ITEM 3. KEY INFORMATION

A. Selected Financial Data

The following table presents in each case for the periods and at the dates indicated, our selected consolidated financial and operating data for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2017. You should read the table together with “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects”. Our selected consolidated financial data is a summary of, is derived from, and is qualified by reference to, our audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Our audited consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2016 and 2017 and the consolidated balance sheets at December 31, 2016 and 2017, together with the notes thereto, are included in “Item 18. Financial Statements” and you should read them in their entirety.

Vessel operating expenses per day (“Opex”) are our vessel operating expenses for a vessel, which consist primarily of crew wages and related costs, insurance, lube oils, communications, spares and consumables, tonnage taxes as well as repairs and maintenance, divided by the days in the applicable period. Please see “Item 4. Information on the Company – B. Business Overview – The International Product Tanker Shipping Industry – Eco Ships” for a description of the terms “eco-efficient”, “eco-modified” and “standard”.

B. Capitalization and Indebtedness

Not applicable.

C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds

Not applicable.

D. Risk Factors

Risks Related to Our Industry

Operating ocean-going vessels is inherently risky.

The operation of ocean-going vessels in international trade is affected by a number of risks. Our vessels and their cargoes will be at risk of being damaged or lost because of events, including bad weather, grounding, fire, explosions, mechanical failure, personal injury, vessel and cargo property loss or damage, hostilities, labor strikes, adverse weather conditions, stowaways, placement on our vessels of illegal drugs and other contraband by smugglers, war, terrorism, piracy, human error, environmental accidents generally, collisions and other catastrophic natural and marine disasters. An accident involving any of our vessels could result in death or injury to persons, loss of property or environmental damage, delays in the delivery of cargo, damage to our customer relationships, loss of revenues from or termination of charter contracts, governmental fines, penalties or restrictions on conducting business or higher insurance rates.

In addition, the operation of tankers, and product tankers in particular, has unique operational risks associated with the transportation of refined petroleum products and chemicals. A spill of refined petroleum products or chemicals may cause significant environmental damage, and a catastrophic spill could exceed the insurance coverage available. 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 operations. 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. Compared to other types of vessels, product tankers are exposed to a higher risk of damage and loss by fire, whether ignited by a terrorist attack, collision or other cause due to the high flammability and high volume of the products transported in tankers. In addition, if our vessels are found with contraband, we may face governmental or other regulatory claims. Any of these circumstances or events could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

If our vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired at a shipyard. The costs of repairs are unpredictable and may be substantial. We may have to pay repairs that our insurance does not cover in full. In addition, we may be unable to find space at a suitable shipyard or our vessels may be forced to travel to a shipyard that is not conveniently located to our vessels’ positions. The loss of revenues and continuation of certain operating expenses while these vessels are being repaired and repositioned, as well as the actual cost of these repairs, may adversely affect our business and financial conditions. In addition, the total loss of any of our vessels could harm our reputation as a safe and reliable vessel owner and operator.

We operate our vessels worldwide and as a result, our vessels are exposed to international risks that may reduce revenue or increase expenses.

The international shipping industry is an inherently risky business involving global operations. In addition to the circumstances and events summarized above, changing economic, regulatory and political conditions in some countries, including political and military conflicts, have from time to time resulted in attacks on vessels, mining of waterways, piracy, terrorism, labor strikes and boycotts. These sorts of events could interfere with shipping routes and result in market disruptions that may reduce our revenue or increase our expenses. International shipping is also subject to various security and customs inspection and related procedures in countries of origin and destination and transshipment points. Inspection procedures can result in the seizure of cargo and/or 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 inspection procedures could impose additional financial and legal obligations on us. Furthermore, changes to inspection procedures could also impose additional costs and obligations on our customers and may, in certain cases, render the shipment of certain types of cargo uneconomical or impractical. Any such changes or developments may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our revenues are derived substantially from a single segment where charter hire rates for product tankers are cyclical and volatile.

Substantially all of our revenues are derived from a single market, the product tanker segment, and therefore our financial results depend on chartering activities and developments in this segment. The product tanker market is cyclical and volatile in charter hire rates. The degree of charter hire rate volatility among different types of product tankers has varied widely, and, as a result, our ability to charter, or to re-charter our vessels upon the expiration or termination of our current charters, the charter rates payable under any replacement charters and vessel values will depend upon, among other things, economic conditions in the product tanker market at that time and changes in the supply and demand for vessel capacity. After reaching historic highs in mid-2008, charter hire rates for product tankers declined significantly before increasing in 2015 and then declining again in 2016. Since then, charter hire rates have remained volatile. If charter hire rates remain depressed or fall further in the future when our charters expire, we may be unable to re-charter our vessels at rates as favorable to us, with the result that our earnings and available cash flow will continue to be adversely affected. In addition, a decline in charter hire rates will likely cause the value of our vessels to decline.

Charter hire rates depend on the demand for, and supply of, product tanker vessels. The factors that influence the demand for product tanker vessel capacity are unpredictable and outside of our control, and include, among others:

The factors that influence the supply of product tanker vessel capacity are also outside of our control and unpredictable and include, among others:

These factors influencing the supply of and demand for product tanker capacity and charter rates are outside of our control, and we may not be able to correctly assess the nature, timing and degree of changes in industry conditions. A global economic downturn may reduce demand for transportation of refined petroleum products and chemicals. We cannot assure you that we will be able to successfully charter our product tankers in the future at all or at rates sufficient to allow us to meet our contractual obligations, including repayment of our indebtedness, or to pay dividends to our stockholders.

Product tanker rates fluctuate based on seasonal variations in demand.

Product tanker markets are typically stronger in the winter months as a result of increased refined petroleum products consumption in the northern hemisphere and weaker in the summer months as a result of lower consumption in the northern hemisphere and refinery maintenance that is typically conducted in the summer months. Unpredictable weather patterns during the winter months in the northern hemisphere tend to disrupt vessel routing and scheduling. The price volatility of products resulting from these factors has historically led to increased product trading activities in the winter months. As a result, revenues generated by vessels are typically weaker during the quarters ended June 30 and September 30, and stronger in the quarters ended March 31 and December 31. If increased revenues generated in the fall/winter months are not sufficient to offset any decreases in revenue in the spring/summer months, it may have an adverse effect on our business results, results of operations and financial condition.

An over-supply of product tanker capacity may lead to reductions in charter rates, vessel values and profitability.

The market supply of product tankers is affected by a number of factors such as the demand for energy resources, oil, petroleum and chemical products, as well as overall global economic growth. There has been a global trend towards energy efficient technologies, lower environmental emissions and alternative sources of energy. In the long-term, demand for oil may be reduced by increased availability of such energy sources and machines that run on them. In addition, reduced global supply of oil due to coordinated action, such as the production cuts recently agreed by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (“OPEC”) and other oil producing nations, may lead to an over-supply of product tanker capacity due to lower demand for the transportation of refined petroleum products.

Furthermore, if the capacity of new ships delivered exceeds the capacity of product tankers being scrapped and lost, product tanker capacity will increase. For example, as of February 28, 2018, there were 173 product and product/chemical tankers on order, equivalent to 6.5% of the existing fleet by units and 7.5% of the existing fleet by dwt and the orderbook may increase further in the future. If the supply of product tanker capacity increases and if the demand for product tanker capacity does not increase correspondingly, charter rates and vessel values could materially decline.

A reduction in charter rates and the value of our vessels for any of these reasons may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Over the last five years, a number of vessel owners have ordered and taken delivery of so-called “eco-efficient” vessel designs, which offer significant bunker savings as compared to older designs. Increased demand for and supply of “eco-efficient” vessels could reduce demand for certain of our vessels that are not classified as such and expose us to lower vessel utilization and/or decreased charter rates.

We estimate that a significant proportion of newbuilding orders are based on new vessel designs, which purport to offer material bunker savings compared to older designs, such as a significant proportion of our tanker vessels. See “Item 4. Information on the Company – B. Business Overview – The Fleet.” New vessel designs could result in a significant reduction of bunker cost for charterers. As the supply of “eco-efficient” tankers expands, if charterers prefer those vessels over our tankers that are not classified as such, this may reduce demand for our non-“eco-efficient” tankers, impair our ability to re-charter such tankers at competitive rates or at all and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

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

Acts of piracy have historically affected ocean-going vessels trading in many regions of the world. Although the frequency of piracy on ocean-going vessels has decreased since 2014, piracy incidents continue to occur, such as in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia and the Gulf of Guinea. Tanker vessels are particularly vulnerable to attacks by pirates. If regions in which our vessels are deployed are characterized as “war risk’’ zones or “war and strikes” listed areas by insurers, or other parties such as the Joint War Committee of Lloyds Insurance and IUA Company, premiums payable for coverage could increase significantly and such insurance coverage may be more difficult to obtain. In addition, crew costs, including employing onboard security guards, could increase in such circumstances. We may not be adequately insured to cover losses from these incidents. In addition, any detention hijacking as a result of an act of piracy against our vessels could increase the cost or affect the availability of insurance for our vessels. These risks could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our substantial operations outside the United States expose us to political, governmental and economic instability.

Our operations are primarily conducted outside the United States and may be adversely affected by changing or adverse political, governmental and economic conditions in the countries where our vessels are flagged or registered, and in the regions where we operate. In particular, we may derive some portion of our revenues from our vessels transporting refined petroleum products from politically unstable regions.

Terrorist attacks, such as the attacks that occurred against targets in the United States on September 11, 2001, Mumbai on November 26, 2008, Paris on November 13, 2015, Nice on July 14, 2016, and continuing hostilities in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East and the world may lead to additional armed conflicts or to further acts of terrorism and civil disturbance causing instability. Our operations may also be adversely affected by expropriation of vessels, taxes, regulation, tariffs, trade embargoes, economic sanctions, or a disruption of, or limit to, trading activities or other adverse events or circumstances in or affecting the countries and regions where we operate or where we may operate in the future.

Our operations are also potentially vulnerable to economic instability inherent in political and government risk. In particular, the shipping industry, like many others, is dependent on the continued growth of emerging markets. For example, the Chinese government’s reputation and economic reforms continue to develop. Many of the reforms by the Chinese government are unprecedented or experimental and may be subject to revision, change or abolition based upon the outcome of such experiments. Due to these and other risks, there can be no assurance that China’s economy will continue to exhibit high growth.

In addition, fluctuations in exchange rates may affect charter rates and may adversely affect the profitability in U.S. dollars of the services we provide in foreign markets where payment is made in other currencies. Substantially all of our consolidated revenue is received in U.S. dollars. The amount and frequency of expenses paid in currency other than the U.S. dollar (such as vessel repairs, supplies and stores) may fluctuate from period to period. Depreciation in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to other currencies increases the U.S. dollar cost to us. The portion of our business conducted in other currencies could increase in the future, which could expand our exposure to losses arising from currency fluctuations, including the continued devaluation of the Yuan by the People’s Bank of China that commenced in August 2015. Even if we implement hedging strategies to mitigate this risk, these strategies might not eliminate our exposure to foreign exchange rate fluctuations and would involve costs and risks of their own, such as ongoing management time and expertise, external costs to implement the hedging activities and potential accounting implications.

