Dixstone Strategic
Peer Benchmarking Review
Where Dixstone stands against the offshore-drilling peer set — and the four observations that matter most.
Built on
three independent lines of evidence.
Three independent lines of evidence — primary regulatory disclosures, a peer-normalised P&L framework restating every contractor to the same Rig Direct Margin normalised basis (H&P MD&A precedent), and the Sigma team's hands-on operating and advisory experience across offshore and land drilling — triangulated cell by cell across the FY21 – FY25 frame.
Regulatory filings as the anchor
SEC EDGAR (10-K, 10-Q, 20-F), Oslo Børs, Tadawul, Bursa, SEDAR+, HKEXnews — direct from the regulator, not from aggregators.
Normalised peer P&L · same basis across 9 peers
Every peer contractor restated to the same Rig Direct Margin normalised basis: drilling-dayrate revenue only (excluding reimbursable, bareboat, management contracts) less direct rig opex (excluding D&A, corporate SG&A, financial items, taxes; including OPEX-reclassed-from-CAPEX). Industry precedent: H&P's "Direct Margin" disclosure (10-K MD&A).
Sigma industry depth
The Sigma team brings hands-on operating and advisory experience across both offshore and land drilling — calibrating which AI inferences are credible, framing the right questions of the data, and validating every benchmark against how the industry actually runs day-to-day.
Historical depth + real-time refresh
FY21 – FY25 spans one full jack-up cycle. The benchmarking layer re-pulls against new disclosures (10-K, 20-F, quarterlies, fleet-status reports) as they file — never older than the most recent peer release.
Segment-matched, uniform definitions
Premium JU vs premium JU; standard JU vs standard JU; land vs land. 18 KPIs with identical formulas across every peer and FY — no per-peer normalisation that obscures comparison.
Dixstone — SAP-direct, per rig
Bottom-up from SAP exports — MB52 inventory, MB51 movements, ME2N purchase orders, P&L by rig, NPT trending. Per-rig granularity preserved; aggregation reversible.
What this review is here to answer.
Sigma was retained to answer two specific questions for Dixstone leadership. The rest of this deck addresses each in order.
Where does Dixstone stand vs the peer set?
A segment-aware view — premium jack-up, standard jack-up, platform rig, land — drawing on primary filings from 9 peers across 5 fiscal years.
What are the most impactful actions?
Four observations with quantified implications, ranked by what materially moves the FY26 P&L and inventory position.
Internal Dixstone Analysis
A SAP-direct deep-dive across Purchase Orders · Goods Receipt · Inventory · Workforce · Supply-Chain Coherence · P&L · CAPEX. Every figure sourced from ME2N / MB51 / MB52 and the per-rig P&L. Bottom-up, per-rig, fully auditable.
Fleet GR rose +47% YoY to $43.4M —
GR-intensity 27.4%, a 5-year high.
P&L-derived Equivalent PO OPEX GR (Dixstone_P&L tab row 40) — captures externally-procured OPEX spend that materialises as goods receipts. Audited, complete, and matches the economic measure used by finance. Fleet GR ran 20–22% of revenue 2022–2024 then jumped to 27.4% in 2025 — concentrated on AXIMA and MIDIR.
| $M GR · per rig | 2025 | 2024 | Δ 24→25 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 5Y total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXIMAPremium JU | $10.1M · 25.8% | $7.2M · 16.2% | +40% · +9.6pp | $5.7M · 15.0% | $0.0M | — | $23.0M |
| BANBAStandard JU | $8.8M · 26.3% | $7.2M · 30.8% | +22% · −4.5pp | $5.8M · 21.8% | $4.7M · 18.0% | $5.3M · 32.4% | $31.8M |
| NUADAStandard JU | $7.8M · 22.6% | $6.7M · 22.2% | +16% · +0.4pp | $4.6M · 27.3% | $5.7M · 23.3% | $5.9M · 57.1% | $30.7M |
| LUGPlatform | $6.5M · 27.4% | $3.4M · 26.1% | +91% · +1.3pp | $4.6M · 21.5% | $3.2M · 17.3% | $4.8M · 28.0% | $22.6M |
| MIDIRLand | $7.1M · 52.0% | $2.5M · 21.8% | +184% · +30.2pp | $3.1M · 24.0% | $3.0M · 29.6% | $4.3M · 38.4% | $20.0M |
| DRAVUSLand | $4.2M · 29.7% | $2.9M · 23.8% | +44% · +5.9pp | $2.6M · 20.7% | $2.8M · 37.6% | $0.2M | $12.6M |
| FLEET | $43.4M · 27.4% | $29.6M · 22.0% | +47% · +5.4pp | $25.4M · 19.8% | $24.6M · 22.8% | $24.7M · 31.0% | $147.7M |
MIDIR GR jumped from 21.8% (2024) to 52.0% of revenue in 2025 — a single rig anomaly.
