GNK US Equity☆

Table of Contents

ce

​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

or

For the transition period from to

Commission file number 001-33393

GENCO SHIPPING & TRADING LIMITED

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

299 Park Avenue, 12th Floor, New York, New York ​ 10171

(Address of principal executive offices) ​ (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (646) 443-8550

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

​​

Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered​

Common Stock, par value $.01 per share GNK New York Stock Exchange​

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes⌧ No ◻

Indicated by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ◻No⌧

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes⌧ No ◻

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes⌧No ◻

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

​ ​ ​

Large accelerated filer ⌧ ​ Accelerated filer ◻

​ ​ ​

Non-accelerated filer ◻ ​ Smaller reporting company ☐

​ ​ Emerging growth company ☐

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☒

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

Indicate by check mark whether registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No ⌧

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant on the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, computed by reference to the last sale price of such stock of $19.32 per share as of June 30, 2022 was approximately $719.5 million. The registrant has no non-voting common equity issued and outstanding. The determination of affiliate status for purposes of this paragraph is not necessarily a conclusive determination for any other purpose.

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant's common stock as of February 22, 2023 was 42,327,181 shares.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of our Proxy Statement for the 2022 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not later than 120 days after December 31, 2022, are incorporated by reference in Part III herein.

​

​

​

Table of Contents

WEBSITE INFORMATION

​

We intend to use our website, www.GencoShipping.com, as a means of disclosing material non-public information and for complying with our disclosure obligations under Regulation FD. Such disclosures will be included in our website’s Investor section. Accordingly, investors should monitor the Investor portion of our website, in addition to following our press releases, SEC filings, public conference calls, and webcasts. To subscribe to our e-mail alert service, please submit your e-mail address at the Investor Relations Home page of the Investor section of our website. The information contained in, or that may be accessed through, our website is not incorporated by reference into or a part of this document or any other report or document we file with or furnish to the SEC, and any references to our website are intended to be inactive textual references only.

​

​

​

i

​

Table of Contents

NOTE ABOUT FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

​

This annual report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements use words such as “anticipate,” “budget,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” and other words and terms of similar meaning in connection with a discussion of potential future events, circumstances or future operating or financial performance. These forward-looking statements are based on our management’s current expectations and observations. Included among the factors that, in our view, could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward looking statements contained in this annual report on Form 10-K are the following: (i) declines or sustained weakness in demand in the drybulk shipping industry; (ii) weakness or declines in drybulk shipping rates; (iii) changes in the supply of or demand for drybulk products, generally or in particular regions; (iv) changes in the supply of drybulk carriers including newbuilding of vessels or lower than anticipated scrapping of older vessels; (v) changes in rules and regulations applicable to the cargo industry, including, without limitation, legislation adopted by international organizations or by individual countries and actions taken by regulatory authorities; (vi) increases in costs and expenses including but not limited to: crew wages, insurance, provisions, lube oil, bunkers, repairs, maintenance, general and administrative expenses, and management fee expenses; (vii) whether our insurance arrangements are adequate; (viii) changes in general domestic and international political conditions; (ix) acts of war, terrorism, or piracy, including without limitation the ongoing war in Ukraine; (x) changes in the condition of the Company’s vessels or applicable maintenance or regulatory standards (which may affect, among other things, our anticipated drydocking or maintenance and repair costs) and unanticipated drydock expenditures; (xi) the Company’s acquisition or disposition of vessels; (xii) the amount of offhire time needed to complete maintenance, repairs, and installation of equipment to comply with applicable regulations on vessels and the timing and amount of any reimbursement by our insurance carriers for insurance claims, including offhire days; (xiii) the completion of definitive documentation with respect to charters; (xiv) charterers’ compliance with the terms of their charters in the current market environment; (xv) the extent to which our operating results are affected by weakness in market conditions and freight and charter rates; (xvi) our ability to maintain contracts that are critical to our operation, to obtain and maintain acceptable terms with our vendors, customers and service providers and to retain key executives, managers and employees; (xvii) completion of documentation for vessel transactions and the performance of the terms thereof by buyers or sellers of vessels and us; (xviii) the relative cost and availability of low sulfur and high sulfur fuel, worldwide compliance with sulfur emissions regulations that took effect on January 1, 2020 and our ability to realize the economic benefits or recover the cost of the scrubbers we have installed; (xix) our financial results for the year ending December 31, 2023 and other factors relating to determination of the tax treatment of dividends we have declared; (xx) the financial results we achieve for each quarter that apply to the formula under our new dividend policy, including without limitation the actual amounts earned by our vessels and the amounts of various expenses we incur, as a significant decrease in such earnings or a significant increase in such expenses may affect our ability to carry out our new value strategy; (xxi) the exercise of the discretion of our Board regarding the declaration of dividends, including without limitation the amount that our Board determines to set aside for reserves under our dividend policy; (xxii) the duration and impact of the COVID-19 novel coronavirus epidemic, which may negatively affect general global and regional economic conditions, our ability to charter our vessels at all and the rates at which are able to do so; our ability to call on or depart from ports on a timely basis or at all; our ability to crew, maintain, and repair our vessels, including without limitation the impact diversion of our vessels to perform crew rotations may have on our revenues, expenses, and ability to consummate vessel sales, expense and disruption to our operations that may arise from the inability to rotate crews on schedule, and delay and added expense we may incur in rotating crews in the current environment; our ability to staff and maintain our headquarters and administrative operations; sources of cash and liquidity; our ability to sell vessels in the secondary market, including without limitation the compliance of purchasers and us with the terms of vessel sale contracts, and the prices at which vessels are sold; and other factors relevant to our business described from time to time in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission; (xxiii) those other risks and uncertainties discussed below under the headings “RISK FACTORS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS & OPERATIONS”, and (xxii) other factors listed from time to time in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Our ability to pay dividends in any period will depend upon various factors, including the limitations under any credit agreements to which we may be a party, applicable provisions of Marshall Islands law and the final determination by the Board of Directors each quarter after its review of our financial performance, market developments, and the best interests of the Company and its shareholders. The timing and amount of dividends, 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 actually paid may vary. We do not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

1

​

Table of Contents

PART I

​

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

​

OVERVIEW

​

General

​

We are a New York City-based company incorporated in the Marshall Islands in 2004. We transport iron ore, coal, grain, steel products and other drybulk cargoes along worldwide shipping routes through the ownership and operation of drybulk carrier vessels. Our fleet currently consists of 44 drybulk carriers, including 17 Capesize drybulk carriers, 15 Ultramax drybulk carriers, and twelve Supramax drybulk carriers with an aggregate carrying capacity of approximately 4,636,000 deadweight tons (“dwt”). The average age of our current fleet is approximately 11.0 years. All of the vessels in our fleet were built in shipyards with reputations for constructing high-quality vessels. We seek to deploy our vessels on time charters, spot market voyage charters, spot market-related time charters or in vessel pools trading in the spot market, to reputable charterers. Of the vessels in our fleet, 18 are currently on spot market voyage charters, 20 are on fixed-rate time charter contracts, four are on spot market-related time charters, and we are currently time chartering-in three third party vessels.

​

See pages 5 – 6 for a table of our current fleet.

​

Genco’s approach towards fleet composition is to own a high-quality fleet of vessels that focuses on Capesize, Ultramax and Supramax vessels. Capesize vessels represent our major bulk vessel category and the other vessel classes, including Ultramax and Supramax vessels, represent our minor bulk vessel category. Our major bulk vessels are primarily used to transport iron ore and coal, while our minor bulk vessels are primarily used to transport grains, steel products and other drybulk cargoes such as cement, scrap, fertilizer, bauxite, nickel ore, salt and sugar. This approach of owning ships that transport both major and minor bulk commodities provide us with exposure to a wide range of drybulk trade flows. We employ an active commercial strategy which consists of a global team located in the U.S., Copenhagen and Singapore. Overall, we utilize a portfolio approach to revenue generation through a combination of short-term, spot market employment, index-linked time charters as well as opportunistically booking longer term fixed-rate coverage. Our fleet deployment strategy currently is weighted towards short-term fixtures, which provides us with optionality on our sizeable fleet. However, depending on market conditions, we may seek to enter into additional longer term time charter contracts or contracts of affreightment. In addition to both short and long-term time charters, we fix our vessels on spot market voyage charters as well as spot market-related time charters depending on market conditions and management’s outlook. Furthermore, we have also transported containers on select vessels on an opportunistic basis. We will continue to explore the possibility of transporting containers on board select vessels from time to time, which could provide additional flexibility for vessel fixture options, primarily for backhaul trades.

​

Drawing on one of the strongest balance sheets in the drybulk industry, in April 2021 we announced a new comprehensive value strategy. This strategy is centered on three key pillars: compelling dividends, financial deleveraging and growth. During 2021, we executed this strategy by paying down $203 million of debt while expanding our core Ultramax fleet. Additionally, during 2022, we paid down an additional $75 million of debt, bringing our debt outstanding to $171 million, a 62% reduction from January 1, 2021. These actions have enabled us to further reduce our cash flow breakeven rate positioning us to pay sizeable quarterly dividends across diverse market environments. To support this strategy, in August 2021, we closed on a new $450 Million Credit Facility which we used to refinance our prior credit facilities, thereby increasing flexibility, improving key terms and lowering our cash flow breakeven rates. Within this facility is a significant revolving credit facility that we can utilize, of which $212.9 million is undrawn as of December 31, 2022. The first quarterly dividend under Genco’s value strategy was paid during the first quarter of 2022 based on the financial results from the fourth quarter of 2021. Since the fourth quarter of 2021 through the fourth quarter of 2022, we have declared cumulative dividends under our value strategy of $3.24 per share.

​

In line with our value strategy, we will continue to focus on the following specific priorities for 2023:

​

● Pay attractive dividends to shareholders

2

​

Table of Contents

● Opportunistically grow the fleet on a low levered basis

​

Our Operations

​

We report financial information and evaluate our operations by charter revenues and not by the length of ship employment for our customers, i.e., spot or time charters. Each of our vessels serves the same type of customer, has similar operations and maintenance requirements, operates in the same regulatory environment, and is subject to similar economic characteristics. Based on this, we have determined that we operate in one reportable segment in which we are engaged in the ocean transportation of drybulk cargoes worldwide through the ownership and operation of drybulk carrier vessels.

​

Our management team and our other employees are responsible for the commercial and strategic management of our fleet. Commercial management includes the negotiation of charters for vessels, managing the mix of various types of charters, such as time charters, spot market voyage charters and spot market-related time charters, and monitoring the performance of our vessels under their charters. Strategic management includes locating, purchasing, financing and selling vessels. Technical management involves the day-to-day management of vessels, including performing routine maintenance, attending to vessel operations and arranging for crews and supplies. In September 2021, we entered into a joint venture named GS Shipmanagement Pte. Ltd (“GSSM”) with Synergy Marine Pte. Ltd. (“Synergy”), one of our previous technical managers. GSSM currently provides the technical management to all 44 vessels in our fleet. GSSM aims to provide a unique and differentiated service to the management of our vessels. We expect this joint venture to increase visibility and control over our vessel operations, augment fleet-wide fuel efficiency to lower our carbon footprint through an advanced data platform and potentially provide vessel operating expense savings over time. Members of our New York City-based management team oversee the activities of GSSM.

​

AVAILABLE INFORMATION

​

We file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements, and other documents with the SEC, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act. The SEC maintains an Internet website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers, including us, that file electronically with the SEC. The public can obtain any documents that we file with the SEC at www.sec.gov.

​

In addition, our company website can be found on the Internet at www.gencoshipping.com. The website contains information about us and our operations. Copies of each of our filings with the SEC on Form 10-K, Form 10-Q and Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports, can be viewed and downloaded free of charge after the reports and amendments are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. To view the reports, access www.gencoshipping.com, click on Investor, then SEC Filings. No information on our company website is incorporated by reference into this annual report on Form 10-K.