Political instability in Greece may have an adverse impact on our and Pyxis Maritime Corp.’s (“Maritime”) operations in that country. We are headquartered in Greece, which continues to be in the midst of an economic crisis that includes, among other things, a high budget deficit compared to previous years. The Greek government is adopting reforms, and it is not clear how this new legislation will be implemented in practice. On August 19, 2015, the European Commission signed a Memorandum of Understanding (the “MoU”) with Greece following approval by the European Stability Mechanism Board of Governors for further stability support accompanied by a third economic adjustment program. Within the scope of the MoU, the Greek government has committed to phasing out special tax treatments of the shipping industry. Over recent years, Greece has subjected foreign flag vessels (jointly with their owners and their Greece-based ship managers) to tonnage tax equal to that payable for equivalent Greek flag vessels on condition of providing a tax credit for the equivalent taxes actually incurred in respect of the same vessels towards their flag states. Greece has also enacted legislation increasing the levels of tonnage tax by 4% until 2020 in conformity with the MoU. In addition, Greek tax-related shipping legislation is currently under scrutiny by the EU Competition Commission, and the European Commission has the ability to amend the existing shipping tax-related legislation in Greece by early 2019. A Supplemental Memorandum of Understanding forming part of the third economic adjustment program has also been agreed, which provides for a review in 2018 of Greece’s preferential tax treatments for the shipping industry. As part of its reforms, the government in Greece may impose additional taxes on ship management companies located in Greece, as well as on shipowners with vessels under the management of such Greece-based managers, including on shipping income which currently benefits from a dividend tax exemption.

Any of these factors may interfere with the operation of our vessels, increase the cost and risk that insurance will be unavailable, insufficient or more expensive for our vessels and increase our costs, which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The current global economic condition and financial environment may negatively affect our business.

In recent years, businesses in the global economy have faced slower growth, recessions, limited or no credit or credit on less favorable terms than previously obtained, lower demand for goods and services, reduced liquidity and declining capital markets. These factors have had, and in part continue to have, a negative effect on the demand for refined petroleum products including fuel oil or bunkers, which, along with diminished trade credit available for the delivery of such cargoes have led to decreased demand for product tankers, creating downward pressure on charter rates and reduced product tanker values. In particular, a significant number of the port calls we expect our vessels to make will likely involve the loading or discharging of cargo in ports in Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development countries and the Asia Pacific region. China’s economy has shown signs of slowing its growth rate. We cannot assure you that the Chinese, Indian or Japanese economies, which generate a substantial amount of demand for shipping companies, will not experience a significant contraction or otherwise negatively change in the future, especially due to the recent effects from the turmoil in the Chinese capital markets. Moreover, a significant or protracted slowdown in the economies of the United States, the European Union (“EU”) or various Asian countries may adversely affect economic growth in China and elsewhere. In addition, 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 European countries could reduce the overall demand for our services.

These issues, along with the re-pricing of credit risk and the difficulties currently experienced by financial institutions, especially those lending in the shipping industry, have made, and will likely continue to make, it difficult to obtain financing. As a result of the disruptions in the credit markets and higher capital requirements, many lenders have enacted tighter lending standards, required more restrictive terms (including higher collateral ratios for advances, shorter maturities and smaller loan amounts), increased margins or lending rates or have refused to refinance existing debt at all. Moreover, certain banks that have historically been significant lenders to the shipping industry have reduced or ceased lending activities in the shipping industry. Further tightening of capital requirements and the resulting policies adopted by lenders, could further reduce lending activities.

Global economic conditions remain fragile with uncertainty surrounding full recovery and long-term prospects. If the current global economic and financial environment persists or worsens, we may be negatively affected in the following ways, among others:

In addition, as a result of the ongoing economic slump in Greece and the related austerity measures implemented by the Greek government, our and Maritime’s operations in Greece will likely be subjected to new regulations that will require us to incur new or additional compliance or other administrative costs and may require us to pay to the Greek government new taxes or other fees as described above. In particular, a recently enacted social security reform is likely to require us and Maritime to incur additional social security costs regarding our and Maritime’s Greek based personnel. Furthermore, the continuing debt crisis in Greece and a possible default in the future may undermine Greece’s political and economic stability and may lead it to exit the Eurozone, which may adversely affect our and Maritime’s operations located in Greece. Even though the Greek government has enacted measures to ease the flow of foreign funds transferred to Greece, we also face the risk that continued capital controls on banking deposits with Greek financial institutions and future strikes, work stoppages and civil unrest within Greece may disrupt our shore-side operations and those of Maritime’s employees located in Greece.

The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Changes in fuel, or bunkers, prices may adversely affect profits.

Fuel, or bunkers, is a significant expense in shipping operations for our vessels employed on the spot market and can have a significant impact on earnings. With respect to our vessels employed on time charter, the charterer is generally responsible for the cost and supply of fuel, but such cost may affect the charter rates we are able to negotiate for our vessels. The price and supply of fuel is unpredictable and fluctuates based on events outside our control, including geopolitical developments, supply and demand for oil and gas, actions by OPEC and other oil and gas producers, war and unrest in oil producing countries and regions, regional production patterns and environmental concerns. Further, fuel may become much more expensive in the future, which may reduce the profitability and competitiveness of our business versus other forms of transportation, such as truck or rail. Changes in the price of fuel may adversely affect our profitability.

If our vessels call on ports located in countries that are subject to restrictions imposed by the U.S. government, our reputation and the market for our securities could be adversely affected.

While none of our vessels called on ports located in countries subject to U.S. sanctions during 2017, and we intend to comply with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations, our vessels may call on ports in these countries from time to time on charterers’ instructions in the future, and there can be no assurance that we will maintain such compliance, particularly as the scope of certain laws may be unclear and may be subject to changing interpretations. 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 strengthened over time. With effect from July 1, 2010, the U.S. enacted the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions Accountability and Divestment Act (“CISADA”), which expanded the scope of the Iran Sanctions Act. Among other things, CISADA expands the application of the prohibitions to companies, such as ours, and introduces limits on the ability of companies 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 addition, on May 1, 2012, President Obama signed 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. Any persons found to be in violation of Executive Order 13608 will be deemed a foreign sanctions evader, and U.S. persons are generally prohibited from all transactions or dealings with such persons, whether direct or indirect. Among other things, foreign sanctions evaders are unable to transact in U.S. dollars.

Also in 2012, President Obama signed into law the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012 (the “Iran Threat Reduction Act”), which created new sanctions and strengthened existing sanctions. Among other things, the Iran Threat Reduction Act intensifies existing sanctions regarding the provision of goods, services, infrastructure or technology to Iran’s petroleum or petrochemical sector. The Iran Threat Reduction Act also includes a provision requiring the President of the United States to impose five or more sanctions from Section 6(a) of the Iran Sanctions Act, as amended, 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 the person’s vessels from U.S. ports for up to two years.

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 (“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 the EU would voluntarily suspend certain sanctions for a period of six months.

On January 20, 2014, the U.S. and the EU indicated that they would begin implementing the temporary relief measures provided for under the JPOA. These measures included, 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. The JPOA was subsequently extended twice.

On July 14, 2015, the P5+1 and the EU announced that they reached a landmark agreement with Iran titled the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action Regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Nuclear Program (the “JCPOA”), which is intended to significantly restrict Iran’s ability to develop and produce nuclear weapons for 10 years while simultaneously easing sanctions directed toward non-U.S. persons for conduct involving Iran, but taking place outside of U.S. jurisdiction and does not involve U.S. persons. On January 16, 2016 (“Implementation Day”), the United States joined the EU and the UN in lifting a significant number of their nuclear-related sanctions on Iran following an announcement by the International Atomic Energy Agency (“IAEA”) that Iran had satisfied its respective obligations under the JCPOA.

U.S. sanctions prohibiting certain conduct that is now permitted under the JCPOA have not actually been repealed or permanently terminated at this time. Rather, the U.S. government has implemented changes to the sanctions regime by: (1) issuing waivers of certain statutory sanctions provisions; (2) committing to refrain from exercising certain discretionary sanctions authorities; (3) removing certain individuals and entities from the Office of Foreign Assets Control’s (“OFAC”) sanctions lists; and (4) revoking certain Executive Orders and specified sections of Executive Orders. These sanctions will not be permanently “lifted” until the earlier of “Transition Day,” set to occur on October 20, 2023, or upon a report from the IAEA stating that all nuclear material in Iran is being used for peaceful activities. On October 13, 2017, the President Trump announced that he would not certify Iran’s compliance with the JCPOA. This did not withdraw the U.S. from the JCPOA or reinstate any sanctions. However, the U.S. President must periodically renew sanctions waivers and his refusal to do so could result in the reinstatement of certain sanctions currently suspended under the JCPOA. Although it is our intention to comply with the provisions of the JCPOA, there can be no assurance that we will be in compliance in the future as such regulations and U.S. Sanctions may be amended over time, and the U.S. retains the authority to revoke the aforementioned relief if Iran fails to meet its commitments under the JCPOA, as noted above.

Current or future counterparties of ours may be affiliated with persons or entities that are or may be in the future the subject of sanctions imposed by the Trump administration, the EU, and/or other international bodies as a result of the annexation of Crimea by Russia in March 2014. If we determine that such sanctions 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 or we may suffer reputational harm. Currently, we do not believe that any of our existing counterparties are affiliated with persons or entities that are subject to such sanctions.

Although we believe that we have been 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, 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 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 subject to U.S. sanctions and embargo laws that are not controlled by the governments of those countries, or engaging in operations associated with those countries pursuant to contracts with third parties that are unrelated to those countries 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 these and surrounding countries.

Our vessels could be arrested by maritime claimants, which could result in a significant loss of earnings and cash flow if we are not able to post the required security to lift the arrest.

Generally under the terms of the time charters for our vessels, a vessel would be placed off-hire (that is, the charterer could cease to pay charter hire) for any period during which it is “arrested” for a reason not arising from the fault of the charterer. Under maritime law in many jurisdictions, and under the International Convention on Arrest of Ships, 1999, crew members, tort claimants, claimants for breach of certain maritime contracts, vessel mortgagees, suppliers of goods and services to a vessel and shippers and consignees of cargo and others entitled to a maritime lien against the vessel may enforce their lien by “arresting” a vessel through court processes. In addition, claims may be brought by parties in hostile jurisdictions or on fictitious grounds or for claims against previous owners, if any, or in respect of previous cargoes. Any such claims could lead to the arrest of the vessel, against which the ship owner would have to post security to have the arrest lifted and to defend against such claims.

In addition, in those countries adopting the International Convention on Arrest of Ships, 1999, and in certain other jurisdictions, such as South Africa, under the “sister ship” theory of liability, a claimant may arrest not only the vessel with respect to which the claimant’s maritime lien has arisen, but also any “associated” vessel owned or controlled by the legal or beneficial owner of that vessel. While in some of the jurisdictions which have adopted this doctrine, liability for damages is limited in scope and would only extend to a company and its vessel-owning subsidiaries, there can be no assurance that liability for damages caused by a vessel managed by International Tanker Management (“ITM”) (but otherwise with no affiliation to us at all), would not be asserted against us or one or more of our vessels. The arrest of one or more vessels in our fleet could result in a material loss of cash flow for us and/or require us to pay substantial sums to have the arrest lifted.

