ITEM 3.

KEY INFORMATION

(1)

2017 and 2016 include a non-cash impairment charge of $8.5 million and $84.7 million, respectively.  2016 includes a gain from sale of vessel of $0.1 million.  2017, 2015 and 2013 include loss from sale of vessels of $3.5 million, $0.8 million and $0.7 million, respectively.  2014 includes a reversal of prior impairment charges of $31.9 million.

(2)	Dividend per common stock.  For 2013, we also paid a dividend of $0.78 per share of Series A Participating Preferred Stock.

(3)

Revenue days consist of the aggregate number of calendar days in a period in which our vessels are owned by us or chartered in by us less days on which a vessel is off-hire.  Off-hire days are days a vessel is unable to perform the services for which it is required under a time charter or according to pool rules.  Off-hire days include days spent undergoing repairs and drydockings, whether or not scheduled.

B.              CAPITALIZATION AND INDEBTEDNESS

Not applicable.

C.              REASONS FOR THE OFFER AND USE OF THE PROCEEDS

Not applicable.

D.              RISK FACTORS

If the events discussed in these Risk Factors occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows could be materially adversely affected.  In such a case, the market price of our common stock could decline.

RISKS RELATING TO OUR COMPANY

A renewed contraction or worsening of the global credit markets and the resulting volatility in the financial markets could have a material adverse impact on credit availability, world oil demand and demand for our vessels, which could adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows, and could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

The global financial markets have been highly volatile and the availability of credit from financial markets and financial institutions can vary substantially depending on developments in the global financial markets.  While we have seen improvement in the health of financial institutions and the willingness of financial institutions to extend credit to companies in the shipping industry, there is no guarantee that credit will be available to us going forward.  As the shipping industry is highly dependent on the availability of credit to finance and expand operations, we may be adversely affected by a decline in the global credit and financial markets.

There is still considerable instability in the world economy that could initiate a new economic downturn and result in tightening in the credit markets, low levels of liquidity in financial markets and volatility in credit and equity markets.  A renewal of the financial crisis that affected the banking system and the financial markets over the past nine years may adversely impact our business and financial condition in ways that we cannot predict.  In addition, the uncertainty about current and future global economic conditions caused by a renewed financial crisis may cause our customers to defer projects in response to tighter credit, decreased cash availability and declining confidence, which may negatively impact the demand for our vessels.

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

In 2017, we entered into agreements with Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. (“HHI”) to construct two VLCC newbuildings (“HHI Agreements”) scheduled to be delivered in the second half of 2018 and we acquired two newbuilding contracts related to the construction of VLCCs at Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering Co., Ltd. (“DSME”) from BW Group Limited (“BW Group”) (“DSME Agreements”) scheduled to be delivered in the first half of 2018.  Our newbuilding agreements subject us to counterparty risk with HHI and DSME.  The ability of HHI and DSME to perform its obligations under the newbuilding agreements will depend on a number of factors that are beyond our control and may include, among other things, general economic conditions, the overall financial condition of the counterparty and various expenses.  Should HHI fail to honor its obligations under its agreements with us, we could sustain significant losses which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.  Also, if we are unable to enforce certain refund guarantees related to the newbuilding agreements with HHI and DSME with third-party banks for any reason, we may lose all or part of our advance deposits in the newbuildings, which would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

We may not pay dividends in the future.

The timing and amount of future dividends for our common stock or preferred stock, if any, could be affected by various factors, including our earnings, financial condition and anticipated cash requirements, the loss of a vessel, the acquisition of one or more vessels, required capital expenditures, reserves established by our board of directors, increased or unanticipated expenses, including insurance premiums, a change in our dividend policy, increased borrowings, increased interest payments to service our borrowings, prepayments under credit agreements in order to stay in compliance with covenants in the secured credit facilities, repurchases of our convertible senior notes or any other security that may be outstanding from time to time, future issuances of securities or the other risks described in this section of this report, many of which may be beyond our control.  In addition, any shares of our common stock issuable upon conversion of the convertible senior notes and any new shares of common stock issued otherwise will increase the cash required to pay future dividends.  Any common or preferred stock that may be issued in the future to finance acquisitions, upon exercise of stock options or other equity incentives, would have a similar effect, and may reduce our ability to pay future dividends.

In addition, our dividends are subject to change at any time at the discretion of our board of directors and our board of directors may elect to change our dividends by establishing a reserve for, among other things, the repayment of the secured credit facilities, repurchases of our convertible senior notes or any other security that may be outstanding from time to time or to help fund the acquisition of a vessel.  Our board of directors may also decide to establish a reserve to repay indebtedness if, as the maturity dates of our indebtedness approach, we are no longer able to generate cash flows from our operating activities in amounts sufficient to meet our debt obligations and it becomes clear that refinancing terms, or the terms of a vessel sale, are unacceptable or inadequate.  If our board of directors were to establish such a reserve, the amount of cash available for dividend payments would decrease.  In addition, our ability to pay dividends is limited by Marshall Islands law.  Marshall Islands law generally prohibits the payment of dividends other than from surplus and while a company is insolvent or if a company would be rendered insolvent by the payment of such dividends.

Restrictive covenants in the secured credit facilities may impose financial and other restrictions on us and our subsidiaries.

We are a holding company and have no significant assets other than cash and the equity interests in our subsidiaries except that as of December 31, 2017, DHT Holdings had made total payments of $114.8 million related to advances for vessels under construction and not yet delivered.  The vessels are scheduled to be delivered in 2018.  In February and March 2018, DHT made total payments of $16.4 million related to advances under the two HHI Agreements.  Our subsidiaries own all of our vessels.  Our subsidiaries have entered into eight secured credit facilities (the “secured credit facilities”), each secured by mortgages over certain vessels owned by our subsidiaries.  The secured credit facilities impose certain operating and financial restrictions on us and our subsidiaries.  These restrictions may limit our and our subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things:  pay dividends, incur additional indebtedness, change the management of vessels, permit liens on their assets, sell vessels, merge or consolidate with, or transfer all or substantially all of their assets to, another person, enter into certain types of charters and enter into a line of business.