​

Any of the above documents can also be obtained in print by any shareholder upon request to our Investor Relations Department at the following address:

​

Corporate Investor Relations

Genco Shipping & Trading Limited

299 Park Avenue, 12th Floor

New York, NY 10171

​

BUSINESS STRATEGY

​

Our strategy is to manage and expand our fleet in a manner that maximizes our cash flows from operations in a safe and efficient manner. To accomplish this objective, we intend to:

​

3

​

Table of Contents

​

​

​

​

​

4

​

Table of Contents

​

OUR FLEET

​

The table below summarizes the characteristics of our vessels that have been delivered to us that are currently in our fleet:

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Vessel Class Dwt Year Built

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Genco Constellation ​ Ultramax ​ 63,310 ​ 2017 ​

5

​

Table of Contents

The following groups of sister ships are included in our current fleet except as noted below:

​

​ ​

Group Vessels

1 Genco Constantine and Genco Augustus

2 Genco Lion and Genco Tiger

3 Genco London, Baltic Wolf, Genco Titus and Baltic Bear

4 Genco Commodus, Genco Hadrian, Genco Maximus and Genco Claudius

5 Genco Resolute and Genco Endeavour

6 Genco Liberty and Genco Defender

9 Genco Warrior, Genco Predator and Genco Picardy

10 Genco Magic, Genco Vigilant and Genco Freedom

11 Genco Mayflower and Genco Constellation

12 Genco Weatherly, Genco Laddey and Genco Mary

​

FLEET MANAGEMENT

​

Our management team and other employees are responsible for the commercial and strategic management of our fleet. Commercial management involves negotiating charters for vessels, managing the mix of various types of charters, such as time charters, spot market voyage charters, vessel pools and spot market-related time charters, and monitoring the performance of our vessels under their charters. Strategic management involves locating, purchasing, financing and selling vessels.

​

Technical management involves the day-to-day management of vessels, including performing routine maintenance, attending to vessel operations and arranging for crews and supplies. Members of our New York City-based management team oversee the activities of GSSM. The head of our technical management team has over 30 years of experience in the shipping industry.

​

Under our technical management agreement with GSSM, GSSM is obligated to:

​

​

​

​

​

● arrange the supply of spares and stores for our vessels; and

​

​

OUR CHARTERS

​

As of February 21, 2023, we employed 18 of our vessels on spot market voyage charters where we provide a vessel for the transportation of goods between a load port and discharge port at a specified per-ton or on a lump sum

6

​

Table of Contents

basis. Under spot market voyage charters, voyage expenses such as fuel and port charges, are borne by us. Additionally, as of February 21, 2023, we employed 20 of our vessels under fixed-rate time charters and four of our vessels under spot market-related time charters. A time charter involves the hiring of a vessel from its owner for a period of time pursuant to a contract under which the vessel owner places its ship (including its crew and equipment) at the disposal of the charterer. Under a time charter, the charterer periodically pays a fixed daily charterhire rate to the owner of the vessel and bears all voyage expenses, including the cost of bunkers (fuel), port expenses, agents’ fees and canal dues. Additionally, as of February 21, 2023, we were chartering in three third party vessels that have been employed on spot market voyage charters.

​

Our vessels operate worldwide within the trading limits imposed by our insurance terms. The technical operation and navigation of the vessel at all times remains the responsibility of the vessel owner, which is generally responsible for the vessel’s operating expenses, including the cost of crewing, insuring, repairing and maintaining the vessel, costs of spares and consumable stores, tonnage taxes and other miscellaneous expenses.

​

For the vessels that we employ on time charters or spot market-related time charters, agreements expire within a range of dates (for example, a minimum of 4 months and maximum of 6 months following delivery), with the exact end of the time charter left unspecified to account for the uncertainty of when a vessel will complete its final voyage under the time charter. The charterer may extend the charter period by any time that the vessel is off-hire. If a vessel remains off-hire for more than 30 consecutive days, the time charter may be cancelled at the charterer’s option.

​

In connection with the charter of each of our vessels, we incur commissions generally ranging from 1.25% to 6.25% of the total daily charterhire rate of each charter or total freight revenue to third parties, depending on the number of brokers involved with arranging the relevant charter.

​

We monitor developments in the drybulk shipping industry on a regular basis and strategically adjust the time and duration of employment for our vessels according to market conditions as they become available for hire.

​

The following table sets forth information about the current employment of the vessels in our fleet as of February 21, 2023:

​

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

​ Year Charter ​ ​

Vessel Built Expiration(1) Cash Daily Rate(2)

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Capesize Vessels ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Genco Augustus 2007 February 2023 Voyage ​

Genco London 2007 December 2022 ​ Voyage ​

Genco Constantine 2008 March 2023 ​ Voyage ​

Genco Commodus 2009 March 2023 ​ Voyage ​

Genco Liberty ​ 2016 ​ March 2023 ​ Voyage ​

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Ultramax Vessels ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Genco Weatherly ​ 2014 ​ March 2023 ​ Voyage ​

7

​

Table of Contents

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

​ Year Charter ​ ​

Vessel Built Expiration(1) Cash Daily Rate(2)

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Genco Columbia ​ 2016 ​ March 2023 ​ Voyage ​

Genco Enterprise ​ 2016 ​ March 2023 ​ Voyage ​

Genco Constellation ​ 2017 ​ December 2022 ​ Voyage ​

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Supramax Vessels ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​

Genco Ardennes 2009 March 2023 ​ Voyage ​

Genco Auvergne 2009 March 2023 ​ Voyage ​

Genco Languedoc 2010 February 2023 ​ Voyage ​

​

​

CLASSIFICATION AND INSPECTION

​

All of our vessels have been certified as being “in class” by the American Bureau of Shipping (“ABS”), DNVGL or Lloyd’s Register of Shipping (“Lloyd’s”). Each of these classification societies is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies. Every commercial vessel’s hull and machinery is evaluated by a classification society authorized by its country of registry. The classification society certifies that the vessel has been built and maintained in accordance with the rules of the classification society and complies with applicable rules and regulations of the vessel’s country of registry and the international conventions of which that country is a member. Each vessel is inspected by a surveyor of the classification society in three surveys of varying frequency and thoroughness: every year for the annual survey, every two to three years for the intermediate survey and every four to five years for special surveys. Special surveys always require drydocking. Vessels that are 15 years old or older are required, as part of the intermediate survey process, to be drydocked every 24 to 36 months for inspection of the underwater portions of the vessel and for necessary repairs stemming from the inspection.

​

In addition to the classification inspections, many of our customers regularly inspect our vessels as a precondition to chartering them for voyages. We believe that our well-maintained, high-quality vessels provide us with a competitive advantage in the current environment of increasing regulation and customer emphasis on quality.

​

We have implemented the International Safety Management Code, which was promulgated by the International Maritime Organization, or IMO (the United Nations agency for maritime safety and the prevention of marine pollution by ships), to establish pollution prevention requirements applicable to vessels. We obtained documents of compliance and safety management certificates for all of our vessels, which are required by the IMO.

8

​

Table of Contents

​

CREWING AND EMPLOYEES

​

Each of our vessels is crewed with 21 to 23 officers and seamen. We do not provide any seaborne personnel to crew our vessels. Instead, GSSM is responsible for locating and retaining qualified officers for our vessels. The crewing agencies are responsible for each seaman’s training, travel and payroll and ensuring that all the seamen on our vessels have the qualifications and licenses required to comply with international regulations and shipping conventions. Our vessels are typically manned with more crew members than are required by the country of the vessel’s flag in order to allow for the performance of routine maintenance duties.

​

We currently employ 36 shore-based personnel, which includes personnel in our Singapore and Copenhagen offices. In addition, approximately 970 seagoing personnel are employed on our vessels. Lastly, GSSM currently employs approximately 80 personnel.

​

CUSTOMERS

​

Our assessment of a charterer’s financial condition and reliability is an important factor in negotiating employment for our vessels. We generally charter our vessels to major trading houses (including commodities traders), major producers and government-owned entities rather than to more speculative or undercapitalized entities. Our customers include national, regional and international companies, such as Rio Tinto Shipping (Asia) Pte. Ltd., Cargill International S.A., BHP, Bunge SA, ADMIntermare, a division of ADM International Sarl, and Vale International S.A. For the year ended December 31, 2022, no customer accounted for more than 10% of our voyage revenue.

​

COMPETITION

​

Our business fluctuates in line with the main patterns of trade of the major drybulk cargoes and varies according to changes in the supply and demand for these items. We operate in markets that are highly competitive and based primarily on supply and demand. We compete for charters on the basis of price, vessel location and size, age and condition of the vessel, as well as on our reputation as an owner and operator. We compete with other owners of drybulk carriers in the Capesize, Panamax, Ultramax, Supramax and Handysize class sectors, some of whom may also charter our vessels as customers. Ownership of drybulk carriers is highly fragmented and is divided among approximately 2,400 independent drybulk carrier owners.

​

PERMITS AND AUTHORIZATIONS

​

We are required by various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses, certificates and other authorizations with respect to our vessels. The kinds of permits, licenses, certificates and other authorizations required for each vessel depend upon several factors, including the commodity transported, the waters in which the vessel operates, the nationality of the vessel’s crew and the age of the vessel. We believe that we have all material permits, licenses, certificates and other authorizations necessary for the conduct of our operations. However, additional laws and regulations, environmental or otherwise, may be adopted which could limit our ability to do business or increase the cost of our doing business.

​

INSURANCE

​

General

​

The operation of any drybulk vessel includes risks such as mechanical failure, collision, property loss, cargo loss or damage and business interruption due to political circumstances in foreign countries, piracy, hostilities and labor strikes. In addition, there is always an inherent possibility of marine disaster, including oil spills and other environmental mishaps, and the liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade. The United States (“U.S.”) Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, which imposes virtually unlimited liability upon owners, operators and demise charterers of vessels trading in the U.S.-exclusive economic zone for certain oil pollution accidents in the United States, has made liability insurance more expensive for ship owners and operators trading in the U.S. market.

​

9

​

Table of Contents

While we maintain hull and machinery insurance, war risks insurance, protection and indemnity cover, and freight, demurrage and defense cover for our fleet and loss of hire insurance for our major bulk vessels in amounts that we believe to be prudent to cover normal risks in our operations, we may not be able to achieve or maintain this level of coverage throughout a vessel’s useful life. Furthermore, while we believe that our present insurance coverage is adequate, not all risks can be insured, and there can be no guarantee that any specific claim will be paid, or that we will always be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates. Additionally, an increase in cost, or unavailability, of insurance for our vessels, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

​

Hull and Machinery, War Risks, Kidnap and Ransom Insurance

​

We maintain marine hull and machinery, war risks and kidnap and ransom insurance, which cover the risk of actual or constructive total loss for all of our vessels. Our vessels are each covered up to at least fair market value with deductibles, which depend primarily on the class of the insured vessel and are subject to change. We are covered, subject to limitations in our policy, to have the crew released in the case of kidnapping due to piracy in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia and the Gulf of Guinea.

​

Protection and Indemnity Insurance

​

Protection and indemnity insurance is provided by mutual protection and indemnity associations, or P&I Associations, which insure our third party liabilities in connection with our shipping activities. This includes third party liability and other related expenses resulting from the injury or death of crew, passengers and other third parties, the loss or damage to cargo, claims arising from collisions with other vessels, damage to other third party property, pollution arising from oil or other substances and salvage, towing and other related costs, including wreck removal. Protection and indemnityinsurance is a form of mutual indemnity insurance, extended by protection and indemnity mutual associations, or “clubs.” Subject to the “capping” discussed below, our coverage, except for pollution, is unlimited.

​

We maintain protection and indemnity insurance coverage for pollution of $1 billion per vessel per incident. The 13 P&I Associations that comprise the International Group insure approximately 90% of the world’s commercial tonnage and have entered into a pooling agreement to reinsure each association’s liabilities. The International Group’s website states that the pool provides a mechanism for sharing all claims in excess of $10 million up to, currently, approximately $8.9 billion. We are a member of P&I Associations, which are members of the International Group. As a result, we are subject to calls payable to the associations based on the group’s claim records as well as the claim records of all other members of the individual associations and members of the pool of P&I Associations comprising the International Group.

​

Loss of Hire Insurance

​

We maintain loss of hire insurance for our major bulk vessels, which covers business interruptions and related losses that result from the loss of use of a vessel. Our loss of hire insurance has a 14-day deductible and provides claim coverage for up to 60 days.

​

ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER REGULATIONS

Government regulation and laws significantly affect the ownership and operation of our fleet. We are subject to international conventions and treaties, national, state and local laws and regulations in force in the countries in which our vessels may operate or are registered relating to safety and health and environmental protection including the storage, handling, emission, transportation and discharge of hazardous and non-hazardous materials, and the remediation of contamination and liability for damage to natural resources. Compliance with such laws, regulations and other requirements entails significant expense, including vessel modifications, procurement of specialized fuels and implementation of certain operating procedures.

A variety of government and private entities subject our vessels to both scheduled and unscheduled inspections. These entities include the local port authorities (applicable national authorities such as the United States Coast Guard (“USCG”), harbor master or equivalent), classification societies, flag state administrations (countries of registry) and

10

​

Table of Contents

charterers, particularly terminal operators. Certain of these entities require us to obtain permits, licenses, certificates and other authorizations for the operation of our vessels. Failure to maintain necessary permits or approvals could require us to incur substantial costs or result in the temporary suspension of the operation of one or more of our vessels.