Governments could requisition our vessels during a period of war or emergency.

A government could take actions for requisition of title, hire or seize our vessels. Requisition for title occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and becomes its owner. Also, a government could requisition our vessels for hire, which occurs when a government takes control of a vessel and effectively becomes her charterer at dictated charter rates. Generally, requisitions occur during a period of war or emergency. Government requisition of one or more of our vessels could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We are subject to increasingly complex laws and regulations, including environmental and safety laws and regulations, which expose us to liability and significant additional expenditures, and can adversely affect our insurance coverage and access to certain ports as well as our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our operations are affected by extensive and changing international, national and local 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.

These laws and regulations include, but are not limited to, the U.S. Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (the “OPA”), requirements of the U.S Coast Guard (“USCG”) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”), the U.S. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (the “CERCLA”), the U.S. Clean Air Act of 1970 (as amended from time to time and referred to herein as the “CAA”), the U.S. Clean Water Act of 1972 (as amended from time to time and referred to herein as the “CWA”), the International Maritime Organization (the “IMO”), the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969 (as amended from time to time and referred to herein as the “CLC”), the IMO International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damages (the “Bunker Convention”), the IMO International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships of 1973 (as amended from time to time and referred to herein as “MARPOL”), including designation of Emission Control Areas (“ECAs”) thereunder, the IMO International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea of 1974 (as amended from time to time and referred to herein as the “SOLAS Convention”) and the International Management Code for the Safe Operation of Ships and Pollution Prevention (the “ISM Code”) promulgated thereby, the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments (the “BWM Convention”), the IMO International Convention on Load Lines of 1966 (as from time to time amended), the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (the “MTSA”), the International Labour Organization (“ILO”), the Maritime Labour Convention and EU regulations.

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. Under the OPA, for example, owners, operators and bareboat charterers are jointly and severally strictly liable for the discharge of oil in U.S. waters, including the 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone around the United States. An oil spill could also result in significant liability, including fines, penalties, criminal liability and remediation costs for natural resource damages under other international and U.S. federal, state and local laws, as well as third-party damages, and could harm our reputation with current or potential charterers of our tankers. We are required to satisfy insurance and financial responsibility requirements for potential oil (including marine fuel) spills and other pollution incidents. Although we have arranged insurance to cover certain environmental risks, there can be no assurance that such insurance will be sufficient to cover all such risks.

The safe operation of our vessels is affected by the requirements of the ISM Code, promulgated by the IMO under the SOLAS Convention. The ISM Code requires ship owners, ship managers and bareboat charterers to develop and maintain an extensive “Safety Management System” that includes the adoption of safety and environmental protection policies setting forth instructions and procedures for safe operation and describing procedures for dealing with emergencies. If we fail to comply with the ISM Code, we may be subject to increased liability, invalidation of our existing insurance, or reduction in available insurance coverage for our affected vessels. Such noncompliance may also result in a denial of access to, or detention in, certain ports.

Compliance with such laws and regulations, where applicable, may require installation of costly equipment, vessel modifications, operational changes or restrictions, a reduction in cargo-capacity and may affect the resale value or useful lives of our vessels as well as result in the denial of access to, or detention in, certain jurisdictional waters or ports. 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 and bilge waters, maintenance and inspection, elimination of tin-based paint, development and implementation of emergency procedures and insurance coverage or other financial assurance of our ability to address pollution incidents. Government regulation of the shipping industry, particularly as it may relate to safety, ship recycling requirements, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, and other environmental matters, can be expected to become stricter in the future, and may require us to incur significant capital expenditures on our vessels to keep them in compliance, may require us to scrap or sell certain vessels altogether, may reduce the residual value we receive if a vessel is scrapped, and may generally increase our compliance costs. A failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in administrative and civil penalties, criminal sanctions or the suspension or termination of operations. All of the above, both individually and cumulatively, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Recent action by the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee and U.S. agencies indicate that cyber-security regulations for the maritime industry are likely to be further developed in the near future in an attempt to combat cyber-security threats. This might cause companies to cultivate additional procedures for monitoring cyber-security, which could require additional expenses and/or capital expenditures. However, the impact of such regulations is hard to predict at this time.

The failure to maintain class certifications of authorized classification societies on one or more of our vessels would affect our ability to employ such vessels.

The hull and machinery of every commercial vessel must be certified as meeting its class requirements by a classification society authorized by the vessel’s country of registry. The classification society certifies that the vessel is safe and seaworthy in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the country of registry of the vessel and the SOLAS Convention. The operating vessels in our fleet are classed by the major classification societies, Nippon Kaiji Kyokai (“NKK”) and Det Norske Veritas (“DNV GL”). ITM and the vessels in our fleet have also been awarded certifications from major classification societies under the ISM Code. In order for a vessel to maintain its classification, the vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys 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 from time to time over a five year period. All of the vessels in our fleet on time charters or operating on the spot market are on special survey cycles for both hull and machinery inspection. Every vessel may also be required to be dry-docked every two to three years for inspection of the underwater parts of the vessel. If a vessel fails any survey or otherwise fails to maintain its class, the vessel will be unable to trade and will be unemployable, and may subject us to claims from the charterer if it has chartered the vessel, which would negatively impact our revenues as well as our reputation.

We could be adversely affected by violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the “FCPA”) and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws.

The FCPA and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to non-U.S. officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Our policies mandate compliance with these laws. In certain circumstances, third parties may request our employees and agents to make payments that may not comply with the FCPA and other anti-bribery laws. Despite such compliance program, we cannot assure you that our internal control policies and procedures always will protect us from reckless or negligent acts committed by our employees or agents. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could have a negative impact on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We are subject to funding calls by our protection and indemnity associations, and our associations may not have enough resources to cover claims made against them.

We are indemnified for certain liabilities incurred while operating our vessels through membership in protection and indemnity associations, which are mutual insurance associations whose members contribute to cover losses sustained by other association members. Claims are paid through the aggregate premiums (typically annually) 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. Claims submitted to the association may include those incurred by members of the association, as well as claims submitted to the association from other protection and indemnity associations with which our association has entered into inter-association agreements. We cannot assure you that the associations to which we belong will remain viable.

Developments in safety and environmental requirements relating to the recycling of vessels may result in escalated and unexpected costs.

The 2009 Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships (the “Hong Kong Convention”) aims to ensure ships, being recycled once they reach the end of their operational lives, do not pose any unnecessary risks to the environment, human health, and safety. The Hong Kong Convention has yet to be ratified by the required number of countries to enter into force. Upon the Hong Kong Convention’s entry into force, however, each ship sent for recycling will have to carry an inventory of its hazardous materials. The hazardous materials, whose use or installation is prohibited in certain circumstances, are listed in an appendix to the Hong Kong Convention. Ships will be required to have surveys to verify their inventory of hazardous materials initially, throughout their lives, and prior to the ship being recycled.

On November 20, 2013, the European Parliament and the Council of the EU adopted the Ship Recycling Regulation, which retains the requirements of the Hong Kong Convention and which is currently open for accession by IMO Member States. The Hong Kong Convention will enter into force 24 months after the date on which 15 IMO Member States, representing 40% of world merchant shipping by gross tonnage, have ratified or approved accession. As of March 5, 2018, six countries have ratified the Hong Kong Convention. Upon implementation, certain commercial seagoing vessels flying the flag of an EU Member State may be recycled only in facilities included on the European list of permitted ship recycling facilities.

These regulatory developments, when implemented, may lead to cost escalation by shipyards, repair yards and scrap yards. This may then result in a decrease in the residual scrap value of a vessel, and a vessel could potentially not cover the cost to comply with latest requirements which may have an adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

We may incur additional costs to retrofit ballast water treatment systems in our vessels to comply with new regulations.

Vessels unload ballast water during passage by taking ballast water in one port and unloading it in another. This helps maintain safety and stability. However, the ballast water can contain local organisms and pathogens. When vessels unload ballast water they can then release organisms and pathogens in different parts of the world, which can be invasive to that local ecosystem. To avoid transfers of invasive species in ballast water, the IMO and United States have regulations that require ballast water is treated prior to the discharge.

In order to comply with IMO and U.S. ballast water regulations, we are required to install ballast water treatment plants on all vessels from January 2020 to June 2022. The cost of compliance per vessel for us is estimated to be between $0.2 and $0.6 million, depending on specifications of the vessel. Significant investments in ballast water treatment systems may have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. For more information on these regulations, see “Item 4. Information on the Company – B. Business Overview – Government Regulation; Effect of Existing or Probable Governmental Regulations on the Business; Costs and Effects of Compliance with Environmental Laws.”

Sulfur regulations to reduce air pollution from ships are likely to require retrofitting of vessels and may cause us to incur significant costs.

In October 2016, the IMO set January 1, 2020 as the implementation date for vessels to comply with its low sulfur fuel oil requirement, which cuts sulfur levels from 3.5% to 0.5%. The interpretation of “fuel oil used on board” includes use in main engine, auxiliary engines and boilers. Shipowners may comply with this regulation by (i) using 0.5% sulfur fuels on board, which is likely to be available around the world by 2020 but likely at a higher cost; (ii) installing scrubbers for cleaning of the exhaust gas; or (iii) by retrofitting vessels to be powered by liquefied natural gas (“LNG”), which may not be a viable option due to the lack of supply network and high costs involved in this process. Costs of compliance with these regulatory changes may be significant and may have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. See “Item 4. Information on the Company – B. Business Overview – Government Regulation; Effect of Existing or Probable Governmental Regulations on the Business; Costs and Effects of Compliance with Environmental Laws.”

Climate change and greenhouse gas restrictions may adversely impact our operations and markets.

Due to concern over the risk of climate change, a number of countries and the IMO have adopted, or are considering the adoption of, regulatory frameworks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. These regulatory measures may include, among others, adoption of cap and trade regimes, carbon taxes, increased efficiency standards and incentives or mandates for renewable energy. In addition, although the emissions of greenhouse gases from international shipping currently are not subject to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (the “Paris Agreement”), a new treaty may be adopted in the future that includes restrictions on shipping emissions. Compliance with changes in laws, regulations and obligations relating to climate change could increase our costs related to operating and maintaining our vessels and require us to install new emission controls, acquire allowances or pay taxes related to our greenhouse gas emissions or administer and manage a greenhouse gas emissions program. Revenue generation and strategic growth opportunities may also be adversely affected.

On June 29, 2017, the Global Industry Alliance (“GIA”), was officially inaugurated. The GIA is a program, under the Global Environmental Facility-United Nations Development Program-IMO project, which supports shipping, and related industries, as they move towards a low carbon future. Organizations including, but not limited to, shipowners, operators, classification societies and oil companies, signed to launch the GIA.

