Dixstone
Rigs Peer Benchmarking Review
17 June 2026
Presented By
Sigma Energy team.
Ghazi Manai
- 18 years in the rigs business
- Projects, Maintenance, Assets, Supply Chain & Audits
- Project Manager & Rig Manager at Weatherford & Lamprell
Adolph Colaco
- 15 years in the rigs business
- Supply Chain, Logistics, Inventory Management
- Global Director at Transocean & Vice President at Weatherford
Agenda
What we’ll cover today.
1
Approach
How we benchmarked
2
Phase 1 · Internal Diagnostics
What we saw — and what the numbers say
3
Phase 2 · External Benchmarking
How Dixstone compares
4
Phase 3 · Recommendations
What we’d do
The Approach
We started from the rigs —
6 steps from on-site findings to recommendations.
01 · SITE VISITS
3 rigs & 3 central warehouses
02 · DATA COLLECTION
From SAP, drilling team & HQ
03 · MEASURE
Score Dixstone across functions
04 · BENCHMARK
Vs. peers
05 · VALIDATE
With the Dixstone team
06 · RECOMMEND
Reduce cost & improve efficiency
Phase 1 of 3
Internal Diagnostics
Phase 1 · 1.1
Rig-Site Findings
On-Site Surveys · 3 Rigs + 3 Central Warehouses · Root-Cause Diagnostic
Rig-site findings are foundational to issues facing the business.
1
SUPPLY CHAIN
Significant Inventory and Rig Warehouse Management Issues
- Overflowing warehouses
- Several rig warehouses poorly managed
- Lack of processes and discipline
- Complete MR to PO process not in SAP
2
EQUIPMENT
Inconsistent Preventive Maintenance (PM)
- Many PM tasks overdue & fluctuating quality
- PM tracking scattered between SAP / MM10 / Excel
- Incomplete asset registers
- Several major equipment Cat IV overdue
3
PEOPLE & PROCESS
Lack of processes and training
- No well-defined supply chain and material management processes
- Personnel lack training on company processes and systems
- Key areas such as Inventory, Warehouse & Asset Management lack focus
4
DATA CAPTURE AT THE RIG LEVEL
Inconsistent system use and poor data quality
- Rig personnel not consistently using systems to execute transactions
- Transactions not recorded in time — incomplete data in ERP and PM systems
- Limits the ability to make data-driven decisions
Phase 1 · 1.2
Desktop Review Findings
Data Foundation · Challenges Encountered During Diagnostics
Data inconsistent, incomplete & scattered —
limited visibility for data-driven decisions.
01 · SCATTERED SYSTEMS
Multiple disconnected platforms.
02 · 2 SAP ENVIRONMENTS
Historical data across 2 SAP environments.
03 · INCOMPLETE EXTRACTS
SAP extracts missing critical fields.
04 · POOR MOVEMENT HISTORY
Poor movement history.
05 · NO DATA VISUALIZATION
No dashboards (rig manager, supply chain…).
06 · MANUAL PO TRACKING
Rig managers track POs manually.
Procurement Commitments vs Actual Consumption · FY 2025
5 of 6 rigs ordered more than they consumed —
over-ordering = growing inventory.
Net order change per rig · FY 2025
← drew down
0
added →
Net $
DRAVUS
+$3.4M
AXIMA
+$1.4M
BANBA
+$1.3M
LUG
+$1.1M
MIDIR
+$0.6M
NUADA
−$3.4M
Disclaimer · Values based on partial mapping of unit prices from PO history, as complete data was not available. Stated numbers are therefore directional.
Inventory · Levels vs Brackets & Dead Stock · End-2025
The fleet carries ~4× recommended inventory —
56% of it dead stock.
$45.2M
Fleet inventory vs ~$12M best-practice levels
$25.2M
Dead stock
Caveat
- Inventory value only partially valorised
- Some rigs came with legacy purchased inventory
Per-rig inventory
Dead stock (no movement >3 years) Active + Dormant (≤3 years) Best-practice mark
NUADA
Standard JU
$12.3M
~4×
BANBA
Standard JU
$9.0M
~3×
MIDIR
Land
$6.0M
~10×
LUG
Platform
$5.3M
~9×
AXIMA
Premium JU
$5.0M
1.4×
DRAVUS
Land
$3.7M
~6×
HARIMA
Platform
$1.1M
~2×
Inventory aging · Active (<12 mo) · Dormant (12–36 mo) · Dead (>3 yrs) · Obsolete (superseded / end-of-life).
Disclaimer ·
Partial unit-price mapping of PO history (MB52 via ME2N) — read as directional magnitude, not an audited valuation.
Causal Chain · Cert → NPT → OPEX · FY 2025
Out-of-cert equipment contributes to elevated NPT —
and inflates the spend.
01 · EQT CERTIFICATION
No standard EQT-certification tracker; EQT out of certification.
02 · PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE
PMs not per OEM, fluctuating quality, and not accurately recorded in the data.