Increasing environmental concerns have created a demand for vessels that conform to stricter environmental standards. We are required to maintain operating standards for all of our vessels that emphasize operational safety, quality maintenance, continuous training of our officers and crews and compliance with United States and international regulations. We believe that the operation of our vessels is in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and that our vessels have all material permits, licenses, certificates or other authorizations necessary for the conduct of our operations. However, because such laws and regulations frequently change and may impose increasingly stricter requirements, we cannot predict our ability to comply and the ultimate cost of complying with these requirements, or the impact of these requirements on the resale value or useful lives of our vessels. In addition, a future serious marine incident that causes significant adverse environmental impact could result in additional legislation or regulation that could negatively affect our profitability.

As one of the largest drybulk shipping companies in the world, we recognize the need to operate a safe, responsible and sustainable business built for the long term. We regularly integrate Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) practices into our operational and strategic decision making. As such, we aim to meet and, if possible and appropriate for our business, exceed minimum compliance levels set forth in rules and regulations governing the maritime industry, including certain rules and regulations described below.

Over the last several years, we have taken various steps to reduce our carbon footprint and improve the environment, including through investments made to our fleet. Specifically, we have:

● Divested certain older, less fuel-efficient vessels;

International Maritime Organization (IMO)

The International Maritime Organization, the United Nations agency for maritime safety and the prevention of pollution by vessels (the “IMO”), has adopted the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto, collectively referred to as MARPOL 73/78 and herein as “MARPOL,” the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974 (“SOLAS Convention”), and the International Convention on Load Lines of 1966 (the “LL Convention”). MARPOL establishes environmental standards relating to oil leakage or spilling, garbage management, sewage, air emissions, handling and disposal of noxious liquids

11

​

Table of Contents

and the handling of harmful substances in packaged forms. MARPOL is applicable to drybulk, tanker and LNG carriers, among other vessels, and is broken into six Annexes, each of which regulates a different source of pollution. Annex I relates to oil leakage or spilling; Annexes II and III relate to harmful substances carried in bulk in liquid or in packaged form, respectively; Annexes IV and V relate to sewage and garbage management, respectively; and Annex VI, lastly, relates to air emissions. Annex VI was separately adopted by the IMO in September of 1997; new emissions standards, titled IMO-2020, took effect on January 1, 2020.

In 2013, the IMO’s Marine Environmental Protection Committee, or the “MEPC,” adopted a resolution amending MARPOL Annex I Condition Assessment Scheme, or “CAS.” These amendments became effective on October 1, 2014 and require compliance with the 2011 International Code on the Enhanced Programme of Inspections during Surveys of Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers, or “ESP Code,” which provides for enhanced inspection programs. We may need to make certain financial expenditures to comply with these amendments, which could be significant.

Air Emissions

In September of 1997, the IMO adopted Annex VI to MARPOL to address air pollution from vessels. Effective May 2005, Annex VI sets limits on sulfur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from all commercial vessel exhausts and prohibits “deliberate emissions” of ozone depleting substances (such as halons and chlorofluorocarbons), emissions of volatile compounds from cargo tanks, and the shipboard incineration of specific substances. Annex VI also includes a global cap on the sulfur content of fuel oil and allows for special areas to be established with more stringent controls on sulfur emissions, as explained below. Emissions of “volatile organic compounds” from certain vessels, and the shipboard incineration (from incinerators installed after January 1, 2000) of certain substances (such as polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs) are also prohibited. We believe that all our vessels are currently compliant in all material respects with these regulations.

The MEPC adopted amendments to Annex VI regarding emissions of sulfur oxide, nitrogen oxide, particulate matter and ozone depleting substances, which entered into force on July 1, 2010. The amended Annex VI seeks to further reduce air pollution by, among other things, implementing a progressive reduction of the amount of sulfur contained in any fuel oil used on board ships. On October 27, 2016, at its 70th session, the MEPC agreed to implement a global 0.5% m/m sulfur oxide emissions limit (reduced from 3.50%) starting from January 1, 2020. This limitation can be met by using low-sulfur compliant fuel oil, alternative fuels, or certain exhaust gas cleaning systems. Ships are now required to obtain bunker delivery notes and International Air Pollution Prevention (“IAPP”) Certificates from their flag states that specify sulfur content. Additionally, at MEPC 73, amendments to Annex VI to prohibit the carriage of bunkers above 0.5% sulfur on ships were adopted and took effect March 1, 2020, with the exception of vessels fitted with exhaust gas cleaning equipment (“scrubbers”) which can carry fuel of higher sulfur content. These regulations subject ocean-going vessels to stringent emissions controls, and may cause us to incur substantial costs, including those related to the purchase, installation and operation of scrubbers and the purchase of compliant fuel oil.

Sulfur content standards are even stricter within certain “Emission Control Areas,” or (“ECAs”). As of January 1, 2015, ships operating within an ECA were not permitted to use fuel with sulfur content in excess of 0.1% m/m. Amended Annex VI establishes procedures for designating new ECAs. Currently, the IMO has designated four ECAs, including specified portions of the Baltic Sea area, North Sea area, North American area and United States Caribbean area. Ocean-going vessels in these areas will be subject to stringent emission controls and may cause us to incur additional costs. Certain ports in which our vessels call, including China and Singapore, are currently or may become subject to local regulations that impose stricter emission controls. In December 2021, the member states of the Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution (the “Barcelona Convention”) agreed to support the designation of a new ECA in the Mediterranean. On December 15, 2022, MEPC 79 adopted the designation of a new ECA in the Mediterranean, with an effective date of May 1, 2025. If other ECAs are approved by the IMO, or other new or more stringent requirements relating to emissions from marine diesel engines or port operations by vessels are adopted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) or the states where we operate, compliance with these regulations could entail significant capital expenditures or otherwise increase the costs of our operations. Refer to “Capital Expenditures” in Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and “We are subject to regulation and liability under environmental and operational safety laws that could

12

​

Table of Contents

require significant expenditures or subject us to increased liability” in Item 1A. Risk Factors for further details of our plan for compliance and potential costs.

Amended Annex VI also establishes new tiers of stringent nitrogen oxide emissions standards for marine diesel engines, depending on their date of installation. At the MEPC meeting held from March to April 2014, amendments to Annex VI were adopted which address the date on which Tier III Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) standards in ECAs will go into effect. Under the amendments, Tier III NOx standards apply to ships that operate in the North American and U.S. Caribbean Sea ECAs designed for the control of NOx produced by vessels with a marine diesel engine installed and constructed on or after January 1, 2016. Tier III requirements could apply to areas that will be designated for Tier III NOx in the future. At MEPC 70 and MEPC 71, the MEPC approved the North Sea and Baltic Sea as ECAs for nitrogen oxide for ships built on or after January 1, 2021. The EPA promulgated equivalent (and in some senses stricter) emissions standards in 2010 and we are compliant with the Tier I and Tier II requirements for NOx emissions under the EPA standards and Annex VI. We do not currently own any vessels subject to the Tier III requirements, although we may acquire such vessels in the future. As a result of these designations or similar future designations, we may be required to incur additional operating or other costs.

As determined at the MEPC 70, the new Regulation 22A of MARPOL Annex VI became effective as of March 1, 2018 and requires ships above 5,000 gross tonnage to collect and report annual data on fuel oil consumption to an IMO database, with the first year of data collection having commenced on January 1, 2019. The IMO intends to use such data as the first step in its roadmap (through 2023) for developing its strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships, as discussed further below.

As of January 1, 2013, MARPOL made mandatory certain measures relating to energy efficiency for ships. All ships are now required to develop and implement Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plans (“SEEMP”), and new ships must be designed in compliance with minimum energy efficiency levels per capacity mile as defined by the Energy Efficiency Design Index (“EEDI”). Under these measures, by 2025, all new ships built will be 30% more energy efficient than those built in 2014. MEPC 75 adopted amendments to MARPOL Annex VI which brings forward the effective date of the EEDI’s “phase 3” requirements from January 1, 2025 to April 1, 2022 for several ship types, including gas carriers, general cargo ships, and LNG carriers.

Additionally, MEPC 75 introduced draft amendments to Annex VI which impose new regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. These amendments introduce requirements to assess and measure the energy efficiency of all ships and set the required attainment values, with the goal of reducing the carbon intensity of international shipping. The requirements include (1) a technical requirement to reduce carbon intensity based on a new Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (“EEXI”), and (2) operational carbon intensity reduction requirements, based on a new operational carbon intensity indicator (“CII”). The attained EEXI is required to be calculated for ships of 400 gross tonnage and above, in accordance with different values set for ship types and categories. With respect to the CII, the draft amendments would require ships of 5,000 gross tonnage to document and verify their actual annual operational CII achieved against a determined required annual operational CII. Additionally, MEPC 75 proposed draft amendments requiring that, on or before January 1, 2023, all ships above 400 gross tonnage must have an approved SEEMP on board. For ships above 5,000 gross tonnage, the SEEMP would need to include certain mandatory content. MEPC 75 also approved draft amendments to MARPOL Annex I to prohibit the use and carriage for use as fuel of heavy fuel oil (“HFO”) by ships in Arctic waters on and after July 1, 2024. The draft amendments introduced at MEPC 75 were adopted at the MEPC 76 session in June 2021 and entered into force in November 2022, with the requirements for EEXI and CII certification coming into effect from January 1, 2023. MEPC 77 adopted a non-binding resolution which urges Member States and ship operators to voluntarily use distillate or other cleaner alternative fuels or methods of propulsion that are safe for ships and could contribute to the reduction of Black Carbon emissions from ships when operating in or near the Arctic. MEPC 79 adopted amendments to MARPOL Annex VI, Appendix IX to include the attained and required CII values, the CII rating and attained EEXI for existing ships in the required information to be submitted to the IMO Ship Fuel Oil Consumption Database. The amendments will enter into force on May 1, 2024.

​

We may incur costs to comply with these revised standards. Additional or new conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted that could require the installation of expensive emission control systems and could adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. Genco plans to continue to invest in its

13

​

Table of Contents

existing fleet to improve fuel efficiency and comply with these revised standards through its comprehensive IMO 2023 plan.

​

Safety Management System Requirements

The SOLAS Convention was amended to address the safe manning of vessels and emergency training drills. The Convention of Limitation of Liability for Maritime Claims (the “LLMC”) sets limitations of liability for a loss of life or personal injury claim or a property claim against ship owners. We believe that our vessels are in substantial compliance with SOLAS and LLMC standards.

Under Chapter IX of the SOLAS Convention, or the International Safety Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention (the “ISM Code”), our operations are also subject to environmental standards and requirements. The ISM Code requires the party with operational control of a vessel to develop an extensive safety management system that includes, among other things, the adoption of a safety and environmental protection policy setting forth instructions and procedures for operating its vessels safely and describing procedures for responding to emergencies. We rely upon the safety management system that we and our technical management team have developed for compliance with the ISM Code. The failure of a vessel owner or bareboat charterer to comply with the ISM Code may subject such party to increased liability, may decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.

The ISM Code requires that vessel operators obtain a safety management certificate for each vessel they operate. This certificate evidences compliance by a vessel’s management with the ISM Code requirements for a safety management system. No vessel can obtain a safety management certificate unless its manager has been awarded a document of compliance, issued by each flag state, under the ISM Code. GSSM has valid documents of compliance for our offices and safety management certificates for all of our vessels for which the certificates are required by the IMO. The document of compliance and safety management certificate are renewed as required.

Regulation II-1/3-10 of the SOLAS Convention governs ship construction and stipulates that ships over 150 meters in length must have adequate strength, integrity and stability to minimize risk of loss or pollution. Goal-based standards amendments in SOLAS regulation II-1/3-10 entered into force in 2012, with July 1, 2016 set for application to new oil tankers and bulk carriers. The SOLAS Convention regulation II-1/3-10 on goal-based ship construction standards for bulk carriers and oil tankers, which entered into force on January 1, 2012, requires that all oil tankers and bulk carriers of 150 meters in length and above, for which the building contract is placed on or after July 1, 2016, satisfy applicable structural requirements conforming to the functional requirements of the International Goal-based Ship Construction Standards for Bulk Carriers and Oil Tankers (“GBS Standards”).