+30.2pp YoY · $2.5M → $7.1M GR on a $13.6M revenue base. Now the only rig in the fleet with GR >50% of revenue (DRAVUS dropped from 51.7% in 2024 to 29.7% in 2025 · −22pp). Single-rig issue, structurally distinct from rest of fleet. Connects to the slide 23 / 43 land-rig over-CAPEX and the slide 46 MIDIR turnaround scenarios.
4 of 6 rigs saw GR-intensity rise YoY · LUG +91% in $ terms (biggest jump).
LUG +$3.1M (almost doubled), AXIMA +$2.9M, MIDIR +$4.6M. Only BANBA saw a meaningful intensity drop (−4.5pp). Combined +$13.8M fleet GR step-up tracks the slide 18 finding that Engineering and Services-for-Ops were the main margin headwinds in 2025 — both flow through this GR line.
AXIMA $32k/day vs DRAVUS $12k/day —
4× fleet spread, MIDIR the outlier.
Daily GR = annual Equivalent PO OPEX GR (P&L row 40) ÷ operating days. AXIMA tops the fleet at $32.5k driven by the 2025 maintenance-intensive year. MIDIR jumped from $7k/day (2024) to $19k/day (2025) — the steepest YoY climb. DRAVUS at $11.5k is the fleet's lowest absolute daily GR. Six-rig spread from $12k to $32k.
$32.5k/day reflects maintenance-intensive 2025 — Spare Parts +6pp · Engineering +3pp YoY.
For a Premium JU at $130K dayrate, $32.5k/day GR = 25% of revenue — within healthy band but elevated vs 16% (2024). Worth confirming via the 2026 PM schedule whether this is one-year SPS catch-up or a new run-rate. If it persists, the +9.6pp GR-intensity rise compresses margin from 39.5% toward 35%.
MIDIR +184% YoY · DRAVUS normalised to fleet-lowest.
MIDIR jumped $2.5M → $7.1M (52% of revenue). DRAVUS DROPPED $2.9M → $4.2M intensity 23.8% → 29.7% — far from previously reported 74%. The land-rig narrative is now MIDIR-specific, not a segment-wide story. Cost-side intervention on MIDIR; DRAVUS only needs margin recovery.
BANBA $24k · NUADA $21k — both stable, BANBA improving on intensity.
BANBA GR-intensity dropped −4.5pp YoY (30.8% → 26.3%) — the only rig in the fleet to lower intensity in 2025. NUADA roughly flat (+0.4pp). Both Standard JUs now in the 22-26% range — solid Premium-JU peer band.
$43.4M fleet GR —
$37.4M MB51-coded, $6M services / freight.
P&L Equivalent PO OPEX GR is $43.4M fleet · 2025 (slides 05–06). Of that, $37.4M is material-coded in MB51 — those are the categories shown below. The remaining ~$6M is services (Engineering, Inspection, Logistics) and "no material" GR entries. MB51-coded subset captures 86% of total GR — the breakdown below is materially complete for cost-driver analysis. Top 15 mat groups = 58% of the MB51 subset.
$265.7M OPEX PO, 2021 → 2025 —
106,488 approved lines.
Order-side view — what the 6-rig fleet committed to buy each year. 2023 was the cycle peak ($93M) as BANBA + NUADA scaled and AXIMA came online; 2024-25 stabilised at $48–59M annual run-rate.
| $M PO · per rig | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 5Y total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXIMAPremium JU | $11.5M | $11.6M | $13.0M | $5.3M | — | $41.4M |
| BANBAStandard JU | $10.1M | $13.0M | $29.9M | $7.0M | $4.9M | $64.9M |
| NUADAStandard JU | $4.4M | $12.3M | $18.7M | $13.4M | $4.6M | $53.4M |
| LUGPlatform | $7.6M | $4.0M | $13.7M | $6.4M | $8.0M | $39.6M |
| MIDIRLand | $7.7M | $10.4M | $11.1M | $5.8M | $2.9M | $37.9M |
| DRAVUSLand | $7.6M | $8.0M | $7.1M | $4.3M | $1.5M | $28.6M |
| FLEET | $48.9M | $59.3M | $93.4M | $42.2M | $22.0M | $265.7M |
AXIMA $37k/day buys 3× NUADA's $12k —
wide jackup spread once normalised.