Adverse effects upon the oil and gas industry relating to climate change, including growing public concern about the environmental impact of climate change, may also adversely affect demand for our services. For example, increased regulation of greenhouse gases or other concerns relating to climate change may reduce the demand for oil and gas in the future or create greater incentives for use of alternative energy sources. Therefore, any long-term material adverse effect on the oil and gas industry could have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position. Please read “Item 4. Information on the Company – B. Business Overview – Government Regulation; Effect of Existing or Probable Governmental Regulations on the Business; Costs and Effects of Compliance with Environmental Laws.”

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

The charter hire 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, the impact of the stress of operations and stipulations from classification societies. If new product tankers 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 once their initial charters expire and the resale value of our vessels could significantly decrease. As a result, our financial condition and available cash could be adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Business and Operations

We operate in highly competitive international markets.

The product tanker industry is highly fragmented, with many charterers, owners and operators of vessels, and the transportation of refined petroleum products is characterized by intense competition. Competition arises primarily from other tanker owners, including major oil companies as well as independent tanker companies, some of which have substantially greater financial and other resources than we do. Although we believe that no single competitor has a dominant position in the markets in which we compete, the trend towards consolidation in the industry is creating an increasing number of global enterprises capable of competing in multiple markets, which will likely result in greater competition to us. Our competitors may be better positioned to devote greater resources to the development, promotion and employment of their businesses than we are. Competition for charters, including for the transportation of refined petroleum products, is intense and depends on price as well as on vessel location, size, age, condition and acceptability of the vessel and its operator to the charterer and reputation. Competition may increase in some or all of our principal markets, including with the entry of new competitors. We may not be able to compete successfully or effectively with our competitors and our competitive position may be eroded in the future, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Because we intend to charter some of the vessels in our fleet on the spot market or in pools trading in the spot market, we expect to have exposure to the cyclicality and volatility of the spot charter market.

The spot market is highly competitive and volatile, and spot charter rates may fluctuate dramatically based on the competitive factors listed in the preceding risk factor. Significant fluctuations in spot charter rates may result in significant fluctuations in our ability to continuously re-charter our vessels upon the expiration or termination of their current spot charters and in the earnings of our vessels operating on the spot market. Since we charter a number of our vessels on the spot market, and may in the future also admit our vessels in pools trading on the spot market, we have exposure to the cyclicality and volatility of the spot charter market. By focusing the employment of some of the vessels in our fleet on the spot market, we will benefit if conditions in this market strengthen. However, we will also be particularly vulnerable to declining spot charter rates. Future spot charters may continue to be at the rates currently prevailing in the spot market at which we cannot operate our vessels profitably and may fall further. If spot charter rates remain at current levels or decrease further, our earnings will be adversely impacted to the extent we have vessels trading on the spot market.

We may be unable to secure medium- and long-term employment for our vessels at profitable rates.

One of our strategies is to explore and selectively enter into or renew medium- and long-term, fixed rate time and bareboat charters for some of the vessels in our fleet in order to provide us with a base of stable cash flows and to manage charter rate volatility. However, the process for obtaining longer term charters is highly competitive and generally involves a more lengthy and intense screening and vetting process and the submission of competitive bids, compared to shorter term charters. In addition to the quality, age and suitability of the vessel, longer term charters tend to be awarded based upon a variety of other factors relating to the vessel operator, including:

We cannot assure you that we would be successful in winning medium- and long-term employment for our vessels at profitable rates.

A substantial portion of our revenues is derived from a limited number of customers, and the loss of any of these customers could result in a significant loss of revenues and cash flow.

We currently derive substantially all of our revenues from a limited number of customers. In 2017, three customers accounted for approximately 49% of our total revenues. The loss of any significant customer or a decline in the amount of services provided to a significant customer could have an adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

Our ability to obtain new customers will depend upon a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control.

Our ability to obtain new customers will depend upon a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control. These include, among others, our ability to: successfully manage our liquidity and obtain the necessary financing to fund our anticipated growth; attract, hire, train and retain qualified personnel and technical managers to manage and operate our fleet; identify and consummate desirable acquisitions, joint ventures or strategic alliances; and identify and capitalize on opportunities in new markets. ITM may not be approved through the vessel vetting process of certain charterers, thereby limiting our ability to develop new customers.

If we cannot meet our customers’ quality and compliance requirements we may not be able to operate our vessels profitably which could have an adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

Our customers, in particular those in the petroleum products industry, have a high and increasing focus on quality and compliance standards with their suppliers across the entire value chain, including the shipping and transportation segment. Our continuous compliance with these standards and quality requirements is vital for our operations. Related risks could materialize in multiple ways, including a sudden and unexpected breach in quality and/or compliance concerning one or more vessels, or a continuous decrease in the quality concerning one or more vessels occurring over time. Moreover, continuous increasing requirements from petroleum products industry customers can further complicate our ability to meet the standards. Any noncompliance by us, either suddenly or over a period of time, on one or more vessels, or an increase in requirements by petroleum products operators above and beyond what we deliver, may have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

We may not be able to successfully mix our charter durations profitably.

It may be difficult to properly balance time and spot charters and anticipate trends in these markets. If we are successful in employing vessels under medium- and long-term charters, those vessels will not be available for the spot market during an upturn in the product tanker demand cycle, when spot trading may be more profitable. By contrast, at the expiration of our charters, if a charter terminates early for any reason or if we acquire vessels charter-free, we may want to charter or re-charter our vessels under medium- and long-term charters. Should more vessels be available on the spot or short-term market at the time we are seeking to fix new medium- to long-term time charters, we may have difficulty entering into such charters at profitable rates and for any term other than a short-term and, as a result, our cash flow may be subject to instability. A more active short-term or spot market may require us to enter into charters on all our vessels based on fluctuating market rates, as opposed to long-term contracts based on a fixed rate, which could result in a decrease in our cash flow in periods when the charter rates for product tankers are depressed. If we cannot successfully employ our vessels in a profitable mix of medium- and long-term time charters and on the spot market, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

We have become reliant on Maritime, an entity affiliated with our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Valentis, for our short-term working capital financing.

At December 31, 2016, Maritime extended $2.0 million of advances which we used to pay various operating costs, debt service and other obligations. During 2017, such advances had been increased to $5.8 million. On December 29, 2017, we entered into a third amendment to the promissory note we issued in favor of Maritime Investors Corp. (“Maritime Investors”) on October 28, 2015. This amendment (i) increased the outstanding principal balance of the promissory note from $2.5 million to $5.0 million, (ii) extended the maturity date to June 15, 2019, and (iii) increased the fixed rate to 4.00% per annum, payable only in cash. In exchange for entering into this amendment, we reduced the outstanding balance due to Maritime by $2.5 million. In the near-term, we expect Maritime to advance us additional funds for similar purposes. There are no specific repayment terms with respect to these advances, which Maritime controls as our manager. We cannot assure you that in the future we will be able to rely on Maritime for this working capital financing on similar terms, or at all, or on what terms Maritime will request repayment. If our operating cash flows are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity needs, we may have to rely on the sale of assets or additional equity financing to raise adequate funds or restructure our indebtedness, or a combination thereof. An inability to continue this financing in the future from Maritime or the imposition by Maritime of repayment terms that are unfavorable to us may negatively affect our liquidity position and our ability to fund our ongoing operations.

Counterparties, including charterers or technical managers, could fail to meet their obligations to us.

We enter into, among other things, memoranda of agreement, charter parties, ship management agreements and loan agreements with third parties with respect to the purchase and operation of our fleet and our business. Such agreements subject us to counterparty risks. The ability and willingness of each of our counterparties to perform its obligations under these agreements with us depends on a number of factors that are beyond our control and may include, among other things, general economic conditions, the condition of the tanker shipping industry and the overall financial condition of the counterparties. In particular, we face credit risk with our charterers. It is possible that not all of our charterers will provide detailed financial information regarding their operations. As a result, charterer risk is largely assessed on the basis of our charterers’ reputation in the market, and even on that basis, there can be no assurance that they can or will fulfill their obligations under the contracts we enter into with them.

Charterers are sensitive to the commodity markets and may be impacted by market forces affecting commodities. In addition, in depressed market conditions, there have been reports of charterers renegotiating their charters or defaulting on their obligations under charters. Our customers may fail to pay charter hire or attempt to renegotiate charter rates. Should a charterer counterparty fail to honor its obligations under agreements with us, it may be difficult to secure substitute employment for that vessel, and any new charter arrangements we secure on the spot market or on substitute charters may be at lower rates depending on the then existing charter rate levels. The costs and delays associated with the default by a charterer under a charter of a vessel may be considerable. In addition, if the charterer of a vessel in our fleet that is used as collateral under our loan agreements defaults on its charter obligations to us, such default may constitute an event of default under our loan agreements, which may allow the banks to exercise remedies under our loan agreements.

As a result of these risks, we could sustain significant losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We depend on ITM and Maritime to operate our business and our business could be harmed if they fail to perform their services satisfactorily.

Pursuant to our management agreements, ITM provides us with day-to-day technical management services (including crewing, maintenance, repair, dry-dockings and maintaining required vetting approvals) and Maritime provides us with ship management and administrative services for our vessels. Our operational success depends significantly upon ITM and Maritime’s satisfactory performance of these services. Our business would be harmed if ITM or Maritime failed to perform these services satisfactorily. In addition, if our management agreements with either ITM or Maritime were to be terminated or if their terms were to be altered, our business could be adversely affected, as we may not be able to immediately replace such services, and even if replacement services were immediately available, the terms offered could be less favorable than those under our management agreements. A change of technical manager may require approval by certain customers of ours for employment of a vessel.

Our ability to compete for and enter into new period time and spot charters and to expand our relationships with our existing charterers will depend largely on our relationship with ITM and Maritime, and their respective reputation and relationships in the shipping industry. If ITM or Maritime suffers material damage to its reputation or relationships, it may harm our ability to:

If our ability to do any of the things described above is impaired, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may fail to successfully control our operating and voyage expenses.

Our operating results are dependent on our ability to successfully control our operating and voyage expenses. Under our ship management agreements with ITM we are required to pay for vessel operating expenses (which includes crewing, repairs and maintenance, insurance, stores, lube oils and communication expenses), and, for spot charters, voyage expenses (which include bunker expenses, port fees, cargo loading and unloading expenses, canal tolls, agency fees and conversions). These expenses depend upon a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our or the technical manager’s control, including unexpected increases in costs for crews, insurance or spare parts for our vessels, unexpected dry-dock repairs, mechanical failures or human error (including revenue lost in off-hire days), vessel age, arrest action against our vessels due to failure to pay debts, disputes with creditors or claims by third parties, labor strikes, severe weather conditions, any quarantines of our vessels and uncertainties in the world oil markets. Some of these costs, primarily relating to voyage expenses, have been increasing and may increase, possibly significantly, in the future. Repair costs are unpredictable and can be substantial, some of which may not be covered by insurance. If our vessels are subject to unexpected or unscheduled off-hire time, it could adversely affect our cash flow and may expose us to claims for liquidated damages if the vessel is chartered at the time of the unscheduled off-hire period. The cost of dry-docking repairs, additional off-hire time, an increase in our operating expenses and/or the obligation to pay any liquidated damages could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In addition, to the extent our vessels are employed under spot charters in the future, our expenses may be impacted by increases in bunker costs and by canal costs, including the cost of canal-related delays incurred by employment of the vessels on certain routes. Unlike time charters in which the charterer bears all bunker and canal costs, in spot charters we bear these costs. Because it is not possible to predict the future price of bunker or canal-related costs when fixing spot charters, a significant rise in these costs could have an adverse impact on the costs associated with any spot charters we enter into and our earnings. Additionally, an increase in the price of bunkers beyond our expectations may adversely affect our profitability at the time we negotiate time or bareboat charters, and low-sulfur bunker rules may result in a significant increase in vessel bunker costs starting in 2020.

