination fee and expense reimbursement discussed below, Crude
may terminate the merger agreement and enter into an agreement
with a third party that makes a superior proposal. See the
section captioned The Merger Agreement
Termination of the Merger Agreement beginning on
page 96 for a discussion of these and other rights of each
of Crude and CPLP to terminate the merger agreement.
Termination
Fees; Reimbursement of Expenses (page 96)
If the merger agreement is terminated in certain circumstances
described under The Merger Agreement
Termination Fees and Reimbursement of Expenses beginning
on page 96, Crude may be obligated to pay a termination fee
of $9.0 million less any expenses previously paid to CPLP.
If the merger agreement is terminated by Crude because of
CPLPs breach of its representations and warranties or
covenants and agreements, CPLP will pay Crude the expenses of
Crude incurred in connection
8
with the merger, up to $3.0 million. If the merger
agreement is terminated by CPLP because of Crudes breach
of its representations and warranties or covenants and
agreements, Crude will pay CPLP the expenses of CPLP incurred in
connection with the merger, up to $3.0 million.
Acquisition
Proposals and a Company Change in Recommendation
(page 92)
The merger agreement provides that Crude is not permitted to
initiate, solicit, facilitate or encourage any acquisition
proposal (as described in The Merger Agreement
Acquisition Proposals and a Company Change in
Recommendation), participate in any discussions or
negotiations regarding, or furnish to any person any non-public
information regarding, any acquisition proposal or waive any
standstill agreement. Crude may furnish information
to, or enter into or participate in discussions or negotiations
with, any person that makes an unsolicited written acquisition
proposal under certain circumstances described under The
Merger Agreement Acquisition Proposals and a Company
Change in Recommendation.
The Crude Board may not (i)(A) withdraw, modify or qualify, in
any manner adverse to CPLP, the company recommendation or
(B) publicly approve or recommend any acquisition proposal
or (ii) approve, adopt or recommend, or allow Crude or any
of its subsidiaries to execute or enter into, any agreement or
any tender or exchange offer in connection with, any acquisition
proposal. Notwithstanding the foregoing, at any time prior to
obtaining the approval of Crudes shareholders, the Crude
Board may (x) make a company change in recommendation or
(y) in connection with a superior proposal, terminate the
merger agreement if it has concluded in good faith, after
consultation with its outside legal counsel and financial
advisors, that failure to take such action would constitute or
would be reasonably likely to constitute a violation of its
fiduciary duties to the shareholders under applicable law.
However, the Crude Board will not be entitled to make a company
change in recommendation pursuant to the previous sentence (or
to terminate the merger agreement in order to enter into a
transaction that the Crude Board has determined is a superior
proposal) unless Crude and its subsidiaries comply with those
procedures described under The Merger
Agreement Acquisition Proposals and a Company Change
in Recommendation.
Ownership
of Combined Company after Completion of the Proposed Transaction
(page 44)
If the proposed transaction is consummated, then based on the
number of shares of Crude common stock and Crude Class B
stock outstanding on June 8, 2011, CPLP would issue
approximately 24,967,275 CPLP common units to Crude shareholders
in the proposed transaction, including 3,284,210 common units to
be issued to CCIC. As a result of the proposed transaction and
CPLPs acquisition of the Cape Agamemnon, CPLP unitholders
would own approximately 65% of the combined company and Crude
shareholders would own approximately 35% of the combined
company. Capital Maritime, the owner of Capital GP, would own
approximately 27.1% of the combined company, including ownership
resulting from the general partnership interest in the combined
company held by Capital GP and, collectively, Capital Maritime
and CCIC would own approximately 31.7% of the combined company.
Under the CPLP Partnership Agreement, Capital GP, which is owned
by Capital Maritime, also has the right to contribute CPLP
common units in return for general partner units in order to
maintain a 2% general partner interest in CPLP. If the proposed
transaction is consummated, shortly thereafter Capital GP
expects to contribute approximately 499,346 CPLP common units in
return for general partner units in order to maintain its 2%
general partner interest.
Treatment
of Existing Debt Facilities in the Proposed Transaction
(page 72)
Neither Crude nor CPLP anticipates drawing down on its credit
facilities in connection with the consummation of the proposed
transaction. The parties anticipate that, following the merger,
CPLP may reach an arrangement with its lenders to draw down its
existing credit facilities to refinance the debt of Crudes
vessels unless CPLP obtains better or similar terms elsewhere,
but this is subject to certain conditions and entails various
risks. Please see the section captioned Risk Factors
beginning on page 22.
In connection with CPLPs agreement to acquire the dry
cargo vessel Cape Agamemnon from Capital Maritime, CPLP entered
into a commitment letter with a financial institution for a
credit facility of $25 million in order to partially
finance the acquisition of the shares of the vessel owning
company of the Cape
9
Agamemnon from Capital Maritime. This credit facility is
non-amortizing
until March 31, 2013 and will be repaid in twenty equal
consecutive quarterly installments commencing in June 2013 plus
a balloon payment in March 2018. Loan commitment fees will be
calculated at 0.50% per annum on any undrawn amount and will be
paid quarterly. This credit facility will contain customary ship
finance covenants and will be secured and guaranteed by the
vessel owning company of the Cape Agamemnon.
Material
United States Federal Income Tax Consequences to Crude
Shareholders (page 73)
The merger has been structured to qualify as a reorganization
for United States federal income tax purposes, and it is a
condition to CPLPs and Crudes obligations to
complete the merger that CPLP receive a legal opinion from a
nationally recognized law firm, which is expected to be Akin
Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, and Crude receive a
legal opinion from Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, to the
effect that the merger should qualify as a
reorganization within the meaning of
Section 368(a) of the Code. Provided that the merger
qualifies as such, holders of Crude common stock generally will
not recognize any gain or loss for United States federal income
tax purposes on the exchange of their Crude Carries common stock
for CPLP common units pursuant to the merger, except for any
gain or loss that may result from the receipt by such holders of
cash instead of fractional CPLP common units.
It is important to note that the United States federal income
tax consequences described above may not apply to some holders
of Crude common stock, including certain holders specifically
referred to under the section captioned Material United
States Federal Income Tax Consequences to Crude
Shareholders beginning on page 73. Your tax
consequences will depend on your individual situation.
Accordingly, we strongly urge you to consult your tax advisor
for a full understanding of the tax consequences of the merger
in your particular circumstances, as well as any tax
consequences that may arise from the laws of any other taxing
jurisdiction.
Regulatory
Matters (page 87)
No further regulatory filings or approvals will be required for
the completion of the merger other than the filing of the merger
agreement with the Republic of the Marshall Islands corporate
registry upon approval of the Merger Proposal by Crude
shareholders.
Appraisal
Rights of Dissenting Shareholders (page 124)
Under Marshall Islands law, a shareholder of a corporation has
the right to vote against any plan of merger to which the
corporation is a party. If such shareholders vote against the
plan of merger, they may have the right to seek payment from
their corporation of the appraised fair value of their shares
(instead of the contractual merger consideration). However, the
right of a dissenting shareholder to receive payment of the
appraised fair value of his shares is not available if the
shares of such class or series of stock are (i) listed on a
securities exchange or (ii) held of record by more than
2,000 holders. Since shares of Crude common stock are traded on
the NYSE, a dissenting holder of shares of Crude common stock
has no right to receive payment from Crude for the appraised
fair market value of his shares under Marshall Islands law.
Furthermore, pursuant to the Support Agreement, CCIC, as the
sole holder of the Crude Class B stock, has waived any
appraisal rights it might have under Marshall Islands law.
Risk
Factors (page 22)
An investment in CPLP common units involves risks, some of which
are related to the merger. In considering the proposed merger,
you should carefully consider the information about these risks
set forth under Risk Factors beginning on
page 22, together with the other information included or
incorporated by reference in this proxy statement/prospectus.
10
Listing
and Trading of CPLP Common Units after Completion of the
Proposed Transaction; Delisting of Crude Common Stock
(page 71)
CPLP common units will continue to be listed on Nasdaq after
completion of the proposed transaction. The Crude common stock
will be delisted from the NYSE and deregistered under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange
Act). Registration under the Exchange Act may be
terminated upon application to the SEC if the shares of Crude
common stock are neither listed on a national securities
exchange nor held by 300 or more holders of record. As a result
of such deregistration, Crude will no longer be required to file
reports with the SEC or otherwise be subject to the United
States federal securities laws applicable to public companies.
Comparison
of Rights of Shareholders of Crude and Unitholders of CPLP
(page 113)
Pursuant to the proposed transaction, Crude shareholders will
receive CPLP common units. Therefore, after the consummation of
the proposed transaction, current Crude shareholders will become
CPLP unitholders, and their rights as CPLP unitholders will be
governed by the CPLP Partnership Agreement, which will be
further amended to modify certain terms, as required by the
merger agreement. See the section captioned the Merger
Agreement Governance Matters after the Merger.
While both Crude and CPLP are organized under the laws of the
Republic of the Marshall Islands, and accordingly their
equityholder rights are both governed by Marshall Islands law,
there are certain differences between the rights of Crude
shareholders and the rights of holders of CPLP common units. For
a description of material differences, please see the section
captioned Comparison of Rights of Shareholders of Crude
and Unitholders of CPLP beginning on page 113.
Comparative
Stock Prices and Dividends (page 98)
CPLP common units are currently listed under the trading symbol
CPLP on Nasdaq, and the Crude common stock is listed
on the NYSE under the trading symbol CRU. On
May 4, 2011, the last full trading day prior to the public
announcement of the execution of the merger agreement, the
closing price of a CPLP common unit was $11.27 per unit, and the
closing price of a share of Crude common stock was $12.99 per
share. The averages of the closing prices of CPLP common units
and shares of Crude common stock for certain periods prior to
the public announcement of the execution of the merger agreement
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude Common
|
|
CPLP Common
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
Units
|
|
|
|
(NYSE)
|
|
(Nasdaq)
|
|
|
|
30 consecutive trading day average ending May 4, 2011
|
|
$
|
14.05
|
|
|
$
|
10.81
|
|
|
60 consecutive trading day average ending May 4, 2011
|
|
$
|
14.53
|
|
|
$
|
10.26
|
|
|
90 consecutive trading day average ending May 4, 2011
|
|
$
|
15.10
|
|
|
$
|
10.11
|
|
On June 7, 2011, the most recent practicable trading date
prior to the printing of this proxy statement/prospectus, the
closing price of Crude common stock was $12.64 per share, and
the closing price of CPLP common units was $8.35 per unit. You
are urged to obtain current market quotations prior to making
any decision with respect to the proposed transaction.
CPLP has generally declared distributions in January, April,
July and October of each year and paid those distributions in
the subsequent month. In January 2010, CPLP introduced an annual
distribution guidance of $0.90 per annum, or $0.225 per quarter.
In July 2010, CPLP revised its annual distribution guidance to
$0.93 per annum, or $0.2325 per quarter. CPLP made distributions
in accordance with its guidance in November 2010, February 2011
and May 2011.
Crudes dividend policy is to pay a variable quarterly
dividend based on its cash available for distribution.
In November 2010, Crude declared a cash dividend of $0.20 per
share, and paid that dividend on December 7, 2010 to
shareholders of record on November 24, 2010. In February
2011, Crude declared a cash dividend of $0.30 per share, and
paid that dividend on March 2, 2011 to shareholders of
record on February 23, 2011. In May 2011, Crude declared a
cash dividend of $0.25 per share, and paid that dividend on
June 1, 2011 to shareholders of record on May 23, 2011.
11
The merger agreement provides that Crude may not declare or pay
any dividends except the declaration and payment of a regular
quarterly dividend for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 and
the quarter ending June 30, 2011, in each case not in
excess of $0.25 per share of Crude common stock and Crude
Class B stock.
The Crude Board and the CPLP Board will continue to evaluate
their respective dividend and distribution policies in light of
applicable business, financial, legal and regulatory
considerations. For more information regarding dividend policy
and distributions of each of CPLP and Crude, and related
matters, please see the section captioned Comparative
Stock Prices and Dividends beginning on page 98.
12
SELECTED
HISTORICAL CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA OF CPLP
The following table sets forth certain selected historical
consolidated financial data of CPLP prepared in accordance with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or
U.S. GAAP. The selected income statement data for each of
the three years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and 2008 and
the selected balance sheet data as of December 31, 2010 and
2009 has been derived from the audited consolidated financial
statements and the related notes of CPLP included in its Annual
Report on
Form 20-F
filed with the SEC on February 4, 2011. The historical
financial data presented for the years ended December 31,
2007 and 2006 have been derived from audited financial
statements not included in this proxy statement/prospectus and
are provided for comparison purposes only. The financial
statements for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006
are not comparable to CPLPs financial statements for the
years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008. CPLPs
initial public offering on April 3, 2007, and certain other
transactions that occurred thereafter, including the delivery or
acquisition of 13 additional vessels, the exchange of two
vessels, the new charters for vessels, the agreement CPLP
entered into with Capital Ship Management for the provision of
management and administrative services to its fleet for a fixed
fee and certain new financing and interest rate swap
arrangements CPLP entered into, affected results of operations.
Furthermore, for the year ended December 31, 2006, only
eight of the vessels in CPLPs current fleet had been
delivered to Capital Maritime and only two were in operation for
the full year. The selected income statement and balance sheet
data as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2011
and 2010 has been derived from the unaudited condensed and
consolidated financial statements and the related notes of CPLP
included in its Current Report on
Form 6-K
furnished to the SEC on June 9, 2011. Data presented for
the three months ended March 31, 2011 do not necessarily
represent the results that can be expected for the year ending
December 31, 2011.
The information presented below is only a summary and should be
read in conjunction with the respective audited and unaudited
financial statements of CPLP, including the notes thereto,
incorporated by reference in this proxy statement/prospectus.
See the section captioned Where You Can Find More
Information beginning on page 125.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
2010(1)
|
|
|
2009(1)
|
|
|
2008(1)
|
|
|
2007(1)
|
|
|
2006(1)
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands of U.S. dollars, except net income per unit,
distributions per unit and number of units)
|
|
|
|
|
Income Statement Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
21,425
|
|
|
$
|
32,333
|
|
|
$
|
113,562
|
|
|
$
|
134,519
|
|
|
$
|
147,617
|
|
|
$
|
98,730
|
|
|
$
|
33,976
|
|
|
Revenues related party
|
|
|
6,229
|
|
|
|
1,152
|
|
|
|
11,030
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
27,654
|
|
|
|
33,485
|
|
|
|
124,592
|
|
|
|
134,519
|
|
|
|
147,617
|
|
|
|
98,730
|
|
|
|
33,976
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voyage expenses(2)
|
|
|
735
|
|
|
|
1,793
|
|
|
|
7,009
|
|
|
|
3,993
|
|
|
|
5,981
|
|
|
|
6,238
|
|
|
|
3,103
|
|
|
Vessel operating expenses related parties(3)
|
|
|
7,048
|
|
|
|
7,171
|
|
|
|
30,261
|
|
|
|
30,830
|
|
|
|
26,193
|
|
|
|
12,958
|
|
|
|
1,319
|
|
|
Vessel operating expenses(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
482
|
|
|
|
1,034
|
|
|
|
2,204
|
|
|
|
5,682
|
|
|
|
7,894
|
|
|
|
6,891
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
1,292
|
|
|
|
630
|
|
|
|
3,506
|
|
|
|
2,876
|
|
|
|
2,817
|
|
|
|
1,477
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
8,117
|
|
|
|
7,712
|
|
|
|
31,464
|
|
|
|
30,685
|
|
|
|
26,581
|
|
|
|
16,759
|
|
|
|
4,819
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
17,192
|
|
|
|
17,788
|
|
|
|
73,274
|
|
|
|
70,588
|
|
|
|
67,254
|
|
|
|
45,326
|
|
|
|
16,132
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
10,462
|
|
|
|
15,697
|
|
|
|
51,318
|
|
|
|
63,931
|
|
|
|
80,363
|
|
|
|
53,404
|
|
|
|
17,844
|
|
|
Interest expense and finance costs
|
|
|
(8,225
|
)
|
|
|
(8,258
|
)
|
|
|
(33,259
|
)
|
|
|
(32,675
|
)
|
|
|
(26,631
|
)
|
|
|
(14,792
|
)
|
|
|
(6,510
|
)
|
|
Loss on interest rate swap agreement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,763
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest and other income/(expense)
|
|
|
156
|
|
|
|
341
|
|
|
|
860
|
|
|
|
1,460
|
|
|
|
1,254
|
|
|
|
655
|
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
2,393
|
|
|
$
|
7,780
|
|
|
$
|
18,919
|
|
|
$
|
32,716
|
|
|
$
|
54,986
|
|
|
$
|
35,504
|
|
|
$
|
11,269
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
2010(1)
|
|
|
2009(1)
|
|
|
2008(1)
|
|
|
2007(1)
|
|
|
2006(1)
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands of U.S. dollars, except net income per unit,
distributions per unit and number of units)
|
|
|
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Capital Maritime operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,005
|
|
|
|
983
|
|
|
|
3,491
|
|
|
|
4,219
|
|
|
|
13,933
|
|
|
|
11,269
|
|
|
CPLPs net income
|
|
|
2,393
|
|
|
|
6,775
|
|
|
|
17,936
|
|
|
|
29,225
|
|
|
|
50,767
|
|
|
|
21,571
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General partners interest in CPLPs net income
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
136
|
|
|
|
359
|
|
|
|
584
|
|
|
|
13,485
|
|
|
|
431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in CPLPs net income
|
|
|
2,345
|
|
|
|
6,639
|
|
|
|
17,577
|
|
|
|
28,641
|
|
|
|
37,282
|
|
|
|
21,140
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocable to limited partner per(4):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common unit (basic and diluted)
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
0.54
|
|
|
|
1.15
|
|
|
|
1.56
|
|
|
|
1.11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subordinated unit (basic and diluted)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.17
|
|
|
|
1.50
|
|
|
|
0.70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total unit (basic and diluted)
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
0.54
|
|
|
|
1.15
|
|
|
|
1.54
|
|
|
|
0.95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average units outstanding (basic and diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common units
|
|
|
37,150,983
|
|
|
|
27,088,625
|
|
|
|
32,437,314
|
|
|
|
23,755,663
|
|
|
|
15,379,212
|
|
|
|
13,512,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subordinated units
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,061,488
|
|
|
|
8,805,522
|
|
|
|
8,805,522
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total units
|
|
|
37,150,983
|
|
|
|
27,088,625
|
|
|
|
32,437,314
|
|
|
|
24,817,151
|
|
|
|
24,184,734
|
|
|
|
22,318,022
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data
(at end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessels, net and under construction
|
|
|
699,222
|
|
|
|
695,995
|
|
|
$
|
707,339
|
|
|
$
|
703,707
|
|
|
$
|
750,815
|
|
|
$
|
569,223
|
|
|
$
|
262,972
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
752,944
|
|
|
|
762,078
|
|
|
|
758,252
|
|
|
|
760,928
|
|
|
|
821,907
|
|
|
|
608,627
|
|
|
|
276,666
|
|
|
Total partners capital / shareholders equity(6)(7)
|
|
|
238,601
|
|
|
|
215,943
|
|
|
|
239,760
|
|
|
|
188,352
|
|
|
|
214,126
|
|
|
|
209,274
|
|
|
|
71,458
|
|
|
Number of units/shares
|
|
|
38,720,594
|
|
|
|
31,733,396
|
|
|
|
38,720,594
|
|
|
|
25,323,623
|
|
|
|
25,323,623
|
|
|
|
22,773,492
|
|
|
|
5,700
|
|
|
Common units
|
|
|
37,946,183
|
|
|
|
31,098,729
|
|
|
|
37,946,183
|
|
|
|
24,817,151
|
|
|
|
16,011,629
|
|
|
|
13,512,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subordinated units(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,805,522
|
|
|
|
8,805,522
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General Partner units
|
|
|
774,411
|
|
|
|
634,667
|
|
|
|
774,411
|
|
|
|
506,472
|
|
|
|
506,472
|
|
|
|
455,470
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared per unit
|
|
$
|
0.2325
|
|
|
$
|
0.41
|
|
|
$
|
1.09
|
|
|
$
|
2.27
|
|
|
$
|
1.62
|
|
|
$
|
0.75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flow Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
11,249
|
|
|
|
11,404
|
|
|
|
50,051
|
|
|
|
72,562
|
|
|
|
76,956
|
|
|
|
55,475
|
|
|
|
11,725
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(46,383
|
)
|
|
|
(79,202
|
)
|
|
|
(55,770
|
)
|
|
|
(270,003
|
)
|
|
|
(335,696
|
)
|
|
|
(197,391
|
)
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by / financing activities
|
|
|
(9,102
|
)
|
|
|
32,748
|
|
|
|
58,070
|
|
|
|
(56,389
|
)
|
|
|
216,277
|
|
|
|
298,901
|
|
|
|
186,898
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
The amount of historical net income attributable to Capital
Maritime operations for the following periods is excluded from
the calculation of net income per unit attributable to
CPLPs unitholders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
a)
|
|
the year ended December 31, 2006,
|
|
|
|
b)
|
|
the period from January 1, 2007 to April 3, 2007 for
the vessels in CPLPs fleet at the time of its initial
public offering,
|
|
|
|
c)
|
|
the period from January 1, 2007 to September 23, 2007,
March 26, 2008 and April 29, 2008 for the
M/T
Attikos,
the M/T Amore Mio II and the M/T Aristofanis, respectively,
|
|
|
|
d)
|
|
the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008 and the period
from January 1, 2009 to April 6, 2009 and
April 12, 2009 for the M/T Agamemnon II and M/T Ayrton
II, respectively,
|
|
|
|
e)
|
|
the years ended December 31, 2007, 2008 and 2009 and for
the period from January 1, 2010 to June 29, 2010 for
the M/T Alkiviadis, and
|
|
|
|
f)
|
|
the period from April 13, 2009 to December 31, 2009
and from January 1, 2010 to February 28, 2010 for the
M/T Atrotos. The results of operations of the vessels mentioned
above are included in CPLPs income statements for the
periods prior to their acquisitions by CPLP as these vessels
were acquired from an entity under common control. However, such
earnings for the periods prior to their acquisitions were not
allocated to CPLPs unitholders and were not included in
the cash available for distribution
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
calculation. Additionally, CPLP does not believe that a
presentation of earnings per unit for periods prior to its
initial public offering in 2007 would be meaningful to its
investors as the vessels comprising its current fleet were
either under construction or operated as part of Capital
Maritimes fleet with different terms and conditions than
those in place after their acquisition by CPLP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Vessel voyage expenses primarily consist of commissions, port
expenses, canal dues and bunkers.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
Since April 4, 2007, CPLPs vessel operating expenses
have consisted primarily of management fees payable to Capital
Ship Management Corp., its manager, who provides commercial and
technical services such as crewing, repairs and maintenance,
insurance, stores, spares and lubricants, as well as
administrative services pursuant to management and
administrative services agreements.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
|
On January 1, 2009, CPLP retroactively adopted accounting
guidance newly available at the time relating to the Application
of the Two Class Method and its application to
Master Limited Partnerships which considers whether the
incentive distributions of a master limited partnership
represent a participating security when considered in the
calculation of earnings per unit under the Two
Class Method. This guidance also considers whether the CPLP
Partnership Agreement contains any contractual limitations
concerning distributions to the incentive distribution rights
that would impact the amount of earnings to allocate to the
incentive distribution rights for each reporting period. In
addition, since the issuance of the non-vested units as
discussed in (7) below, CPLP has applied the
Two Class Method, which requires CPLP to
allocate the portion of net income to non-vested units resulting
in a reduction of net income available to common unitholders.
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
|
Following the early termination of the subordination period on
February 14, 2009, all of CPLPs 8,805,522
subordinated units converted into common units on a
one-for-one
basis. Please read Item 8: Financial
Information Termination of the Subordination
Period to CPLPs financial statements included in
CPLPs most recent 20-F, which is incorporated by reference
to this proxy statement/prospectus, for additional information.
|
|
|
|
(6)
|
|
In February and August 2010 CPLP successfully completed two
equity offerings of 6,281,578 and 6,052,254 common units,
respectively, which include the partial exercise of the
underwriters overallotment option of 481,578 and 552,254
common units, respectively. During the same periods CPLP issued,
in exchange for cash, 128,195 and 123,515 general partner units,
respectively, to Capital GP, its general partner, pursuant to
the terms of the CPLP Partnership Agreement which entitles
Capital GP to maintain its 2% interest in CPLP.
|
|
|
|
(7)
|
|
On August 31, 2010, CPLP issued either directly or through
Capital GP, its general partner, 795,200 units to the
members of the CPLP Board, to all employees of Capital GP,
CPLPs manager, Capital Maritime and certain key affiliates
and other eligible persons.
|
Please read Item 6E: Share Ownership
Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan and Note 13
(Omnibus Incentive Compensation Plan) to CPLPs financial
statements, which are incorporated by reference to this proxy
statement/prospectus, for additional information.
15
SELECTED
HISTORICAL CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA OF CRUDE
The following table sets forth certain selected historical
consolidated financial data of Crude prepared in accordance with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, or
U.S. GAAP. The selected income statement data for each of
the years in the three years ended December 31, 2010, 2009,
and 2008 and the selected balance sheet data as of
December 31, 2010 and 2009 have been derived from the
audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes
of Crude included in its Annual Report on
Form 20-F
filed with the SEC on April 18, 2011. The historical
financial data presented for the year ended December 31,
2007 and the period from April 6, 2006 (inception) to
December 31, 2006 have been derived from financial
statements not included in this proxy statement/prospectus and
are provided for comparison purposes only. The financial
statements for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008,
2007 and for the period from April 6, 2006 (inception) to
December 31, 2006 are not comparable to Crudes
financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Crudes initial public offering on March 17, 2010, and
certain other transactions that occurred thereafter, including
the delivery or acquisition of four additional vessels, the
agreement Crude entered into with Capital Ship Management for
the provision of management and administrative services to its
fleet and the new revolving credit facility Crude entered into,
as amended, have materially affected its results of operations.
Furthermore, for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008,
2007 and for the periods from April 6, 2006 (inception) to
December 31, 2006 and January 1, 2010 to
March 30, 2010, only one of the vessels in Crudes
current fleet, the Miltiadis M II, had been delivered and was
operating. The selected statement of operations and balance
sheet data as of and for the three months ended March 31,
2011 and 2010 has been derived from the unaudited consolidated
financial statements and the related notes of Crude included in
its Current Report on
Form 6-K
furnished to the SEC on June 9, 2011. Data presented for
the three months ended March 31, 2011 do not necessarily
represent the results that can be expected for the year ending
December 31, 2011.
The information presented below is only a summary and should be
read in conjunction with the respective audited and unaudited
financial statements of Crude, including the notes thereto,
incorporated by reference in this proxy statement/prospectus.
See the section captioned Where You Can Find More
Information beginning on page 125.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period from
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
April 6, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
(inception) to
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
|
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands of U.S. dollars, except net income/(loss) per
share, dividends per share and number of shares)
|
|
|
|
|
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
12,831
|
|
|
$
|
7,620
|
|
|
$
|
55,882
|
|
|
$
|
16,870
|
|
|
$
|
39,166
|
|
|
$
|
24,665
|
|
|
$
|
15,017
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voyage expenses(1)
|
|
|
2,256
|
|
|
|
3,447
|
|
|
|
18,482
|
|
|
|
6,252
|
|
|
|
14,317
|
|
|
|
10,800
|
|
|
|
5,182
|
|
|
Vessel voyage expenses related party(1)
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
611
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel operating expenses(2)
|
|
|
3,559
|
|
|
|
852
|
|
|
|
9,152
|
|
|
|
2,457
|
|
|
|
2,351
|
|
|
|
2,243
|
|
|
|
1,292
|
|
|
Vessel operating expenses related party(2)
|
|
|
384
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
1,086
|
|
|
|
540
|
|
|
|
540
|
|
|
|
270
|
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
1,616
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
3,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
301
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessel depreciation
|
|
|
4,005
|
|
|
|
899
|
|
|
|
11,317
|
|
|
|
3,357
|
|
|
|
3,356
|
|
|
|
3,356
|
|
|
|
2,238
|
|
|
Other operating income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,286
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
11,981
|
|
|
|
5,384
|
|
|
|
42,626
|
|
|
|
12,606
|
|
|
|
20,865
|
|
|
|
16,669
|
|
|
|
8,888
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
$
|
850
|
|
|
|
2,236
|
|
|
|
13,256
|
|
|
|
4,264
|
|
|
|
18,301
|
|
|
|
7,996
|
|
|
|
6,129
|
|
|
Interest expense and finance costs
|
|
|
(1,347
|
)
|
|
|
(113
|
)
|
|
|
(3,687
|
)
|
|
|
(530
|
)
|
|
|
(1,590
|
)
|
|
|
(3,132
|
)
|
|
|
(3,059
|
)
|
|
Interest and other income/(expenses)
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
328
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
Net income/(loss)
|
|
$
|
(467
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,323
|
|
|
$
|
9,897
|
|
|
$
|
3,736
|
|
|
$
|
16,712
|
|
|
$
|
4,846
|
|
|
$
|
3,066
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period from
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
April 6, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
(inception) to
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
|
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands of U.S. dollars, except net income/(loss) per
share, dividends per share and number of shares)
|
|
|
|
|
Net income/(loss) per share (basic and diluted):
|
|
$
|
(0.03
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.53
|
|
|
$
|
0.76
|
|
|
$
|
1.77
|
|
|
$
|
7.94
|
|
|
$
|
2.30
|
|
|
$
|
1.97
|
|
|
Weighted-average number of shares (basic and diluted):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shares (basic and diluted)
|
|
|
13,500,000
|
|
|
|
2,250,000
|
|
|
|
10,726,027
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class B shares (basic and diluted)(3)
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
1,557,318
|
|
|
Total shares (basic and diluted)
|
|
|
15,605,263
|
|
|
|
4,355,263
|
|
|
|
12,831,290
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
1,557,318
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data (at end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vessels, net
|
|
$
|
388,964
|
|
|
$
|
191,785
|
|
|
$
|
392,969
|
|
|
$
|
76,238
|
|
|
$
|
79,595
|
|
|
$
|
82,951
|
|
|
$
|
86,307
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
414,063
|
|
|
|
287,911
|
|
|
|
418,297
|
|
|
|
81,260
|
|
|
|
82,174
|
|
|
|
88,413
|
|
|
|
89,150
|
|
|
Total long-term debt including current portion
|
|
|
134,580
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134,580
|
|
|
|
32,460
|
|
|
|
35,621
|
|
|
|
39,587
|
|
|
|
65,800
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity(4)
|
|
|
272,889
|
|
|
|
281,250
|
|
|
|
277,620
|
|
|
|
46,860
|
|
|
|
43,124
|
|
|
|
26,412
|
|
|
|
21,566
|
|
|
Number of common shares
|
|
|
13,899,400
|
|
|
|
13,500,000
|
|
|
|
13,894,400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Class B shares(3)
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
Total number of shares
|
|
|
16,004,663
|
|
|
|
15,605,263
|
|
|
|
15,999,663
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
|
2,105,263
|
|
|
Dividends declared per share
|
|
$
|
0.30
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flow Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
$
|
5,119
|
|
|
$
|
542
|
|
|
$
|
18,755
|
|
|
$
|
3,161
|
|
|
$
|
20,859
|
|
|
$
|
9,313
|
|
|
$
|
4,471
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(184,574
|
)
|
|
|
(404,274
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(88,545
|
)
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by / financing activities
|
|
|
(4,800
|
)
|
|
|
277,392
|
|
|
|
396,443
|
|
|
|
(3,161
|
)
|
|
|
(20,869
|
)
|
|
|
(9,310
|
)
|
|
|
84,082
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Voyage expenses primarily consist of commissions, port expenses,
canal dues and bunkers. Vessel voyage expenses
related party includes commissions payable to Crudes
manager, Capital Maritime.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Crudes vessel operating expenses consist primarily of crew
costs, insurance, repairs and maintenance, stores, lubricants,
spares and consumables, professional and legal fees and
miscellaneous expenses. Vessel operating expenses
related party also includes management fees payable to
Crudes manager.