Daily PO = annual non-project PO ÷ operating days. Land & platform cluster tight at $21k — expected, but signal-clean. NUADA is the structural low — useful internal benchmark for jackup operations.
AXIMA $37k/day — 3× NUADA.
Premium-jackup spec drives part of it, but the gap is too large to be only spec-driven. Mix of consumption intensity, project leakage, and ageing inventory replenishment.
NUADA — settled, low-CAPEX steady-state.
$12k/day is a clean internal target for jackup operations. Applying its protocol to BANBA alone would close ~$5–6M/yr.
LUG · MIDIR · DRAVUS = $21k/day each.
Tight band — but well above what their issue-out rate justifies (see Supply Chain Coherence slide).
$48.9M fleet PO —
concentrated in 15 material groups.
Order-side view of what was bought. Same filters as the per-rig PO slide: drilling-only · CMT & WIR excluded · non-project. Fleet top 15 = 65% of all 2025 PO value.
DRAVUS the sole over-spender at 1.81× —
all other rigs in-band or drawing down.
The clearest single test for procurement discipline: 2025 PO (newly committed) ÷ 2025 GR (actually consumed). Ratio >1.2× = over-ordering (committing more than the rig burns). 1.0–1.2× = healthy operating band. <1.0× = drawing down existing stock. Of 6 rigs, only DRAVUS sits above 1.2× — committing 81% more than it consumes. Fleet-wide the discipline has tightened sharply YoY (2.00× → 1.13×), driven mainly by MIDIR's correction (4.16× → 1.08×) and NUADA's active inventory drawdown.
| Rig | 2025 GR (consumed) | 2025 PO (ordered) | 2025 PO ÷ GR | 2024 PO ÷ GR | YoY shift | Read |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXIMAPremium JU | $10.1M | $11.5M | 1.14× | 1.61× | −0.47× | Ordering 14% ahead · discipline improving |
| BANBAStandard JU | $8.8M | $10.1M | 1.15× | 1.81× | −0.66× | Ordering 15% ahead · discipline improving |
| NUADAStandard JU | $7.8M | $4.4M | 0.56× | 1.84× | −1.28× | Drawing down excess inventory · positive (carries $12.3M stock) |
| LUGPlatform | $6.5M | $7.6M | 1.17× | 1.18× | −0.01× | Stable · ordering slightly ahead consistently |
| MIDIRLand | $7.1M | $7.7M | 1.08× | 4.16× | −3.08× | In sync · biggest YoY correction (was wildly over-ordering) |
| DRAVUSLand | $4.2M | $7.6M | 1.81× | 2.72× | −0.91× | Still over-ordering 81% above consumption · only outlier |
| FLEET | $43.4M | $48.9M | 1.13× | 2.00× | −0.87× | Discipline tightened sharply YoY · DRAVUS sole remaining outlier |
DRAVUS — sole rig where PO substantially exceeds GR.
2025: $7.6M PO vs $4.2M GR · 1.81× ratio · building $3.4M of inventory ahead. Was 2.72× in 2024 — improving but still far above peer norm. Worth confirming: SPS prep stockpile? Cameroon-base demob inventory? Or operational drift? Combined with DRAVUS's 5Y CAPEX 12.5% (over-investing per slide 21), this rig consistently spends ahead of what its operations consume.
AXIMA · BANBA · MIDIR — all dropped from elevated 2024 ratios.
MIDIR's correction is the most dramatic — from 4.16× in 2024 to 1.08× in 2025. PO compressed from $10.4M to $7.7M while GR rose from $2.5M to $7.1M. Now in sync. AXIMA and BANBA both dropped ~0.5× to a healthy 1.14-1.15× range. LUG stable at 1.17×. All four within the normal 1.1-1.2× operating band.
NUADA — PO cut 64% YoY while consumption flat.
2024 PO $12.3M → 2025 PO $4.4M (−$7.9M). GR roughly flat ($6.7M → $7.8M). Ratio collapsed from 1.84× to 0.56×. Positive direction given NUADA carries the fleet's highest inventory ($12.3M, 57% dead stock per slide 13). Active drawdown of excess stock. Watch for stockout risk on long-lead items — but otherwise model behaviour for over-stocked rigs.
$45.2M fleet inventory —
$33M above ceiling, every rig over.