We will be required to make substantial capital expenditures, for which we may be dependent on additional financing, to maintain the vessels we own or to acquire other vessels.

We must make substantial capital expenditures to maintain, over the long-term, the operating capacity of our fleet. Our business strategy is also based in part upon the expansion of our fleet through the purchase of additional vessels. Maintenance capital expenditures include dry-docking expenses, modification of existing vessels or acquisitions of new vessels to the extent these expenditures are incurred to maintain the operating capacity of our fleet. In addition, we expect to incur significant maintenance costs for our current and any newly-acquired vessels. A newbuilding vessel must be dry-docked within five years of its delivery from a shipyard, and vessels are typically dry-docked every 30 to 60 months thereafter depending on the vessel, not including any unexpected repairs. We estimate the cost to dry-dock a vessel is between $0.2 and $0.9 million (including estimated expenditures for upgrades to comply with new ballast water treatment system regulations), depending on the size and condition of the vessel and the location of dry-docking. In addition, capital maintenance expenditures could increase as a result of changes in the cost of labor and materials, customer requirements, increases in the size of our fleet, governmental regulations and maritime self-regulatory organization standards relating to safety, security or the environment and competitive standards.

To purchase additional vessels from time to time, we may be required to incur additional borrowings or raise capital through the sale of debt or additional equity securities. Asset impairments, financial stress, enforcement actions and credit rating pressures experienced in recent years by financial institutions to extend credit to the shipping industry due to depressed shipping rates and the deterioration of asset values that have led to losses in many banks’ shipping portfolios, as well as changes in overall banking regulations, have severely constrained the availability of credit for shipping companies like us. For example, following heavy losses in its shipping portfolio, and at the EU Commission’s behest, one of our lenders, HSH Nordbank AG (“HSH”), was privatized on February 28, 2018.

In addition, our ability to obtain bank financing or to access the capital markets for future offerings may be limited by the terms of our existing credit agreements, our financial condition, the actual or perceived credit quality of our customers, and any defaults by them, as well as by adverse market conditions resulting from, among other things, general economic conditions and contingencies and uncertainties that are beyond our control.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain such additional financing in the future on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. Our failure to obtain funds for capital expenditures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, our actual operating and maintenance capital expenditures will vary significantly from quarter to quarter based on, among other things, the number of vessels dry-docked during that quarter. Even if we are successful in obtaining the necessary funds for capital expenditures, the terms of such financings could limit our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders. Incurring additional debt may significantly increase our interest expense and financial leverage, and issuing additional equity securities may result in significant dilution.

Any vessel modification projects we undertake could have significant cost overruns, delays or fail to achieve the intended results.

Market volatility and higher bunker prices, coupled with increased regulation and concern about the environmental impact of the international shipping industry, have led to an increased focus on bunker efficiency. Many shipbuilders have implemented vessel modification programs for their existing ships in an attempt to capture potential efficiency gains. We will consider making modifications to our fleet in instances when we believe the efficiency gains will result in a positive return for our stockholders. However, these types of projects are subject to risks of delay and cost overruns, resulting from shortages of equipment, unforeseen engineering problems, work stoppages, unanticipated cost increases, inability to obtain necessary certifications and approvals, shortages of materials or skilled labor, among other problems. In addition, any completed modification may not achieve the full expected benefits or could even compromise the fleet’s ability to operate at higher speeds, which is an important factor in generating additional revenue in an improving freight rate environment. The failure to successfully complete any modification project we undertake or any significant cost overruns or delays in any retrofitting projects could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may not be able to implement our business strategy successfully or manage our growth effectively.

Our future growth will depend on the successful implementation of our business strategy. A principal focus of our business strategy is to grow by expanding the size of our fleet while capitalizing on a mix of charter types, including on the spot market. Our future growth will depend upon a number of factors, some of which are not within our control. These factors include, among others, our ability to:

In addition, unlike newbuildings, secondhand vessels typically provide very limited or no warranties with respect to the condition of the vessel. While we expect we would inspect secondhand vessels prior to purchase, this does not provide us with the same knowledge about their condition that we would have had if these vessels had been built for, and operated exclusively by, us. Generally, we do not receive the benefit of warranties from the builders of the secondhand vessels that we acquire.

We also seek to take advantage of changing market conditions, which may include taking advantage of pooling arrangements or profit sharing components of the charters we may enter into. In addition, our future growth will depend upon our ability to: maintain or develop new and existing customer relationships; employ vessels consistent with our chartering strategy; successfully manage our liquidity and expenses; and identify and capitalize on opportunities in new markets. Changing market and regulatory conditions may require or result in the sale or other disposition of vessels we are not able to charter because of customer preferences or because they are not or will not be compliant with existing or future rules, regulations and conventions. Additional vessels of the age and quality we desire may not be available for purchase at prices we are prepared to pay or at delivery times acceptable to us, and we may not be able to dispose of vessels at reasonable prices, if at all.

However, even if we successfully implement our business strategy, we may not improve our net revenues or operating results. Furthermore, we may decide to alter or discontinue aspects of our business strategy and may adopt alternative or additional strategies in response to business or competitive factors or factors or events beyond our control. Our failure to execute our business strategy or to manage our growth effectively could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

If we purchase and operate secondhand vessels, we will be exposed to increased operating costs which could adversely affect our earnings and, as our fleet ages, the risks associated with older vessels could adversely affect our ability to obtain profitable charters.

In general, the costs to maintain a vessel in good operating condition increase with the age of the vessel. Older vessels are typically less fuel-efficient than more recently constructed vessels due to improvements in engine technology. Cargo insurance rates 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 the 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.

In addition, 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 date of initial delivery from the shipyard. 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 will be materially adversely affected. Any reserves set aside for vessel replacement may not be available for other cash needs or dividends.

New vessels may experience initial operational difficulties and unexpected incremental start-up costs.

New vessels, during their initial period of operation, have the possibility of encountering structural, mechanical and electrical problems as well as unexpected incremental start-up costs. Typically, the purchaser of a newbuilding will receive the benefit of a warranty from the shipyard for newbuildings, but we cannot assure you that any warranty we obtain will be able to resolve any problem with the vessel without additional costs to us and off-hire periods for the vessel. Upon delivery of a newbuild vessel from a shipyard, we may incur operating expenses above the incremental start-up costs typically associated with such a delivery and such expenses may include, among others, additional crew training, consumables and spares.

Delays in deliveries of additional vessels, our decision to cancel an order for purchase of a vessel, or our inability to otherwise complete the acquisitions of additional vessels for our fleet, could harm our operating results.

We expect to purchase additional vessels from time to time. The delivery of these vessels, or vessels on order, could be delayed, not completed or cancelled, which would delay or eliminate our expected receipt of revenues from the employment of these vessels. The seller could fail to deliver these vessels to us as agreed, or we could cancel a purchase contract because the seller has not met its obligations. The delivery of vessels we propose to order or that are on order could be delayed because of, among other things:

If the delivery of any vessel is materially delayed or cancelled, especially if we have committed the vessel to a charter under which we become responsible for substantial liquidated damages to the customer as a result of the delay or cancellation, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Declines in charter rates and other market deterioration could cause us to incur impairment charges.

We evaluate the carrying amounts of our vessels to determine if events have occurred that would require an impairment of their carrying amounts. The recoverable amount of vessels is reviewed based on events and changes in circumstances that would indicate that the carrying amount of the assets might not be recovered. The review for potential impairment indicators and projection of future cash flows related to the vessels is complex and requires our management to make various estimates including future charter rates, operating expenses and dry-dock costs. All of these items have been historically volatile. We reviewed, as of December 31, 2016, the carrying amount in connection with the estimated recoverable amount for each of our vessels. This review indicated that such carrying amount was not fully recoverable for the Northsea Alpha and the Northsea Beta . Consequently, we wrote down the carrying value of these vessels and recorded a total vessel impairment charge of $4.0 million. We performed an impairment test as of December 31, 2017, and the analysis indicated that no further adjustment to our vessels’ carrying values was required.

Our charterers may terminate charters early or choose not to re-charter with us, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our charters may terminate earlier than the dates indicated in the charter party agreements. The terms of our charters vary as to which events or occurrences will cause a charter to terminate or give the charterer the option to terminate the charter, but these generally include a total or constructive loss of the relevant vessel, the requisition for hire of the relevant vessel, the dry-docking of the relevant vessel for a certain period of time or the failure of the relevant vessel to meet specified performance criteria. An early termination of our charters may adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We cannot predict whether any of our charterers will, upon the expiration of their charters, re-charter our vessels on favorable terms or at all. If our charterers decide not to re-charter our vessels, we may not be able to re-charter them on terms similar to our current charters or at all. Also, we may incur additional costs depending on where the vessel is re-delivered to us. We may also employ our vessels on the spot-charter market, which is subject to greater rate fluctuation than the time charter market. If we receive lower charter rates under replacement charters or are unable to re-charter all of our vessels, our available cash may be significantly reduced or eliminated.

We are dependent on the services of our founder and Chief Executive Officer and other members of our senior management team.

We are dependent upon our Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Valentios (“Eddie”) Valentis, and the other members of our senior management team for the principal decisions with respect to our business activities. The loss or unavailability of the services of any of these key members of our management team for any significant period of time, or the inability of these individuals to manage or delegate their responsibilities successfully as our business grows, could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. If the individuals were no longer to be affiliated with us, we may be unable to recruit other employees with equivalent talent and experience, and our business and financial condition may suffer as a result. We do not maintain “key man” life insurance for our Chief Executive Officer or other members of our senior management team.

Our founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer has affiliations with Maritime, which may create conflicts of interest.

Mr. Valentis, our founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, also owns and controls Maritime. His responsibilities and relationships with Maritime could create conflicts of interest between us, on the one hand, and Maritime, on the other hand. These conflicts may arise in connection with the chartering, purchase, sale and operations of the vessels in our fleet versus vessels managed by other companies affiliated with Maritime. Maritime entered into a Head Management Agreement (as defined herein) with us and into separate ship management agreements with our subsidiaries. The negotiation of these management arrangements may have resulted in certain terms that may not reflect market standard terms or may include terms that could not have been obtained from arms-length negotiations with unaffiliated third parties for similar services.

In addition, Maritime may give preferential treatment to vessels that are time chartered-in by related parties because our founder, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and members of his family may receive greater economic benefits. In particular, as of December 31, 2017, Maritime provided commercial management services to one tanker vessel, other than the vessels in our fleet, that was owned or operated by one or more entities affiliated with Mr. Valentis. Such conflicts may have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Several of our senior executive officers do not, and certain of our officers in the future may not, devote all of their time to our business, which may hinder our ability to operate successfully.

