Stifel Financial Corp. (SF) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

I am Nicolas Bornozis of Capital Link and I have also Markella Kara with me of Capital Link, and we are delighted to welcome you today to this Capital Link webinar. Today's webinar is going to focus on the development and outlook of Capital Product Partners. We have with us Mr. Jerry Kalogiratos, who is the CEO of the company; and Ben Nolan, who's the Head of Maritime Research at Stifel. And the 2 of them are going to go into an in-depth discussion about the company, the sector that the company is involved in and its strategy. Please note that at the end, I would suggest that you also read the disclaimer about forward-looking statements. Capital Link is also the Investor Relations adviser for CPLP. And please note that you can submit questions during the webinar. These questions will be taken up by Ben and Jerry, and they will try to address them. You can submit questions at any time, and they will be replied to the end. So without any further delay, I turn the floor over to Ben and Jerry, and I thank them very much for being with us today.

Thank you, Nicolas, and Capital Link specifically for inviting me and one of my favorite people, Jerry, to talk about his company or partnership. Like I said, very pleased to be here and grateful for the opportunity.

Jerry, we'll start -- and again, just backing up a moment. If you do have any questions, please feel free to submit those. I'll try to work them in as we go, and rather than sort of waiting until the end, we'll try to do it that way. Jerry, if I could, I'm not going to -- you know me, and I'm not the type to give just a lot of softball questions, but I do want to start with just an overview of level set, give us sort of the elevator pitch on who CPLP is? What your looks fleet like? Where you come from and where you're going?

Thank you, Ben, and thank you for doing this. And Nicolas, thank you and Capital Link for hosting us today. So as I was thinking about CPLP, next year, we will, I guess, celebrate 15 years of presence in the capital markets, which for a shipping company is not a short period of time. I think we have been around by now for a while and together through very different markets. And I think we have navigated those to the best of our ability despite the volatility. But we started in a way very different but very similar. We started in 2007 with 8 plus 7 product tankers at the time. All of them were long-term charters to the likes of BP and Morgan Stanley, hence, also the name Capital Product Partners. But the business model remains the same, even if today, we don't own any products tankers, that is we invest in assets with medium- to long-term charters, which give us [indiscernible] cash flow visibility. As we were looking for assets with these characteristics, we have to diversify in different asset classes. So in 2010, we acquired crude tankers, 6 as well as through M&A with a merger with Crude Carriers at the time. Then we bought, well, a sole drive-up vessel, which we still own. But also, we expanded rapidly into containers from 2015 onwards and lately LNG. But I would say, at the same time, we have not been inside of divesting from assets [ with the notes ] check this box. So in 2019, many of our older tankers, the original fleet started becoming older, and it was increasingly more difficult to secure long-term charters. So we divested of these assets in what I think was a very accretive transaction for unitholders. We spun off 25 of our tankers into a new company. We distributed the shares of this company with unitholders. And then we merged with Diamond S Shipping in $1.7 billion transaction at the time. And then recently, Diamond S Shipping, DSSI and International Seaways. I still, from time to time, look at the [indiscernible]. And I think it continues to be a very good transaction for the unitholders. I should also say that while we are [indiscernible] structure, our unitholders file 1099. Under the hood, we are [indiscernible] We have paid distributions to our unitholders. We had come north of $800 million over the last 14 years. And we continue to pay, of course, a $0.10 distribution per quarter. And we also have in place a $30 million unit buyback program.

Great. Well, that's a good background. You recently have acquired or stepped into a new area, that being the acquisition of a number of LNG ships. Appreciating that those were acquired from the sponsor, and so it's not a new business or, let's say, the combined entity. But can you maybe talk through the thinking on that, how people should think about the accretion of that acquisition and where you think that fits into -- LNG fits into CPLP on the longer-term perspective?