Therefore, we may need to seek permission from the lenders under the respective secured credit facilities in order to engage in certain corporate actions.  The lenders’ interests may be different from ours and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain their permission when needed.

If we fail to comply with certain covenants, including as a result of declining vessel values, or are unable to meet our debt obligations under the secured credit facilities, our lenders could declare their debt to be immediately due and payable and foreclose on our vessels.

Our obligations under the secured credit facilities include financial and operating covenants, including requirements to maintain specified “value-to-loan” ratios.  Our credit facilities generally require that the fair market value of the vessels pledged as collateral never be less than between 130% and 135%, depending on the applicable credit facility, of the aggregate principal amount outstanding under the loan.  Though we are currently compliant with such ratios under the secured credit facilities, vessel values have generally experienced significant volatility over the last few years.  If vessel values decline meaningfully from current levels, we could be required to make repayments under certain of the secured credit facilities in order to remain in compliance with the value-to-loan ratios.

If we breach these or other covenants contained in the secured credit facilities or we are otherwise unable to meet our debt obligations for any reason, our lenders could declare their debt, together with accrued interest and fees, to be immediately due and payable and foreclose on those of our vessels securing the applicable facility, which could result in the acceleration of other indebtedness we may have at such time and the commencement of similar foreclosure proceedings by other lenders.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to refinance our indebtedness incurred under the secured credit facilities.

In the event that we are unable to service our debt obligations out of our operating activities, we may need to refinance our indebtedness and we cannot assure you that we will be able to do so on terms that are acceptable to us or at all.  The actual or perceived tanker market rate environment and prospects and the market value of our fleet, among other things, may materially affect our ability to obtain new debt financing.  If we are unable to refinance our indebtedness, we may choose to issue securities or sell certain of our assets in order to satisfy our debt obligations.

We may not have the ability to raise the funds necessary to meet our payment obligations under the convertible senior notes.

Our convertible senior notes bear interest at a rate of 4.50% per annum, payable semi-annually in arrears on April 1 and October 1 of each year, beginning on April 1, 2015.  In addition, upon the occurrence of specific events, referred to as a “fundamental change,” we must offer to purchase the convertible senior notes plus accrued and unpaid interest to the purchase date.  If we fail to pay interest on the convertible senior notes or to purchase the convertible senior notes upon a fundamental change, we will be in default under the indenture which governs the convertible senior notes.

In addition, any future credit agreements or other agreements relating to our indebtedness may contain provisions prohibiting purchase of the convertible senior notes under some circumstances or expressly prohibiting our purchase of the convertible senior notes upon a fundamental change or may provide that a fundamental change constitutes an event of default under that agreement.  If a fundamental change occurs at a time when we are prohibited from purchasing the convertible senior notes, we could seek the consent of our lenders to purchase the convertible senior notes or attempt to refinance this debt.  If we do not obtain any required consent, we would not be permitted to purchase the convertible senior notes.  Our failure to purchase tendered notes would constitute an event of default under the indenture governing the convertible senior notes, which could constitute an event of default under our senior indebtedness then outstanding, if any, and might constitute a default under the terms of our other indebtedness then outstanding, if any.

We are dependent on performance by our charterers.

As of December 31, 2017, six of our twenty-six vessels currently in operation are on time charters for periods of up to 3½ years.  In the past, a greater percentage of our vessels have been on charter.  We are dependent on the performance by the charterers of their obligations under the charters.  Any failure by the charterers to perform their obligations could materially and adversely affect our business, financial position and cash available for the payment of dividends.  Our stockholders do not have any direct recourse against our charterers.

The indexes used to calculate the earnings for vessels on index-based charters may, in the future, no longer reasonably reflect the earnings potential of the vessels.

The indexes used to calculate the earnings for vessels on index-based charters may, in the future, no longer reasonably reflect the earnings potential of the vessels due to changing trading patterns or other factors not controlled by us.  If an index used to calculate the earnings for a vessel on an index-based charter incorrectly reflects the earnings potential of a vessel on such charter, this could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and our ability to pay dividends.  As of December 31, 2017, we had three vessels on index based charters for which the profit sharing element is calculated based on the indexes.

We may have difficulty managing growth.

We may grow our fleet by acquiring additional vessels, fleets of vessels, companies owning vessels or entering into joint ventures in the future.  Such future growth will primarily depend on:

·

identifying and acquiring vessels , fleets of vessels or companies owning vessels or entering into joint ventures that meet our requirements, including, but not limited to, price, specification and technical condition;

·

consummating acquisitions of vessels, fleets of vessels, companies owning vessels or acquisitions of companies or joint ventures; and

·

obtaining required financing through equity or debt financing on acceptable terms.

Growing any business by acquisition presents numerous risks, such as undisclosed liabilities and obligations, the possibility that indemnification agreements will be unenforceable or insufficient to cover potential losses and difficulties associated with imposing common standards, controls, procedures and policies, obtaining additional qualified personnel, managing relationships with customers and integrating newly acquired assets and operations into existing infrastructure.  We cannot give any assurance that we will be successful in executing any growth plans or that we will not incur significant expenses and losses in connection with any future growth.

We may not be able to re-charter or employ our vessels profitably.

As of December 31, 2017, six of our vessels are currently on charters with four different charterers for periods of up to 3½ years.  At the expiry of these charters, we may not be able to re-charter our vessels on terms similar to the terms of our charters.  We may also employ the vessels on the spot charter market, which is subject to greater rate volatility than the long-term time charter market.  If we receive lower charter rates under replacement charters or are unable to re-charter our vessels, the amounts that we have available, if any, to pay distributions to our stockholders may be significantly reduced or eliminated.

Under the ship management agreements for our vessels, our operating costs could materially increase.