Amendments to the SOLAS Convention Chapter VII apply to vessels transporting dangerous goods and require those vessels be in compliance with the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code (“IMDG Code”). Effective January 1, 2018, the IMDG Code includes (1) updates to the provisions for radioactive material, reflecting the latest provisions from the International Atomic Energy Agency, (2) new marking, packing and classification requirements for dangerous goods, and (3) new mandatory training requirements. Amendments that took effect on January 1, 2020, also reflect the latest material from the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, including (1) new provision regarding IMO type 9 tank, (2) new abbreviations for segregation groups, and (3) special provisions for carriage of lithium batteries and of vehicles powered by flammable liquid or gas. Additional amendments, which came into force on June 1, 2022, include (1) addition of a definition of dosage rate, (2) additions to the list of high consequence dangerous goods, (3) new provisions for medical/clinical waste, (4) addition of various ISO standards for gas cylinders, (5) a new handling code, and (6) changes to stowage and segregation provisions.

The IMO has also adopted the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (“STCW”). As of February 2017, all seafarers are required to meet the STCW standards and be in possession of a valid STCW certificate. Flag states that have ratified SOLAS and STCW generally employ the classification societies, which have incorporated SOLAS and STCW requirements into their class rules, to undertake surveys to confirm compliance.

14

​

Table of Contents

The IMO's Maritime Safety Committee and MEPC, respectively, each adopted relevant parts of the International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Water (the “Polar Code”). The Polar Code, which entered into force on January 1, 2017, covers design, construction, equipment, operational, training, search and rescue as well as environmental protection matters relevant to ships operating in the waters surrounding the two poles. It also includes mandatory measures regarding safety and pollution prevention as well as recommendatory provisions. The Polar Code applies to new ships constructed after January 1, 2017, and after January 1, 2018, ships constructed before January 1, 2017 are required to meet the relevant requirements by the earlier of their first intermediate or renewal survey.

Furthermore, recent action by the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee and United States agencies indicates that cybersecurity regulations for the maritime industry are likely to be further developed in the near future in an attempt to combat cybersecurity threats. By IMO resolution, administrations are encouraged to ensure that cyber-risk management systems must be incorporated by ship-owners and managers by their first annual Document of Compliance audit after January 1,2021. In February 2021, the U.S. Coast Guard published guidance on addressing cyber risks in a vessel’s safety management system. This might cause companies to create additional procedures for monitoring cybersecurity, which could require additional expenses and/or capital expenditures. The impact of future regulations is hard to predict at this time.

In June 2022, SOLAS also set out new amendments that will take effect January 1, 2024, which include new requirements for: (1) the design for safe mooring operations, (2) the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (“GMDSS”), (3) watertight integrity, (4) watertight doors on cargo ships, (5) fault-isolation of fire detection systems, (6) life-saving appliances, and (7) safety of ships using LNG as fuel. These new requirements may impact the cost of our operations.

Pollution Control and Liability Requirements

The IMO has negotiated international conventions that impose liability for pollution in international waters and the territorial waters of the signatories to such conventions. For example, the IMO adopted an International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (the “BWM Convention”) in 2004. The BWM Convention entered into force on September 8, 2017. The BWM Convention requires ships to manage their ballast water to remove, render harmless, or avoid the uptake or discharge of new or invasive aquatic organisms and pathogens within ballast water and sediments. The BWM Convention’s implementing regulations call for a phased introduction of mandatory ballast water exchange requirements, to be replaced in time with mandatory concentration limits, and require all ships to carry a ballast water record book and an international ballast water management certificate.

On December 4, 2013, the IMO Assembly passed a resolution revising the application dates of the BWM Convention so that the dates are triggered by the entry into force date and not the dates originally in the BWM Convention. This, in effect, makes all vessels delivered before the entry into force date “existing vessels” and allows for the installation of ballast water management systems on such vessels at the first International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP) renewal survey following entry into force of the convention. The MEPC adopted updated guidelines for approval of ballast water management systems (G8) at MEPC 70. At MEPC 71, the schedule regarding the BWM Convention’s implementation dates was also discussed and amendments were introduced to extend the date existing vessels are subject to certain ballast water standards. Those changes were adopted at MEPC 72. Ships over 400 gross tons generally must comply with a “D-1 standard,” requiring the exchange of ballast water only in open seas and away from coastal waters. The “D-2 standard” specifies the maximum amount of viable organisms allowed to be discharged, and compliance dates vary depending on the IOPP renewal dates. Depending on the date of the IOPP renewal survey, existing vessels must comply with the D-2 standard on or after September 8, 2019. For most ships, compliance with the D-2 standard will involve installing on-board systems to treat ballast water and eliminate unwanted organisms. Ballast water management systems, which include systems that make use of chemical, biocides, organisms or biological mechanisms, or which alter the chemical or physical characteristics of the ballast water, must be approved in accordance with IMO Guidelines (Regulation D-3). As of October 13, 2019, MEPC 72’s amendments to the BWM Convention took effect, making the Code for Approval of Ballast Water Management Systems, which governs assessment of ballast water management systems, mandatory rather than permissive, and formalized an implementation schedule for the D-2 standard. Under these amendments, all ships must meet the D-2 standard by September 8, 2024. Costs of compliance with these regulations may be substantial. Additionally, in November 2020, MEPC 75 adopted amendments to the BWM

15

​

Table of Contents

Convention which would require a commissioning test of the ballast water management system for the initial survey or when performing an additional survey for retrofits. This analysis will not apply to ships that already have an installed BWM system certified under the BWM Convention. These amendments entered into force on June 1, 2022. In December 2022, MEPC 79 agreed that it should be permitted to use ballast tanks for temporary storage of treated sewage and grey water. MEPC 79 also established that ships are expected to return to D-2 compliance after experiencing challenging uptake water and bypassing a BWM system should only be used as a last resort. Guidance will be developed at MEPC 80 (in July 2023) to set out appropriate actions and uniform procedures to ensure compliance with the BWM Convention.

During the fourth quarter of 2018, we originally entered into agreements for the purchase of ballast water treatments systems for 36 of our vessels. As of December 31, 2022, we have installed such systems on 24 vessels that were not already fitted with a ballast water treatment system upon purchase (excluding eleven vessels that have been sold), and we expect the remaining one to be installed during the first quarter of 2023. After the installation of these ballast water treatment systems, all of our vessels will be in compliance with these standards.

Once mid-ocean ballast exchange ballast water treatment requirements become mandatory under the BWM Convention, the cost of compliance could increase for ocean carriers and may have a material effect on our operations. However, many countries already regulate the discharge of ballast water carried by vessels from country to country to prevent the introduction of invasive and harmful species via such discharges. The U.S., for example, requires vessels entering its waters from another country to conduct mid-ocean ballast exchange, or undertake some alternate measure, and to comply with certain reporting requirements. The system specification requirements for trading in the U.S. have been formalized and we have been installing ballast water treatment systems on our vessels as their special survey deadlines come due. These ballast water treatment systems range in cost from $0.5 million to $1.09 million each, primarily dependent on the size of the vessel. Refer to “Capital Expenditures” section for further information.

The IMO adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969, as amended by different Protocols in 1976, 1984, and 1992, and amended in 2000 (the “CLC”). Under the CLC and depending on whether the country in which the damage results is a party to the 1992 Protocol to the CLC, a vessel’s registered owner may be strictly liable for pollution damage caused in the territorial waters of a contracting state by discharge of persistent oil, subject to certain exceptions. The 1992 Protocol changed certain limits on liability expressed using the International Monetary Fund currency unit, the Special Drawing Rights. The limits on liability have since been amended so that the compensation limits on liability were raised. The right to limit liability is forfeited under the CLC where the spill is caused by the shipowner’s actual fault and under the 1992 Protocol where the spill is caused by the shipowner’s intentional or reckless act or omission where the shipowner knew pollution damage would probably result. The CLC requires ships over 2,000 tons covered by it to maintain insurance covering the liability of the owner in a sum equivalent to an owner’s liability for a single incident. We have protection and indemnity insurance for environmental incidents. P&I Clubs in the International Group issue the required Bunkers Convention “Blue Cards” to enable signatory states to issue certificates. All of our vessels are in possession of a CLC State issued certificate attesting that the required insurance coverage is in force.

The IMO also adopted the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage (the “Bunker Convention”) to impose strict liability on ship owners (including the registered owner, bareboat charterer, manager or operator) for pollution damage in jurisdictional waters of ratifying states caused by discharges of bunker fuel. The Bunker Convention requires registered owners of ships over 1,000 gross tons to maintain insurance for pollution damage in an amount equal to the limits of liability under the applicable national or international limitation regime (but not exceeding the amount calculated in accordance with the LLMC). With respect to non-ratifying states, liability for spills or releases of oil carried as fuel in ship’s bunkers typically is determined by the national or other domestic laws in the jurisdiction where the events or damages occur.

Ships are required to maintain a certificate attesting that they maintain adequate insurance to cover an incident. In jurisdictions, such as the United States where the CLC or the Bunker Convention has not been adopted, various legislative schemes or common law govern, and liability is imposed either on the basis of fault or on a strict-liability basis.

16

​

Table of Contents

Anti-Fouling Requirements

​

In 2001, the IMO adopted the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships, or the “Anti-fouling Convention.” The Anti-fouling Convention, which entered into force on September 17, 2008, prohibits the use of organotin compound coatings to prevent the attachment of mollusks and other sea life to the hulls of vessels. The exteriors of vessels constructed prior to January 1, 2003 that have not been in drydock must, as of September 17, 2008, either not contain the prohibited compounds or have coatings applied to the vessel exterior that act as a barrier to the leaching of the prohibited compounds. Vessels of over 400 gross tons engaged in international voyages will also be required to undergo an initial survey before the vessel is put into service or before an International Anti-fouling System Certificate, or the “IAFS Certificate,” is issued for the first time; and subsequent surveys when the anti-fouling systems are altered or replaced. Vessels of 24 meters in length or more but less than 400 gross tonnage engaged in international voyages will have to carry a Declaration on Anti-fouling Systems signed by the owner or authorized agent.

​

In November 2020, MEPC 75 approved draft amendments to the Anti-fouling Convention to prohibit anti-fouling systems containing cybutryne, which would apply to ships from January 1, 2023, or, for ships already bearing such an anti-fouling system, at the next scheduled renewal of the system after that date, but no later than 60 months following the last application to the ship of such a system. In addition, the IAFS Certificate has been updated to address compliance options for anti-fouling systems to address cybutryne. Ships which are affected by this ban on cybutryne must receive an updated IAFS Certificate no later than two years after the entry into force of these amendments. Ships which are not affected (i.e. with anti-fouling systems which do not contain cybutryne) must receive an updated IAFS Certificate at the next Anti-fouling application to the vessel. These amendments were formally adopted at MEPC 76 in June 2021.

​

We have obtained Anti-fouling System Certificates for all of our vessels that are subject to the Anti-fouling Convention.

Compliance Enforcement

Noncompliance with the ISM Code or other IMO regulations may subject the ship owner or bareboat charterer to increased liability, may lead to decreases in available insurance coverage for affected vessels and may result in the denial of access to, or detention in, some ports. The USCG and European Union authorities have indicated that vessels not in compliance with the ISM Code by applicable deadlines will be prohibited from trading in U.S. and European Union ports, respectively. As of the date of this report, each of our vessels is ISM Code certified. However, there can be no assurance that such certificates will be maintained in the future. The IMO continues to review and introduce new regulations. It is impossible to predict what additional regulations, if any, may be passed by the IMO and what effect, if any, such regulations might have on our operations.

United States Regulations

The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act

The U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA”) established an extensive regulatory and liability regime for the protection and cleanup of the environment from oil spills. OPA affects all “owners and operators” whose vessels trade or operate within the U.S., its territories and possessions or whose vessels operate in U.S. waters, which includes the U.S.’s territorial sea and its 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone around the U.S. The U.S. has also enacted the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), which applies to the discharge of hazardous substances other than oil, except in limited circumstances, whether on land or at sea. OPA and CERCLA both define “owner and operator” in the case of a vessel as any person owning, operating or chartering by demise, the vessel. Both OPA and CERCLA impact our operations.

Under OPA, vessel owners and operators are “responsible parties” and are jointly, severally and strictly liable (unless the spill results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war) for all

17

​

Table of Contents

containment and clean-up costs and other damages arising from discharges or threatened discharges of oil from their vessels, including bunkers (fuel). OPA defines these other damages broadly to include:

OPA contains statutory caps on liability and damages; such caps do not apply to direct cleanup costs. Effective November 12, 2019, the USCG adjusted the limits of OPA liability for non-tank vessels, edible oil tank vessels, and any oil spill response vessels, to the greater of $1,200 per gross ton or $997,100 (subject to periodic adjustment for inflation). On December 23, 2022, the USCG issued a final rule to adjust the limitation of liability under the OPA. Effective March 23, 2022, the new adjusted limits of OPA liability for non-tank vessels, edible oil tank vessels, and any oil spill response vessels, to the greater of $1,300 per gross ton or $1,076,000 (subject to periodic adjustment for inflation).