03 · NPT + OPEX INFLATION
Failures shift onto NPT and spare-parts.
5.8–8.7%
NPT · 4 of 6 rigs
BANBA, NUADA, LUG, MIDIR, DRAVUS · vs peer median 3.0%, ADES best 1.5%
14.5%
Spare parts · % of revenue · FY 2025
$22.9M fleet on $158.5M theoretical revenue
Workforce · Manning vs Peers · FY 2025
Manning —
jackups near peer, land rigs well above.
JACKUPS
Slightly — chargeback personnel to Perenco.
LAND RIGS
Clearly overmanned.
Crew vs peer benchmark · per rig · FY 2025
2 bars per rig: peer benchmark (lighter) and actual crew (longer). Same POB scale across all rigs; the visible gap between the two bars is the overmanning.
0
50 POB
100
110
% over
MIDIR
20%
Land
Peer
60
Crew
72
LUG
10%
Platform
Peer
60
Crew
66
DRAVUS
10%
Land
Peer
60
Crew
66
BANBA
8%
Standard JU
Peer
96
Crew
104
AXIMA
10%
Premium JU
Peer
96
Crew
106
NUADA
0%
Standard JU
Peer
96
Crew
96
HQ Support Personnel · Peer Benchmark · FY 2025
HQ & country support is ~14% below peers.
~72
Dixstone today
~12 below peer-matched scope
84
Peers today · HQ & country support
14 per rig × 6 active rigs
>14%
Gap vs peer benchmark
Likely understates the shortfall at smaller fleet scale
Observation
Gap concentrated in HQ — Supply Chain, Assets & Maintenance.
Implication
Lack of focus negatively impacting these functions — Supply Chain, Assets & Maintenance.
Path forward
Bring in expertise to support these functions (hiring and/or external).
How the ~14 support / rig benchmark is derived: Shelf Drilling 13.9 (500 support / 36 rigs · FY24) · Borr Drilling 13.8 (332 / 24 · FY25) → 14 × 6 rigs = 84 target; Dixstone today ~72.
| Peer benchmark | Rigs | Total support (shore + HQ) | Support / rig |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shelf DrillingFY24 | 36 | 500 | 13.9 |
| Borr DrillingFY25 | 24 | 332 | 13.8 |
Source: peer annual reports / SEC filings (FY24–FY25) · support headcount ÷ rig count → ~14 / rig.
CAPEX · % of Revenue · 5-Year 2021–2025
Peer CAPEX as % of revenue —
jackups vs land rigs.
~22%
Jackups · peer median CAPEX / Rev
Median of ADES, ADNOC, Borr, Shelf, Velesto (5Y 2021–25)
~12%
Land Rigs · peer median CAPEX / Rev
Median of H&P, Nabors, Precision (5Y 2021–25)
Jackups · peer median ~22%
ADES
26%
ADNOC
26%
Borr
22%
Shelf
20%
Velesto
19%
Median
~22%
Land Rigs · peer median ~12%
Nabors
17%
H&P
12%
Precision
11%
Median
~12%
CAPEX (drilling contractor) = rig equipment & Cat IV recertification — e.g. top drive, BOP, major equipment repairs. Note: Dixstone CAPEX data was not provided — peer CAPEX as % of revenue shown for reference.
Phase 1 · How We Measure Each Rig
Rig Direct Margin (RDM) —
the rig-level profitability lens.
A like-for-like measure of each rig's margin from its own operations, before group-level items.
RIG DIRECT MARGIN (RDM)
Theoretical revenue − direct rig operating costs.
Direct costs = workforce, spare parts & services (excluding D&A, G&A & corporate).
ADJUSTED RDM
RDM + OPEX reclassed from CAPEX.
Adds back operating spend booked as CAPEX.
The top line of the exercise · theoretical revenue per rig · FY 2025
| P&L Line | AXIMA | BANBA | NUADA | LUG | MIDIR | DRAVUS | Fleet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theoretical Day Rate | $130K | $100K | $100K | $70K | $40K | $40K | — |
| Billable Operating Days | 301.6 | 333.2 | 343.7 | 340.5 | 339.8 | 353.1 | 2,012 |
| Theoretical Revenue | $39.2M | $33.3M | $34.4M | $23.8M | $13.6M | $14.1M | $158.5M |
Billable Operating Days = Operating Days − NPT Days.
Per-Rig Spend Mix · % of Theoretical Revenue · FY 2025
AXIMA, MIDIR and DRAVUS run high on spare parts —
land rigs high on manning.
| Rig | Spare Parts · % of revenue | Workforce · % of revenue | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 2024 | Δ pp | 2025 | 2024 | Δ pp | |
| AXIMAPremium JU | 15.1% | 9.1% | +6.0 | 31.7% | 30.1% | +1.6 |
| BANBAStandard JU | 11.2% | 21.7% | −10.5 | 33.7% | 37.7% | −4.0 |
| NUADAStandard JU | 10.0% | 17.0% | −7.0 | 30.0% | 33.5% | −3.5 |
| LUGPlatform | 12.9% | 11.7% | +1.2 | 32.0% | 47.9% | −15.9 |
| MIDIRLand | 25.5% | 13.8% | +11.7 | 51.9% | 68.5% | −16.6 |
| DRAVUSLand | 23.1% | 19.8% | +3.3 | 40.9% | 45.4% | −4.5 |
| Fleet | 14.5% | 14.7% | −0.2 | 34.3% | 38.6% | −4.3 |
Per-Rig Profit & Loss · FY 2025 · USD '000s
$53.5M Adjusted Rig Direct Margin —
below the 44.8% peer median.