So our fleet today, as we say, consists of containers and 3 LNG. So we have actually 15 containers, the majority of them are post-Panamax vessels. We have 1 capesize vessel and 3 brand-new LNG carriers. I'm -- I think the advantage of having a sponsor like Capital Maritime, which is also a diversified shipping company, is that they have and together, we benefit from that unique vantage point. So we sit across different assets. And the LNG market has been our regular for a while. And recently, as we were thinking about what will be the next area of growth, we begin increasingly wary of investing in the container segment where by now asset values have increased to a very large extent, almost irrespective of type of ship and where also the order book has definitely increased. While we thought that the LNG sector is much more promising in the sense that it's more at an inflection point. So LNG production is expected to double over the next 15-20 years. Demand with the Far East and Southeast Asia continues to grow. China will probably outpace everybody else in terms of LNG importing. And it remains a very viable solution to energy transition. Definitely not a solution, but when it comes to energy transition and especially reducing carbon emissions from burning coal, LNG is going to be the cure of choice. So we believe that the long-term fundamentals are solid. At the same time, from, if you want, purely shipping perspective, we have seen asset values start to increase. Newbuilding values have seen high inflationary pressures both because of commodity prices, be it steel or even nowadays, equipment has increase in price, but also there is competition for slots that with other shipping classes such as containers. But at the same time, we believe that technology is mature enough, and we don't expect any radical changes and so that the residual value risk is very low compared to the previous LNG generations. So on the back of this, we decided to invest in 3 LNG carriers. Of course, they come with long-term targets attached. They are very high-spec ships, latest type, SCF. They have really planned [indiscernible]. And this can be very handy when LNG prices are where they are today for your customers so they have an early indication system, increased filling limits and so on, so very high-spec ships. And they come with 5.5 year remaining charter duration to charters like BP and Cheniere, so investment-grade on markets. Then you look at what those do for us for the partnership and, for example, in terms of EBITDA generation, we expect our pro forma 12-month EBITDA to increase to excess $150 million from $93 million that is -- it is today or with the previous fleet. Well, if you want, operating surplus after reserves, which is a kind of proxy for free cash flow, again, on a pro forma basis, is expected to increase by 34% or $18 million just on the back of these 3 acquisitions, which translates approximately $0.90 per unit. So a highly accretive transaction. So in a way, the acquisition of the LNG sector evolves. So brand new ships, importantly, that comes also with a lower environmental footprint, which is going to be increasingly more important for us and everybody else. Good [ shoppers ] in place, good counterparties, good length, accretive to distributable cash flow. And at the same time, we're diversifying our asset base and revenue base. So I think it was the great months without having to take a kind of more risky bet into containers or other more inflated asset classes.

Perfect. We have a question that came in related to those. I'm going to get to that in just a second, but I wanted to sort of put a bow on where we've taken this conversation. But a little bit more of a, I don't know, maybe a little bit harder in question in that you guys tend to be somewhat asset agnostic, containers and dry bulk and historically tankers and now LNG. I think one of the -- historically, one -- within public markets, one of the things that had been -- has been sort of the prevailing viewpoint is that they are -- these are cyclical businesses. Each of these verticals are cyclical businesses. And investors tend to trade those cyclical businesses or have a view on, let's say, containers or dry bulk or LNG or what have you. And so when they're looking to make an investment, they're looking to make investment in a pure play as opposed to something that is a little bit more diversified as a function of that probably a smoother curve of performance. How do you -- what's the pitch, right? How do you say, well, this is why CPLP makes sense as a diversified holder of maritime assets?