Mr. Valentis, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Lytras, our Chief Operating Officer, Mr. Williams, our Chief Financial Officer, and Mr. Backos, our General Counsel, Senior Vice President and Secretary, participate, and other of our senior officers which we may appoint in the future may also participate, in business activities not associated with us. As a result, they may devote less time to us than if they were not engaged in other business activities and may owe fiduciary duties to our stockholders as well as stockholders of other companies with which they may be affiliated. This may create conflicts of interest in matters involving or affecting us and our customers and it is not certain that any of these conflicts of interest will be resolved in our favor. This could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We have a limited operating history which may make it difficult for investors to evaluate our prospects for success.

We were incorporated under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands on March 23, 2015. We own the vessels in our fleet through six separate wholly-owned subsidiaries that are incorporated in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. We acquired the vessel-owning subsidiaries from affiliates of our founder and Chief Executive Officer in advance of the closing of the transactions contemplated by the agreement and plan of merger dated as of April 23, 2015, as amended (the “Agreement and Plan of Merger”) by and among Maritime Technologies Corp., LookSmart Ltd. (“LookSmart”), LookSmart Group, Inc. (“LSG”) and us (the “LookSmart Agreement”), which occurred on October 28, 2015. We have a limited operating history as a consolidated company and this lack of consolidated operating history may make it difficult for investors to evaluate our prospects for success. There is no assurance that we will be successful and the likelihood of success must be considered in light of the relatively early stage of our consolidated operations.

As we expand our business, both we and Maritime may need to improve our operating and financial systems and Maritime will need to recruit and retain suitable employees and crew for our vessels.

Our and Maritime’s current operating and financial systems may not be adequate as the size of our fleet expands, and attempts to improve those systems may be ineffective. In addition, as we expand our fleet, Maritime may need to recruit and retain suitable additional seafarers and shore based administrative and management personnel. We cannot guarantee that Maritime will be able to continue to hire suitable employees as we expand our fleet. If we or Maritime encounter business or financial difficulties, we may not be able to adequately staff our vessels. If we are unable to accomplish the above, our financial reporting performance may be adversely affected and, among other things, it may not be compliant with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) rules.

Our insurance may be insufficient to cover losses that may result from our operations.

Although we carry hull and machinery, protection and indemnity and war risk insurance on each of the vessels in our fleet, we face several risks regarding that insurance. The insurance is subject to deductibles, limits and exclusions. Since it is possible that a large number of claims may be brought, the aggregate amount of these deductibles could be material. As a result, there may be other risks against which we are not insured, and certain claims may not be paid. We do not carry insurance covering the loss of revenues resulting from vessel off-hire time based on our analysis of the cost of this coverage compared to our off-hire experience.

Certain of our insurance coverage, such as tort liability (including pollution-related liability), is maintained through mutual protection and indemnity associations, and as a member of such associations we may be required to make additional payments over and above budgeted premiums if member claims exceed association reserves. Claims submitted to the association may include those incurred by members of the association, as well as claims submitted to the association from other protection and indemnity associations with which our association has entered into inter-association agreements. We cannot assure you that the associations to which we belong will remain viable. If such associations do not remain viable or are unable to cover our losses, we may have to pay what our insurance does not cover in full.

We may be unable to procure adequate insurance coverage at commercially reasonable rates in the future. For example, more stringent environmental regulations have led in the past to increased costs for, and in the future may result in the lack of availability of, insurance against risks of environmental damage or pollution. Changes in the insurance markets attributable to terrorist attacks may also make certain types of insurance more difficult for us to obtain. We maintain for each of the vessels in our existing fleet pollution liability coverage insurance in the amount of $1.0 billion per incident. A catastrophic oil spill or marine disaster could exceed such insurance coverage. In addition, our insurance may be voidable by the insurers as a result of certain of our actions, such as our vessels failing to maintain certification with applicable maritime self-regulatory organizations. The circumstances of a spill, including non-compliance with environmental laws, could also result in the denial of coverage, protracted litigation and delayed or diminished insurance recoveries or settlements. The insurance that may be available to us may be significantly more expensive than our existing coverage. Furthermore, even if insurance coverage is adequate, we may not be able to obtain a timely replacement vessel in the event of a loss. Any of these circumstances or events could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

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, from time to time, involved in various litigation matters. These matters may include, among other things, contract disputes, environmental claims or proceedings, employment and personal injury matters, 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 or insurers may not remain solvent, which may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

We and our subsidiaries may be subject to group liability for damages or debts owed by one of our subsidiaries or by us.

Although each of our vessels is and will be separately owned by individual subsidiaries, under certain circumstances, a parent company and its ship-owning subsidiaries can be held liable under corporate veil piercing principles for damages or debts owed by one of the subsidiaries or the parent. Therefore, it is possible that all of our assets and those of our subsidiaries could be subject to execution upon a judgment against us or any of our subsidiaries.

Maritime and ITM are privately held companies and there is little or no publicly available information about them.

The ability of Maritime and ITM to render their respective management services will depend in part on their own financial strength. Circumstances beyond each such company’s control could impair its financial strength. Because each of these companies is privately held, information about each company’s financial strength is not available. As a result, we and an investor in our securities might have little advance warning of financial or other problems affecting either Maritime or ITM even though its financial or other problems could have a material adverse effect on us and our stockholders.

Our vessels may operate in pooling arrangements in the future, which may or may not be beneficial compared to chartering our vessels outside of a pool.

In a pooling arrangement, the net revenues generated by all of the vessels in a pool are aggregated and distributed to pool members pursuant to a pre-arranged weighting system that recognizes each vessel’s earnings capacity based on factors, which may include its cargo capacity, speed and bunker consumption, and actual on-hire performance. Pooling arrangements are intended to maximize vessel utilization. However, pooling arrangements are dependent on the spot charter market, in which rates fluctuate. We cannot assure you that entering any of our vessels into a pool will be beneficial to us compared to chartering our vessels outside of a pool. If we participate in, or for any reason our vessels cease to participate in a pooling arrangement, their utilization rates could fall and the amount of additional hire paid could decrease, either of which could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. We also cannot assure you that if we join a pooling arrangement that we will continue to use the pooling arrangement or whether the pools our vessels could participate in will continue to exist in the future.

Exchange rate fluctuations could adversely affect our revenues, financial condition and operating results.

We generate a substantial part of our revenues in U.S. dollars, but incur costs in other currencies. The difference in currencies could in the future lead to fluctuations in our net income due to changes in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to other currencies. We have not hedged our exposure to exchange rate fluctuations, and as a result, our U.S. dollar denominated results of operations and financial condition could suffer as exchange rates fluctuate.

We must protect the safety and condition of the cargoes transported on our vessels and any failure to do so may subject us to claims for loss or damage.

Under our time and spot charters, we are responsible for the safekeeping of cargo entrusted to us and must properly maintain and control equipment and other apparatus to ensure that cargo is not lost or damaged in transit. Claims and any liability for loss or damage to cargo that is not covered by insurance could harm our reputation and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Increase in frequency of immigrant salvage operations in the Mediterranean could adversely affect our business.

In 2017, the majority of the Northsea Alpha’s and the Northsea Beta’s trading routes occurred in the Mediterranean Sea. In recent years, the number of immigrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean from North Africa to Europe in unseaworthy vessels has increased significantly. Many of the vessels are in such a poor condition that they either capsize and sink, incur engine problems or are otherwise incapacitated en route to Europe. As a result, commercial ships may, if witnessing an immigrant vessel in distress, deviate from the task and course and conduct a salvage operation. Such salvage operation may prove costly in terms of time and resources spent and can thus prove a substantial cost for the commercial vessel and may pose risks to the safety of the crew, vessel and cargo. If we are not able to mitigate this potential exposure, and dependent on the number of such salvage operations which must be carried out in the future, this could have a material adverse effect on our future performance, results of operations, cash flows and financial position.

We may face labor interruptions.

A majority of the crew members on the vessels in our fleet that are under time or spot charters are employed under collective bargaining agreements. ITM is a party to some of these collective bargaining agreements. These collective bargaining agreements and any employment arrangements with crew members on the vessels in our fleet may not prevent labor interruptions and are subject to renegotiation in the future. Any labor interruptions, including due to failure to successfully renegotiate collective bargaining employment agreements with the crew members on the vessels in our fleet, could disrupt our operations and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We do not currently enter into hedging arrangements with respect to the cost of fuel.

We have not entered into hedging arrangements to establish, in advance, a price for the cost of fuel. As a result, although we may realize the benefit of any short-term decrease in the price of fuel, we will not be protected against increases in the price of fuel, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operation.

In addition, to the extent we decide to enter into hedging arrangements in the future, the success of any hedging arrangement generally depends on the degree of correlation between price movements of a derivative instrument and the position being hedged, the creditworthiness of the counterparty, the costs of the hedging transaction and other factors. While such transactions may reduce the risks of losses with respect to adverse movements in market factors, the transaction may also limit the opportunity for gain. In addition, these arrangements may require the posting of cash or other collateral at a time when we have insufficient cash or illiquid assets such that the posting of the cash is either impossible or requires the sale of assets at prices that do not reflect their underlying value. Moreover, these hedging arrangements may generate significant transactions costs, including potential tax costs and legal fees, which reduce the anticipated returns on an investment. There can be no assurance that any future hedging transaction we enter will successfully hedge the risks associated with hedged positions or that it will not result in poorer overall investment performance than if it had not been executed.

A cyber-attack could materially disrupt our business.

We and our ship managers rely on information technology systems and networks in our and their operations and business administration. Our or any of our ship managers’ operations and business administration could be targeted by individuals or groups seeking to sabotage or disrupt such systems and networks, or to steal data. A successful cyber-attack could materially disrupt our or our managers’ operations, which could also adversely affect the safety of our operations or result in the unauthorized release or alteration of information in our or our managers’ systems. Such an attack on us, or our managers, could result in significant expenses to investigate and repair security breaches or system damages and could lead to litigation, fines, other remedial action, heightened regulatory scrutiny, diminished customer confidence and damage to our reputation. We do not maintain cyber-liability insurance at this time to cover such losses. As a result, a cyber-attack or other breach of any such information technology systems could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Risks Related to our Indebtedness

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash flow to meet our debt service and other obligations.

Our ability to make scheduled payments on our outstanding indebtedness and other obligations will depend on our ability to generate cash from operations in the future. Our future financial and operating performance will be affected by a range of economic, financial, competitive, regulatory, business and other factors that we cannot control, such as general economic and financial conditions in the tanker sector or the economy generally. In particular, our ability to generate steady cash flow will depend on our ability to secure charters at acceptable rates. Our ability to renew our existing charters or obtain new charters at acceptable rates or at all will depend on the prevailing economic and competitive conditions.

Amounts borrowed under our loan agreements bear interest at variable rates. Increases in prevailing interest rates could increase the amounts that we would have to pay to our lenders, even though the outstanding principal amount remains the same, and our net income and cash flows would decrease.