33.7%
Adjusted RDM
fleet · FY 2025
fleet · FY 2025
34.3%
Workforce
% of revenue
% of revenue
14.5%
Spare parts
% of revenue
% of revenue
| P&L Line | AXIMA | BANBA | NUADA | LUG | MIDIR | DRAVUS | Fleet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theoretical Day Rate | $130K | $100K | $100K | $70K | $40K | $40K | — |
| Billable Operating Days | 301.6 | 333.2 | 343.7 | 340.5 | 339.8 | 353.1 | 2,012 |
| Theoretical Revenue | $39.2M | $33.3M | $34.4M | $23.8M | $13.6M | $14.1M | $158.5M |
| Workforce & Labor | 31.7% · ($12.4M) | 33.7% · ($11.2M) | 30.0% · ($10.3M) | 32.0% · ($7.6M) | 51.9% · ($7.1M) | 40.9% · ($5.8M) | 34.3% · ($54.4M) |
| Spare Parts | 15.1% · ($5.9M) | 11.2% · ($3.7M) | 10.0% · ($3.4M) | 12.9% · ($3.1M) | 25.5% · ($3.5M) | 23.1% · ($3.3M) | 14.5% · ($22.9M) |
| + OPEX→CAPEX reclass | 6.1% · $2.4M | 3.6% · $1.2M | 2.6% · $0.9M | 1.7% · $0.4M | 11.0% · $1.5M | 22.3% · $3.1M | 6.6% · $10.5M |
| Adjusted RDM | 39.5% · $15.5M | 36.3% · $12.1M | 41.1% · $14.1M | 37.1% · $8.8M | −10.7% · ($1.4M) | 23.5% · $3.3M | 33.7% · $53.5M |
Rig Direct Margin Evolution · 2024 → 2025 · Per Rig
Fleet RDM at 33.7% —
but rigs range from +41% to −11% — a 52pp gap.
2025 Rig Direct Margin · per rig · bar color = YoY direction
Green = RDM improved 2024 → 2025 · Red = RDM declined. Vertical line marks 0% RDM.
−15%
0%
15%
30%
45%
2025 RDM
YoY Δ
NUADA
41.1%
↑ +1.4 pp
Standard JU
AXIMA
39.5%
↓ −8.2 pp
Premium JU
LUG
37.1%
↑ +34.4 pp
Platform
BANBA
36.3%
↑ +10.6 pp
Standard JU
DRAVUS
23.5%
↓ −10.3 pp
Land
MIDIR
−10.7%
↓ −17.9 pp
Land
Fleet: 33.2% → 33.7% (+0.5 pp) — headline flat YoY masks the wide rig-level divergence above.
Rig One-Pagers · FY 2025
Pick a rig
AXIMAPremium Jack-Up
FY 2025 · SAP direct
Utilization
84.9%
310 / 365 days
NPT
2.7%
Top-quartile peer
Revenue
$39.2M
$130K/day · 301.6 bill. days
Rig Direct Margin
39.5%
2024: 47.7% · Δ −8.2pp
Staff Cost %
31.7%
$12.4M · 106 POB
Daily PO
$37K
PO/GR 0.92× · ME2N 2025
P&L Snapshot · USD '000s
20252024Δ 24→25
Revenue$39,210$44,245−11.4%
Spare parts cost$5,921 (15.1%)$4,026 (9.1%)+6.0pp
Workforce cost$12,415 (31.7%)$13,318 (30.1%)+1.6pp
Rig Direct Margin$15,504 (39.5%)$21,105 (47.7%)−8.2pp
GR · real spent$10,066 (25.8%)$7,176 (16.2%)+9.6pp
New POs$11.5M$11.6M−1%
PO ÷ GR1.14×ordering slightly ahead of consumption
Inventory (end-2025)$5.0M
Dead stock %40%
NPT Equipment Drivers · 2025 · Top 5
BOP
52.4%
TDS
16.9%
Rig Crew
15.4%
Miscel
6.5%
Rig Floor
3.8%
2025 NPT (Total)
201.25
Hours
8.4
Days
2.7%
NPT %
Lowest total NPT hours in fleet. BOP (52%) + TDS PM are the primary interventions.