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
Crude considers the issuance of shares of Class B stock as
an equity recapitalization. Crude has used the
2,105,263 shares of Class B stock in the calculation
of net income per share for all the periods presented herein,
with the exception of 2006 where the weighted-average number of
shares of Class B stock outstanding during the year was
used in the calculation.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
|
On March 1, 2010, Crude adopted the Crude Equity Plan. On
August 31, 2010, Crude issued 394,400 shares in the
aggregate to the members of the Crude Board, all employees of
the company, its manager, Capital Maritime, and certain key
affiliates and other eligible persons. An additional
5,000 shares were issued in March 2011.
|
Please read Item 6E: 2010 Equity Incentive Plan
and Note 11 (Equity Incentive Plan) to Crudes
Financial Statements, which are incorporated by reference to
this proxy statement/prospectus, for additional information.
17
SELECTED
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED COMBINED FINANCIAL DATA
The following tables present, as at the dates and for the
periods indicated, selected unaudited pro forma condensed
financial data, which has been prepared to give effect to the
proposed transaction using the acquisition method of accounting
as if the proposed transaction closed on March 31, 2011 for
selected balance sheet data and January 1, 2010 and carried
forward through three months ended March 31, 2011 for selected
income statement data.
You should read this information in conjunction with
(i) Crudes audited consolidated financial statements
and the related notes included in Crudes Annual Report on
Form 20-F
for the year ended December 31, 2010 filed with the SEC on
April 18, 2011, Crudes unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements and the related notes for the
three months ended March 31, 2011 included in Crudes
Current Report on
Form 6-K
furnished to the SEC on June 9, 2011, CPLPs audited
financial statements and the related notes included in
CPLPs Annual Report on
Form 20-F
for the year ended December 31, 2010 filed with the SEC on
February 4, 2011, and CPLPs unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements and the related notes for the
three months ended March 31, 2011 included in CPLPs
Current Report on
Form 6-K
furnished with the SEC on June 9, 2011, all of which are
incorporated by reference herein and (ii) the unaudited pro
forma condensed combined financial statements and accompanying
notes included elsewhere in this proxy statement/prospectus. See
the sections captioned Where You Can Find More
Information beginning on page 125 and Unaudited
Pro Forma Condensed Combined Financial Information
beginning on page 100.
The selected unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial
data is presented for illustrative purposes only and, therefore,
is not necessarily indicative of the financial position or
results of operations that might have been achieved had the
proposed transaction occurred on (i) December 31, 2010
and (ii) January 1, 2011 and was carried forward
through March 31, 2011, respectively. In addition, the
selected unaudited pro forma condensed financial data is not
necessarily indicative of the results of operations or financial
position of the company in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands of U.S. dollars, except net income per unit,
distributions per unit and number of units)
|
|
|
|
|
Income Statement Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
40,485
|
|
|
$
|
180,474
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voyage expenses
|
|
|
2,991
|
|
|
|
25,491
|
|
|
Vessel voyage expenses related party
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
611
|
|
|
Vessel operating expenses
|
|
|
3,559
|
|
|
|
10,186
|
|
|
Vessel operating expenses related party
|
|
|
7,432
|
|
|
|
31,347
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
2,804
|
|
|
|
6,590
|
|
|
Vessel depreciation
|
|
|
11,889
|
|
|
|
41,847
|
|
|
Other operating income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,286
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
28,836
|
|
|
|
114,786
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
$
|
11,649
|
|
|
$
|
65,688
|
|
|
Interest expense and finance costs
|
|
|
(8,816
|
)
|
|
|
(34,685
|
)
|
|
Interest and other income
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
1,188
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
3,019
|
|
|
$
|
32,191
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
(Thousands of U.S. dollars, except net income per unit,
distributions per unit and number of units)
|
|
|
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Capital Maritime operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
983
|
|
|
CPLPs net income
|
|
$
|
3,019
|
|
|
$
|
31,208
|
|
|
General partners interest in CPLPs net income
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
624
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in CPLPs net income
|
|
|
2,959
|
|
|
|
30,584
|
|
|
Net income allocable to limited partner per:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common unit (basic and diluted)
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
|
$
|
0.58
|
|
|
Weighted-average units outstanding (basic and diluted)(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common units
|
|
|
61,054,788
|
|
|
|
52,069,715
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data
(at end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At March 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
Vessels, net
|
|
|
1,093,098
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
1,170,388
|
|
|
Total partners capital
|
|
|
514,871
|
|
|
Number of units(2)
|
|
|
63,687,869
|
|
|
Common units
|
|
|
62,414,112
|
|
|
General Partner units
|
|
|
1,273,757
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
The pro forma weighted average number of common units, basic and
diluted, presented in the unaudited pro forma condensed combined
income statement for the three month period ended March 31,
2011, and for the year ended December 31, 2010,
respectively, include (i) CPLPs weighted average
number of units for the three month period ended March 31,
2011, and for the year ended December 31, 2010,
respectively, (ii) Crudes weighted average number of
shares of Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock for
the three month period ended March 31, 2011, and for the
year ended December 31, 2010, multiplied by the exchange
ratio of 1.56 respectively, and (iii) the weighted average
of 20,000 shares of Crude common stock representing awards,
to a number of members of the Crude Independent Committee who
are not designated by Crude to serve as members of the CPLP
Board, whose vesting will be accelerated upon closing of the
merger multiplied by the exchange ratio of 1.56. Please see the
section captioned Comparative Historical and Pro Forma Per
Share/Unit Data below.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
The number of CPLP common units and CPLP general partner units
have been calculated based on the units that would have been
outstanding as of end of the periods presented after giving
effect to the merger.
|
19
COMPARATIVE
HISTORICAL AND PRO FORMA PER SHARE/UNIT DATA (1)
The December 31, 2010 selected historical comparative per
share or per unit information of Crude and CPLP, set forth
below, was derived from their respective audited financial
statements. The March 31, 2011 selected historical
comparative per share or per unit information of Crude and CPLP
set forth below was derived from unaudited financial statements
and, in the opinion of the management of Crude and CPLP,
includes all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring
adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation for such periods.
You should read the information in this section along with
Crudes and CPLPs historical consolidated financial
statements and accompanying notes for the periods referred to
above included in the documents described under the section
captioned Where You Can Find More Information
beginning on page 125. You should also read the section
captioned Unaudited Pro Forma Condensed Combined Financial
Information beginning on page 100.
CPLP
Historical and Unaudited Pro Forma Common Unit Data
The following table presents the net income per unit,
distributions per unit and book value per unit with respect to
CPLP on a historical basis and pro forma combined basis giving
effect to the transaction. The CPLP pro forma combined amounts
are presented as if the transaction had been effective for the
periods presented based on the acquisition method of accounting.
The CPLP pro forma combined amounts do not reflect the benefits
of expected cost savings, opportunities to earn additional
revenue, and merger related costs, or other factors that may
result as a consequence of the merger and, accordingly, do not
attempt to predict or suggest future results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and Diluted Net Income Per Unit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLP historical
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
|
$
|
0.54
|
|
|
CPLP pro forma combined
|
|
$
|
0.05
|
|
|
$
|
0.58
|
|
|
Dividends Per Unit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLP historical
|
|
$
|
0.2325
|
|
|
$
|
1.09
|
|
|
CPLP pro forma combined(1)
|
|
$
|
0.2325
|
|
|
$
|
1.09
|
|
|
Book Value Per Unit at Period End:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLP historical
|
|
$
|
6.16
|
|
|
$
|
6.19
|
|
|
CPLP pro forma combined
|
|
$
|
8.08
|
|
|
$
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Pro forma combined distributions of $0.2325 and $1.09 per unit
for the three month period ended March 31, 2011 and for the
year ended December 31, 2010, respectively, are based on
historical distributions paid by CPLP.
|
20
Crude
Historical and Unaudited Pro Forma Common and Class B Share
Data
The following table presents the net income/(loss) per share for
historical, and net income per unit for pro forma, dividends per
share and book value per share with respect to Crude on a
historical basis and dividend per unit and book value per unit
on a pro forma equivalent basis. The pro forma equivalent
amounts with respect to the Crude common stock are calculated by
multiplying the corresponding CPLP pro forma combined amount by
the exchange ratio of 1.56.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income/(Loss) Per Share/Unit, Basic and Diluted:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude historical per share
|
|
$
|
(0.03
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.76
|
|
|
Crude pro forma equivalent per unit
|
|
$
|
0.08
|
|
|
$
|
0.90
|
|
|
Dividends Per Share/Unit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude historical per share
|
|
$
|
0.30
|
|
|
$
|
0.70
|
|
|
Crude pro forma equivalent per unit
|
|
$
|
0.36
|
|
|
$
|
1.70
|
|
|
Book Value Per Share/Unit at Period End:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude historical per share
|
|
$
|
17.05
|
|
|
$
|
17.35
|
|
|
Crude pro forma equivalent per unit
|
|
$
|
12.60
|
|
|
$
|
N/A
|
|
21
RISK
FACTORS
Investing in the CPLP common units involves risks, some of
which are related to the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated therein. In considering whether to approve the
merger agreement and the transactions contemplated by the merger
agreement, including the merger, Crude shareholders should
carefully consider the following information about these risks,
as well as the other information included in or incorporated by
reference into this proxy statement/prospectus, including
CPLPs Annual Report on
Form 20-F
for the year ended December 31, 2010 and the extensive risk
factors relating to the businesses of CPLP described therein
beginning on page 8 thereof. The business of CPLP, as well
as its financial condition and results of operations, could be
materially adversely affected by any of these risks, as well as
other risks and uncertainties not currently known to CPLP or not
currently deemed to be material.
CPLP also encourages you to read and consider the risk
factors specific to Crudes businesses (that may also
affect CPLP) described in Crudes Annual Report on
Form 20-F
for the year ended December 31, 2010 beginning on
page 8 thereof.
Please see Where You Can Find More Information
and Incorporation of Certain Documents by Reference
on pages 125 and 125, respectively, for information on
where you can find the periodic reports and other documents CPLP
and Crude have filed with or furnished to the SEC and which are
incorporated into this proxy statement/prospectus by
reference.
RISKS
RELATING TO THE PROPOSED TRANSACTION
Any
delay in the completion of the proposed transaction may
significantly reduce the benefits expected to be obtained from
the proposed transaction or could adversely affect the market
price of Crude common stock or CPLP common units or their future
business and financial results, including the ability to
maintain the current rate of Crude cash dividends and CPLP cash
distributions.
The proposed transaction is subject to a number of conditions,
including approvals of Crude shareholders and other required
approvals, many of which are beyond the control of Crude and
CPLP and which may prevent, delay or otherwise materially and
adversely affect completion of the proposed transaction. See the
section captioned The Merger Agreement
Conditions to Completion of the Proposed Transaction
beginning on page 95. Crude and CPLP cannot predict whether
and when these conditions will be satisfied.
Failure to complete the proposed transaction would prevent Crude
and CPLP from realizing the anticipated benefits of the proposed
transaction. Each company would also remain liable for
significant transaction costs, including legal, accounting and
financial advisory fees. Any delay in completing the proposed
transaction may significantly reduce the benefits that Crude and
CPLP expect to achieve if they successfully complete the
proposed transaction within the expected timeframe and integrate
their respective businesses.
In addition, the market price of Crude common stock or CPLP
common units may reflect various market assumptions as to
whether and when the proposed transaction will be completed.
Consequently, the completion of, the failure to complete, or any
delay in the completion of the proposed transaction could result
in a significant change in the market price of Crude common
stock or CPLP common units.
The
market price of the CPLP common units may decline following
completion of the proposed transaction.
Following completion of the merger, the market price of the CPLP
common units may decline if, among other reasons, the combined
company does not achieve the expected benefits to the proposed
transaction as rapidly or to the extent anticipated by it,
financial analysts or investors or at all, current Crude
shareholders sell a significant number of CPLP common units
after consummation of the proposed transaction, or the effect of
the proposed transaction on the financial results of the
combined company is not consistent with the expectations of
financial analysts or investors.
22
Fluctuations
in market prices may cause the value of the CPLP common units
that you receive to be less than the value of your shares of
Crude capital stock.
Upon completion of the proposed transaction, all shares of Crude
common stock and Crude Class B stock will be converted into
CPLP common units. The ratio at which the shares will be
converted is fixed, and there will be no adjustment for changes
in the market price of CPLP common units. Any change in the
price of CPLP common units will affect the value Crude
shareholders will receive in the proposed transaction. CPLP
common units have historically experienced significant
volatility, and the value of the consideration received in the
proposed transaction may go up or down as the market price of
CPLP common units goes up or down. Stock price changes may
result from a variety of factors that are beyond the control of
Crude and CPLP, including changes in their businesses,
operations and prospects, regulatory considerations,
fluctuations in the spot and period tanker market and vessel
values and general market and economic conditions. Crude is not
permitted to walk away from the proposed transaction
or resolicit the vote of its shareholders solely because of
changes in the market price of CPLPs common units.
The prices of Crude common stock and CPLP common units at the
closing of the proposed transaction may vary from their
respective prices on the date of this proxy statement/prospectus
and on the date of the Crude special meeting. Because the date
the proposed transaction is completed will be later than the
date of the Crude special meeting, the prices of Crude common
stock and CPLP common units on the date of the Crude special
meeting may not be indicative of their respective prices on the
date the proposed transaction is completed.
CPLPs
general partner and its other affiliates own a significant
interest in CPLP and they have conflicts of interest and limited
fiduciary and contractual duties, which may permit them to favor
their own interests over the interests of holders of CPLP common
units.
If the proposed transaction is consummated, then based on the
number of shares of Crude common stock and Crude Class B
stock outstanding on June 8, 2011, CPLP would issue
approximately 24,967,275 CPLP common units to Crude shareholders
in the proposed transaction, including 3,284,210 common units to
be issued to CCIC. Capital Maritime, the owner of Capital GP,
currently owns a 31.2% interest in CPLP (including its 2%
general partner interest through its ownership of CPLPs
general partner, Capital GP), and following the merger, Capital
Maritime will own a 27.1% interest in the combined company,
including ownership resulting from the general partnership
interest in the combined company held by Capital GP, and
collectively, Capital Maritime and CCIC would own approximately
31.7% of the combined company. The CPLP common units owned by
Capital Maritime have the same rights as CPLPs other
outstanding common units. Capital GP effectively controls
CPLPs
day-to-day
affairs consistent with policies and procedures adopted by and
subject to the direction of the CPLP Board. Capital GP and its
affiliates and its directors have a fiduciary duty to manage
CPLP in a manner beneficial to CPLP and the unitholders.
A number of the officers of Capital GP and certain of
CPLPs directors are directors or officers of Capital
Maritime and its affiliates, and as such they also have
fiduciary duties to Capital Maritime. As a result, conflicts of
interest may arise between Capital Maritime and its affiliates,
including Capital GP and its officers, on the one hand, and CPLP
and CPLP unitholders, on the other hand. These conflicts
include, among others, the following situations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the executive officers of Capital GP and three of
CPLPs current directors also serve as executive officers
and/or
directors of Capital Maritime;
|
|
|
|
|
|
neither the CPLP Partnership Agreement nor any other agreement
requires Capital GP or Capital Maritime or its affiliates to
pursue a business strategy that favors CPLP or utilizes its
assets, and Capital Maritimes officers and directors have
a fiduciary duty to make decisions in the best interests of the
shareholders of Capital Maritime, which may not be in the best
interests of CPLP;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital GP and the CPLP Board are allowed to take into account
the interests of parties other than CPLP, such as Capital
Maritime, in resolving conflicts of interest, which has the
effect of limiting their fiduciary duties to CPLP unitholders;
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital GP and CPLPs directors have limited their
liabilities and reduced their fiduciary duties under the laws of
the Republic of the Marshall Islands, while also restricting the
remedies available to CPLP unitholders, and, as a result of
purchasing CPLP units, unitholders are treated as having agreed
to the modified standard of fiduciary duties and to certain
actions that may be taken by Capital GP and CPLPs
directors, all as set forth in the CPLP Partnership Agreement;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital GP and the CPLP Board will be involved in determining
the amount and timing of the combined companys asset
purchases and sales, capital expenditures, borrowings, and
issuances of additional partnership securities and reserves,
each of which can affect the amount of cash that is available
for distribution to CPLP unitholders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital GP may have substantial influence over the CPLP
Boards decision to cause the combined company to borrow
funds in order to permit the payment of cash distributions, even
if the purpose or effect of the borrowing is to make incentive
distributions;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital GP is entitled to reimbursement of all reasonable costs
incurred by it and its affiliates for CPLPs benefit;
|
|
|
|
|
|
The CPLP Partnership Agreement does not restrict CPLP from
paying Capital GP or its affiliates for any services rendered to
the combined company or entering into additional contractual
arrangements with any of these entities on the combined
companys behalf provided that the terms of any such
payment of arrangement are fair and reasonable; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currently, Capital GP may exercise its right to call and
purchase CPLPs outstanding units if it and its affiliates
own more than 80% of the CPLP common units. If the merger and
the transactions contemplated are consummated, Capital GP will
continue to have such right after the effective time of the
merger, provided that it and its affiliates own 90% of the CPLP
common units.
|
Although a majority of the combined companys directors
will over time be elected by holders of CPLP common units,
Capital GP will likely have substantial influence on decisions
made by the CPLP Board. See Description of CPLP Common
Units and Comparison of Rights of Shareholders of
Crude and Unitholders of CPLP beginning on pages 111
and 113 respectively.
Crude
shareholders and CPLP unitholders will experience a reduction in
their percentage ownership and voting power with respect to
their units as a result of the consummation of the proposed
transaction. Crude shareholders will hold less than a majority
of the common units of the combined company and may be
outvoted.
As a result of the consummation of the proposed transaction,
Crude shareholders and CPLP unitholders will experience a
reduction in their percentage ownership interests and voting
power relative to their percentage ownership interests and
voting power in Crude and CPLP, respectively, prior to
consummation of the proposed transaction. Taking into account
CPLPs acquisition of the Cape Agamemnon, if the proposed
transaction is consummated, it is expected that Crude
shareholders will hold approximately 35% and current CPLP
unitholders will hold approximately 65% of the CPLP common units
outstanding immediately following the consummation of the
proposed transaction. In particular, Crude shareholders in the
aggregate will own less than a majority of CPLP and could, as a
result, be outvoted by current CPLP unitholders if current CPLP
unitholders voted together as a group. Therefore, Crude
shareholders will not have the same control over the combined
company as they had over Crude prior to consummation of the
proposed transaction.
The
proposed transaction may adversely affect the relationships of
Crude or CPLP with their respective charterers, customers and
suppliers, whether or not the proposed transaction is
completed.
In response to the announcement of the proposed transaction,
existing or prospective customers or suppliers of Crude or CPLP
may:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
delay, defer or cease purchasing services from or providing
goods or services to Crude or CPLP;
|
|
|
|
|
|
delay or defer other decisions concerning Crude or CPLP, or
refuse to extend credit to Crude or CPLP;
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
raise disputes under their business arrangements with Crude or
CPLP or assert purported consent or change of control
rights; or
|
|
|
|
|
|
otherwise seek to change the terms on which they do business
with Crude or CPLP.
|
Any such delays, disputes or changes to terms could seriously
harm the business of Crude or CPLP or, if the proposed
transaction is completed, the combined company.
The
integration of Crude and CPLP following the proposed transaction
will present challenges that may result in a decline in the
anticipated potential benefits of the proposed
transaction.
Crude and CPLP entered into the merger agreement with the
expectation that the proposed transaction would result in
various benefits, including, among other things, enhanced
liquidity, increased access to the capital markets, facilitation
of the combined companys growth, the potential for
improved distributions and operating efficiencies. Although the
companies expect to achieve the anticipated benefits of the
proposed transaction, achieving them cannot be assured.
Moreover, Crude and CPLP will face challenges in integrating
their organizations in a timely and efficient manner, and in
retaining key Crude personnel. There can be no assurance that
the integration will be completed in a timely or effective
manner, or that Crude personnel will continue with the combined
company if the integration is time-consuming or ineffective.
Crude
and CPLP will incur significant costs in connection with the
proposed transaction.
Crude and CPLP expect to incur approximately $4.0 million
and $4.0 million, respectively, in fees and costs
associated with consummating the proposed transaction. The
amounts of such fees and costs expected to be incurred by each
of Crude and CPLP are preliminary estimates and are subject to
change. Crude is in the early stages of assessing the magnitude
of transaction costs, and, therefore, these estimates may change
substantially, and additional unanticipated costs may be
incurred in the integration of the businesses of Crude and CPLP.
The
merger agreement contains provisions that could affect the
decision of a third party considering making an alternative
acquisition proposal to the proposed transaction.
The merger agreement contains no shop provisions
that, subject to limited exceptions, restrict Crudes
ability to initiate, solicit, facilitate or encourage competing
third-party proposals for the acquisition of Crudes stock
or assets. Further, even if the Crude Board withdraws or
qualifies its recommendation with respect to the merger, Crude
will still be required to submit the merger to a shareholder
vote. In addition, CPLP generally has an opportunity to offer to
modify the terms of the merger in response to any competing
acquisition proposals before the Crude Board may withdraw or
qualify its recommendation with respect to the merger. In some
circumstances, upon termination of the merger agreement, Crude
will be required to pay a termination fee of $9.0 million,
less previously paid expenses, to CPLP. See The Merger
Agreement Acquisition Proposals and a Company Change
in Recommendation beginning on page 92, The
Merger Agreement Termination of the Merger
Agreement beginning on page 96 and The Merger
Agreement Termination Fees and Reimbursement of
Expenses beginning on page 96.
These provisions could discourage a potential third-party
acquiror that might have an interest in acquiring all or a
significant portion of Crude from considering or proposing that
acquisition, even if it were prepared to pay consideration with
a higher per share cash or market value than the market value
proposed to be received or realized in the merger or might
result in a potential third-party acquiror proposing to pay a
lower price to the shareholders than it might otherwise have
proposed to pay because of the added expense of the
$9.0 million termination fee, less previously paid
expenses, that may become payable in certain circumstances.
If the merger agreement is terminated and Crude determines to
seek another business combination, it may not be able to
negotiate a transaction with another party on terms comparable
to, or better than, the terms of the merger.
25
RISKS
RELATING TO THE BUSINESS AND OPERATIONS OF THE COMBINED
COMPANY
The
recent global economic downturn may have a material adverse
effect on the combined companys business, financial
position, distributions and results of operations as well as on
its ability to recharter its vessels at favorable
rates.
Oil has been one of the worlds primary energy sources for
a number of decades. The global economic growth of previous
years had a significant impact on the demand for oil and
subsequently on the oil trade and shipping demand. However, the
second half of 2008, the year 2009 and parts of 2010 were marked
by a major economic slowdown which has had, and is expected to
continue to have, a significant impact on world trade, including
the oil trade. Demand for oil and refined petroleum products
contracted sharply as a result of the global economic slowdown,
which in combination with the diminished availability of trade
credit, deteriorating international liquidity conditions and
declining financial markets, led to decreased demand for tanker
vessels, creating downward pressure on charter rates. This
economic downturn also affected vessel values overall. Despite
certain indications of recovery during 2010 and upward revisions
of expected global oil demand growth for 2011, there has not
been a material increase in crude or product tanker charter
rates and global economic conditions remain fragile with
significant uncertainty remaining with respect to recovery
prospects, levels of recovery and long-term effects. Such upward
revisions are primarily based on increased demand from countries
not part of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development, or OECD, such as China and India, and if economic
growth in these countries slows global oil demand and seaborne
transport of oil may be significantly affected.
If these global economic conditions persist the combined company
may not be able to operate its vessels profitably or employ its
vessels at favorable charter rates as they come up for
rechartering. Furthermore, a significant decrease in the market
value of the combined companys vessels may cause it to
recognize losses if any of its vessels are sold or if their
values are impaired, and may affect the combined companys
ability to comply with its loan covenants. A deterioration of
the current economic and market conditions or a negative change
in global economic conditions or the product or crude tanker
markets would be expected to have a material adverse effect on
the combined companys business, financial position,
results of operations and ability to make cash distributions and
comply with its loan covenants, as well as its future prospects
and ability to grow its fleet.
Charter
rates for tanker vessels are highly volatile and are currently
near historically low levels and may further decrease in the
future, which may adversely affect the combined companys
earnings and ability to make cash distributions.
Currently, Crude charters all of its five vessels and CPLP
charters two vessels in the spot charter market or on spot
market- linked time charter agreements. The period employment of
three of Crudes vessels and two of CPLPs vessels is
scheduled to expire during 2011. The combined company may only
be able to recharter these vessels at reduced or unprofitable
rates as their current charters expire, or it may not be able to
recharter these vessels at all. Throughout 2010 the period
charter market for product and Crude tanker vessels
(particularly in the second half of 2010 in the case of Crude
tanker vessels) was at close to historically low levels and the
majority of the vessels that entered into new charters during
this period were rechartered at rates lower than their original
charters. Recently, the product tanker period market has
improved but rates remain significantly below historical
averages. In the event the current low rate environment
continues and charterers do not display an increased interest in
chartering product or crude tanker vessels for longer periods at
improved rates or at all, the combined company may not be able
to obtain competitive rates for its vessels and its earnings and
ability to make cash distributions may be adversely affected.
Alternatively, the combined company may have to deploy these
vessels in the spot market, which, although common in the
product and crude tanker industries, is cyclical and highly
volatile, with rates fluctuating significantly based upon demand
for oil and oil products and tanker supply, among others. In the
past, the spot charter market has also experienced periods when
spot rates have declined below the operating cost of vessels.
The successful operation of the combined companys vessels
in the spot charter market depends upon, among other things,
obtaining profitable spot charters and minimizing, to the extent
possible,
26
time spent waiting for charters and time spent traveling unladen
to pick up cargo. Furthermore, as charter rates for spot
charters are fixed for a single voyage which may last up to
several weeks, during periods in which spot charter rates are
rising, the combined company will generally experience delays in
realizing the benefits from such increases.
The demand for period charters may not increase and the tanker
charter market may not significantly recover over the next
several months or may decline further. The occurrence of any of
these events could have a material adverse effect on the
combined companys business, results of operations, cash
flows, financial condition and ability to meet its obligations
and to make cash distributions.
The
combined company may not be able to grow or to effectively
manage its growth.
A principal focus of the combined companys strategy is to
continue to grow consistently with CPLPs current business
model, to gradually reduce the combined companys crude
spot market exposure over the next six to 18 months as the
crude market recovers and opportunities arise, by entering into
fixed period charter contracts for Crudes two VLCCs and
three Suezmax vessels, which are currently employed in the spot
market or spot related time charters.
The combined companys future growth will depend upon a
number of factors, some of which it cannot control. These
factors include its ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
capitalize on a potential recovery of the crude and product
tanker market by fixing period charters for its vessels at
attractive rates;
|
|
|
|
|
|
identify businesses engaged in managing, operating or owning
vessels for acquisitions or joint ventures;
|
|
|
|
|
|
identify vessels
and/or
shipping companies for acquisitions;
|
|
|
|
|
|
integrate any acquired businesses or vessels successfully with
existing operations;
|
|
|
|
|
|
hire, train and retain qualified personnel to manage, maintain
and operate its growing business and fleet;
|
|
|
|
|
|
identify additional new markets;
|
|
|
|
|
|
improve operating and financial systems and controls;
|
|
|
|
|
|
complete accretive transactions in the future; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
access financing and obtain required financing for existing and
new operations, including refinancing of existing indebtedness.
|
The combined companys ability to grow is in part dependent
on its ability to expand its fleet through acquisitions of
suitable vessels. The combined company may not be able to
acquire newbuildings or product and crude tankers on favorable
terms, which could impede its growth and negatively impact its
financial condition and ability to pay distributions. The
combined company may not be able to contract for newbuildings or
locate suitable vessels or negotiate acceptable construction or
purchase contracts with shipyards and owners, or obtain
financing for such acquisitions on economically acceptable
terms, or at all.
The failure to effectively identify, purchase, develop, employ
and integrate any vessels or businesses could adversely affect
the combined companys business, financial condition and
results of operations.
Following
the acquisition of the Cape Agamemnon, CPLP will be exposed to
various risks in the international drybulk shipping industry,
which is cyclical and volatile.
Following the closing of its agreement to acquire the dry cargo
Cape Agamemnon from Capital Maritime, CPLP will become subject
to various risks of the drybulk shipping industry. The drybulk
shipping industry is cyclical with attendant volatility in
charter rates, vessel values and profitability. In addition, the
degree of charter hire rate volatility among different types of
drybulk carriers has varied widely. After reaching historical
highs in mid-2008, charter hire rates for Capesize drybulk
carriers such as the Cape Agamemnon reached near
27
historically low levels at the end of 2008, from which they have
not significantly recovered. Although the Cape Agamemnon is
currently deployed on a period time charter, in the future the
combined company may have to charter it pursuant to short-term
time charters, and may be exposed to changes in spot market and
short-term charter rates for drybulk carriers, and such changes
may affect the combined companys earnings and the value of
the Cape Agamemnon at any given time.
Moreover, the factors affecting the supply and demand for
drybulk vessels are outside of the combined companys
control and are difficult to predict with confidence. As a
result, the nature, timing, direction and degree of changes in
industry conditions are also unpredictable.
Factors that influence demand for vessel capacity include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
demand for and production of drybulk products;
|
|
|
|
|
|
global and regional economic and political conditions;
|
|
|
|
|
|
environmental and other regulatory developments;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the distance drybulk cargoes are to be moved by sea; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns.
|
Factors that influence the supply of vessel capacity include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the number of newbuild deliveries, which among other factors
relates to the ability of shipyards to deliver newbuilds by
contracted delivery dates and the ability of purchasers to
finance such newbuilds;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the scrapping rate of older vessels;
|
|
|
|
|
|
port and canal congestion;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the number of vessels that are in or out of service, including
due to vessel casualties; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in environmental and other regulations that may limit
the useful lives of vessels.
|
CPLP currently anticipates that the future demand for the Cape
Agamemnon following completion of its charter and, in turn,
drybulk charter rates, will be dependent, among other things,
upon economic growth in the global economy including the
worlds developing economies such as China, India, Brazil
and Russia, seasonal and regional changes in demand, changes in
the capacity of the global drybulk vessel fleet and the sources
and supply of drybulk cargo to be transported by sea. A decline
in demand for commodities transported in drybulk vessels or an
increase in supply of drybulk vessels could cause a significant
decline in charter rates, which could materially adversely
affect the combined companys business, financial condition
and results of operations.
The
Cape Agamemnon is currently chartered at rates that are at a
substantial premium to the spot and period market, and the loss
of this charter could result in a significant loss of expected
future revenues and cash flows.
The Cape Agamemnon is currently under a 10 year time
charter to Cosco Bulk Carrier Co. Ltd (Cosco), an
affiliate of the COSCO Group and one of the largest dry bulk
charterers globally, which commenced in July 2010, and the
earliest expiry under the charter is June 2020. The gross
charter rate is $53,100 ($50,445 net) per day until July 2015
and from July 2015 until the end of the term $33,100 gross
($31,445 net) per day, which is a substantial premium to current
market levels.
