FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Euroseas Ltd. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, or the Company, desires to take advantage of the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and is including this cautionary statement in connection with this safe harbor legislation. This annual report contains forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements include information about possible or assumed future results of our operations or our performance. Words such as “expects,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” and variations of such words and similar expressions are intended to identify the forward-looking statements. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable, no assurance can be given that such expectations will prove to have been correct. These statements involve known and unknown risks and are based upon a number of assumptions and estimates which are inherently subject to significant uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are beyond our control. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding:

WE UNDERTAKE NO OBLIGATION TO PUBLICLY UPDATE OR REVISE ANY FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THIS ANNUAL REPORT, EXCEPT AS REQUIRED BY LAW, OR THE DOCUMENTS TO WHICH WE REFER YOU IN THIS ANNUAL REPORT, TO REFLECT ANY CHANGE IN OUR EXPECTATIONS WITH RESPECT TO SUCH STATEMENTS OR ANY CHANGE IN EVENTS, CONDITIONS OR CIRCUMSTANCES ON WHICH ANY STATEMENT IS BASED.     

PART I

Not Applicable.

Not Applicable.

Please note: Throughout this report, all references to "we," "our," "us" and the "Company" refer to Euroseas Ltd. and its subsidiaries. We use the term deadweight ton, or dwt, in describing the size of vessels. Dwt, expressed in metric tons, each of which is equivalent to 1,000 kilograms, refers to the maximum weight of cargo and supplies that a vessel can carry. We use the term twenty-foot equivalent unit, or teu, in describing the size of our containerships in addition to dwt. Teu, expressed in number of containers, refers to the maximum number of twenty-foot long containers that can be placed on board. Unless otherwise indicated, all references to "dollars" and "$" in this report are to, and amounts are presented in, U.S. dollars.

Not Applicable.

Not Applicable.

Any investment in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should consider carefully the following factors, as well as the other information set forth in this annual report, before making an investment in our common stock. Some of the following risks relate principally to the industry in which we operate and our business in general. Other risks relate to the securities market for, and ownership of, our common stock. Any of the described risks could significantly and negatively affect our business, financial condition, operating results and common stock price. The following risk factors describe the material risks that are presently known to us.

Risk Factors Summary

Industry Risk Factors

Our future profitability will be dependent on the level of charter rates in the international container shipping industry.

We are an independent shipping company that operates in the container shipping industry. Our profitability is dependent upon the charter rates we are able to charge for our ships. The supply of, and demand for, shipping capacity strongly influences charter rates. The demand for shipping capacity is determined primarily by the demand for containerized goods trade and the distance that those goods must be moved by sea. The demand for trade is affected by, among other things, world and regional economic and political conditions (including developments in international trade, economic slowdowns caused by public health events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, fluctuations in industrial and agricultural production and armed conflicts), environmental concerns, weather patterns, and changes in seaborne and other transportation costs. The size of the existing fleet in a particular market, the number of new vessel deliveries, the scrapping of older vessels and the number of vessels out of active service (i.e., laid-up, drydocked, awaiting repairs or otherwise not available for hire) determine the supply of shipping capacity, which is measured by the amount of suitable tonnage available to carry cargo.

In addition to the prevailing and anticipated charter 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 bunkers 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. These factors influencing the supply of and demand for shipping capacity are outside of our control, and we may not be able to correctly assess the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions. Some of these factors may have a negative impact on our revenues and net income.

The cyclical nature of the shipping industry may lead to volatile changes in charter rates, which may reduce our revenues and negatively affect our results of operations.

Containership rates have experienced volatility in the past five years. Containership rates started in a depressed state in 2019 but by March had gradually strengthened to levels that, although were below those achieved in the first quarter of 2018, were noticeably higher than the low rates seen in 2016. The remainder of the year saw one of the slowest growth rates in the containerized trade, as global economic growth weakened and continued fears of a U.S.-China ‘trade war’ escalated. In January 2020, freight rates rose initially, only to decrease significantly as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in disruptions to industrial production and supply chains and caused uncertainty in the short-term outlook for the sector. However, during the final quarter of 2020, containership rates increased across all segments, drawing a more positive picture for the future. That sentiment continued throughout 2021 and the first half of 2022, with containership rates reaching all-time highs and surpassing the last ten-year historical medians. After peaking in the summer of 2022, containership rates across all segments began to gradually soften, before dropping significantly in the fourth quarter of 2022, since which time rates have declined. Throughout 2023, charter rates declined across all segments, however the trend has reversed since December 2023 due to incidents in the Red Sea, the Panama Canal drought and the implementation of various environmental regulations.

Rates in the containership market are influenced by the balance of demand for and supply of vessels and may decline again in the future.  Because the factors affecting the supply of and demand for vessels are outside of our control and are unpredictable, the nature, timing, direction and degree of changes in industry conditions are unpredictable, and as a result so are the rates at which we can charter our vessels.  In addition, we may not be able to successfully charter our vessels in the future or renew existing charters at rates sufficient to allow us to meet our obligations or to pay dividends to our shareholders.

Some of the factors that influence demand for vessel capacity include:

We anticipate that the future demand for our container vessels and the charter rates of the corresponding markets will be dependent upon economic recovery and growth in the United States, Europe, Japan, China and India and the overall world economy as well as seasonal and regional changes in demand and changes to the capacity of the world fleet. The capacity of the world fleet may increase and economic growth may not continue. Adverse economic, political, social or other developments could also have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

The market value of our vessels can fluctuate significantly, which may adversely affect our financial condition, cause us to breach financial covenants, result in the incurrence of a loss upon disposal of a vessel or increase the cost of acquiring additional vessels.

The value of our vessels may fluctuate, adversely affecting our earnings and liquidity and causing us to breach our secured credit agreements.

The fair market values of our vessels are related to prevailing charter rates. While the fair market value of vessels and the freight charter market have a very close relationship as the charter market moves from trough to peak, the time lag between the effect of charter rates on market values of ships can vary. A decrease in the market values of our vessels could limit the amount of funds that we can borrow or trigger certain financial covenants under our current or future credit facilities, and we may incur a loss if we sell vessels following a decline in their market value. Furthermore, a decrease in the market value of our vessels could require us to raise additional capital in order to remain compliant with our loan covenants, and could result in the foreclosure of our vessels and adversely affect our earnings and financial condition.

The market value of our vessels may increase or decrease depending on the following factors:

As vessels grow older, they generally decline in value. Due to the cyclical nature of the container shipping industry, if for any reason we sell vessels at a time when prices have fallen, we could incur a loss and our business, results of operations, cash flow, financial condition and ability to pay dividends could be adversely affected.

In addition, we periodically re-evaluate the carrying amount and period over which vessels are depreciated to determine if events have occurred that would require modification to such assets’ carrying values or their useful lives. A determination that a vessel's estimated remaining useful life or recoverable value has declined below its carrying amount could result in an impairment charge against our earnings and a reduction in our shareholders' equity.

Our secured loan agreements, which are secured by mortgages on our vessels, contain various financial covenants. Any change in the assessed market value of any of our vessels might also cause a violation of the covenants of each secured credit agreement, which, in turn, might restrict our cash and affect our liquidity. Among those covenants are requirements that relate to our net worth, operating performance and liquidity. For example, there is a maximum fleet leverage covenant that is based, in part, upon the market value of the vessels securing the loans, as well as requirements to maintain a minimum ratio of the market value of our vessels mortgaged thereunder to our aggregate outstanding balance under each respective loan agreement. If the assessed market value of our vessels declines below certain thresholds, we may violate these covenants and may incur penalties for breach of our credit agreements. For example, these penalties could require us to prepay the shortfall between the assessed market value of our vessels and the value of such vessels required to be maintained pursuant to the secured credit agreement, or to provide additional security acceptable to the lenders in an amount at least equal to the amount of any shortfall. If we are unable to pledge additional collateral, our lenders could accelerate our debt and foreclose on our fleet. Furthermore, we may enter into future loans, which may include various other covenants, in addition to the vessel-related ones, that may ultimately depend on the assessed values of our vessels. Such covenants could include, but are not limited to, maximum fleet leverage covenants and minimum fair net worth covenants.

An over-supply of containership capacity may lead to a reduction in charter rates and profitability and may require us to raise additional capital in order to remain compliant with our loan covenants and affect our ability to pay dividends in the future.

The market supply of containerships was highly elevated at the beginning of last decade, with the number of containerships on order reaching historic highs. The orderbook gradually declined and by the end of 2020 neared its lowest level of the last twenty years, though it has been on the rise since. As reported by industry sources, the containership fleet increased by 4.0% in 2019, 2.9% in 2020, 4.5% in 2021, 4.0% in 2022 and 8.2% in 2023. As of March 31, 2024, containership volumes have increased by 9.4%. Specifically, as reported by industry sources, the capacity of the fully cellular worldwide container vessel fleet, as of March 31, 2024, was approximately 28.33 million teu with approximately another 6.56 million teu, or about 23.16% of the fleet capacity on order. Growth of the fleet is also affected by the scrapping rate. If the number of new ships delivered exceeds the number of vessels being scrapped and lost, vessel capacity will increase. An over-supply of containership capacity may result in a reduction of charter rates. If the supply of vessel capacity increases but the demand for vessel capacity does not increase correspondingly, charter rates and vessel values could materially decline.

If a rate decline occurs upon the expiration or termination of our current charters, we may only be able to re-charter those vessels at reduced rates or we may not be able to charter these vessels at all. Many containership charters we renewed or concluded during 2016 and 2017 were at unprofitable rates and were entered into because they resulted in lower losses than would have resulted had we put the vessels in lay-up. Charter rates have improved since and reached marginally profitable levels during 2018 and into 2019, but remained volatile and fluctuated during 2018, which continued into 2019. During 2020, the disruption in trade flows and markets caused by the COVID-19 pandemic caused volatility in charter rates. By the end of the year, the market was amongst the best performing across all containership segments, with charter markets celebrating new highs. Charters renewed or entered into during 2021 and 2022 were at rates that were profitable, while charters renewed during 2023 were at lower, but still profitable levels for some of our vessels. Due to events in the Red Sea, Panama Canal and the implementation of certain environmental regulations, rates have increased in late 2023 and so far in 2024, but depending on changes of demand for and supply of shipping capacity, they could decrease again. Any inability to enter into more profitable charters may require us to raise additional capital in order to remain compliant with our loan covenants and may also affect our ability to pay dividends in the future.

Adverse economic conditions, especially in the Asia Pacific region, the European Union or the United States and the current Ukraine Russia conflict, could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Because a significant number of the port calls made by our vessels involves the loading or discharging of containerships in ports in the Asia Pacific region, economic turmoil in that region may exacerbate the effect of any economic slowdown on us. China has been one of the world’s fastest growing economies and a major manufacturing hub for the production and export of finished goods which are predominantly shipped in containerships. However, even prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, China’s high rate of real GDP growth had already reached a plateau, posting a 0.5 percentage points decline, year on year, in 2019, followed by a tremendous decline to 3.8 percentage points in 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. With a global economic recovery under way in 2021, China’s GDP increased by 6.1 percent, to stand at 8.4 percentage points. The rapid spread of COVID infections in China, along with its troubled property market, dampened growth significantly in 2022, which expanded by a mere 3.0 percent. Nevertheless, Chinese economy grew further in 2023 by 2.2 percentage points to stand at 5.2 percent, despite an underwhelming boost following the lifting of pandemic sanctions and persistent property sector woes. Projections now show a Chinese growth of 4.6 percentage points in 2024 and further growth of 4.1 percentage points in 2025. In addition, the rise in interest rates to tame inflation and the war between Russia and Ukraine and the war between Israel and Hamas continue to impact economic activity. The United States, a major trading partner of China, has imposed tariffs on certain goods and has indicated that it may seek to implement more protectionist trade measures, in order to protect its domestic economy, which might further affect the growth rate of the Chinese economy, in particular, and the Asia Pacific region in general. Additionally, the European Union, or the EU, and certain of its member states are facing significant economic and political challenges, including a risk of increased protectionist policies. The trade and financial sanctions imposed on Russia have also directly impacted prices and economic activity. Our business, results of operations and financial condition will likely be harmed by any significant economic downturn and economic instability in the Asia Pacific region, including China, or in the EU or the United States.

Outbreaks of epidemic and pandemic diseases and governmental responses thereto could adversely affect our business.

Pandemics, epidemics or other infectious disease outbreaks and government responses to such outbreaks could affect our operations negatively. For instance, COVID-19, which was initially declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020 and was declared no longer a global health emergency on May 5, 2023, negatively affected economic conditions, supply chains, labor markets, and demand for certain shipped goods both regionally and globally as a result of government efforts to combat the pandemic, including the enactment or imposition of travel bans, quarantines and other emergency public health measures.

The extent to which our business could be negatively affected by future pandemics, epidemics or other outbreaks of infectious diseases is uncertain and may depend on numerous evolving factors that we cannot predict and that are outside of our control, such as the duration and severity of the infectious disease outbreak; government responses to such outbreak including travel restrictions and quarantine; the effect such an outbreak would have on the global business environment and the demand for the goods we transport; its effect on the price of fuel for our vessels; shortages or reductions of supply of essential goods, services or labor; and fluctuations in general economic or financial conditions tied to the outbreak, such as a sharp increase in interest rates or reduction in the availability of credit, and governmental responses thereto. We cannot predict the effect that an outbreak of a new COVID-19 variant or strain, or any future infectious disease outbreak, pandemic or epidemic may have on our business, results of operations and financial condition, but it could be material and adverse.

Eurozone’s potential inability to deal with the sovereign debt issues of some of its members could have a material adverse effect on the profitability of our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Despite the efforts of the European Council since 2011 to implement a structured financial support mechanism for Eurozone countries experiencing financial difficulties, questions remain about the capability of a number of member countries to refinance their sovereign debt and meet their debt obligations, especially, as the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in lower economic growth in almost all countries. In March 2011, the European Council agreed on the need for Eurozone countries to establish a permanent stability mechanism, the European Stability Mechanism (or “the ESM”), which will be activated by mutual agreement to provide external financial assistance to Eurozone countries. Despite these measures, concerns persist regarding the debt burden of certain Eurozone countries and their ability to meet future financial obligations and the overall stability of the euro. An extended period of adverse development in the outlook for Eurozone countries could reduce the overall demand for our services. These potential developments, or market perceptions concerning these and related issues, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flow.

Effects and events related to the Greek sovereign debt and economic crisis may adversely affect our operating results.

Greece has experienced a macroeconomic downturn in previous years, from which it has been recovering, partially as a result of the sovereign debt crisis and the related austerity measures implemented by the Greek government. Eurobulk’s operations in Greece may be subjected to new regulations or regulatory action that may require us to incur new or additional compliance or other administrative costs and may require that we or Eurobulk pay to the Greek government new taxes or other fees. We and Eurobulk also face the risk that strikes, work stoppages, civil unrest and violence within Greece may disrupt our and Eurobulk's shore-side operations located in Greece. The Greek government's taxation authorities have increased their scrutiny of individuals and companies to secure tax law compliance. If economic and financial market conditions remain uncertain, persist or deteriorate further, the Greek government may impose further changes to tax and other laws to which we and Eurobulk may be subject or change the ways they are enforced, which may adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition.

Liner companies, which comprise the largest contingent of charterers of containerships, have been placed under significant financial pressure, thereby increasing our charter counterparty risk which may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The decline in global trade after the financial crisis of 2008 and the subsequent economic slowdown resulted in a significant decline in demand for the seaborne transportation of products in containers, including for exports from China to Europe and the United States. Consequently, the cargo volumes and, especially, freight rates (i.e., the rates that liner companies charge to their clients) achieved by liner companies, which charter containerships from ship owners like us, declined sharply in the second half of 2011. They stabilized toward the end of 2012, remained at similar levels in 2013, but declined in 2014 and 2016 also due to a growing oversupply of containerships despite a short-lived recovery in the middle of 2015. In 2017, a rate recovery began, which was maintained throughout the year and the first half of 2018. The second half of 2018 and the beginning of 2019 saw a decline in containership charter rates mainly due to measured demand for goods because of the uncertainty surrounding the possibility of increased protectionist policies by governments worldwide. Rates made progress throughout 2019, although improvements were mostly weighted towards the larger size container segments. The COVID-19 pandemic had a major impact on containership rates, causing prolonged uncertainty in the markets through most of 2020. However, by the end of the year, rates reached ten-year highs. 2021 and the first half of 2022 were strong periods for the containership markets, with rates exceeding average and median levels for the last 20 years, due in large part to logistical disruptions and firm trade demand in containership products. However, starting from the third quarter of 2022, containership rates began to gradually soften as a result of a slowdown in world economic activity, including waning demand for containership trade, alongside lower consumer activity due to inflationary pressures and the easing of logistical disruptions. Containership rates have slightly increased starting from December 2023 and so far in 2024 following the continued Houthi attacks on ships in the Red Sea and in the Gulf of Aden. However, strong supply growth in the next two years is likely to increase pressure in containerized trade. These challenges may reduce demand for containership charters and may increase the likelihood of our customers being unable or unwilling to pay us contracted charter rates. The combination of the current surplus of containership capacity and the expected increase in the size of the world containership fleet over the next several years may make it difficult to secure substitute employment for our containerships if our counterparties fail to perform their obligations under the currently arranged time charters, and any new charter arrangements we are able to secure may be at lower rates.