2025 PO · Top 5 Mat Groups
DRIL_HDLG
$1.13M9.9%
DRIL_CTRL
$1.04M9.0%
MECHA
$994K8.7%
ELEC
$759K6.6%
ROT_MACH
$502K4.4%
Total 2025 PO$11.5M
2025 GR · Top 5 Mat Groups
NO MATERIAL
$1.22M13.6%
ELEC
$640K7.1%
PIPING
$460K5.1%
INSP_SRV
$450K5.0%
PIPE_SRV
$400K4.4%
Total 2025 GR$9.0M
2025 IO · Top 5 Mat Groups (proxy — 42% line coverage)
PPE
$1.36M18.7%
ELEC
$794K10.9%
WELL_CPL
$751K10.3%
DRIL_HDLG
$617K8.5%
MECHA
$615K8.4%
Total 2025 IO$7.3M
BANBAStandard Jack-Up
FY 2025 · SAP direct
Utilization
100%
365 / 365 days
NPT
8.7%
Lagging peer median
Revenue
$33.3M
$100K/day · 333.2 bill. days
Rig Direct Margin
36.3%
2024: 25.7% · Δ +10.6pp
Staff Cost %
33.7%
$11.2M · ~104 POB
Daily PO
$28K
PO/GR 1.08× · ME2N 2025
P&L Snapshot · USD '000s
20252024Δ 24→25
Revenue$33,321$23,418+42.3%
Spare parts cost$3,732 (11.2%)$5,082 (21.7%)−10.5pp
Workforce cost$11,236 (33.7%)$8,829 (37.7%)−4.0pp
Rig Direct Margin$12,098 (36.3%)$6,012 (25.7%)+10.6pp
GR · real spent$8,762 (26.3%)$7,222 (30.8%)−4.5pp
New POs$10.1M$13.0M−22%
PO ÷ GR1.15×ordering slightly ahead of consumption
Inventory (end-2025)$9.0M
Dead stock %59%
NPT Equipment Drivers · 2025 · Top 5
Miscel
62.9%
PowGen
21.0%
BOP
10.6%
TDS
2.4%
Pump
1.3%
2025 NPT (Total)
763
Hours
31.8
Days
8.7%
NPT %
Power Generation + BOP shared culprit with NUADA. Root-cause programme recommended.
2025 PO · Top 5 Mat Groups
ELEC
$1.01M10.0%
MECHA
$858K8.5%
ELE_SRV
$739K7.3%
DRIL_TUB
$658K6.5%
WELDI_SRV
$436K4.3%
Total 2025 PO$10.1M
2025 GR · Top 5 Mat Groups
NO MATERIAL
$680K9.7%
ELEC
$530K7.6%
MECHA
$370K5.3%
ELE_SRV
$370K5.2%
TEL_SRV
$320K4.5%
Total 2025 GR$7.0M
2025 IO · Top 5 Mat Groups (proxy — 42% line coverage)
NO MATERIAL
$468K18.1%
ELEC
$381K14.8%
HDLG_LFTG
$192K7.4%
MECHA
$184K7.1%
PPE
$132K5.1%
Total 2025 IO$2.6M
NUADAStandard Jack-Up
FY 2025 · SAP direct
Utilization
100%
365 / 365 days
NPT
5.8%
Lagging peer median
Revenue
$34.4M
$100K/day · 343.7 bill. days
Rig Direct Margin
41.1%
2024: 39.7% · Δ +1.4pp
Staff Cost %
30.0%
$10.3M · ~90 POB
Daily PO
$12K
PO/GR 0.33× · ME2N 2025
P&L Snapshot · USD '000s
20252024Δ 24→25
Revenue$34,374$30,112+14.2%
Spare parts cost$3,437 (10.0%)$5,119 (17.0%)−7.0pp
Workforce cost$10,309 (30.0%)$10,088 (33.5%)−3.5pp
Rig Direct Margin$14,141 (41.1%)$11,966 (39.7%)+1.4pp
GR · real spent$7,752 (22.6%)$6,694 (22.2%)+0.4pp
New POs$4.4M$12.3M−64%
PO ÷ GR0.56×drawing down excess inventory
Inventory (end-2025)$12.3M
Dead stock %58%
NPT Equipment Drivers · 2025 · Top 5
PowGen
39.9%
BOP
26.2%
Miscel
17.9%
TDS
3.4%
Pump
3.4%
2025 NPT (Total)
510.25
Hours
21.3
Days
5.8%
NPT %
Power Generation now dominant — joint programme with BANBA targeting shared root causes.