MB52 end-2025 snapshot. 16,427 of 28,385 distinct materials valued (57.9% — clean enough for analysis; high-dollar items over-represented in PO history). Drilling-only scope. NUADA carries the largest single excess at $9.3M above its bracket.
$25.2M dead stock — 56% of inventory,
$20.8M dormant 5+ years.
Dead stock = no consumption movement over the indicated period. The red segment of each bar shows the 3-year dormant portion. Working capital tied up with no operational return — a recurring write-down risk, not a one-off.
58% dead
59% dead
40% dead
60% dead
38% dead
73% dead
73% dead
65% dead
NUADA & BANBA — $12.4M of dead stock combined.
Both standard JUs are running ~4× their bracket and ~58% of stock is dormant. NUADA represents the single largest cash-release opportunity in the fleet.
Capital items currently on the inventory line.
A complete diesel engine is currently sitting on a rig's inventory line. Reclassify engines, large rotating equipment, BOP-grade components, and capital spares onto the capital-equipment register before re-running the bracket analysis.
AXIMA & BANBA over jackup cap —
MIDIR & DRAVUS expat cost 2× the land norm.
Rig-resident headcount per rig (day & night shifts combined) vs industry max. Premium-JU peer ~100, Standard-JU peer ~95, platform 66, land ~60. Expat-cost as % of revenue is shown for context — an expat-heavy mix is industry-standard for offshore jackups (limited local pool for offshore JU positions), but for land rigs the norm is <8% expat — MIDIR and DRAVUS sit well above that.
| Rig | Type | Drilling Crew (rig-resident) | Industry max | Excess vs cap | Expat % of Theoretical Revenue | Flag |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXIMA | Premium JU | 106 | 100 | +6 | 9.6% | Modest overmanning |
| HURSTGRA | Jackup | 94 | 95 | −1 | — | At cap |
| NUADA | Standard JU | 96 | 95 | +1 | 13.9% | At peer · expat mix normal for offshore JU |
| BANBA | Standard JU | 104 | 95 | +9 | 11.5% | Modest overmanning |
| LUG | Platform | 66 | 66 | at cap | 9.8% | In line |
| MIDIR | Land | 72 | 60 | +12 | 16.2% | ⚠ Overmanning + expat overload |
| DRAVUS | Land | 66 | 60 | +6 | 10.5% | ⚠ Modest overmanning + expat overload |
AXIMA 106 vs peer 100 (+6) · BANBA 104 vs peer 95 (+9).
Modest jackup overmanning, enough for a direct ~2% drag on gross margin given the bonus-loaded jackup expat rate. ~$0.8–1.0M annual recovery per rig.
MIDIR & DRAVUS — overmanning + expat overload.
Both carrying 16% / 11% expat-cost as % of theoretical revenue — vs industry land norm <8%. Combination explodes margin: MIDIR Adj RGM at −10.7%.
Workforce 20–35% of revenue.
Above 35%, gross margin can't realistically reach the 40% profitability threshold. MIDIR sits at 51.9% — structurally cannot reach profitability under current dayrate.
From early-stage to classic drilling-contractor.
Today's structure fits an early-stage contractor with resource focus on projects and rig-fleet preparation. With 7 full-time rigs, the structure should evolve toward a classic drilling-contractor model — three dedicated heads added under the Technical Manager.
Project- & Readiness-Heavy
- Drilling Manager — direct reports:
- Fleet Readiness Manager
- Operations Manager
- Technical Support Manager (Electrical / Mech / Maintenance bundled)
- Projects Manager (multiple project teams)
- QHSE Manager · Cementing Operations Manager
- Financial Controller · Doc Controller · single Buyer
Aligned with 7-Rig Steady State
- Add three dedicated heads under Technical Manager:
- Drilling Supply Chain Manager — owns ME2N, MB51, MB52, GR/IR, country-base material strategy
- Drilling Assets Manager — owns rig asset register, transfers, certification, life-cycle
- Maintenance Manager — owns CMMS, PM compliance, OEM-aligned routines (assets + maintenance reporting in)
- Projects Manager — kept distinct (engineering / capital projects)
$53.5M Adjusted Rig Direct Margin —
33.7% of Theoretical Revenue.