The containership industry is highly competitive, and we may be unable to compete successfully for charters with established companies or new entrants that may have greater resources and access to capital, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

The containership industry is highly competitive and capital intensive. Competition arises primarily from other vessel owners, some of whom may have greater resources and access to capital than we have. Competition among vessel owners for the seaborne transportation of semi-finished and finished consumer and industrial products can be intense and depends on the charter rate, location, size, age, condition and the acceptability of the vessel and its operators to the charterers. Due in part to the highly fragmented market, many of our competitors with greater resources and access to capital than we have could operate larger fleets than we may operate and thus be able to offer lower charter rates or higher quality vessels than we are able to offer. If this were to occur, we may be unable to retain or attract new charterers on attractive terms or at all, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

Changes in the economic and political environment in China and policies adopted by the Chinese government to regulate China’s economy may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Chinese economy differs from the economies of most countries belonging to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, (or “OECD”), in such respects as structure, government involvement, level of development, growth rate, capital reinvestment, allocation of resources, rate of inflation and balance of payments position. Prior to 1978, the Chinese economy was a planned economy. Since 1978, increasing emphasis has been placed on the utilization of market forces in the development of the Chinese economy. Annual and five-year State Plans are adopted by the Chinese government in connection with the development of the economy. Although state-owned enterprises still account for a substantial portion of the Chinese industrial output, in general, the Chinese government is reducing the level of direct control that it exercises over the economy through State Plans and other measures. There is an increasing level of freedom and autonomy in areas such as allocation of resources, production, pricing and management and a gradual shift in emphasis to a "market economy" and enterprise reform. Limited price reforms were undertaken, with the result that prices for certain commodities are principally determined by market forces. Many of the reforms are unprecedented or experimental and may be subject to revision, change or abolition based upon the outcome of such experiments. The Chinese government may not continue to pursue a policy of economic reform. The level of imports to and exports from China could be adversely affected by the nature of the economic reforms pursued by the Chinese government, as well as by changes in political, economic and social conditions or other relevant policies of the Chinese government, such as changes in laws, regulations or export and import restrictions, all of which could adversely affect our business, operating results, financial condition and cash flows.

We conduct business in China, where the legal system is not fully developed and has inherent uncertainties that could limit the legal protections available to us.

Some of our vessels may be chartered to Chinese customers and from time to time on our charterers' instructions, our vessels may call on Chinese ports. Such charters and voyages may be subject to regulations in China that may require us to incur new or additional compliance or other administrative costs and may require that we pay to the Chinese government new taxes or other fees. Applicable laws and regulations in China may not be well publicized and may not be known to us or to our charterers in advance of us or our charterers becoming subject to them, and the implementation of such laws and regulations may be inconsistent. Changes in Chinese laws and regulations, including with regards to tax matters, or changes in their implementation by local authorities could affect our vessels if chartered to Chinese customers as well as our vessels calling to Chinese ports and could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may have difficulty securing profitable employment for our vessels if their charters expire in a depressed market.

All of our vessels are employed on time charter contracts. Seven of our vessels are under time charters scheduled to expire during 2024, nine are scheduled to expire in 2025, and five in 2026. As of March 31, 2024, the containership charter rates for vessels like ours are above historical averages. In addition, we have secured employment for another one of our newbuildings scheduled to be delivered in the second quarter of 2024, until 2026. When the current charters of our vessels are due for renewal, we may be unable to re-charter these vessels at similar or better rates or we might not be able to charter them at all. Although we do not receive any revenues from our vessels while not employed, we are required to pay expenses necessary to maintain the vessels in proper operating condition, insure them and service any indebtedness secured by such vessels. If we cannot re-charter our vessels on time charters or trade them in the spot market profitably, our results of operations and operating cash flow will be adversely affected. Despite the fact that all of our vessels are employed, we may be forced to lay up vessels if rates drop to levels below daily running expenses or if we are unable to find employment for the vessels for prolonged periods of time.

We will not be able to take advantage of potentially favorable opportunities in the current market with respect to vessels employed on time charters.

As of March 31, 2024, all of our vessels are employed under time charters with remaining terms ranging from 2 months to 28 months based on the minimum duration of the charter contracts, with options to extend for an additional 12 months. The percentage of our fleet that is under time charter contracts represents approximately 76% of our vessel capacity for the remainder of 2024, 30% of our capacity in 2025 and 8% of our capacity for 2026. Although time charters provide relatively steady streams of revenue, vessels committed to time charters may not be available for chartering during periods of increasing charter rates. If we cannot re-charter these vessels on time charters or trade them profitably on the spot market, our results of operations and operating cash flow may suffer. We may not be able to secure charter rates in the future that will enable us to operate our vessels profitably.

Global economic conditions may continue to negatively impact the container shipping industry.

Major market disruptions and adverse changes in market conditions and regulatory climate in China, the United States, the European Union and worldwide may adversely affect our business.

Accordingly, our financial condition and results of operations, as well as our future prospects, would likely be hindered by an economic downturn in any of these countries or geographic regions. In recent years China and India have been among the world’s fastest growing economies in terms of gross domestic product, and any economic slowdown in the Asia Pacific region, particularly in China or India, may adversely affect demand for seaborne transportation of our products and our results of operations. Moreover, any deterioration in the economy of the United States or the European Union, may further adversely affect economic growth in Asia.

Economic growth is expected to slow, including due to supply-chain disruption, the recent surge in inflation and related actions by central banks and geopolitical conditions, with a significant risk of recession in many parts of the world in the near term. In particular, an adverse change in economic conditions affecting China, Japan, India or Southeast Asia generally could have a negative effect on the container shipping market.

Increasing scrutiny and changing expectations from investors, lenders and other market participants with respect to our Environmental, Social and Governance (“ESG”) policies may impose additional costs on us or expose us to additional risks.

Companies across all industries are facing increasing scrutiny relating to their ESG policies. Investor advocacy groups, certain institutional investors, investment funds, lenders and other market participants are increasingly focused on ESG practices and in recent years have placed increasing importance on the implications and social cost of their investments. The increased focus and activism related to ESG and similar matters may hinder access to capital, as investors and lenders may decide to reallocate capital or to not commit capital as a result of their assessment of a company’s ESG practices. Companies which do not adapt to or comply with investor, lender or other market participant expectations and standards, which are evolving, or which are perceived to have not responded appropriately to the growing concern for ESG issues, regardless of whether there is a legal requirement to do so, may suffer from reputational damage and the business, financial condition, and/or stock price of such a company could be materially and adversely affected.

We may face increasing pressures from investors, lenders and other market participants, who are increasingly focused on climate change, to prioritize sustainable energy practices, reduce our carbon footprint and promote sustainability. As a result, we may be required to implement more stringent ESG procedures or standards so that our existing and future investors and lenders remain invested in us and make further investments in us. If we do not meet these standards, our business and/or our ability to access capital could be harmed.

Additionally, certain investors and lenders may exclude shipping companies, such as us, from their investing portfolios altogether due to environmental, social and governance factors. These limitations in both the debt and equity capital markets may affect our ability to develop as our plans for growth may include accessing the equity and debt capital markets. If those markets are unavailable, or if we are unable to access alternative means of financing on acceptable terms, or at all, we may be unable to implement our business strategy, which would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations and impair our ability to service our indebtedness. Further, it is likely that we will incur additional costs and require additional resources to monitor, report and comply with wide ranging ESG requirements. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

On March 6, 2024, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) adopted final rules to require registrants to disclose certain climate-related information in SEC filings of all public companies. The final rules require companies to disclose, among other things: material climate-related risks; activities to mitigate or adapt to such risks; information about the registrant's board of directors' oversight of climate-related risks and management’s role in managing material climate-related risks; and information on any climate-related targets or goals that are material to the registrant's business, results of operations, or financial condition. Further, to facilitate investors' assessment of certain climate-related risks, the final rules require disclosure of Scope 1 and/or Scope 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on a phased-in basis when those emissions are material; the filing of an attestation report covering the required disclosure of such registrants’ Scope 1 and/or Scope 2 emissions, also on a phased-in basis; and disclosure of the financial statement effects of severe weather events and other natural conditions including, for example, costs and losses. The final rules include a phased-in compliance period for all registrants, with the compliance date dependent on the registrant’s filer status and the content of the disclosure.

If we fail to adapt to or comply with investor, lender or other industry shareholder expectations and standards, which are evolving, or if we fail to comply with the SEC’s requirements, or if we are perceived to have failed to respond appropriately to the growing concern for ESG issues, regardless of whether there is a legal requirement to do so, we may suffer from reputational damage and incur costs related to litigation or as a failure to comply with regulatory requirements, and our business, financial condition, and/or stock price could be materially and adversely affected.

We are subject to complex laws and regulations, including environmental regulations that can adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of doing business.

Our operations are subject to numerous laws and regulations in the form of international conventions and treaties, national, state and local laws and national and international regulations in force in the jurisdictions in which our vessels operate or are registered, which can significantly affect the ownership and operation of our vessels. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto, collectively referred to as MARPOL 73/78 and herein as MARPOL, including the designation of emission control areas, ECAs, thereunder, the International Convention on Load Lines of 1966, or the LL Convention, the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969, as amended by different Protocol in 1976, 1984 and 1992, and amended in 2000, and generally referred to as the CLC, the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, or Bunker Convention, the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974, or SOLAS, the International Safety Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and for Pollution Prevention, or ISM Code, the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments, or the BWM Convention, the U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or OPA, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, or CERCLA, the U.S. Clean Water Act, or the CWA, the U.S. Clean Air Act, or the CAA, the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002, or the MTSA, and European Union regulations. Compliance with such laws, regulations and standards, where applicable, may require installation of costly equipment or operational changes and may affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels.

Furthermore, events like the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon and the subsequent release of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, or other events, may result in further regulation of the shipping industry, and modifications to statutory liability schemes. Thus, we may also incur additional costs in order to comply with other existing and future regulatory obligations, including, but not limited to, costs relating to air emissions including greenhouse gases, the management of ballast waters, maintenance and inspection, development and implementation of emergency procedures and insurance coverage or other financial assurance of our ability to address pollution incidents. These costs could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition. A failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in administrative and civil penalties, criminal sanctions or the suspension or termination of our operations.

Environmental laws often impose strict liability for remediation of spills and releases of oil and hazardous substances, which could subject us to liability without regard to whether we were negligent or at fault. Because such conventions, laws and regulations are often revised, we cannot predict the ultimate cost of complying with such conventions, laws and regulations or the impact thereof on the resale price or useful life of our vessels. Additional conventions, laws and regulations may be adopted which could limit our ability to do business or increase the cost of our doing business and which may materially adversely affect our operations. We are required by various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses and certificates with respect to our operations. Under OPA, for example, owners, operators and bareboat charterers are jointly and severally strictly liable for the discharge of oil within the 200-mile exclusive economic zone around the United States. An oil spill could result in significant liability, including fines, penalties and criminal liability and remediation costs for natural resource damages under other federal, state and local laws, as well as third-party damages. We are required to satisfy insurance and financial responsibility requirements for potential oil (including marine fuel) spills and other pollution incidents. There can be no assurance that any such insurance we have arranged to cover certain environmental risks will be sufficient to cover all such risks or that any claims will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends. We currently maintain, for each of our vessels, pollution liability coverage insurance of $1.0 billion per incident. If the damages from a catastrophic spill exceeded our insurance coverage, it would severely and adversely affect our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends.

Environmental requirements can also require a reduction in cargo capacity, ship modifications or operational changes or restrictions, lead to decreased availability of insurance coverage for environmental matters or result in the denial of access to certain jurisdictional waters or ports, or detention in certain ports. Under local, national and foreign laws, as well as international treaties and conventions, we could incur material liabilities, including clean up obligations and natural resource damages in the event that there is a release of bunkers or hazardous substances from our vessels or otherwise in connection with our operations. We could also become subject to personal injury or property damage claims relating to the release of hazardous substances associated with our existing or historic operations. Violations of, or liabilities under, environmental requirements can result in substantial penalties, fines and other sanctions, including in certain instances, seizure or detention of our vessels.

We are subject to international safety regulations and the failure to comply with these regulations may subject us to increased liability, may adversely affect our insurance coverage and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.

The operation of our vessels is affected by the requirements set forth in the ISM Code set forth in Chapter IX of SOLAS. The ISM Code requires shipowners, ship managers and bareboat charterers to develop and maintain 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 safe vessel operations and for dealing with emergencies. We rely upon the safety management system that we and our technical manager have developed for compliance with the ISM Code. The failure of a shipowner or bareboat charterer to comply with the ISM Code may subject it to increased liability, may invalidate existing insurance or decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and may result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.  Currently, each of our vessels and Eurobulk, are ISM Code-certified, but we may not be able to maintain such certification indefinitely.

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. We have obtained documents of compliance for our offices and safety management certificates for all of our vessels for which the certificates are required by the United Nations’ International Maritime Organization (the “IMO”). The document of compliance (the “DOC”) and the safety management certificate (the “SMC”) are renewed as required.

In addition, vessel classification societies also impose significant safety and other requirements on our vessels. In complying with current and future environmental requirements, vessel-owners and operators may also incur significant additional costs in meeting new maintenance and inspection requirements, in developing contingency arrangements for potential spills and in obtaining insurance coverage. Government regulation of vessels, particularly in the areas of safety and environmental requirements, can be expected to become stricter in the future and require us to incur significant capital expenditures on our vessels to keep them in compliance.

The operation of our vessels is also affected by other government regulation in the form of international conventions, national, state and local laws and regulations in force in the jurisdictions in which the vessels operate, as well as in the country or countries of their registration. As mentioned above, we are required by various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses, certificates and financial assurances with respect to our operations. See Item 4: “Information on the Company – Business Overview – Environmental and Other Regulations in the Shipping Industry” for more information.

Regulations relating to ballast water discharge may adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

The IMO has imposed updated guidelines for ballast water management systems specifying the maximum amount of viable organisms allowed to be discharged from a vessel’s ballast water. Depending on the date of the International Oil Pollution Prevention (“IOPP”) renewal survey, existing vessels constructed before September 8, 2017 must comply with the updated D-2 standard on or after September 8, 2019. For most vessels, compliance with the D-2 standard will involve installing on-board systems to treat ballast water and eliminate unwanted organisms. Ships constructed on or after September 8, 2017 are to comply with the D-2 standards on or after September 8, 2017. We currently have 2 vessels that will be fitted to comply with the updated guideline in 2024 during their respective drydock. Costs of compliance may be substantial and adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

Furthermore, United States regulations are currently changing. Although the 2013 Vessel General Permit (“VGP”) program and U.S. National Invasive Species Act (“NISA”) are currently in effect to regulate ballast discharge, exchange and installation, the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (“VIDA”), which was signed into law on December 4, 2018, requires that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) develop national standards of performance for approximately 30 discharges, similar to those found in the VGP within two years. On October 26, 2020, the EPA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Vessel Incidental Discharge National Standards of Performance under VIDA. On October 18, 2023, the EPA published a supplemental notice of the proposed rule sharing new ballast water data received from the U.S. Coast Guard (“USCG”) and providing clarification on the proposed rule. The public comment period for the proposed rule ended on December 18, 2023. Once EPA finalizes the rule (possibly by fall 2024), USCG must develop corresponding implementation, compliance and enforcement regulations regarding ballast water within two years. The new regulations could require the installation of new equipment, which may cause us to incur substantial costs. Until the EPA publishes its final standards and issues its corresponding implementing regulations, interim requirements established through the EPA 2013 Vessel General Permit (VGP) and the USCG ballast water regulations, and any applicable state and local government requirements, continue to apply.

Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC 80) continued discussions of 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. To achieve a 40% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 compared to 2008, shipping companies are required to include: (i) a technical requirement to operational carbon intensity reduction requirements, based on a new operational carbon intensity indicator (“CII”). The Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (EEXI) is required to be calculated for ships of 400 gross tonnage and above. The IMO and MEPC will calculate “required” EEXI levels based on the vessel’s technical design, such as vessel type, date of creation, size and baseline. Additionally, an “attained” EEXI will be calculated to determine the actual energy efficiency of the vessel. A vessel’s attained EEXI must be less than the vessel’s required EEXI. Non-compliant vessels will have to upgrade their engine to continue to travel. 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. The vessel’s attained CII must be lower than its required CII. Vessels that continually receive subpar CII ratings will be required to submit corrective action plans to ensure compliance. 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.

Additionally, MEPC 75 proposed draft amendments requiring that, on or before January 1, 2023, all ships above 400 gross tonnage must have an approved Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan, or 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 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 held on June 2021, entered into force on November 1, 2022 and became effective on January 1, 2023. 

Regulations relating to low sulfur emissions that came into effect on January 1, 2020 may adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

Under maritime regulations that came into effect on January 1, 2020, ships are required to reduce sulfur emissions from 3.5% to 0.5% m/m through the use of scrubbers or buying fuel with low sulfur content which is more expensive than standard marine fuel. We do not currently intend to install scrubbers on our fleet. Our fuel costs and fuel inventories have increased as a result of these sulfur emission regulations, but the effect is limited by the fact that our vessels are under time charter agreements and these costs are paid by the charterer. However, fuel costs are taken into account by the charterer in determining the amount of time charter hire and, therefore, fuel costs also indirectly affect time charter rates. Low sulfur fuel is more expensive than standard marine fuel containing 3.5% sulfur content and may become more expensive or difficult to obtain as a result of increased demand, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.

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

International container shipping is subject to various security and customs inspection and related procedures in countries of origin and destination. Inspection procedures may result in the seizure of contents of our vessels, delays in the loading, offloading or delivery and the levying of customs duties, fines or other penalties against us.

It is possible that changes to existing procedures will be proposed or implemented. Any such changes may affect the container shipping industry and have the potential to impose additional financial and legal obligations on carriers and, in certain cases, to render the shipment of certain types of goods by container uneconomical or impractical. These additional costs could reduce the volume of goods shipped in containers, resulting in a decreased demand for container vessels. In addition, it is unclear what financial costs any new security procedures might create for container vessel owners, or whether companies responsible for the global traffic of containers at sea, referred to as container line operators, may seek to pass on certain of the costs associated with any new security procedures to vessel owners.

If our vessels fail to maintain their class certification and/or fail any annual survey, intermediate survey, drydocking or special survey, those vessels would be unable to carry cargo, thereby reducing our revenues and profitability and violating certain covenants in our loan agreements.

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. Our vessels are currently classed with Det Norske Veritas (“DNV”), Bureau Veritas and Nippon Kaiji Kyokai. ISM and International Ship and Port Facilities Security (“ISPS”) certifications have been awarded to the vessels by Bureau Veritas or Liberian Flag Administration and to the Manager by Bureau Veritas.

A vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys, dry-dockings 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 have its underwater parts inspected by class every 30 to 36 months, but for vessels subject to enhanced survey requirements and above 15 years of age, its underwater parts must be inspected in dry-dock.