2025 PO · Top 5 Mat Groups
STRUC_SRV
$1.65M37.2%
SEA_TRSP
$390K8.8%
IT_SRV
$370K8.3%
INSP_SRV
$296K6.7%
MECHA_SRV
$189K4.2%
Total 2025 PO$4.4M
2025 GR · Top 5 Mat Groups
SEA_TRSP
$420K11.9%
IT_SRV
$410K11.5%
HDLG_LFTG
$330K9.3%
ROT_MACH
$310K8.9%
STRUC_SRV
$180K5.1%
Total 2025 GR$3.5M
2025 IO · Top 5 Mat Groups (proxy — 42% line coverage)
ROT_MACH
$844K20.1%
PPE
$370K8.8%
MECHA
$325K7.7%
SMAL_TOOL
$316K7.5%
HDLG_LFTG
$287K6.8%
Total 2025 IO$4.2M
LUGPlatform Rig
FY 2025 · SAP direct
Utilization
100%
365 / 365 days
NPT
6.7%
Above peer benchmark
Revenue
$23.8M
$70K/day · 340.5 bill. days
Rig Direct Margin
37.1%
2024: 2.7% · Δ +34.4pp
Staff Cost %
32.0%
$7.6M · ~55 POB
Daily PO
$21K
PO/GR 1.16× · ME2N 2025
P&L Snapshot · USD '000s
20252024Δ 24→25
Revenue$23,834$12,895+84.8%
Spare parts cost$3,075 (12.9%)$1,509 (11.7%)+1.2pp
Workforce cost$7,637 (32.0%)$6,177 (47.9%)−15.9pp
Rig Direct Margin$8,842 (37.1%)$344 (2.7%)+34.4pp
GR · real spent$6,518 (27.4%)$3,371 (26.1%)+1.3pp
New POs$7.6M$4.0M+90%
PO ÷ GR1.17×ordering slightly ahead of consumption
Inventory (end-2025)$5.3M
Dead stock %60%
NPT Equipment Drivers · 2025 · Top 5
TDS
34.0%
Pump
25.1%
BOP
11.4%
PowGen
9.3%
Drawworks
7.5%
2025 NPT (Total)
588.25
Hours
24.5
Days
6.7%
NPT %
TDS (34%) + Pump (25%) are the 2 operational levers — top-drive overhaul + pump PM cycle.
2025 PO · Top 5 Mat Groups
ELEC
$511K6.8%
MECHA
$461K6.1%
DRIL_CTRL
$375K5.0%
HDLG_LFTG
$359K4.8%
MECHA_SRV
$339K4.5%
Total 2025 PO$7.6M
2025 GR · Top 5 Mat Groups
NO MATERIAL
$820K16.0%
MECHA
$240K4.7%
AER_TRSP
$210K4.0%
HDLG_LFTG
$200K3.8%
MECHA_SRV
$190K3.8%
Total 2025 GR$5.1M
2025 IO · Top 5 Mat Groups (proxy — 42% line coverage)
NO MATERIAL
$196K11.1%
DRIL_PMP
$175K10.0%
HDLG_LFTG
$161K9.1%
PPE
$154K8.7%
WELL_CPL
$146K8.3%
Total 2025 IO$1.8M
MIDIRLand Rig
FY 2025 · SAP direct
Utilization
100%
365 / 365 days
NPT
6.9%
Above peer benchmark
Revenue
$13.6M
$40K/day · 339.8 bill. days
Rig Direct Margin
−10.7%
2024: 7.2% · Δ −17.9pp
Staff Cost %
51.9%
$7.1M · ~72 POB
Daily PO
$21K
PO/GR 0.82× · ME2N 2025
P&L Snapshot · USD '000s
20252024Δ 24→25
Revenue$13,593$11,650+16.7%
Spare parts cost$3,466 (25.5%)$1,608 (13.8%)+11.7pp
Workforce cost$7,054 (51.9%)$7,980 (68.5%)−16.6pp
Rig Direct Margin−$1,449 (−10.7%)$844 (7.2%)−17.9pp
GR · real spent$7,071 (52.0%)$2,540 (21.8%)+30.2pp
New POs$7.7M$10.4M−26%
PO ÷ GR1.08×ordering in sync with consumption
Inventory (end-2025)$6.0M
Dead stock %38%
NPT Equipment Drivers · 2025 · Top 5
TDS
49.1%
BOP
12.5%
Drawworks
11.6%
Pump
9.7%
Miscel
9.1%
2025 NPT (Total)
604
Hours
25.2
Days
6.9%
NPT %
TDS alone = 49% of NPT. Top-drive overhaul is the single highest-impact intervention.