These limits of liability do not apply if an incident was proximately caused by the violation of an applicable U.S. federal safety, construction or operating regulation by a responsible party (or its agent, employee or a person acting pursuant to a contractual relationship), or a responsible party's gross negligence or willful misconduct. The limitation on liability similarly does not apply if the responsible party fails or refuses to (i) report the incident as required by law where the responsible party knows or has reason to know of the incident; (ii) reasonably cooperate and assist as requested in connection with oil removal activities; or (iii) without sufficient cause, comply with an order issued under the Federal Water Pollution Act (Section 311 (c), (e)) or the Intervention on the High Seas Act.

CERCLA contains a similar liability regime whereby owners and operators of vessels are liable for cleanup, removal and remedial costs, as well as damages for injury to, or destruction or loss of, natural resources, including the reasonable costs associated with assessing the same, and health assessments or health effects studies. There is no liability if the discharge of a hazardous substance results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of war. Liability under CERCLA is limited to the greater of $300 per gross ton or $5.0 million for vessels carrying a hazardous substance as cargo and the greater of $300 per gross ton or $500,000 for any other vessel. These limits do not apply (rendering the responsible person liable for the total cost of response and damages) if the release or threat of release of a hazardous substance resulted from willful misconduct or negligence, or the primary cause of the release was a violation of applicable safety, construction or operating standards or regulations. The limitation on liability also does not apply if the responsible person fails or refused to provide all reasonable cooperation and assistance as requested in connection with response activities where the vessel is subject to OPA.

OPA and CERCLA each preserve the right to recover damages under existing law, including maritime tort law. OPA and CERCLA both require owners and operators of vessels to establish and maintain with the USCG evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to meet the maximum amount of liability to which the particular responsible person may be subject. Vessel owners and operators may satisfy their financial responsibility obligations by providing a proof of insurance, a surety bond, qualification as a self-insurer or a guarantee. We comply and plan to comply going forward with the USCG’s financial responsibility regulations by providing applicable certificates of financial responsibility.

The 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico resulted in additional regulatory initiatives and statutes, including higher liability caps under OPA, new regulations regarding offshore oil and gas drilling, and a pilot inspection program for offshore facilities. However, several of these initiatives and regulations have been or may be revised. For example, the U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement’s (“BSEE”) revised Production Safety

18

​

Table of Contents

Systems Rule (“PSSR”), effective December 27, 2018, modified and relaxed certain environmental and safety protections under the 2016 PSSR. Additionally, the BSEE amended the Well Control Rule, effective July 15, 2019, which rolled back certain reforms regarding the safety of drilling operations, and former U.S. President Trump had proposed leasing new sections of U.S. waters to oil and gas companies for offshore drilling. In January 2021, current U.S. President Biden signed an executive order temporarily blocking new leases for oil and gas drilling in federal waters. However, attorney generals from 13 states filed suit in March 2021 to lift the executive order, and in June 2021, a federal judge in Louisiana granted a preliminary injunction against the Biden administration, stating that the power to pause offshore oil and gas leases “lies solely with Congress.” In August 2022, a federal judge in Louisiana sided with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, along with the other 12 plaintiff states, by issuing a permanent injunction against the Biden Administration’s moratorium on oil and gas leasing on federal public lands and offshore waters. With these rapid changes, compliance with any new requirements of OPA and future legislation or regulations applicable to the operation of our vessels could impact the cost of our operations and adversely affect our business.

OPA specifically permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to oil pollution incidents occurring within their boundaries, provided they accept, at a minimum, the levels of liability established under OPA and some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for oil spills. Many U.S. states that border a navigable waterway have enacted environmental pollution laws that impose strict liability on a person for removal costs and damages resulting from a discharge of oil or a release of a hazardous substance. These laws may be more stringent than U.S. federal law. Moreover, some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for discharge of pollutants within their waters, although in some cases, states which have enacted this type of legislation have not yet issued implementing regulations defining vessel owners’ responsibilities under these laws. We intend to comply with all applicable state regulations in the ports where our vessels call.

While we do not carry oil as cargo, we do carry fuel and lube oil in our drybulk carriers. We currently maintain pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1 billion per incident for each of our vessels. If the damages from a catastrophic spill were to exceed our insurance coverage, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations, cash flows, and ability to pay dividends.

Other United States Environmental Regulations

The U.S. Clean Air Act of 1970 (including its amendments of 1977 and 1990) (“CAA”) requires the EPA to promulgate standards applicable to emissions of volatile organic compounds and other air contaminants. The CAA requires states to adopt State Implementation Plans, or SIPs, some of which regulate emissions resulting from vessel loading and unloading operations which may affect our vessels.

The U.S. Clean Water Act (“CWA”) prohibits the discharge of oil, hazardous substances and ballast water in U.S. navigable waters unless authorized by a duly-issued permit or exemption, and imposes strict liability in the form of penalties for any unauthorized discharges. The CWA also imposes substantial liability for the costs of removal, remediation and damages and complements the remedies available under OPA and CERCLA. In 2015, the EPA expanded the definition of “waters of the United States” (“WOTUS”), thereby expanding federal authority under the CWA. Following litigation on the revised WOTUS rule, in December 2018, the EPA and Department of the Army proposed a revised, limited definition of WOTUS. In 2019 and 2020, the agencies repealed the prior WOTUS Rule and promulgated the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (“NWPR”) which significantly reduced the scope and oversight of EPA and the Department of the Army in traditionally non-navigable waterways. On August 30, 2021, a federal district court in Arizona vacated the NWPR and directed the agencies to replace the rule. On December 7, 2021, the EPA and the Department of the Army proposed a rule that would reinstate the pre-2015 definition. On December 30, 2022, the EPA and the Department of Army announced the final WOTUS rule that largely reinstated the pre-2015 definition.

The EPA and the USCG have also enacted rules relating to ballast water discharge, compliance with which requires the installation of equipment on our vessels to treat ballast water before it is discharged or the implementation of other port facility disposal arrangements or procedures at potentially substantial costs, and/or otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. Waters. The EPA will regulate these ballast water discharges and other discharges incidental to the normal operation of certain vessels within United States waters pursuant to the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (“VIDA”), which was signed into law on December 4, 2018 and replaces the 2013 Vessel General Permit (“VGP”)

19

​

Table of Contents

program (which authorizes discharges incidental to operations of commercial vessels and contains numeric ballast water discharge limits for most vessels to reduce the risk of invasive species in U.S. waters, stringent requirements for exhaust gas scrubbers, and requirements for the use of environmentally acceptable lubricants) and current Coast Guard ballast water management regulations adopted under the U.S. National Invasive Species Act (“NISA”), such as mid-ocean ballast exchange programs and installation of approved USCG technology for all vessels equipped with ballast water tanks bound for U.S. ports or entering U.S. waters. VIDA establishes a new framework for the regulation of vessel incidental discharges under Clean Water Act (CWA), requires the EPA to develop performance standards for those discharges within two years of enactment, and requires the U.S. Coast Guard to develop implementation, compliance, and enforcement regulations within two years of EPA’s promulgation of standards. Under VIDA, all provisions of the 2013 VGP and USCG regulations regarding ballast water treatment remain in force and effect until the EPA and U.S. Coast Guard regulations are finalized. Non-military, non-recreational vessels greater than 79 feet in length must continue to comply with the requirements of the VGP, including submission of a Notice of Intent (“NOI”) or retention of a PARI form and submission of annual reports. We have submitted NOIs for our vessels where required. On October 26, 2020, the EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Vessel Incidental Discharge National Standards of Performance under VIDA. Within two years after the EPA publishes its final Vessel Incidental Discharge National Standards of Performance, the U.S. Coast Guard must develop corresponding implementation, compliance and enforcement regulations regarding ballast water. Compliance with the EPA, U.S. Coast Guard and state regulations could require the installation of ballast water treatment equipment on our vessels or the implementation of other port facility disposal procedures at potentially substantial cost, or may otherwise restrict our vessels from entering U.S. waters.

European Union Regulations

In October 2009, the European Union amended a directive to impose criminal sanctions for illicit ship-source discharges of polluting substances, including minor discharges, if committed with intent, recklessly or with serious negligence and the discharges individually or in the aggregate result in deterioration of the quality of water. Aiding and abetting the discharge of a polluting substance may also lead to criminal penalties. The directive applies to all types of vessels, irrespective of their flag, but certain exceptions apply to warships or where human safety or that of the ship is in danger. Criminal liability for pollution may result in substantial penalties or fines and increased civil liability claims. Regulation (EU) 2015/757 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2015 (amending EU Directive 2009/16/EC) governs the monitoring, reporting and verification of carbon dioxide emissions from maritime transport, and, subject to some exclusions, requires companies with ships over 5,000 gross tonnage to monitor and report carbon dioxide emissions annually, which may cause us to incur additional expenses.

The European Union has adopted several regulations and directives requiring, among other things, more frequent inspections of high-risk ships, as determined by type, age, and flag as well as the number of times the ship has been detained. The European Union also adopted and extended a ban on substandard ships and enacted a minimum ban period and a definitive ban for repeated offenses. The regulations also provided the European Union with greater authority and control over classification societies, by imposing more requirements on classification societies and providing for fines or penalty payments for organizations that failed to comply. Furthermore, the EU has implemented regulations requiring vessels to use reduced sulfur content fuel for their main and auxiliary engines. The EU Directive 2005/33/EC (amending Directive 1999/32/EC) introduced requirements parallel to those in Annex VI relating to the sulfur content of marine fuels. In addition, the EU imposed a 0.1% maximum sulfur requirement for fuel used by ships at berth in the Baltic, the North Sea and the English Channel (the so-called “SOx-Emission Control Area”). As of January 2020, EU member states must also ensure that ships in all EU waters, except the SOx-Emission Control are, use fuels with a 0.5% maximum sulfur content.

On September 15, 2020, the European Parliament voted to include greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime sector in the European Union’s carbon market, the EU Emissions Trading System (“EU ETS”). On July 14, 2021, the European Parliament formally proposed its plan, which would involve gradually including the maritime sector from 2023 and phasing the sector in over a three-year period. This will require shipowners to buy permits to cover these emissions. The Environment Council adopted a general approach on the proposal in June 2022. On December 18, 2022, the Environmental Council and European Parliament agreed to include maritime shipping emissions within the scope of the EU ETS on a gradual introduction of obligations for shipping companies to surrender allowances: 40% for verified

20

​

Table of Contents

emissions from 2024, 70% for 2025 and 100% for 2026. Most large vessels will be included in the scope of the EU ETS from the start. Big offshore vessels of 5,000 gross tonnage and above will be included in the 'MRV' on the monitoring, reporting and verification of CO2 emissions from maritime transport regulation from 2025 and in the EU ETS from 2027. General cargo vessels and off-shore vessels between 400-5,000 gross tonnage will be included in the MRV regulation from 2025 and their inclusion in EU ETS will be reviewed in 2026

Greenhouse Gas Regulation

Our industry currently is heavily dependent on the consumption of fossil fuels, which has been linked by certain experts to greenhouse gas emissions and the warming of the global climate system. We are committed to working to reduce our carbon footprint, including by transitioning to low-carbon fuels while continuing to deliver for our customers. Our governance, strategy, risk management and performance monitoring efforts with respect to managing this challenge continue to evolve.

Currently, the emissions of greenhouse gases from international shipping are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which entered into force in 2005 and pursuant to which adopting countries have been required to implement national programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions with targets extended through 2020. International negotiations are continuing with respect to a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, and restrictions on shipping emissions may be included in any new treaty. In December 2009, more than 27 nations, including the U.S. and China, signed the Copenhagen Accord, which includes a non-binding commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris resulted in the Paris Agreement, which entered into force on November 4, 2016 and does not directly limit greenhouse gas emissions from ships. The U.S. initially entered into the agreement, but on June 1, 2017, former U.S. President Trump announced that the United States intended to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, and the withdrawal became effective on November 4, 2020. On January 20, 2021, U.S. President Biden signed an executive order to rejoin the Paris Agreement, which the U.S. officially rejoined on February 19, 2021.