The technical management of our vessels is handled by Goodwood Ship Management Pte. Ltd. (of which DHT owns 50%) and V.Ships France SAS (which manages our three French Flag vessels).  DHT Peony was under management by BW Fleet Management Pte Ltd until January 2018.  Under our ship management agreements, we pay the actual cost related to the technical management of our vessels, plus an additional management fee.  The amounts that we have available, if any, to pay distributions to our stockholders could be significantly impacted by changes in the cost of operating our vessels.

When a tanker changes ownership or technical management, it may lose customer approvals.

Most users of seaborne oil transportation services will require vetting of a vessel before it is approved to service their account.  This represents a risk to our company as it may be difficult to efficiently employ the vessel until such vettings are in place.  Most users of seaborne oil transportation services conduct inspection and assessment of vessels on request from owners and technical managers.  Such inspections must be carried out regularly for a vessel to have valid approvals from such users of seaborne oil transportation services.  Whenever a vessel changes ownership or its technical manager, it loses its approval status and must be re-inspected and re-assessed by such users of seaborne oil transportation services.

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 and other obligations.

We are a holding company and have no significant assets other than cash and the share holdings in our subsidiaries.  Our ability to pay dividends depends on the performance of our subsidiaries and their ability to distribute funds to us.  Our ability or the ability of our subsidiaries to make these distributions are subject to restrictions contained in our subsidiaries’ financing agreements and could be affected by a claim or other action by a third party, including a creditor, or by Cayman Islands, Marshall Islands or Singapore law which regulates the payment of dividends by companies.  If we are unable to obtain funds from our subsidiaries, we may not be able to pay dividends.

Certain adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences could arise for U.S. stockholders.

A non-U.S. corporation will be treated as a “passive foreign investment company” (a “PFIC”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes if either (i) at least 75% of its gross income for any taxable year consists of certain types of “passive income” or (ii) at least 50% of the average value of the corporation’s assets are “passive assets,” or assets that produce or are held for the production of “passive income.”  “Passive income” includes dividends, interest, gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business.  For purposes of these tests, income derived from the performance of services does not constitute “passive income.”

We believe it is more likely than not that the gross income we derive or are deemed to derive from our time chartering activities is properly treated as services income, rather than rental income.  Assuming this is correct, our income from our time chartering activities would not constitute “passive income,” and the assets we own and operate in connection with the production of that income would not constitute passive assets.  Consequently, based on our actual and projected income, assets and activities, we believe that it is more likely than not that we are not currently a PFIC and will not become a PFIC in the foreseeable future.

We believe there is substantial legal authority supporting the position that we are not a PFIC consisting of case law and U.S. Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) pronouncements concerning the characterization of income derived from time charters as services income for other tax purposes.  Nonetheless, it should be noted that there is legal uncertainty in this regard because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has held that, for purposes of a different set of rules under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), income derived from certain time chartering activities should be treated as rental income rather than services income.  However, the IRS has stated that it disagrees with the holding of this Fifth Circuit case, and that income derived from time chartering activities should be treated as services income.  We have not sought, and we do not expect to seek, an IRS ruling on this matter.  Accordingly, 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.  No assurance can be given that this result will not occur.  In addition, although we intend to conduct our affairs in a manner to avoid, to the extent possible, being classified as a PFIC with respect to any taxable year, no assurance can be given that the nature of our operations will not change in the future, or that we will be able to avoid PFIC status in the future.

If the IRS were to find that we are or have been a PFIC for any taxable year, our U.S. stockholders will face adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences.  In particular, U.S. stockholders who are individuals would not be eligible for the maximum 20% preferential tax rate on qualified dividends.  In addition, under the PFIC rules, unless U.S. stockholders make certain elections available under the Code, such stockholders would be liable to pay U.S. federal income tax at the then prevailing income tax rates on ordinary income upon the receipt of excess distributions and upon any gain from the disposition of our common stock, with interest payable on such tax liability as if the excess distribution or gain had been recognized ratably over the stockholder’s holding period of such stock.  The maximum 20% preferential tax rate for individuals would not be available for this calculation.

Our operating income could fail to qualify for an exemption from U.S. federal income taxation, which will reduce our cash flow.

Under the Code, 50% of our gross income that is attributable to transportation that begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States is characterized as U.S. source gross transportation income and is subject to a 4% U.S. federal income tax without allowance for any deductions, unless we qualify for exemption from such tax under Section 883 of the Code.  Based on our review of the applicable Securities and Exchange Commission documents, we believe that we qualified for this statutory tax exemption in 2017 and we will take this position for U.S. federal income tax return reporting purposes.

However, there are factual circumstances that could cause us to lose the benefit of this tax exemption in the future, and there is a risk that those factual circumstances could arise in 2018 or future years.  For instance, we might not qualify for this exemption if our common stock no longer represents more than 50% of the total combined voting power of all classes of our stock entitled to vote or of the total value of our outstanding stock.  In addition, we might not qualify if holders of our common stock owning a 5% or greater interest in our stock were to collectively own 50% or more of the outstanding shares of our common stock on more than half the days during the taxable year.

If we are not entitled to this exemption for a taxable year, we would be subject in that year to a 4% U.S. federal income tax on our U.S. source gross transportation income.  This could have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased earnings available for distribution to our stockholders.

We may be subject to taxation in Norway, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and would subject dividends paid by us to Norwegian withholding taxes.

If we were considered to be a resident of Norway or to have a permanent establishment in Norway, all or a part of our profits could be subject to Norwegian corporate tax.  We operate in a manner so that we do not have a permanent establishment in Norway and so that we are not deemed to reside in Norway, including by having our principal place of business outside Norway.  Material decisions regarding our business or affairs are made, and our board of directors meetings are held, outside Norway and at our principal place of business (including telephonically, in the case of board meetings).  However, because one of our directors resides in Norway and we have entered into a management agreement with our Norwegian subsidiary, DHT Management AS, the Norwegian tax authorities may contend that we are subject to Norwegian corporate tax.  If the Norwegian tax authorities make such a contention, we could incur substantial legal costs defending our position and, if we were unsuccessful in our defense, our results of operations would be materially and adversely affected.  In addition, if we are unsuccessful in our defense against such a contention, dividends paid to you would be subject to Norwegian withholding taxes.