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. That status 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.

Most insurance underwriters make it a condition for insurance coverage that a vessel be certified as "in class" by a classification society that is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies (“IACS”). All of our vessels that we have purchased, and may agree to purchase in the future, must be certified as being "in class" prior to their delivery under our standard purchase contracts and memorandum of agreement. If the vessel is not certified on the date of closing, we have no obligation to take delivery of the vessel. We have all of our vessels, and intend to have all vessels that we acquire in the future, classed by IACS members. See Item 4: “Information on the Company – Business Overview – Environmental and Other Regulations in the Shipping Industry” for more information.

Rising fuel prices may adversely affect our results of operations and the marketability of our vessels.

Fuel (bunkers) is a significant, if not the largest, operating expense for many of our shipping operations when our vessels are under voyage charter. When a vessel is operating under a time charter, these costs are paid by the charterer. However, fuel costs are taken into account by the charterer in determining the amount of time charter hire and, therefore, fuel costs also indirectly affect time charter rates. Fuel prices are highly based on, and are highly correlated to, the price of oil. The price and supply of fuel is unpredictable and fluctuates based on events outside our control, including geopolitical developments, such as the recent war between Russia and Ukraine, which remain ongoing as of the date of this annual report, supply and demand for oil and gas, actions by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (“OPEC”) and other oil and gas producers, war and unrest in oil producing countries and regions, regional production patterns and environmental concerns. Fuel prices had been at historically high levels through mid-2014, but by the first quarter of 2016 fuel prices had fallen by more than 50% and by 2018 and 2019, the price of fuel fluctuated from a low of $42.53/bbl (for West Texas Intermediate, “WTI”) on December 24, 2018 to $61.0/bbl in December 2019. In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in crude oil prices hitting a major slump as oil demand drastically declined following lockdowns and travel restrictions. By April 2020, prices fell to $18.44/bbl, after OPEC and Russia failed to agree on maintaining production cuts, and Saudi Arabia increased its own production. As the COVID-19 pandemic continued to spread around the world, oil prices dropped to historical lows during 2020 and closed the year at $43.52/bbl. Oil traded lower throughout the year, as rising COVID-19 infections and the new strain, sparked demand concerns. Prices edged slightly higher in December 2020, ranging around $48/bbl, upon the rolling out of the COVID-19 vaccines, coupled by Saudi Arabia’s announcement regarding a large output reduction for February and March 2021. In February 2021, the average WTI stood at $59/bbl, the highest value since the start of the pandemic, with hopes of steady vaccination roll out and OPEC production limits having led to cautious optimism at global markets. Prices fluctuated throughout the year, with the annual average price reaching about $68/bbl; a significant increase compared to the 2020 average. Since then, we have seen a significant increase, after Western countries imposed sanctions on Russia, raising fears of supply disruptions from one of the largest producers of oil and gas. During 2022, oil prices fluctuated significantly. Following Russia’s invasion in Ukraine and fears over low crude oil inventories, prices rose to over $130/bbl in March 2022. Prices starting waning towards the end of 2022 and the beginning of 2023, to around $80/bbl, briefly rising to around $91/bbl in September 2023, before dropping to around $74/bbl by the end of the year. Oil prices remained high and well above their 10-year average of about $63/bbl (for WTI) throughout 2023. At year-end 2023, the price of WTI/bbl was $71.33 and currently stands at around $80/bbl. Prices are currently influenced by concerns over the Red Sea crisis amid an escalating conflict in the Middle East, further economic slowdown fears and central banks’ efforts to address inflation. Any increases in the price of fuel, especially if exceeding its 10-year average, may adversely affect our operations, particularly if such increases are combined with lower containership rates.

Upon redelivery of vessels at the end of a period time or trip time charter, we may be obligated to repurchase bunkers on board at prevailing market prices, which could be materially higher than fuel prices at the inception of the charter period. We may also be obligated to value our bunkers inventories on board at the end of a period time or trip time charter, at a lower value than the acquisition value, if prevailing market prices are significantly lower at the time of the vessel redelivery from the charterer.

Rising crew costs may adversely affect our profits.

Crew costs are a significant expense for us under our charters. There is a limited supply of well-qualified crew. We generally bear crewing costs under our charters. An increase in the world vessel operating fleet will likely result in higher demand for crews which, in turn, might drive crew costs further up. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic had affected the rotation of our crew members due to quarantine restrictions placed on embarking and disembarking on our vessels. Any such disruptions could impact the cost of rotating our crew. Any increase in crew costs may adversely affect our profitability especially if such increase is combined with lower containership rates.

Maritime claimants could arrest or attach our vessels, which would interrupt our business or have a negative effect on our cash flows.

Crew members, suppliers of goods and services to a vessel, shippers of cargo, lenders and other parties may be entitled to a maritime lien against that vessel for unsatisfied debts, claims or damages. In many jurisdictions, a maritime lien holder may enforce its lien by arresting or attaching a vessel through foreclosure proceedings. The arresting or attachment of one or more of our vessels could interrupt our cash flow and require us to pay large sums to have the arrest or attachment lifted which would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, in some jurisdictions, such as South Africa, under the "sister ship" theory of liability, a claimant may arrest both the vessel that is subject to the claimant's maritime lien, and any "associated" vessel, which is any vessel owned or controlled by the same owner. Claimants could try to assert "sister ship" liability against one of our vessels for claims relating to another of our vessels.

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

We expect that our vessels will call in ports in South America and other areas where smugglers attempt to hide drugs and other contraband on vessels, with or without the knowledge of crew members. To the extent our vessels are found with contraband, whether inside or attached to the hull of our vessel and whether with or without the knowledge of any of our crew, 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.

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

A government could requisition for title or seize one or more of our vessels. Requisition for title occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and becomes the owner. Also, a government could requisition one or more of our vessels for hire. Requisition for hire occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and effectively becomes the charterer at dictated charter rates. Generally, requisitions occur during a period of war or emergency. Even if we would be entitled to compensation in the event of a requisition of one or more of our vessels, the amount and timing of the payment would be uncertain. Government requisition of one or more of our vessels could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

World events outside our control may negatively affect our ability to operate, thereby reducing our revenues and results of operations or our ability to obtain additional financing, thereby restricting the implementation of our business strategy.

We operate in a sector of the economy that is likely to be adversely impacted by the effects of political conflicts, including the continued global trade war between the U.S. and China, current political instability in the Middle East, terrorist or other attacks, war or international hostilities. Terrorist attacks such as the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, and similar attacks that followed, the continuing response to these attacks, as well as the threat of future terrorist attacks, continue to cause uncertainty in the world financial markets and may affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. The continuing conflicts in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Ukraine, Syria, Palestine and the Red Sea region may lead to additional acts of terrorism and armed conflict around the world, which may contribute to further economic instability in the global financial markets. More recently, the trade and financial sanctions imposed on Russia due to its invasion in Ukraine, have caused turbulence in the global markets. These uncertainties could also have a material adverse effect on our ability to obtain additional financing on terms acceptable to us or at all. Terrorist attacks on vessels may in the future also negatively affect our operations and financial condition and directly impact our vessels or our customers, including most recently, disruptions in the Red Sea in connection with the conflict between Israel and Hamas. Future terrorist attacks could result in increased volatility and turmoil of the financial markets in the United States of America and globally and could result in an economic recession in the United States of America or the world. Additionally, any escalations between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization countries and Russia could result in retaliation from Russia that could potentially affect the shipping industry. There may also be long-term adverse impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic that negatively affect industrial production. In addition, the continued global trade war between the U.S. and China, including the introduction by the U.S. of tariffs on selected imported goods, mainly from China, may provoke further retaliation measures from the affected countries which has the potential to impede trade. Any of these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, costs and operating cash flows.

Disruptions in world financial markets and the resulting governmental action could have a material adverse impact on our ability to obtain financing, our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows, and could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Europe, the United States and other parts of the world have exhibited weak economic conditions, are exhibiting volatile economic trends or have been in a recession. For example, during the 2008-2009 crisis, the credit markets in the United States experienced sudden and significant contraction, deleveraging and reduced liquidity, and the United States federal government and state governments have since implemented a broad variety of governmental action and/or new regulation of the financial markets. Securities and futures markets and the credit markets are subject to comprehensive statutes, regulations and other requirements. The SEC, other regulators, self-regulatory organizations and exchanges are authorized to take extraordinary actions in the event of market emergencies, and may effect changes in law or interpretations of existing laws. A number of financial institutions and especially banks that traditionally provide debt to shipping companies like ours have experienced serious financial difficulties and, in some cases, have entered bankruptcy proceedings or are in regulatory enforcement actions. As a result, access to credit markets around the world has been reduced. The extension of Quantitative Easing (“QE”) and more recently the reversal of it, high levels of Non-Performing Loans (“NPLs”) in Europe and stricter lending requirements may reduce bank lending capacity and/or make the terms of any lending more onerous.

We face risks related to changes in economic environments, changes in interest rates, and instability in the banking and securities markets around the world, among other factors. Major market disruptions and the changes in market conditions and regulatory changes worldwide may adversely affect our business or impair our ability to borrow amounts under our credit facilities or any future financial arrangements. We cannot predict how long the current market conditions will last. However, these recent and developing economic and governmental factors, including proposals to reform the financial system, together with the concurrent decline in charter rates and vessel values, may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows, and might cause the price of our common stock on the Nasdaq Capital Market to decline.

In addition, public health threats, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, influenza and other highly communicable diseases or viruses, outbreaks of which have from time to time occurred in various parts of the world in which we operate, including China, could adversely impact our operations, and the operations of our customers.

If there are further disruptions in world financial markets, we may require substantial additional financing to fund acquisitions of additional vessels and to implement our business plans. Sufficient financing may not be available on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. If we cannot raise the financing we need in a timely manner and on acceptable terms, we may not be able to acquire the vessels necessary to implement our business plans and consequently we may not be able to pay dividends.

We rely on information technology, and if we are unable to protect against service interruptions, data corruption, cyber-based attacks or network security breaches, our operations could be disrupted and our business could be negatively affected.

We rely on information technology networks and systems to process, transmit and store electronic and financial information; to capture knowledge of our business; to coordinate our business across our operation bases; and to communicate internally and with customers, suppliers, partners and other third-parties. These information technology systems, some of which are managed by third parties, may be susceptible to damage, disruptions or shutdowns, hardware or software failures, power outages, computer viruses, cyberattacks, telecommunication failures, user errors or catastrophic events. Our information technology systems are becoming increasingly integrated, so damage, disruption or shutdown to the system could result in a more widespread impact. Our business operations could be targeted by individuals or groups seeking to sabotage or disrupt our information technology systems and networks, or to steal data. A successful cyber-attack could materially disrupt our operations, including the safety of our operations, or lead to unauthorized release of information or alteration of information in our systems. Any such attack or other breach of our information technology systems could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. If our information technology systems suffer severe damage, disruption or shutdown, and our business continuity plans do not effectively resolve the issues in a timely manner, our operations could be disrupted and our business could be negatively affected. In addition, cyber-attacks could lead to potential unauthorized access and disclosure of confidential information and data loss and corruption. There is no assurance that we will not experience these service interruptions or cyber-attacks in the future. Further, as the methods of cyber-attacks continue to evolve, we may be required to expend additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate any vulnerabilities to cyber-attacks.

Moreover, cyber-attacks against the Ukrainian government and other countries in the region have been reported in connection with the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. It is possible that such attacks could have collateral effects on additional critical infrastructure or financial institutions globally, which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. At this time, it is difficult to assess the likelihood of such threat and any potential impact.

Further, in July 2023, the SEC adopted amendments to its rules on cybersecurity risk management, strategy, governance, and incident disclosure. The amendments, require us to report material cybersecurity incidents involving our information systems and periodic reporting regarding our policies and procedures to identify and manage cybersecurity risks, among other disclosures.

The increased number of our shore personnel working remotely might increase our vulnerability to cyber-attacks and risk of cyber-security breaches which would affect our operations and financial results.

We, and our Manager, have implemented a policy permitting personnel to work remotely when necessary. While adapting to new ways of operating, employees are encouraged and in certain cases required to operate remotely. When not working at our shore office location, our staff is working remotely, typically, from their private residences. While we have taken measures to ensure secure communications with our office information systems and systems on-board our vessels, we do not control all of the equipment and communication systems that each of our staff is using at their residence. Consequently, we may face an increased risk of cyber-security attacks and cyber-security breaches which could impede our ability to manage our operations and affect our financial results.

Seasonal fluctuations could affect our operating results and the amount of available cash with which we service our debt or could pay dividends.

We operate our vessels in markets that have historically exhibited seasonal variations in demand and, as a result, in charter rates. To the extent we operate vessels in the spot market, this seasonality may result in quarter-to-quarter volatility in our operating results which could affect our ability to continue the payment of dividends to our common shareholders. For example, the containership market is typically stronger in the spring and fall months following the celebration of Chinese New Year in the first quarter of each year and in anticipation of the increased demand during the year-end holiday season. In addition, unpredictable weather patterns in these months tend to disrupt vessel scheduling and supplies of certain commodities. This seasonality has not materially affected our operating results and the amount of available cash with which we service our debt or could pay dividends, because our fleet is currently employed on period time charters, but this seasonality may materially affect our operating results if our vessels are employed in the spot market in the future.

Reliance on suppliers may limit our ability to obtain supplies and services when needed.

We rely on a significant number of third-party suppliers of consumables, spare parts and equipment to operate, maintain, repair and upgrade our fleet of ships. Delays in delivery or unavailability or poor quality of supplies could result in off-hire days due to consequent delays in the repair and maintenance of our fleet or lead to our time charters being terminated. This would negatively impact our revenues and cash flows. Cost increases could also negatively impact our future operations.

The derivative contracts we enter into to hedge our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates can result in higher than market rates and reductions in our stockholders’ equity as well as charges against our income, while there is no assurance of the credit worthiness of our counterparties.

We enter into interest rate swaps generally for purposes of managing our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates applicable to indebtedness under our credit facilities which were advanced at floating rates based on the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”), which we transitioned to SOFR. Interest rates and currency hedging may result in us paying higher than market rates. In April 2020, October 2021, and June 2022, we entered into new interest rate swap agreements for a notional amount of $30.0 million, $10.0 million and $20.0 million, respectively. The swaps entered into in April 2020 and October 2021 were liquidated in March 2023. As of December 31, 2023, the aggregate notional amount of interest rate swaps relating to our fleet was $20.0 million. There is no assurance that our interest rate swap contracts or any other derivative contract that we enter into in the future will provide adequate protection against adverse changes in interest rates or that our bank counterparties will be able to perform their obligations. In addition, as a result of the implementation of new regulation of the swaps markets in the United States, the European Union and elsewhere over the next few years, the cost of interest rate swaps may increase or suitable hedges may not be available. While we monitor the credit risks associated with our bank counterparties, there can be no assurance that these counterparties would be able to meet their commitments under our derivative contracts or any future derivative contract. Our bank counterparties include financial institutions that are based in European Union countries that have faced and might face again financial stress. The potential for our bank counterparties to default on their obligations under our derivative contracts may be highest when we are most exposed to the fluctuations in interest and currency rates such contracts are designed to hedge, and several or all of our bank counterparties may simultaneously be unable to perform their obligations due to the same events or occurrences in global financial markets.

To the extent our existing interest rate swaps do not, and future derivative contracts may not, qualify for treatment as hedges for accounting purposes we would recognize fluctuations in the fair value of such contracts in our statement of operations. In addition, to the extent any future derivative contracts qualify for treatment as hedges for accounting purposes, the effective portion of changes in the fair value of our derivative contracts would be recognized in “Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss)” affecting our accumulated deficit, and may affect compliance with the net worth covenant requirements in our credit facilities. Changes in the fair value of our derivative contracts that do not qualify for treatment as hedges for accounting and financial reporting purposes affect, among other things, our net income and our earnings per share. For additional information see “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” and “Item 11. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk”.

We may be subject to litigation that, if not resolved in our favor and not sufficiently insured against, could have a material adverse effect on us.

We may be involved in various litigation matters from time to time. These matters may include, among other things, contract disputes, personal injury claims, environmental claims or proceedings, asbestos and other toxic tort claims, employment matters, governmental claims for taxes or duties, and other litigation that arises in the ordinary course of our business. Although we intend to defend these matters vigorously, we cannot predict with certainty the outcome or effect of any claim or other litigation matter, and the ultimate outcome of any litigation or the potential costs to resolve them may have a material adverse effect on us. Insurance may not be applicable or sufficient in all cases and/or insurers may not remain solvent which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating cash flows.

Company Risk Factors

We depend entirely on Eurobulk to manage and charter our fleet, which may adversely affect our operations if Eurobulk fails to perform its obligations.

We have no employees and we currently contract the commercial and technical management of our fleet, including crewing, maintenance and repair, to Eurobulk, our affiliated ship management company. We may lose the Manager’s services or the Manager may fail to perform its obligations to us which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of our operations. Although we may have rights against our Manager if it defaults on its obligations to us, you will have no recourse against our Manager. Further, we will need to seek approval from our lenders to change the Manager as our ship manager.

Because the Manager is a privately held company, there is little or no publicly available information about it and there may be very little advance warning of operational or financial problems experienced by the Manager that may adversely affect us.

The ability of the Manager to continue providing services for our benefit will depend in part on its own financial strength. Circumstances beyond our control could impair the Manager’s financial strength, and because the Manager is privately held it is unlikely that information about its financial strength would become public unless the Manager began to default on its obligations. As a result, there may be little advance warning of problems affecting the Manager, even though these problems could have a material adverse effect on us.

We may have difficulty properly managing our growth through acquisitions of new or secondhand vessels and we may not realize expected benefits from these acquisitions, which may negatively impact our cash flows, liquidity and our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders.