The loss of this customer could result in a significant loss of
revenues, cash flow and the combined companys ability to
maintain or improve distributions longer term. The combined
company could lose this customer or the benefits of the charter
entered into with it if, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the customer faces financial difficulties forcing it to declare
bankruptcy or making it impossible for it to perform its
obligations under the charter, including the payment of the
agreed rates in a timely manner;
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the customer fails to make charter payments because of its
financial inability, disagreements with the combined company or
otherwise;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the customer seeks to re-negotiate the terms of the charter
agreement due to prevailing economic and market conditions;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the customer exercises certain rights to terminate the charter;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the customer terminates the charter because the combined company
fails to comply with the terms of the charter, the vessel is
lost or damaged beyond repair, there are serious deficiencies in
the vessel or prolonged periods of off-hire, or the combined
company defaults under the charter;
|
|
|
|
|
|
a prolonged force majeure event affecting the customer,
including war or political unrest prevents the combined company
from performing services for that the; or
|
|
|
|
|
|
the customer terminates the charter because the combined company
fails to comply with the safety and regulatory criteria of the
charterer or the rules and regulations of various maritime
organizations and bodies.
|
In the event the combined company loses the benefit of the
charter with Cosco prior to its expiration date, it would have
to recharter the vessel at the then prevailing charter rates. In
the event the current low rate environment continues, the
combined company may not be able to obtain competitive, or
profitable, rates for this vessel and the combined
companys earnings and ability to make cash distributions
may be adversely affected.
A
negative change in the economic conditions in the United States,
the European Union or the Asian region, especially in China,
Japan or India, could reduce drybulk trade and demand, which
could reduce charter rates and have a material adverse effect on
the combined companys business, financial condition and
results of operations.
A significant number of the port calls made by Capesize bulk
carriers involve the loading or discharging of raw materials in
ports in the Asian region, particularly China, Japan and India.
As a result, a negative change in economic conditions in any
Asian country, particularly China, Japan or, to a lesser extent,
India, could have a material adverse effect on the combined
companys business, financial position and results of
operations, as well as its future prospects, by reducing demand
and, as a result, charter rates and affecting the combined
companys ability to re-charter the Cape Agamemnon at a
profitable rate. In past years, China and India have had two of
the worlds fastest growing economies in terms of gross
domestic product and have been the main driving force behind
increases in marine drybulk trade and the demand for drybulk
vessels. If economic growth declines in China, Japan, India and
other countries in the Asian region, the combined company may
face decreases in such drybulk trade and demand. Moreover, a
slowdown in the United States and Japanese economies, as has
occurred recently, or the economies of the European Union or
certain Asian countries will likely adversely affect economic
growth in China, India and elsewhere. Such an economic downturn
in any of these countries could have a material adverse effect
on the combined companys business, financial condition and
results of operations.
An
oversupply of drybulk vessel capacity may lead to reductions in
charter rates and profitability.
The market supply of drybulk vessels has been increasing, and
the number of drybulk vessels on order as of May 1, 2011,
was approximately 45.6% of the then-existing global drybulk
fleet in terms of dwt, with deliveries expected mainly during
the succeeding 24 months, although available data with
regard to cancellations of existing newbuild orders or delays of
newbuild deliveries are not always accurate. During the recent
economic crisis, it was also observed that significantly fewer
vessels were being scrapped as compared with prior periods. As a
result, the drybulk fleet remains an aged fleet that has not
decreased in number. An oversupply of drybulk vessel capacity
will likely result in a reduction of charter hire rates. Upon
the expiration of its current period time charter in June 2020,
if the combined company cannot enter into a new period time
charter for the Cape Agamemnon on acceptable terms, it may have
to secure charters in the spot market,
29
where charter rates are more volatile and revenues are,
therefore, less predictable, or it may not be able to charter
the vessel at all.
In addition, a material increase in the net supply of drybulk
vessel capacity without corresponding growth in drybulk vessel
demand could have a material adverse effect on the Cape
Agamemnons utilization, and could, accordingly, materially
adversely affect the combined companys business, financial
condition and results of operations.
The
international drybulk shipping industry is highly competitive,
and as a new entrant in this industry with only one drybulk
vessel in its fleet, the combined company may not be able to
compete successfully for charters with established companies or
other new entrants with greater resources, and it may not be
able to successfully operate the vessel.
Both CPLP and Crude have historically owned tanker vessels and
been active in the tanker market only. CPLP employs the Cape
Agamemnon in the highly competitive drybulk market in which it
has no prior experience. The drybulk market is capital intensive
and highly fragmented. Competition arises primarily from other
vessel owners, some of which have substantially greater
resources than CPLP has or the combined company will have.
Competition for the transportation of drybulk cargo by sea is
intense and depends on price, customer relationships, operating
expertise, professional reputation and size, age, location and
condition of the vessel. In this highly fragmented market,
established companies operating larger fleets as well as
additional competitors with greater resources may be able to
offer lower charter rates than the combined company is able to
offer, which could have a material adverse effect on the
combined companys ability to utilize the Cape Agamemnon
and, accordingly, its profitability.
The
operation of drybulk vessels has certain unique operational
risks, and failure to adequately maintain the Cape Agamemnon
could have a material adverse effect on the combined
companys business, financial condition and results of
operations.
The Cape Agamemnon is the only drybulk vessel in the combined
companys fleet. With a drybulk vessel, the cargo itself
and its interaction with the vessel may create operational
risks. By their nature, drybulk cargoes are often heavy, dense
and easily shifted, and they may react badly to water exposure.
In addition, drybulk vessels are often subjected to battering
treatment during unloading operations with grabs, jackhammers
(to pry encrusted cargoes out of the hold) and small bulldozers.
This treatment may cause damage to the vessel. Vessels damaged
due to treatment during unloading procedures may be more
susceptible to breach while at sea. Breaches of a drybulk
vessels hull may lead to the flooding of the vessels
holds. If a drybulk vessel suffers flooding in its forward
holds, the bulk cargo may become so dense and waterlogged that
its pressure may buckle the vessels bulkheads, leading to
the loss of a vessel. If CPLP or Capital Maritime, as manager,
does not adequately maintain the Cape Agamemnon, it may be
unable to prevent these events. The occurrence of any of these
events could have a material adverse effect on the combined
companys business, financial condition and results of
operations.
The
Crude vessels are managed under a floating fee management
agreement, whereby Crude reimburses the manager for all expenses
incurred in connection with the management of the vessels. An
increase in operating costs could adversely affect the combined
companys cash flows and financial condition and its
ability to make cash distributions.
Crude vessels are managed under a floating fee management
agreement and CPLP vessels are managed under a fixed-fee
management agreement. Under the Crude management agreement,
however, the combined company must pay for vessel operating
expenses (including crewing, repairs and maintenance, insurance,
stores, lube oils and communication expenses) as incurred. These
expenses depend upon a variety of factors, many of which will be
beyond the combined companys or its managers
control. Some of these costs, primarily relating to crewing,
insurance and enhanced security measures, have been increasing
and may increase in the future. Increases in any of these costs
would decrease the combined companys earnings, cash flows
and the amount of cash available for distribution to its
unitholders.
30
In addition, the manager has the right to terminate the Crude
management agreement and, under certain circumstances, could
receive substantial sums in connection with such termination;
however, even if the board of directors of the combined company
or its unitholders are dissatisfied with the manager, there are
limited circumstances under which the combined company can
terminate the Crude management agreement. If the manager elects
to terminate the Crude management agreement, in accordance with
the terms of the agreement a termination payment, which could be
substantial, will be payable to the manager. This termination
payment was initially set at $9.0 million and increases on
each one-year anniversary during which the Crude management
agreement remains in effect (on a compounding basis) in
accordance with the total percentage increase, if any, in the
Consumer Price Index over the immediately preceding twelve
months. As of March 18, 2011, the amount of the termination
payment had increased to $9.2 million.
If the
merger fails to qualify as a reorganization within
the meaning of Section 368(a) of the Internal Revenue Code,
Crude shareholders may be required to recognize gain or loss on
the exchange of their shares of Crude common stock and
Class B stock in the merger for United States federal
income tax purposes.
CPLP and Crude have structured the merger to qualify as a
reorganization within the meaning of
Section 368(a) of the Code. Neither CPLP nor Crude intends
to request any ruling from the U.S. Internal Revenue
Service (the IRS) as to the tax consequences of the
exchange of shares of Crude common stock for CPLP common units
in the merger. If the merger fails to qualify as a
reorganization, a holder of Crude common stock or Crude
Class B stock would generally recognize gain or loss for
United States federal income tax purposes on each share of Crude
common stock or Crude Class B stock exchanged in the merger
in an amount equal to the difference between that holders
basis in such stock and the fair market value of the CPLP common
units the holder of Crude common stock or Crude Class B
stock receives or may receive in exchange for each such share of
Crude common stock or Crude Class B stock. Holders who
recognize gain will generally be subject to United States
federal income tax on such gain if they are U.S. persons
for United States federal income tax purposes but will generally
not be subject to United States federal income tax on such gain
if they are not U.S. persons. You are urged to consult with
your own tax advisor regarding the proper reporting of the
amount and timing of such gain or loss. See Material
United States Federal Income Tax Consequences to Crude
Shareholders The Merger beginning on
page 74.
U.S.
tax authorities could treat CPLP as a passive foreign
investment company, which could have adverse United States
federal income tax consequences to U.S. persons who hold CPLP
common units.
A foreign entity taxed as a corporation for United States
federal income tax purposes will be treated as a passive
foreign investment company (a PFIC) for United
States federal income tax purposes if (i) at least 75% of
its gross income for any taxable year consists of certain types
of passive income, or (ii) at least 50% of the
average value of the entitys assets produce or are held
for the production of those types of passive income.
For purposes of these tests, passive income includes
dividends, interest, gains from the sale or exchange of
investment property, and rents and royalties other than rents
and royalties that are received from unrelated parties in
connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. For
purposes of these tests, income derived from the performance of
services does not constitute passive income.
U.S. persons who own shares of a PFIC are subject to a
disadvantageous U.S. federal income tax regime with respect
to the income derived by the PFIC, the distributions they
receive from the PFIC, and the gain, if any, they derive from
the sale or other disposition of their shares in the PFIC.
Based on CPLPs current and projected method of operation,
CPLP believes that it is not currently a PFIC and does not
expect to become a PFIC in the future. CPLP intends to treat its
income from time chartering activities as non-passive income,
and the vessels engaged in those activities as non-passive
assets, for PFIC purposes. However, no assurance can be given
that the IRS will accept this position. There are legal
uncertainties involved in this determination. Accordingly, no
assurance can be given that the IRS or a United States court
will accept the position that CPLP is not a PFIC and there is a
risk that the IRS or a United States court could determine that
CPLP is a PFIC. Moreover, no assurance can be given that CPLP
would not become a PFIC for any future taxable year if there
were to be changes in CPLPs assets, income or operations.
31
See Material United States Federal Income Tax Consequences
to Crude Shareholders Ownership and Disposition of
CPLP Common Units Certain PFIC Considerations,
Applicable to U.S. Holders beginning on page 78.
CPLP
may have to pay tax on United States source income, which would
reduce earnings.
Under the Code, 50% of the gross shipping income of a
vessel-owning or chartering corporation that is attributable to
transportation that either begins or ends, but that does not
both begin and end, in the U.S. is characterized as
U.S. source shipping income, and such income generally is
subject to a 4% United States federal income tax without
allowance for deduction, unless that corporation qualifies for
exemption from tax under Section 883 of the Code. CPLP
believes that it and each of its subsidiaries will qualify for
this statutory tax exemption, and CPLP will take this position
for United States federal income tax return reporting purposes.
See Material United States Federal Income Tax Consequences
to Crude Shareholders United States Federal Income
Tax Considerations Relating to CPLP The
Section 883 Exemption and the Taxation of Operating
Income beginning on page 82. However, there are
factual circumstances, including some that may be beyond
CPLPs control, which could cause CPLP to lose the benefit
of this tax exemption.
Additionally, a prerequisite for this statutory tax exemption is
that CPLPs common units represent more than 50% of the
voting power and value of CPLP, and while CPLP believes that the
CPLP common units represent more than 50% of the voting power of
CPLP because holders of the common units (other than Capital
Maritime and its affiliates) can elect a majority of the CPLP
Board, the IRS could disagree with CPLPs position. In
particular, although CPLP has elected to be treated as a
corporation for United States federal income tax purposes, for
corporate law purposes CPLP is organized as a limited
partnership under Marshall Islands law, and CPLPs general
partner will be responsible for managing our business and
affairs on a
day-to-day
basis and has been granted certain veto rights over decisions of
the CPLP Board. The IRS could assert that the aforementioned
powers of the general partner effectively reduce the voting
power of the CPLP common units to 50% or less of the overall
voting power of CPLP. Therefore, CPLP can give no assurances
that the IRS will not take a different position regarding
CPLPs qualification, or the qualification of any of
CPLPs subsidiaries, for this tax exemption.
If CPLP or its subsidiaries are not entitled to this exemption
under Section 883 for any taxable year, CPLP or its
subsidiaries generally would be subject for those years to a 4%
gross income tax on their U.S. source shipping income. The
imposition of this taxation could have a negative effect on
CPLPs business and would result in decreased earnings
available for distribution to holders of common units.
RISK
RELATING TO FINANCING ACTIVITIES
The
combined company will have incurred significant indebtedness,
which could affect its ability to finance its operations, pursue
desirable business opportunities or successfully run its
business in the future, as well as its ability to make cash
distributions. Any new or amended credit facilities the combined
company enters into in order to refinance its debt will contain
restrictive covenants, which may limit its business and
financing activities, including its ability to make cash
distributions.
Crude has borrowed approximately $134.6 million of
$200.0 million available under its revolving credit
facility. The combined company expects to refinance the Crude
facility, but its ability to do so will depend upon, among other
things, its compliance with its loan facility covenants as well
as future financial and operating performance, which may be
affected by the level of the vessel values of the combined
companys assets, financial ratios and earnings, prevailing
economic conditions and financial, business, regulatory and
other factors, some of which are beyond its control. The
combined company may not be successful in refinancing the
existing Crude indebtedness on similar terms or at all, and any
new indebtedness it may enter into may have additional
restrictions that the combined company will need to comply with,
which may limit its business and financing activities, including
its ability to make cash distributions.
32
CPLP had drawn (i) $366.5 million of
$370.0 million available under its 2007 credit facility,
(ii) $107.5 million of $350.0 million available
under its 2008 credit facility, and
(iii) $25.0 million of $25.0 million available
under its 2011 credit facility. The combined companys
leverage and debt service obligations could have significant
consequences, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If future cash flows are insufficient, it may need to incur
further indebtedness in order to make the capital expenditures
and other expenses or investments planned by it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If future cash flows are insufficient and the combined company
is not able to service its debt or, when the
non-amortizing
period of its existing credit facilities expires (which is
scheduled to occur as early as June 2012 in the case of the
$370.0 million facility and in March 2013 for the
$350.0 million and $25.0 million facilities), to
refinance its existing indebtedness, its obligation to make
principal payments under its credit facilities starting in
September 2012 may force the combined company to take
actions such as reducing or eliminating distributions, reducing
or delaying business activities, acquisitions, investments or
capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring or
refinancing its debt, or seeking additional equity capital or
bankruptcy protection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Its indebtedness will have the general effect of reducing its
flexibility to react to changing business and economic
conditions insofar as they affect its financial condition and,
therefore, may pose substantial risk to its unitholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the event that it is liquidated, any of its senior or
subordinated creditors and any senior or subordinated creditors
of its subsidiaries will be entitled to payment in full prior to
any distributions to the holders of its CPLP common units.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crudes credit facility matures in 2015, and CPLPs
2007, 2008 and 2011 credit facilities mature in 2017, 2018 and
2018, respectively. The combined companys ability to
secure additional financing prior to or after that time, if
needed, may be substantially restricted by the existing level of
the combined companys indebtedness and the restrictions
contained in its debt instruments. Upon maturity, the combined
company will be required to dedicate a substantial portion of
its cash flow to the payment of such debt, which will reduce the
amount of funds available for operations, capital expenditures
and future business opportunities.
|
The occurrence of any one of these events could have a material
adverse effect on the combined companys business,
financial condition, results of operations, prospects and
ability to make distributions and to satisfy its obligations
under its credit facilities or any debt securities.
If the
combined company defaults under its credit facilities, it could
forfeit its rights in certain of its vessels and their charters
and its ability to make cash distributions may be
impaired.
Crude and CPLP have pledged their respective vessels as security
to the lenders under their respective credit facilities. Default
under these credit facilities, if not waived or modified, would
permit the lenders to foreclose on the mortgages over the
vessels and the related collateral, and the combined company
could lose its rights in the vessels and their charters.
When final payment is due under loan agreements, each company
must repay any borrowings outstanding, including balloon
payments. To the extent that cash flows are insufficient to
repay any of these borrowings or asset cover is inadequate due
to a deterioration in vessel values, the combined company will
need to refinance some or all of its loan agreements, replace
them with alternate credit arrangements or provide additional
security. The combined company may not be able to refinance or
replace its loan agreements or provide additional security at
the time they become due.
In the event the combined company is not able to refinance its
existing debt obligations, or if its operating results are not
sufficient to service current or future indebtedness, or to make
relevant principal repayments if necessary, it may be forced to
take actions such as reducing or eliminating distributions,
reducing or delaying business activities, acquisitions,
investments or capital expenditures, selling assets,
restructuring or refinancing debt, or seeking additional equity
capital or bankruptcy protection. In addition, the terms of any
refinancing or
33
alternate credit arrangement may restrict the combined
companys financial and operating flexibility and its
ability to make cash distributions.
If the
combined company is in breach of any of the terms of its credit
facilities, a significant portion of its obligations may become
immediately due and payable and its lenders commitments to
make further loans to it may terminate. It may also be unable to
execute its business strategy or make cash
distributions.
The combined companys ability to comply with the covenants
and restrictions contained in its credit facilities and any
other debt instruments it may enter into in the future may be
affected by events beyond its control, including prevailing
economic, financial and industry conditions. If vessel
valuations or market or other economic conditions deteriorate
further, the combined companys ability to comply with
these covenants may be impaired. If the combined company is in
breach of any of the restrictions, covenants, ratios or tests in
the combined companys credit facilities, especially if the
combined company triggers a cross-default currently contained in
its credit facilities or any interest rate swap agreements it
has entered into pursuant to their terms, a significant portion
of the combined companys obligations may become
immediately due and payable, and its lenders commitment to
make further loans to it may terminate. The combined company may
not be able to reach agreement with its lenders to amend the
terms of the loan agreements or waive any breaches and it may
not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient funds to make any
accelerated payments. In addition, obligations under the
combined companys credit facilities are secured by its
vessels, and if it is unable to repay debt under the credit
facilities, the lenders could seek to foreclose on those assets.
Furthermore, if funds under the combined companys credit
facilities become unavailable as a result of a breach of the
combined companys covenants or otherwise, it may not be
able to execute its business strategy, which could have a
material adverse effect on the combined companys business,
results of operations and financial condition and its ability to
make cash distributions.
Decreases
in asset values due to circumstances outside of the combined
companys control may limit its ability to refinance
existing debt or make further draw-downs under existing credit
facilities, which may limit the combined companys ability
to purchase additional vessels or pay distributions in the
future. In addition, if asset values continue to decrease
significantly, the combined company may have to pre-pay part of
its outstanding debt or provide additional security in order to
remain in compliance with covenants under existing credit
facilities.
Each of the credit facilities of the combined company requires
that a specific aggregate fair market value of the vessels in
the fleet be maintained as a percentage of the aggregate amount
outstanding under such credit facility. Any contemplated vessel
acquisitions will have to be at levels that do not impair the
required ratios. The recent global economic downturn has had an
adverse effect on tanker asset values which is likely to persist
if the economic slowdown resumes. If the estimated asset values
of the vessels in the combined companys fleet continue to
decrease, such decreases may limit the amounts the combined
company can draw down under its current credit facilities to
purchase additional vessels and the ability to expand the
combined companys fleet. In addition, the combined company
may be obligated to pre-pay part of its outstanding debt or
provide additional security in order to remain in compliance
with the relevant covenants under its existing credit
facilities. Such decreases could have a material adverse effect
on the combined companys business, results of operations
and financial condition and its ability to refinance its
existing facilities or to make cash distributions.
A
limited number of financial institutions hold Crudes and
CPLPs cash, including financial institutions located in
Greece.
Crude and CPLP maintain all of their cash with a limited number
of financial institutions, including institutions located in
Greece. The financial institutions located in Greece may be
subsidiaries of international banks or Greek financial
institutions. These balances may not be covered by insurance in
the event of default by these financial institutions. The
ongoing fiscal situation in Greece, including the possibility of
further sovereign credit rating downgrades and the restructuring
of Greeces sovereign debt, may result in an event of
34
default by some or all of these financial institutions. The
occurrence of such a default could therefore have a material
adverse effect on the combined companys business,
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
RISK
RELATING TO CPLPs COMMON UNITS
CPLP
cannot assure you that it will pay any
distributions.
Crude and CPLP currently observe a cash dividend and cash
distribution policy, respectively, implemented by their
respective boards of directors. The actual declaration of future
cash dividends or distributions, and the establishment of record
and payment dates, is subject to final determination by each
companys board of directors each quarter after its review
of financial performance. CPLPs ability to pay
distributions in any period will depend upon factors including
but not limited to financial condition, results of operations,
prospects and applicable provisions of Marshall Islands law.
The timing and amount of distributions, if any, could be
affected by factors affecting cash flows, results of operations,
required capital expenditures, or reserves. Maintaining the
distribution policy will depend on CPLPs and Crudes
cash earnings, financial condition and cash requirements and
could be affected by factors, including the loss of a vessel,
required capital expenditures, reserves established by the CPLP
Board, increased or unanticipated expenses, additional
borrowings and ability to refinance existing indebtedness, asset
valuations, or future issuances of securities, which may be
beyond CPLPs control.
Under Marshall Islands law, a limited partnership shall not make
a distribution to a partner to the extent that at the time of
the distribution, after giving effect to the distribution, all
liabilities of the limited partnership, other than liabilities
to partners on account of their partnership interests and
liabilities for which the recourse of creditors is limited to
specified property of the limited partnership, exceed the fair
value of the assets of the limited partnership, except that the
fair value of property that is subject to a liability for which
the recourse of creditors is limited shall be included in the
assets of the limited partnership only to the extent that the
fair value of that property exceeds that liability.
CPLPs distribution policy may be changed at any time, and
from time to time, by its board of directors.
Future
sales of CPLP common units could cause the market price of CPLP
common units to decline.
The market price of CPLP common units could decline due to sales
of a large number of units in the market, including sales of
units by CPLPs large unitholders, or the perception that
these sales could occur. These sales could also make it more
difficult or impossible for CPLP to sell equity securities in
the future at a time and price that it deems appropriate to
raise funds through future offerings of common units.
CPLPs
organization as a limited partnership under the laws of the
Republic of the Marshall Islands may limit the ability of
unitholders to protect their interests.
CPLPs affairs are governed by the CPLP Partnership
Agreement and the Marshall Islands Limited Partnership Act
(MILPA). The provisions of the MILPA resemble
provisions of the limited partnership laws of a number of states
in the United States, most notably Delaware. The MILPA Act also
provides that it is to be applied and construed to make it
uniform with the Delaware Revised Uniform Partnership Act and,
so long as it does not conflict with the MILPA or decisions of
the Marshall Islands courts, interpreted according to the
non-statutory law (or case law) of the State of Delaware.
However, there have been few, if any, judicial cases in the
Republic of the Marshall Islands interpreting the MILPA. For
example, the rights and fiduciary responsibilities of directors
under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands are not
as clearly established as the rights and fiduciary
responsibilities of directors under statutes or judicial
precedent in existence in certain U.S. jurisdictions.
Although the MILPA does specifically incorporate the
non-statutory law, or judicial case law, of the State of
Delaware, CPLPs public unitholders may have more
difficulty in
35
protecting their interests in the face of actions by management,
directors or controlling shareholders than would shareholders of
a limited partnership organized in a U.S. jurisdiction.
It may
not be possible for investors to enforce U.S. judgments against
CPLP.
CPLP is organized under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall
Islands, as is its general partner, and most of its subsidiaries
are incorporated or organized under the laws of the Republic of
the Marshall Islands. Substantially all of CPLPs assets
and those of its subsidiaries are located outside the United
States. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for
U.S. investors to serve process within the United States
upon CPLP or to enforce judgment upon CPLP for civil liabilities
in U.S. courts. In addition, you should not assume that
courts in the countries in which CPLP or its subsidiaries are
incorporated or organized or where CPLPs assets or the
assets of its subsidiaries are located (i) would enforce
judgments of U.S. courts obtained in actions against CPLP
or its subsidiaries based upon the civil liability provisions of
applicable U.S. federal and state securities laws or
(ii) would enforce, in original actions, liabilities
against CPLP or its subsidiaries based upon these laws.
36
SPECIAL
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This proxy statement/prospectus and the documents that are
incorporated into this proxy statement/prospectus by reference
may contain or incorporate by reference statements that do not
directly or exclusively relate to historical facts, i.e.,
forward-looking statements.
Broadly speaking, forward-looking statements include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
statements relating to the benefits of the merger;
|
|
|
|
|
|
statements containing projections of revenues, income (including
income loss), earnings (including earnings loss) per share,
capital expenditures, dividends, distributions, capital
structure, or other financial items;
|
|
|
|
|
|
statements of the plans and objectives of management for future
operations, including plans or objectives relating to products
or services;
|
|
|
|
|
|
statements of future economic performance, including statements
contained in discussion and analysis of financial condition by
management or in results of operations;
|
|
|
|
|
|
statements of assumptions underlying or relating to the
foregoing;
|
|
|
|
|
|
reports issued by an outside reviewer retained by CPLP or Crude,
to the extent any such report assesses a forward-looking
statement made by CPLP or Crude, as applicable; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
statements containing a projection or estimate of any other item
required by applicable regulations.
|
You can typically identify forward-looking statements by the use
of forward-looking words, such as may,
will, could, project,
believe, anticipate, expect,
estimate, continue,
potential, plan, forecast
and other similar words. Those statements represent our
intentions, plans, expectations, assumptions and beliefs about
future events and are subject to risks, uncertainties and other
factors. Many of those factors are outside our control and could
cause actual results to differ materially from the results
expressed or implied by those forward-looking statements.
Included among the important factors that, in Crudes and
CPLPs view, could cause actual results to differ
materially from such forward-looking statements are the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the factors described under the section captioned Risk
Factors beginning on page 22;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the ability to obtain the approval of the transaction by
Crudes shareholders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the ability to satisfy other conditions to the transaction on
the proposed terms and timeframe;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the ability to realize the expected benefits to the degree, in
the amounts or in the timeframe anticipated;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the ability to integrate Crudes businesses with those of
CPLP in a timely and cost-efficient manner;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in demand and supply;
|
|
|
|
|
|
a material decline in rates in the crude or product tanker
markets;
|
|
|
|
|
|
a material decline in asset values;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in production of or demand for oil and petroleum
products, generally or in particular regions;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the ability to refinance existing indebtedness or the debt of
Crude;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the ability to access debt and equity markets;
|
|
|
|
|
|
greater than anticipated levels of tanker new building orders or
lower than anticipated rates of tanker scrapping;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in rules and regulations applicable to the tanker
industry, including, without limitation, legislation adopted by
international organizations such as the IMO and the European
Union or by individual countries;
|
|
|
|
|
|
actions taken by regulatory authorities;
|
37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in trading patterns significantly impacting overall
tanker tonnage requirements;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the typical seasonal variations in tanker charter
rates;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the cost of other modes of oil transportation;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in oil transportation technology;
|
|
|
|
|
|
increases in costs, including, without limitation, crew wages,
insurance, provisions, repairs and maintenance;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in general domestic and international political
conditions;
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the condition of Crudes or CPLPs vessels
or applicable maintenance or regulatory standards (which may
affect, among other things, the combined companys
anticipated drydocking or maintenance and repair costs);
|
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the itineraries of Crudes or CPLPs
vessels;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the fulfillment of the closing conditions under, or the
execution of customary additional documentation for, CPLPs
agreements to acquire vessels; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
other factors listed from time to time in Crudes or
CPLPs filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
including, without limitation, their respective Annual Reports
on
Form 20-F
for the year ended December 31, 2010 and their respective
subsequent reports on
Form 6-K.
|
The areas of risk and uncertainty described above should be
considered in connection with any written or oral
forward-looking statements that may be made after the date of
this proxy statement/prospectus by Crude or CPLP or anyone
acting for any or all of them. The ability of Crude, CPLP, or
the combined company to pay dividends or distributions, as the
case may be, in any period will depend upon factors including
applicable provisions of law and the final determination by the
board of directors each quarter after its review of the combined
companys financial performance. The timing and amount of
dividends or distributions, as the case may be, if any, could
also be affected by factors affecting cash flows, results of
operations, required capital expenditures, or reserves. As a
result, the amount of dividends or distributions, as the case
may be, actually paid may vary from the amounts currently
estimated. Crude and CPLP disclaim any intention or obligation
to update any forward-looking statements as a result of
developments occurring after the date of this proxy
statement/prospectus.
38
THE CRUDE
SPECIAL MEETING
General
Crude is furnishing this proxy statement/prospectus to the Crude
shareholders as part of the solicitation of proxies by the Crude
Board for use at the special meeting of Crude shareholders to be
held on , 2011, and at any adjournment
thereof. This proxy statement/prospectus is first being
furnished to Crude shareholders on or
about , 2011 in connection with the vote
on the Merger Proposal and the Adjournment Proposal. This
document provides you with the information you need to know to
be able to vote or instruct your vote to be cast at the Crude
special meeting.
Date,
Time and Place
The special meeting of Crude shareholders will be held
at (Athens, Greece time),
on , 2011, at ,
located at 3 Iassonos Street, Piraeus, 18357 Greece.
Purpose
of the Crude Special Meeting
At the special meeting, Crude is asking holders of Crude common
stock and Crude Class B stock to approve the following
proposals:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Merger Proposal a proposal to adopt the
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of May 5, 2011, by
and among CPLP, Crude, Capital GP and MergerCo, and to approve
the transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger,
pursuant to which MergerCo will merge with and into Crude, as a
result of which Crude will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of
CPLP; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Adjournment Proposal a proposal to authorize the
adjournment of the special meeting to a later date or dates, if
necessary, to permit further solicitation and vote of proxies in
the event there are insufficient votes for, or otherwise in
connection with, the adoption of the Merger Proposal and the
transactions contemplated thereby.
|
Recommendation
of Crude Independent Committee
The Crude Independent Committee:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
has determined that the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, including the merger, are fair and
reasonable to, and in the best interests of, the Unaffiliated
Shareholders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
recommended to the Crude Board that it declare the advisability
of, and approve, the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, including the merger; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
recommended to the Crude Board that it recommend that
Crudes shareholders vote FOR the merger
agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, including
the merger.
|
Recommendation
of Crude Board of Directors
The Crude Board:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
has determined that the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, including the merger, are fair to and
reasonable, and in the best interests of, Crude and its
shareholders, including the Unaffiliated Shareholders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
has adopted and approved the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
recommends that the holders of the outstanding shares of Crude
common stock and the sole holder of all outstanding shares of
Crude Class B stock vote FOR the Merger
Proposal.
|
39
Record
Date; Who is Entitled to Vote
The Crude Board has fixed the close of business
on , 2011, as the record date
for determining those Crude shareholders entitled to notice of
and to vote at the special meeting. As of the close of business
on June 8, 2011, there were 13,899,400 shares of Crude
common stock and 2,105,263 shares of Crude Class B
stock outstanding and entitled to vote. Each holder of Crude
common stock is entitled to one vote per share, and each holder
of Crude Class B stock is entitled to ten votes per share,
on each proposal on which such shares are entitled to vote at
the special meeting.
As of June 8, 2011, the Unaffiliated Shareholders, either
directly or beneficially, owned 13,745,400 shares, or
approximately 98.9% of Crudes outstanding common stock.