A cyberattack could lead to a material disruption of our IT systems and the loss of business information, which may hinder our ability to conduct our business effectively and may result in lost revenues and additional costs.

Parts of our business depend on the secure operation of our computer systems to manage, process, store and transmit information.  Like other global companies, we have, from time to time, experienced threats to our data and systems, including malware and computer virus attacks, internet network scans, systems failures and disruptions.  A cyberattack that bypasses our information technology, or IT, security systems, causing an IT security breach, could lead to a material disruption of our IT systems and adversely impact our daily operations and cause the loss of sensitive information, including our own proprietary information and that of our customers, suppliers and employees.  Such losses could harm our reputation and result in competitive disadvantages, litigation, regulatory enforcement actions, lost revenues, additional costs and liability.  While we devote substantial resources to maintaining adequate levels of cybersecurity, our resources and technical sophistication may not be adequate to prevent all types of cyberattacks.

Failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could result in material misstatements in our financial statements which could negatively impact the market price of our common stock.

W e cannot assure you that our internal control over financial reporting will be effective in the future or that a material weakness will not be discovered with respect to a prior period for which we had previously believed that our internal control over financial reporting was effective. In connection with the preparation of our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2017, we and our independent registered public accounting firm carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting and concluded that there was a material weakness in relation to the preparation of our consolidated statement of cash flows as described in “Item 15. Controls and Procedures” below.

As a consequence of this material weakness, management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting and, consequently, our disclosure controls and procedures, were not effective as of December 31, 2017. The identified misstatement was corrected in the financial statements as of December 31, 2017 and our management believes that the consolidated financial statements included in this annual report fairly present in all material respects our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented.

We are taking, and will continue to take, measures to remediate the causes of this material weakness . However, failure to effectively remediate the causes of this material weakness or establish and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could result in material misstatements in our financial statements or a failure to meet our reporting obligations. This, in turn, could negatively impact our business and operating results, the market price of our shares and our ability to remain listed on the New York Stock Exchange (the “NYSE”).

RISKS RELATING TO OUR INDUSTRY

Vessel values and charter rates are volatile.  Significant decreases in values or rates could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The tanker industry historically has been highly cyclical.  If the tanker industry is depressed at a time when we may want to charter or sell a vessel, our earnings and available cash flow may decrease.  Our ability to charter our vessels and the charter rates payable under any new charters will depend upon, among other things, the conditions in the tanker market at that time.  Fluctuations in charter rates and vessel values result from changes in the supply and demand for tanker capacity and changes in the supply and demand for oil and oil products.

The highly cyclical nature of the tanker industry may lead to volatile changes in charter rates from time to time, which may adversely affect our earnings.

Factors affecting the supply and demand for tankers are outside of our control, and the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions are unpredictable and may adversely affect the values of our vessels and result in significant fluctuations in the amount of revenue we earn, which could result in significant fluctuations in our quarterly or annual results.  The factors that influence the demand for tanker capacity include:

·

demand for oil and oil products, which affect the need for tanker capacity;

·

global and regional economic and political conditions which, among other things, could impact the supply of oil as well as trading patterns and the demand for various types of vessels;

·

changes in the production of crude oil, particularly by OPEC and other key producers, which impact the need for tanker capacity;

·

developments in international trade;

·

changes in seaborne and other transportation patterns, including changes in the distances that cargoes are transported;

·

environmental concerns and regulations;

·

international sanctions, embargoes, import and export restrictions, nationalizations and wars;

·

weather; and

·

competition from alternative sources of energy.

The factors that influence the supply of tanker capacity include:

·

the number of newbuilding deliveries;

·

the scrapping rate of older vessels;

·

the number of vessels that are out of service; and

·

environmental and maritime regulations.

An oversupply of new vessels may adversely affect charter rates and vessel values.

If the capacity of new ships delivered exceeds the capacity of tankers being scrapped and lost, tanker capacity will increase.  As of April 10, 2018, the newbuilding order book for VLCC, Suezmax and Aframax vessels equaled approximately 13.0% of the existing world tanker fleet for these classes of vessels measured in dwt.  We cannot assure you that the order book will not increase further in proportion to the existing fleet.  If the supply of tanker capacity increases and the demand for tanker capacity does not increase correspondingly, charter rates could decline and the value of our vessels could be adversely affected.

Terrorist attacks and international hostilities can affect the tanker industry, which could adversely affect our business.

Terrorist attacks, the outbreak of war or the existence of international hostilities could damage the world economy, adversely affect the availability of and demand for crude oil and petroleum products and adversely affect our ability to re-charter our vessels on the expiration or termination of the charters and the charter rates payable under any renewal or replacement charters.  We conduct our operations internationally, and our business, financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected by changing economic, political and government conditions in the countries and regions where our vessels are employed.  Moreover, we operate in a sector of the economy that is likely to be adversely impacted by the effects of political instability, terrorist or other attacks, war or international hostilities.

Acts of piracy on ocean-going vessels could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Acts of piracy have historically affected ocean-going vessels trading in regions of the world such as the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia and the South China Sea.  For example, in November 2008, the M/V Sirius Star, a tanker not affiliated with us, was captured by pirates in the Indian Ocean while carrying crude oil estimated to be worth $100 million at the time of its capture.  If these pirate attacks result in regions in which our vessels are deployed being characterized as “war risk” zones by insurers, as the Gulf of Aden temporarily was categorized in May 2008, premiums payable for insurance coverage could increase significantly and such coverage may be more difficult to obtain.  In addition, crew costs, including costs in connection with employing onboard security guards, could increase in such circumstances.  We may not be adequately insured to cover losses from these incidents, including the payment of any ransom we may be forced to make, which could have a material adverse effect on us.  In addition, any of these events may result in a loss of revenues, increased costs and decreased cash flows to our customers, which could impair their ability to make payments to us under our charters.

