madddawg
Thanks for pointing providing the links which demonstrate to all that the information supplied is clearly in the public domain.
From what I have read it appears that both companies were about the same size on the asset/revenue front. So (rather obviously) combining the two entities will in effect double the size of ‘Subsea 7’ the name that will be retained for trading under.
The balance of ‘backlog’ Day rate contracts (bulk of which were on SS7 books) and Lump sum contracts (bulk of which were on Acergy’s books) will give the new single entity a roughly 50/50 split of both types of contracts.
The final backlog figure by contract type is roughly:
- Day Rate 46%
- Lump Sum 54%
Once the dust has settled Subsea 7 will have at it’s disposal a diversified fleet of 43 work vessels comprising 22 from Acergy and 21 from Subsea 7
Combined FY2009 revenues by region show:
- SS7 were stronger than Acergy in N Europe and Canada
- Acergy were far stronger than SS7 in Africa and the Med.
- Subsea 7 were far stronger than Acergy in South America
- Acergy were slightly stronger than SS7 in Asia & ME
- SS7 were far stronger than Acergy in N. America.
The upshot is this will be one biggie of a construction entity!
.
.