I agree with you that the trend since shipping companies started becoming public was always the soft [indiscernible] plays, giving exposure to very specific segments. And that was more to as -- again, as you say, to cater for investor appetite. But a real business, a real shipping business is a diversified business. We have seen this again and again both in CPLP as well as in Capital Maritime, the sponsor which is also very diversified. And we have also seen increasingly more companies, even as of late, follow the trend. You have seen companies manage with diversified assets. You have seen companies that have been traditionally one segment, acquire ships and another. And I think there is a very good logic to that because simply in any industry and in any kind of portfolio approach, you want to diversify your asset base and revenue base. Not to put your -- all your eggs in one basket, that's people saying. So having said that, our business is not a very exciting business. I agree with that. I mean it's not for the people that are looking for the excitement of stock earnings and related volatility. Some companies that have this exposure have been, some others we have forgotten about because they have been wiped out. As you know, we have raised more than $2.1 billion in debt since we became public. But we never delayed a cent of debt service. We never had to restructure debt. We haven't even asked ever for a waiver under our covenants. And that says a lot. There are very few companies that can do that. This is partly because we manage our balance sheet very proactively and partly also because we have had different streams of revenue, not only from diversified assets, but also because we have been choosing cash flow visibility. So I think the value proposition for us is that maximizing equity valuation with steady rules, cash flow visibility and a return of some capital to unitholders while continuing to maintain a strong balance sheet. So I think the returns that we offer and especially going forward with the pipeline that we have, can be quite attractive, but also for the kind of risk/reward profile that there are. So this is not a high risk/high reward profile, but I think a more managed risk, and we have [indiscernible] the cycle. Of course, it's still shipping, but we try to manage this risk to the best of our ability.

Okay. That's helpful. So now I'm going to work in the first of the questions that have come in here. And it ties back to the LNG. It says, can you give an update on the 3 LNG tankers that are -- that you have an exclusive right to acquire until November 1, which is probably not too many days from now. Let's see here, I guess the question is, can you acquire just one? Or do you have to acquire all 3? Or any update on sort of what the status is or how you're thinking about what to do in the next 3 weeks?

So obviously, this is not a very long time line. So we hope to have news by the end of the month as to how we fare with regard to these acquisitions. The -- actually, the options of agreement does allow for 1 -- for exercising 1, 2 or 3 vessels, so we have this flexibility. The discussion, as you can imagine or the discussions, as you can imagine, with regard to the kind of capital that will fund potentially these acquisitions has started now for a few months. I think we have a good choice, be it from unsecured debt bonds or preferred. We have said that a common unit issue is not our preference, given the valuation's location. We hope to have more news by the end of the month, but we are optimistic that we can deliver on this acquisition. If required, we will, of course, try to get an extension on this option. But hopefully, we can -- we'll have good news.

Well, and you're talking there about the -- your options, effectively unsecured debt and preferred. Can you maybe just give us an update post the most recent acquisition, where the balance sheet stands and how you view your war chest of capital to be able to acquire at the moment?

So pro forma net debt to cap after the acquisition of the last 3 ships is probably in the high 50s or 60% kind of range. However, given the strong cash generation spending from these vessels, I think the prudent amortization schedule, we might recall that some of that amortization is more heavy upfront. And we expect this to come down quite quickly. Also the valuation of our container fleet has, as you can imagine, increased considerably. So that gives us a lot of room when it comes to LTV covenants. It's actually, right now, the LTV to net LTV ratio is at very low levels given both the cash generation as well as the appreciation of assets. So I think there is room there in terms of adding on some additional debt, at least in the short term as we pay this down. In terms of liquidity, of course, it's going to be little incremental liquidity from the balance sheet after the acquisition of the 3 ships. Having said that, obviously, some of our vessels are making more money than we're expecting. A very good example is our sole capesize vessel earnings today, or if you're renewing a target today, it's probably the mid 700,000 for a capesize, which is definitely very different to what we expected to be at the beginning of the year.

Yes. Well, there was a 3-year charter this week. It was lower than that, but still in the, I think, high 20. Even that I would think would be a pretty good outcome relative to sort of the mean. But -- well, and just on that, while we're there, so is the prevailing thought on that 1 vessel, you probably keep it for a little bit longer since you some capacity to earn more on it? Or alternatively, price of the assets moved up to the [indiscernible] you're selling, so any update there?