 

Our vessels may call on ports located in countries that are subject to restrictions imposed by the governments of the U.S., the United Nations (the “UN”) or the European Union (the “EU”), which could negatively affect the trading price of our shares of common stock.

From time to time on charterers’ instructions, our vessels have called and may again call on ports located in countries subject to sanctions and embargoes imposed by the U.S. government, the UN or the EU and countries identified by the U.S. government, the UN or the EU as state sponsors of terrorism.  The U.S., UN and EU 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, strengthened or lifted over time.  For example, in 2010, the United States enacted the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act, or “CISADA,” which expanded the scope of the Iran Sanctions Act (as amended, the “ISA”) by amending existing sanctions under the ISA and creating new sanctions.  Among other things, CISADA introduced additional prohibitions and limits on the ability of companies (both U.S. and non-U.S.) and persons to do business or trade with Iran when such activities relate to the investment, supply or export of refined petroleum or petroleum products.  In 2011, the President of the United States issued Executive Order 13590, which expanded on the existing energy-related sanctions available under the ISA.  In 2012, the President signed additional relevant executive orders, including Executive Order 13608, which prohibits foreign persons from violating or attempting to violate, or causing a violation of, any sanctions in effect against Iran or facilitating any deceptive transactions for or on behalf of any person subject to U.S. sanctions.  The Secretary of the Treasury may prohibit any transactions or dealings, including any U.S. capital markets financing, involving any person found to be in violation of Executive Order 13608.  Also in 2012, the U.S. enacted the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (the “ITRA”) which again created new sanctions and strengthened existing sanctions under the ISA.  Among other things, the ITRA intensifies existing sanctions regarding the provision of goods, services, infrastructure or technology to Iran’s petroleum or petrochemical sector.  The ITRA also includes a provision requiring the President of the United States to impose five or more sanctions from Section 6(a) of the ISA on a person the President determines is a controlling beneficial owner of, or otherwise owns, operates, or controls or insures a vessel that was used to transport crude oil from Iran to another country and (1) if the person is a controlling beneficial owner of the vessel, the person had actual knowledge the vessel was so used or (2) if the person otherwise owns, operates, or controls, or insures the vessel, the person knew or should have known the vessel was so used.  Such a person could be subject to a variety of sanctions, including exclusion from U.S. capital markets, exclusion from financial transactions subject to U.S. jurisdiction, and exclusion of that person’s vessels from U.S. ports for up to two years.  The ITRA also includes a requirement that issuers of securities must disclose to the SEC in their annual and quarterly reports filed after February 6, 2013 if the issuer or “any affiliate” has “knowingly” engaged in certain sanctioned activities involving Iran during the time frame covered by the report.  At this time, we are not aware of any such sanctionable activity, conducted by ourselves or by any affiliate that is likely to prompt an SEC disclosure requirement.  In January 2013, the U.S. enacted the Iran Freedom and Counter-Proliferation Act of 2012 (the “IFCPA”) which expanded the scope of U.S. sanctions on any person that is part of Iran’s energy, shipping or shipbuilding sector and operators of ports in Iran, and imposes penalties on any person who facilitates or otherwise knowingly provides significant financial, material, technological or other support to these entities.  On November 24, 2013, the P5+1 (the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Russia and China) entered into an interim agreement with Iran entitled the “Joint Plan of Action” (the “JPOA”).  Under the JPOA, it was agreed that, in exchange for Iran taking certain voluntary measures to ensure that its nuclear program is used only for peaceful purposes, the U.S. and EU would voluntarily suspend certain sanctions for a period of six months.  On January 20, 2014, the U.S. and EU indicated that they would begin implementing the temporary relief measures provided for under the JPOA.  These measures include, among other things, the suspension of certain sanctions on the Iranian petrochemicals, precious metals, and automotive industries from January 20, 2014 until July 20, 2014.  At the end of the six-month period, when no agreement between Iran and the P5+1 could be reached, the measures were extended for a further six months to November 24, 2014, on which date the parties affirmed that they would continue to implement the measures through June 30, 2015.  On July 14, 2015, the P5+1 and EU entered into a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (“JCPOA”) with Iran.  Under the JCPOA, it was agreed that, in exchange for Iran taking certain voluntary measures to ensure that its nuclear program is used only for peaceful purposes, certain sanctions would be lifted on the Iranian petrochemicals, precious metals, and automotive industries.  The parties affirmed that the JPOA’s temporary relief measures would remain in effect until the date that Iran implemented certain nuclear-related commitments described in the JCPOA (“Implementation Day”).  On October 18, 2015, the JCPOA came into effect and participants began taking steps necessary to implement their JCPOA commitments.  On January 16, 2016, the International Atomic Energy Agency verified that Iran implemented key nuclear-related commitments described in the JCPOA, and, in accordance with the JCPOA, that day was deemed Implementation Day.  As a result, the following sanctions were lifted on Implementation Day:  (1) U.S. nuclear-related sanctions described in sections 17.1 to 17.2 of Annex V of the JCPOA, (2) EU nuclear-related sanctions described in section 16 of Annex V of the JCPOA and (3) the UN Security Council Resolutions 1696, 1737, 1747, 1803, 1835, 1929 and 2224.  While the lifting of these sanctions allows non-U.S. companies to engage in certain business or trade with Iran that was previously prohibited, the U.S. has the ability to reimpose sanctions against Iran if, in the future, Iran does not comply with its requirements under the JCPOA.  Additionally, on Implementation Day, the JPOA ceased to be in effect.  Finally, certain or future counterparties of ours may be affiliated with persons or entities that are the subject of sanctions imposed by the U.S., and EU or other international bodies as a result of the annexation of Crimea by Russia in March 2014.