Quorum
For purposes of the vote by the holders of Crude common stock
and Crude Class B stock, considered as a single class, the
holders of a majority in total voting power of the shares of
Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock issued and
outstanding as of the record date entitled to vote at the
special meeting of the shareholders, present in person or
represented by proxy, shall constitute a quorum. For purposes of
the vote by the sole holder of Crude Class B stock, the
holder of a majority in total voting power of shares of Crude
Class B stock issued and outstanding as of the record date
entitled to vote at the special meeting of the shareholders,
present in person or represented by proxy, shall constitute a
quorum. In the absence of a quorum the Chairman of the meeting
or the holders of a majority of the votes entitled to be cast by
the shareholders of Crude common stock and Crude Class B
stock, considered as a single class, who are present in person
or by proxy may adjourn the meeting.
Abstentions
and Broker Non-Votes
Proxies that are marked abstain and proxies relating
to street name shares that are returned to us but
marked by brokers as not voted will be treated as
shares present for purposes of determining the presence of a
quorum on all matters. The latter will not be treated as shares
entitled to vote on the matter as to which authority to vote is
withheld by the broker.
Vote of
Our Shareholders Required
The adoption of the Merger Proposal will require the affirmative
vote of the holders of a majority of the voting power of shares
of Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock outstanding
and entitled to vote at the Special Meeting, voting together as
a single class; by the sole holder of shares of Crude
Class B stock outstanding and entitled to vote at the
Special Meeting, voting as a separate class; and by a majority
of the voting power of the shares of Crude common stock
outstanding and entitled to vote at the Special Meeting that are
held by the Unaffiliated Shareholders, voting as a separate
class. Because these three required votes are based on a
majority of all shares outstanding (i.e., not just a majority of
the shares present at the meeting and voting), if you abstain
from voting, or if you fail to vote or fail to instruct your
bank, brokerage firm or nominee how to vote, that will make it
more difficult to achieve the votes required to approve the
Merger Proposal.
The adoption of the Adjournment Proposal will require the
affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the votes
entitled to be cast by the holders of Crude common stock and
Crude Class B stock, considered as a single class, who are
present in person or by proxy. The special meeting may also be
adjourned by the Chairman of the meeting.
Voting
Your Shares
Each share of Crude common stock that you own in your name
entitles you to one vote for each proposal on which such shares
are entitled to vote at the special meeting. Your proxy card
shows the number of shares of Crude common stock that you own.
40
There are two ways to ensure that your shares of Crude common
stock are voted at the special meeting:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can cause your shares to be voted by signing and returning
the enclosed proxy card. If you submit your proxy card, your
proxy, whose name is listed on the proxy card, will
vote your shares as you instruct on the proxy card. If you sign
and return the proxy card but do not give instructions on how to
vote your shares, your shares will be voted, as recommended by
our board, FOR the adoption of the Merger Proposal
and the Adjournment Proposal. Votes received after a matter has
been voted upon at the special meeting will not be counted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can attend the special meeting and vote in person. We will
give you a ballot when you arrive. However, if your shares are
held in the name of your broker, bank or another nominee, you
must get a proxy from the broker, bank or other nominee. That is
the only way we can be sure that the broker, bank or nominee has
not already voted your shares.
|
IF YOU RETURN YOUR PROXY CARD WITHOUT AN INDICATION OF HOW
YOU WISH TO VOTE, YOUR SHARES WILL BE VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE
MERGER PROPOSAL AND THE ADJOURNMENT PROPOSAL.
Revoking
Your Proxy
If you give a proxy, you may revoke it at any time before it is
exercised by doing any one of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you may send another proxy card with a later date;
|
|
|
|
|
|
you may notify Crudes corporate secretary in writing
before the special meeting that you have revoked your
proxy; or
|
|
|
|
|
|
you may attend the special meeting, revoke your proxy, and vote
in person, as indicated above.
|
No
Additional Matters May Be Presented at the Special
Meeting
This special meeting has been called only to consider the
adoption of the Merger Proposal and the Adjournment Proposal.
Under Crudes bylaws, other than procedural matters
incident to the conduct of the special meeting, no other matters
may be considered at the special meeting if they are not
included in the notice of the special meeting.
Appraisal
Rights
Under Marshall Islands law, a shareholder of a corporation has
the right to vote against any plan of merger to which the
corporation is a party. If such shareholders vote against the
plan of merger, they may have the right to seek payment from
their corporation of the appraised fair value of their shares
(instead of the contractual merger consideration). However, the
right of a dissenting shareholder to receive payment of the
appraised fair value of his shares is not available if the
shares of such class or series of stock are (i) listed on a
securities exchange or (ii) held of record by more than
2,000 holders. Since shares of Crude common stock are traded on
the NYSE, a dissenting holder of shares of Crude common stock
has no right to receive payment from Crude for the appraised
fair market value of his shares under Marshall Islands law.
Furthermore, pursuant to the Support Agreement, CCIC, as the
sole holder of the Crude Class B stock, has waived any
appraisal rights it might have under Marshall Islands law.
Proxies
and Proxy and Consent Solicitation Costs
Crude is soliciting proxies on behalf of the Crude Board. This
solicitation is being made by mail but also may be made by
telephone or in person. Crude and its directors, officers and
employees may also solicit proxies in person, by telephone or by
other electronic means. Any solicitation made and information
provided in such a solicitation will be consistent with the
written proxy statement and proxy card. Morrow, a proxy
solicitation firm that Crude has engaged to assist it in
soliciting proxies, will be paid its customary fee of
approximately $15,000, plus
out-of-pocket
expenses.
41
Crude will ask banks, brokers and other institutions, nominees
and fiduciaries to forward proxy materials to their principals
and to obtain their authority to execute proxies and voting
instructions. Crude will reimburse them for their reasonable
expenses.
If you send in your completed proxy card, you may still vote
your shares in person if you revoke your proxy before it is
exercised at the special meeting.
Crude
Support Agreement
Evangelos M. Marinakis, Chairman of the Board and CEO of Crude,
Ioannis E. Lazaridis, President of Crude, Gerasimos G.
Kalogiratos, CFO of Crude, and CCIC, holder of all of the
outstanding shares of Crude Class B stock, have entered
into a support agreement pursuant to which they have agreed to
vote their shares in favor of the transaction.
Representatives
of Deloitte. Hadjipavlou, Sofianos & Cambanis
S.A.
Representatives of Deloitte. Hadjipavlou, Sofianos &
Cambanis S.A. are expected to be present at the Crude special
meeting. The representatives of Deloitte. Hadjipavlou,
Sofianos & Cambanis S.A. will have the opportunity to
make a statement regarding the proposed transaction if they
desire to do so, and they are expected to be available to
respond to appropriate questions from Crude shareholders at the
Crude special meeting.
Who Can
Answer Your Questions About Voting Your Shares
If you have any questions about how to vote or direct a vote in
respect of your shares of Crude common stock, you may call
Morrow, Crudes proxy solicitor, at
+
1 800
662-5200
or
Crudes corporate secretary at
+
30 210 4584 900.
42
THE
PROPOSED TRANSACTION
The
Companies
Crude
Carriers Corp.
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
Crude Carriers Corp. is a corporation organized under the laws
of the Republic of the Marshall Islands focusing on the maritime
transportation of crude oil cargoes. It employs its vessels in
the spot tanker market or under spot related employment. Crude
owns a modern, high specification fleet of crude oil tankers,
comprising two VLCCs (Very Large Crude Carriers) and three
Suezmax tankers, with a weighted average age of 2.1 years
as of March 31, 2011 and a total carrying capacity of
approximately 1,058,344 dwt. Crudes vessels transport
mainly crude oil and fuel oil along worldwide shipping routes.
Capital Maritime, an international shipping company, serves as
the manager of Crudes vessels. Currently three out of
Crudes five vessels are employed with Shell under spot
index linked time charter arrangements, which are also subject
to a profit sharing arrangement. Shares of Crude common stock
have traded on the NYSE under the symbol CRU since
Crudes initial public offering in March 2010. As of
March 31, 2011, Crude had approximately $414.1 million
in total assets.
Capital
Product Partners L.P.
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
Capital Product Partners L.P. is a limited partnership organized
under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, whose
vessels trade on a worldwide basis and are capable of carrying
crude oil, refined oil products, such as gasoline, diesel, fuel
oil and jet fuel, as well as edible oils and certain chemicals
such as ethanol. As of March 31, 2011, CPLPs fleet
consisted of 21 double-hull tankers with an average age of
approximately 4.7 years, including one of the largest Ice
Class 1A MR product tanker fleets in the world based on
number of vessels and carrying capacity, with 83% of the fleet
total days in the last nine months of 2011 secured under period
charter coverage. In June 2011, CPLP is expected to begin
operating one drybulk capesize vessel. Capital Ship Management
Corp., a subsidiary of Capital Maritime, serves as the manager
of CPLPs vessels. CPLP charters 19 of its 22 vessels
(including the capesize vessel) under medium- to long-term time
and bareboat charters to large charterers such as BP Shipping
Limited, Petroleo Brasileiro S.A., Capital Maritime and
subsidiaries of Overseas Shipholding Group Inc. CPLPs
common units trade on Nasdaq under the symbol CPLP.
CPLP unitholders also receive reports on Form 1099, as the
partnership is treated as a corporation for U.S. tax
purposes. As of March 31, 2011, CPLP had approximately
$752.9 million in total assets.
Capital
GP L.L.C.
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
Capital GP L.L.C. is a limited liability company organized under
the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. It is the
general partner of CPLP and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Capital
Maritime.
43
Poseidon
Project Corp.
3 Iassonos Street
Piraeus, 18537
Greece
+30 210 4584 900
Poseidon Project Corp. is a corporation incorporated under the
laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands and is a
wholly-owned subsidiary of CPLP. This entity was recently formed
for the sole purpose of effecting the merger.
Structure
of the Proposed Transaction
The merger agreement provides for the transactions described
below. The merger agreement is attached to this document as
Appendix A and is incorporated by reference into this proxy
statement/prospectus. We urge you to read the merger agreement
carefully and in its entirety, as it is the legal document that
governs the proposed transaction and your rights and obligations
in connection with the proposed transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On May 5, 2011, CPLP and Crude announced that they had
entered into a merger agreement, pursuant to which MergerCo
would merge with and into Crude, with the result of Crude
becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of CPLP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The transaction is structured as a unit for share transaction.
The exchange ratio is 1.56 CPLP common units for each share of
Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock, which equates
to a value of $17.58 per share of Crude common stock and Crude
Class B stock based on CPLPs closing unit price of
$11.27 on May 4, 2011. The transaction is subject to
customary closing conditions, including approval by a majority
of the voting power of the shares of Crude common stock held by
the Unaffiliated Shareholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLP will become the sole parent of Crude and will continue to
be structured as a limited partnership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition, on May 5, CPLP agreed to acquire from Capital
Maritime 100% of the shares of capital stock of Patroklos Marine
Corp. a corporation organized under the laws of the Republic of
the Marshall Islands, that was the registered owner of the dry
cargo vessel Cape Agamemnon for a total consideration of
approximately $98.5 million, to be paid in a combination of
CPLP common units and cash. CPLP will issue 6,958,000 CPLP
common units to Capital Maritime based on a $10.35 price per
unit, as part of the consideration for the acquisition of the
Cape Agamemnon, and pay approximately $26.5 million in cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital Maritime will also be making a capital contribution of
approximately $1.5 million to Capital GP, which will make a
capital contribution in the same amount to CPLP in exchange for
142,000 general partnership interests in CPLP, so that Capital
GP can maintain a 2% general partnership interest in CPLP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Following completion of the merger and CPLPs acquisition
of the Cape Agamemnon, CPLP unitholders will own approximately
65% of the combined company, with Crude shareholders owning the
remaining approximate 35% of the combined company (including
3,284,210 common units to be issued to CCIC). As a result of the
two transactions, Capital Maritime, the owner of Capital GP,
will own approximately 27.1% of the combined company, including
ownership resulting from the general partnership interest in the
combined company held by Capital GP and, collectively, Capital
Maritime and CCIC would own approximately 31.7% of the combined
company. Under the CPLP Partnership Agreement, Capital GP, which
is owned by Capital Maritime, also has the right to contribute
CPLP common units in return for general partner units in order
to maintain a 2% general partner interest in CPLP. If the
proposed transaction is consummated, shortly thereafter Capital
GP expects to contribute approximately 499,346 CPLP common units
in return for general partner units in order to maintain its 2%
general partner interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLPs current directors and one current member of the
Crude Independent Committee, which will be Dimitris
Christacopoulos, will be the directors of CPLP immediately after
the effective time of the proposed transaction, and Evangelos M.
Marinakis will continue to serve as Chairman of the CPLP Board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLPs current headquarters will serve as the headquarters
of the combined company.
|
44
Background
of the Proposed Transaction
Crude was formed in October 2009 as a wholly-owned subsidiary of
CCIC, to conduct a shipping business focused on the crude tanker
industry. Crude had no meaningful operating history as an
independent company prior to its initial public offering (the
IPO) in March 2010. Following its IPO, CCIC
continued to own, and currently owns, 2,105,263 shares of
Crude Class B stock, representing 100% of the outstanding
shares of the Crude Class B stock. CCIC does not own any
Crude common stock.
There is substantial overlap of the ownership and control of
Crude and CPLP. CCIC is controlled by Evangelos M. Marinakis,
the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Crude and the
Chairman of CPLP Mr. Marinakis also is the Chief Executive
Officer of Capital Maritime, which as of June 8, 2011 owns
approximately 12,079,062 CPLP units (including general partner
units), or 31.2% of the CPLP units, and is the owner of Capital
GP. There also is significant overlap between the senior
management teams of each of Crude and Capital GP.
Throughout 2010, Capital GP, as the manager of CPLP,
communicated to CPLP unitholders its belief that CPLP should be
looking for opportunities to further grow CPLP and take
advantage of the historically attractive vessel asset purchase
price environment in the tanker shipping sector. In that
context, in early December 2010, Mr. Evangelos M. Marinakis
and Ioannis M. Lazaridis discussed a potential combination
between CPLP and Crude, including the potential for such a
combination to strengthen the balance sheet, provide a solid
basis of future fleet growth, provide a basis for future
distribution growth and enhance financing opportunities for both
entities. Mr. Lazaridis and Mr. Marinakis having
further discussed the above met again and decided to commence an
evaluation of a combination of Crude and CPLP. Senior management
of Capital GP and CPLP also agreed that the merits of such a
combination should be explored, and, accordingly, concluded that
a potential combination might be attractive to Crude, CPLP, and
their respective equityholders. In addition, Mr. Marinakis
indicated that CCIC, as the sole holder of Crude Class B
stock, could be receptive to such a transaction.
In December 2010, Mr. Lazaridis contacted a representative
of Evercore Group L.L.C. (Evercore) indicating that
Capital GP senior management was going to discuss a proposed
transaction involving Crude with the CPLP Board, and that the
matter would likely be submitted to the CPLP Conflicts Committee
for its consideration. The CPLP Conflicts Committee had
previously engaged Evercore as its financial advisor on three
separate occasions in 2010. Mr. Lazaridis met with
representatives of Evercore on December 7, 2010,
December 30, 2010 and January 12, 2011 to further
discuss the possibility of CPLP and Crude pursuing a proposed
transaction.
On January 19, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee, after
reviewing and considering the knowledge and experience of Akin
Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP (Akin Gump)
with public company mergers and acquisitions, the energy
industry generally, and Akin Gumps experience in advising
master limited partnerships (MLPs) and other
companies with respect to transactions similar to the proposed
transaction, as well as its past representations of the CPLP
Conflicts Committee, determined to engage Akin Gump as its legal
counsel in anticipation of a delegation by the CPLP Board to the
CPLP Conflicts Committee of certain responsibilities and
authority with respect to a proposed transaction.
On January 20, 2011, Mr. Lazaridis, Mr. Marinakis
and other members of Capital GPs management met with the
CPLP Board. During that meeting, members of management discussed
with the CPLP Board the outlook for CPLPs future growth
and distributions based on various assumptions regarding, among
other things, the tanker shipping market, the tanker financing
market and the general state of the overall economy. It was
further suggested that the CPLP Board consider a transaction
with Crude, as a combination of CPLP and Crude could provide
CPLP with a stronger balance sheet, improve its position in the
tanker shipping market and improve future distribution growth
prospects.
On January 20, 2011, the CPLP Board (including the members
of the CPLP Conflicts Committee) along with representatives of
the law firms Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
(Sullivan & Cromwell), as counsel to
Capital Maritime, and Akin Gump, participated in a presentation
in which representatives of Evercore gave
45
their preliminary financial analysis of a combination of CPLP
and Crude. During the presentation, members of the CPLP
Conflicts Committee provided Evercore with feedback to refine
its preliminary financial analysis.
On January 20, 2011, as a result of the ongoing
consideration of such strategic factors, the CPLP Board, on the
recommendation of the CPLP Conflicts Committee, determined to
further analyze and pursue a potential business combination
transaction with Crude. The CPLP Board also determined that the
CPLP Conflicts Committee should analyze and, if determined
appropriate, pursue and negotiate, on behalf of the CPLP Board,
such a potential transaction. The members of the CPLP Conflicts
Committee are Keith Forman, Robert Curt and Abel Rasterhoff,
each of whom is an independent director of CPLP and has no
affiliations with Crude, CCIC or any of their affiliates.
Mr. Forman served as chairman of the CPLP Conflicts
Committee and continues to serve in that role.
The CPLP Board authorized the CPLP Conflicts Committee to, among
other things, (i) explore, consider and, if appropriate,
develop a proposal on behalf of CPLP with respect to a proposed
transaction, (ii) negotiate the terms and conditions of a
transaction and agreements related to a transaction, subject in
each case to final approval of the CPLP Board, and (iii) in
order to address any potential conflicts of interest between
CPLP, on the one hand, and Capital GP, Capital Maritime and each
of their affiliates, on the other hand, determine whether to
approve such a transaction by following the CPLP special
approval process, which in accordance with CPLPs
Partnership Agreement requires approval of a majority of the
members of the CPLP Conflicts Committee.
On January 20, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee engaged
Evercore to act as the CPLP Conflicts Committees financial
advisor with respect to a proposed transaction. Evercore was
chosen primarily because of its knowledge and experience with
public company mergers and acquisitions, the shipping and energy
industries generally, transactions involving MLPs and its work
with special committees, including the CPLP Conflicts Committee,
in past transactions.
In connection with the consideration of the proposed
transaction, on January 20, 2011, the CPLP Board approved
the payment of a one-time fee for each member of the CPLP
Conflicts Committee (other than the chairman) of $25,000, with
the chairman of the CPLP Conflicts Committee to be paid a
one-time fee of $40,000, in cash.
On January 24, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee held a
meeting with representatives of Akin Gump and Evercore to
discuss various matters, including (i) the duties of, and
the process to be followed by, the CPLP Conflicts Committee in
connection with delivering a proposal, and considering a
potential counter proposal, with respect to a proposed
transaction, (ii) potential conflicts of interest,
independence considerations and the special approval process
under CPLPs partnership agreement, (iii) fiduciary
duties of the members of the CPLP Conflicts Committee,
(iv) equityholder approval requirements, and
(v) general process, securities law and other
considerations to be taken into account in public transactions
similar to the proposed transaction. Evercore also discussed
with members of the CPLP Conflicts Committee its
January 20, 2011 presentation, including the pro forma
impact of a proposed transaction on accretion and dilution on
distributions to the equityholders of CPLP and Crude, taking
into account various financing, chartering rate, and asset
valuation scenarios, in each case based on information provided
by the management of CPLP. Evercore also discussed with the CPLP
Conflicts Committee the possibility of providing additional
financial analysis, including extending the analysis through
2013, based on additional forecasts and projections to be
provided by the respective managements of CPLP and, potentially,
Crude, utilizing various alternative scenarios.
On January 31, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee met with
representatives of Akin Gump and Evercore. Evercore provided an
update concerning its progress with respect to its financial
analysis of a proposed transaction with Crude, taking into
account various financing, chartering rate, and asset valuation
scenarios. The CPLP Conflicts Committee also discussed, among
other things, the appropriate exchange ratio for a proposal to
Crude, the exchange ratios impact on accretion and
dilution distributions to the stakeholders of CPLP and Crude,
negotiating strategy, the desirability of confidentiality and
whether exclusivity should be required for some period of time
(or whether exclusivity was unnecessary under the
circumstances). The CPLP Conflicts Committee also discussed
possible alternatives to a proposed transaction with Crude. The
CPLP Conflicts Committee determined that it would make a
non-binding proposal to acquire Crude in a merger
46
transaction pursuant to which each shareholder of Crude would
receive 1.72 CPLP common units for each share of Crude common
stock and Crude Class B stock held by such shareholder. The
committee also determined to propose that Crude sign a mutual
confidentiality agreement without an exclusivity period. The
CPLP Conflicts Committee decided that the chairman of the CPLP
Conflicts Committee should contact the Crude Independent
Committee, a standing committee of the Crude Board, to deliver a
non-binding indication of interest to such effect.
On February 2, 2011, Mr. Forman sent via
e-mail
a
letter to the Crude Independent Committee. At that time, Richard
Sages, Pierre de Demandolx Dedons, Gregory Timagenis and
Socrates Kominakis comprised the Crude Independent Committee.
Mr. Formans
e-mail
indicated CPLPs interest in pursuing a proposed
transaction, and included a draft confidentiality agreement.
Mr. Forman also left a voicemail for the Crude Independent
Committees chairman, Mr. Socrates Kominakis,
conveying a desire to meet in person in the near future to
discuss the Crude Independent Committees reaction to the
proposal. Mr. Formans letter included, among other
things, (i) a non-binding indication of CPLPs
interest in CPLPs acquiring Crude in a merger transaction
in which each outstanding share of Crude common stock and Crude
Class B stock would be exchanged for 1.72 CPLP common units
(the Initial Proposal) and (ii) a request for
the support of CCIC and its affiliates, as well as members of
Crude management (in their capacity as shareholders of Crude),
for such a potential transaction. Further discussion of a
proposed transaction was conditioned upon execution by the
parties of a mutual confidentiality agreement, which would
include mutual customary standstill and
non-solicitation provisions. Based on CPLPs common unit
price on February 1, 2011, the Initial Proposal had a value
of approximately $17.50 per share. The 1.72x exchange ratio was
based on (i) CPLPs calculation of Crudes net
asset value per share using a third party appraisal of the
vessels comprising Crudes fleet as of December 31,
2010, discounted by approximately 5% to take into account the
general trend of declining asset values, (ii) CPLPs
view that such offer would potentially enhance CPLPs
ability to maintain and potentially grow its distribution
forecast of $0.2325 per quarter in 2013, (iii) a
premiums-paid analysis suggesting a 12.4% premium to
Crudes share price of approximately $15.57 as of
January 31, 2011 and (iv) the fact that Crude
shareholders would experience significant and immediate
accretion with respect to distributions upon consummation of the
merger. The Crude Independent Committee promptly informed the
Crude Board of the proposal received from the CPLP Conflicts
Committee.
On February 3, 2011, the Crude Board met to discuss several
matters, including the receipt by the Crude Independent
Committee of the Initial Proposal. The Crude Board determined
that the Crude Independent Committee should evaluate and, if
appropriate, negotiate the terms of any transaction with CPLP on
behalf of the Crude Board. To that end, the Crude Board
authorized the Crude Independent Committee to engage independent
legal and financial advisors to assist in its evaluation and
potential negotiations.
The Crude Independent Committee retained Jones Day as its
independent legal advisor on February 10, 2011, after
confirming that the firm had not represented Crude, CPLP, CCIC
or their respective affiliates and was otherwise free of any
conflicting relationships.
On February 15, 2011, the Crude Independent Committee met
with Jones Day to discuss next steps, including the process for
selecting the committees financial advisor. The committee
discussed potential financial advisor candidates, including
Jefferies and two other internationally-recognized investment
banking firms, none of which had previously provided financial
advisory services to Crude, CPLP, CCIC or any of their
respective affiliates. Jones Day also explained to the committee
that the Crude Board had adopted authorizing resolutions for the
Crude Independent Committee, but that those resolutions did not
expressly provide the Crude Independent Committee the authority
to pursue alternative transactions. The committee decided that
it was still early in the process, and that the possibility of
confirming whether such authority had been provided should be
reconsidered after the Crude Independent Committee had selected
a financial advisor and had had the opportunity to review the
proposed transaction with its financial advisor.
During the next few days, members of the Crude Independent
Committee and Jones Day contacted representatives of Jefferies
and the two other investment banking firms to schedule meetings
with the Crude Independent Committee to be held during the week
of February 20th.
47
On February 17, 2011, Mr. Kominakis informed the other
members of the Crude Independent Committee that he would be
unable to continue participating in the committees
deliberations regarding any potential transaction with CPLP. He
explained that he was advising a private equity firm
unaffiliated with Crude or CPLP in connection with an unrelated
matter that he expected would require substantially all of his
time for the foreseeable future. Accordingly, Mr. Kominakis
delivered a letter dated February 17, 2011 to the Crude
Independent Committee resigning from his position as chairman of
the Crude Independent Committee and, due to his time
commitments, withdrawing from all deliberations of the Crude
Independent Committee regarding any proposed transaction between
Crude and CPLP. The following day, on February 18, 2011,
the other members of the Crude Independent Committee elected
Mr. Gregory Timagenis as the new chairman of the Crude
Independent Committee.
On February 18, 2011, the Crude Independent Committee sent
a preliminary response to the CPLP Conflicts Committee, stating,
among other things, that (i) the Crude Board had authorized
the Crude Independent Committee to consider the proposed
transaction and to engage legal, financial and other advisors in
connection therewith, (ii) Jones Day would serve as the
legal advisor to the Crude Independent Committee and
(iii) the Crude Independent Committee was in the process of
selecting a financial advisor from a list of highly qualified
firms.
During the week of February 20, 2011, the Crude Independent
Committee met with representatives of Jefferies and the two
other financial advisor candidates to discuss their
qualifications for advising the Crude Independent Committee.
Over the next several days, Jones Day and Mr. Timagenis
corresponded with each of the three investment banks, seeking
clarification on and negotiating their fee proposals.
On February 28, 2011, the Crude Independent Committee met
for the purpose of finalizing its selection of a financial
advisor. Even though it was the consensus of the Crude
Independent Committee that, because of, among other things,
Jefferies M&A experience, and financial advisory
experience in the shipping industry, Jefferies should be
selected as the Crude Independent Committees financial
advisor, a change in the composition of the Crude Independent
Committee delayed the retention of Jefferies. On March 3,
2011, Mr. Timagenis informed the committee that he could no
longer serve on the committee. He explained that his ongoing
responsibilities to his law firm made it impracticable to take a
meaningful role in the Crude Independent Committees
evaluation of the proposed transaction with CPLP.
Mr. Timagenis remained on the Crude Board following his
resignation from the committee.
As a result of Mr. Kominakiss recusal and
Mr. Timageniss resignation, only two members of the
Crude Independent Committee remained to participate in
deliberations regarding the Initial Proposal. Accordingly,
during the following week, the members of the Crude Independent
Committee and the Crude Board agreed that the Crude Board should
appoint a new independent director to the Crude Board with the
expectation that such new independent director would serve on
the Crude Independent Committee. On March 11, 2011, the
Crude Board met to elect Mr. Dimitris Christacopoulos to
the Crude Board and, subsequent to his election, he was
appointed by the Crude Board to the Crude Independent Committee.
Prior to Mr. Christacopouloss election, the Crude
Board had made the determination that Mr. Christacopoulos
was independent and had no prior relationships with Crude, CPLP,
CCIC or any of their respective affiliates, and had discussed
Mr. Christacopouloss qualifications, including his
background in the shipping and financing sectors and work in
business consulting. The members of the Crude Independent
Committee held a meeting shortly after the Crude Board meeting
and elected Mr. Christacopoulos to be the chairman of the
Crude Independent Committee.
After Mr. Christacopoulos had the opportunity to review the
background material provided by Jones Day and after he had
spoken to each of the three financial advisor candidates to
understand their qualifications, the Crude Independent Committee
met on March 18, 2011. After discussion of the relative
merits of the three firms, the committee re-confirmed its
selection of Jefferies as its financial advisor.
From March 18th through the end of April, the Crude
Independent Committees legal and financial advisors
conducted their due diligence review of CPLP, its subsidiaries
and their respective businesses and the CPLP Conflicts
Committees legal and financial advisors conducted their
due diligence review of Crude, its subsidiaries and their
respective businesses. The Crude Independent Committees
legal and financial advisors
48
and the CPLP Conflicts Committees legal and financial
advisors exchanged, and provided responses to, due diligence
request lists and participated in multiple due diligence calls
with management of each of CPLP and Crude. On April 5,
2011, Crude and CPLP executed a confidentiality agreement,
which, in addition to customary bilateral confidentiality
provisions, imposed a two-year standstill on each of Crude and
CPLP. Following the execution of the confidentiality agreement,
CPLP and Crude began to exchange non-public information.
On April 13, 2011, the two chairmen of the companies
two independent committees, Dimitris Christacopoulos and Keith
Forman, met in Athens. Although the two spoke about general
process points and macroeconomic factors related to a potential
business combination relating to the proposed transaction, no
specific transaction terms were discussed at this meeting.
On April 18, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee met with
representatives of Evercore and Akin Gump to receive an update
from Evercore about its discussions with Jefferies and to
discuss and identify differences in the assumptions underlying
their respective financial analyses of CPLP and Crude.
On April 19, 2011, the Crude Independent Committee met with
representatives of Jefferies and Jones Day to receive an update
on the status of the advisors due diligence and to review
Jefferies preliminary financial analyses based on
projections provided by Crude management. An analyst report from
Wells Fargo was also released the same day, which report
downgraded Crudes shares based on the analysts
conclusions that Crude would not be able to maintain its current
dividend payments once the amortization payments under
Crudes credit facility became due beginning in the third
quarter of 2011. Crudes share price decreased from $14.20
at closing on April 18, 2011 to a closing price of $12.05
on April 19, 2011.
On April 21, 2011, during a regularly scheduled meeting,
the CPLP Board received an update from the CPLP Conflicts
Committee regarding the status of its and its advisors
discussions with the Crude Independent Committee and its
advisors. Mr. Forman summarized for the CPLP Board the
status of the discussions.
On April 21, 2011, members of the CPLP Conflicts Committee
and the Crude Independent Committee and representatives of
Evercore, Jefferies, Akin Gump and Jones Day met to receive
additional guidance from management of CPLP and Crude with
respect to their respective managements financial
projections and to discuss the effect of such additional
guidance on the financial advisors respective financial
analyses. Following the discussion, the CPLP Conflicts Committee
met with representatives of Evercore and Akin Gump to discuss
the additional guidance that management had given and to discuss
the status of Evercores analysis of managements
financial projections with respect to CPLP. Evercore also
reviewed with the CPLP Conflicts Committee its updated
preliminary financial analysis. Among other things, the CPLP
Conflicts Committee discussed the recent increase in CPLPs
unit price as compared to the decrease in Crudes stock
price, and the Initial Proposals 1.72x exchange ratio in
light of prevailing market conditions. It also discussed the
deterioration in the asset values of crude tanker vessels
similar to those that Crude owns, which, in turn, had lowered
Crudes per share net asset value. The CPLP Conflicts
Committee determined that a revised indication of interest
letter should be prepared proposing an exchange ratio of 1.36
CPLP common units for each Crude share. The CPLP Conflicts
Committee also determined that its chairman should contact the
chairman of the Crude Independent Committee to indicate that the
CPLP Conflicts Committee was still interested in pursuing a
proposed transaction, but would likely propose a lower exchange
ratio under which the proposed transaction would be consummated.