I think we have said that we're going to be opportunistic about it, and we have been right not to divest earlier. We have been enjoying the cash flow from that asset. As now asset prices start to catch up and reflect more of the cash flow going forward, we might look more closely to divesting from that vessel. There is -- I mean it's also an older asset, [ 11 ] years old. We are going to concentrate going forward on more modern, more energy efficient ships. So taking advantage of a great market and redeploying that equity, I think that would be a good trend.

Yes. So there's starting to be some more questions that are coming in here. I'm going to try to continue to work them in. And for those listening, if you have more, feel free to log them in. So this, I think, is an interesting one because you talked earlier about not really being interested in issuing common equity at these prices because it's, in your view, not adequately valued. Could you maybe talk to what you -- maybe roughly what you view the net asset value of the fleet to be? And that gets to the question, which is, in your view, in the view of the CPLP management, why do you think the shares stay at such a steep discount to that NAV?

So we don't typically comment on NAV. We are very much focused on delivering on accretion distributable cash flow. But I think on any metric and there are different evaluations out there, there is a big dislocation between the intrinsic value of the assets and our current equity value. Now the reasons behind it, it's difficult to say. I think this is not an ailment that we are only suffering from. Across the shipping industry, you have smaller or larger discounts to NAV. Even in parts that are like the container industry today, even in companies that own containers with a lot of spot exposure, they are also suffering from a permanent discount to NAV. So it's not something that is only related to us. The book says that liquidity size matters when it comes to valuation. And we have seen that the larger companies tend to trade better. And that's definitely something that makes sense. And we are trying to address this by growing the company and hopefully improve our valuation over time. At the same time, taking advantage of that dislocation, we have initiated a $30 million unit buyback program. We have spent about $4.5 million or less than that between the mid-February and June 30, which was our last reporting date, buying back our units. So we do recognize that, and we're trying to take advantage of it. I'm not sure if this discount close only by buying back stock, but I think it does make a very accretive transaction for the [ partnership ]. So we are deploying some money that way as well. I guess the answer is that we will try to deliver against a business model by continuing to grow the company with accretive transactions, increase our distributable cash flow, return more capital to unitholders as this increases and hopefully also exceed a better valuation with that.

Right. So we have -- even this week, we have seen one of your MLP peers be taken or announced plans to be taken private with private equity. And in general, there certainly has not been any new MLPs coming into the market. Do you think that still being a master limited partnership is the right path forward in the long run for CPLP? And also, do you think that any element of the valuation discount that you just addressed might be due to the corporate structure at all?

Well, one thing is for certain, we do need to change our name. But joking aside, we have talked about the MLP structure. And if it is an impediment or a driver valuation, I don't think it is a material one. It is also helpful for us in a way because being focused on operating surplus, distributable cash flow makes us more disciplined. So accretion has to be tangible as opposed to many different metrics that people use to justify, for example, acquiring a 15-year-old ship trading in the spot market. So for our business model, I think it works quite well. In terms of the governance, I understand the differences is the [indiscernible] but I think we have a first-class governance, majority independents, seasoned directors. They come from every walk of the business, be it MLPs, shipping, energy and finance. All our transactions are very thoroughly discussed and reviewed over the years. And I think also the MLP sponsor relationship has been a positive one. Capital Maritime has been a great sponsor. And it's a symbiotic relationship. It does -- CPLP does acquire ships from Capital Maritime. But the flipside of that is that CPLP has a good pipeline always at hand that can wait for the partnership. Typically, you pay a lot of money for keeping options like the ones that we have today or at the first refusals if they work with third party. Very often we buy assets with their existing finance in place, again, considerable savings in terms of fees or pricing. And Capital Maritime has also provided charter coverage from time to time. It has recently provided interest-free credit to the partnership, has taken common equity at the premium, has bought units. So all in all, I think the MLP structure as we do it and in view of our business model works well. The support from Capital Maritime has been good, and we look forward to doing more in the future. And I think we're also in a very interesting turning point from the partnership. Don't forget that we're coming off a very significant corporate event with the spin-off of our tanker business in 2019. We have since managed to grow our fleet considerably. We were at 11 ships. Today, we're at 19. Hopefully, we will grow more. We have a great pipeline of assets, good customer generation, very good cash flow visibility, and I'm really excited to see us deliver on all these fronts.