At MEPC 70 and MEPC 71, a draft outline of the structure of the initial strategy for developing a comprehensive IMO strategy on reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from ships was approved. In accordance with this roadmap, in April 2018, nations at the MEPC 72 adopted an initial strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from ships. The initial strategy identifies “levels of ambition” to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, including (1) decreasing the carbon intensity from ships through implementation of further phases of the EEDI for new ships; (2) reducing carbon dioxide emissions per transport work, as an average across international shipping, by at least 40% by 2030, pursuing efforts towards 70% by 2050, compared to 2008 emission levels; and (3) reducing the total annual greenhouse emissions by at least 50% by 2050 compared to 2008 while pursuing efforts towards phasing them out entirely. The initial strategy notes that technological innovation, alternative fuels and/or energy sources for international shipping will be integral to achieve the overall ambition. These regulations could cause us to incur additional substantial expenses. At MEPC 77, the Member States agreed to initiate the revision of the Initial IMO Strategy on Reduction of GHG emissions from ships, recognizing the need to strengthen the ambition during the revision process. MEPC 79 revised the EEDI calculation guidelines to include a CO2 conversion factor for ethane, a reference to the updated ITCC guidelines, and a clarification that in case of a ship with multiple load line certificates, the maximum certified summer draft should be used when determining the deadweight. A final draft Revised IMO GHG Strategy would be considered by MEPC 80 (scheduled to meet in July 2023), with a view to adoption. Various parties, particularly those attending the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference at the end of last year, have called upon the maritime community to increase their ambition regarding decarbonization goals. Genco, among many other companies across the maritime value chain, became a signatory to Call to Action for Shipping Decarbonization focusing on decarbonizing shipping by 2050.

The EU made a unilateral commitment to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions from its member states from 20% of 1990 levels by 2020. The EU also committed to reduce its emissions by 20% under the Kyoto Protocol’s second period from 2013 to 2020. Starting in January 2018, large ships over 5,000 gross tonnage calling at EU ports are required to collect and publish data on carbon dioxide emissions and other information. As noted above, regulations relating to the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime sector in the European Union’s carbon market, EU ETS, are also forthcoming..

21

​

Table of Contents

In the United States, the EPA issued a finding that greenhouse gases endanger the public health and safety, adopted regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from certain mobile sources, and proposed regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from large stationary sources. However, in March 2017, former U.S. President Trump signed an executive order to review and possibly eliminate the EPA’s plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions, and in August 2019, the Administration announced plans to weaken regulations for methane emissions. Further, on August 13, 2020, the EPA released rules rolling back standards to control methane and volatile organic compound emissions from new oil and gas facilities. However, U.S. President Biden recently directed the EPA to publish a proposed rule suspending, revising, or rescinding certain of these rules. On November 2, 2021, the EPA issued a proposed rule under the CAA designed to reduce methane emissions from oil and gas sources. The proposed rule would reduce 41 million tons of methane emissions between 2023 and 2035 and cut methane emissions in the oil and gas sector by approximately 74 percent compared to emissions from this sector in 2005. EPA issued a supplemental proposed rule in November 2022 to include additional methane reduction measures following public input and anticipates issuing a final rule in 2023. If these new regulations are finalized, they could affect our operations.

Any passage of climate control legislation or other regulatory initiatives by the IMO, the EU, the U.S. or other countries where we operate, or any treaty adopted at the international level to succeed the Kyoto Protocol or Paris Agreement, that restricts emissions of greenhouse gases could require us to make significant financial expenditures which we cannot predict with certainty at this time. Even in the absence of climate control legislation, our business may be indirectly affected to the extent that climate change may result in sea level changes or certain weather events.

International Labour Organization

The International Labour Organization (the “ILO”) is a specialized agency of the UN that has adopted the Maritime Labor Convention 2006 (“MLC 2006”). A Maritime Labor Certificate and a Declaration of Maritime Labor Compliance is required to ensure compliance with the MLC 2006 for all ships that are 500 gross tonnage or over and are either engaged in international voyages or flying the flag of a Member and operating from a port, or between ports, in another country. We believe that all of our vessels are in substantial compliance with and are certified to meet MLC 2006.

Vessel Security Regulations

Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 in the United States, there have been a variety of initiatives intended to enhance vessel security such as the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (“MTSA”). To implement certain portions of the MTSA, the USCG issued regulations requiring the implementation of certain security requirements aboard vessels operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and at certain ports and facilities, some of which are regulated by the EPA.

Similarly, Chapter XI-2 of the SOLAS Convention imposes detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities and mandates compliance with the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (“the ISPS Code”). The ISPS Code is designed to enhance the security of ports and ships against terrorism. To trade internationally, a vessel must attain an International Ship Security Certificate (“ISSC”) from a recognized security organization approved by the vessel’s flag state. Ships operating without a valid certificate may be detained, expelled from, or refused entry at port until they obtain an ISSC. The various requirements, some of which are found in the SOLAS Convention, include, for example, on-board installation of automatic identification systems to provide a means for the automatic transmission of safety-related information from among similarly equipped ships and shore stations, including information on a ship’s identity, position, course, speed and navigational status; on-board installation of ship security alert systems, which do not sound on the vessel but only alert the authorities on shore; the development of vessel security plans; ship identification number to be permanently marked on a vessel’s hull; a continuous synopsis record kept onboard showing a vessel's history including the name of the ship, the state whose flag the ship is entitled to fly, the date on which the ship was registered with that state, the ship's identification number, the port at which the ship is registered and the name of the registered owner(s) and their registered address; and compliance with flag state security certification requirements.

The USCG regulations, intended to align with international maritime security standards, exempt non-U.S. vessels from MTSA vessel security measures, provided such vessels have on board a valid ISSC that attests to the vessel’s compliance with the SOLAS Convention security requirements and the ISPS Code. Future security measures

22

​

Table of Contents

could have a significant financial impact on us. We intend to comply with the various security measures addressed by MTSA, the SOLAS Convention and the ISPS Code.

The cost of vessel security measures has also been affected by the escalation in the frequency of acts of piracy against ships, notably off the coast of Somalia, including the Gulf of Aden and Arabian Sea area, as well as off the coast of Western Africa. Substantial loss of revenue and other costs may be incurred as a result of detention of a vessel or additional security measures, and the risk of uninsured losses could significantly affect our business. Costs are incurred in taking additional security measures in accordance with Best Management Practices to Deter Piracy, notably those contained in the BMP5 industry standard.

Inspection by Classification Societies

​

The hull and machinery of every commercial vessel must be classed by a classification society authorized by its country of registry. The classification society certifies that a vessel is safe and seaworthy in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the country of registry of the vessel and SOLAS. Most insurance underwriters make it a condition for insurance coverage and lending that a vessel be certified “in class” by a classification society which is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies, the IACS. The IACS has adopted harmonized Common Structural Rules, or “the Rules,” which apply to oil tankers and bulk carriers contracted for construction on or after July 1, 2015. The Rules attempt to create a level of consistency between IACS Societies. All of our vessels are certified as being “in class” by all the applicable Classification Societies (American Bureau of Shipping, DNVGL, or Lloyd's Register of Shipping). All new and secondhand vessels that we purchase must be certified prior to their delivery under our standard agreements.

A vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys, drydockings and special surveys. In lieu of a special survey, a vessel’s machinery may be on a continuous survey cycle, under which the machinery would be surveyed periodically over a five-year period. Every vessel is also required to be surveyed every 30 to 36 months for inspection of the underwater parts of the vessel. If any vessel does not maintain its class and/or fails any annual survey, intermediate survey, drydocking or special survey, the vessel will be unable to carry cargo between ports and will be unemployable and uninsurable which could cause us to be in violation of certain covenants in our loan agreements. Any such inability to carry cargo or be employed, or any such violation of covenants, could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

SEASONALITY

​

We operate our vessels in markets that have historically exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, there have been seasonal variations in freight and charter rates. We may seek to mitigate the risk of these seasonal variations by entering into long-term time charters for certain of our vessels, where possible. However, this seasonality may result in quarter-to-quarter volatility in our operating results, depending on when we enter into our time charters or if our vessels trade on the spot market. The drybulk sector is typically stronger in the fall and winter months in anticipation of increased consumption of coal and raw materials in the northern hemisphere during the winter months. As a result, our revenues could be weaker during the fiscal quarters ended June 30 and September 30, and conversely, our revenues could be stronger during the quarters ended December 31 and March 31.

​

23

​

Table of Contents

​

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

​

The following risk factors and other information included in this report should be carefully considered. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition, operating results or cash flows could be materially and adversely affected, and the trading price of our common stock could decline.

​

RISK FACTORS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS AND OPERATIONS

​

Industry Specific Risk Factors

​

A downturn in the global economic environment may negatively impact our business.

​

If the current global economic environment worsens, we may be negatively affected in a number of ways.

​

As a result of low freight and charter rates that in some instances may not allow us to operate our vessels profitably, our earnings and cash flows could decline. Continuation of these types of conditions for a prolonged period may leave us with insufficient cash resources for our operations or required debt repayments under our credit facility, which would potentially accelerate the repayment of our outstanding indebtedness.

​

If our earnings and cash flows decline for a prolonged period, we may also breach one or more of our credit facility covenants, such as those relating to our minimum cash balance, collateral maintenance, or minimum working capital. This also would potentially accelerate the repayment of outstanding indebtedness. Additionally, our charterers may fail to meet their obligations under our time charter and freight agreements.

​

A significant number of our vessels’ port calls involve loading or discharging raw materials and semi-finished products in the Asia Pacific region. As a result, a negative change in economic conditions in any Asia Pacific country, particularly in China, India, or Japan, could adversely affect our business. In recent years, China has been one of the world’s fastest growing economies in terms of gross domestic product, and our business substantially depends on economic activity in China. While China has relaxed its “zero tolerance” policy toward COVID-19, the Chinese government could reimpose stricter measures against COVID-19, which could have a negative effect on Chinese economic activity. Moreover, to the extent the Chinese government does not pursue economic growth and urbanization generally, including infrastructure stimulus spending, the level of imports to and exports from China could be adversely affected, as well as by changes in political, economic and social conditions or other Chinese government policies. The Chinese government may adopt policies that favor domestic drybulk shipping companies and may hinder our ability to compete with them effectively. The Chinese government has also taken actions seen as protecting domestic industries such as coal or steel, which may reduce the demand for China-bound drybulk cargoes and negatively impact the drybulk industry. Moreover, a significant or protracted slowdown in the economies of the U.S., the European Union or various Asian countries may adversely affect economic growth in China and elsewhere.

​

Any increased trade barriers or restrictions, especially involving China, could adversely impact global economic conditions and, as a result, the amount of cargo transported on drybulk vessels. As an example of such restrictions, and most notable in term of drybulk trade volumes, China imposed tariffs on U.S. soybean exports in 2019 as part of the U.S.-China trade dispute. A deterioration in the trading relationship or a re-escalation of protectionist measures taken between these countries or others could lead to reduced drybulk trade volumes.

​

Freight and charterhire rates for drybulk carriers could decrease in the future, which may adversely affect our earnings.

​

A prolonged downturn in the drybulk charter market, from which we derive the large majority of our revenues, has been volatile over the past five years. The Baltic Dry Index (“BDI”), an index published by The Baltic Exchange of shipping rates for key drybulk routes increased during 2021 after a decline in 2020 principally caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, while another firm year was seen in 2022. There can be no assurance that the drybulk charter market will not experience future downturns.

​

Shipping capacity supply and demand strongly influences freight rates. Factors that influence demand include

24

​

Table of Contents

demand for and production of drybulk products; global and regional economic and political conditions, including developments in international trade, fluctuations in industrial and agricultural production and armed conflicts; the distance drybulk cargo is to be moved by sea; environmental and other regulatory developments; events impacting production of the commodities that we carry; and changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns. Factors that influence the supply of vessel capacity include the number of newbuilding deliveries; port and canal congestion; scrapping of older vessels; vessel casualties; conversion of vessels to other uses; the number of vessels out of service (laid-up, drydocked, awaiting repairs or otherwise not available for hire); and environmental concerns and regulations.

​

In addition to prevailing and anticipated freight rates, factors that affect the rate of newbuilding, scrapping and laying-up include newbuilding prices, secondhand vessel values in relation to scrap prices, costs of fuel and other operating costs, costs associated with classification society surveys, normal maintenance and insurance coverage, the efficiency and age profile of the existing fleet in the market and government and industry regulation of maritime transportation practices, particularly environmental protection laws and regulations.

​

Adverse economic, political, social or other developments, including a change in worldwide fleet capacity, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, ability to pay dividends, and ability to continue as a going concern.