During 2017, vessels in our fleet made a total of four calls to ports in Iran, representing approximately 0.56% of our 707 calls on worldwide ports during the same period.  During 2016, vessels in our fleet made a total of three calls to ports in Iran, representing approximately 0.48% of our 629 calls on worldwide ports during the same period.  Prior to 2016, the last call to a port in Iran made by a vessel in our fleet was in January 2012.  The port calls made to ports in Iran in 2017 and 2016 were made at the direction of the time charterer of the vessels.  Prior to making port calls to Iran, the charterer is required to conduct a due diligence to ensure that the port calls are in compliance with the JCPOA and other applicable sanctions against Iran.  To our knowledge, none of our vessels made port calls to Syria, Sudan, Cuba or the Crimea Region during the period from 2011 to 2016.

We monitor compliance of our vessels with applicable restrictions through, among other things, communication with our charterers and administrators regarding such legal and regulatory developments as they arise.  Although we believe that we are in compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations, and intend to maintain such compliance, there can be no assurance that we will be in compliance 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 or other penalties and could result in some investors deciding, or being required, to divest their interest, or not to invest, in our company.  Additionally, some investors may decide to divest their interest, or not to invest, in our company simply because we do business with companies that do business in sanctioned countries.  Moreover, our charterers may violate applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations as a result of actions that do not involve us or our vessels, and those violations could in turn negatively affect our reputation.  Investor perception of the value of our common stock may also be adversely affected by the consequences of war, the effects of terrorism, civil unrest or governmental actions in these and surrounding countries.

Failure to comply with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and other anti-bribery legislation in other jurisdictions could result in fines, criminal penalties, contract terminations and an adverse effect on our business.

We operate in a number of countries throughout the world, including some 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, or the “FCPA.”  We are subject, however, to the risk that we, our affiliated entities or our or their respective officers, directors, employees and agents may take actions determined to be in violation of such anti-corruption laws, including the FCPA.  Any such violation could result in substantial fines, sanctions, civil or criminal penalties, 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 can consume significant time and attention of our management.

Political decisions may affect the vessel’s trading patterns and could adversely affect our business and operation results.

Our vessels are trading globally, and the operation of our vessels is therefore exposed to political risks.  The political disturbances in Egypt, Iran and the Middle East in general may potentially result in a blockage of the Strait of Hormuz or a closure of the Suez Canal.  Geopolitical risks are outside of our control, and could potentially limit or disrupt our access to markets and operations and may have an adverse effect on our business.

Adverse conditions and disruptions in European economies could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our business can be affected by a number of factors that are beyond our control, such as general geopolitical, economic and business conditions.  In recent years, the EU has faced both financial and political turmoil which, if it continues or worsens, could have a material adverse effect on our business. For example, following the global financial crisis of 2008, several countries in Europe faced a sovereign debt crisis (commonly referred to as the “European Debt Crisis”) that negatively affected economic activity in that region and adversely affected the strength of the euro versus the U.S. dollar and other currencies. Although some of these countries are no longer facing a serious debt crisis, the lingering effects of the European Debt Crisis are unclear and may have a material adverse effect on our business, particularly if any European countries face sovereign debt default.

Political uncertainty has created financial and economic uncertainty, most recently as a result of the United Kingdom’s June 2016 referendum to withdraw from the EU (commonly referred to as “Brexit”).  The economic consequences of Brexit, including the possible repeal of open-skies agreements, could have a material adverse effect on our business.  Further, many of the structural issues facing the EU following the European Debt Crisis and Brexit remain, and problems could resurface that could affect financial market conditions, and, possibly, our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity, particularly if they lead to the exit of one or more countries from the European Monetary Union (the “EMU”) or the exit of additional countries from the EU.  If one or more countries exited the EMU, there would be significant uncertainty with respect to outstanding obligations of counterparties and debtors in any exiting country, whether sovereign or otherwise, and it would likely lead to complex and lengthy disputes and litigation.  Additionally, it is possible that the recent political events in Europe may lead to the complete dissolution of the EMU or EU.  The partial or full breakup of the EMU or EU would be unprecedented and its impact highly uncertain, including with respect to our business.

The value of our vessels may be depressed at a time when and in the event that we sell a vessel.

Tanker values have generally experienced high volatility.  Investors can expect the fair market value of our tankers to fluctuate, depending on general economic and market conditions affecting the tanker industry and competition from other shipping companies, types and sizes of vessels and other modes of transportation.  In addition, as vessels age, they generally decline in value.  These factors will affect the value of our vessels for purposes of covenant compliance under the secured credit facilities and at the time of any vessel sale.  If for any reason we sell a tanker at a time when tanker prices have fallen, the sale may be at less than the tanker’s carrying amount on our financial statements, with the result that we would also incur a loss on the sale and a reduction in earnings and surplus, which could reduce our ability to pay dividends.

The carrying values of our vessels may not represent their charter-free market value at any point in time.  The carrying values of our vessels held and used by us are reviewed for potential impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of a particular vessel may not be fully recoverable.

Vessel values may be depressed at a time when our subsidiaries are required to make a repayment under the secured credit facilities or when the secured credit facilities mature, which could adversely affect our liquidity and our ability to refinance the secured credit facilities.

In the event of the sale or loss of a vessel, certain of the secured credit facilities requires us and our subsidiaries to prepay the facility in an amount proportionate to the market value of the sold or lost vessel compared with the total market value of all of our vessels financed under such credit facility before such sale or loss.  If vessel values are depressed at such a time, our liquidity could be adversely affected as the amount that we and our subsidiaries are required to repay could be greater than the proceeds we receive from a sale.  In addition, declining tanker values could adversely affect our ability to refinance our secured credit facilities as they mature, as the amount that a new lender would be willing to lend on the same terms may be less than the amount we owe under the expiring secured credit facilities.

We operate in the highly competitive international tanker market, which could affect our financial position.

The operation of tankers and transportation of crude oil are extremely competitive.  Competition arises primarily from other tanker owners, including major oil companies, as well as independent tanker companies, some of whom have substantially larger fleets and substantially greater resources than we do.  Competition for the transportation of oil and oil products can be intense and depends on price, location, size, age, condition and the acceptability of the tanker and its operators to charterers.  We will have to compete with other tanker owners, including major oil companies and independent tanker companies, for charters.  Due in part to the fragmented tanker market, competitors with greater resources may be able to offer better prices than us, which could result in our achieving lower revenues from our vessels.