Okay. So here's another question that came in that sort of links to your very first comment. And appreciating that this is not currently a business that CPLP is in, but you were a number of paths over there. The question is, do you have any thoughts on the future trends for product tankers?

I think I will probably allude this to my colleagues in the product tanker business. But what I can say is the risk is on the upside if anything, as economies open up, demand for crude and oil products increases. Recent surge in gas prices and other energy prices should drive more use of products. So refining margins have been widening as of late. So all this is a very good backdrop for tankers. Supply is interesting. It's not as good, for example, as it is in other segments. And we haven't seen maybe the motion that we wanted. But in the end, this is a demand-driven business. So we expect, as I said, that the risk is on the upside. But you won't see us in that segment, I think, anytime soon.

Okay. Thanks for clarifying that. So let me ask a question, and I know that probably many of the people on the call care very deeply about. Maybe walk me through what the distribution, i.e., dividend policy is at the moment? And how should investors think about what the strategy is for that going forward? And what is fair to assume with respect to growth and how you're using or distributing the capital?

So our stated common unit distribution guidance is $0.10 per quarter. This implies a yield of about 3.2% today. As I said, we have also spent additional money buying back our units. So if you want, between the first half of 2021, we have spent more like, I would say, $7 million, $8 million in returning capital to unitholders. And we will continue with our unit buyback program. We have left decisions to revisit our capital allocation for the future for after we finish our options agreement on the 3 ships. So we want first to see if we manage to effect the drop-down of the 3 additional ships before we revisit our capital allocation policy. But I expect that at the end of the year and after we have better visibility of drop-downs and expected cash flow generation going forward, the Board will review again the distribution policy and capital allocation policy.

Okay. Perfect. So at this point, I think a minute, we'll start to delve a little bit into some of the various business segments that you're in, maybe talk a little bit more about some of the shipping macro elements. So let's start with containers. I know that you'd said that at the moment, one of the reasons you were looking to invest in LNG is that there may be some dark clouds ahead for the container shipping space. Can you maybe talk through that sort of how you're positioned than most of your assets have long-term contracts? But what do you do -- what are you looking to do with the assets that you already own and sort of walk through how do you think the container shipping market might look over the next couple of years?

All in all, I think at least in the short, maybe the medium term, the fundamentals of the container market are strong. The orderbook has been increasing. That's for sure. I mean in -- between January to October of this year, we have seen about 3.9 million TEU being ordered. By the way, this is the highest ever on record. The next, the second largest order in the same time frame, so this 10 months, has been in 2007, and it was 2.7 million TEU. So there has been significant ordering. The orderbook is probably now in the low 20s. If you take account -- into account options and the like, may be higher than that. So it is a significant orderbook, but most of it is expected to be delivered in 2023. So half of this, almost, is going to be delivered in 2023 onwards. So there is good reasons to expect that 2021 and 2022 can be good years. There is, of course, another element which is very difficult to quantify or rather to have a view as to when things will normalize. This is port congestion and the whole logistics bottleneck that we have seen. Port congestion has gone up by 3, 4 percentage points compared to the average of the last 2 years. This is really considerable. Then there's also a problem with logistics equipment such as boxes. There is problems with the mode of transportation in different ports, very much affected by COVID. And it's not that we see these trends abate. They continue to be strong, I mean, in certain places where we see quarantine rules being introduced for crew changes that are stricter than we have seen over the last few years, especially in Asia. So things in the East don't seem to be opening up. But at the same time, you would think that these factors will tend to be of lesser importance in the near future as things normalize probably then people also find other solutions. For example, boxes have been guarded all the time, and the situation should improve in the near future. So demand and supply of ships. So if we assume that demand remains strong, and really the big burden of new ships comes into 2023, there is good chances that the market will remain good, at least, in the short to medium term. But asset values have increased dramatically. And it's -- and while cash flow calculations might make sense, it is increasingly more difficult to invest in assets like that as they are still operating assets, we still have one counterparty paying that bill. And increasingly, the downside risk, when it comes to residual value risk, becomes much higher. So that's what's keeping us maybe at this point away from containers. But with regard to our existing fleet, hopefully, we will be able to take advantage of this market. We really have 1 vessel coming off charter in -- at the end of 2022. That's a 9,000 TEU container vessel. But there is a market for forward fixing to the extent that we see an interesting proposition. We might look to fix this for a longer period. The rest is mostly fixed. So it's not that we have a lot of exposure on the rise in that segment.