2025 PO · Top 5 Mat Groups
MAIN_RTAL
$895K11.4%
DRIL_CTRL
$760K9.7%
ELEC
$731K9.3%
TEL_SRV
$442K5.6%
DRIL_TUB
$416K5.3%
Total 2025 PO$7.7M
2025 GR · Top 5 Mat Groups
MAIN_RTAL
$740K11.8%
DRIL_HDLG
$610K9.8%
TEL_SRV
$530K8.5%
ELEC
$380K6.1%
WELDI_SRV
$320K5.0%
Total 2025 GR$6.3M
2025 IO · Top 5 Mat Groups (proxy — 42% line coverage)
ROT_MACH
$301K20.7%
DRIL_PMP
$262K18.0%
DRIL_TDS
$205K14.1%
DRIL_HDLG
$176K12.1%
ELEC
$81K5.6%
Total 2025 IO$1.5M
DRAVUSLand Rig
FY 2025 · SAP direct
Utilization
100%
365 / 365 days
NPT
3.3%
Near peer benchmark
Revenue
$14.1M
$40K/day · 353.1 bill. days
Rig Direct Margin
23.5%
2024: 33.8% · Δ −10.3pp
Staff Cost %
40.9%
$5.8M · ~66 POB
Daily PO
$21K
PO/GR 0.46× · ME2N 2025
P&L Snapshot · USD '000s
20252024Δ 24→25
Revenue$14,125$12,395+13.9%
Spare parts cost$3,263 (23.1%)$2,454 (19.8%)+3.3pp
Workforce cost$5,779 (40.9%)$5,627 (45.4%)−4.5pp
Rig Direct Margin$3,325 (23.5%)$4,188 (33.8%)−10.3pp
GR · real spent$4,200 (29.7%)$2,946 (23.8%)+5.9pp
New POs$7.6M$8.0M−5%
PO ÷ GR1.81×over-ordering 81% above consumption
Inventory (end-2025)$3.7M
Dead stock %73%
NPT Equipment Drivers · 2025 · Top 5
Miscel
32.9%
TDS
26.7%
Drawworks
10.1%
Rig Floor
8.5%
BOP
7.5%
2025 NPT (Total)
285
Hours
11.9
Days
3.3%
NPT %
TDS (27%) + Drawworks (10%) are operational. Lowest absolute NPT among land rigs.
2025 PO · Top 5 Mat Groups
STO_RTAL
$898K11.8%
ELEC
$830K10.9%
MAIN_RTAL
$551K7.2%
PIPING
$524K6.9%
MECHA
$479K6.3%
Total 2025 PO$7.6M
2025 GR · Top 5 Mat Groups
STO_RTAL
$640K9.8%
NO MATERIAL
$580K8.9%
MAIN_RTAL
$510K7.9%
MECHA
$440K6.8%
DRIL_TDS
$360K5.6%
Total 2025 GR$6.5M
2025 IO · Top 5 Mat Groups (proxy — 42% line coverage)
ROT_MACH
$123K11.8%
DRIL_PMP
$119K11.5%
DRIL_LOGG
$83K8.1%
HDLG_LFTG
$79K7.7%
NO MATERIAL
$74K7.2%
Total 2025 IO$1.0M
Major Findings · Phase 1 — Internal Diagnostics
Strong jackup, weak land rig performance —
over-ordering & excess inventory fleet-wide.
01 · JACKUP MARGIN
Jackups ~39% RDM — close to peers.
~6 pp below the ~45% jackup peer median.
02 · LAND RIG MARGIN
Land rigs ~6% RDM — far below peers.
~26 pp below the ~33% land peer median.
03 · INVENTORY
$45.2M held — ~4× peer median.
04 · OVER-ORDERING
5 rigs ordered more than consumed.
05 · LAND RIG OVERMANNING
All land rigs overmanned vs peers.
06 · ROOT CAUSE
Data, systems and dashboards missing.
Phase 2 of 3
External Peer Benchmarking
Peer Fleet Profile · FY 2025
The peer set —
9 listed contractors, ~1,200 rigs.
Benchmarked across the full drilling spectrum — global land-rig majors, MENA-anchored blended fleets, and pure jackup contractors.
Land & mixed peers · 5 contractors · ~1,083 rigs
Helmerich & Payne Land + platform · US + Intl367
Nabors Industries Land + platform · Global269
Precision Drilling Land · Canada + US + Intl184
ADNOC Drilling Mixed · UAE140
ADES Holding JU + onshore · MENA + Intl123
Jackup-pure peers · 4 contractors · 96 rigs
Valaris JU + ARO · Global33
Shelf Drilling Standard JU · MENA + SE Asia33
Borr Drilling Premium JU · Global24
Velesto Energy Standard JU · SE Asia6
Subject: Dixstone · 7 rigs (3 jackups, 2 platform, 2 land) · West Africa.
Premium Jackup · AXIMA vs peers · FY 2025
AXIMA —
RDM 7.2pp below peer median, bridgeable via spares + cert/PM.
Premium Jackup peer set: Borr · ADNOC · ADES · Valaris-JU · Velesto.
$130K
Dayrate
Peer median $130K · Borr top $150K
2.7%
NPT
Peer median 3.0% · ADES best 1.5%
39.5%
Rig Direct Margin
Peer median 46.7% · gap −7.2 pp
106
POB / rig
Premium peer 96 · +10 over (mostly back-charged)
$5.0M
Inventory (approx.)
Best-practice mark $2.5–3.5M · ~1.4× over
Standard Jackup · BANBA & NUADA vs peers · FY 2025
BANBA & NUADA —
NPT bridges the RDM gap; 3–4× excess inventory.
Standard Jackup peer set: Shelf · Valaris · ADES.
BANBA · Standard JU
$100K
Dayrate
Shelf $83K · Valaris JU $138K
8.7%
NPT
Peer median 3.0% · Shelf best 0.6%
36.3%
Rig Direct Margin
Peer median 42.9% · gap −6.6 pp
104
POB / rig
Standard peer 96 · +8 over (mostly back-charged)
$9.0M
Inventory (approx.)