On April 23, 2011, Mr. Forman called
Mr. Christacopoulos and left him a voicemail, indicating
that the CPLP Conflicts Committee would likely be sending a new
letter with a lower proposed exchange ratio. Later that evening
(New York time), the Crude Independent Committee received a
revised proposal from the CPLP Conflicts Committee reflecting a
lower exchange ratio of 1.36 CPLP common units for each share of
Crude common stock and Class B stock (the Revised
Proposal). Based on CPLPs common unit price on
April 21, 2011, the Revised Proposal had a value of
approximately $15.00 per share. The 1.36x exchange ratio in the
Revised Proposal was based on (i) CPLPs calculation
of Crudes net asset value per share using a more recent
third party appraisal of the vessels comprising Crudes
fleet as of March 31, 2011, discounted by a range of
approximately 5% to 10% due to the general trend of declining
asset values, (ii) CPLPs view that the lower offer would
further enhance CPLPs ability to maintain and potentially
grow its distribution forecast of
49
$0.2325 per quarter in 2013, (iii) a premiums-paid analysis
suggesting a 20% premium to Crudes share price of
approximately $12.50 following the release of the Wells Fargo
report and (iv) the fact that Crude shareholders would
experience significant and immediate accretion with respect to
distributions upon consummation of the merger.
The Crude Independent Committee met on April 25, 2011 with
its financial and legal advisors to discuss the Revised Proposal
and the CPLP Conflicts Committees request that both
committees and their advisors meet in Athens within the week to
discuss the potential transaction. After discussing with its
financial and legal advisors, the Crude Independent Committee
determined that such a meeting would not be productive until
after the Crude Independent Committee had first discussed with
Jefferies its analysis of the Revised Proposal, which discussion
took place later that day.
Between April 25 and April 28, 2011, at the request of the
CPLP Conflicts Committee and the Crude Independent Committee,
representatives of Evercore and Jefferies met to discuss the
proposed exchange ratios and the financial assumptions
underlying the Initial and Revised Proposals.
Representatives of Jefferies and Evercore met briefly on
April 26, 2011 to discuss the proposed transaction, as well
as some of the alternatives being considered by CPLP to manage
some of its future cash requirements.
On April 27, 2011, the Crude Independent Committee met
again with representatives of Jefferies and Jones Day to discuss
the Revised Proposal. Representatives of Jefferies advised the
Crude Independent Committee that representatives of Jefferies
and Evercore had had a discussion on April 26, 2011
regarding the proposals, but that no terms were negotiated.
Representatives of Jefferies discussed with the Crude
Independent Committee its financial analysis of the Revised
Proposal. The Crude Independent Committee asked various
questions regarding Jefferies financial analysis,
including with respect to certain assumptions underlying its
analysis. The Crude Independent Committee also discussed, with
the input of its financial and legal advisors, what potential
alternatives Crude could consider on a standalone basis,
including refinancing Crudes credit facility and
undertaking a potential bond offering. However, the Crude
Independent Committee determined that given the deteriorated
state of the tanker industry and limited access to capital
markets, such alternatives were not sufficiently attractive to
warrant a detailed analysis from Jefferies.
After discussion among the Crude Independent Committee members
with input from representatives of Jefferies, it was the
consensus of the Crude Independent Committee that the 1.36x
exchange ratio proposed by the CPLP Conflicts Committee in the
Revised Proposal should not be accepted. And after further
discussion with its advisors, it was the consensus of the Crude
Independent Committee that a 1.75x exchange ratio (with an
implied offer price of approximately $19.00 per share, based on
CPLPs common unit price at the time), was an appropriate
counter proposal to the CPLP Conflicts Committee. The Crude
Independent Committee reached this consensus based on various
considerations, including: (i) the need for the premium to
be measured against net asset value per share because the merger
consideration would consist solely of CPLP common units and for
net asset value per share to be calculated using the average of
both of Crudes third party appraisals, rather than only
the lower appraisal prepared as of March 31, 2011,
(ii) the 1.75x exchange ratio represented an 11% premium to
net asset value per share (based on CPLPs common unit
price at the time), (iii) the proposed merger of the two
companies would increase the combined companys scale,
market capitalization and cash flow, and decrease the combined
companys
loan-to-value
ratio, thereby permitting the combined company greater access to
the capital markets and enhancing its ability to refinance
existing indebtedness, which would better enable CPLP to
maintain its distribution forecast of $0.2325 per quarter
through 2013, (iv) a desire to achieve value in the range
of the IPO price for the Crude shares and (v) the
combination would be a deleveraging transaction for CPLP that
would be significantly accretive to the net asset value per unit
for CPLPs common unitholders.
The Crude Independent Committee also discussed the scope of its
authority at the meeting and whether it was authorized to
solicit or consider business combination or other proposals from
third parties other than CPLP. After discussing this issue with
Jones Day, the Crude Independent Committee determined to contact
the Crude Board in order to confirm whether the committee had
sufficient authority from the Crude Board in order to explore
and/or
pursue alternatives to the proposed CPLP transaction. The
committee requested that
50
Jones Day prepare a letter for Mr. Christacopoulos to
deliver to the Crude Board on behalf of the Crude Independent
Committee requesting confirmation of such authority. The Crude
Independent Committee also briefly discussed certain other items
that would need to be addressed in connection with the proposed
transaction, including whether any changes to CPLPs
limited partnership agreement should be requested to harmonize
the rights of unitholders of the combined entity to that of the
shareholders of Crude. For example, the committee discussed the
number of directors that Crude would be able to designate on the
CPLP Board, as well as increasing the ownership threshold
necessary for the general partner to have right to call CPLP
common units from 80% to 90% of the outstanding CPLP common
units.
At the request of the Crude Independent Committee,
representatives of Jefferies communicated the Crude Independent
Committees counter proposal of a 1.75x exchange ratio, or
an implied price of approximately $19.00 per share, to Evercore
on April 27, 2011. Evercore explained the premise of the
1.36x exchange ratio in the Revised Proposal as described above
and also argued that a 1.36x exchange ratio (i) still
represented a 20% premium to Crudes share price and
(ii) would be immediately and significantly accretive to
Crudes shareholders distributions. Evercore also
stated that it believed a 1.75x exchange ratio would make it
difficult for CPLP to maintain and potentially grow its
distribution forecast of $0.2325 per quarter in 2013, due to the
increased number of outstanding common units and the potential
debt amortization payments if CPLP had not refinanced its debt
by then. After discussion of both parties positions,
representatives of Evercore stated that they would need to
present the Crude Independent Committees counter proposal
to the CPLP Conflicts Committee and discuss an appropriate
response.
On April 27, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee met with
representatives of Evercore and Akin Gump to discuss, among
other things, (i) an analysis of the Revised Proposal and
recent Crude Independent Committee counter proposal and the
implications of these proposals at various prices, including
potential accretion and dilution on distributions, and
(ii) the terms of the proposed merger agreement being
prepared by Akin Gump, including various deal protection issues
such as, among other things, the circumstances under which the
Crude Board or Crude Independent Committee could change their
recommendations as to the merger, the termination fee, the
termination date and the scope of CCICs and Crude
managements obligation to vote their shares of Crude stock
in favor of the approval of the merger and against alternative
transactions.
On April 28, 2011, the Crude Independent Committee met
again with its advisors, and representatives of Jefferies
relayed to the Crude Independent Committee their discussion with
Evercore regarding the Crude Independent Committees
counter proposal of a 1.75x exchange ratio. The members of the
committee discussed the possibility of engaging the chairmen of
both committees in negotiations by having a call among
Mr. Christacopoulos, Mr. Forman and the
committees financial advisors. However, the Crude
Independent Committee determined that it first wished to hear
the CPLP Conflicts Committees response to the proposed
1.75x exchange ratio, as well as the Crude Boards response
to Mr. Christacopouloss letter requesting
confirmation of additional authority for the Crude Independent
Committee.
On April 28, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee met with
representatives of Evercore and Akin Gump to discuss potential
exchange ratios and the financial assumptions underlying the
proposals. Evercore updated the CPLP Conflicts Committee with
respect to its discussions with Jefferies regarding the proposed
exchange ratios and their underlying financial assumptions. The
CPLP Conflicts Committee discussed increasing the proposed
exchange ratio and determined to propose an exchange ratio of
1.48 CPLP common units for each share of Crude common stock and
Crude Class B stock. After further discussion, the CPLP
Conflicts Committee requested that Evercore organize a call with
Jefferies and the Crude Independent Committee to discuss the
proposed exchange ratio.
Later in the day on April 28, 2011, Evercore contacted
representatives of Jefferies to convey the CPLP Conflicts
Committees response to the 1.75x exchange ratio proposed
by the Crude Independent Committee. The CPLP Conflicts Committee
proposed a 1.48x exchange ratio, or approximately $16.55 per
share based on the closing price of $11.18 for CPLP common units
on April 27, 2011. Evercore also delivered written
materials with the following arguments in support of the 1.48x
exchange ratio: (i) the implied cash purchase price
represented a 30.8% premium above current Crude share prices,
(ii) based on CPLPs current distribution forecast,
Crudes shareholders would receive a 10.9% dividend yield
from the combined company going
51
forward, almost all of which would be attributable to
CPLPs operating cash flows in 2012 and 2013,
(iii) the implied aggregate purchase price was equal to
Crudes net asset value, taking into consideration a
declining asset value environment, Crudes first quarter
dividend and its drydock reserves and (iv) the implied cash
purchase price of $16.55, plus the $1.25 in dividends the
shareholders have received since Crudes IPO (and would
receive during the first quarter of 2011) and the
additional $1.38 in aggregate distributions anticipated from the
combined company during the next 12 months would provide
Crude shareholders who purchased at the time of the IPO an
aggregate of more than the IPO price of $19.00 per share.
At the same time that the two financial advisor teams were
meeting, a representative from Sullivan & Cromwell
contacted Jones Day to discuss the Crude Independent
Committees letter to the Crude Board requesting additional
authority. In a subsequent call, the representative from
Sullivan & Cromwell informed Jones Day that a meeting
of the Crude Board would be held the next day and any
uncertainty regarding the scope of authority of the Crude
Independent Committee could be addressed at the meeting. During
that discussion, the representative from Sullivan &
Cromwell also expressed to Jones Day that Crudes largest
shareholder, CCIC, which as a result of its holdings of Crude
Class B stock controls approximately 49% of the shareholder
vote in connection with any such transaction that required Crude
shareholder approval, had informed Sullivan & Cromwell
that it would expect to vote against any reasonably foreseeable
similar transaction with a party other than CPLP.
On April 29, 2011, the Crude Board held a meeting to
receive an update from the Crude Independent Committee regarding
the status of its and its advisors discussions with the
CPLP Conflicts Committee and its advisors.
Mr. Christacopoulos summarized for the Crude Board the
status of the discussions. The Crude Board also discussed the
letter delivered to the Crude Board on
April 28th regarding the Crude Independent
Committees authority and the Crude Board confirmed that,
under the Crude Board resolutions of February 3rd, the
Crude Independent Committee was already authorized to consider
alternative transactions. In addition, the position of CCIC as a
shareholder of Crude also was reiterated to the Crude Board.
The Crude Independent Committee also met on
April 29th to discuss the events that had occurred
since their meeting on April 28th, including the full Crude
Board meeting. Based on the discussions with the Crude Board,
including the reality that any transaction with a party other
than CPLP would be voted down by CCIC, the Crude Independent
Committee determined not to explore alternative transactions or
other strategic alternatives to the proposed transaction with
CPLP at that time. The Crude Independent Committee also
discussed the latest exchange ratio proposal from the CPLP
Conflicts Committee of 1.48x, including the reasonableness of
the rationale and assumptions on which the exchange ratio was
based, as presented by Evercore to representatives of Jefferies
in their meeting the day before. After a discussion about the
best strategy for maximizing the value received by Crudes
unaffiliated shareholders, it was the consensus of the Crude
Independent Committee to respond with a 1.65x exchange ratio.
This exchange ratio was based on substantially the same
arguments that supported a 1.75x exchange ratio, and still
provided a significant premium to the net asset value per share
that was greater in terms of dollar price based on
CPLPs common unit price that day than the
implied dollar price proposed in the Initial Proposal and would,
together with paid and expected dividends/distributions (both
before and after the proposed transaction), exceed the $19.00
Crude IPO price.
On April 30, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee received a
counter proposal from the Crude Independent Committee of an
exchange ratio of 1.65x.
On May 1, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee met with
representatives of Evercore and Akin Gump to discuss the results
of Evercores price discussions and the recently received
counter proposal. Representatives of Evercore indicated that the
Crude Independent Committee appeared to be seeking a premium to
net asset value and might accept an exchange ratio in the 1.52x
to 1.55x range, but appeared to be seeking an exchange ratio
closer to 1.55x. A discussion followed regarding negotiating
strategy, potential accretion and dilution to distributions at
various prices and, in particular, accretion/dilution as the
exchange ratio increased to 1.55x. The CPLP Conflicts Committee
noted that it was reluctant to increase its proposed exchange
ratio by much over its previous proposal. Following these
discussions, the CPLP Conflicts Committee authorized the
chairman of the CPLP Conflicts Committee to contact the chairman
of the Crude Independent Committee to
52
initially propose an exchange ratio of 1.525x, but with
authority to increase the offer to up to 1.55x. In addition, the
CPLP Conflicts Committee determined to seek a waiver of the
termination payment that would be due to Capital Ship Management
under the Crude management agreement in the event of a change of
control of Crude, if and to the extent the proposed transaction
would be considered a change of control under the management
agreement.
Mr. Forman called Mr. Christacopoulos immediately
after the end of the CPLP Conflicts Committee meeting to propose
a new exchange ratio of 1.525x. Mr. Christacopoulos again
raised the issue of Crudes shareholders receiving at
least in dollar amounts $17.50 per share
so that they would receive at least the net asset value of Crude
per share and the need to build in a cushion in the exchange
ratio to protect Crude shareholders from fluctuations in
CPLPs unit price. After a series of further exchanges, the
two chairman agreed to discuss with the their respective
committees an exchange ratio of 1.56x, or an implied offer price
of $17.64 per share, based on CPLPs then current common
unit price, subject to satisfactory negotiation of the
transaction documents and the non-economic deal terms.
Later on May 1, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee met with
representatives of Evercore and Akin Gump to discuss the results
of the negotiations between the chairmen of the two committees.
Mr. Forman indicated that Mr. Christacopoulos, on
behalf of his committee, was asking for an exchange ratio of not
less than 1.56x. The CPLP Conflicts Committee then determined to
make another counter proposal of an exchange ratio of 1.55x,
with a value of approximately $17.53 (based on CPLPs then
current common unit price), that would be adjusted upward to
1.56x if CPLPs unit price decreased below an amount that
would yield an implied price at the time of the public
announcement of the transaction of less than $17.50 per share at
a 1.55x exchange ratio. Mr. Forman delivered via
e-mail
the
CPLP Conflicts Committees proposal to
Mr. Christacopoulos after the meeting, indicating that the
CPLP Conflicts Committee did not propose to make any further
adjustments in its offer.
The Crude Independent Committee met on May 2, 2011, after
Mr. Christacopouloss receipt of the CPLP Conflicts
Committees revised proposal, to discuss an appropriate
response. The Crude Independent Committee considered several
possibilities, including the rejection of any transaction with
CPLP, which the Crude Independent Committee ultimately
determined not to be the best alternative, given the issues with
Crudes credit facility and the amortization payments due
to begin in late 2011, as well as the attractiveness of the
1.55x exchange ratio, which at then current CPLP unit prices
would give Crudes shareholders approximately $17.52 per
share (based on the closing price of the CPLP common units on
April 29, 2011), a 35% premium to the then current market
value of Crudes share price, a 2.5% premium to
Crudes net asset value per share, and an immediate annual
dividend of $1.44 per share. After further discussion and
consultation with its advisors, the Crude Independent Committee
determined to accept the economic terms proposed by the CPLP
Conflicts Committee, conditioned on the acceptance by the CPLP
Conflicts Committee of certain non-financial terms of the
transaction to be included in the merger agreement as described
below. However, even though the CPLP Conflicts Committees
most recent proposal would have adjusted the exchange ratio up
to 1.56x as described above, certain members of the Crude
Independent Committee expressed a preference for a fixed
exchange ratio of 1.56x and directed Mr. Christacopoulos to
try to obtain the higher exchange ratio on a fixed basis. Akin
Gump delivered a draft of the merger agreement to Jones Day on
the morning of May 2, 2011, during the Crude Independent
Committee meeting.
Later that day, after reviewing the draft merger agreement,
representatives of Jones Day discussed with representatives of
Akin Gump certain issues raised in the draft merger agreement,
as well as the non-financial terms on which the Crude
Independent Committees acceptance of the economic terms of
the CPLP Conflicts Committees last proposal would be
accepted. The matters discussed included the requirement that
the holders of a majority of Crudes common stock held by
Unaffiliated Shareholders approve the transaction, that certain
provisions in CPLPs Partnership Agreement be amended to
harmonize the rights that the combined companys
unitholders would have after the merger with the current rights
of Crude shareholders, to increase the size of the CPLP Board to
accommodate directors to be designated by Crude, that
CPLPs Omnibus Agreement with Capital Maritime be amended
to include substantially similar terms as the business
opportunities agreement between Crude and Capital Maritime, and
to include reasonable time periods during which CPLP could elect
to pursue business opportunities subject to the terms of the
Omnibus Agreement.
53
On May 2, 2011, Mr. Christacopoulos and
Mr. Forman discussed the proposed transaction again, and,
after Mr. Forman had conferred with the other members of
the CPLP Conflicts Committee and Evercore, they reached an
agreement on a fixed 1.56x exchange ratio, without any collars
or similar adjustments.
On May 1, 2011, Akin Gump sent an initial draft of the
support agreement to be entered into by Capital Maritime, CCIC
and certain of their affiliates to Sullivan &
Cromwell, and on May 3 to Jones Day. Revised drafts of the
agreement were exchanged among Akin Gump, Sullivan &
Cromwell and Jones Day from May 3rd until its
execution on May 5th.
On May 3, 2011, Jones Day sent a revised draft of the
merger agreement to Akin Gump reflecting the issues raised by
Jones Day on a May 2nd call between the two law firms.
Between May 3, 2011 and May 5, 2011, representatives
of Akin Gump received input from the CPLP Conflicts Committee on
the remaining open points in the merger agreement, which were
reflected in the drafts exchanged.
On May 4, 2011, the Crude Independent Committee met to
receive a status update on all exchanges since its last meeting
on May 2, 2011. Mr. Christacopoulos informed the
committee that the CPLP Conflicts Committee had agreed to the
fixed 1.56x exchange ratio. He also informed the committee of
CPLPs desire to execute the merger agreement prior to the
opening of the U.S. stock markets on Thursday,
May 5th, when CPLP planned to announce its first quarter
earnings. The Crude Independent Committee and its advisors
determined that finalizing the merger agreement within that
timing would be feasible and could potentially be advantageous
to the Unaffiliated Shareholders in the negotiation of the
non-financial terms of the merger agreement. In reaching this
conclusion, the committee made note of all the preparatory work
that it and its advisors had performed in the weeks leading up
to this point in the process.
Representatives of Jones Day then reviewed with the Crude
Independent Committee the current terms of the merger agreement
reflecting Jones Days revisions. Jones Day also reviewed
with the Crude Independent Committee key issues that remained
outstanding under the merger agreement, including the number of
Crude directors to be designated to the CPLP Board. The Crude
Independent Committee determined, after discussion with its
advisors, that the committee would request at least one (but
preferably two) Board seats, and that the designated directors,
who would be independent, be appointed to the CPLP Conflicts
Committee.
During this time, and until the resolution of all remaining
issues in the early morning of May 5th, Jones Day, Akin
Gump and Sullivan & Cromwell also exchanged and
negotiated several drafts of the transaction documents,
including the merger agreement and the support agreement to be
entered into by Capital Maritime, CCIC and certain of their
affiliates whereby Capital Maritime, CCIC and certain of their
affiliates agreed to vote in favor of the proposed transaction
and to waive any dissenters rights they might have.
Later on May 4th, members of the Crude Independent
Committee met with representatives of Jefferies again (with
representatives of Jones Day also present) to discuss
Jefferies financial analyses, as more fully described in
The Proposed Transaction Opinion of the Crude
Independent Committees Financial Advisor.
Also on May 4, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee and
representatives of Evercore and Akin Gump met with a
representative of Capital GPs senior management to discuss
the status of the potential transaction and to answer questions
relating to whether there existed any risks or approvals which
the CPLP Conflicts Committee had not already considered. The
representative confirmed the management teams financial
forecasts and projections and affirmed that there were no such
additional risks or approvals and no material changes in the
operations or performance of the CPLP or Crude, or other
material events or contingencies, other than as previously
disclosed.
Later on May 4, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts Committee met with
representatives of Evercore and Akin Gump to receive
Evercores updated financial analysis of the proposed
transaction. Representatives of Akin Gump reviewed the terms of
the transaction documents and the status of negotiations among
the parties. The CPLP Conflicts Committee discussed with its
legal and financial advisors the logistics of the CPLP Conflicts
Committee approval process with respect to the proposed
transaction, as well as the CPLP Board meeting that would
immediately follow the committee meeting.
54
The Crude Independent Committee reconvened on the morning of
May 5, 2011 to consider whether to recommend the proposed
transaction to the Crude Board. Representatives of Jones Day and
Jefferies were present, and drafts of the transaction documents,
including the merger agreement, and other materials prepared by
the committees advisors were distributed to the members of
the Crude Independent Committee in advance of the meeting. The
Crude Independent Committee and its advisors then discussed the
recent developments with respect to the negotiations and the
possible resolution of the terms of the merger agreement and the
related transaction documents, including the support agreement
pursuant to which Capital Maritime, CCIC and certain of their
affiliates would agree to vote in favor of the proposed
transaction. Representatives of Jefferies then discussed with
the Crude Independent Committee its financial analysis of the
1.56x exchange ratio in the proposed transaction, as more fully
described in The Proposed Transaction Opinion
of the Crude Independent Committees Financial
Advisor.
Representatives of Jefferies then delivered to the Crude
Independent Committee its opinion to the effect that, as of
May 5, 2011 and based upon and subject to various
assumptions made, procedures followed, matters considered and
limitations on the scope of the review undertaken by Jefferies
set forth in its opinion, the exchange ratio of 1.56x was fair,
from a financial point of view, to the Unaffiliated
Shareholders. Upon completion of its deliberations, all of the
members of the Crude Independent Committee who remained involved
in the evaluation of the proposal CPLP transaction
unanimously (i) determined that the merger agreement and
the transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger, are
fair and reasonable to, and in the best interests of, the
Unaffiliated Shareholders, (ii) recommended to the Crude
Board that it declare the advisability of, and approve, the
merger agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby,
including the merger, and (iii) recommended to the Crude
Board that it recommend to the Crude shareholders that they
adopt and approve the merger agreement.
Following the Crude Independent Committee meeting, the Crude
Board met to consider the proposed transaction. Representatives
of management, Sullivan & Cromwell, Jefferies and
Jones Day attended the meeting. Drafts of the transaction
documents, including the merger agreement, and other materials
prepared by the Crude Independent Committees and
Crudes advisors were distributed to the members of the
Crude Board in advance of the meeting. Mr. Christacopoulos
described the due diligence reviews undertaken, the history of
the discussions and the terms of the proposed transaction. A
representative of Jones Day reviewed the process and analyses
undertaken by the Crude Independent Committee and gave a
presentation to the Crude Board of the material terms of the
transaction documents. At the request of the Crude Independent
Committee, representatives of Jefferies informed the Board that
it had discussed with the Crude Independent Committee its
financial analysis and that it had delivered to the Crude
Independent Committee its opinion as described above. The Crude
Independent Committee reported to the Crude Board its
recommendation as described above.
The Crude Board, based in part on the recommendation of the
Crude Independent Committee:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
determined that the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, including the merger, are fair and
reasonable to, and in the best interests of, Crude and its
shareholders, including the Unaffiliated Shareholders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
adopted and approved the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, including the merger; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
resolved to recommend to the Crude shareholders that they
approve the merger agreement and the transactions contemplated
thereby, including the merger.
|
On the morning of May 5, 2011, the CPLP Conflicts
Committee, with representatives of Evercore and Akin Gump in
attendance, met to review and consider the proposed transaction.
Evercore presented a summary of the updated financial analysis
of the proposed transaction that was previously presented to the
committee.
Later on May 5, 2011, the CPLP Board determined, by
unanimous vote, that the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, are fair and reasonable to, and in the
best interests of, CPLP and its unitholders and approved the
merger agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby.
55
Early in the morning of May 5, 2011 (New York time), the
parties executed the transaction documents. Thereafter, CPLP
published its financial results for the first quarter of fiscal
year 2011, and Crude and CPLP issued a joint press release
announcing the execution of the merger agreement.
Recommendation
of the Crude Independent Committee and the Crude Board;
Crudes Reasons for the Proposed Transaction
The Crude
Independent Committee
On February 3, 2011, following the receipt by the Crude
Independent Committee of the Initial Proposal from the CPLP
Conflicts Committee, the Crude Board, after considering, among
other factors, the relationships among Capital Maritime, CCIC,
Mr. Marinakis and their affiliates, authorized the Crude
Independent Committee to review the transactions proposed by the
CPLP Conflicts Committee and alternatives thereto, and to
evaluate, negotiate and make recommendations to the Crude Board
in connection with the proposed transaction. The Crude
Independent Committee, with the advice and assistance of its
independent legal and financial advisors, evaluated and
negotiated the transaction, including the terms and conditions
of the merger agreement and the related agreements, with the
CPLP Conflicts Committee. Following the negotiations, the Crude
Independent Committee (i) determined that the transactions
contemplated by the merger agreement are fair and reasonable to,
and in the best interests of the, Unaffiliated Shareholders,
(ii) recommended to the Crude Board that it declare the
advisability of, and approve, the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger, and
(iii) recommended to the Crude Board that it recommend to the
Crude shareholders that they adopt and approve the merger
agreement.
In the course of reaching its determination and making the
recommendation described above, the Crude Independent Committee
considered a number of factors and a substantial amount of
information, including at 16 meetings and substantial additional
discussions in between such meetings with its independent legal
and financial advisors. The principal factors and benefits that
the Crude Independent Committee believes support its conclusion
are set forth below.
Positive
Factors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The enhanced liquidity and greater cash flows of the combined
company, which are expected to allow the combined company to
maintain, and potentially further grow, its distributions to the
combined companys unitholders, including former Crude
shareholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The combined companys enhanced ability to provide earnings
and cash flow stability while also having greater potential to
benefit from stronger crude and product tanker rates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that the exchange ratio in the proposed transaction was
determined based on the net asset values of Crude and CPLP and
the dollar value of the exchange ratio represented an
approximately 35% premium to Crudes share price on
May 4, 2011 and an approximately 2.9% premium to
Crudes net asset value per share.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The combined companys improved balance sheet, financial
flexibility and size, potentially improving its access to debt
and equity capital markets and better enabling it to pursue
growth opportunities while maintaining, and potentially further
growing, its contemplated cash distribution target of $0.93 per
unit annually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Crude Independent Committees conclusion that the terms
reflected by the exchange ratio and contained in the merger
agreement represent the best economic terms that could be
obtained from CPLP and would result in an approximately 35% pro
forma ownership interest in CPLPs assets by current
Unaffiliated Shareholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The analyses and opinion of Jefferies, dated May 5, 2011,
to the effect that, as of that date, and based upon and subject
to the assumptions made, procedures followed, matters considered
and limitations on the scope of the review undertaken by
Jefferies set forth in its opinion, the Crude exchange ratio was
fair, from a financial point of view, to the Unaffiliated
Shareholders, as more fully described in the
|
56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
section captioned The Proposed Transaction
Opinion of the Crude Independent Committees Financial
Advisor beginning on page 60.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that the consideration to be paid to Crude shareholders
was consistent with recent comparable transactions in the
industry, thereby reinforcing the view that the merger
consideration was appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Crude Independent Committees view that the merger is
more favorable to the Unaffiliated Shareholders than the
possible alternatives to the merger, including continuing to
operate Crude as an independent publicly traded company in light
of the limitations that Crude could face as a result of its
capital structure, including its debt amortization obligations,
or pursuing alternative transactions in light of CCICs
intention, as conveyed to the Crude Independent Committee by the
Crude Board, that it did not expect to support any reasonably
foreseeable transaction with a third party other than CPLP, and
the uncertainties surrounding the availability of future equity
or debt financing in light of the current state of the tanker
market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that the combined company will have substantially
larger, and more diversified, fleet of modern high specification
vessels, comprised of two VLCCs, four Suezmaxes, 18 MR Product
tankers, two smaller product tankers and one Capesize dry cargo
vessel, with an average age (weighted by dwt) of 3.2 years,
making it the youngest fleet among U.S. listed tanker
companies as of May 5, 2011, and which will have a presence
in both the crude oil and the petroleum product segments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The potential positive effects of the proposed transaction on
existing businesses and customer relationships of the combined
companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The terms and conditions of the merger agreement, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the merger consideration and the exchange ratio payable to Crude
shareholders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the condition to consummation of the proposed transaction that
the merger be approved by at least a majority of its
Unaffiliated Shareholders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the limitations on the interim business operations of Crude and
CPLP and the conditions to consummation of the proposed
transaction;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the terms regarding third party proposals and termination
(including the potential reimbursement by CPLP of expenses in
specified circumstances); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the requirement to amend certain provisions in the CPLP
Partnership Agreement to cause the designation of a Crude
Independent Committee member to the CPLP Board and to harmonize
the rights of unitholders of the combined entity to that of the
shareholders of Crude.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that the exchange ratio was fixed and therefore the
value of the consideration payable to Crude shareholders would
increase in the event that the unit price of CPLP increased
prior to closing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The structuring of the merger to qualify as a
reorganization within the meaning of
Section 368(a) of the Code, as in the event of
qualification, holders of Crude common stock will generally not
recognize gain or loss for United States federal income tax
purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The relative market capitalization of Crude and CPLP and the
expected capital structure of the combined company following the
proposed transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that CPLP unitholders receive Form 1099s and CPLP
and Crude are both treated as corporations for United States
federal income tax purposes, so Crude shareholders tax
position would not change.
|
Negative
Factors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that the exchange ratio was fixed and therefore the
value of the consideration payable to Crude shareholders would
decrease in the event that the unit price of CPLP decreased
prior to closing.
|
57
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that Crude shareholders will not be entitled to
appraisal rights under the merger agreement or Marshall Islands
law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The ownership by CCIC of 100% of the issued and outstanding
shares of Crude Class B stock and by Mr. Marinakis of
approximately 1% of Crudes outstanding common stock,
representing approximately 49% of the voting power of all shares
of outstanding Crude Class B stock and Crude common stock, taken
together, which could negatively impact the interest of third
parties in making alternative proposals that could be more
favorable for Crude than the transactions contemplated by the
merger agreement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fact that the Crude Independent Committee did not solicit
alternative proposals prior to executing the merger agreement
(because no alternative proposals were likely to be obtained or,
if obtained, successfully concluded) in light of CCICs
stated unwillingness to approve a transaction with a third party
other than CPLP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The risks and costs associated with the proposed transaction not
being completed in a timely manner or at all, even if approved
by Crudes shareholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The risks and costs associated with diverting management and
employee attention and resources for an extended period of time
from other strategic opportunities and operational matters while
working to implement the proposed transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The potential adverse effects of the proposed transaction on
existing business and customer relationships.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Potential litigation arising from the merger agreement or the
proposed transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The substantial transactional costs and expenses expected to be
incurred by Crude, as well as by CPLP, in connection with the
proposed transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under the terms of the merger agreement, (i) Crude may not
solicit other takeover proposals and (ii) Crude, in certain
circumstances, may be required to pay CPLP a $9.0 million
termination fee (representing 2.2% of the estimated transaction
value), less previously paid expenses, if the merger agreement
is terminated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restrictions under the merger agreement on the conduct of
Crudes business and its ability to pursue other strategic
opportunities prior to the completion of the proposed
transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The risk that, while the merger is expected to be completed,
there can be no assurance that all conditions to the
parties obligations to consummate the merger will be
satisfied, and, as a result, it is possible that the merger may
not be completed even if approved by Crudes shareholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risks relating to the overall economy, and more particularly the
crude tanker shipping market, which has deteriorated in recent
years and which may not recover. See the related risks described
under the section captioned Risk Factors beginning
on page 22.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The risk that the combined company will be unable to refinance
Crudes debt in a timely fashion, on acceptable terms, or
at all. See the related risks described under the section
captioned Risk Factors beginning on page 22.
|
The Crude Independent Committee believes that sufficient
safeguards were and are present to ensure the procedural
fairness of the transaction and to permit the Crude Independent
Committee to represent effectively the interests of the
Unaffiliated Shareholders. These procedural safeguards include
the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arms Length Negotiations.