In addition, our existing loan agreements require us to maintain various cash balances, our financial and operating performance is also dependent on our subsidiaries’ ability to make distributions to us, whether in the form of dividends, loans or otherwise. The timing and amount of such distributions will depend on restrictions on our various debt instruments, our earnings, financial condition, cash requirements and availability, fleet renewal and expansion, the provisions of Marshall Islands law affecting the payment of dividends and other factors.

At any time that our operating cash flows are insufficient to service our debt and other liquidity needs, we may be forced to take actions such as increasing our accounts payable and/or our amounts due to related parties, reducing or delaying capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring or refinancing our indebtedness, seeking additional capital, seeking bankruptcy protection or any combination of the foregoing. For example, at December 31, 2016, our accounts payable were $3.1 million and our amount due to related parties was $2.0 million, which represented increases of $2.0 and $1.8 million, respectively, since December 31, 2015. At December 31, 2017, our accounts payable declined to $2.3 million, while our amount due to related parties increased to $2.1 million, after being reduced by $2.5 million following the third amendment to our promissory note with Maritime Investors that we entered into on December 29, 2017, as discussed above. We cannot assure you that any of the actions listed above could be effected on satisfactory terms, if at all, or that they would yield sufficient funds to make required payments on our outstanding indebtedness and to fund our other liquidity needs. As of December 31, 2017, our total bank debt outstanding, net of deferred financing costs, aggregated $66.4 million. Also, the terms of existing or future debt agreements may restrict us from pursuing any of these actions as, among other things, if we are unable to meet our debt obligations or if some other default occurs under our loan agreements, the lenders could elect to declare that debt, together with accrued interest and fees, to be immediately due and payable and foreclose against the collateral vessels securing that debt. Any such action could also result in an impairment of cash flows and our ability to service debt in the future. Further, our debt level could make us more vulnerable than our competitors with less debt to competitive pressures or a downturn in our business or the economy generally.

The market values of our vessels may decrease, which could cause, as in the past, us to breach covenants in our loan agreements.

The fair market values of product tankers have generally experienced high volatility. You should expect the market value of our vessels to fluctuate. Values for ships can fluctuate substantially over time due to a number of factors, including, among others:

If the market value of our fleet declines further, we may not be able to incur debt at all or on terms that are acceptable to us. An additional decrease in these values could cause us to breach certain covenants that are contained in our loan agreements and in future financing agreements.

If we breach covenants in our loan agreements or future financing agreements and are unable to cure the breach, our lenders could accelerate our debt repayment and foreclose on vessels in our fleet. In addition, as vessels grow older, they generally decline in value. 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 and financial condition could be adversely affected. During 2017, the market value of our fleet was less than its book value. Accordingly, we will incur losses on disposition if we sell vessels below their depreciated book value.

Restrictive covenants in our current and future loan agreements may impose financial and other restrictions on us.

The restrictions and covenants in our current and future loan agreements could adversely affect our ability to finance future operations or capital needs or to pursue and expand our business activities. Our current loan agreements contain, and future financing agreements will likely contain, restrictive covenants that prohibit us or our subsidiaries from, among other things:

In addition, failure to re-domicile three of our vessel-owning subsidiaries to the Republic of Malta by May 1, 2018, as required under one of our loan agreements that we entered into in February 2018, will result in an event of default under such loan agreement. For more information, see “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects – B. Liquidity and Capital Resources – Indebtedness.”

As a result of the above, we may need to seek permission from our lenders in order to engage in some corporate actions. The lenders’ interests may be different from ours and we may not be able to obtain our lenders’ permission when needed. This may limit our ability to pay dividends, finance our future operations or capital requirements, make acquisitions or pursue business opportunities.

Our ability to comply with covenants and restrictions contained in our current and future loan agreements may also be affected by events beyond our control, including prevailing economic, financial and industry conditions. If our cash flow is insufficient to service our current and future indebtedness and to meet our other obligations and commitments, we will be required to adopt one or more alternatives, such as reducing or delaying our business activities, acquisitions, investments, capital expenditures, the payment of dividends or the implementation of our other strategies, refinancing or restructuring our debt obligations, selling vessels or other assets, seeking to raise additional debt or equity capital or seeking bankruptcy protection. However, we may not be able to effect any of these remedies or alternatives on a timely basis, on satisfactory terms or at all, which could lead to events of default under these loan agreements, giving the lenders foreclosure rights on our 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 materially affect our ability to obtain the additional capital resources that we will require to purchase additional vessels or may significantly increase our costs of obtaining such capital. Our inability to obtain additional financing at all, or our ability to do so only at a higher than anticipated cost, may materially affect our results of operations and our ability to implement our business strategy.

If LIBOR is volatile, it could affect our profitability, earnings and cash flow.

LIBOR has been volatile in the past, with the spread between LIBOR and the prime lending rate widening significantly at times. Because the interest rates borne by most of our outstanding indebtedness fluctuates with changes in LIBOR, significant changes in LIBOR would have a material effect on the amount of interest payable on our debt, which in turn, could have an adverse effect on our financial condition. In order to hedge our variable interest rate exposure, on January 19, 2018, Seventhone entered into an interest rate cap agreement with its lender for a notional amount of $10.0 million and a cap rate of 3.5%. The interest rate cap will terminate on July 18, 2022.

Risks Related to Being a Public, Emerging Growth Company

We are an “emerging growth company,” and we cannot be certain if the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies make our securities less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”). We expect to remain an “emerging growth company” until December 31, 2020. As an emerging growth company, we are not required to comply with, among other things, the auditor attestation requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Further, the JOBS Act exempts emerging growth companies from being required to comply with new or revised financial accounting standards until private companies are required to comply with the new or revised financial accounting standards. The JOBS Act provides that a company can elect to opt-out of the extended transition period and comply with the requirements that apply to non-emerging growth companies but any such an election to opt-out is irrevocable. We have elected not to opt-out of such extended transition period, which means that when a standard is issued or revised and it has different application dates for public or private companies, we, as an emerging growth company, will not adopt the new or revised standard until the time private companies are required to adopt the new or revised standard. This may make comparison of our financial statements with other public companies difficult or impossible because of the potential differences in accountant standards used. Investors may find our securities less attractive because we rely on these provisions. If investors find our securities less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our securities and prices of the securities may be more volatile.

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, stockholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our securities.

Effective internal controls over financial reporting are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and, together with adequate disclosure controls and procedures, are designed to prevent fraud. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation, could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that may require prospective or retroactive changes in our financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. In addition, for as long as we are an “emerging growth company,” our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. An independent assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls could detect problems that our management’s assessment might not. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls could lead to restatements of our financial statements and require us to incur the expense of remediation. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our securities.

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) inspection of our independent accounting firm could lead to findings in our auditors’ reports and challenge the accuracy of our published audited consolidated financial statements.

Auditors of U.S. public companies are required by law to undergo periodic PCAOB inspections that assess their compliance with U.S. law and professional standards in connection with performance of audits of financial statements filed with the SEC. These PCAOB inspections could result in findings in our auditors’ quality control procedures, question the validity of the auditor’s reports on our published consolidated financial statements and cast doubt upon the accuracy of our published audited financial statements.

Risks Related to our Common Stock

An investment in our common stock is speculative and there can be no assurance of any return on any such investment.

An investment in our common stock is highly speculative, and there is no assurance that investors will obtain any return on their investment. Investors will be subject to substantial risks involved in their investment, including the risk of losing their entire investment.

The price of our Common Stock may be volatile.

Our shares of common stock have been listed on the NASDAQ since November 2, 2015. We cannot assure you that the public market for our common stock will be active and liquid. The price of shares of our common stock may fluctuate due to a variety of factors, some of which are beyond our control, including:

These market and industry factors may materially reduce the market price of shares of our common stock, regardless of our operating performance. The seaborne transportation industry has been highly unpredictable and volatile. The market for shares of our common stock may be equally volatile, and has been particularly volatile during the period from November 2017 through January 2018. Consequently, you may not be able to sell shares of our common stock at prices equal to or greater than those paid by you in any previous or future offerings.

We may issue additional shares of our common stock or other equity securities without stockholder approval, which would dilute your ownership interests and may depress the market price of our common stock.

We may issue additional shares of our common stock or other equity securities of equal or senior rank in the future in connection with, among other things, future vessel acquisitions, repayment of outstanding indebtedness or our equity incentive plan, without stockholder approval, in a number of circumstances. Our issuance of additional common stock or other equity securities of equal or senior rank would have the following effects:

Future sales of shares of our common stock by existing stockholders or issuance of shares of our common stock pursuant to the exercise by former holders of LookSmart’s common stock of their right to receive additional shares of our common stock could negatively impact our ability to sell equity in the future and cause the market price of shares of our common stock to decline.

The market price for shares of our common stock could decline as a result of sales by existing stockholders of large numbers of shares of our common stock, including Maritime Investors (the parent of Pyxis Holdings Inc.) and the selling stockholders named herein, or as a result of the perception that such sales may occur. In addition, in accordance with the terms of the LookSmart Agreement, former holders of LookSmart’s common stock (the “Legacy LookSmart Stockholders”) are entitled to receive the value of any difference between $4.30 (the “Consideration Value”) and the price of our shares in a future offering of common stock of at least $5 million completed prior to April 29, 2018 (the “Make-Whole Right”). During November and December 2017, our share’s trade activity increased notably. Its price reached a high of $12.22, or about 184% higher than the Consideration Value. We estimate that most of the shares that were originally issued to Legacy LookSmart Stockholders have been sold. Nonetheless, the actual number of original shares currently held by Legacy LookSmart Stockholders cannot be accurately assessed. Please read “Item 4. Information on the Company – The LookSmart Agreement and Make-Whole Right” for information concerning the Make-Whole Right. The ability of Legacy LookSmart Stockholders to obtain additional shares of our common stock and any future sales of shares of our common stock by these and other stockholders might make it more difficult to us to sell equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and at the prices that we deem appropriate.

We are incorporated in the Marshall Islands, which does not have a well-developed body of corporate or bankruptcy law and, as a result, stockholders may have fewer rights and protections under Marshall Islands law than under a U.S. jurisdiction.

Our corporate affairs are governed by our Articles of Incorporation, Bylaws and 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 laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands are not as clearly established as the rights and fiduciary responsibilities of directors under statutes or judicial precedent in existence in certain U.S. jurisdictions. Stockholder rights may differ as well. While the BCA does specifically incorporate the non-statutory law, or judicial case law, of the State of Delaware and other states with substantially similar legislative provisions, our public stockholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests in the face of actions by management, directors or significant stockholders than would stockholders of a corporation incorporated in a U.S. jurisdiction. Additionally, the Republic of the Marshall Islands does not have a legal provision for bankruptcy or a general statutory mechanism for insolvency proceedings. As such, in the event of a future insolvency or bankruptcy, our stockholders and creditors may experience delays in their ability to recover their claims after any such insolvency or bankruptcy. Further, 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.