We intend to grow our business by ordering newbuild vessels and through selective acquisitions of high-quality secondhand vessels to the extent that they are available. Our future growth will primarily depend on:

Ship values are correlated with charter rates. During periods in which charter rates are high, ship values are generally high as well, and it may be difficult to consummate ship acquisitions or enter into shipbuilding contracts at favorable prices. During periods in which charter rates are low and employment is scarce, ship values are low and any vessel acquired without an attached time charter will automatically incur additional expenses to operate, insure, maintain and finance the ship, thereby significantly increasing our operating and finance costs. In addition, any vessel acquisition may not be profitable at or after the time of acquisition and may not generate cash flows sufficient to justify the investment. We may not be successful in executing any future growth plans and we cannot give any assurance that we will not incur significant expenses and losses in connection with such growth efforts. Other risks associated with vessel acquisitions that may harm our business, financial condition and operating results include the risks that we may:

Furthermore, a delay in the delivery to us of any such vessel acquired, or the failure of the shipyard to deliver a vessel at all, could cause us to breach our obligations under a related charter and could adversely affect our earnings. In addition, the delivery of any of these vessels with substantial defects could have similar consequences.

A shipyard could fail to deliver a newbuild on time or at all because of:

If we fail to properly manage our growth through acquisitions of newbuild or secondhand vessels we may not realize the expected benefits from these acquisitions, which may negatively impact our cash flows, liquidity and our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders. Unlike newbuild vessels, secondhand vessels typically do not carry warranties as to their condition. While we generally inspect existing vessels prior to purchase, such an inspection would normally not provide us with as much knowledge of a vessel’s condition as we would possess if it had been built for us and operated by us during its life. Repairs and maintenance costs for secondhand vessels are difficult to predict and may be substantially higher than for vessels we have operated since they were built. These costs could decrease our cash flows, liquidity and our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders.

Our business depends upon certain members of our senior management who may not necessarily continue to work for us.

Our future success depends to a significant extent upon our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), Aristides J. Pittas, certain members of our senior management and our Manager. Mr. Pittas has substantial experience in the container shipping industry and has worked with us and our Manager for many years. He, our Manager and certain members of our senior management team are crucial to the execution of our business strategies and to the growth and development of our business. If these individuals were no longer to be affiliated with us or our Manager, or if we were to otherwise cease to receive services from them, we may be unable to recruit other employees with equivalent talent and experience, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Certain of our shareholders hold shares of Euroseas in amounts to give them a significant percentage of the total outstanding voting power represented by our outstanding shares.

As of March 31, 2024, Containers Shareholders Trinity Ltd., or “CST”, our largest shareholder and an affiliate of the company, partly owned by our Chairman and CEO, Vice Chairman and people affiliated or working with Eurobulk amongst others, owns approximately 39.2% of the outstanding shares of our common stock and unvested incentive award shares, representing 39.2% of total voting power. As a result of this share ownership and for as long as CST owns a significant percentage of our outstanding common stock, CST will be able to influence the outcome of any shareholder vote, including the election of directors, the adoption or amendment of provisions in our amended and restated articles of incorporation or bylaws, as amended, and possible mergers, corporate control contests and other significant corporate transactions.

Our corporate governance practices are in compliance with, and are not prohibited by, the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and as such we are entitled to exemption from certain Nasdaq corporate governance standards. As a result, you may not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to all of the Nasdaq corporate governance requirements.

Our Company's corporate governance practices are in compliance with, and are not prohibited by, the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Therefore, we are exempt from many of Nasdaq's corporate governance practices other than the requirements regarding the disclosure of a going concern audit opinion, submission of a listing agreement, notification of material non-compliance with Nasdaq corporate governance practices, and the establishment and composition of an audit committee and a formal written audit committee charter. For a list of the practices followed by us in lieu of Nasdaq's corporate governance rules, we refer you to the section of this annual report entitled "Board Practices—Corporate Governance" under Item 6.C.

We and our principal officers have affiliations with the Manager that could create conflicts of interest detrimental to us.

Our principal officers are also principals, officers and employees of the Manager, which is our ship management company. These responsibilities and relationships could create conflicts of interest between us and the Manager. Conflicts may also arise in connection with the chartering, purchase, sale and operations of the vessels in our fleet versus other vessels that are or may be managed in the future by the Manager. Circumstances in any of these instances may make one decision advantageous to us but detrimental to the Manager and vice versa. Eurobulk currently manages vessels for Euroseas, and one containership vessel that is not owned by Euroseas, potentially causing conflicts such as those described above. Further, it is possible that in the future Eurobulk may manage additional vessels which will not belong to Euroseas and in which the Pittas family may have non-controlling, little or even no power or participation, and Eurobulk may not be able to resolve all conflicts of interest in a manner beneficial to us and our shareholders.

Companies affiliated with Eurobulk or our officers and directors may acquire vessels that compete with our fleet.

Companies affiliated with Eurobulk or our officers and directors may acquire additional containership vessels in the future. These vessels could be in competition with our fleet and other companies affiliated with Eurobulk might be faced with conflicts of interest with respect to their own interests and their obligations to us. Eurobulk, Friends Investment Company Inc. (“Friends”) and Aristides J. Pittas, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, have granted us a right of first refusal to acquire any containership that any of them may consider for acquisition in the future. In addition, Aristides J. Pittas will use his best efforts to cause any entity with respect to which he directly or indirectly controls to grant us this right of first refusal. Were we, however, to decline any such opportunity offered to us or if we did not have the resources or desire to accept any such opportunity, Eurobulk, Friends and Aristides J. Pittas, and any of their respective affiliates, could acquire such vessels.

Our officers do not devote all of their time to our business.

Our officers are involved in other business activities that may result in their spending less time than is appropriate or necessary in order to manage our business successfully. Our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Administrative Officer, Investor Relations Officer, Internal Auditor and Secretary are not employed directly by us, but rather their services are provided pursuant to our Master Management Agreement with Eurobulk. All our corporate officers hold similar positions with EuroDry Ltd. (“EuroDry”), a publicly listed company spun-off from Euroseas in May 2018, and our CEO is also President of Eurobulk and involved in the management of other affiliates and is a member of the board of other companies. Therefore, our officers may spend a material portion of their time providing services to other companies. They may also spend a material portion of their time providing services to Eurobulk and its affiliates on matters unrelated to us.

We are a holding company, and we depend on the ability of our subsidiaries to distribute funds to us in order to satisfy our financial obligations or to make dividend payments.

We are a holding company and our subsidiaries, which are all wholly-owned by us, conduct all of our operations and own all of our operating assets. We have no significant assets other than the equity interests in our wholly-owned subsidiaries. As a result, our ability to make dividend payments to you depends on our subsidiaries and their ability to distribute funds to us. If we are unable to obtain funds from our subsidiaries, we may be unable or our Board of Directors may exercise its discretion not to pay dividends.

We may not be able to pay dividends.

Our Board of Directors decided to suspend the quarterly dividend in the fourth quarter of 2013 in order to focus every resource available in exploiting investment opportunities in the market. Our last dividend of $0.15 per share was declared in August 2013 and was paid in September 2013. This was the thirty-second consecutive quarterly dividend declared and paid. In May 2022, our Board of Directors reinstated our common stock dividend plan, declaring a quarterly dividend of $0.50 per share for the first quarter of 2022, paid on June 16, 2022. Subsequent quarterly dividends of $0.50 per share were declared for the second, third and fourth quarters of 2022. These dividends were paid on September 16, 2022, December 16, 2022 and March 16, 2023, respectively. In 2023, our Board of Directors declared quarterly dividends of $0.50 per share for each of the first, second and third quarters of 2023 and on February 21, 2024 our Board of Directors declared a quarterly dividend of $0.60 per share for the fourth quarter of 2023. These dividends were paid on June 16, 2023, September 16, 2023, December 16, 2023 and March 15, 2024, respectively. 

The declaration and payment of any dividends will be subject at all times to the discretion of our Board of Directors. The timing and amount of dividends will depend on our earnings, financial condition, cash requirements and availability, restrictions in our loan agreements, growth strategy, charter rates in the container shipping industry, the provisions of Marshall Islands law affecting the payment of dividends and other factors. Marshall Islands law generally prohibits the payment of dividends other than from surplus (retained earnings and the excess of consideration received for the sale of shares above the par value of the shares), but, if there is no surplus, dividends may be declared out of the net profits (basically, the excess of our revenue over our expenses) for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared or the preceding fiscal year. Marshall Islands law also prohibits the payment of dividends while a company is insolvent or if it would be rendered insolvent upon the payment of a dividend. As a result, we may not be able to pay dividends.

If we are unable to fund our capital expenditures, we may not be able to continue to operate some of our vessels, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and our ability to pay dividends.

In order to fund our capital expenditures, we may be required to incur borrowings or raise capital through the sale of debt or equity securities. Our ability to access the capital markets through future offerings may be limited by our financial condition at the time of any such offering as well as by adverse market conditions resulting from, among other things, general economic conditions and contingencies and uncertainties that are beyond our control. Our failure to obtain the funds for necessary future capital expenditures would limit our ability to continue to operate some of our vessels and could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to pay dividends. Even if we are successful in obtaining such funds through financings, the terms of such financings could further limit our ability to pay dividends.

Our existing loan agreements contain restrictive covenants that may limit our liquidity and corporate activities.

Our existing loan agreements impose operating and financial restrictions on us. These restrictions may limit our ability to:

Therefore, we may need to seek permission from our lenders in order to engage in some corporate actions. The lenders' interests may be different from our interests, and we may not be able to obtain the lenders' permission when needed. This may prevent us from taking actions that are in our best interest.

Servicing future debt would limit funds available for other purposes.

To finance our fleet, we have incurred secured debt under loan agreements for our vessels. We also currently expect to incur additional secured debt to partly finance the acquisition of our newbuild vessels on order or additional vessels we may decide to acquire in the future. We must dedicate a portion of our cash flow from operations to pay the principal and interest on our debt. These payments limit funds otherwise available for working capital expenditures and other purposes. As of December 31, 2023, we had total bank debt of approximately $131.0 million. Our bank debt repayment schedule as of December 31, 2023 required us to repay $31.20 million of bank debt during 2024, $34.75 million of bank dent during 2025, $9.05 million of bank debt during 2026, $26.35 million bank debt during 2027, $2.60 million in 2028 and the remaining $27.05 million in the sixth and seventh years. As of March 31, 2024, we repaid $7.35 million of our total bank debt, decreasing our outstanding bank debt to $123.65 million. If we are unable to service our debt, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

A further rise in interest rates could cause an increase in our costs and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. To finance vessel purchases, we have borrowed, and may continue to borrow, under loan agreements that provide for periodic interest rate adjustments based on indices that fluctuate with changes in market interest rates. If interest rates increase significantly, it would increase our costs of financing our acquisition of vessels, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Any increase in debt service would also reduce the funds available to us to purchase other vessels.

Our ability to obtain additional debt financing may be dependent on the performance of our then existing charters and the creditworthiness of our charterers.

The actual or perceived credit quality of our charterers, and any defaults by them, may be one of the factors that materially affect our ability to obtain the additional debt financing that we will require to purchase additional vessels or may significantly increase our costs of obtaining such financing. We may be unable to obtain additional financing, or may be able to obtain additional financing only at a higher-than-anticipated cost, which may materially affect our results of operations, cash flows and our ability to implement our business strategy.

Credit market volatility may affect our ability to refinance our existing debt or incur additional debt.

The credit markets have recently experienced extreme volatility and disruption, which has limited credit capacity for certain issuers, and lenders have requested shorter terms and lower leverage ratios. The market for new debt financing is extremely limited and in some cases not available at all. If current levels of market disruption and volatility continue or worsen, we may not be able to refinance our existing debt or incur additional debt, which may require us to seek other funding sources to meet our liquidity needs or to fund planned expansion.

We are exposed to volatility in SOFR, and have entered into and may selectively enter from time to time into derivative contracts, which can result in higher than market interest rates and charges against our income. Volatility in SOFR could affect our profitability, earnings and cash flow.

Our indebtedness accrues interest based on SOFR, which is volatile. The publication of U.S. Dollar LIBOR for the one-week and two-month U.S. Dollar LIBOR tenors ceased on December 31, 2021, and the ICE Benchmark Administration (“IBA”), the administrator of LIBOR, with the support of the United States Federal Reserve and the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority, ceased the publication of all other U.S. Dollar LIBOR tenors on June 30, 2023. The United States Federal Reserve concurrently issued a statement advising banks to cease issuing U.S. Dollar LIBOR instruments after 2021. As such, any new debt agreements we entered into did not use LIBOR as an interest rate, and we transitioned any existing loan agreements from U.S. Dollar LIBOR to an alternative reference rate prior to June 2023. In response to the anticipated discontinuation of LIBOR, the Alternative Reference Rate Committee, a committee convened by the Federal Reserve that includes major market participants, has selected the SOFR as the preferred alternative to LIBOR. SOFR is a broad measure of the cost of borrowing cash in the overnight U.S. treasury repo market. SOFR is now the predominant interest rate being used across cash and derivatives markets and the one we have used following the transition away from LIBOR. The impact of such a transition from LIBOR to SOFR was not significant for us. In light of the transition we added fallback language to existing debt tied to LIBOR and in some cases agreed to pricing adjustments in our credit agreements. In particular, in certain cases the fallback language provides for the implementation of the so called “hardwire approach” where even the pricing adjustment (the Credit Adjustment Spread or “CAS”) is agreed to in advance, and in other cases the fallback language provides for a negotiation framework and timing in advance of the expected transition. All our loan agreements that previously accrued under LIBOR have been amended accordingly. As of December 31, 2023, our obligations under our credit facilities which accrue interest based on SOFR amounted to approximately $131.0 million.

In order to manage our exposure to interest rate fluctuations under SOFR, we have and may from time to time use interest rate derivatives to effectively fix some of our floating rate debt obligations. No assurance can however be given that the use of these derivative instruments may effectively protect us from adverse interest rate movements. The use of interest rate derivatives may affect our results through mark to market valuation of these derivatives. Also, adverse movements in interest rate derivatives may require us to post cash as collateral, which may impact our free cash position.

As we expand our business, our Manager may need to upgrade our operations and financial systems, and add more staff and crew. If we cannot upgrade these systems or recruit suitable employees, our performance may be adversely affected.

Our Manager’s current operating and financial systems may not be adequate if we expand the size of our fleet, and our attempts to improve those systems may be ineffective. In addition, if we expand our fleet, we will have to rely on our Manager to recruit suitable additional seafarers and shore-side administrative and management personnel. Our Manager may not be able to continue to hire suitable employees as we expand our fleet. If our Manager’s affiliated crewing agent encounters business or financial difficulties, we can make satisfactory arrangements with unaffiliated crewing agents or else we may not be able to adequately staff our vessels. If we are unable to operate our financial and operations systems effectively or to recruit suitable employees, our performance may be materially adversely affected.

If we acquire additional ships, whether on the secondhand market or newbuildings, and those vessels are not delivered on time or are delivered with significant defects, our earnings and financial condition could be adversely affected.

We expect to acquire additional vessels in the future either from the secondhand markets or by placing newbuilding orders. The delivery of any vessels we might decide to acquire, whether newbuildings or secondhand vessels, could be delayed or certain events may arise which could result in us not taking delivery of a vessel, such as a total loss of a vessel, a constructive loss of a vessel, substantial damage to a vessel prior to delivery or construction not in accordance with agreed upon specification or with substantial defects. A delay in the delivery of any of these vessels to us or the failure of the contract counterparty to deliver a vessel at all could cause us to breach our obligations under a related time charter and could adversely affect our earnings, our financial condition and the amount of dividends, if any, that we pay in the future.

Labor interruptions could disrupt our business.

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

We or our Manager may be unable to attract and retain key management personnel and other employees in the shipping industry, which may negatively affect the effectiveness of our management and our results of operations.

Our success depends to a significant extent upon the abilities and efforts of our management team. Our success will depend upon our and our Manager’s ability to hire additional employees and to retain key members of our management team. The loss of any of these individuals could adversely affect our business prospects and financial condition and operating cash flows. Difficulty in hiring and retaining personnel could adversely affect our results of operations. We do not currently intend to maintain "key man" life insurance on any of our officers.

Risks involved with operating ocean-going vessels could affect our business and reputation, which may reduce our revenues.

The operation of an ocean-going vessel carries inherent risks. These risks include, among others, the possibility of:

Such occurrences could result in death or injury to persons, loss of property or environmental damage, delays in the delivery of cargo, loss of revenues from or termination of charter contracts, governmental fines, penalties or restrictions on conducting business, higher insurance rates, and damage to our reputation and customer relationships generally. Any of these circumstances or events could increase our costs or lower our revenues, which could result in reduction in the market price of our shares of common stock. The involvement of our vessels in an environmental disaster may harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator.

The operation of containerships has certain unique operational risks which could affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to pay dividends.

The operation of certain ship types, such as containerships, has certain unique risks. Containerships operate at higher speeds as compared to other ocean-going vessels in order to move cargoes around the world quickly and minimize delivery delays. These high speeds can result in greater impact in collisions and groundings resulting in more damage to the vessel when compared to vessels operating at lower speeds. In addition, due to the placement of the containers on a containership, there is a greater risk that containers carried on deck will be lost overboard if an accident does occur. Furthermore, with the highly varied cargo that can be carried on a single containership, there can be additional difficulties with any clean-up operation following an accident. Also, we may not be able to correctly control the contents and condition of cargoes within the containers which may give rise to events such as customer complaints, accidents on-board the ships or problems with authorities due to carriage of illegal cargoes. Any of these circumstances or events could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations 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.

Our vessels may suffer damage and may face unexpected drydocking costs, which could affect our cash flows and financial condition.

If our vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired at a drydocking facility. The costs of drydock repairs are unpredictable and may be substantial. We may have to pay drydocking costs that our insurance does not cover. The loss of earnings while these vessels are being repaired and reconditioned, as well as the actual cost of these repairs, would decrease our earnings. In addition, space at drydocking facilities is sometimes limited and not all drydocking facilities are conveniently located. We may be unable to find space at a suitable drydocking facility or our vessels may be forced to travel to a drydocking facility that is not conveniently located near our vessels’ positions. The loss of earnings and any costs incurred while these vessels are forced to wait for space or to steam to more distant drydocking facilities would decrease our earnings.