The Crude
Independent Committee engaged in arms length negotiations,
with the assistance of independent legal and financial advisors,
with the CPLP Conflicts Committee and its independent legal and
financial advisors regarding the merger consideration and the
other terms of the transaction and the merger agreement, which
the Crude Independent Committee believes resulted in the
transactions terms being more beneficial to the
Unaffiliated Shareholders.
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Committee Authority.
The Crude Independent
Committee had the exclusive authority to negotiate the terms of
the transaction on behalf of Crude, had no obligation to
recommend the approval of the transaction and had the power to
reject the proposed the transaction on behalf of Crude.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Required Vote of Unaffiliated
Shareholders.
The merger agreement requires, as a
condition to the consummation of the transaction, that the
merger be approved by the holders of a majority of the
outstanding shares of Crude common stock held by the
Unaffiliated Shareholders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advisors.
The Crude Independent Committee
received the advice and assistance of Jones Day, as its
independent legal advisor, and Jefferies, as its independent
financial advisor, which the Crude Independent Committee
determined had no relationships that would compromise their
independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interests of the Committee.
All four members
of the Crude Independent Committee, including the three members
who participated in the deliberations regarding, and negotiated
the terms of, the proposed transaction are independent Crude
directors who are not affiliated with Capital Maritime, CCIC or
any of their affiliates and are not employees of Crude or any of
its affiliates. Other than the receipt of Crude board and
committee fees and reimbursement of expenses, which are not
contingent upon the consummation of the transaction or the Crude
Independent Committees recommendation of the transaction,
their indemnification and liability insurance rights under the
merger agreement and the lapsing of transfer restrictions and
forfeiture provisions with respect to restricted shares or
options to purchase Crude common stock held by members of the
Crude Independent Committee (other than the member who will be
designated to the CPLP Board pursuant to the merger agreement)
immediately prior to the merger, members of the Crude
Independent Committee do not have an interest in the transaction
different from that of Crude shareholders generally, including
the Unaffiliated Shareholders. While the merger agreement
provides that one member of the Crude Independent Committee will
be designated as an independent director of the combined company
following the completion of the transaction, the Crude
Independent Committee was not aware prior to acting on the
proposed transaction that such designation would occur.
Furthermore, no decision had been made at that time as to which
member of the Crude Independent Committee would be so designated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recommendation Changes and Termination.
Under
the terms of the merger agreement, the Crude Board, acting
through or consistent with the recommendation of the Crude
Independent Committee, may withdraw, modify or qualify its
recommendation, or terminate the merger agreement, in certain
circumstances as more fully described under The Merger
Agreement Acquisition Proposals and a Company Change
in Recommendation.
|
The above discussion is not exhaustive, but it addresses the
material factors considered by the Crude Independent Committee
in connection with the proposed transaction. In view of the
variety of factors and the amount of information considered, as
well as the complexity of that information, the Crude
Independent Committee does not find it practicable to, and did
not, quantify, rank or otherwise assign relative weights to the
specific factors it considered in reaching its decision. In
addition, individual members of the Crude Independent Committee
may have given different weight to different factors. This
explanation of the Crude Independent Committees reasoning,
and all other information presented in this section, is
forward-looking in nature and, therefore, should be read in
light of the factors discussed under the section captioned
Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
beginning on page 37.
The Crude
Board of Directors
The Crude Board met on May 5, 2011 to consider the merger
agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby. On the
basis of the Crude Independent Committees recommendations
and the other factors described below, the Crude Board, among
other things, (i) determined that the merger agreement and
the transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger, are
fair and reasonable to, and in the best interests of, Crude and
its shareholders, including the Unaffiliated Shareholders,
(ii) adopted and approved the merger agreement and the
transactions contemplated thereby, including the merger and
(iii) resolved to recommend to the Crude shareholders that
they approve the merger agreement and the transactions
contemplated thereby, including the merger. See The
Proposed Transaction Background of the Proposed
Transaction.
59
In determining that the merger agreement and the merger are fair
and reasonable to, and in the best interests of Crude and its
shareholders, including the Unaffiliated Shareholders, the Crude
Board considered:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the unanimous determination and recommendation of the Crude
Independent Committee; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the factors considered by the Crude Independent Committee as
described in The Proposed Transaction
Recommendation of the Crude Independent Committee and the Crude
Board of Directors; Crudes Reasons for the Proposed
Transaction The Crude Independent Committee,
including the positive factors and potential benefits of the
merger agreement and the merger, the risks and potentially
negative factors relating to the merger agreement and the merger
and the factors relating to procedural safeguards.
|
The above discussion is not exhaustive, but it addresses the
material factors considered by the Crude Board in connection
with the proposed transaction. In view of the variety of factors
and the amount of information considered, as well as the
complexity of that information, the Crude Board does not find it
practicable to, and did not, quantify, rank or otherwise assign
relative weights to the specific factors it considered in
reaching its decision. The Crude Board discussed the factors
described above and asked questions of Crudes management
and its advisors. This determination was made after the Crude
Board considered all of the factors as a whole. In addition,
individual members of the Crude Board may have given different
weight to different factors. This explanation of the Crude
Boards reasoning, and all other information presented in
this section, is forward-looking in nature and, therefore,
should be read in light of the factors discussed under the
section captioned Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking
Statements beginning on page 37.
Based in part on the recommendation of the Crude Independent
Committee, the Crude Board, by the unanimous vote of the
directors, recommends that Crudes shareholders vote
FOR
the approval of the proposal to adopt the
merger agreement and to approve the merger.
Opinion
of the Crude Independent Committees Financial
Advisor
The Crude Independent Committee retained Jefferies to act as its
financial advisor in connection with the merger and to render to
the Crude Independent Committee an opinion as to the fairness of
the Crude exchange ratio to the Unaffiliated Shareholders. At
the meeting of the Crude Independent Committee on May 5,
2011, Jefferies rendered its opinion to the Crude Independent
Committee to the effect that, as of that date, and based upon
and subject to the assumptions made, procedures followed,
matters considered and limitations on the scope of the review
undertaken by Jefferies set forth in its opinion, the Crude
exchange ratio was fair, from a financial point of view, to the
Unaffiliated Shareholders.
The full text of the written opinion of Jefferies, dated as
of May 5, 2011, is attached hereto as
Appendix B
. The opinion sets forth, among other
things, the assumptions made, procedures followed, matters
considered and limitations on the scope of the review undertaken
by Jefferies in rendering its opinion. Crude encourages its
shareholders to read the opinion carefully and in its entirety.
Jefferies opinion is directed to the Crude Independent
Committee and addresses only the fairness, from a financial
point of view and as of the date of the opinion, of the Crude
exchange ratio to the Unaffiliated Shareholders. It does not
address any other aspects of the merger and does not constitute
a recommendation as to how any holder of Crude common stock or
Crude Class B stock should vote on the merger or any matter
related thereto. The summary of the opinion of Jefferies set
forth below is qualified in its entirety by reference to the
full text of the opinion.
In arriving at its opinion, Jefferies, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reviewed the merger agreement;
|
|
|
|
|
|
reviewed certain publicly available financial and other
information about Crude and CPLP;
|
|
|
|
|
|
reviewed certain information furnished to Jefferies by the
managements of Crude and CPLP, including financial forecasts and
analyses, relating to the business, operations and prospects of
Crude and CPLP, respectively;
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
held discussions with members of senior managements of Crude and
CPLP concerning the matters described in the prior two bullets;
|
|
|
|
|
|
reviewed the share trading price history and valuation multiples
for the Crude common stock and the CPLP common units and
compared them with those of certain publicly traded companies
that Jefferies deemed relevant;
|
|
|
|
|
|
compared the proposed financial terms of the merger with the
financial terms of certain other transactions that Jefferies
deemed relevant;
|
|
|
|
|
|
reviewed the relative financial contributions of Crude and CPLP
to the future performance of the combined company on a pro forma
basis;
|
|
|
|
|
|
reviewed certain third-party appraisals, each of which was as of
March 31, 2011, furnished to Jefferies by CPLP with regard
to the vessels owned by CPLP (the CPLP Appraisals),
and certain third-party appraisals, each of which was as of
March 31, 2011, furnished to Jefferies by Crude with regard
to the vessels owned by Crude (the Crude Appraisals, and
together with the CPLP Appraisals, the Appraisals);
|
|
|
|
|
|
considered the potential pro forma impact of the merger; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
conducted such other financial studies, analyses and
investigations as Jefferies deemed appropriate.
|
In Jefferies review and analysis and in rendering its
opinion, Jefferies assumed and relied upon, but did not assume
any responsibility to independently investigate or verify, the
accuracy and completeness of all financial and other information
that was supplied or otherwise made available by Crude and CPLP
to Jefferies or that was publicly available (including, without
limitation, the information described above), or that was
otherwise reviewed by Jefferies. In its review, Jefferies relied
on assurances of the managements of Crude and CPLP that they
were not aware of any facts or circumstances that would make
such information inaccurate or misleading. In its review,
Jefferies did not obtain any independent evaluation or appraisal
of any of the assets or liabilities of, nor did Jefferies
conduct a physical inspection of any of the properties or
facilities of, Crude or CPLP, nor was Jefferies furnished with
any such evaluations or appraisals, other than the Appraisals,
nor did Jefferies assume any responsibility to obtain any such
evaluations or appraisals.
With respect to the financial forecasts provided to and examined
by Jefferies, Jefferies opinion noted that projecting
future results of any company is inherently subject to
uncertainty. Crude and CPLP informed Jefferies, and Jefferies
assumed, that such financial forecasts were reasonably prepared
on bases reflecting the best currently available estimates and
good faith judgments of the managements of Crude and CPLP as to
the future financial performance of Crude and CPLP,
respectively. Jefferies expressed no opinion as to the financial
forecasts provided to Jefferies by Crude or CPLP or the
assumptions on which they are made.
Jefferies opinion was based on economic, monetary,
regulatory, market and other conditions existing and which could
be evaluated as of the date of its opinion. Jefferies expressly
disclaimed any undertaking or obligation to advise any person of
any change in any fact or matter affecting Jefferies
opinion of which Jefferies became aware after the date of its
opinion.
Jefferies made no independent investigation of any legal or
accounting matters affecting Crude or CPLP, and Jefferies
assumed the correctness in all respects material to
Jefferies analysis of all legal and accounting advice
given to Crude, the Crude Independent Committee and the Crude
Board, including, without limitation, advice as to the legal,
accounting and tax consequences of the terms of, and
transactions contemplated by, the merger agreement to Crude and
its shareholders. In addition, in preparing its opinion,
Jefferies did not take into account any tax consequences of the
merger to any holder of Crude common stock. Crude advised
Jefferies that the merger will qualify as a tax-free
reorganization for United States federal income tax purposes.
Jefferies also assumed that in the course of obtaining the
necessary regulatory or third party approvals, consents and
releases for the merger, no delay, limitation, restriction or
condition would be imposed that would have an adverse effect on
Crude, CPLP or the contemplated benefits of the merger.
61
Jefferies was not authorized to and did not solicit any
expressions of interest from any other parties with respect to
the sale of all or any part of Crude or any other alternative
transaction.
Jefferies opinion was for the use and benefit of the Crude
Independent Committee in its consideration of the merger, and
Jefferies opinion did not address the relative merits of
the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement as
compared to any alternative transaction or opportunity that
might be available to Crude, nor did it address the underlying
business decision by Crude to engage in the merger or the terms
of the merger agreement or the documents referred to therein.
Jefferies opinion did not constitute a recommendation as
to how any holder of Crude common stock or Crude Class B
stock should vote on the merger or any matter related thereto.
Jefferies was not asked to address, and its opinion did not
address, the fairness to, or any other consideration of, the
holders of any class of securities, creditors or other
constituencies of Crude, other than the holders of Crude common
stock. Jefferies expressed no opinion as to the price at which
Crude common stock or CPLP common units would trade at any time.
Furthermore, Jefferies did not express any view or opinion as to
the fairness, financial or otherwise, of the amount or nature of
any compensation payable or to be received by any of
Crudes officers, directors or employees, or any class of
such persons, in connection with the merger, whether relative to
the Crude exchange ratio or otherwise. Jefferies opinion
has been authorized by the Fairness Committee of Jefferies.
In preparing its opinion, Jefferies performed a variety of
financial and comparative analyses. The preparation of a
fairness opinion is a complex process involving various
determinations as to the most appropriate and relevant
quantitative and qualitative methods of financial analysis and
the applications of those methods to the particular
circumstances and, therefore, is not necessarily susceptible to
partial analysis or summary description. Jefferies believes that
its analyses must be considered as a whole. Considering any
portion of Jefferies analyses or the factors considered by
Jefferies, without considering all analyses and factors, could
create a misleading or incomplete view of the process underlying
the conclusion expressed in Jefferies opinion. In
addition, Jefferies may have given various analyses more or less
weight than other analyses, and may have deemed various
assumptions more or less probable than other assumptions, so
that the range of valuations resulting from any particular
analysis described below should not be taken to be
Jefferies view of Crudes or CPLPs actual
value. Accordingly, the conclusions reached by Jefferies are
based on all analyses and factors taken as a whole and also on
the application of Jefferies own experience and judgment.
In performing its analyses, Jefferies made numerous assumptions
with respect to industry performance, general business,
economic, monetary, regulatory, market and other conditions and
other matters, many of which are beyond Crudes and
Jefferies control. The analyses performed by Jefferies are
not necessarily indicative of actual values or actual future
results, which may be significantly more or less favorable than
suggested by such analyses. In addition, analyses relating to
the per share value of Crude common stock do not purport to be
appraisals or to reflect the prices at which Crude common stock
may actually be sold. The analyses performed were prepared
solely as part of Jefferies analysis of the fairness, from
a financial point of view, of the Crude exchange ratio pursuant
to the merger agreement to the Unaffiliated Shareholders, and
were provided to the Crude Independent Committee in connection
with the delivery of Jefferies opinion.
The following is a summary of the material financial and
comparative analyses performed by Jefferies in connection with
Jefferies delivery of its opinion. The financial analyses
summarized below include information presented in tabular
format. In order to fully understand Jefferies financial
analyses, the tables must be read together with the text of each
summary. The tables alone do not constitute a complete
description of the financial analyses. Considering the data
described below without considering the full narrative
description of the financial analyses, including the
methodologies and assumptions underlying the analyses, could
create a misleading or incomplete view of Jefferies
financial analyses.
Transaction
Overview
Based upon the approximately 16.0 million shares of Crude
common stock and Crude Class B stock that were outstanding
as of May 3, 2011 on a fully diluted basis, the closing
price per CPLP common unit of $11.32 on that date and the Crude
exchange ratio of 1.56 CPLP common units per share of Crude
common stock and Crude Class B stock, Jefferies noted that
the implied value of the merger consideration pursuant to
62
the merger agreement was approximately $17.66 per share of Crude
common stock, which is referred to as the Implied Merger
Consideration Value. Based on the implied equity value of
$282.6 million, plus approximately $134.6 million in
Crude indebtedness as of June 30, 2011 (Crude
Indebtedness), less approximately $14.2 million of
Crude cash and cash equivalents as of June 30, 2011 and net
of an estimated $3.9 million dividend to be paid to the
holders of Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock in
the second quarter of 2011 (Crude Cash and Cash
Equivalents), Jefferies noted that the Crude exchange
ratio of 1.56 implied an enterprise value for Crude of
approximately $403.0 million. Jefferies also noted that the
Implied Merger Consideration Value of $17.66 per share of Crude
common stock represented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a premium of approximately 36.3% over the closing price per
share of Crude common stock on May 2, 2011,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a premium of approximately 39.8% over the closing price per
share of Crude common stock on April 26, 2011 and
|
|
|
|
|
|
a premium of approximately 16.6% over the closing price per
share of Crude common stock on April 2, 2011.
|
Crude
Analysis
Adjusted
Net Asset Value Analysis
Jefferies performed an adjusted net asset value, or NAV,
analysis for Crude based on the asset valuations set forth in
the Crude Appraisals totaling approximately $386 million
and $402 million, respectively, for the vessels comprising
Crudes fleet. In performing such analysis, such asset
valuations were adjusted, to the extent applicable where the
charter governing the use of a vessel does not provide for its
use at spot market rates, to reflect estimated cash flows over
the life of the vessels charter based on forward rates
provided by an internationally recognized ship valuation
company; however, no such adjustments were required to be made
for Crude. Jefferies derived the midpoint of such asset
valuations and subtracted Crude Indebtedness and added Crude
Cash and Cash Equivalents to determine an adjusted NAV for Crude
of approximately $273.5 million (the Crude Adjusted
NAV). This analysis indicated a range, based on the asset
valuations contained in such appraisals, of implied values per
share of Crude common stock, on a fully diluted basis, of $16.58
to $17.60, compared to the Implied Merger Consideration Value of
$17.66.
Selected
Public Company Analysis
Using publicly available information, financial forecasts and
other information provided by Crudes management, Jefferies
analyzed the trading multiples of Crude and the corresponding
trading multiples of the following publicly traded companies, in
each case as of May 3, 2011, with similar assets and
vessels and similar operating and financial characteristics,
which are referred to as the Selected Public
Companies:
Normal
Corporate Wet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General Maritime Corporation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Navios Maritime Acquisition Corporation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overseas Shipholding Group, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scorpio Tankers Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teekay Corporation
|
|
|
|
|
|
TORM A/S
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tsakos Energy Navigation Limited
|
Yield-Oriented
Wet
63
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frontline Ltd.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nordic American Tanker Shipping Limited
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teekay Tankers Ltd.
|
Yield-Oriented
MLP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Golar LNG Partners L.P.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Midstream Partners L.P.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Navios Maritime Partners L.P.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teekay LNG Partners L.P.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teekay Offshore Partners L.P.
|
In its analysis, Jefferies derived and compared multiples or
percentages, as the case may be, for Crude and the Selected
Public Companies, calculated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the total enterprise value divided by estimated earnings before
interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, or EBITDA, for
calendar year 2011, which is referred to as Enterprise
Value/2011E EBITDA;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the total enterprise value divided by estimated EBITDA for
calendar year 2012, which is referred to as Enterprise
Value/2012E EBITDA; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
where estimated adjusted net asset values were available, the
price per share divided by the adjusted net asset value per
share, which is referred to as Price/Adjusted NAV.
|
This analysis indicated the following:
Selected
Public Company Multiples and Percentages
Normal Corporate Wet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Mean
|
|
|
Median
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA
|
|
|
22.6
|
x
|
|
|
10.0
|
x
|
|
|
14.9
|
x
|
|
|
14.1
|
x
|
|
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA
|
|
|
12.4
|
x
|
|
|
7.8
|
x
|
|
|
10.1
|
x
|
|
|
9.9
|
x
|
|
Price/Adjusted NAV
|
|
|
234.1
|
%
|
|
|
50.9
|
%
|
|
|
122.2
|
%
|
|
|
102.0
|
%
|
Selected
Company Multiples and Percentages
Yield-Oriented Wet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Mean
|
|
|
Median
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA
|
|
|
15.7
|
x
|
|
|
8.7
|
x
|
|
|
11.3
|
x
|
|
|
10.4
|
x
|
|
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA
|
|
|
11.3
|
x
|
|
|
8.1
|
x
|
|
|
9.7
|
x
|
|
|
9.7
|
x
|
|
Price/Adjusted NAV
|
|
|
162.2
|
%
|
|
|
120.2
|
%
|
|
|
148.0
|
%
|
|
|
161.7
|
%
|
Selected
Company Multiples and Percentages
Yield-Oriented MLP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Mean
|
|
|
Median
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA
|
|
|
12.9
|
x
|
|
|
8.3
|
x
|
|
|
10.8
|
x
|
|
|
11.0
|
x
|
|
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA
|
|
|
12.0
|
x
|
|
|
7.9
|
x
|
|
|
10.4
|
x
|
|
|
10.1
|
x
|
|
Price/Adjusted NAV
|
|
|
197.7
|
%
|
|
|
197.7
|
%
|
|
|
197.7
|
%
|
|
|
197.7
|
%
|
64
Using the reference ranges for Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA and
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA set forth below and Crudes
estimated EBITDA for 2011 and 2012 (based on managements
projections), Jefferies determined implied total enterprise
values for Crude, then subtracted Crude Indebtedness and added
Crude Cash and Cash Equivalents to determine implied equity
values. Using the reference ranges for Price/Adjusted NAV set
forth below and the Crude Adjusted NAV, Jefferies determined
implied equity values for Crude. These analyses indicated the
ranges of implied values per share of Crude common stock, on a
fully diluted basis, set forth opposite the relevant benchmarks
below, compared, in each case, to the Implied Merger
Consideration Value of $17.66:
Selected
Public Company Reference Ranges and Implied Price
Ranges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implied Price
|
|
|
Benchmark
|
|
Reference Range
|
|
|
Range
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA
|
|
|
10.5x - 19.0
|
x
|
|
$
|
6.34 - $17.57
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA
|
|
|
8.5x - 12.0
|
x
|
|
$
|
7.36 - $13.49
|
|
|
Price/Adjusted NAV
|
|
|
90.0% - 110.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
15.38 - $18.79
|
|
No company utilized in the selected public company analysis is
identical to Crude. In evaluating the Selected Public Companies,
Jefferies made judgments and assumptions with regard to industry
performance, general business, economic, market and financial
conditions and other matters, many of which are beyond
Crudes and Jefferies control. Mathematical analysis,
such as determining the mean and median, is not in itself a
meaningful method of using comparable company data.
Precedent
Transactions Analysis
Using publicly available information, Jefferies examined the
following five transactions, announced since September 2006,
involving companies in the maritime transportation and related
industries. The transactions considered and the month and year
each transaction was announced were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date Announced
|
|
Acquiror
|
|
Target
|
|
|
|
August 5, 2008
|
|
General Maritime Corporation
|
|
Arlington Tankers Limited
|
|
February 29, 2008
|
|
Excel Maritime Carriers Ltd.
|
|
Quintana Maritime Limited
|
|
July 30, 2007
|
|
Bear Stearns Merchant Banking
|
|
MC Shipping Inc.
|
|
April 17, 2007
|
|
Teekay Corporation and TORM A/S
|
|
OMI Corporation
|
|
September 25, 2006
|
|
Overseas Shipholding Group, Inc.
|
|
Maritrans Inc.
|
Using publicly available estimates and other information for
each of these transactions, Jefferies reviewed the implied
enterprise value as a multiple of the target companys
EBITDA for the last 12 months as of the announcement date
of such transaction, or LTM EBITDA, which is referred to as
Enterprise Value/LTM EBITDA.
This analysis indicated the following:
Precedent
Transactions Multiples
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Mean
|
|
|
Median
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/LTM EBITDA
|
|
|
13.8
|
x
|
|
|
7.3
|
x
|
|
|
10.1
|
x
|
|
|
10.2x
|
|
Using a reference range of 7.5x 11.5x Enterprise
Value/LTM EBITDA and Crudes projected LTM EBITDA as of
June 30, 2011, Jefferies determined implied enterprise
values for Crude, then subtracted indebtedness and added cash
and cash equivalents to determine implied equity values. This
analysis indicated
65
a range of implied values per share of Crude common stock, on a
fully diluted basis, of $3.05 $8.69, compared to the
Implied Merger Consideration Value of $17.66.
No transaction utilized as a comparison in the precedent
transaction analysis is identical to the merger. In evaluating
the merger, Jefferies made numerous judgments and assumptions
with regard to industry performance, general business, economic,
market, and financial conditions and other matters, many of
which are beyond Crudes and Jefferies control.
Mathematical analysis, such as determining the mean and median,
is not in itself a meaningful method of using comparable
transaction data.
Premiums
Paid Analysis
Using publicly available information, Jefferies analyzed the
premiums offered in completed transactions announced from
January 1, 2008 to May 3, 2011 having transaction
values between $100 million and $1 billion involving
all industries other than the real estate and financial
industries.
For each of these transactions, Jefferies calculated the premium
represented by the offer price over the target companys
closing share price one day, one week and one month prior to the
transactions announcement. This analysis indicated the
following premiums for those time periods prior to announcement:
Premiums
Paid Percentages
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75th
|
|
|
|
|
|
25th
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time Period Prior to Announcement
|
|
High
|
|
|
Percentile
|
|
|
Median
|
|
|
Percentile
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
|
|
1 day
|
|
|
207.1
|
%
|
|
|
39.6
|
%
|
|
|
25.3
|
%
|
|
|
11.8
|
%
|
|
|
(4.1
|
%)
|
|
1 week
|
|
|
298.7
|
%
|
|
|
47.3
|
%
|
|
|
29.5
|
%
|
|
|
13.0
|
%
|
|
|
(7.4
|
%)
|
|
1 month
|
|
|
353.5
|
%
|
|
|
50.9
|
%
|
|
|
33.3
|
%
|
|
|
15.7
|
%
|
|
|
(4.4
|
%)
|
Using a reference range based on the 25th percentile to the 75th
percentile of the premiums set forth above for the one day, one
week and one month prior to May 3, 2011, Jefferies
performed a premiums paid analysis using the closing prices of
shares of Crude common stock for the periods one day, one week
and one month prior to May 3, 2011. These analyses
indicated a range of implied values per share of Crude common
stock of $14.27 to $22.85, compared to the Implied Merger
Consideration Value of $17.66.
CPLP
Analysis
Adjusted
NAV Analysis
Jefferies performed an adjusted NAV analysis for CPLP based on
the asset valuations set forth in the CPLP Appraisals, adjusted
as described below, which adjusted asset valuations totaled
approximately $801 million and $874 million,
respectively, for the vessels comprising CPLPs fleet and
the Cape Agamemnon. In performing such analysis, such asset
valuations were adjusted, to the extent applicable where a
vessels charter does not provide for its use at spot
market rates, to reflect estimated cash flows over the life of
the vessels charter based on forward rates provided by an
internationally recognized ship valuation company. Jefferies
derived the midpoint of such adjusted asset valuations and
subtracted indebtedness as of June 30, 2011 and pro forma
for the acquisition of the Cape Agamemnon (CPLP
Indebtedness) and added cash and cash equivalents as of
June 30, 2011 and pro forma for the acquisition of the Cape
Agamemnon and net of distributions for the second quarter of
2011 (CPLP Cash and Cash Equivalents) to determine
an adjusted NAV for CPLP of approximately $382.1 million
(the CPLP Adjusted NAV). This analysis indicated a
range of implied values per CPLP common unit, on a fully diluted
basis (including fully diluted units outstanding pro forma for
CPLPs acquisition of the Cape Agamemnon), of $7.56 to
$9.16, compared to the closing price per CPLP common unit on
May 3, 2011 of $11.32.
Selected
Public Company Analysis
Using publicly available information and financial forecasts and
other information provided to the financial advisors, Jefferies
analyzed the trading multiples of CPLP and the corresponding
trading multiples of
66
the Selected Public Companies. In its analysis, Jefferies
derived and compared multiples for CPLP and the Selected Public
Companies, calculated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the estimated dividend yield for calendar year 2011, which is
referred to as 2011E Dividend Yield; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the estimated dividend yield for calendar year 2012, which is
referred to as 2012E Dividend Yield.
|
This analysis indicated the following:
Selected
Public Company Multiples and Percentages
Normal Corporate Wet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Mean
|
|
|
Median
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA
|
|
|
22.6
|
x
|
|
|
10.0
|
x
|
|
|
14.9
|
x
|
|
|
14.1
|
x
|
|
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA
|
|
|
12.4
|
x
|
|
|
7.8
|
x
|
|
|
10.1
|
x
|
|
|
9.9
|
x
|
|
2011E Dividend Yield
|
|
|
6.2
|
%
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
|
|
3.7
|
%
|
|
2012E Dividend Yield
|
|
|
6.2
|
%
|
|
|
0.0
|
%
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
|
|
2.5
|
%
|
Selected
Public Company Multiples and Percentages
Yield-Oriented Wet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Mean
|
|
|
Median
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA
|
|
|
15.7
|
x
|
|
|
8.7
|
x
|
|
|
11.3
|
x
|
|
|
10.4
|
x
|
|
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA
|
|
|
11.3
|
x
|
|
|
8.1
|
x
|
|
|
9.7
|
x
|
|
|
9.7
|
x
|
|
2011E Dividend Yield
|
|
|
11.0
|
%
|
|
|
3.3
|
%
|
|
|
7.3
|
%
|
|
|
7.4
|
%
|
|
2012E Dividend Yield
|
|
|
10.1
|
%
|
|
|
5.2
|
%
|
|
|
8.1
|
%
|
|
|
8.6
|
%
|
Selected
Public Company Multiples and Percentages
Yield-Oriented MLP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benchmark
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Mean
|
|
|
Median
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA
|
|
|
12.9
|
x
|
|
|
8.3
|
x
|
|
|
10.8
|
x
|
|
|
11.0
|
x
|
|
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA
|
|
|
12.0
|
x
|
|
|
7.9
|
x
|
|
|
10.4
|
x
|
|
|
10.1
|
x
|
|
2011E Dividend Yield
|
|
|
8.4
|
%
|
|
|
5.7
|
%
|
|
|
7.0
|
%
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
|
2012E Dividend Yield
|
|
|
8.8
|
%
|
|
|
5.7
|
%
|
|
|
7.4
|
%
|
|
|
7.1
|
%
|
Using the reference ranges for Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA and
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA set forth below and estimated
EBITDA of CPLP for 2011 (including a full year contribution from
the Cape Agamemnon acquisition) and 2012, Jefferies determined
implied total enterprise values for CPLP, then subtracted CPLP
Indebtedness and added CPLP Cash and Cash equivalents to
determine implied equity values. Using the reference ranges for
2011E Dividend Yield and 2012E Dividend Yield set forth below
and CPLPs projected distributions for 2011 and 2012,
Jefferies determined implied equity values per CPLP common
units. These analyses indicated the ranges of implied values per
CPLP common unit, on a fully diluted basis (including fully
diluted units outstanding pro forma for CPLPs acquisition
of the Cape Agamemnon), set forth
67
opposite the relevant benchmarks below, compared, in each case,
to the closing price per CPLP common unit on May 3, 2011 of
$11.32:
Selected
Public Company Reference Ranges and Implied Price
Ranges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reference
|
|
|
Implied Price
|
|
|
Benchmark
|
|
Range
|
|
|
Range
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA
|
|
|
8.5x - 12.0
|
x
|
|
$
|
6.72 - $13.60
|
|
|
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA
|
|
|
8.0x - 11.5
|
x
|
|
$
|
5.30 - $11.97
|
|
|
2011E Dividend Yield
|
|
|
6.5% - 8.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
11.63 - $14.31
|
|
|
2012E Dividend Yield
|
|
|
7.0% - 8.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
10.94 - $13.29
|
|
No company utilized in the selected public company analysis is
identical to CPLP. In evaluating the selected companies,
Jefferies made judgments and assumptions with regard to industry
performance, general business, economic, market and financial
conditions and other matters, many of which are beyond
CPLPs and Jefferies control. Mathematical analysis,
such as determining the mean and median, is not in itself a
meaningful method of using comparable company data.