​

Although vessel supply growth rates have slowed in recent years, if the supply of newbuilding vessels outpaces the demand for vessels, it could negatively impact freight rates and charterhire rates. If market conditions deteriorate following our vessels’ current employment, we may not be able to employ our vessels at profitable rates or at all. The occurrence of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, ability to pay dividends, and ability to continue as a going concern.

​

Prolonged declines in freight and charter rates, changes in the useful life of vessels, and other market deterioration could cause us to incur impairment charges.

​

We evaluate the carrying amounts of our vessels to determine if events have occurred that would require us to evaluate our vessels for an impairment of their carrying amounts. The recoverable amount of vessels is reviewed based on events and changes in circumstances that would indicate that the carrying amount of the assets might not be recovered. The review for potential impairment indicators and projection of future cash flows related to the vessels is complex and requires us to make various estimates including future freight rates and earnings from the vessels. All of these items have been historically volatile.

​

We determine each vessel’s recoverable amount by estimating the vessel’s undiscounted future cash flows. If the recoverable amount is less than the vessel’s carrying amount, the vessel is deemed impaired and written down to its fair market value. Our vessels’ carrying values may not represent their fair market value because market prices of secondhand vessels tend to fluctuate with freight and charter rate changes and the cost of newbuildings. Any impairment charges incurred as a result of declines in freight and charter rates could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, ability to pay dividends, and ability to continue as a going concern.

​

Inflation could continue to adversely affect our business and financial results.

​

Inflation could continue to adversely affect our business and financial results by increasing the costs of labor and materials needed to operate our business. During the year ended December 31, 2022, we have experienced increased costs for crew, spares, and stores, which we currently expect to continue into 2023. In an inflationary environment such as the current economic environment, depending on the drybulk industry and other economic conditions, we may be unable to raise our charter rates enough to offset the increasing costs of our operations, which would decrease our profit margins. Inflation may also raise our costs of capital and decrease our purchasing power, making it more difficult to maintain sufficient funds to operate our business.

​

The COVID-19 pandemic and measures to contain its spread have impacted the markets in which we operate and could have a material adverse impact on our business and its operations.

​

25

​

Table of Contents

The COVID-19 pandemic and measures to contain it have negatively impacted regional and global economies and trade patterns in markets in which we operate, the way we operate our business, and the businesses of our charterers and suppliers. These negative impacts could continue or worsen, even though the pandemic has diminished and measures to contain its spread have been relaxed. The pandemic may have far-reaching repercussions on our business and industry that are currently unknown. The pandemic resulted in reduced industrial activity in China on which our business substantially depends, as well as in other major industrial and financial centers, including the U.S., the E.U., Japan, India, South Korea and Brazil. Declines in worldwide, regional, or national economic conditions and activity could reduce demand for drybulk cargoes and shipping services and may negatively affect our charters, suppliers, and other parties with which we do business.

​

We also face risks to our personnel and operations due to COVID-19, as our crews face risk of exposure as a result of travel, and our shore-based personnel likewise face such exposure, as we are headquartered in New York and have offices in other major metropolitan areas. Disruption of normal business activities due to COVID-19 and the imposition of measures against its spread may result in operational disruptions and delays, including increases in deviation and incremental fuel consumption. We have and may continue to incur additional expenses associated with testing, personal protective equipment, quarantines, and travel expenses such as airfare costs, in order to perform crew rotations. Some ports reimposed restrictions that affected crew rotations during the first half of 2022. Measures against COVID-19 in a number of countries have restricted crew rotations on our vessels, which could continue or become more restrictive. Although conditions have significantly improved and our COVID-19 exposure related risk has declined over time, we may experience disruptions to our normal vessel operations caused by increased deviation time from positioning our vessels where we can undertake a crew rotation and we may incur additional expenses in the future.

​

Our $450 Million Credit Facility contains collateral maintenance covenants that require the aggregate appraised value of collateral vessels to be at least 140% of the principal amount of the loan outstanding under such facility. If the values of our vessels were to decline as a result of COVID-19 or otherwise, we may not satisfy this covenant. If we do not satisfy the collateral maintenance requirement, we will need to post additional collateral or prepay outstanding loans to bring us back into compliance or seek waivers, which may not be available or may be subject to conditions.

​

We are subject to regulation and liability under environmental and operational safety laws that could require significant expenditures or subject us to increased liability.

​

Governments regulate our business and vessel operations through international conventions and national, state and local laws and regulations. Various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies require us to obtain permits, licenses, certificates, and financial assurances regarding our operations. Given frequent regulatory changes, we cannot predict their effect on our ability to do business, the cost of complying with them, or their impact on vessels’ useful lives or resale value. Our failure to comply with any such conventions, laws, or regulations could cause us to incur substantial liability. See “Overview — Environmental and Other Regulation” in Item 1, “Business” of this annual report.

​

Increased inspection procedures and tighter import and export controls could increase costs and disrupt our business.

​

International shipping is subject to various security and customs inspection and related procedures in countries of origin and destination. Inspection procedures can result in the seizure of the contents of our vessels, delays in the loading, offloading or delivery and the levying of customs duties, fines or other penalties against us. Changes to inspection procedures could impose additional financial and legal obligations on us. Such changes could also impose additional costs and obligations on our customers and may render the shipment of certain types of cargo uneconomical or impractical. Any such changes or developments may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends.

​

26

​

Table of Contents

Our vessels are exposed to international risks that could reduce revenue or increase expenses.

​

Our vessels are at risk of damage or loss because of events such as mechanical failure, collision, human error, war, terrorism, piracy, cargo loss and bad weather. All these can result in death or injury to persons, repair and other increased costs, loss of revenues, loss or damage to property (including cargo), environmental damage, higher insurance rates, damage to our customer relationships, harm to our reputation as a safe and reliable operator and delay or rerouting. Public health threats, such as COVID-19, influenza and other highly communicable diseases or viruses, could adversely impact our and our customers’ operations. Changing economic, regulatory and political conditions, including political and military conflicts, have resulted in attacks on vessels, mining of waterways, piracy, terrorism, labor strikes and boycotts. Our vessels may operate in dangerous areas, including areas of the South China Sea, the Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean, the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia, the Gulf of Guinea, and the Red Sea. In November 2013, the Chinese government announced an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) covering much of the East China Sea. A number of nations do not honor the ADIZ, which includes certain maritime areas that have been contested among various nations in the region. Tensions relating to the Chinese ADIZ or other territorial disputes may escalate and result in interference with shipping routes or in market disruptions.

​

In recent years, tensions have been rising between the U.S. and China as a result of significantly increased Chinese military flights into Taiwan’s air defense zone, U.S. claims that China tested a hypersonic missile, and the establishment of the AUKUS pact among Australia, the U.K., and the U.S. under which the U.S. is to assist Australia in developing a nuclear submarine program. In addition, China imposed restrictions on the imports of coal and certain other products from Australia following Australia’s alignment with the U.S. on a number of issues, which China perceived as adverse to its interests. Developments around these restrictions are dynamic and uncertain. The escalation of such trade issues or tensions or development of any military conflict could result in interference with shipping routes or in market disruptions. In addition, unfavorable weather conditions brought on by climate change or otherwise could result in disruption to our operations or require infrastructure adaptations or new or different investments for our vessels. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends.

​

Our vessels may suffer damage, resulting in unexpected drydocking costs.

​

If our vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired at a drydocking facility for substantial and unpredictable costs that may not be fully covered by insurance. Space at drydocking facilities is sometimes limited, and not all drydocking facilities are conveniently located. The loss of earnings while our vessels are not operable could negatively impact our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends.

​

The operation of drybulk vessels has certain unique operational risks which could affect our earnings and cash flow.

​

A drybulk vessel’s cargo and its interaction with the vessel can be an operational risk. By their nature, drybulk cargoes are often heavy, dense, easily shifted, and react badly to water exposure. Drybulk vessels are often subjected to battering treatment that may damage the vessel during unloading operations with grabs, jackhammers (to pry encrusted cargoes out of the hold) and small bulldozers. Vessels so damaged may be more susceptible to hull breaches, which may lead to the flooding of the vessels’ holds. This may cause the bulk cargo to become so dense and waterlogged that its pressure buckles the vessel’s bulkheads, leading to the loss of a vessel. If we are unable to adequately maintain our vessels, we may be unable to prevent these events. Any of these circumstances or events may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends. In addition, the loss of any of our vessels could harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator.

​

Acts of piracy on ocean-going vessels have continued and could adversely affect our business.

​

Acts of piracy have historically affected vessels trading in such regions as the South China Sea, the Arabian Sea, the Indian Ocean, the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia, the Gulf of Guinea, and the Red Sea. Piracy incidents continue to occur particularly in the Gulf of Aden, the Gulf of Guinea and increasingly in Southeast Asia. Our vessels could be subject to detention hijacking as a result of acts of piracy, rendering our vessels unable to perform their charters and earn revenues. Moreover, if these piracy attacks result in regions characterized by insurers as “war risk” zones, or Joint War Committee (JWC) “war and strikes” listed areas, premiums payable for such coverage could increase

27

​

Table of Contents

significantly and such insurance coverage may be more difficult to obtain, if available at all. In addition, crew costs, including costs that may be incurred to the extent we employ onboard security guards, could increase in such circumstances. We may not be adequately insured to cover losses from these incidents. In response to piracy incidents, following consultation with regulatory authorities, we may station guards on some of our vessels. This may increase our risk of liability for death or injury to persons or damage to personal property, and we may not have adequate insurance in place to cover such liability. The occurrence of any of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

Acts of war, terrorist attacks, and other acts of violence may have an adverse effect on our business.

​

On February 24, 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine leading to what is now a multi-month war and a humanitarian crisis. The impact to date on the drybulk market has been a redirection of cargo flows, higher commodity prices, slower vessels speeds due to increased fuel prices, a rush to secure commodities given the tightness in the global energy complex as well as global grain supplies, and sanctions on various Russian exports. The U.S., Europe and other countries have imposed unprecedented economic sanctions in response to Russian actions which could be increased with uncertain effects on the drybulk market and the world economy. In addition, the U.S. and certain other North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries have been supplying Ukraine with military aid. The longer term impact of Russia’s war in Ukraine remains unknown, which may take some time to materialize. Russia and Ukraine export significant volumes of coal and grain cargoes. A reduction of these exports as well as the global effect of these reduced supplies may result in lower trade volumes, higher commodity prices, increased inflation, and potential demand destruction. U.S. officials have also warned of the increased possibility of Russian cyberattacks, which could disrupt the operations of businesses involved in the drybulk industry, including ours. As a reaction to higher energy prices, China has chosen to increase domestic coal production as a way to bolster energy security. The scope or intensity of the ongoing military conflict as well as sanctions and other actions undertaken in response to it could increase, potentially having negative effects on the global economy and markets. While Ukraine and Russia reached an agreement to extend an arrangement allowing shipment of grain from Ukrainian ports through a humanitarian corridor in the Black Sea in November 2022, the agreement could be terminated before its expiration date in March 2023, or the agreement may not be renewed. Any of these occurrences, or the continuation or worsening of any such occurrences, could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operation, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

In addition, terrorist attacks continue to cause uncertainty in the world’s financial markets and may affect our business. Continuing conflicts and recent developments in the Middle East and the presence of U.S. and other armed forces in the Middle East may lead to additional acts of terrorism and armed conflict, which may contribute to further economic instability. Following the U.S.’ withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action agreed to on July 14, 2015 regarding the Iranian nuclear program, tensions have been rising between Iran on the one hand and the U.S. and its allies on the other. As our vessels transit the Arabian Gulf from time to time, they may face increased risk of damage or seizure. Political conflicts have also resulted in attacks on vessels, mining of waterways and other efforts to disrupt international shipping, particularly in the Arabian Gulf region. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operation, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

Compliance with safety and other vessel requirements imposed by classification societies may be costly and could reduce our net cash flows and net income.

​

The hull and machinery of commercial vessels must be certified as being “in class” by a classification society authorized by its country of registry and undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys and special surveys as described in Item 1., “Business – Classification and Inspection” in this report. If any vessel does not maintain its class or fails any annual, intermediate or special survey, the vessel will be unable to trade between ports and unemployable, and we could be in violation of certain covenants in our credit facility, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

If our vessels call on ports located in countries that are subject to restrictions imposed by the U.S. or other governments, that could adversely affect our reputation and the market for our common shares.