Best-practice mark $2.5–3.0M · ~3× over
NUADA · Standard JU
$100K
Dayrate
Shelf $83K · Valaris JU $138K
5.8%
NPT
Peer median 3.0% · Shelf best 0.6%
41.1%
Rig Direct Margin
Peer median 42.9% · gap −1.8 pp
96
POB / rig
Standard peer 96 · at peer
$12.3M
Inventory (approx.)
Best-practice mark $2.5–3.0M · ~4× over
Land Rigs · MIDIR & DRAVUS vs peers · FY 2025
MIDIR & DRAVUS —
payroll, expat cost and 6–10× excess inventory drive the gap.
Land peer set: Helmerich & Payne · Nabors · Precision.
MIDIR · Land
$40K
Dayrate
HP / Nabors $25–35K · MENA premium
6.9%
NPT
Peer median ~3.5% · HP best ~2.0%
−10.7%
Rig Direct Margin
Peer median 32.8% · Nabors top 39.9%
72
POB / rig
Land peer norm ~60 · +12 over
$6.0M
Inventory (approx.)
Best-practice mark $0.4–0.6M · ~10× over
DRAVUS · Land
$40K
Dayrate
HP / Nabors $25–35K · MENA premium
3.3%
NPT
Peer median ~3.5% · HP best ~2.0%
23.5%
Rig Direct Margin
Peer median 32.8% · Nabors top 39.9%
66
POB / rig
Land peer norm ~60 · +6 over
$3.7M
Inventory (approx.)
Best-practice mark $0.4–0.6M · ~6× over
Platform Rig · LUG vs peers · FY 2025
LUG —
NPT high vs peers and ~9× excess inventory.
Platform peer set: Helmerich & Payne · Nabors · Precision.
$70K
Dayrate
HP / Nabors $25–35K · platform premium applies
6.7%
NPT
HP best ~2.0% · Nabors ~3.0%
37.1%
Rig Direct Margin
Peer median 32.8% · Nabors top 39.9%
~55
POB / rig
Land peer norm ~60 at peer
$5.3M
Inventory (approx.)
Best-practice mark $0.4–0.6M · ~9× over
Phase 3 of 3
Recommendations &
Roadmap
Target State · Our Goal · RDM · NPT · PO/GR
The Goal — operational & cost efficiency:
44.8% RDM at 2–4% NPT & disciplined daily PO/GR.
44.8%
Target Rig Direct Margin
2–4%
Target NPT
PO/GR
Daily ceiling per rig
| Rig | 2025 actual | Target | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPT | RDM | Daily PO | NPT | RDM | Daily PO | |
| AXIMAPremium JU | 2.7% | 39.5% | $32.6K | 2.0% | 44.8% | $26.4K |
| BANBAStandard JU | 8.7% | 36.3% | $24.1K | 4.0% | 44.8% | $20.0K |
| NUADAStandard JU | 5.8% | 41.1% | $21.3K | 4.0% | 44.8% | $19.9K |
| LUGPlatform | 6.7% | 37.1% | $17.9K | 4.0% | 44.8% | $14.7K |
| MIDIRLand | 6.9% | −10.7% | $19.4K | 4.0% | 44.8%* | $8K |
| DRAVUSLand | 3.3% | 23.5% | $11.5K | 4.0% | 44.8% | $8K |
| Fleet | 5.7% | 33.1% | — | 2–4% | 44.8% | — |
Recommendations · Strategic Direction
5 strategic areas, run concurrently —
toward one outcome.
1
Data Visualization
2
Supply Chain
3
Equipment
4
People
5
Land Rigs Business Review
▼
OUR GOAL
Operational & Cost Efficiency
Strategic Area 01 · Data Visualization
You can't improve what you don't measure well —
fleet-wide dashboards.
Track key metrics across operations, supply chain, equipment, people, HSE and finance — and benchmark continuously against peers and targets.
01 · OPERATIONS
NPT, uptime, utilization, rig move.
02 · SUPPLY CHAIN
PO, PO/GR, issue-out, inventory.
03 · EQUIPMENT (ASSETS & PM)
PM overdue, Cat IV overdue.
04 · PEOPLE
Manning, competency, training.
05 · HSE
LTIR, LTI, near misses, MTC…
06 · FINANCE
Direct P&L, vs last year, vs targets.
Strategic Area 01 · Data Visualization · Targets & Weekly Call
Set the targets —
then review them weekly.
SET THE TARGETS
- NPT
- Overdue PM
- Overdue Cat IV
- Daily average spending limit
- Inventory on rig
- Min/max compliance
- Competency & training
WEEKLY OPERATIONS CALL
- Rig dashboard
- Compare to target
- Compare rig to rig
- Discuss deviations & remedial actions
Strategic Area 01 · Data Visualization · Sample Dashboard
A working sample —
see the dashboards in action.