Implied
Exchange Ratio Analysis
Adjusted
NAV Analysis
Using the range of implied per share equity values for Crude of
$16.58 to $17.60 and the range of implied per unit equity values
for CPLP of $7.56 to $9.16 based on the adjusted NAV analysis
for each company on a standalone basis as described above,
Jefferies calculated implied exchange ratios by
(i) dividing the lowest implied value per share of Crude
common stock by the highest implied value per CPLP common unit
to arrive at the low end of the implied exchange ratio range and
(ii) dividing the highest implied value per share of Crude
common stock by the lowest implied value per CPLP common unit to
arrive at the high end of the implied exchange ratio range. This
analysis indicated a range of implied exchange ratios of 1.81 to
2.33, compared to the Crude exchange ratio set forth in the
merger agreement of 1.56.
Selected
Public Company Analysis
Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA.
Using
the range of implied per share equity values for Crude of $6.34
to $17.57 and the range of implied per unit equity values for
CPLP of $6.72 to $13.60 based on the Enterprise Value/2011E
EBITDA metric of the selected public company analysis for each
company on a standalone basis as described above, Jefferies
calculated implied exchange ratios by (i) dividing the
lowest implied value per share of Crude common stock by the
highest implied value per CPLP common unit to arrive at the low
end of the implied exchange ratio range and (ii) dividing
the highest implied value per share of Crude common stock by the
lowest implied value per CPLP common unit to arrive at the high
end of the implied exchange ratio range. This analysis indicated
a range of implied exchange ratios of 0.47 to 2.61, compared to
the Crude exchange ratio set forth in the merger agreement of
1.56.
Enterprise Value/2012E EBITDA.
Using
the range of implied per share equity values for Crude of $7.36
to $13.49 and the range of per unit implied equity values for
CPLP of $5.30 to $11.97 based on the Enterprise Value/2012E
EBITDA metric of the selected public company analysis for each
company on a standalone basis as described above, Jefferies
calculated implied exchange ratios by (i) dividing the
lowest implied value per share of Crude common stock by the
highest implied value per CPLP common unit to arrive at the low
end of the implied exchange ratio range and (ii) dividing
the highest implied value per share of Crude common stock by the
lowest implied value per CPLP common unit to arrive at the high
end of the implied exchange ratio range. This analysis indicated
a range of implied exchange ratios of 0.61 to 2.55, compared to
the Crude exchange ratio set forth in the merger agreement of
1.56.
68
Precedent
Transaction Analysis
Using the range of implied per share equity values for Crude of
$3.05 to $8.69 based on the precedent transaction analysis for
Crude on a standalone basis as described above, and the range of
implied per unit equity values for CPLP of $6.72 to $13.60 based
on the Enterprise Value/2011E EBITDA metric of the selected
public company analysis for CPLP on a standalone basis as
described above, Jefferies calculated implied exchange ratios by
(i) dividing the lowest implied value per share of Crude
common stock by the highest implied value per CPLP common unit
to arrive at the low end of the implied exchange ratio range and
(ii) dividing the highest implied value per share of Crude
common stock by the lowest implied value per CPLP common unit to
arrive at the high end of the implied exchange ratio range. This
analysis indicated a range of implied exchange ratios of 0.22 to
1.29, compared to the Crude exchange ratio set forth in the
merger agreement of 1.56.
Implied
Historical Exchange Ratio Analysis
Based on the daily closing price per share of Crude common stock
and CPLP common unit on May 3, 2011 and using the various
time periods set forth below ending on that date, Jefferies
calculated a range of implied historical exchange ratios by
dividing the daily closing price per CPLP common unit by the
daily closing price per share of Crude common stock. This
analysis indicated the following implied historical exchange
ratios, compared, in each case, to the Crude exchange ratio set
forth in the merger agreement of 1.56:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
Implied Exchange Ratio
|
|
|
|
|
May 3, 2011
|
|
|
1.1449
|
|
|
30-day
average
|
|
|
1.2586
|
|
|
60-day
average
|
|
|
1.3980
|
|
|
90-day
average
|
|
|
1.4376
|
|
|
120-day
average
|
|
|
1.4922
|
|
|
1-year
average
|
|
|
1.8654
|
|
|
1-year
high
|
|
|
2.2606
|
|
|
1-year
low
|
|
|
1.1091
|
|
Pro
Forma Relative Contribution Analysis
Based on information provided by the management of each of Crude
and CPLP, Jefferies compared the standalone contribution of each
of Crude and CPLP to projected EBITDA and operating cash flow,
calculated as EBITDA less net interest expense, for fiscal years
2011, 2012 and 2013 and adjusted NAV for the combined company,
as determined by combining the Crude Adjusted NAV and the CPLP
Adjusted NAV. Jefferies derived implied ownership of the
combined company by holders of Crude common stock and Crude
Class B stock and holders of CPLP common units for each
metric based on the relative contributions to each metric for
the combined company by each of Crude and CPLP, after, for
EBITDA calculations, subtracting Crude Indebtedness and CPLP
Indebtedness, as applicable. This analysis indicated implied
ownership as follows, compared,
69
in each case, to the implied actual ownership percentages of
Crude stockholders and CPLP unitholders of 35.1% and 64.9%,
respectively, based on the Crude exchange ratio set forth in the
merger agreement of 1.56:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implied Ownership
|
|
|
Metric
|
|
(Crude / CPLP)
|
|
|
|
|
2011E EBITDA(1)
|
|
|
17.6% / 82.4%
|
|
|
2012E EBITDA
|
|
|
27.3% / 72.7%
|
|
|
2013E EBITDA
|
|
|
32.2% / 67.8%
|
|
|
2011E Operating Cash Flow(1)
|
|
|
20.9% / 79.1%
|
|
|
2012E Operating Cash Flow
|
|
|
25.8% / 74.2%
|
|
|
2013E Operating Cash Flow
|
|
|
28.7% / 71.3%
|
|
|
Adjusted NAV
|
|
|
41.7% / 58.3%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Estimated EBITDA and estimated operating cash flow for CPLP for
2011 was adjusted to include a full year contribution from the
Cape Agamemnon acquisition.
|
Other
Factors
Using publicly available information and information provided by
the managements of CPLP and Crude, Jefferies reviewed, among
other things, the potential pro forma effect of the merger on
each of CPLPs and Crudes fiscal years 2011, 2012 and
2013 estimated distributions to holders of CPLP common units and
Crude common shares, as applicable. Based on, among other
things, an illustrative merger closing date of June 30,
2011 and assuming that Crude drydocking costs are expensed
rather than capitalized in fiscal year 2013, this analysis
indicated that the merger could, during the fiscal years
reviewed, (i) be neutral to CPLPs estimated
distributions to holders of CPLP common units and (ii) be
accretive to Crudes estimated distributions to holders of
Crude common shares.
General
Jefferies opinion was one of many factors taken into
consideration by the Crude Independent Committee in making its
determination to recommend the merger to the Crude Board and
should not be considered determinative of the views of the Crude
Independent Committee or management with respect to the merger
or the merger consideration.
Jefferies was selected by the Crude Independent Committee based
on Jefferies qualifications, expertise and reputation.
Jefferies is an internationally recognized investment banking
and advisory firm. Jefferies, as part of its investment banking
business, is regularly engaged in the valuation of businesses
and securities in connection with mergers and acquisitions,
negotiated underwritings, competitive biddings, secondary
distributions of listed and unlisted securities, private
placements, financial restructurings and other financial
services.
Jefferies maintains a market in the securities of Crude, and in
the ordinary course of business, Jefferies and its affiliates
may trade or hold securities of Crude or CPLP
and/or
their
respective affiliates for its own account and for the accounts
of its customers and, accordingly, may at any time hold long or
short positions in those securities.
Pursuant to an engagement agreement between Crude, the Crude
Independent Committee and Jefferies dated April 6, 2011,
Crude has agreed to pay Jefferies a fee for its services in the
amount of approximately $2.6 million, a portion of which
was payable upon delivery of Jefferies opinion and a
significant portion of which is payable contingent upon
consummation of the merger. In addition, Crude has agreed to
reimburse Jefferies for expenses Jefferies has incurred in
connection with rendering its services under the engagement
agreement. Crude also has agreed to indemnify Jefferies against
liabilities arising out of or in connection with the services
rendered and to be rendered by it under its engagement. In
addition, Jefferies may seek to, in the future, provide
financial advisory and financing services to Crude, CPLP or
entities that are affiliated with Crude or CPLP, for which it
would expect to receive compensation.
70
Interests
of Crudes Directors and Executive Officers in the Proposed
Transaction
There is substantial overlap of the ownership and control of
Crude and CPLP. CCIC is controlled by Evangelos M. Marinakis,
the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Crude and the
Chairman of CPLP. Mr. Marinakis also is the Chief Executive
Officer of Capital Maritime, the owner of Capital GP. In
addition, there is significant overlap between the senior
management teams of each of Crude and Capital GP. Crude
shareholders should note that some Crude directors and executive
officers have interests in the proposed transaction as directors
or officers that are different from, or in addition to, the
interests of other Crude shareholders. The Crude Board was aware
of these interests and considered them, among other matters, in
reaching its decisions to approve the merger agreement and to
recommend that Crudes shareholders vote in favor of the
approval and adoption of the merger agreement. As provided in
the merger agreement, at the completion of the proposed
transaction, the combined companys board will include one
member who is currently a member of the Crude Board, namely
Dimitris Christacopoulos. In addition, the transfer restrictions
and forfeiture provisions with respect to Crude Awards (as
defined below) held by members of the Crude Independent
Committee, other than the member to be designated to the CPLP
Board, will lapse immediately prior to the effective time of the
merger.
Indemnification
The merger agreement includes provisions relating to
indemnification and insurance for directors and officers of
CPLP. See the section captioned The Merger
Agreement Indemnification and Insurance; Rights of
Third Parties beginning on page 97.
Continuing
Board and Management Positions
At the effective time of the proposed transaction, the combined
company board of directors will consist of CPLPs current
directors and one member of the Crude Independent Committee
designated by Crude, namely Dimitris Christacopoulos. The
arrangements for Crudes executive officers will be
announced at a later time. For information about where you can
find out more about the combined companys directors and
executive officers at the effective time of the proposed
transaction, please see the section captioned Where You
Can Find More Information beginning on page 125.
Listing
of CPLP Common Units; Deregistration and Delisting of Crude
Common Stock
CPLP common units are currently listed and traded on Nasdaq
under the trading symbol CPLP. Upon consummation of
the proposed transaction, CPLP common units will continue to be
listed and traded on Nasdaq. Crude common stock is currently
listed and traded on the NYSE under the trading symbol
CRU. Upon consummation of the proposed transaction,
Crude common stock will no longer be listed or traded on the
NYSE. The Crude common stock will be delisted from the NYSE and
deregistered under the Exchange Act. Registration under the
Exchange Act may be terminated upon application to the SEC if
shares of Crude common stock are neither listed on a national
securities exchange nor held by 300 or more holders of record.
As a result of such deregistration, Crude will no longer be
required to file reports with the SEC or otherwise be subject to
the United States federal securities laws applicable to public
companies.
The shareholders of Crude will become unitholders of CPLP upon
consummation of the proposed transaction.
Distribution
and Dividend Information
Historically, CPLP has intended to pay quarterly cash
distributions of $0.3750 per common unit to the extent CPLP has
sufficient cash from operations after establishment of cash
reserves and payment of fees and expenses, including payments to
CPLPs general partner. CPLP has generally declared those
distributions in January, April, July and October of each year
and paid those distributions in the subsequent month. In January
2010 CPLP introduced an annual distribution guidance of $0.90
per annum, or $0.225 per quarter. In July 2010 CPLP revised its
annual distribution guidance to $0.93 per annum, or $0.2325 per
quarter.
71
In October 2010, CPLP declared a cash distribution of $0.2325
per unit, and paid that distribution on November 16, 2010
to unitholders of record on November 5, 2010. In January
2011, CPLP declared a cash distribution of $0.2325 per unit, and
paid that distribution on February 15, 2011 to unitholders
of record on February 4, 2011. In April 2011, CPLP declared
a cash distribution of $0.2325, and paid that distribution on
May 16, 2011 to unitholders of record on May 9, 2011.
Crudes dividend policy is to pay a variable quarterly
dividend based on its cash available for distribution, which
represents net cash flow generated by its vessels trading in the
crude tanker market during the previous quarter, less any amount
required to maintain a reserve the Crude Board determines from
time to time as appropriate for the operation and future growth
of the fleet.
In November 2010, Crude declared a cash dividend of $0.20 per
share, and paid that dividend on December 7, 2010 to
shareholders of record on November 24, 2010. In February
2011, Crude declared a cash dividend of $0.30 per share, and
paid that dividend on March 2, 2011 to shareholders of
record on February 23, 2011. In May 2011, Crude declared a
cash dividend of $0.25 per share, and paid that dividend on
June 1, 2011 to shareholders of record on May 23, 2011.
The merger agreement provides that Crude may not declare or pay
any dividends except the declaration and payment of a regular
quarterly dividend for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 and
the quarter ending June 30, 2011, in each case not in
excess of $0.25 per share of Crude common stock and Crude
Class B stock.
The Crude Board and the CPLP Board will continue to evaluate
their respective dividend and distribution policies in light of
applicable business, financial, legal and regulatory
considerations.
CPLP has a cash distribution target of $0.93 per unit. The
payment of distributions by CPLP following the merger, however,
will be subject to approval and declaration by the CPLP Board
and will depend on a variety of factors, including business,
financial, legal and regulatory considerations, including but
not limited to, vessel earnings remaining at current levels or
improving, refinancing of current debt obligations in a timely
fashion, operating and voyage expenses remaining at comparable
levels, no accidents or material loss to its vessels occurring,
as well as covenants under the combined companys credit
facilities. Please see the relevant subheadings under the
section captioned Risk Factors beginning on
page 22.
Treatment
of Existing Debt Facilities in the Proposed
Transaction
Neither Crude nor CPLP anticipates drawing down on its credit
facilities in connection with the consummation of the proposed
transaction. The parties anticipate that, following the merger,
CPLP may reach an arrangement with its lenders to draw down its
existing credit facilities to refinance the debt of Crudes
vessels unless CPLP obtains better or similar terms elsewhere,
but this is subject to certain conditions and entails various
risks. Please see the section captioned Risk Factors
beginning on page 22.
In connection with CPLPs agreement to acquire the dry
cargo vessel Cape Agamemnon from Capital Maritime, CPLP entered
into a commitment letter with a financial institution for a
credit facility of $25 million in order to partially
finance the acquisition of the shares of the vessel owning
company of the Cape Agamemnon from Capital Maritime. This credit
facility is
non-amortizing
until March 31, 2013 and will be repaid in twenty equal
consecutive quarterly installments commencing in June 2013 plus
a balloon payment in March 2018. Loan commitment fees will be
calculated at 0.50% per annum on any undrawn amount and will be
paid quarterly. This credit facility will contain customary ship
finance covenants and will be secured and guaranteed by the
vessel owning company of the Cape Agamemnon.
Marshall
Islands Tax Considerations
The following are the material Marshall Islands tax consequences
of the proposed transaction, the operations of combined company,
and the ownership and disposition of CPLP common units. Each of
Crude and CPLP are incorporated in the Marshall Islands. Under
current Marshall Islands law, no Marshall Islands withholding
tax or income tax will be imposed on any of the combined
company, Crude, CPLP, or their respective shareholders or
unitholders as a result of the proposed transaction. In
addition, the combined company will not be subject to tax in the
Marshall Islands on income or capital gains, and no Marshall
Islands
72
withholding tax or income tax will be imposed upon distributions
by CPLP to unitholders who do not reside in the Marshall Islands
or with respect to proceeds from the disposition of CPLP common
units.
Material
United States Federal Income Tax Consequences to Crude
Shareholders
The following is a summary of the material United States federal
income tax consequences of the merger to holders of Crude common
stock and of the ownership of CPLP common units received in the
merger. The below discussion applies to you only if you exchange
your shares of Crude common stock for CPLP common units in the
merger and you hold your shares of Crude common stock and CPLP
common units as capital assets for tax purposes. This section
does not address any United States federal income tax
considerations related to the Marshall Islands tax treatment of
a holder in connection with the merger. This section does not
apply to you if you are a member of a special class of holders
subject to special rules, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a holder who acquired shares of Crude common stock pursuant to
the exercise of employee stock options or otherwise as
compensation,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a dealer in securities,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a trader in securities that elects to use a
mark-to-market
method of accounting for securities holdings,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a tax-exempt organization,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a life insurance company,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a person liable for alternative minimum tax,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a person that, actually or constructively, owns or at any time
owned 10% or more of the Crude common stock prior to the merger
or that will own 5% or more of the CPLP common units after the
merger,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a person that holds shares of Crude common stock or CPLP common
units as part of a straddle or a hedging or conversion
transaction,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a U.S. expatriate,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a U.S. Holder (as defined below) whose functional currency
is not the U.S. dollar.
|
This section is based on the Code, its legislative history,
existing and proposed regulations, and published rulings and
court decisions, all as currently in effect. These laws are
subject to change, possibly on a retroactive basis. CPLP and
Crude have not and will not seek any rulings from the IRS
regarding the matters discussed below. There can be no assurance
that the IRS will not take positions concerning the tax
consequences of the merger that are different from those
discussed below.
If a partnership holds CPLP common units or shares of Crude
common stock, the tax treatment of a partner will generally
depend on the status of the partners and the tax treatment of
the partnership. If you are a partner of a partnership holding
CPLP common units or shares of Crude common stock, you should
consult your tax advisors.
For purposes of this discussion, the term
U.S. Holder means a beneficial owner of shares
of Crude common stock or CPLP common units, as relevant, that is:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
an individual citizen or resident of the United States for
United States federal income tax purposes,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a corporation (or other entity treated as a corporation for
United States federal income tax purposes) created or organized
in or under the laws of the United States, any U.S. state
or the District of Columbia,
|
|
|
|
|
|
an estate the income of which is subject to United States
federal income taxation regardless of its source, or
|
|
|
|
|
|
a trust which either (i) is subject to the primary
supervision of a court within the United States and one or more
United States persons have the authority to control all
substantial decisions of the trust or
|
73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(ii) has a valid election in effect under applicable United
States Treasury regulations to be treated as a United States
person.
|
A
Non-U.S. Holder
is a beneficial owner of shares of Crude common stock or CPLP
common units (other than a partnership), as relevant, that is
not a United States person for United States federal income tax
purposes.
This discussion does not address tax consequences that may
vary with, or are contingent on, individual circumstances.
Moreover, it only addresses United States federal income tax and
does not address any non-income tax or any foreign, state or
local tax consequences. You should consult your own tax advisors
concerning the United States federal income tax consequences of
the merger and the ownership of CPLP common units in light of
your particular situation, as well as any consequences arising
under the laws of any other taxing jurisdiction.
Tax
Characterization of CPLP and Crude
CPLP has elected to be taxed as a corporation for United States
federal income tax purposes. As such, among other consequences,
U.S. Holders of CPLP common units will, subject to the
discussion of certain rules relating to PFICs below (please see
Ownership and Disposition of CPLP Common Units
Certain PFIC Considerations Applicable to
U.S. Holders), generally not be directly subject to
United States federal income tax on CPLPs income, but
rather will be subject to United States federal income tax on
distributions received from CPLP and dispositions of CPLP common
units, as described below. Additionally, distributions from CPLP
to its common unitholders will generally be reported on Internal
Revenue Service
Form 1099-DIV.
Crude is a corporation for United States federal income tax
purposes.
The
Merger
General
Tax Consequences of the Merger
The merger has been structured to qualify as a reorganization
for United States federal income tax purposes, and it is a
condition to CPLPs and Crudes obligations to
complete the merger that CPLP receive a legal opinion from a
nationally recognized law firm, which is expected to be Akin
Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, and Crude receive a
legal opinion from Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, to the
effect that the merger should qualify as a
reorganization within the meaning of
Section 368(a) of the Code. These opinions will be based on
assumptions, representations, warranties and covenants,
including those contained in the merger agreement and in tax
representation letters provided by CPLP and Crude. The accuracy
of such assumptions, representations and warranties, and
compliance with such covenants, could affect the conclusions set
forth in such opinions.
No ruling has been or will be sought from the IRS as to the
United States federal income tax consequences of the merger, and
the opinions of counsel described above are not binding upon the
IRS or any court. Accordingly, there can be no assurances that
the IRS will not disagree with or challenge any of the
conclusions described herein.
The remainder of this discussion assumes that the merger will
qualify as a reorganization within the meaning of
Section 368(a) of the Code.
Subject to the discussion of certain rules relating to PFICs
below (please see Certain PFIC Considerations Related to
the Merger), the following material United States federal
income tax consequences will result from the merger:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A U.S. Holder will not recognize any gain or loss upon
receipt of CPLP common units in exchange for shares of Crude
common stock in the merger, except with respect to cash received
in lieu of fractional CPLP common units;
|
74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A U.S. Holders aggregate basis in the CPLP common
units received in the merger (including any fractional shares
deemed received and redeemed as described below) will be equal
to the U.S. Holders aggregate tax basis in the shares
of Crude common stock surrendered; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
A U.S. Holders holding period for the shares of CPLP
common units received in the merger (including any fractional
shares deemed received and redeemed as described below) will
include the U.S. Holders holding period of the shares
of Crude common stock surrendered.
|
Where different blocks of shares of Crude common stock were
acquired at different times and at different prices, the tax
basis and holding period of such shares of Crude common stock
may be determined with reference to each block of shares of
Crude common stock.
Cash in
Lieu of Fractional Units
A U.S. Holder of Crude common stock who receives cash in
lieu of a fractional CPLP common unit in the merger generally
will be treated as having received such fractional unit in the
merger and then as having received cash in redemption of such
fractional unit. Gain or loss generally will be recognized based
on the difference between the amount of cash received in lieu of
the fractional unit and the portion of the
U.S. Holders aggregate tax basis in the shares of
Crude common stock surrendered which is allocable to the
fractional unit. This gain or loss generally will be capital
gain or loss, and long-term capital gain or loss if the holding
period for the shares of Crude common stock is more than one
year at the effective time of the merger. Long-term capital gain
of non-corporate U.S. Holders that is recognized in taxable
years beginning before January 1, 2013 is generally taxed
at a maximum rate of 15%. The deductibility of capital losses is
subject to limitations.
Any gain realized by a
Non-U.S. Holder
pursuant to the above paragraph generally will not be subject to
United States federal income tax unless (i) the gain is
effectively connected with the
Non-U.S. Holders
conduct of a trade or business in the United States, and the
gain is attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by
the
Non-U.S. Holder
in the United States if that is required by an applicable income
tax treaty as a condition for subjecting the
Non-U.S. Holder
to U.S. taxation on a net income basis, or (ii) the
Non-U.S. Holder
is an individual and is present in the United States for 183 or
more days in the taxable year of the sale and certain other
conditions exist. Effectively connected gains
recognized by a corporate
Non-U.S. Holder
may also, under certain circumstances, be subject to an
additional branch profits tax at a 30% rate, or at a
lower rate if the corporate
Non-U.S. Holder
is eligible for the benefits of an income tax treaty that
provides for a lower rate.
Certain
PFIC Considerations Related to the Merger
Crude believes that it has at no time been a PFIC. If you
are a U.S. Holder of shares of Crude common stock, Crude
would generally be a PFIC with respect to you if for any taxable
year in which you held shares of Crude common stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75% or more of its gross income for the taxable year consists of
passive income (generally including dividends,
interest, gains from the sale or exchange of investment property
and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are
received from unrelated parties in connection with the active
conduct of a trade or business, as defined in applicable
Treasury regulations); or
|
|
|
|
|
|
at least 50% of its assets for the taxable year (averaged over
the year and generally determined based upon value) produce or
are held for the production of passive income.
|
Because the determination of whether a foreign corporation is a
PFIC is primarily factual and, as described below in
Ownership and Disposition of CPLP common units
Certain PFIC Considerations, Applicable to
U.S. Holders, there is little administrative or
judicial authority on which to rely to make a determination, the
IRS might not agree that Crude is not and never has been a PFIC.
If it was determined that Crude was a PFIC, then a
U.S. Holder of shares of Crude common stock may be required
to recognize gain as a result of the merger, notwithstanding
that the merger qualifies as a
75
reorganization within the meaning of Section 368(a) of the
Code. In particular, Section 1291(f) of the Code generally
requires that, to the extent provided in regulations, a
U.S. person who disposes of stock of a PFIC recognizes gain
notwithstanding any other provision of the Code. No final
Treasury regulations have been promulgated under this statute.
Proposed Treasury regulations were promulgated in 1992 with a
retroactive effective date. If finalized in their current form,
these regulations would generally require gain recognition by
U.S. persons exchanging shares in a corporation that is a
PFIC at any time during such U.S. persons holding
period of such shares where such person has not made either
(i) a qualified electing fund election under
Section 1295 of the Code for the first taxable year in
which such U.S. person owns such shares or in which the
corporation is a PFIC, whichever is later or (ii) a
mark-to-market
election under Section 1296 of the Code. There is an
exception to this rule in certain instances where the exchanging
shareholder receives shares of another corporation that is a
PFIC, but, as described below in Ownership and Disposition
of CPLP common units Certain PFIC Considerations
Applicable to U.S. Holders, CPLP believes that it has
not been and is not now a PFIC, and CPLP does not expect to
become a PFIC.
The tax on any gain recognized pursuant to the above paragraph
would be imposed at the rate applicable to ordinary income, and
an interest charge would apply based on a complex set of
computational rules designed to offset the tax deferral to such
persons on undistributed earnings of the subject foreign
corporation. CPLP and Crude are unable to predict at this time
whether, in what form, and with what effective date, final
Treasury regulations under Section 1291(f) of the Code will
be adopted, or how the proposed Treasury regulations will be
applied.
Backup
Withholding and Information Reporting on the Merger
Payments of cash made to a U.S. Holder in connection with
the merger may be subject to information reporting and
backup withholding at a rate of 28 percent,
unless the U.S. Holder of shares of Crude common stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
provides a correct taxpayer identification number and any other
required information to the exchange agent, or
|
|
|
|
|
|
is a corporation or comes within certain exempt categories and
otherwise complies with applicable requirements of the backup
withholding rules.
|
Backup withholding does not constitute an additional tax, but
merely an advance payment of tax, which may be refunded to the
extent it results in an overpayment of tax if the required
information is supplied to the IRS.
Reporting
Requirements in Respect of the Merger
A U.S. Holder of shares of Crude common stock who receives
CPLP common units as a result of the merger will be required to
retain records pertaining to the merger. Each U.S. Holder
of shares of Crude common stock who is required to file a United
States federal income tax return and who is a significant
holder that receives CPLP common units in the merger will
be required to file a statement with the holders United
States federal income tax return setting forth such
holders basis in the shares of Crude common stock
surrendered and the fair market value of the CPLP common units
and cash, if any, received in the merger. You are a
significant holder of shares of Crude common stock
if, immediately before the merger, you owned at least 5% (by
vote or value) of the outstanding capital stock of Crude or you
had an aggregate tax basis in securities of Crude of $1,000,000
or more.
Ownership
and Disposition of CPLP Common Units
Taxation
of Distributions to U.S. Holders
Subject to the discussion of PFICs below, any distributions made
by CPLP with respect to CPLP common units will generally
constitute dividends to the extent of CPLPs current or
accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under United
States federal income tax principles.
76
Distributions in excess of those earnings and profits will be
treated first as a nontaxable return of capital to the extent of
the U.S. Holders tax basis in CPLP common units, and
thereafter as capital gain. Because CPLP is a
non-U.S. corporation
for United Stated federal tax purposes, U.S. Holders that
are corporations generally will not be entitled to claim a
dividends-received deduction with respect to any distributions
they receive from CPLP. Amounts taxable as dividends generally
will be treated as income from sources outside the United States
and will, depending on the U.S. Holders
circumstances, be passive or general
income which, in either case, is treated separately from other
types of income for purposes of computing the foreign tax credit
allowable to the U.S. Holder. However, if (i) CPLP is
50% or more owned, by vote or value, by United States persons
and (ii) at least 10% of CPLPs earnings and profits
are attributable to sources within the United States, then for
foreign tax credit purposes, a portion of the dividends received
by a U.S. Holder would be treated as derived from sources
within the United States. With respect to any dividend paid for
any taxable year, the United States source ratio of dividends
for foreign tax credit purposes would be equal to the portion of
CPLPs earnings and profits from sources within the United
States for such taxable year, divided by the total amount of
CPLPs earnings and profits for such taxable year.
Dividends paid on CPLP common units to a U.S. Holder who is
an individual, trust or estate (a U.S. Non-Corporate
Holder) will generally be treated as qualified
dividend income that is taxable to such
U.S. Non-Corporate Holder at a maximum tax rate of 15% (for
payments made in taxable years beginning before January 1,
2013), provided that (i) the CPLP common units are readily
tradable on an established securities market in the United
States (such as Nasdaq, on which CPLPs common units are
traded); (ii) CPLP is not a PFIC for the taxable year
during which the dividend is paid or the immediately preceding
taxable year (as discussed below, CPLP believes that it has not
been a PFIC, is not a PFIC, and will not become a PFIC);
(iii) the U.S. Non-Corporate Holders holding
period of the CPLP common units includes more than 60 days
in the
121-day
period beginning 60 days before the date on which the CPLP
common units becomes ex-dividend; and (iv) the
U.S. Non-Corporate Holder is not under an obligation to
make related payments with respect to positions in substantially
similar or related property. Any dividends CPLP pays out of its
earnings and profits which are not eligible for these
preferential rates will be taxed as ordinary income to a
U.S. Non-Corporate Holder.
Special rules may apply to any extraordinary
dividend generally, a dividend in an amount
which is equal to or in excess of 10% of a shareholders
adjusted basis (or fair market value in certain circumstances)
in a CPLP common unit paid by CPLP. If CPLP pays an
extraordinary dividend on its common units that is
treated as qualified dividend income, then any loss
derived by a U.S. Non-Corporate Holder from the sale or
exchange of such common units will be treated as long-term
capital loss to the extent of such dividend.
Taxation
of Distributions to
Non-U.S.
Holders
Dividends paid to a
Non-U.S. Holder
in respect of CPLP common units will not be subject to United
States federal income tax unless the dividends are
effectively connected with the
Non-U.S. Holders
conduct of a trade or business within the United States and the
dividends are attributable to a permanent establishment or fixed
base maintained by the
Non-U.S. Holder
in the United States if that is required by an applicable income
tax treaty as a condition for subjecting the
Non-U.S. Holder
to U.S. taxation on a net income basis. In such cases, the
Non-U.S. Holder
generally will be taxed in the same manner as a
U.S. Holder. Effectively connected dividends
recognized by a corporate
Non-U.S. Holder
may also, under certain circumstances, be subject to an
additional branch profits tax at a 30% rate, or at a
lower rate if the corporate
Non-U.S. Holder
is eligible for the benefits of an income tax treaty that
provides for a lower rate.
Taxation
of Disposition of CPLP Common Units by U.S. Holders
Subject to the discussion of PFICs below, a U.S. Holder who
sells or otherwise disposes of its CPLP common units will
recognize capital gain or loss for United States federal income
tax purposes equal to the difference between the amount that is
realized and the U.S. Holders tax basis in the common
units. Capital gain of a U.S. Non-Corporate Holder that is
recognized in taxable years beginning before January 1,
2013 is generally taxed at a maximum rate of 15% where the
holder has a holding period greater than one year and is
otherwise expected to be taxed at preferential rates. The gain
or loss will generally be income or loss from
77
sources within the United States for foreign tax credit
limitation purposes. The ability to deduct capital losses is
subject to certain limitations.