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 the equity interests in our subsidiaries. Our subsidiaries own all of our existing vessels, and subsidiaries we form in the future will own any other vessels we may acquire in the future. All payments under our charters will be made to our subsidiaries. As a result, our ability to meet our financial and other obligations, and to pay dividends in the future, will depend on the performance of our subsidiaries and their ability to distribute funds to us. The ability of a subsidiary to make these distributions could be affected by a claim or other action by a third party, including a creditor, by the terms of our loan agreements, any financing agreement we may enter into in the future, or by Marshall Islands law, which regulates the payment of dividends by our companies. The applicable loan agreement entered into by our subsidiaries, Sixthone and Seventhone, prohibits such subsidiaries from paying any dividends to us unless the ratio of the total liabilities and the market value adjusted total assets (total assets adjusted to reflect the market value of all our vessels) of us and our subsidiaries as a group is 65% or less. As of December 31, 2016, the ratio of total liabilities over the market value of our adjusted total assets was 68%, or 3% higher than the required threshold. As of December 31, 2017, the requirement was met as such ratio was marginally lower than 65%. If we, Sixthone or Seventhone do not satisfy this requirement or if we or a subsidiary breach a covenant in our loan agreements or any financing agreement we may enter into in the future, such subsidiary may be restricted from paying dividends. If we are unable to obtain funds from our subsidiaries, we will not be able to fund our liquidity needs or pay dividends in the future unless we obtain funds from other sources, which we may not be able to do.

It may be difficult to serve process on or enforce a U.S. judgment against us, our officers and our directors because we are not a U.S. corporation.

We are a Marshall Islands corporation, a substantial portion of our assets are located outside of the United States and many of our directors and executive officers are not residents of the United States. As a result, you may have difficulty serving legal process within the United States upon us. You may also have difficulty enforcing, both in and outside the United States, judgments you may obtain in U.S. courts against us in any action, including actions based upon the civil liability provisions of U.S. federal or state securities laws. Furthermore, there is substantial doubt that the courts of the Marshall Islands or of the non-U.S. jurisdictions in which our offices are located would enter judgments in original actions brought in those courts predicated on U.S. federal or state securities laws. As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for you to bring an original action against us or against individuals in a Marshall Islands court in the event that you believe that your rights have been infringed under the U.S. federal securities laws or otherwise because the Marshall Islands courts would not have subject matter jurisdiction to entertain such a suit. A judgment entered in a foreign jurisdiction is enforceable in the Marshall Islands without a retrial on the merits so long as the provisions of the Marshall Islands Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act are complied with. In addition, there is doubt as to the enforceability in Greece against us and/or our executive officers and directors who are non-residents of the U.S., in original actions or in actions for enforcement of judgments of U.S. courts, of liabilities predicated solely upon the securities laws of the U.S.

We do not intend to pay dividends in the near future and cannot assure you that we will ever pay dividends.

We do not intend to pay dividends in the near future, and we will make dividend payments to our stockholders in the future only if our board of directors, acting in its sole discretion, determines that such payments would be in our best interest and in compliance with relevant legal, fiduciary and contractual requirements. The payment of any dividends is not guaranteed or assured, and, if paid at all in the future, may be discontinued at any time at the discretion of the board of directors.

Our ability to pay dividends will in any event be subject to factors beyond our control, including the following, among others:

The payment of dividends would not be permitted if we are not in compliance with our loan agreements or in default of such agreements.

Maritime Investors beneficially owns approximately 81.4% of our total outstanding common stock, which may limit stockholders’ ability to influence our actions.

Maritime Investors, a corporation controlled by our Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Valentis, beneficially owns approximately 81.4% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, Maritime Investors has the power to exert considerable influence over our actions through Maritime Investors’ ability to effectively control matters requiring stockholder approval, including the determination to enter into a corporate transaction or to prevent a transaction, regardless of whether our other stockholders believe that any such transaction is in their or our best interests. For example, Maritime Investors could cause us to consummate a merger or acquisition that increases the amount of our indebtedness or causes us to sell all of our revenue-generating assets. We cannot assure you that the interests of Maritime Investors will coincide with the interests of other stockholders. As a result, the market price of shares of our common stock could be adversely affected.

Additionally, Maritime Investors may invest in entities that directly or indirectly compete with us, or companies in which Maritime Investors currently invests may begin competing with us. Maritime Investors may also separately pursue acquisition opportunities that may be complementary to our business, and as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us. As a result of these relationships, when conflicts arise between the interests of Maritime Investors and the interests of our other stockholders, Mr. Valentis may not be a disinterested director. Maritime Investors will effectively control all of our corporate decisions so long as they continue to own a substantial number of shares of our common stock.

If our common stock does not meet the NASDAQ’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 NASDAQ, 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. 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 February 23, 2016, we received a deficiency notice from The NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. stating that, for a period of 30 consecutive trading days, our shares of common stock closed below the minimum price of $1.00 per share as required for continued listing on NASDAQ. In accordance with the notice, we had until August 22, 2016, or 180 calendar days from the date of the notice, to regain compliance with NASDAQ’s continued listing minimum closing bid price requirements (Marketplace Rule 5550(a)(2)). We received a written notification from the exchange on March 11, 2016 stating that the closing bid price of our shares had been $1.00 per share or higher for 10 consecutive trading days, from February 26 to March 10, 2016, and, accordingly, we were again in compliance with the exchange’s minimum closing bid price rule.

On June 1, 2017, our shares of common stock closed at the price of $0.99 per share. However, the closing price of our shares has remained above $1.00 per share since that date.

As a foreign private issuer, our corporate governance practices are exempt from certain NASDAQ corporate governance requirements applicable to U.S. domestic companies. As a result, our corporate governance practices may not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to all of the NASDAQ corporate governance requirements.

We believe that our corporate governance practices are in compliance with the applicable NASDAQ listing rules and are not prohibited by the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands.

Anti-takeover provisions in our Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws could make it difficult for our stockholders to replace our board of directors or could have the effect of discouraging an acquisition, which could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Several provisions of our Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws make it difficult for our stockholders to change the composition of our board of directors in any one year. In addition, the same provisions may discourage, delay or prevent a merger or acquisition that stockholders may consider favorable. These provisions include:

These anti-takeover provisions could substantially impede the ability of public stockholders to benefit from a change in control and, as a result, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and your ability to realize any potential change of control premium.

Tax Risks

We may have to pay tax on U.S. source income, which would reduce our earnings and cash flow.

Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), 50% of the gross shipping income of a vessel-owning or chartering corporation (or “shipping income”) that is attributable to voyages that either begin or end in the United States is characterized as “U.S.-source shipping income” and such income is generally subject to a 4% U.S. federal income tax (on a gross basis) unless that corporation qualifies for exemption from tax under Section 883 of the Code or under an applicable U.S. income tax treaty.

As we and our shipowning subsidiaries are organized under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, a country with which the United States does not have an income tax treaty, we do not qualify for a treaty-based exemption. However, we believe that we qualify for the exemption from tax under Section 883 of the Code for the 2017 taxable year and intend to take such position on our returns for the 2017 taxable year. Nevertheless, for the 2018 or any later taxable year, there are factual circumstances beyond our control that could cause us to lose the benefit of this tax exemption and thereby cause us to become subject to U.S. federal income tax on our U.S.-source shipping income. For example, there is a risk that we could no longer qualify for exemption under Section 883 of the Code for a particular taxable year if additional shares of our common stock are issued to new stockholders such that, due to their status or unwillingness to cooperate with certain substantiation and reporting requirements, we no longer satisfy one of the ownership test requirements for qualification. Due to the factual nature of the issues involved, we can give no assurances on the availability of the exemption to us.

If we and/or one or more of our subsidiaries are not entitled to this exemption under Section 883 of the Code for any taxable year, we and/or such subsidiaries would generally be subject for that year to a 4% U.S. federal income tax on the U.S.-source shipping income for that year. The imposition of this tax could have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased earnings and cash flow. See “Item 10. Additional Information – E. Taxation – U.S. Federal Income Taxation of the Company” for a detailed discussion of the qualification for the exemption under Section 883 of the Code.

If U.S. tax authorities were to treat us or one or more of our subsidiaries as a “passive foreign investment company,” there could be adverse tax consequences to U.S. holders.

A non-U.S. corporation will be treated as a “passive foreign investment company” (or 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 produce, or are held for the production of, such 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 trade or business. For purposes of these tests, time and voyage charter income is generally viewed as income derived from the performance of services and not rental income and, therefore, would not constitute “passive income.” U.S. stockholders of a PFIC are subject to a disadvantageous U.S. federal income tax regime with respect to the income derived by the PFIC, the distributions they receive from the PFIC and the gain, if any, they derive from the sale or other disposition of their shares in the PFIC.

U.S. shareholders of a PFIC generally are subject to an adverse U.S. federal income tax regime with respect to the income derived by the PFIC, the distributions they receive from the PFIC and the gain, if any, they derive from the sale or other disposition of their shares in the PFIC, and would be subject to annual information reporting to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”). If we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year (and regardless of whether we remained a PFIC for subsequent taxable years), a U.S. shareholder who does not make certain mitigating elections (as described more fully under “Item 10. Additional Information – E. Taxation – U.S. Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders”) would be required to allocate ratably over such U.S. shareholder’s holding period any “excess distributions” received (i.e., the portion of any distributions received on our common stock in a taxable year in excess of 125% of certain average historic annual distributions) and any gain realized on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common stock. The amount allocated to the current taxable year and any year prior to the first year in which we were a PFIC would be subject to U.S. federal income tax as ordinary income and the amount allocated to each of the other taxable years would be subject to tax at the highest rate of tax in effect for the applicable class of taxpayer for that year. An interest charge for the deemed deferral benefit would be imposed with respect to the resulting tax attributable to each such other taxable year. Investors in our common stock are urged to consult with their own tax advisors regarding the tax consequences of the PFIC rules to them, including the benefit of any available mitigating elections. For a more complete discussion of the U.S. Federal income tax consequences of passive foreign investment company characterization, see “Item 10. Additional Information – E. Taxation – U.S. Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders.”

Based on our current and projected operations, we do not believe that we (or any of our subsidiaries) were a PFIC in our 2017 taxable year, and we do not expect to become (or any of our subsidiaries to become) a PFIC with respect to the 2018 or any later taxable year. In this regard, we intend to 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 does not constitute “passive income,” and the assets that we own and operate in connection with the production of that income do not constitute “passive assets.” There is, however, no direct legal authority under the PFIC rules addressing our method of operation. Accordingly, no assurance can be given that the IRS or a court of law will accept our position, and there is a risk that the IRS or a court of law could determine that we are (or were in a prior taxable year) a PFIC. Moreover, no assurance can be given that we would not constitute a PFIC for any taxable year if there were to be changes in the nature and extent of our operations.

If U.S. tax authorities were to treat us as a “controlled foreign corporation,” there could be adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences to certain U.S. investors.

If more than 50% of the voting power or value of our shares is treated as owned by U.S. citizens or residents, U.S. corporations or partnerships, or U.S. estates or trusts (as defined for U.S. federal income tax purposes), each of which owned at least 10% of our voting power or value (each, a “U.S. Stockholder”), then we and one or more of our subsidiaries will be a controlled foreign corporation (or “CFC”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes. If we were treated as a CFC for any taxable year, our U.S. Stockholders may face adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences and information reporting obligations. See “Item 10. Additional Information – E. Taxation – U.S. Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders.”