​

All of our charters with customers prohibit our vessels from entering any countries or conducting any trade prohibited by the U.S. However, on such customers’ instructions, our vessels could call on ports in countries subject to

28

​

Table of Contents

sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S. government or countries identified by the U.S. government as state sponsors of terrorism, such as Iran, Sudan and Syria. Moreover, the ongoing war in Ukraine could result in the imposition of further economic sanctions by the U.S. and the European Union against Russia. Current or future counterparties of ours may be affiliated with persons or entities that are or may be in the future the subject of sanctions imposed by the governments of the U.S., European Union, and/or other international bodies. Any violation of sanctions and embargo laws and regulations could result in fines or other penalties and could result in some investors deciding, or being required, to divest their interest, or not to invest, in us. Additionally, some investors may decide to divest their interest, or not to invest, in us simply because we do business with companies that do business in sanctioned countries. Moreover, our charterers may violate applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations as a result of actions that do not involve us or our vessels, and those violations could in turn negatively affect our reputation. War, terrorism, civil unrest and governmental actions in these and surrounding countries may adversely affect investor perception of the value of our common stock.

​

We could be adversely affected by violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, UK Bribery Act, and other applicable worldwide anti-corruption laws.

​

The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) and other applicable worldwide anti-corruption laws generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. These laws include the U.K. Bribery Act, which is broader in scope than the FCPA, as it contains no facilitating payments exception. We charter our vessels into some jurisdictions that international monitoring groups have identified as having high levels of corruption. Our activities create the risk of unauthorized payments or offers of payments by our employees or agents that could violate the FCPA or other applicable anti-corruption laws. Our policies mandate compliance with applicable anti-corruption laws. If we violate the FCPA or other applicable anti-corruption laws, we could suffer from civil and criminal penalties or other sanctions.

​

We may be unable to attract and retain qualified, skilled employees or crew necessary to operate our business.

​

Our success largely depends on attracting and retaining highly skilled and qualified personnel. In crewing our vessels, we require technically skilled employees with specialized training who can perform physically demanding work. Competition to attract and retain qualified crew members is intense. Any inability that GSSM or we experience in the future to hire, train and retain a sufficient number of qualified employees could impair our ability to manage, maintain and grow our business, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

Labor interruptions could disrupt our business.

​

Our vessels are manned by masters, officers and crews employed by third parties. If not resolved in a timely and cost-effective manner, labor unrest could prevent or hinder our normal operations and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

The smuggling of drugs or other contraband onto our vessels may lead to governmental claims against us.

​

Our vessels sometimes call in ports in South America and other areas where smugglers attempt to hide drugs and other contraband on vessels. To the extent our vessels are found with contraband, whether inside or attached to the hull and regardless of our crew’s knowledge, we may face governmental or other regulatory claims, which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

Arrests of our vessels by maritime claimants could cause a significant loss of earnings for the related off-hire period.

​

Crew members, suppliers of goods and services to a vessel, shippers of cargo and other parties may be entitled to a maritime lien against a vessel for unsatisfied debts, claims or damages. In many jurisdictions, a maritime lienholder may enforce its lien by arresting or attaching a vessel through foreclosure proceedings. The arrest or attachment of one or more of our vessels could result in a significant loss of earnings for the related off-hire period. In addition, in jurisdictions where the “sister ship” theory of liability applies, a claimant may arrest the vessel subject to the claimant’s maritime lien and any associated vessel, which is any vessel owned or controlled by the same owner.

29

​

Table of Contents

​

Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency, resulting in loss of earnings.

​

A government of a vessel’s registry could requisition for title or seize our vessels. A government could also requisition our vessels for hire, becoming the charterer at dictated charter rates. Generally, requisitions occur during a period of war or emergency. Such requisitioning of one or more of our vessels could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

Changes in fuel prices could adversely affect our profits.

​

We operate a large portion of our vessels on spot market voyage charters, which generally require the vessel owner to bear the cost of fuel in the form of bunkers, a significant operating expense. Depending on the timing of increases in the price of fuel and market conditions, we may be unable to pass along fuel price increases to our customers. In standard time charter arrangements, under which the balance of our vessels operate, the charterer bears the cost of fuel bunkers. At the commencement of a charter, the charterer purchases fuel from us at then-prevailing market rates, and we must repurchase fuel at that same initial rate when the charterer redelivers the vessel to us. Market rates at the time the charterer redelivers the vessel may be more or less than the prevailing market rates at the commencement of the charter. In certain of our short-term time charter agreements, we sell the charterer the amount of the bunkers actually consumed and the charterer is required to redeliver the vessel to us without replenishment of the bunkers consumed. The date of redelivery of vessels and fluctuations in the price and supply of fuel are unpredictable, and therefore, these arrangements could result in losses or reductions in working capital that are beyond our control.

​

As part of our approach to comply with IMO regulations that limit sulfur emissions, we retrofitted our 17 Capesize vessels with scrubbers. The performance of our investment in scrubbers depends in part upon the fuel spread between compliant low sulfur fuel and high sulfur fuel. Any decrease in the spread between these two fuel types could reduce the return for this investment. In addition, certain countries have imposed regulations regarding the operations of scrubbers. These restrictions could become more restrictive or widespread, and we may be further limited in or prevented from operating scrubbers on our vessels as a result. See “General – IMO 2020 Compliance” in Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition for further details. To the extent we cannot operate scrubbers on our vessels, we would no longer be able to recover our investment in scrubbers and would have to use low sulfur fuel instead. Low sulfur fuel, which we currently use in our minor bulk fleet is more expensive than standard marine fuel. Increased demand for low sulfur fuel has resulted in an increase in prices for such fuel and may result in further increases, which we may not be able to include in our freight rates.

​

To mitigate the risk associated with fuel price increases, we may enter into forward bunker contracts that permit us to purchase fuel at a fixed price in exchange for payment of a certain amount. We may incur a loss on such contracts if the price of fuel declines below the price at which the contract permits us to purchase fuel, or a significant increase in the price of fuel may not be mitigated by our entry into any such contracts. Either occurrence could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations, cash flows, and ability to pay dividends.

​

Our results of operations are subject to seasonal fluctuations, which may adversely affect our financial condition.

​

We operate our vessels in markets that have historically exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, freight and charter rates. This seasonality may result in quarterly volatility in our operating results, depending on when and whether we enter into time charters or trade on the spot market. The drybulk sector is typically stronger in the fall and winter months in anticipation of increased consumption of coal and raw materials in the northern hemisphere during the winter months. As a result, our revenues could be weaker during the fiscal quarters ended June 30 and September 30, and conversely, our revenue could be stronger during the quarters ended December 31 and March 31. This seasonality could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends.

​

30

​

Table of Contents

Company Specific Risk Factors

​

Our earnings and our ability to pay dividends will be adversely affected if we do not successfully employ our vessels.

​

The charterhire rates for our vessels have sometimes declined below the operating costs of our vessels. Because we currently charter most of our vessels on spot market voyage charters, we are exposed to the cyclicality and volatility of the spot charter market, and we do not have significant long-term, fixed-rate time charters to ameliorate the adverse effects of downturns in the spot market. Capesize vessels, which we operate as part of our fleet, have been particularly susceptible to significant freight rate fluctuations in spot charter rates.

​

Spot market voyage charter rates may fluctuate dramatically based primarily on the worldwide supply of drybulk vessels and the worldwide demand for transportation of drybulk cargoes. Future freight rates and charterhire rates may not enable us to operate our vessels profitably. Further, our standard time charter contracts with our customers specify certain performance parameters that can result in customer claims if not met. Such claims may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

To the extent our vessels undertake spot market voyages, we face operational risks from responsibility for delays in delivery of the cargo, which may be due to weather, vessel breakdown, port congestion, or other factors that may be beyond our control. Such delays can result in customer claims. In addition, spot market voyages require us to make payments directly to third parties that our charterers would ordinarily make. Such arrangements carry a risk of disputes and fraud by third parties. As a result of any of these circumstances, we may experience a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

In addition, while we try to capture arbitrage opportunities by taking cargo positions, a significant fluctuation in the rate environment could adversely affect profitability.

​

We may face liquidity issues if conditions in the drybulk market worsen for a prolonged period.

​

While supply and demand fundamentals have improved starting in 2017, if the market environment declines over a prolonged period of time, we may have insufficient liquidity to fund ongoing operations or satisfy our obligations under our credit facility, which may lead to a default under our credit facility. As a result, the repayment of our indebtedness could potentially be accelerated, and we could experience a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, ability to pay dividends.

​

The market values of our vessels may decrease, which could adversely affect our operating results.

​

If the book value of one of our vessels is impaired due to unfavorable market conditions or a vessel is sold at a price below its book value, we would incur a loss that could adversely affect our financial results. See “Impairment of long-lived assets” section under the heading “Critical Accounting Policies” in Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” The occurrence of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

Restrictive covenants under our credit facility may restrict our growth and operations.

​

Our credit facility imposes operating and financial restrictions that may limit our ability to utilize cash above a certain amount; incur additional indebtedness on satisfactory terms or at all; incur liens on our assets; sell our vessels or the capital stock of our subsidiaries; make investments; engage in mergers or acquisitions; pay dividends; make capital expenditures; compete effectively or change management arrangements relating to any of our vessels. Therefore, we may need to seek permission from our lenders in order to engage in some corporate actions, which we may not be able to obtain when needed. This may prevent us from taking actions that are in our best interest and from executing our business strategy of growth and may restrict or limit our ability to pay dividends and finance our future operations.

We depend upon ten charterers for a large part of our revenues. The loss of any significant customers could adversely affect our financial performance.

31

​

Table of Contents

​

For the year ended December 31, 2022, approximately 39% of our revenues were derived from ten charterers. While we are seeking to expand customer relationships with cargo providers, this may not sufficiently diversify our customer base to mitigate this risk. If we were to lose any of our major customers or if any of them significantly reduced use of our services or were unable to make payments to us, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

The aging of our fleet and our practice of purchasing and operating previously owned vessels may result in increased operating costs and vessels off-hire, which could adversely affect our earnings.

​

The majority of our drybulk carriers were previously owned by third parties. We may seek additional growth by acquiring previously owned vessels. The pre-inspection of such vessels does not provide us with the same knowledge about their condition that we would have had if these vessels had been built for and operated exclusively by us. We may not detect all defects or problems before purchase. Any such defects or problems may be expensive to repair, and if not timely detected, may result in accidents or other incidents for which we may become liable. Also, we do not receive the benefit of any builder warranties if the vessels we buy are older than one year.

​

The costs to maintain a vessel in good operating condition generally increase with its age. Older vessels are typically less fuel efficient than newer ones due to improvements in engine technology. Cargo insurance rates increase with the age of a vessel, making older vessels less desirable to charterers. We may not be able to incur borrowings on favorable terms or at all to fund the cost of maintaining our vessels.

​

Governmental regulations and safety and other equipment standards related to vessel age may require expenditures for vessel equipment and restrict our vessels’ activities. Market conditions may not justify such expenditures or enable us to operate our vessels profitably. As a result, regulations and standards could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

An increase in interest rates could adversely affect our cash flow and financial condition.

​

We are subject to market risks relating to changes in LIBOR rates because we have significant amounts of floating rate debt outstanding. Moreover, in the recent past, concerns have been publicized that some of the member banks surveyed by the British Bankers’ Association (“BBA”) in connection with the calculation of LIBOR may have been underreporting or otherwise manipulating the inter-bank lending rate applicable to them. A number of BBA member banks entered into settlements with their regulators and law enforcement agencies with respect to alleged LIBOR manipulation, and investigations by regulators and governmental authorities in various jurisdictions are ongoing. In addition, on July 27, 2017, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit LIBOR rates after 2021.

​

All LIBOR tenors relevant to us will cease to be published or will no longer be representative after June 30, 2023. This means that any of our LIBOR-based borrowings that extend beyond June 30, 2023 will be converted to a replacement rate. In the U.S., the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, a committee of private sector entities convened by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, has recommended the Secured Overnight Financing Rate, or SOFR plus a recommended spread adjustment as LIBOR's replacement. LIBOR and SOFR have significant differences, such as LIBOR being an unsecured lending rate while SOFR is a secured lending rate, and SOFR is an overnight rate while LIBOR reflects term rates at different maturities. If our LIBOR-based borrowings are converted to SOFR, the differences between LIBOR and SOFR, plus the recommended spread adjustment, could result in higher interest costs than if LIBOR remained available, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results. Our credit facility specifies that upon cessation of the LIBOR rate, borrowings will bear interest at a rate based on SOFR. If LIBOR or any alternative reference rate were to increase significantly, the amount of interest payable on our outstanding indebtedness could increase significantly and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition, and ability to pay dividends.

​

We depend significantly on our GSSM joint venture for technical management of our fleet.

32

​