A live, interactive sample of the fleet dashboards, built on Dixstone data — operations, supply chain, equipment, people, HSE and finance in one view.
OPEN THE LIVE DASHBOARD
dixstone-dashboards.vercel.app →
Strategic Area 02 · Supply Chain
Standardize supply-chain operating model —
streamlined processes, clean inventory, disciplined ordering.
SUPPLY CHAIN PROCESSES
Define and streamline the processes.
- Develop SC processes & procedures
- Standardize MR, PO, GR, issue-out, transfers & master-data
- Classify inventory vs non-inventory / capital items
INVENTORY
Reset every warehouse, end to end.
- Wall-to-wall physical count
- Move dead stock to CWHs
- Re-label & SAP-ID tag every part
MATERIAL MANAGEMENT
Issue-out discipline and min/max control.
- Log every issue-out in SAP
- Establish history-based min/max
- Consumption check before every PO
- Cross-rig pooling before new orders
SAP (ERP) PROCURE-TO-PAY & RECORDS
Run the full cycle in SAP — with values.
- MR-to-PO in SAP
- Record every inventory movement
- Capture inventory value
- Country-level material creation
- Single source of truth
SUPPORT
Bring in supply-chain management support.
- Supply chain specialists
- Cover the HQ gap (drilling supply chain manager)
TRAINING
Train the supply-chain team.
- Rig material men
- Country buyers
- Country material men
Strategic Area 03 · Equipment
Preventive maintenance & certification —
reduce NPT, keep equipment in cycle.
PM · ONE SYSTEM WITH HISTORY
All rigs on the same CMMS.
One preventive-maintenance system across the fleet, holding the complete equipment & PM history.
PM · OEM TASKS & RECORDS
OEM-based tasks with recordables & measurables.
Replace free-text fields with structured recordables & measurables per OEM instructions; link every PM to its correct asset.
PM · OVERSIGHT
Shift from fire-fighting to managed PM.
Oversee overdue PM tasks; weekly review cadence; PM-compliance KPIs in the dashboard.
ASSETS & CERTIFICATION
Updated register & Cat III/IV tracker.
Keep the asset register & transfers updated and a Cat III/IV certification tracker; introduce a dedicated Asset Manager position.
Strategic Area 04 · People
Right competencies, right manning —
at rigs and HQ.
COMPETENCY & TRAINING
Strengthen competency & training matrices (equipment, supply chain).
HQ RESOURCING
Strengthen HQ competencies & headcount.
Recommended minimum:
- Drilling supply chain manager
- Drilling asset manager
RIG MANNING
Right-size land-rig crews to peer norms.
Strategic Area 05 · Land Rigs Business Review
MIDIR & DRAVUS need a complete business-model review.
MIDIR is loss-making and DRAVUS sub-par despite peer-level CAPEX — the gap merits a full business-model review, not line-by-line trims.
SCOPE OF REVIEW
- Review manning & POB vs land-rig norms
- Review workforce cost structure — exceeding 50% of theoretical revenue
- Review rig spec, sizing & capabilities
- Review CAPEX strategy
OPTIONS TO EVALUATE
- Upgrade to a more competitive spec
- Re-deploy to better-fit work
- Restructure crew model — expat ratio & rotation
- Re-base the cost structure to land-rig norms
Roadmap · Sequenced Action Plan
From diagnostics to delivery —
capture value fast, then lock it in.
WORKSTREAM
NOW · NEXT 90 DAYS
THEN · 3–12 MONTHS
1
Performance
Dashboards
Dashboards
Weekly rig + management dashboard live · benchmark vs peers and targets
Fleet-wide dashboards across Ops, Finance, HR, Supply Chain, Equipment & HSE
2
Reduce NPT
Operations & Reliability
Operations & Reliability
Mandatory PM record retention · Cat III/IV cert tracker + recert campaign
CMMS rollout with OEM-based PM tasks · reliability programme by rig
3
Tighten Ordering
Supply Chain & Inventory
Supply Chain & Inventory
Wall-to-wall count · dead stock off rigs to CWHs · consumption + min/max before every PO
Complete re-labelling & SAP-ID tagging · MR-to-PO cycle in SAP · SKU scrap policy · appoint drilling supply chain manager
4
Clean Asset Register
Asset & Certification
Asset & Certification
Asset-register re-baseline · tag & verify across all rigs
Updated asset & cert tracking, including asset movements · appoint drilling asset manager
5
Land Rigs Review
MIDIR & DRAVUS
MIDIR & DRAVUS
Frame the review · scope, terms of reference & data pack
Complete business-model review · manning, cost base, spec & commercial model
NOW · OUTCOME
Discipline & visibility — inventory build-up halted, NPT trending down, register trusted.
THEN · OUTCOME
Platform & structure — systems, processes and rig portfolio aligned to peer-level performance & efficiency.
DIXSTONE · RIGS PEER BENCHMARKING REVIEW
Open Discussion
Questions & Next Steps