Purchasing and operating previously owned vessels may result in increased operating costs and vessels off-hire, which could adversely affect our earnings. The aging of our fleet may result in increased operating costs in the future, which could adversely affect our results of operations.

Although we inspect the secondhand vessels prior to purchase, this inspection does not provide us with the same knowledge about their condition and cost of any required (or anticipated) repairs that it would have had if these vessels had been built for and operated exclusively by us. Generally, we do not receive the benefit of warranties on secondhand vessels.

In general, the costs to maintain a vessel in good operating condition increase with the age of the vessel. As of March 31, 2024, the vessels in our fleet had an average age of approximately 16.6 years. As our vessels age, they may become less fuel efficient and more costly to maintain and will not be as advanced as more recently constructed vessels due to improvements in design and engine technology. Rates for cargo insurance, paid by charterers, also increase with the age of a vessel, making older vessels less desirable to charterers. Governmental regulations, safety or other equipment standards related to the age of vessels may require expenditures for alterations, or the addition of new equipment, to our vessels and may restrict the type of activities in which our vessels may engage. As our vessels age, market conditions may not justify those expenditures or enable us to operate our vessels profitably during the remainder of their useful lives.

If we sell vessels, we are not certain that the price for which we sell them will equal their carrying amount at that time. 

Unless we set aside reserves for vessel replacement, at the end of a vessel's useful life, our revenue will decline, which would adversely affect our cash flows and income.

As of March 31, 2024, the vessels in our fleet had an average age of approximately 16.6 years. Unless we maintain cash reserves for vessel replacement, we may be unable to replace the vessels in our fleet upon the expiration of their useful lives. We estimate the useful life of our vessels to be 25 years from the completion of their construction. Our cash flows and income are dependent on the revenues we earn by chartering our vessels to customers. If we are unable to replace the vessels in our fleet upon the expiration of their useful lives, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected. Any reserves set aside for vessel replacement would not be available for other cash needs or dividends.

Technological innovation could reduce our charter income and the value of our vessels.

The charter rates and the value and operational life of a vessel are determined by a number of factors including the vessel's efficiency, operational flexibility and physical life. Efficiency includes speed, fuel economy and the ability to load and discharge cargo quickly. Flexibility includes the ability to enter harbors, utilize related docking facilities and pass through canals and straits. The length of a vessel's physical life is related to its original design and construction, its maintenance and the impact of the stress of operations. If new vessels are built that are more efficient or more flexible or have longer physical lives than our vessels, competition from these more technologically advanced vessels could adversely affect the amount of charter hire payments we receive for our vessels and the resale value of our vessels could significantly decrease. As a result, our available cash could be adversely affected.

A decrease in spot charter rates may provide an incentive for some charterers to default on their charters.

We are subject to certain risks with respect to our counterparties on contracts, and failure of such counterparties to meet their obligations could cause us to suffer losses or otherwise adversely affect our business.

We enter into, among other things, charter-party agreements. When we enter into a time charter, charter rates under that charter are fixed for the term of the charter. Such agreements subject us to counterparty risks. The ability and willingness of each of our counterparties to perform its obligations under a contract with us will depend on a number of factors that are beyond our control and may include, among other things, general economic conditions, the condition of the maritime and offshore industries, the overall financial condition of the counterparty, charter rates received for specific types of vessels, and various expenses. If the spot charter rates or short-term time charter rates in the containership shipping industry remain significantly lower than the time charter equivalent rates that some of our charterers are obligated to pay us under our existing charters, the charterers may have incentive to default under that charter or attempt to renegotiate the charter. In addition, in depressed market conditions, our charterers may no longer need a vessel that is currently under charter or may be able to obtain a comparable vessel at lower rates. As a result, charterers may seek to renegotiate the terms of their existing charter parties or avoid their obligations under those contracts, especially when the contracted charter rates are significantly above market levels. If our charterers fail to meet their obligations to us or attempt to renegotiate our charter agreements, it may be difficult to secure substitute employment for such vessel, and any new charter arrangements we secure in the spot market or on time charters may be at lower rates given currently decreased charter rate levels. As a result, we could sustain significant losses which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, as well as our ability to pay dividends in the future and compliance with covenants in our credit facilities.

We may not have adequate insurance to compensate us adequately for damage to, or loss of, our vessels.

We procure insurance for our fleet against risks commonly insured by vessel owners and operators which includes hull and machinery insurance, protection and indemnity insurance (which, in turn, includes environmental damage and pollution insurance) and war risk insurance and freight, demurrage and defense insurance for our fleet. We generally maintain insurance against loss of hire which covers business interruptions that result in the loss of use of a vessel in cases we consider such protection appropriate. We may not be adequately insured against all risks and we may not be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage for our fleet in the future. The insurers may not pay particular claims. Even if our insurance coverage is adequate to cover our losses, we may not be able to timely obtain a replacement vessel in the event of a loss. Our insurance policies contain deductibles for which we will be responsible and limitations and exclusions which may increase our costs. Since it is possible that a large number of claims may be brought, the aggregate amount of these deductibles could be material. Moreover, the insurers may default on any claims they are required to pay. If our insurance is not enough to cover claims that may arise, it may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Because we obtain some of our insurance through protection and indemnity associations (“P&I Associations”), we may also be subject to calls in amounts based not only on our own claim records, but also the claim records of other members of the P&I Associations.

We are indemnified for legal liabilities incurred while operating our vessels through membership in P&I Associations or clubs. P&I Associations are mutual insurance associations whose members must contribute to cover losses sustained by other association members. The objective of a P&I Association is to provide mutual insurance based on the aggregate tonnage of a member’s vessels entered into the association. Claims are paid through the aggregate premiums of all members of the association, although members remain subject to calls for additional funds if the aggregate premiums are insufficient to cover claims submitted to the association. We cannot assure you that the P&I Association to which we belong will remain viable or that we will not become subject to additional funding calls which could adversely affect us. Claims submitted to the association may include those incurred by members of the association as well as claims submitted to the association from other P&I Associations with which our P&I Association has entered into inter-association agreements.

We may be subject to calls in amounts based not only on our claim records but also the claim records of other members of the protection and indemnity associations through which we receive insurance coverage for tort liability, including pollution-related liability. Our payment of these calls could result in significant expense to us, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and ability to pay dividends.

Our vessels are exposed to operational risks, including terrorism, cyber-terrorism and piracy that may not be adequately covered by our insurance.

The operation of any vessel includes risks such as weather conditions, mechanical failure, collision, fire, contact with floating objects, cargo or property loss or damage and business interruption due to political circumstances in countries, piracy, terrorist and cyber-terrorist attacks, armed hostilities and labor strikes. Such occurrences could result in death or injury to persons, loss, damage or destruction of property or environmental damage, delays in the delivery of cargo, loss of revenues from or termination of charter contracts, governmental fines, penalties or restrictions on conducting business, higher insurance rates and damage to our reputation and customer relationships generally.

Acts of piracy have historically affected ocean-going vessels trading in regions of the world such as the South China Sea, the Indian Ocean and in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia. Although the frequency of sea piracy worldwide has generally decreased since 2013, in 2023, the number of piracy acts slightly increased compared to 2022. Sea piracy incidents continue to occur, particularly in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia and increasingly in the Sulu Sea and the Gulf of Guinea, with dry bulk vessels and tankers particularly vulnerable to such attacks. Acts of piracy could result in harm or danger to the crews that man our vessels.

If these piracy attacks occur in regions in which our vessels are deployed that insurers characterized as “war risk” zones or Joint War Committee “war and strikes” listed areas, premiums payable for such coverage could increase significantly and such insurance coverage may be more difficult to obtain. In addition, crew costs, including the employment of onboard security guards, could increase in such circumstances. Furthermore, while we believe the charterer remains liable for charter payments when a vessel is seized by pirates, the charterer may dispute this and withhold charter-hire until the vessel is released. A charterer may also claim that a vessel seized by pirates was not “on-hire” for a certain number of days and is therefore entitled to cancel the charter party, a claim that we would dispute. We may not be adequately insured to cover losses from these incidents, which could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, any detention hijacking as a result of an act of piracy against our vessels, or an increase in cost, or unavailability, of insurance for our vessels, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and earnings.

We may not be adequately insured against all risks, and our insurers may not pay particular claims. With respect to war risks insurance, which we usually obtain for certain of our vessels making port calls in designated war zone areas, such insurance may not be obtained prior to one of our vessels entering into an actual war zone, which could result in that vessel not being insured. Even if our insurance coverage is adequate to cover our losses, we may not be able to timely obtain a replacement vessel in the event of a loss. Under the terms of our credit facilities, we will be subject to restrictions on the use of any proceeds we may receive from claims under our insurance policies. Furthermore, in the future, we may not be able to maintain or obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates for our fleet. We may also be subject to calls, or premiums, in amounts based not only on our own claim records but also the claim records of all other members of the protection and indemnity associations through which we receive indemnity insurance coverage for tort liability. Our insurance policies also contain deductibles, limitations and exclusions which, although we believe are standard in the shipping industry, may nevertheless increase our costs in the event of a claim or decrease any recovery in the event of a loss. If the damages from a catastrophic oil spill or other marine disaster exceeded our insurance coverage, the payment of those damages could have a material adverse effect on our business and could possibly result in our insolvency.

Recent action by the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee and U.S. agencies indicate that cybersecurity regulations for the maritime industry are likely to be further developed in the near future in an attempt to combat cybersecurity threats.  This might cause companies to cultivate additional procedures for monitoring cybersecurity, which could require additional expenses and/or capital expenditures. However, the impact of such regulations is hard to predict at this time. We do not carry cyber-attack insurance, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We occasionally carry loss of hire insurance when our vessels are trading in areas where a history of piracy has been reported. Loss of hire insurance covers the loss of revenue during extended vessel off-hire periods, such as those that occur during an unscheduled drydocking or unscheduled repairs due to damage to the vessel. Accordingly, any loss of a vessel or any extended period of vessel off-hire, due to an accident or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If our vessels call on ports located in countries or territories that are the subject of sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S. government, the European Union, the United Nations, or other governmental authorities, it could lead to monetary fines or other penalties and/or adversely affect our reputation and the market for our shares of common stock and its trading price.

Although none of our vessels have called on ports located in countries or territories that are the subject of country-wide or territory-wide comprehensive sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S. government or other governmental authorities (“Sanctioned Jurisdictions”) in violation of sanctions or embargo laws during 2023, and we endeavor to take precautions reasonably designed to mitigate such risks, it is possible that, in the future, vessels in our fleet may call on ports located in Sanctioned Jurisdictions on charterers' instructions and/or without our consent in violation of applicable sanctions laws. If such activities result in a violation of applicable sanctions or embargo laws, we could be subject to monetary fines, penalties, or other sanctions, and our reputation and the market for our common stock could be adversely affected.

Beginning in February of 2022, President Biden and several European leaders announced various economic sanctions against Russia in connection with the conflict in the Ukraine region, which may adversely impact our business. Our business could also be adversely impacted by trade tariffs, trade embargoes or other economic sanctions that limit trading activities by the United States or other countries against countries in the Middle East, Asia or elsewhere as a result of terrorist attacks, hostilities or diplomatic or political pressures.

On March 8, 2022, President Biden issued an executive order prohibiting the import of certain Russian energy products into the United States, including crude oil, petroleum, petroleum fuels, oils, liquefied natural gas and coal. Additionally, the executive order, as amended, prohibits any new investments in Russia by U.S. persons, among other restrictions.

Furthermore, the United States has also prohibited a variety of specified services related to the maritime transport of Russian Federation origin crude oil and petroleum products, including trading/commodities brokering, financing, shipping, insurance (including reinsurance and protection and indemnity), flagging, and customs brokering. These prohibitions took effect on December 5, 2022, with respect to the maritime transport of crude oil, and on February 5, 2023, with respect to the maritime transport of other petroleum products. Due to their nature, the Company’s vessels do not transport any crude oil or petroleum products. Although these sanctions do not presently apply to the maritime transport of containers transported by our vessels, the expansion of such sanctions could adversely affect our business.

The U.S. sanctions and embargo laws and regulations vary in their application, as they do not all apply to the same covered persons or proscribe the same activities, and such sanctions and embargo laws and regulations may be amended or expanded over time. Current or future counterparties of ours, including charterers, may be affiliated with persons or entities that are or may be in the future the subject of sanctions or embargoes imposed by the U.S. government, the EU, and/or other international bodies. If we determine that such sanctions or embargoes require us to terminate existing or future contracts to which we, or our subsidiaries, are party or if we are found to be in violation of such applicable sanctions, our results of operations may be adversely affected, we could face monetary fines or penalties, or we may suffer reputational harm.

All of the Company's revenues are from chartering-out its vessels on voyage or time charter contracts. The Company's vessels can also enter into pooling arrangements under which an international company and trading house involved in the use and/or transportation of commodities directs the Company's vessel to carry cargoes on its behalf. Under time charters and pooling arrangements, the Company has no contractual relationship with the owner of the cargo. The vessel is directed to a load port to load the cargo, and to a discharge port to offload the cargo, based solely on the instructions of the charterer. As of March 31, 2024, none of our vessels have called on ports in Sanctioned Jurisdictions in the past or are arranged to call on such ports in the future in violation of applicable sanctions laws. The vessels’ ship-owning companies do not presently have, and have not in the past had, any agreements, arrangements or contracts with the governments of Sanctioned Jurisdictions, such as Iran, North Korea, Crimea Region of Ukraine, Syria or Cuba, or entities that these countries control.

Although we believe that we have been in compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations in 2023, and intend to maintain such compliance, there can be no assurance that we will be in compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations in the future, particularly as the scope of certain laws may be unclear and may be subject to changing interpretations. Any such violation could result in fines, penalties or other sanctions that could severely impact our ability to access U.S. capital markets and conduct our business, and could result in some investors deciding, or being required, to divest their interest, or not to invest, in us. In addition, certain institutional investors may have investment policies or restrictions that prevent them from holding securities of companies that have contracts with countries or territories identified by the U.S. government as state sponsors of terrorism. The determination by these investors not to invest in, or to divest from, our common stock may adversely affect the price at which our common stock trades. 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. In addition, our reputation and the market for our securities may be adversely affected if we engage in certain other activities, such as entering into charters with individuals or entities in countries or territories subject to U.S. sanctions or embargo laws that are not controlled by the governments of those countries or territories, or engaging in operations associated with those countries or territories pursuant to contracts with third parties that are unrelated to those countries or territories or entities controlled by their governments. Investor perception of the value of our common stock may be adversely affected by the consequences of war, the effects of terrorism, civil unrest and governmental actions in the countries or territories that we operate in.

As a result of sanctions arising from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the ability to make payments to accounts at certain Russian banks may be limited, which could affect our ability to pay the wages of any crew members or consultants who hold such accounts.

As a result of sanctions arising from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, our ability to make payments to accounts at certain Russian banks may be limited. Currently our vessels have only a small number of Ukrainian crew members.  Although wage payments have not been affected by this issue as of March 31, 2024, continuing or additional sanctions may affect our ability to pay the wages of any crew members or consultants who hold such accounts, which could adversely impact our operations.

We expect to operate substantially outside the United States, which will expose us to political and governmental instability, which could harm our operations.

We expect that our operations will be primarily conducted outside the United States and may be adversely affected by changing or adverse political and governmental conditions in the countries where our vessels are flagged or registered and in the regions where we otherwise engage in business. Any disruption caused by these factors may interfere with the operation of our vessels, which could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Past political efforts to disrupt shipping in these regions, particularly in the Arabian Gulf, have included attacks on ships and mining of waterways. In addition, terrorist attacks outside this region, such as the attacks that occurred against targets in the United States on September 11, 2001 and on a number of occasions in other countries following that, as well as continuing or new unrest and hostilities in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Ukraine, Syria, Gaza and elsewhere in the world, may lead to additional armed conflicts or to further acts of terrorism and civil disturbance. Any such attacks or disturbances may disrupt our business, increase vessel operating costs, including insurance costs, and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Our operations may also be adversely affected by expropriation of vessels, taxes, regulation, economic sanctions or other adverse events or circumstances in or affecting the countries and regions where we operate or where we may operate in the future.

Further, governments may turn to trade barriers to protect their domestic industries against foreign imports, thereby depressing shipping demand. In particular, leaders in the United States have indicated that the United States may seek to implement more protective trade measures. The results of the 2020 presidential election in the United States have created significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States, China and other exporting countries, including with respect to trade policies, treaties, government regulations and tariffs. For example, in March 2018, former President Trump announced tariffs on imported steel and aluminum into the United States that could have a negative impact on international trade generally and in January 2019, the United States announced sanctions against Venezuela, which may have an effect on its oil output, and in turn, affect global oil supply. The U.S. government has recently made statements and taken certain actions that may lead to changes to U.S. and international trade policies, including recently-imposed tariffs affecting certain Chinese industries. It is unknown whether and to what extent new tariffs (or other new laws or regulations) will be adopted, or the effect that any such actions would have on us or our industry. If any new tariffs, legislation and/or regulations are implemented, or if existing trade agreements are renegotiated or, in particular, if the U.S. government takes retaliatory trade actions due to the recent U.S.-China trade tension, such changes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. In February 2022, at the onset of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, economic and trade sanctions were imposed against Russia, which have had large economic consequences on a global scale. Protectionist developments, or the perception that they may occur, may have a material adverse effect on global economic conditions, and may significantly reduce global trade.

Moreover, increasing trade protectionism may cause an increase in:

(a) the cost of goods exported from regions globally,

(b) the length of time required to transport goods and

(c) the risks associated with exporting goods.

Such increases may significantly affect the quantity of goods to be shipped, shipping time schedules, voyage costs and other associated costs, which could have an adverse impact on our charterers' business, operating results and financial condition and could thereby affect their ability to make timely charter hire payments to us and to renew and increase the number of their time charters with us. This could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and our ability to pay any cash distributions to our stockholders.

The international nature of our operations may make the outcome of any bankruptcy proceedings difficult to predict.