Compliance with environmental laws or regulations may adversely affect our business.

Our operations are affected by extensive and changing international, national and local environmental protection laws, regulations, treaties, conventions and standards in force in international waters, the jurisdictional waters of the countries in which our vessels operate, as well as the countries of our vessels’ registration.  Many of these requirements are designed to reduce the risk of oil spills and other pollution, and our compliance with these requirements can be costly.

These requirements can affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels, require a reduction in carrying 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 cleanup obligations, in the event that there is a release of petroleum or other 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 or exposure to hazardous materials associated with our current or historic operations, as well as natural resource damages.  Violations of or liabilities under environmental requirements also can result in substantial penalties, fines and other sanctions, including in certain instances, seizure or detention of our vessels.  For example, the U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990, as amended, or the “OPA,” affects all vessel owners shipping oil to, from or within the United States.  The OPA allows for potentially unlimited liability without regard to fault for owners, operators and bareboat charterers of vessels for oil pollution in U.S. waters.  Similarly, the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, 1969, as amended, which has been adopted by most countries outside of the United States, imposes liability for oil pollution in international waters.  The OPA expressly permits individual states to impose their own liability regimes with regard to hazardous materials and oil pollution incidents occurring within their boundaries.  Coastal states in the United States have enacted pollution prevention liability and response laws, many providing for unlimited liability.

In addition, in complying with the OPA, International Maritime Organization, or “IMO,” regulations, EU directives and other existing laws and regulations and those that may be adopted, shipowners may incur significant additional costs in meeting new maintenance and inspection requirements, developing contingency arrangements for potential spills and obtaining insurance coverage.  Government regulation of vessels, particularly in the areas of safety and environmental requirements, can be expected to become more strict in the future and require us to incur significant capital expenditures on our vessels to keep them in compliance, or even to scrap or sell certain vessels altogether.  For example, the U.S. and the IMO recently enacted ballast water discharge standards that will likely require the installation of ballast water treatment systems in existing ships, which would increase compliance costs for us and other similarly regulated ocean carriers.  In the past, the IMO and EU accelerated non-double-hull phase-out schedules in response to highly publicized oil spills and other shipping incidents involving companies unrelated to us.  Although all of our tankers are double-hulled, future accidents can be expected in the industry, and such accidents or other events could be expected to result in the adoption of even stricter laws and regulations, which could limit our operations or our ability to do business and which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial results.

The shipping industry has inherent operational risks, which could impair the ability of charterers to make payments to us.

Our tankers and their cargoes are at risk of being damaged or lost because of events such as marine disasters, bad weather, mechanical failures, human error, war, terrorism, piracy, environmental accidents and other circumstances or events.  In addition, transporting crude oil across a wide variety of international jurisdictions creates a risk of business interruptions due to political circumstances in foreign countries, hostilities, labor strikes and boycotts, the potential for changes in tax rates or policies, and the potential for government expropriation of our vessels.  Any of these events could impair the ability of charterers of our vessels to make payments to us under our charters.

Our insurance coverage may be insufficient to make us whole in the event of a casualty to a vessel or other catastrophic event, or fail to cover all of the inherent operational risks associated with the tanker industry.

In the event of a casualty to a vessel or other catastrophic event, we will rely on our insurance to pay the insured value of the vessel or the damages incurred, less the agreed deductible that may apply.  Each of DHT Management AS and DHT Ship Management (Singapore) Pte., Ltd., both wholly owned subsidiaries of ours, will be responsible for arranging insurance against those risks that we believe the shipping industry commonly insures against, and we are responsible for the premium payments on such insurance.  This insurance includes marine hull and machinery insurance, protection and indemnity insurance, which includes pollution risks and crew insurance, and war risk insurance.  We may also enter into loss of hire insurance, in which case each of DHT Management AS or DHT Ship Management (Singapore) Pte., Ltd. is responsible for arranging such loss of hire insurance, and we are responsible for the premium payments on such insurance.  This insurance generally provides coverage against business interruption for periods of more than 60 days per incident (up to a maximum of 180 days per incident) per year, following any loss under our hull and machinery policy.  We will not be reimbursed under the loss of hire insurance policies, on a per incident basis, for the first 60 days of off-hire.  Currently, the amount of coverage for liability for pollution, spillage and leakage available to us on commercially reasonable terms through protection and indemnity associations and providers of excess coverage is $1 billion per vessel per occurrence.  We cannot assure you that we will be adequately insured against all risks.  If insurance premiums increase, we may not be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates for our fleet.  Additionally, our insurers may refuse to pay particular claims.  Any significant loss or liability for which we are not insured could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.  In addition, the loss of a vessel would adversely affect our cash flows and results of operations.

Maritime claimants could arrest our tankers, which could interrupt charterers’ or our cash flow.

Crew members, suppliers of goods and services to a vessel, shippers of cargo 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 a vessel through foreclosure proceedings.  The arrest or attachment of one or more of our vessels could interrupt the charterers’ or our cash flow and require us to pay a significant amount of money to have the arrest lifted.  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 vessel in our fleet for claims relating to another vessel in our fleet.

Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency without adequate compensation.

A government could requisition one or more of our vessels for title or for hire.  Requisition for title occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and becomes her owner, while requisition for hire occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and effectively becomes her charterer at dictated charter rates.  Generally, requisitions occur during periods of war or emergency, although governments may elect to requisition vessels in other circumstances.  Although we would be entitled to compensation in the event of a requisition of one or more of our vessels, the amount and timing of payment would be uncertain.  Government requisition of one or more of our vessels may negatively impact our revenues and reduce the amount of cash we have available for distribution as dividends to our stockholders.

RISKS RELATING TO OUR CAPITAL STOCK

The market price of our common stock may be unpredictable and volatile.