So just to -- and this sort of gets to a question that has come in online, just to sort of wrap up a little bit. As you're looking at the container market and appreciating that this is really and probably not easy to answer question, but is it possible or have you seen anything that says with respect to the market for container ship, how much of that do you think is fundamental demand growth versus how much of it is supply chain issues that might last for a little while, but we're probably longer-term transient?

I think that's really a very difficult question to answer because a lot of the congestion-related issues are difficult to quantify. For example, what happens with regard to availability of trucks and what -- once the boxes are discharged from the container base, so that's very hard for us to understand and I think for anybody to quantify. So I think it does play a big part. But as I said earlier on, this is -- shipping is a demand-driven business. If demand remains robust, I wouldn't see a big shock. Maybe we'll see more normalized rates. But I think demand is also a very important factor here. So I wouldn't just put it out to what congestion and the likes.

Okay. So let's shift to the LNG market, which similarly is really -- especially the commodity itself is in a very dynamic time similar to the container shipping market. The -- I guess the -- my question for you, and we were talking before the call started, you were just in Dubai last week at the big LNG conference that they, I guess, have now. Maybe talk through what you're seeing with respect to demand and interest from people for LNG ships on a longer-term basis and maybe how that's evolved even over the last few months with respect to -- and again, appreciating that your vessels have contracts on them already, but with respect to how you're thinking about the future of the business?

I -- first of all, I was very glad to travel again, and it was good to be in Gastech. It was also very good to meet people who, like me, haven't traveled extensively for almost 1.5 years or 2 years. And it was good to see people move and exchange ideas. Overall, it was -- the meetings were very positive. There is increased appetite for LNG. It is -- LNG is -- demand is being driven very much on the back of CO2 reduction policies. It does -- it is a transition, if you will. But it is an available transition fuel that can be easily transported and then it is also easy to convert power generation from coal to LNG. We expect to see more production coming online, quite significant. And it does seem like also certain projects that were kind of slow over the last year or so, they will, of course, accelerate. Maybe just to say the current LNG price helps when it comes to thinking about new LNG production. And shipping, I think, is going to benefit. Most of the new production is coming out of the U.S. Most of the demand is coming in the [ East ] if we wanted to simplify things. And this is very good [indiscernible] And as a result of that, of the positive long-term fundamentals, but also because of last winter where charter rates spiked and effectively charterers could not get their hands on a ship even if they wanted to pay those very high rates. We saw over the last 3 to 6 months a lot of appetite for long-term period charters. Effectively all available ships have disappeared. Even if you look into the orderbook and beyond, today, while the orderbook looks chunky with more than 20% of the current fleet being on order, it's a questionable whether it's really 10 ships that have not been already committed to projects or long-term VCs. So I think the sentiment is very positive for LNGs and especially, I would stress that, for ships like ours, the [indiscernible] larger vessels with the better containment systems, the difference in earnings and the savings for charterers are very significant. And as a result, all the attention, all the focus is on X-DFs and MEGIs at this point.