Taxation
of Disposition of CPLP Common Units by
Non-U.S.
Holders
A
Non-U.S. Holder
will not be subject to United States federal income tax on gain
recognized on the sale or other disposition of your CPLP common
units unless (i) the gain is effectively
connected with the
Non-U.S. Holders
conduct of a trade or business in the United States, and the
gain is attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by
the
Non-U.S. Holder
in the United States if that is required by an applicable income
tax treaty as a condition for subjecting the
Non-U.S. Holder
to U.S. taxation on a net income basis, or (ii) the
Non-U.S. Holder
is an individual and is present in the United States for 183 or
more days in the taxable year of the sale and certain other
conditions exist. Effectively connected gains
recognized by a corporate
Non-U.S. Holder
may also, under certain circumstances, be subject to an
additional branch profits tax at a 30% rate, or at a
lower rate if the corporate
Non-U.S. Holder
is eligible for the benefits of an income tax treaty that
provides for a lower rate.
Certain
PFIC Considerations Applicable to U.S. Holders
CPLP believes that it has not been and is not, for United States
federal income tax purposes, a PFIC, and CPLP expects to operate
in such a manner so as not to become a PFIC, but this conclusion
is a factual determination that is made annually and thus may be
subject to change. If CPLP is or becomes a PFIC, a
U.S. Holder could be subject to additional United States
federal income taxes on gains recognized with respect to CPLP
common units and on certain distributions, plus an interest
charge on certain taxes treated as having been deferred under
the PFIC rules.
CPLP will be a PFIC with respect to a U.S. Holder if, for
any taxable year in which the U.S. Holder held CPLP common
units, either:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75% or more of its gross income for the taxable year consists of
passive income (generally including dividends,
interest, gains from the sale or exchange of investment property
and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are
received from unrelated parties in connection with the active
conduct of a trade or business, as defined in applicable
Treasury regulations); or
|
|
|
|
|
|
at least 50% of its assets for the taxable year (averaged over
the year and generally determined based upon value) produce or
are held for the production of passive income.
|
For purposes of these tests, income derived from the performance
of services does not constitute passive income. By contrast,
rental income would generally constitute passive income unless
CPLP is treated under specific rules as deriving its rental
income in the active conduct of a trade or business. Based on
CPLPs planned operations and future projections, CPLP
believes that it will not be a PFIC with respect to any taxable
year. In this regard, CPLP intends to treat its income from the
spot charter and time charter of vessels as services income,
rather than rental income. Accordingly, CPLP believes that such
income does not constitute passive income, and that the assets
that it owns and operates in connection with the production of
that income, primarily certain of CPLPs vessels, do not
constitute passive assets for purposes of determining whether
CPLP is a PFIC, at least to the extent that they generate income
that is not passive.
There is, however, no direct legal authority under the PFIC
rules addressing CPLPs method of operation. Moreover, in a
case not specifically interpreting the PFIC rules,
Tidewater
Inc.
v.
United States
, 565 F.3d 299 (5th Cir.
2009), the Fifth Circuit held that a vessel time charter at
issue generated predominantly rental income rather than services
income. However, the courts ruling was contrary to the
position of the IRS that the time charter income should have
been treated as services income. Additionally, the IRS recently
affirmed its position in
Tidewater
, adding further that
the vessel charters at issue would be treated as giving rise to
services income under the PFIC rules.
No assurance, however, can be given that the IRS, or a court of
law will accept CPLPs position, and there is a risk that
the IRS or a court of law could determine that CPLP is or was a
PFIC. Moreover, because there are uncertainties in the
application of the PFIC rules, because the PFIC test is an
annual test, and
78
because, although CPLP intends to manage its business so as to
avoid PFIC status to the extent consistent with its other
business goals, there could be changes in the nature and extent
of CPLPs operations in future years, there can be no
assurance that CPLP will not become a PFIC in any taxable year.
If CPLP were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year (and
regardless of whether CPLP remains a PFIC for subsequent taxable
years), each U.S. Holder who is treated as owning CPLP
common units for purposes of the PFIC rules would be liable to
pay United States federal income tax at the highest applicable
income tax rates on ordinary income upon the receipt of excess
distributions (generally the portion of any distributions
received by the U.S. Holder on CPLP common units in a
taxable year in excess of 125 percent of the average annual
distributions received by the U.S. Holder in the three
preceding taxable years or, if shorter, the
U.S. Holders holding period for the CPLP common
units) and on any gain from the disposition of CPLP common
units, plus interest on such amounts, as if such excess
distributions or gain had been recognized ratably over the
U.S. Holders holding period of the CPLP common units.
The above rules relating to the taxation of excess distributions
and dispositions will not apply to a U.S. Holder who has
made a timely qualified electing fund
(QEF) election. Instead, each U.S. Holder who
has made a timely QEF election is required for each taxable year
to include in income a pro rata share of CPLPs ordinary
earnings as ordinary income and a pro rata share of CPLPs
net capital gain as long-term capital gain, regardless of
whether CPLP has made any distributions of the earnings or gain.
The U.S. Holders basis in CPLP common units will be
increased to reflect taxed but undistributed income.
Distributions of income that had been previously taxed will
result in a corresponding reduction in the basis of the CPLP
common units and will not be taxed again once distributed. A
U.S. Holder making a QEF election would generally recognize
capital gain or loss on the sale, exchange or other disposition
of CPLP common units. If CPLP determines that it is a PFIC for
any taxable year, CPLP will provide U.S. Holders with such
information as may be required to make a QEF election effective.
Alternatively, if CPLP were to be treated as a PFIC for any
taxable year and provided that CPLPs common units are
treated as marketable, which CPLP believes will be
the case, a U.S. Holder may make a
mark-to-market
election. Under a
mark-to-market
election, any excess of the fair market value of the CPLP common
units at the close of any taxable year over the
U.S. Holders adjusted tax basis in the CPLP common
units is included in the U.S. Holders income as
ordinary income. These amounts of ordinary income will not be
eligible for the favorable tax rates applicable to qualified
dividend income or long-term capital gains. In addition, the
excess, if any, of the U.S. Holders adjusted tax
basis at the close of any taxable year over the fair market
value of the CPLP common units is deductible in an amount equal
to the lesser of the amount of the excess or the amount of the
net
mark-to-market
gains that the U.S. Holder included in income in prior
years. A U.S. Holders tax basis in CPLP common units
would be adjusted to reflect any such income or loss. Gain
realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of CPLP
common units would be treated as ordinary income, and any loss
realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of CPLP
common units would be treated as ordinary loss to the extent
that such loss does not exceed the net
mark-to-market
gains previously included by the U.S. Holder.
A U.S. Holder who holds CPLP common units during a period
when CPLP is a PFIC generally will be subject to the foregoing
rules for that taxable year and all subsequent taxable years
with respect to that U.S. Holders holding of CPLP
common units, even if CPLP ceases to be a PFIC, subject to
certain exceptions for U.S. Holders who made a
mark-to-market
or QEF election. U.S. Holders are urged to consult their
tax advisors regarding the PFIC rules, including as to the
advisability of choosing to make a QEF or
mark-to-market
election.
Medicare
Tax
For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012, a
U.S. person that is an individual or estate, or a trust
that does not fall into a special class of trusts that is exempt
from such tax, will be subject to a 3.8% tax on the lesser of
(i) the U.S. persons net investment
income for the relevant taxable year and (ii) the
excess of the U.S. persons modified adjusted gross
income for the taxable year over a certain threshold (which in
the case of individuals will be between $125,000 and $250,000,
depending on the individuals circumstances). A
79
holders net investment income will generally include its
dividend income and its net gains from the disposition of shares
of CPLP common units, unless such dividend income or net gains
are derived in the ordinary course of the conduct of a trade or
business (other than a trade or business that consists of
certain passive or trading activities). If you are a
U.S. Holder that is an individual, estate or trust, you are
urged to consult your tax advisors regarding the applicability
of the Medicare tax to your income and gains in respect of your
investment in CPLP common units.
Backup
Withholding and Information Reporting
If you are a Non-Corporate U.S. Holder, information
reporting requirements, on IRS Form 1099, generally will
apply to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dividend payments or other taxable distributions made to you
within the United States, and
|
|
|
|
|
|
the payment of proceeds to you from the sale of CPLP common
units effected at a U.S. office of a broker.
|
Additionally, backup withholding may apply to such payments if
you are a Non-Corporate U.S. Holder that:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fails to provide an accurate taxpayer identification number,
|
|
|
|
|
|
is notified by the IRS that you have failed to report all
interest and dividends required to be shown on your federal
income tax returns, or
|
|
|
|
|
|
in certain circumstances, fails to comply with applicable
certification requirements.
|
If you are a
Non-U.S. Holder,
you are generally exempt from backup withholding and information
reporting requirements with respect to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dividend payments made to you outside the United States by CPLP
or another
non-U.S. payor, and
|
|
|
|
|
|
other dividend payments and the payment of the proceeds from the
sale of CPLP common units effected at a U.S. office of a
broker, as long as the income associated with such payments is
otherwise exempt from United States federal income tax, and:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the payor or broker does not have actual knowledge or reason to
know that you are a U.S. person and you have furnished the
payor or broker:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
an IRS
Form W-8BEN
or an acceptable substitute form upon which you certify, under
penalties of perjury, that you are a
non-United
States person, or
|
|
|
|
|
|
other documentation upon which it may rely to treat the payments
as made to a
non-United
States person in accordance with U.S. Treasury
regulations, or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you otherwise establish an exemption.
|
Payment of the proceeds from the sale of CPLP common units
effected at a foreign office of a broker generally will not be
subject to information reporting or backup withholding. However,
a sale of CPLP common units that is effected at a foreign office
of a broker will be subject to information reporting and backup
withholding if:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the proceeds are transferred to an account maintained by you in
the United States,
|
|
|
|
|
|
the payment of proceeds or the confirmation of the sale is
mailed to you at a U.S. address, or
|
|
|
|
|
|
the sale has some other specified connection with the United
States as provided in U.S. Treasury regulations,
|
unless the broker does not have actual knowledge or reason to
know that you are a United States person and the documentation
requirements described above are met or you otherwise establish
an exemption.
80
In addition, a sale of CPLP common units effected at a foreign
office of a broker will be subject to information reporting if
the broker is:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
a U.S. person,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a controlled foreign corporation for U.S. tax purposes,
|
|
|
|
|
|
a foreign person 50% or more of whose gross income is
effectively connected with the conduct of a U.S. trade or
business for a specified three-year period, or
|
|
|
|
|
|
a foreign partnership, if at any time during its tax year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
one or more of its partners are U.S. persons,
as defined in United States Treasury regulations, who in the
aggregate hold more than 50% of the income or capital interest
in the partnership, or
|
|
|
|
|
|
such foreign partnership is engaged in the conduct of a
U.S. trade or business,
|
unless the broker does not have actual knowledge or reason to
know that you are a United States person and the documentation
requirements described above are met or you otherwise establish
an exemption. Backup withholding will apply if the sale is
subject to information reporting and the broker has actual
knowledge that you are a U.S. person.
You generally may obtain a refund of any amounts withheld under
the backup withholding rules that exceed your income tax
liability by filing a refund claim with the IRS.
Information
with Respect to Foreign Financial Assets
Under recently enacted legislation, individuals that own
specified foreign financial assets with an aggregate
value in excess of $50,000 are generally required to file an
information report with respect to such assets with their tax
returns. Specified foreign financial assets include
any financial accounts maintained by foreign financial
institutions, as well as any of the following, but only if they
are not held in accounts maintained by financial institutions:
(i) stocks and securities issued by
non-U.S. persons,
(ii) financial instruments and contracts held for
investment that have
non-U.S. issuers
or counterparties, and (iii) interests in foreign entities.
U.S. Holders that are individuals are urged to consult
their tax advisors regarding the application of this legislation.
United
States Federal Income Tax Considerations Relating to
CPLP
Election
to be Taxed as a Corporation
CPLP has elected to be taxed as a corporation for United States
federal income tax purposes. As such, among other consequences,
U.S. Holders will not directly be subject to United States
federal income tax on CPLPs income, but rather will be
subject to United States federal income tax on distributions
received from CPLP and dispositions of common units as described
above. As a corporation for United States federal income tax
purposes, CPLP may be subject to United States federal income
tax on its income, as discussed below.
Taxation
of Operating Income
CPLP expects that substantially all of its gross income will
continue to be attributable to the transportation of crude oil
and related oil products. For this purpose, gross income
attributable to transportation (or Transportation
Income) includes income derived from, or in connection
with, the use (or hiring or leasing for use) of a vessel to
transport cargo, or the performance of services directly related
to the use of any vessel to transport cargo, and thus includes
spot charter, time charter and bareboat charter income.
Transportation Income that is attributable to transportation
that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in
the United States (or U.S. Source International
Transportation Income) will be considered to be 50%
derived from sources within the United States. Transportation
Income attributable to transportation that both begins and ends
in the United States (or U.S. Source Domestic
Transportation Income) will be considered to be 100%
derived from sources within the United States. Transportation
Income attributable to
81
transportation exclusively between
non-U.S. destinations
will be considered to be 100% derived from sources outside the
United States. Transportation Income derived from sources
outside the United States generally will not be subject to
United States federal income tax.
Based on current operations and also due to prohibitions under
U.S. law, CPLP does not expect to have U.S. Source
Domestic Transportation Income. However, certain of CPLPs
activities give rise to U.S. Source International
Transportation Income, and future expansion of its operations
could result in an increase in the amount of U.S. Source
International Transportation Income, as well as give rise to
U.S. Source Domestic Transportation Income, all of which
could be subject to U.S. federal income taxation unless
exempt from U.S. taxation under Section 883 of the
Code (or the Section 883 Exemption), as
discussed below.
The
Section 883 Exemption and the Taxation of Operating
Income
In general, the Section 883 Exemption provides that if a
non-U.S. corporation
satisfies the requirements of Section 883 of the Code and
the Treasury Regulations thereunder (the Section 883
Regulations), it will not be subject to the net basis and
branch profits taxes or the 4% gross basis tax described below
on its U.S. Source International Transportation Income. The
Section 883 Exemption only applies to U.S. Source
International Transportation Income. As discussed below, CPLP
believes that under its current ownership structure, the
Section 883 Exemption will apply and that, accordingly, it
will not be taxed on its U.S. Source International
Transportation Income. The Section 883 Exemption does not
apply to U.S. Source Domestic Transportation Income.
CPLP will qualify for the Section 883 Exemption if, among
other matters, the following three requirements are met:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLP is organized in a jurisdiction outside the United States
that grants an equivalent exemption from tax to corporations
organized in the United States (an Equivalent
Exemption);
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLP satisfies the Publicly Traded Test (as
described below); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
CPLP meets certain substantiation, reporting and other
requirements.
|
The Publicly Traded Test requires that one or more classes of
equity representing more than 50% of the voting power and value
in a
non-U.S. corporation
be primarily and regularly traded on an established
securities market either in the United States or in a
jurisdiction outside the United States that grants an Equivalent
Exemption. The Section 883 Regulations provide, in
pertinent part, that equity interests in a
non-U.S. corporation
will be considered to be primarily traded on an
established securities market in a given country if the number
of units of each class of equity that are traded during any
taxable year on all established securities markets in that
country exceeds the number of units in each such class that are
traded during that year on established securities markets in any
other single country. Equity of a
non-U.S. corporation
will be considered to be regularly traded on an
established securities market under the Section 883
Regulations if one or more classes of equity of the corporation
that, in the aggregate, represent more than 50% of the combined
vote and value of the
non-U.S. corporation
are listed on such market and certain trading volume
requirements are met or deemed met as described below. For this
purpose, if one or more 5% Unitholders (i.e., a
holder of common units holding, actually or constructively, at
least 5% of the vote and value of a class of equity) own in the
aggregate 50% or more of the vote and value of a class of equity
(the Closely Held Block), such class of equity will
not be treated as primarily and regularly traded on an
established securities market (the Closely Held Block
Exception).
CPLP is organized under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall
Islands. The U.S. Treasury Department has recognized the
Republic of the Marshall Islands as a jurisdiction that grants
an Equivalent Exemption. Consequently, CPLPs
U.S. Source International Transportation Income (including,
for this purpose, (i) any such income earned by
subsidiaries that have properly elected to be treated as
partnerships or disregarded as entities separate from CPLP for
United States federal income tax purposes and (ii) any such
income earned by subsidiaries that are corporations for United
States federal income tax purposes, are organized in a
jurisdiction that grants an Equivalent Exemption and whose
outstanding stock is owned 50% or more by value by CPLP) will be
exempt from United States federal income taxation provided CPLP
meets the Publicly Traded Test.
82
CPLPs common units are listed exclusively on the Nasdaq
Global Market, and based on past trading patterns, CPLP believes
that its common units have been and are primarily
traded on established securities markets within the United
States.
CPLP believes that it meets the trading volume requirements of
the Section 883 Exemption. The pertinent regulations
provide that trading volume requirements will be deemed to be
met with respect to a class of equity traded on an established
securities market in the United States where the subject equity
is regularly quoted by dealers who regularly and actively make
offers, purchases and sales of such units to unrelated persons
in the ordinary course of business, and CPLP believes that such
conditions will exist for the CPLP common units. Additionally,
the pertinent regulations also provide that a class of equity
will be considered to be regularly traded on an
established securities market if (i) such class of stock is
listed on such market, (ii) such class of stock is traded
on such market, other than in minimal quantities, on at least
60 days during the taxable year or one sixth of the days in
a short taxable year, and (iii) the aggregate number of
shares of such class of stock traded on such market during the
taxable year is at least 10% of the average number of shares of
such class of stock outstanding during such year, or as
appropriately adjusted in the case of a short taxable year. CPLP
believes that trading of the common units has satisfied these
conditions in the past, and expects that such conditions will
continue to be satisfied. Finally, CPLP believes that its common
units represent more than 50% of its voting power and value and
accordingly believes that the common units should be considered
to be regularly traded on an established securities
market.
These conclusions, however, are based upon legal authorities
that do not expressly contemplate an organizational structure
such as CPLPs. In particular, although CPLP has elected to
be treated as a corporation for United States federal income tax
purposes, for corporate law purposes, CPLP is organized as a
limited partnership under Marshall Islands law and CPLPs
general partner is responsible for managing CPLPs business
and affairs and has been granted certain veto rights over
decisions of the CPLP Board. Accordingly, it is possible that
the IRS could assert that the common units do not meet the
regularly traded test.
CPLP expects that the common units will not lose eligibility for
the Section 883 Exemption as a result of the Closely Held
Block Exception, because the CPLP partnership agreement provides
that the voting rights of any 5% Unitholders (other than
CPLPs general partner and its affiliates, their
transferees and persons who acquired such common units with the
approval of the CPLP board of directors) are limited to a 4.9%
voting interest in CPLP regardless of how many units are held by
that 5% Unitholder. (The voting rights of any such Unitholders
in excess of 4.9% will be redistributed pro rata among the other
common unitholders holding less than 4.9% of the voting power of
all classes of units entitled to vote). If Capital Maritime and
CPLPs general partner own 50% or more of the common units,
they will provide the necessary documents to establish an
exception to the application of the Closely Held Block
Exception. This exception is available when shareholders
residing in a jurisdiction granting an Equivalent Exemption and
meeting certain other requirements own sufficient shares in the
Closely Held Block to preclude shareholders who have not met
such requirements from owning 50% or more of the outstanding
class of equity relied upon to satisfy the Publicly Traded Test.
Thus, although the matter is not free from doubt, CPLP believes
that it will satisfy the Publicly Traded Test. Should any of the
facts described above cease to be correct, CPLPs ability
to satisfy the Publicly Traded Test will be compromised.
Taxation
of Operating Income in the Absence of the Section 883
Exemption
If the Section 883 Exemption does not apply, CPLP would be
subject to a 4% tax on 50% of its gross U.S. Source
International Transportation Income, without benefit of
deductions, unless such income is treated as effectively
connected with the conduct of a trade or business in the United
States (Effectively Connected Income), as described
below. CPLP does not currently anticipate that a significant
portion of its shipping income will be U.S. Source
International Transportation Income, though there can be no
assurance in this regard.
CPLPs U.S. Source International Transportation Income
would be treated as Effectively Connected Income if
(i) CPLP has a fixed place of business in the United States
and (ii) substantially all of its U.S. Source
83
International Transportation Income is attributable to regularly
scheduled transportation or, in the case of bareboat charter
income, is attributable to a fixed place of business in the
United States. Based on current operations, CPLP believes that
none of its potential U.S. Source International
Transportation Income is attributable to regularly scheduled
transportation or is received pursuant to bareboat charters
attributable to a fixed place of business in the United States.
As a result, CPLP does not anticipate that any of its
U.S. Source International Transportation Income will be
treated as Effectively Connected Income. However, there is no
assurance that CPLP will not earn income pursuant to regularly
scheduled transportation or bareboat charters attributable to a
fixed place of business in the United States in the future,
which would result in such income being treated as Effectively
Connected Income.
Any income that CPLP earns that is treated as Effectively
Connected Income would be subject to United States federal
corporate income tax (the highest statutory rate is currently
35%). In addition, a 30% branch profits tax imposed under
Section 884 of the Code also could apply to such income,
and a branch interest tax could be imposed on certain interest
paid or deemed paid by CPLP.
Taxation
of Gain on the Sale of Vessel
Provided CPLP qualifies for the Section 883 Exemption, gain
from the sale of a vessel likewise should be exempt from tax
under Section 883. If, however, CPLP does not qualify for
the Section 883 Exemption, then such gain could be treated
as effectively connected income (determined under rules
different from those discussed above) and subject to the net
income and branch profits tax regime described above.
Accounting
Treatment
CPLP intends to account for the merger as an acquisition of
Crude in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles in the United States applicable to business
combinations. Crude will be treated as the acquired entity for
such purposes. Accordingly, the aggregate fair value of the
consideration transferred by CPLP in connection with the merger
will be allocated to Crudes assets acquired and
liabilities assumed based on their fair values as of the
completion of the merger. If the fair value of Crudes net
assets is in excess of the aggregate fair value of the
consideration transferred by CPLP, the excess will be recorded
as a gain from bargain purchase. If the fair value of
Crudes net assets is less than the aggregate fair value of
the consideration transferred by CPLP, the difference will be
recorded as goodwill. The results of operations of Crude will be
included in CPLPs consolidated results of operations only
for periods subsequent to the completion of the merger.
Principal
Corporate Offices
After completion of the proposed transaction, the combined
company will maintain the headquarters and principal corporate
offices of CPLP in Piraeus, Greece.
Executive
Compensation Arrangements
None.
Treatment
of Crude Unvested Shares in the Proposed Transaction
Crude has granted shares of Crude common stock subject to
certain vesting requirements pursuant to the Crude Equity Plan,
adopted March 1, 2010. Except as described below, these
grants will be converted into equivalent grants with respect to
CPLP common units.
All shares of Crude common stock and other compensatory awards
denominated in shares of Crude common stock subject to a risk of
forfeiture, or right of repurchase by Crude (the Crude
Awards), will be converted to CPLP common units subject to
a risk of forfeiture, or right of repurchase by CPLP, with the
same terms and conditions as were applicable prior to such
conversion (the CPLP Awards), except to the extent
otherwise required by the terms of the Crude Awards or pursuant
to the Crude Equity Plan. Upon conversion,
84
each holder of Crude Awards will be entitled to receive a number
of CPLP Awards equal to the product of (x) the Crude Awards
held by such holder immediately prior to the effective time of
the merger and (y) 1.56.
Upon the effective time of the merger, the Crude Awards will be
converted into equivalent CPLP Awards and all the terms of such
awards will remain the same. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
transfer restrictions and forfeiture provisions relating to the
Crude Awards held by those members of the Crude Independent
Committee who are not designated by Crude to serve as a member
of the CPLP Board (an aggregate of approximately
20,000 shares of Crude common stock or the right to receive
approximately 31,200 CPLP common units), will lapse immediately
prior to the effective time of the merger, and such Crude Awards
will vest in full immediately prior to the effective time of the
merger.
Resale of
CPLP Common Units
The issuance of the CPLP common units that Crude shareholders
will receive in the proposed transaction will have been
registered under the Securities Act. Therefore, these units may
be traded in normal market and brokerage transactions by any
Crude shareholders following the consummation of the proposed
transaction as long as that person is not deemed to be an
affiliate of either CPLP or Crude under the
Securities Act. An affiliate, as defined by the
rules promulgated under the Securities Act, is a person who,
directly or indirectly, through one or more intermediaries,
controls, or is controlled by, or is under common control with,
CPLP or Crude. Persons who are affiliates of CPLP or Crude at
the time the merger agreement is submitted to the vote of their
respective shareholders may not sell their CPLP common units
acquired in the proposed transaction except pursuant to an
effective registration statement under the Securities Act, or
pursuant to an applicable exemption from the registration
requirements of the Securities Act, including Rules 144 and
145 promulgated by the SEC under the Securities Act. Affiliates
generally include directors, executive officers and beneficial
owners of 10% or more of any class of capital stock.
This proxy statement/prospectus does not cover any resale of
CPLP common units received in the proposed transaction by any
person that may be deemed to be an affiliate of CPLP or
Crude.
85
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS,
DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
The amounts and percentages of Crude common stock and Crude
Class B stock and CPLP common units beneficially owned are
reported on the basis of regulations of the SEC governing the
determination of beneficial ownership of securities. Under the
rules of the SEC, a person is deemed to be a beneficial
owner of a security if that person has or shares
voting power, which includes the power to vote or to
direct the voting of that security, or investment
power, which includes the power to dispose of or to direct
the disposition of that security. A person is also deemed to be
a beneficial owner of any securities as to which that person has
a right to acquire beneficial ownership presently or within
60 days. Under these rules, more than one person may be
deemed a beneficial owner of the same securities, and a person
may be deemed to be the beneficial owner of securities as to
which that person has no economic interest.
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners, Directors and Executive
Officers of Crude
As of March 31, 2011, a total of 13,899,400 shares of
Crude common stock and 2,105,263 shares of Crude
Class B stock were outstanding. Each share of Crude common
stock is entitled to one vote and each share of Crude
Class B stock is entitled to ten votes on matters on which
Crude common shareholders and Crude Class B shareholders,
respectively, are eligible to vote.
The following table sets forth as of December 31, 2010 the
beneficial ownership of Crude common stock or Crude Class B
stock by each person Crude knew that beneficially owned more
than 5.0% of the outstanding shares of Crude common stock or
Crude Class B stock, and all of Crudes directors and
executive officers as a group. The number of shares beneficially
owned by each person is determined under SEC rules and the
information is not necessarily indicative of beneficial
ownership for any other purpose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
Shares of
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
Total Common
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Total Common
|
|
|
Class B Stock
|
|
|
Total Class B
|
|
|
and Class B
|
|
|
Name of Beneficial Owner
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Stock Owned
|
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Stock Owned
|
|
|
Stock Owned
|
|
|
|
|
All executive officers and directors as a group
(10 persons)(1)(2)(3)
|
|
|
154,000
|
|
|
|
1.11
|
%
|
|
|
2,105,163
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
14.11
|
%
|
|
Ameriprise Financial Inc. and Columbia Management Investment
Advisers, LLC(4)
|
|
|
1,615,064
|
|
|
|
11.62
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
10.09
|
%
|
|
Bank of America Corporation, Bank of America, NA and Merrill
Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.(5)
|
|
|
1,043,453
|
|
|
|
7.51
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
6.52
|
%
|
|
TIAA-CREF Investment Management LLC and Teachers Advisors,
Inc.(6)
|
|
|
906,928
|
|
|
|
6.52
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
5.67
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Other than Crudes Chairman, who owns 145,000 shares
of Crude common stock, representing a 1.04% ownership of Crude
common stock, no member of the Crude Board nor any executive
officers own shares of Crude common stock in a number
representing more than 1.00% of the outstanding shares of Crude
common stock.
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
The Marinakis family, including Crudes Chairman,
Mr. Marinakis, through its ownership of CCIC, may be deemed
to beneficially own, or to have beneficially owned, the Crude
Class B stock held by CCIC. Mr. Marinakis also
directly owns Crude common stock, as described in note (1).
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
Shares of Crude common stock were issued to all members of the
Crude Board and certain executive officers in August 2010 (March
2011 in the case of one newly elected director at the time)
under the terms of the Crude Equity Plan, which they may be
deemed to beneficially own, or to have beneficially owned.
|
|
|
|
(4)
|
|
This information is based on Amendment No. 2 to the
Schedule 13G filed with the SEC jointly by Ameriprise
Financial Inc. and Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC,
on May 10, 2011.
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
(5)
|
|
This information is based on the Schedule 13G filed with
the SEC jointly by Bank of America Corporation, Bank of America,
NA and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. on
February 14, 2011.
|
|
|
|
(6)
|
|
This information is based on the Schedule 13G filed with
the SEC jointly by TIAA-CREF Investment Management LLC and
Teachers Advisors, Inc. on February 11, 2011.
|
Holders of shares of Crude common stock and Crude Class B
stock have equivalent economic rights, but Crude common
shareholders are entitled to one vote per share and Crude
Class B shareholders are entitled to 10 votes per share.
However, the voting power of the Crude Class B stock is
limited to an aggregate maximum of 49% of the combined voting
power of Crude common stock and Crude Class B stock. Except
as otherwise provided by the MIBCA, holders of shares of Crude
common stock and Crude Class B stock vote together as a
single class on all matters submitted to a vote of shareholders,
including the election of directors. In addition, if, at any
time, any person or group other than CCIC owns beneficially 5%
or more of the shares of Crude common stock then outstanding,
then any shares of common stock owned by that person or group in
excess of 4.9% may not be voted. The voting rights of any such
shareholders in excess of 4.9% shall be redistributed pro rata
among other holders of shares of Crude common stock holding less
than 5.0% of the outstanding shares of Crude common stock.
Support
Agreement
On May 5, 2011, Evangelos M. Marinakis, Chairman of the
Crude Board and CEO of Crude, Ioannis E. Lazaridis, President of
Crude, Gerasimos G. Kalogiratos, CFO of Crude, and CCIC, holder
of all of the outstanding shares of Crude Class B stock,
entered into a support agreement pursuant to which they have
agreed, subject to certain conditions, to vote their shares in
favor of the merger.
REGULATORY
MATTERS
No further regulatory filings or approvals will be required for
the completion of the merger other than the filing of the merger
agreement with the Republic of the Marshall Islands corporate
registry upon approval of the Merger Proposal by Crude
shareholders.
THE
MERGER AGREEMENT
The following section summarizes material provisions of the
merger agreement, which is included in this proxy
statement/prospectus as Appendix A and is incorporated
herein by reference in its entirety. Because the following is a
summary, it does not contain all information that may be
important to you. The rights and obligations of CPLP and Crude
are governed by the express terms and conditions of the merger
agreement and not by this summary or any other information
contained in this proxy statement/prospectus. Crude shareholders
are urged to read the merger agreement carefully and in its
entirety as well as this proxy statement/prospectus before
making any decisions regarding the merger, including the
adoption of the merger agreement.
The merger agreement is included in this proxy
statement/prospectus to provide you with information regarding
its terms and is not intended to provide any factual information
about CPLP or Crude. The merger agreement contains
representations and warranties by each of the parties to the
merger agreement. These representations and warranties have been
made as of specific dates solely for the benefit of the other
parties to the merger agreement and:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
may not be intended as statements of fact, but rather as a way
of allocating the risk between the parties in the event the
statements therein prove to be inaccurate;
|
|
|
|
|
|
have been qualified by certain disclosures that modify, qualify
or create exceptions to such representations and warranties and
that were made between the parties in connection with the
negotiation of the merger agreement, which disclosures are not
reflected in the merger agreement itself; and
|
|
|
|