The market price of our common stock may fluctuate due to factors such as actual or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly and annual results and those of other public companies in our industry, mergers and strategic alliances in the tanker industry, market conditions in the tanker industry, changes in government regulation, shortfalls in our operating results from levels forecast by securities analysts, announcements concerning us or our competitors and the general state of the securities market.  The tanker industry has been unpredictable and volatile.  The market for common stock in this industry may be equally volatile.  Therefore, we cannot assure you that you will be able to sell any of our common stock you may have purchased at a price greater than or equal to the original purchase price.

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

The market price of our common stock could decline due to sales of our shares in the market or the perception that such sales could occur.  This could depress the market price of our common stock and make it more difficult for us to sell equity securities in the future at a time and price that we deem appropriate, or at all.

We have shares of common stock that are available for resale.

We have shares of common stock that are available for resale, including the issuance in March 2017, of a total of 47,724,395 shares of common stock (including shares issued upon the mandatory exchange of our Series D Junior Participating Preferred Stock).  We do not know when or in what amount these shareholders, or their respective transferees, donees, pledgees, or other successors in interest may offer their shares of common stock for sale, if any.  These shares may create an excess supply of our stock if any significant resale were to occur.

Conversion of our convertible senior notes may dilute the ownership interest of existing stockholders.

In September 2014, we closed a private placement of approximately $150,000,000 aggregate principal amount of convertible senior notes due 2019 to institutional accredited investors.  In 2017 and 2016, we repurchased a total of $27,000,000 and $17,174,000 in aggregate principal amount of the convertible senior notes, respectively.  As of April 10, 2018, $105,826,000 in aggregate principal amount remains outstanding.  The convertible senior notes are convertible into our common stock at any time until one business day prior to their maturity.  The initial conversion price for the convertible senior notes was $8.125 per share of common stock (equivalent to an initial conversion rate of 123.0769 shares of common stock per $1,000 aggregate principal amount of convertible senior notes).  The conversion price is subject to adjustment based on cash dividends paid on our common stock and as of April 10, 2018, the conversion price is $6.3282.  The conversion of some or all of the convertible senior notes may dilute the ownership interests of existing stockholders and any sales in the public market of the shares of our common stock issuable upon such conversion could adversely affect prevailing market prices for our common stock.  In addition, the existence of the convertible senior notes may encourage short-selling by market participants because the conversion of the convertible senior notes could depress the market price of our common stock.

Holders of our convertible senior notes may have to pay tax with respect to distributions on our capital stock that they do not receive.

The terms of our convertible senior notes allow for changes in the conversion rate of the notes in certain circumstances.  A change in conversion rate that allows holders of our convertible senior notes to receive more shares of capital stock on conversion may increase those note holders’ proportionate interests in our earnings and profits or assets.  In that case, U.S. Holders (as defined under “Certain U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences”) could be treated as though they received a dividend in the form of our capital stock under United States tax laws.  Such a constructive stock dividend could be taxable to those note holders, although they would not actually receive any cash or other property.

We are incorporated in the Marshall Islands, which does not have a well-developed body of corporate law,  a bankruptcy act or an insolvency act.

Our corporate affairs are governed by our amended and restated articles of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws and by the Marshall Islands Business Corporations Act, or 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 Marshall Islands interpreting the BCA, and the rights and fiduciary responsibilities of directors under the laws 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 the United States.  Therefore, the rights of stockholders of the Marshall Islands may differ from the rights of stockholders of companies incorporated in the United States.  While the BCA provides that it is to be interpreted and construed according to the laws of the State of Delaware and other states with substantially similar legislative provisions, there have been few, if any, court cases interpreting the BCA in the Marshall Islands.  We cannot predict whether Marshall Islands courts would reach the same conclusions that any particular U.S. court would reach or has reached.  Thus, you may have more difficulty in protecting your interests in the face of actions by the management, directors or controlling stockholders than would stockholders of a corporation incorporated in a U.S. jurisdiction which has developed a relatively more substantial body of case law.

In addition, the Marshall Islands has no established bankruptcy act, and as a result, any bankruptcy action involving our company would have to be initiated outside the Marshall Islands, and our public stockholders may find it difficult or impossible to pursue their claims in such other jurisdictions.

Our amended and restated bylaws restrict stockholders from bringing certain legal action against our officers and directors.

Our amended and restated bylaws contain a broad waiver by our stockholders of any claim or right of action, both individually and on our behalf, against any of our officers or directors.  The waiver applies to any action taken by an officer or director, or the failure of an officer or director to take any action, in the performance of his or her duties, except with respect to any matter involving any fraud or dishonesty on the part of the officer or director.  This waiver limits the right of stockholders to assert claims against our officers and directors unless the act or failure to act involves fraud or dishonesty.

The anti-takeover provisions in our amended and restated bylaws, certain provisions in our convertible senior notes and our shareholder rights plan may discourage a change of control.

Our amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us without the consent of our board of directors.  These provisions provide for:

·

a classified board of directors with staggered three-year terms, elected without cumulative voting;

·

directors only to be removed for cause and only with the affirmative vote of holders of at least a majority of the common stock issued and outstanding;

·

advance notice for nominations of directors by stockholders and for stockholders to include matters to be considered at annual meetings;

·

a limited ability for stockholders to call special stockholder meetings; and

·

our board of directors to determine the powers, preferences and rights of our preferred stock and to issue the preferred stock without stockholder approval.

In addition, if a fundamental change occurs under the terms of our convertible senior notes, we must offer to purchase the convertible senior notes at 100% of the principal amount thereof plus accrued and unpaid interest to the purchase date.

We adopted a shareholder rights plan (the “Rights Plan”), which expired in accordance with its terms on January 28, 2018.  The Rights Plan allowed our board of directors to cause the substantial dilution of the holdings of any person that attempts to acquire us without the approval of our board of directors.  The Rights Plan was not replaced.  Our board of directors may, subject to its fiduciary duties under applicable law, choose to implement a shareholder rights plan in the future.

These provisions could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if the third party’s offer may be considered beneficial by many stockholders.  As a result, stockholders may be limited in their ability to obtain a premium for their shares.