We are incorporated under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands and we conduct operations in countries around the world. Consequently, in the event of any bankruptcy, insolvency, liquidation, dissolution, reorganization or similar proceeding involving us or any of our subsidiaries, bankruptcy laws other than those of the United States could apply. If we become a debtor under U.S. bankruptcy law, bankruptcy courts in the United States may seek to assert jurisdiction over all of our assets, wherever located, including property situated in other countries. There can be no assurance, however, that we would become a debtor in the United States, or that a U.S. bankruptcy court would be entitled to, or accept, jurisdiction over such a bankruptcy case, or that courts in other countries that have jurisdiction over us and our operations would recognize a U.S. bankruptcy court's jurisdiction if any other bankruptcy court would determine it had jurisdiction.

Obligations associated with being a public company require significant company resources and management attention.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the other rules and regulations of the SEC, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Sarbanes-Oxley”). Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley requires that we evaluate and determine the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.

We work with our legal, accounting and financial advisors to identify any areas in which changes should be made to our financial and management control systems to manage our growth and our obligations as a public company. We evaluate areas such as corporate governance, corporate control, internal audit, disclosure controls and procedures and financial reporting and accounting systems. We will make changes in any of these and other areas, including our internal control over financial reporting, which we believe are necessary. However, these and other measures we may take may not be sufficient to allow us to satisfy our obligations as a public company on a timely and reliable basis. In addition, compliance with reporting and other requirements applicable to public companies do create additional costs for us and will require the time and attention of management. Our limited management resources may exacerbate the difficulties in complying with these reporting and other requirements while focusing on executing our business strategy. We may not be able to predict or estimate the amount of the additional costs we may incur, the timing of such costs or the degree of impact that our management's attention to these matters will have on our business.

Exposure to currency exchange rate fluctuations will result in fluctuations in our cash flows and operating results.

We generate all our revenues in U.S. dollars, but we incur approximately 24% of our vessel operating expenses and drydocking expenses, all of our vessel management fees, and approximately 5% in 2023 of our general and administrative expenses in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. This could lead to fluctuations in our operating expenses, which would affect our financial results. Expenses incurred in foreign currencies increase when the value of the U.S. dollar falls, which would reduce our profitability and cash flows.

We depend upon a few significant customers for a large part of our revenues and the loss of one or more of these customers could adversely affect our financial performance.

We have historically derived a significant part of our revenues from a small number of charterers. During 2023, 2022, and 2021, approximately 84%, 82%, and 78%, respectively, of our revenues were derived from our top five charterers. If one or more of our charterers chooses not to charter our vessels or is unable to perform under one or more charters with us and we are not able to find a replacement charter, we could suffer a loss of revenues that could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

United States tax authorities could treat us as a "passive foreign investment company," which could have adverse United States federal income tax consequences to United States holders.

A foreign corporation will be treated as a “passive foreign investment company,” or PFIC, for United States federal income tax purposes if either (1) at least 75% of its gross income for any taxable year consists of certain types of “passive income” or (2) at least 50% of the average value of the corporation’s assets produce or are held for the production of those types of “passive income”. For purposes of these tests, “passive income” includes dividends, interest, and gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. For purposes of these tests, income derived from the performance of services does not constitute “passive income.” United States shareholders of a PFIC are subject to a disadvantageous United States federal income tax regime with respect to the income derived by the PFIC, the distributions they receive from the PFIC and the gain, if any, they derive from the sale or other disposition of their shares in the PFIC. In addition, United States shareholders of a PFIC are required to file annual information returns with the United States Internal Revenue Service, or IRS.

Based on our current method of operation, we do not believe that we have been, are or will be a PFIC with respect to any taxable year. In this regard, we treat the gross income we derive or are deemed to derive from our time chartering activities as services income, rather than rental income. Accordingly, we believe that our income from our time chartering activities should not constitute "passive income," and the assets that we own and operate in connection with the production of that income should not constitute passive assets.

There is substantial legal authority supporting this position consisting of case law and IRS pronouncements concerning the characterization of income derived from time charters and voyage charters as services income for other tax purposes.  However, it should be noted that there is also authority which characterizes time charter income as rental income rather than services income for other tax purposes.  Accordingly, in the absence of legal authority directly relating to PFIC rules, no assurance can be given that the IRS or a court of law will accept this position, and there is a risk that the IRS or a court of law could determine that we are a PFIC. Moreover, no assurance can be given that we would not constitute a PFIC for any future taxable year if the nature and extent of our operations changed.

If the IRS were to find that we are or have been a PFIC for any taxable year, our United States shareholders will face adverse United States federal income tax consequences. Under the PFIC rules, unless those shareholders make an election available under the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, (which election could itself have adverse consequences for such shareholders, as discussed in Item 10 of this Annual Report under "Taxation — United States Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders"), such shareholders would be subject to United States federal income tax at the then prevailing income tax rates on ordinary income plus interest upon excess distributions and upon any gain from the disposition of our shares, as if the excess distribution or gain had been recognized ratably over the United States shareholder's holding period of our shares. See "Taxation — United States Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders" in this Annual Report under Item 10 for a more comprehensive discussion of the United States federal income tax consequences to United States shareholders if we are treated as a PFIC.

Based on the current and expected composition of our and our subsidiaries' assets and income, it is not anticipated that we will be treated as a PFIC. Our actual PFIC status for any taxable year, however, will not be determinable until after the end of such taxable year. Accordingly, there can be no assurances regarding our status as a PFIC for the current taxable year or any future taxable year. See the discussion in the section entitled "Item 10.E. Taxation — Passive Foreign Investment Company Status and Significant Tax Consequences". We urge U.S. Holders to consult with their own tax advisors regarding the possible application of the PFIC rules.

Changes in tax laws and unanticipated tax liabilities could materially and adversely affect the taxes we pay, results of operations and financial results.

We are subject to income and other taxes in the United States and foreign jurisdictions, and our results of operations and financial results may be affected by tax and other initiatives around the world. For instance, there is a high level of uncertainty in today’s tax environment stemming from global initiatives put forth by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (“OECD”) two-pillar base erosion and profit shifting project. In October 2021, members of the OECD put forth two proposals: (i) Pillar One reallocates profit to the market jurisdictions where sales arise versus physical presence; and (ii) Pillar Two compels multinational corporations with €750 million or more in annual revenue to pay a global minimum tax of 15% on income received in each country in which they operate. The reforms aim to level the playing field between countries by discouraging them from reducing their corporate income taxes to attract foreign business investment. Over 140 countries agreed to enact the two-pillar solution to address the challenges arising from the digitalization of the economy and, in 2024, these guidelines were declared effective and must now be enacted by those OECD member countries. It is possible that these guidelines, including the global minimum corporate tax rate measure of 15%, could increase the burden and costs of our tax compliance, the amount of taxes we incur in those jurisdictions and our global effective tax rate, which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations and financial results.

As a Marshall Islands corporation and with some of our subsidiaries being Marshall Islands entities and also having subsidiaries in other offshore jurisdictions, our operations may be subject to economic substance requirements, which could impact our business.

We are a Marshall Islands corporation and some of our subsidiaries are Marshall Islands entities. The Marshall Islands has enacted economic substance laws and regulations with which we may be obligated to comply. We believe that we and our subsidiaries are compliant with the Marshall Islands economic substance requirements. However, if there were a change in the requirements or interpretation thereof, or if there were an unexpected change to our operations, any such change could result in noncompliance with the economic substance legislation and related fines or other penalties, increased monitoring and audits, and dissolution of the non-compliant entity, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or operating results.

EU Finance ministers rate jurisdictions for tax rates and tax transparency, governance and real economic activity. Countries that are viewed by such finance ministers as not adequately cooperating, including by not implementing sufficient standards in respect of the foregoing, may be put on a “grey list” or a “blacklist”. Effective October 23, 2023 the Marshall Islands has been designated as a cooperating jurisdiction for tax purposes. If the Marshall Islands is added to the list of non-cooperative jurisdictions in the future and sanctions or other financial, tax or regulatory measures were applied by European Member States to countries on the list or further economic substance requirements were imposed by the Marshall Islands, our business could be harmed.

If management is unable to provide reports as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, investors could lose confidence in the reliability of our financial statements, which could result in a decrease in the value of our common stock.

Under Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley, we are required to include in each of our annual reports on Form 20-F a report containing our management’s assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. If, in such annual reports on Form 20-F, our management cannot provide a report as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as required by Section 404, investors could lose confidence in the reliability of our financial statements, which could result in a decrease in the value of our common stock.

We may have to pay tax on United States source income, which would reduce our earnings.

Under the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or the Code, 50% of the gross shipping income of a vessel owning or chartering corporation, such as us and our subsidiaries, that is attributable to transportation that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States may be subject to a 4% United States federal income tax without allowance for deduction, unless that corporation qualifies for exemption from tax under Section 883 of the Code, or Section 883, and the applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder.

We intend to take the position that we qualified for this statutory tax exemption for United States federal income tax return reporting purposes for our 2023 taxable year and we intend to so qualify for future taxable years. However, there are factual circumstances beyond our control that could cause us to lose the benefit of this tax exemption for any future taxable year and thereby become subject to United States federal income tax on our U.S.-source shipping income. For example, in certain circumstances we may no longer qualify for exemption under Section 883 for a particular taxable year if shareholders, other than “qualified shareholders”, with a five percent or greater interest in our common shares owned, in the aggregate, 50% or more of our outstanding common shares for more than half the days during the taxable year. Due to the factual nature of the issues involved, there can be no assurances on our tax-exempt status. In addition, we may fail to qualify if our common stock comes to represent 50% or less of the value or outstanding voting power of our stock.

If we are not entitled to exemption under Section 883 for any taxable year, we would be subject for those years to an effective 2% United States federal income tax on the shipping income we derive during the year which is attributable to the transport of cargoes to or from the United States. The imposition of this taxation would have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased earnings available for distribution to our shareholders.

Failure to comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) could result in fines, criminal penalties, and an adverse effect on our business.

We may operate in a number of countries throughout the world, including countries known to have a reputation for corruption. We are committed to doing business in accordance with applicable anti-corruption laws, and have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics which is consistent and in full compliance with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977. We are subject, however, to the risk that we, our affiliated entities or respective officers, directors, employees and agents may take actions determined to be in violation of such anti-corruption laws. Any such violation could result in substantial fines, sanctions, civil and/or criminal penalties and curtailment of operations in certain jurisdictions, and might adversely affect our business, results of operations or financial condition. In addition, actual or alleged violations could damage our reputation and ability to do business. Furthermore, detecting, investigating, and resolving actual or alleged violations is expensive and time- and attention-consuming for our senior management.

It may be difficult to enforce service of process and enforcement of judgments against us and our officers and directors.

We are a Marshall Islands corporation, and our subsidiaries are incorporated in jurisdictions outside of the United States. Our executive offices are located outside of the United States in Maroussi, Greece. A majority of our directors and officers reside outside of the United States, and a substantial portion of our assets and the assets of our officers and directors are located outside of the United States. As a result, you may have difficulty serving legal process within the United States upon us or any of these persons. You may also have difficulty enforcing, both in and outside of the United States, judgments you may obtain in the U.S. courts against us or these persons in any action, including actions based upon the civil liability provisions of U.S. federal or state securities laws.

There is also substantial doubt that the courts of the Marshall Islands, Greece or jurisdictions in which our subsidiaries are organized would enter judgments in original actions brought in those courts predicated on U.S. federal or state securities laws. In addition, the protection afforded minority shareholders in the Marshall Islands is different than those offered in the United States.

Risk Factors Relating To Our Common Stock

The trading volume for our common stock has been low, which may cause our common stock to trade at lower prices and make it difficult for you to sell your common stock.

Although our shares of common stock have traded on the Nasdaq Global Market since January 31, 2007, on the Nasdaq Global Select Market since January 1, 2008, and on the Nasdaq Capital Market since June 26, 2015, the trading volume has been low over the last couple of years. Such limited liquidity may cause our common stock to trade at lower prices and make it difficult to sell your common stock.

The market price of our common stock has recently been volatile and may continue to be volatile in the future, and as a result, investors in our common stock could incur substantial losses on any investment in our common stock.

The market price of our common stock has recently been volatile and may continue to be volatile in the future. For example, the reported closing sale price of our common stock on the Nasdaq Capital Market was $17.03 per share on March 17, 2023 and $33.80 per share on December 22, 2023. In addition, on November 9, 2023, the intra-day sale price of our common stock reported on the Nasdaq Capital Market fluctuated between a low of $22.50 per share and a high of $26.40 per share without any discernable announcements or developments by the Company or third parties to substantiate the movement of our stock price.

Among the factors that have in the past and could in the future affect our stock price are:

The international container shipping industry has been highly unpredictable. In addition, the stock markets in general, and the markets for container shipping and shipping stocks in general, have experienced extreme volatility that has sometimes been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of particular companies. In addition, the COVID-19 pandemic caused broad stock market and industry fluctuations. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.  As a result of this volatility, our shares may trade at prices lower than you originally paid for such shares and you may incur substantial losses on your investment in our common stock.

Investors may purchase our common stock to hedge existing exposure or to speculate on the price of our common stock. Speculation on the price of our common stock may involve long and short exposures. To the extent an aggregate short exposure in our common stock becomes significant, investors with short exposure may have to pay a premium to purchase common stock for delivery to common stock lenders at times if and when the price of our common stock increases significantly, particularly over a short period of time. Those purchases may in turn, dramatically increase the price of our common stock. This is often referred to as a “short squeeze.” A short squeeze could lead to volatile price movements in our common stock that are not directly correlated to our business prospects, operating performance, financial condition or other traditional measures of value for the Company or our common stock.

If our common stock does not meet the Nasdaq Capital Market’s minimum share price requirement, and if we cannot cure such deficiency within the prescribed timeframe, our common stock could be delisted.

Under the rules of the Nasdaq Capital Market, listed companies are required to maintain a share price of at least $1.00 per share.  If the share price declines below $1.00 for a period of 30 consecutive business days, then the listed company has a cure period of at least 180 days to regain compliance with the $1.00 per share minimum. The company may regain compliance if the bid price of its common shares closes at $1.00 per share or more for a minimum of ten consecutive business days at any time during the 180-day cure period. If the price of our common stock closes below $1.00 for 30 consecutive days, and if we cannot cure that deficiency within the 180-day timeframe, then our common stock could be delisted. On January 14, 2019, we received such a notice as our share price traded below $1.00 for 30 consecutive days, however Nasdaq determined that the Company was eligible for an additional 180-day period, or until January 13, 2020, to regain compliance. In December 2019, we effected a 1-for-8 reverse stock split to comply with the minimum share price requirement. Our common stock has been above $1.00 per share since this reverse stock split.

If the market price of our common stock falls below $5.00 per share, under stock exchange rules, our shareholders will not be able to use such shares as collateral for borrowing in margin accounts. This inability to continue to use our common stock as collateral may lead to sales of such shares creating downward pressure on and increased volatility in the market price of our common stock.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about our business, or publish negative reports about our business, our share price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common shares will depend, in part, upon the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. We do not have any control over analysts as to whether they will cover us, and if they do, whether such coverage will continue. If analysts do not commence coverage of the Company, or if one or more of these analysts cease coverage of the Company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which could cause our share price or trading volume to decline. In addition, if one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrade our shares or change their opinion of our shares, our share price may likely decline.

Our Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws and Shareholders' Rights Plan contain anti-takeover provisions that may discourage, delay or prevent (1) merger or acquisition, (2) the removal of incumbent directors and officers and (3) the ability of public shareholders to benefit from a change in control.

Our current amended and restated articles of incorporation and bylaws contain certain anti-takeover provisions. These provisions include blank check preferred stock, the prohibition of cumulative voting in the election of directors, a classified Board of Directors, advance written notice for shareholder nominations for directors, removal of directors only for cause, advance written notice of shareholder proposals for the removal of directors and limitations on action by shareholders. In addition, on May 10, 2019, we adopted a shareholders' rights plan, which replaced and is substantially similar to our prior shareholder rights agreement that expired on May 27, 2019, pursuant to which our Board of Directors may cause the substantial dilution of any person that attempted to acquire us without the approval of our Board of Directors. These anti-takeover provisions, either individually or in the aggregate, may discourage, delay or prevent (1) our merger or acquisition by means of a tender offer, a proxy contest or otherwise, that a shareholder may consider in its best interest, (2) the removal of incumbent directors and officers, and (3) the ability of public shareholders to benefit from a change in control. These anti-takeover provisions could substantially impede the ability of shareholders to benefit from a change in control and, as a result, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and shareholders’ ability to realize any potential change of control premium.

Future sales of our common stock could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that these sales could occur, may depress the market price for our common stock. These sales could also impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of our equity securities in the future.

We may issue additional shares of our stock in the future and our stockholders may elect to sell large numbers of shares held by them from time to time. Our amended and restated articles of incorporation authorize us to issue up to 200,000,000 shares of common stock and 20,000,000 shares of preferred stock.

On December 29, 2022, we filed with the SEC a shelf registration statement on Form F-3, pursuant to which we may sell, from time to time, securities up to a total dollar amount of $400,000,000.

Issuance of preferred stock may adversely affect the voting power of our shareholders and have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing a merger or acquisition, which could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Our Board of Directors approved the issuance of 30,700 shares of our Series B Preferred Shares in 2014 (of which none are outstanding as of December 31, 2023) and may decide in the future to issue preferred shares in one or more series and to determine the rights, preferences, privileges and restrictions with respect to, among other things, dividends, conversion, voting, redemption, liquidation and the number of shares constituting any series subject to prior shareholders' approval. If our Board determines to issue preferred shares, such issuance may discourage, delay or prevent a merger or acquisition that shareholders may consider favorable. The issuance of preferred shares with voting and conversion rights may also adversely affect the voting power of the holders of common shares. This could substantially impede the ability of public shareholders to benefit from a change in control and, as a result, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and shareholders’ ability to realize any potential change of control premium.

Because the Republic of the Marshall Islands, where we are incorporated, does not have a well-developed body of corporate law, shareholders may have fewer rights and protections than under typical state law in the United States, such as Delaware, and shareholders may have difficulty in protecting their interests with regard to actions taken by our Board of Directors.