Right. So we'll try to continue to work in some of the questions that have come in here. But maybe we'll step back on the LNG in a minute. But another area that I wanted to make sure that we discussed before we run out of time as we're rapidly approaching some time limits here. But there is a whole lot happening and changing and evolving with respect to regulations around marine fuel and emissions and alternatives to traditional oil as a -- or oil products as a marine fuel. Can you maybe talk -- there's a few directions we can go here. But can you maybe talk through what you're doing to manage that? How your existing fleet -- obviously, the LNG ships can use LNG, but how you think about what is the right kind of fuel when you're looking to add container ships or what to do with your existing container ships as things evolve going forward?

So yes, I think this question is going to be with us for a while, I'm afraid. For us, the -- this question together with the other ESG considerations has come to the forefront. We recently published, actually yesterday, our first sustainability report. And I think, as we said earlier this year, the environmental footprint of the partnership and making sure we remain compliant and ahead of regulations is going to be a major driver in our choices going forward. So part of the rationale for investing in the LNG carriers is that: a, we are part of the energy transition, if you want, the logistics chain going forward; and secondly, these vessels do burn natural gas instead of oil, which we expect will reduce significantly our CO2 emissions going forward as well as other greenhouse emissions. We know that natural gas does not emit any particular matter and/or sulfur. And our -- and X-DFs have a very low NOx emissions. So it's really -- you can see the impact across most greenhouse emissions. We have also decided on the back of that, that going forward, we will invest in modern energy-efficient assets even if it is -- even if the propulsion is traditional. And to be extent that we can, we will divest from all the assets. It's -- with regard to the fuel of the future, I don't think that the answer is there yet. What we expect is that in 10, 15 years from now, you will have multiple technologies in the water competing -- or coexisting rather. So you probably have both fuel oil or gas oil as well as LNG, potentially ammonia, methanol. And hydrogen is being discussed a lot, but it's not an easy fuel, but I'm sure that there will be technological advances. And we also expect that there will be a lot of technological advances and improvement on existing ships. So there will be significant CapEx for all their vessels, or otherwise, they will simply have to steam at lower speeds. That's also the reason why we will tend to avoid investing in other assets or try to divest from them if we can get a good return. So it's very much on our minds. Unfortunately, there is no straight answer today, so that increases the risk. And I think shipping is going to look very different from what it has been for the last [ 17, 18 ] years.

Yes. Well, it looks very different at moment anyway. But so I think that pretty much covers my questions, and we're closing in on an hour here. So there is 1 or 2 other important things that we need to make sure we discuss. First of which, is who is your favorite basketball team?

Milwaukee Bucks. Am I allowed to say that?

Yes, I think you didn't answer the way I thought you would.

There you go. Yes. There is a soft spot, of course, for Yannis at the Bucks so...

All right. And then in the longer term, let's -- this is a little unscripted here, but put on your thinking cap for a second. And let's look to 2030 and from where you sit today in 2021, what do you envision CPLP looking like in 9 years from now? How will it be different, what you hope it becomes?

In shipping, sometimes, it's difficult to predict the next 6 months, let alone the next 6 years or 10 years. But if I would try a prediction, I hope or at least I hope, by 2030, we will have more modern ships, more energy efficient, that we would have made the right choices with regard to propulsion and technology. I wouldn't be surprised if we are selling similar asset classes or LNG and containers. I would be surprised if we were more on, let's say, the tankers. I find LNG and containers much more future-proof investment also longer term. But I would like our fleet to be very modern and at the forefront of energy efficiency and environmental footprint.

All right. Well, if there's Nicolas, I guess that means you and I are getting the hook here, Jerry. So very nice stock to you as always. And again, while I have the chance, thank you, Nicolas, for inviting me to take part of it. Grateful.

Ben, thank you for doing this. It was...

Thank you for both you. Thank you, Ben. Thank you, Jerry. It's been a very interesting discussion. It's exactly what the title is, a Deep Dive into Capital Product Partners. So thank you, both of you for a great review. And just to remind everybody that this webinar will also be available for replay upon demand. So with that, we can disconnect. And again, thanks.

Nicolas, thank you for having us.

Thank you.

Thank you. Buh-bye.