Our corporate affairs are governed by our amended and restated articles of incorporation and bylaws, as amended, and by the Marshall Islands Business Corporations Act (the “BCA”). The provisions of the BCA resemble provisions of the corporation laws of a number of states in the United States. However, there have been few judicial cases in the Republic of the Marshall Islands interpreting the BCA. The rights and fiduciary responsibilities of directors under the law of the Republic of the Marshall Islands are not as clearly established as the rights and fiduciary responsibilities of directors under statutes or judicial precedent in existence in certain U.S. jurisdictions. Stockholder rights may differ as well. For example, under Marshall Islands law, a copy of the notice of any meeting of the shareholders must be given not less than 15 days before the meeting, whereas in Delaware such notice must be given not less than 10 days before the meeting. Therefore, if immediate shareholder action is required, a meeting may not be able to be convened as quickly as it can be convened under Delaware law. Also, under Marshall Islands law, any action required to be taken by a meeting of shareholders may only be taken without a meeting if consent is in writing and is signed by all of the shareholders entitled to vote, whereas under Delaware law action may be taken by consent if approved by the number of shareholders that would be required to approve such action at a meeting. Therefore, under Marshall Islands law, it may be more difficult for a company to take certain actions without a meeting even if a majority of the shareholders approve of such action. While the BCA does specifically incorporate the non-statutory law, or judicial case law, of Delaware and other states with substantially similar legislative provisions, public shareholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests in the face of actions by the management, directors or controlling shareholders than would shareholders of a corporation incorporated in a U.S. jurisdiction.

Euroseas Ltd. is a Marshall Islands company incorporated under the BCA on May 5, 2005. We are a provider of worldwide ocean-going transportation services. On May 30, 2018, the Company spun-off its drybulk fleet (excluding M/V Monica P, a handymax drybulk carrier, which was agreed to be sold at the time) into EuroDry Ltd., a separate publicly listed company also listed on Nasdaq Capital Market (the “Spin-off”). Shareholders of the Company received one EuroDry Ltd. share for every five shares of the Company they held. As a result of the Spin-off and the subsequent sale of M/V Monica P, the Company has become a pure containership company and the only publicly listed company concentrating on the feeder and intermediate containership sector. Our containerships transport dry and refrigerated containerized cargoes, mainly including manufactured products and perishables. As of March 31, 2024, our fleet consisted of 20 containerships. The total cargo carrying capacity of the 20 containerships is 777,749 dwt or 61,661 teu. After the delivery of our remaining six newbuilding containerships, our fleet will consist of 26 containerships with a cargo carrying capacity of 956,246 dwt or 75,461 teu. Two of our vessels were acquired before January 1, 2004 and were controlled by the Pittas family interests. On June 29, 2005, the shareholders of the two vessels (and of five additional vessels that have since been sold) transferred their ownership in each of the vessels to Euroseas in exchange for shares in Friends, a 100% owner of Euroseas at that time. Since June 2005, the Company has purchased 40 vessels, sold 22 vessels and ordered 13 newbuildings. Euroseas took delivery of three of the newbuildings in February 2016, January 2017 and May 2018, respectively, under its previous newbuilding program of dry bulk vessels, while one newbuilding vessel contract was cancelled. The Company spun-off 6 of its vessels into EuroDry on May 30, 2018.

In October 2021 we took delivery of a feeder containership, M/V “Jonathan P.”, for a purchase price of $25.5 million and in December 2021 of an intermediate container, M/V “Marcos V.”, with an attached time charter, for a purchase price of $40.0 million.

In June 2021, January 2022, March 2022 and May 2022, we entered into four separate agreements with Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Co., Ltd. to construct nine modern containerships; six with a carrying capacity of 2,800 teu each and three with a carrying capacity of 1,800 teu each. Furthermore, in May and June 2022, we took delivery of two intermediate 4,250 teu containerships, M/V “Rena P” built in 2007, and M/V “Emmanuel P” built in 2005, for a combined price of $37 million. We also assumed the existing charter arrangements of both vessels.

The M/V “Gregos”, the first of the two newbuilding vessels ordered in June 2021, was delivered on April 6, 2023, while M/V “Terataki”, the second of the two, was delivered on July 6, 2023. The combined price for the construction of these two newbuildings was approximately $80.5 million. The Company paid another $4.4 million for costs relating to the construction and to make the vessel available for use, as well as capitalized interest costs. The cost of these newbuilding contracts was financed with a combination of own cash and a bank loan of $26 million for each of the vessels. We also ordered two newbuilding vessels in January 2022; the first of these, the M/V “Tender Soul”, was delivered to us on February 6, 2024, while the other newbuilding is scheduled to be delivered in the second quarter of 2024. The combined price for the construction of these two new buildings was approximately $88.8 million. The three vessels ordered in March 2022 are scheduled to be delivered during the second and third quarter of 2024 for approximately $101.6 million. Finally, the two vessels ordered in May 2022 are scheduled to be delivered during the fourth quarter of 2024 for approximately $89.3 million.

In December 23, 2022, we agreed to sell M/V “Akinada Bridge” for scrap, at a gross price of $14.2 million. The vessel was delivered to her new owners on January 9, 2023.

Our common shares traded under the symbol ESEA on the Nasdaq Global Market beginning January 31, 2007 and on the Nasdaq Global Select Market beginning January 1, 2008, and since June 26, 2015 have traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market.

Our executive offices are located at 4 Messogiou & Evropis Street, 151 24, Maroussi, Greece. Our telephone number is +30-211-1804005.

The SEC maintains an Internet website at www.sec.gov, which contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. Our website address is www.euroseas.gr. The information contained on our website is not part of this annual report.

Our fleet consists of containerships that transport container boxes providing scheduled service between ports. Please see the information in the section titled "Our Fleet", below. During 2021, 2022, and 2023 we had a fleet utilization of 98.5%, 98.3% and 98.6%, respectively, our vessels achieved daily time charter equivalent rates of$19,327, $31,964 and $29,714, respectively, and we generated time charter revenue totalling $97.98 million, $189.6 million and $195.80 million respectively.

Our business strategy is focused on providing consistent shareholder returns by carefully selecting the timing and the structure of our investments in containership vessels and by reliably, safely and competitively operating the vessels we own, through our affiliate, Eurobulk. Representing a continuous ship-owning and management history that dates back to the 19th century, we believe that one of our advantages in the industry is our ability to select and safely operate containership vessels of any age.

Our Fleet

Currently, the profile and deployment of our fleet are the following:

We plan to expand our fleet by investing in vessels in the containership market under favorable market conditions. We also intend to take advantage of the cyclical nature of the market by buying and selling ships when we believe favorable opportunities exist. We employ our vessels in the spot and time charter market. Currently, all of our vessels are employed under time charter contracts.

As of March 31, 2024, approximately 78% of our ship capacity days for the remainder of 2024, 28% of our ship capacity days in 2025 and 8% of our ship capacity days in 2026 are under contract.

In “Critical Accounting Estimates – Impairment of vessels” below, we discuss our policy for impairing the carrying values of our vessels. During the past few years, the market values of vessels have experienced extraordinarily high volatility, and substantial declines in many vessel classes. As a result, the charter-free market value, or basic market value, of certain of our vessels may have declined below those vessels’ carrying value. We may not impair those vessels’ carrying value under our impairment accounting policy, due to our belief that future undiscounted cash flows expected to be earned by such vessels over their operating lives would exceed such vessels’ carrying amounts.

The table set forth below indicates (i) the carrying value of each of our vessels as of December 31, 2022 and 2023, respectively, (ii) which of our vessels we believe has a basic market value below its carrying value, and (iii) the aggregate difference between carrying and market value represented by such vessels. This aggregate difference represents the approximate analysis of the amount by which we believe we would have to reduce our net income if we sold all of such vessels in the current environment, using industry-standard valuation methodologies, in cash, in arm’s-length transactions. For purposes of this calculation, we have assumed that the vessels would be sold at a price that reflects our estimate of their basic market values as of the respective year end. However, we are not holding our vessels for sale, except as otherwise noted in this report.

Our estimates of basic market value assume that our vessels are all in good and seaworthy condition without need for repair and if inspected would be certified in class without any notations. Our estimates are based on information available from various industry sources, including:

As we obtain information from various industry and other sources, our estimates of basic market value are inherently uncertain. In addition, vessel values are highly volatile; as such, our estimates may not be indicative of the current or future basic market value of our vessels or prices that we could achieve if we were to sell them.

We note that as of March 31, 2024, all but one of our container vessels are employed under time charter contracts of durations from 2 to 27 months until the earliest redelivery charter period (one is undergoing drydock). If we sell those vessels with the charters attached, the sale price may be affected by the relationship of the charter rate to the prevailing market rate for a comparable charter with the same terms.

We refer you to the risk factor entitled “The market value of our vessels can fluctuate significantly, which may adversely affect our financial condition, cause us to breach financial covenants, result in the incurrence of a loss upon disposal of a vessel or increase the cost of acquiring additional vessels” and the discussion in Item 3.D under “Industry Risk Factors.”

Our Competitive Strengths

We believe that we possess the following competitive strengths:

Our Business Strategy

Our business strategy is focused on providing consistent shareholder returns by carefully timing and structuring acquisitions of containerships and by reliably, safely and competitively operating our vessels through Eurobulk. We continuously evaluate purchase and sale opportunities, as well as long term employment opportunities for our vessels. Key elements of the above strategy are:

Our Customers

We have well-established relationships with major containership charterers, which we serve by carrying a variety of cargoes over a multitude of routes around the globe. We are a relationship driven company, and our top five customers in 2023 include four of our top five customers from 2022 and two from 2021. Our top five customers accounted for approximately 82% of our revenues in 2023, 82% of our revenues in 2022 and 78% of our revenues in 2021. In 2023, ZIM, Maersk, Sealand, ASYAD and CMA accounted for 23%, 23%, 15%, 11% and 10% of our revenues, respectively. In 2022, ZIM, Maersk, Sealand, CMA, and Hapag Lloyd accounted for 21%, 21%, 21%, 11% and 8% of our revenues, respectively. In 2021, CMA, Maersk, Vasi, GSL and Hapag Lloyd accounted for 24%, 21%, 15%, 9% and 9% of our revenues, respectively. We believe that our dependence on our key charter customers is moderate, because in the event of a charterer default our vessels can generally be re-chartered at the market rate, in the spot or charter market, although it is likely that such rate will be lower than the charter rate agreed with the charterer. In addition, as of the date of this report, none of our charterers have reported any inability to pay their obligations to us as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak or as a result of ongoing conflicts such as the war in Ukraine, the war in Palestine and current events in the Red Sea region.

The Containership Industry

Containership shipping refers to the transport of containerized trade which encompasses mainly the carriage of finished goods, but an increasing number of other cargoes in container boxes. Containerized trade has been the fastest growing sector of seaborne trade, although in the last three years the rate of growth has slowed. Containerships are categorized by their size measured in terms of twenty-foot equivalent unit (“teu”) capacity and whether they have their own gearing (cranes). The different categories of containerships are as follows: (i) Post-Panamax vessels are generally vessels with carrying capacity of more than 4,000 teu; (ii) Panamax vessels are vessels with carrying capacity from 3,000 to 4,000 teu, and, in some designs, even up to 5,000 teu; these vessels are called such because the measurements of their beam and draft are the maximum allowable through the original Panama Canal; and (iii) Feeder containerships are vessels with carrying capacity from 500 to 3,000 teu and are usually equipped with cargo loading and unloading gear. Containerships are primarily employed in time charter contracts with liner companies, which in turn employ them as part of the scheduled liner operations. Feeder containerships are put in liner schedules feeding containers to and from central regional ports (hubs) where larger containerships provide cross ocean or longer haul service. The length of the time charter contract can range from several months to years.

Our Competitors

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, size, age and vessel condition, as well as on reputation. Eurobulk arranges our charters (whether spot charters, time charters or shipping pools) through Eurochart S.A. (“Eurochart”), an affiliated brokering company which negotiates the terms of the charters based on market conditions. We compete with other shipowners of carriers primarily in the Feeder and Panamax containership sectors. Ownership of containerships is highly fragmented and is divided among state controlled and independent shipowners. Some of our publicly listed competitors include Danaos Corporation (NYSE: DAC), Costamare Inc. (NASDAQ: CMRE) and Global Ship Lease Inc. (NYSE: GSL).

Seasonality

The containership shipping industry’s seasonal trends are driven by the import patterns of manufactured goods and refrigerated cargoes by the major importers, such as the United States, Europe and Japan. The volume of containerized trade is usually higher in the fall in preparation for the holiday season. During this period, container shipping rates are higher and, as a result, so are charter rates.

Environmental and Other Regulations in the Shipping Industry

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 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 USCG, harbor master or equivalent), classification societies, flag state administrations (countries of registry) and 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 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.

While we do not carry oil as cargo, we do carry fuel oil (bunkers) in our containerships. We currently maintain, for each of our vessels, pollution liability insurance coverage of $1.0 billion per incident. If the damages from a catastrophic spill exceeded our insurance coverage, that would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating cash flows.

International Maritime Organization

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 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.

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 Marine Environment Protection Committee, or “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 on 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.

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. Other areas in China are 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 (“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. In July 2023, MEPC 80 announced three new ECA proposals, including the Canadian Arctic waters and the North-East Atlantic Ocean. 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.

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. 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 (“SEEMPs”), 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 on November 1, 2022, with the requirements for EEXI and CII certification becoming effective 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. MEPC 79 also 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. The amendments will enter into force on May 1, 2024. In July 2023, MEPC 80 approved the plan for reviewing CII regulations and guidelines, which must be completed at the latest by January 1, 2026. There will be no immediate changes to the CII framework, including correction factors and voyage adjustments, before the review is completed.

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.

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. We have obtained applicable 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 documents of compliance and safety management certificates are renewed as required.

Although all our vessels are currently ISM Code-certified, such certification may not be maintained by all our vessels at all times. Non-compliance with the ISM Code may subject such party to increased liability, invalidate existing insurance or decrease available insurance coverage for the affected vessels and result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports. For example, the U.S. Coast Guard and E.U. authorities have indicated that vessels not in compliance with the ISM Code will be prohibited from trading in U.S. and E.U. ports.

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 which took effect on January 1, 2020 also reflect the latest material from the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods, including (1) new provisions 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.

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 are 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. To comply with these regulations, we developed a Cybersecurity Manual for all our vessels that was reviewed by IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee in March 2021.

In June 2022, SOLAS also set out new amendments that took 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 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 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. In July 2023, MEPC 80 approved a plan for a comprehensive review of the BWM Convention over the next three years and the corresponding development of a package of amendments to the Convention. MEPC 80 also adopted further amendments relating to Appendix II of the BWM Convention concerning the form of the Ballast Water Record Book, which are expected to enter into force in February 2025. A protocol for ballast water compliance monitoring devices and unified interpretation of the form of the BWM Convention certificate were also adopted.

Once mid-ocean 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 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 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.

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

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 and entered into force on January 1, 2023.

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 annual 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 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. On December 23, 2022, the USCG issued a final rule to adjust the limitation of liability under the OPA. Effective March 23, 2023, the new adjusted limits of OPA liability for non-tank vessels, edible oil tank vessels, and any oil spill response vessels, amount to the greater of $1,300 per gross ton or $1,076,000 (previous limit was $1,200 per gross ton or $997,100). 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 or 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 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. After being blocked by the courts, in September 2023, the Biden administration announced a scaled back offshore oil drilling plan, including just three oil lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico. 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 the Company’s vessels call.

We currently maintain pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1.0 billion per incident for each of our vessels. If the damages from a catastrophic spill were to exceed our insurance coverage, it could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Other United States Environmental Initiatives

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 with the pre-2015 definition. In January 2023, the revised WOTUS rule was codified in place of the vacated NWPR. On May 25, 2023, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case Sackett v. EPA that only wetlands and permanent bodies of water with a "continuous surface connection" to "traditional interstate navigable waters" are covered by the CWA, further narrowing the application of the WOTUS rule. In August 2023, the EPA and the Department of the Army issued the final WOTUS rule that largely reinstated the pre-2015 definition and applied the Sackett ruling.

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”) 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. 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 regulation 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 Area, 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”) as part of its “Fit-for-55” legislation to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030. 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 on a gradual introduction of obligations for shipping companies to surrender allowances equivalent to a portion of their carbon emissions: 40% for verified 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. Furthermore, starting from January 1, 2026, the ETS regulations will expand to include emissions of two additional greenhouse gases: nitrous oxide and methane. Compliance with the Maritime EU ETS will result in additional compliance and administration costs to properly incorporate the provisions of the Directive into our business routines. Additionally, on July 25, 2023, the European Council of the European Union adopted the Maritime Fuel Regulation under the FuelEU Initiative of its “Fit-for-55” package which sets limitations on the acceptable yearly greenhouse gas intensity of the energy used by covered vessels.  Among other things, the Maritime Fuel Regulation requires that greenhouse gas emissions from covered vessels are reduced by 2% starting January 1, 2025, with additional reductions contemplated every five years (up to 80% from January 1, 2050).

Additional EU regulations which are part of the EU’s “Fit-for-55,” could also affect our financial position in terms of compliance and administration costs when they take effect.

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 our vessels are in substantial compliance with and are certified to meet MLC 2006.

Greenhouse Gas Regulation

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 intends 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 greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions from ships, recognizing the need to strengthen the ambition during the revision process. In July 2023, MEPC 80 adopted a revised strategy, which includes an enhanced common ambition to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping around or close to 2050, a commitment to ensure an uptake of alternative zero and near-zero greenhouse gas fuels by 2030, as well as i) reducing the total annual greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping by at least 20%, striving for 30%, by 2030, compared to 2008; and ii) reducing the total annual greenhouse gas emissions from international shipping by at least 70%, striving for 80%, by 2040, compared to 2008.

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. Under the European Climate Law, the EU committed to reduce its net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 through its “Fit-for-55” legislation package. As further discussed herein, regulations relating to the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions from the maritime sector in the European Union’s carbon market have entered into force, and additional regulations are forthcoming.

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. 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. On December 2, 2023, the Biden Administration announced the final rule that includes updated and strengthened standards for methane and other air pollutants from new, modified, and reconstructed sources, as well as Emissions Guidelines to assist states in developing plans to limit methane emissions from existing sources. These new regulations could potentially 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.

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 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. 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. All of our vessels are certified as being “in class” by all the applicable Classification Societies (e.g., Bureau Veritas, Det Norske Veritas, Nippon Kaiji Kyokai).

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 have its underwater parts inspected by class every 30 to 36 months, but for vessels subject to enhanced survey requirements and above 15 years of age, its underwater parts must be inspected in dry-dock. 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.

The following table lists the upcoming intermediate or special survey for the vessels in our current fleet. Special surveys typically require drydocking of the vessels while intermediate surveys may not, depending on the age of the vessel and its condition. The intermediate surveys listed in the table below will not require drydocking of the vessels, unless otherwise specified below. M/V Marcos V and M/V Synergy Antwerp underwent their intermediate survey with dry-dock and special survey in February and March 2024, respectively.

Risk of Loss and Liability Insurance

General

The operation of any cargo vessel includes risks such as mechanical failure, physical damage, collision, property loss, cargo loss or damage and business interruption due to political circumstances in foreign countries, piracy incidents, 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. OPA, which imposes virtually unlimited liability upon shipowners, operators and bareboat charterers of any vessel trading in the exclusive economic zone of the United States for certain oil pollution accidents in the United States, has made liability insurance more expensive for shipowners and operators trading in the United States market. We carry insurance coverage as customary in the shipping industry. However, not all risks can be insured, specific claims may be rejected, and we might not be always able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates.

Hull and Machinery Insurance

We procure hull and machinery insurance, protection and indemnity insurance, which includes environmental damage and pollution insurance and war risk insurance and freight, demurrage and defense insurance for our fleet. We generally maintain insurance against loss of hire (for certain charters for which we consider it appropriate), which covers business interruptions that result in the loss of use of a vessel.

Protection and Indemnity Insurance

Protection and indemnity insurance is provided by mutual protection and indemnity associations, or “P&I Associations,” and covers our third-party liabilities in connection with our shipping activities. This includes third-party liability and other related expenses of injury or death of crew, passengers and other third parties, 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 indemnity insurance is a form of mutual indemnity insurance, extended by protection and indemnity mutual associations, or “clubs.”

Our current protection and indemnity insurance coverage for pollution is $1.0 billion per vessel per incident. The 12 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. As a member of a P&I Association, which is a member of the International Group, we are subject to calls payable to the associations based on our claim records as well as the claim records of all other members of the individual associations and members of the shipping pool of P&I Associations comprising the International Group.

Euroseas is the sole owner of all outstanding shares of the subsidiaries listed in Note 1 of our consolidated financial statements under “Item 18. Financial Statements” and in Exhibit 8.1 to this annual report.

We do not own any real estate property. As part of the management services provided by Eurobulk during the period in which we have conducted business to date, we have shared, at no additional cost, offices with Eurobulk. We do not have current plans to lease or purchase office space, although we may do so in the future.

Our interests in our vessels are owned through our wholly-owned vessel owning subsidiaries and these are our only material properties. Please refer to Note 1, “Basis of Presentation and General Information”, of the attached Financial Statements for a listing of our vessel owning subsidiaries. The majority of our vessels are subject to priority mortgages, which secure our obligations under our various credit facilities. For further details regarding our credit facilities, refer to “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects — Loans”

None.

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with “Item 3. Key Information – D. Risk Factors”, “Item 4. Business Overview”, and our financial statements and footnotes thereto contained in this annual report. This discussion contains forward-looking statements, which are based on our assumptions about the future of our business. Our actual results may differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements. Please read “Forward-Looking Statements” for additional information regarding forward-looking statements used in this annual report. Reference in the following discussion to “we,” “our” and “us” refer to Euroseas and our subsidiaries, except where the context otherwise indicates or requires.

We are constantly evaluating opportunities to increase the number of our vessels deployed on time charters or to participate in shipping pools (if available for our vessels); however, we only expect to enter into additional time charters or shipping pools if we can obtain contract terms that satisfy our criteria. Containerships are employed almost exclusively on time charter contracts. We carefully evaluate the length and rate of the time charter contract at the time of fixing or renewing a contract considering market conditions, trends and expectations.

We constantly evaluate vessel purchase opportunities to expand our fleet accretive to our earnings and cash flow. Additionally, we will consider selling certain of our vessels when favorable sales opportunities present themselves. If, at the time of sale, the carrying value is less than the sales price, we will realize a gain on sale, which will increase our earnings, but if, at the time of sale, the carrying value of a vessel is more than the sales price, we will realize a loss on sale, which will negatively impact our earnings. Please see “Critical Accounting Estimates”, below, for a further discussion of the consequences of selling our vessels for amounts below their carrying values.

Significant Developments in 2023

Vessel Deliveries & Disposals

On January 9, 2023, M/V “Akinada Bridge” was delivered to her buyers and we recognized a gain on sale of vessel of approximately $5.2 million.

On June 29, 2021, we entered into a contract with Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Co. in South Korea, for the construction of two eco-design fuel efficient feeder containerships with a carrying capacity of 2,800 teu each, for a total cost of approximately $80.5 million. The Company paid another $4.4 million for costs relating to the construction and to make the vessel available for use, as well as capitalized interest costs. We took delivery of the first vessel, M/V “Gregos” on April 6, 2023 and the second one, M/V “Terataki” on July 6, 2023.

Vessels Under Construction

On January 28, 2022, we entered into a contract for the construction of two eco-design fuel efficient containerships. The vessels will have a carrying capacity of about 2,800 teu each and will be built at Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Co. in South Korea. One of the newbuidings, M/V “Tender Soul”, was delivered to the Company on February 6, 2024 for a consideration of $44.4 million. The other newbuilding M/V “Leonidas Z” was delivered to the Company on April 25, 2024 for a total consideration of approximately $45.0 million.

On March 18, 2022, we entered into a contract for the construction of three 1,800 teu eco-design fuel efficient feeder containerships. The vessels will be built at Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Co. in South Korea and are scheduled to be delivered during the second and third quarters of 2024, respectively. The total consideration for the construction of the three vessels is approximately $101.6 million.

On May 20, 2022, we entered into a contract for the construction of two eco-design fuel efficient containerships. The vessels will have a carrying capacity of about 2,800 teu each and will be built at Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Co. in South Korea. The two newbuildings are scheduled to be delivered during the fourth quarter of 2024. The total consideration for these two newbuilding contracts is approximately $89.3 million.

As of December 31, 2023, the outstanding amount of the newbuilding contracts is $198.0 million, which we intend to finance the cost of our newbuilding program with a combination of debt and own cash.

Loans

On February 6, 2023, Kea Shipowners Ltd., Spetses Shipowners Ltd. and Hydra Shipowners Ltd. repaid the full amount of outstanding indebtedness amounting to $6.65 million using the Company’s own funds and became unencumbered.

On May 30, 2023, Noumea Shipping Ltd. and Gregos Shipping Ltd. repaid the full amount of outstanding indebtedness amounting to $7.5 million using the Company’s own funds and became unencumbered.

On March 30, 2023, we signed a loan agreement with Eurobank Ergasias S.A., and drew an amount of $26.0 million to finance part of the construction cost of M/V “Gregos” (Hull No. 4201). The loan is payable in twenty-eight consecutive quarterly instalments, twelve in the amount of $0.7 million and sixteen in the amount of $0.45 million, with a $10.4 million balloon payment to be made with the last installment in March 2030. The loan bears interest at SOFR plus a margin of 2.15% per annum.

On June 29, 2023, we signed a loan agreement with National Bank of Greece, S.A., and drew an amount of $26.0 million to finance part of the construction cost of M/V “Terataki” (Hull No. 4202). The loan is payable in twenty-four consecutive quarterly instalments, twelve in the amount of $0.8 million and twelve in the amount of $0.2 million, with a $14.0 million balloon payment to be made with the last instalment in June 2029. The loan bears interest at SOFR plus a margin of 2.15%.

On July 13, 2023, we signed a new loan agreement with Piraeus Bank S.A., and drew an amount of $40.0 million in order to repay the outstanding indebtedness relating to the previous financing of M/V “Synergy Antwerp”, M/V “Synergy Busan”, M/V “Synergy Oakland” and M/V “Synergy Keelung” and finance general corporate purposes of the Company. The loan is payable in sixteen consecutive quarterly instalments of $1.25 million each and by a balloon payment of $20.0 million payable together with the last instalment in July 2027. The loan bears interest at SOFR plus a margin of 2.25% per annum.

Dividends

In 2023, our Board of Directors declared quarterly dividends of $0.50 per share for the fourth quarter of 2022 and for the first, second and third quarters of 2023. These dividends were paid on March 16, 2023, June 16, 2023, September 16, 2023 and December 16, 2023, respectively. 

Share Repurchases

In May 2022, our Board of Directors approved a share repurchase program for up to a total of $20 million of our common stock, which was extended in May 2023 for another year. Share repurchases are made from time to time for cash in open market transactions at prevailing market prices or in privately negotiated transactions. The timing and amount of purchases under the program are determined by management based upon market conditions and other factors. The program does not require us to purchase any specific number or amount of shares and may be suspended or reinstated at any time at our discretion and without notice.

During the year ended December 31, 2023 we repurchased 162,375 shares of our common stock in the open market for a total of $3.1 million, under this plan.

Recent Developments

There have been no significant changes since the date of the annual consolidated financial statements included in this annual report, other than those described in Note 19 “Subsequent events” of our annual consolidated financial statements.

Factors Affecting Our Results of Operations

We believe that the important measures for analysing trends in the results of our operations consist of the following:

Calendar days. We define calendar days as the total number of days in a period during which each vessel in our fleet was in our possession including off-hire days associated with major repairs, drydockings or special or intermediate surveys or days of vessels in lay-up. Calendar days are an indicator of the size of our fleet over a period and affect both the amount of revenues and the amount of expenses that we record during that period.

Available days. We define available days as the total number of Calendar days in a period net of off-hire days associated with scheduled repairs, drydockings or special or intermediate surveys, or days of vessels in lay-up. The shipping industry uses available days to measure the number of days in a period during which vessels were available to generate revenues.

Voyage days. We define voyage days as the total number of Available days in a period net of off-hire days associated with unscheduled repairs or days waiting to find employment but including days our vessels were sailing for repositioning. The shipping industry uses voyage days to measure the number of days in a period during which vessels actually generate revenues or are sailing for repositioning purposes. Our definition of voyage days may not be comparable to that used by other companies in the shipping industry.

Fleet utilization. We calculate fleet utilization by dividing the number of our voyage days during a period by the number of our available days during that period. The shipping industry uses fleet utilization to measure a company’s efficiency in finding suitable employment for its vessels and minimizing the amount of days that its vessels are off-hire either waiting to find employment, or commercial off-hire, or for reasons such as unscheduled repairs or other off-hire time related to the operation of the vessels, or operational off-hire. We distinguish our fleet utilization into commercial and operational. We calculate our commercial fleet utilization by dividing our available days net of commercial off-hire days during a period by our available days during that period. We calculate our operational fleet utilization by dividing our available days net of operational off-hire days during a period by our available days during that period.

Spot Charter Rates. We calculate spot charter rates on contracts made in the spot market for the use of a vessel for a specific voyage ("voyage charter") to transport a specified agreed upon cargo at a specified freight rate per ton or occasionally a lump sum amount. Under a voyage charter agreement, the charter party generally commits to a minimum amount of cargo and the charterer is liable for any short loading of cargo or "dead" freight. Spot charter rates are volatile and fluctuate on a seasonal and year to year basis. The fluctuations are caused by imbalances in the availability of cargoes for shipment and the number of vessels available at any given time to transport these cargoes.

Time Charter Equivalent (“TCE”). A standard maritime industry performance measure used to evaluate performance is the daily TCE. Daily TCE revenues are time charter revenues and voyage charter revenues, gross of commissions, minus voyage expenses divided by the number of voyage days during the relevant time period. Voyage expenses primarily consist of port, canal and fuel costs that are unique to a particular voyage, which would otherwise be paid by a charterer under a time charter whereas under spot market voyage charters, we pay such voyage expenses. We believe that the daily TCE neutralizes the variability created by unique costs associated with particular voyages or the employment of containerships on time charter or on the spot market (containerships are, generally, chartered on a time charter basis) and provides additional meaningful information in conjunction with time charter revenue generated by our vessels. Our definition of TCE may not be comparable to that used by other companies in the shipping industry.

Basis of Presentation and General Information

We use the following measures to describe our financial performance:

Time charter revenue and Voyage charter revenue. Our charter revenues are driven primarily by the number of vessels in our fleet, the number of voyage days during which our vessels generate revenues and the amount of daily charter revenue that our vessels earn under charters, which, in turn, are affected by a number of factors, including our decisions relating to vessel acquisitions and disposals, the amount of time that we spend positioning our vessels, the amount of time that our vessels spend in drydock undergoing repairs, maintenance and upgrade work, the age, condition and specifications of our vessels, levels of supply and demand in the transportation market, the number of vessels on time charters, voyage charters and in pools and other factors affecting charter rates in the containership market.

Commissions. We pay commissions on all chartering arrangements of 1.25% to Eurochart, a company affiliated with our CEO, plus additional commission of usually up to 1.25% to other brokers involved in the transaction, plus address commission of usually up to 3.75% deducted from charter hire. These additional commissions, as well as changes to charter rates will cause our commission expenses to fluctuate from period to period. Eurochart also receives a fee equal to 1% of the vessel sales price calculated as stated in the relevant memorandum of agreement for any vessel sold by it on our behalf. Eurochart also receives a commission of 1% of the vessel purchase price for acquisitions the Company makes using Eurochart’s services, which is paid by the seller or the buyer of the vessel, depending on the terms stated in the relevant memorandum of agreement.

Voyage expenses. Voyage expenses primarily consist of port, canal and fuel costs that are unique to a particular voyage which would otherwise be paid by the charterer under a time charter contract or paid by the Company when the vessel is off hire. Under time charters, the charterer pays voyage expenses whereas under spot market voyage charters, we pay such expenses. The amounts of such voyage expenses are driven by the mix of charters undertaken during the period. Voyage expenses are also incurred, when our vessels are idle or are sailing for repositioning purposes or for drydocking, which we pay.

Vessel operating expenses. Vessel operating expenses include crew wages and related costs, the cost of insurance, expenses relating to repairs and maintenance, the costs of spares and consumable stores, tonnage taxes and other miscellaneous expenses. Our vessel operating expenses, which generally represent fixed costs, have historically changed in line with the size of our fleet. Other factors beyond our control, some of which may affect the shipping industry in general (including, for instance, developments relating to market prices for insurance or inflationary increases) may also cause these expenses to increase.

Related party management fees. These are the fees that we pay to our affiliated ship manager (Eurobulk) under our management agreements for the technical and commercial management that Eurobulk performs on our behalf.

Vessel depreciation. We depreciate our vessels on a straight-line basis with reference to the cost of the vessel, age and scrap value as estimated at the date of acquisition. Depreciation is calculated over the remaining useful life of the vessel. Remaining useful lives of property are periodically reviewed and revised to recognize changes in conditions, new regulations or other reasons. Revisions of estimated lives are recognized over current and future periods.

Dry-docking expenses. Dry-docking expenses relate to regularly scheduled intermediate survey or special survey necessary to preserve the quality of our vessels as well as to comply with international shipping standards and environmental laws and regulations. Our vessels are required to be drydocked approximately every 30 to 60 months for major repairs and maintenance that cannot be performed while the vessels are trading. Dry-docking expenses are accounted for using the direct expense method as this method eliminates the significant amount of time and subjectivity to determine which costs and activities related to drydocking and special survey should be deferred.

General and administrative expenses. We incur expenses consisting mainly of executive compensation, share based compensation, professional fees, directors’ liability insurance and reimbursement of our directors’ and officers’ travel-related expenses. We acquire executive services of our chief executive officer, chief financial officer, chief administrative officer, investor relations officer, internal auditor and corporate secretary, through Eurobulk as part of our Master Management Agreement.

Impairment loss. When indicators of impairment are present for the Company’s vessels and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those vessels are less than their carrying value, the carrying value is reduced to its estimated fair value and the difference is recorded under “Impairment loss” in the consolidated statements of operations.

Interest and other financing costs. We traditionally finance vessel acquisitions partly with loan facilities on which we incur interest expense. The interest rate we pay will generally be linked to SOFR, although from time to time we may utilize fixed rate loans or could use interest rate swaps to eliminate our interest rate exposure. Interest due is expensed in the period incurred. We also incur financing costs in connection with establishing those facilities, which are presented as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the relevant debt liability and amortize them to interest and other financing costs over the term of the underlying obligation using the effective interest method; the un-amortized portion is written-off if the loan is prepaid early.

(Loss) / gain on derivatives, net. We enter into interest rate swap transactions to manage interest costs and risk associated with changing interest rates with respect to our variable interest loans. Interest rate swaps are recorded in the balance sheet as either assets or liabilities, measured at their fair value (Level 2) with changes in such fair value recognized in earnings under (Loss) / gain on derivatives, net, unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met.

In evaluating our financial condition, we focus on the above measures to assess our historical operating performance and we use future estimates of the same measures to assess our future financial performance. In addition, we use the amount of cash at our disposal and our total indebtedness to assess our short-term liquidity needs and our ability to finance additional acquisitions with available resources (see also discussion under “Capital Expenditures” below). In assessing the future performance of our present fleet, the greatest uncertainty relates to the spot market performance which affects those of our vessels that are not employed under fixed time charter contracts as well as the level of the new charter rates for the charters that are to expire. Decisions about the acquisition of additional vessels or possible sales of existing vessels are based on financial and operational evaluation of such action and depend on the overall state of the containership vessel market, the availability of purchase candidates, available employment, anticipated drydocking cost and our general assessment of economic prospects for the sectors in which we operate.

Results from Operations

The following table sets forth a summary of our consolidated results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2023. This information should be read together with our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this annual report.