Per-rig income statement on theoretical-revenue basis (billable days × theoretical dayrate). Workforce and Spare Parts together = 49% of fleet cost. MIDIR is the only loss-making rig; NUADA leads at 41% margin.
| P&L Line | AXIMA | BANBA | NUADA | LUG | MIDIR | DRAVUS | Fleet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theoretical Revenue | $39.2M | $33.3M | $34.4M | $23.8M | $13.6M | $14.1M | $158.5M |
| Workforce & Labor | ($12.4M) 31.7% | ($11.2M) 33.7% | ($10.3M) 30.0% | ($7.6M) 32.0% | ($7.1M) 51.9% | ($5.8M) 40.9% | ($54.4M) 34.3% |
| Spare Parts | ($5.9M) 15.1% | ($3.7M) 11.2% | ($3.4M) 10.0% | ($3.1M) 12.9% | ($3.5M) 25.5% | ($3.3M) 23.1% | ($22.9M) 14.5% |
| Services for Ops | ($1.4M) 3.6% | ($1.6M) 4.7% | ($2.1M) 6.1% | ($0.8M) 3.5% | ($1.8M) 12.9% | ($1.4M) 10.1% | ($9.1M) 5.7% |
| Logistics | ($0.1M) 0.2% | ($0.0M) 0.1% | ($0.0M) 0.1% | ($0.0M) 0.0% | ($0.3M) 2.2% | ($0.6M) 4.6% | ($1.1M) 0.7% |
| Engineering | ($2.7M) 6.9% | ($2.4M) 7.4% | ($0.6M) 1.9% | ($1.6M) 6.5% | ($1.1M) 8.0% | ($0.8M) 5.4% | ($9.2M) 5.8% |
| General Services | ($1.8M) 4.5% | ($1.3M) 4.0% | ($1.1M) 3.1% | ($0.9M) 3.9% | ($1.3M) 9.8% | ($0.8M) 5.8% | ($7.3M) 4.6% |
| Goods Transport | ($0.6M) 1.5% | ($0.7M) 2.2% | ($1.4M) 3.9% | ($0.3M) 1.4% | ($0.6M) 4.6% | ($0.4M) 2.8% | ($4.0M) 2.5% |
| Taxes | $0.0M | ($0.1M) 0.4% | $0.0M | ($0.2M) 0.8% | $0.0M | $0.0M | ($0.4M) 0.2% |
| Running OPEX | ($24.9M) 63.5% | ($21.2M) 63.6% | ($19.0M) 55.2% | ($14.6M) 61.1% | ($15.6M) 114.9% | ($13.1M) 92.9% | ($108.4M) 68.4% |
| Extraordinary | ($1.2M) 3.0% | ($1.2M) 3.6% | ($2.2M) 6.3% | ($0.8M) 3.5% | ($0.9M) 6.7% | ($0.8M) 5.9% | ($7.1M) 4.5% |
| Cost of Revenue (raw) | ($26.1M) | ($22.4M) | ($21.1M) | ($15.4M) | ($16.5M) | ($13.9M) | ($115.5M) |
| Rig Direct Margin (raw) | $13.1M · 33.5% | $10.9M · 32.7% | $13.3M · 38.6% | $8.4M · 35.4% | ($2.9M) ·−21.7% | $0.2M · 1.3% | $43.0M · 27.1% |
| + OPEX→CAPEX reclass | $2.4M | $1.2M | $0.9M | $0.4M | $1.5M | $3.1M | $10.5M |
| Adjusted RDM | $15.5M · 39.5% | $12.1M · 36.3% | $14.1M · 41.1% | $8.8M · 37.1% | ($1.4M) · −10.7% | $3.3M · 23.5% | $53.5M · 33.7% |
Adj RDM grew 5× —
$10.3M (2021) to $53.5M, margin +21pp.
Five-year fleet P&L on the same theoretical-revenue basis. Each line shown as absolute $ and as % of Theoretical Revenue — to expose where the cost base actually compressed. Revenue scaled 2× (from $80M to $158M) as AXIMA came online and other rigs ramped to full utilisation. Adjusted RDM grew from $10.3M (12.9%) in 2021 to $53.5M (33.7%) in 2025 — a $43M absolute improvement and +21pp margin uplift driven almost entirely by Workforce intensity falling from 52.8% to 34.3% of revenue.
| Line | 2025 | 2024 | Δ 24→25 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theoretical Revenue | $158.5M | $134.7M | +17.6% | $127.8M | $107.7M | $79.7M |
| Workforce & Labor | ($54.4M) · 34.3% | ($52.0M) · 38.6% | +4.6% | ($62.6M) · 49.0% | ($52.8M) · 49.0% | ($42.1M) · 52.8% |
| Spare Parts | ($22.9M) · 14.4% | ($19.8M) · 14.7% | +16.0% | ($18.4M) · 14.4% | ($15.9M) · 14.8% | ($12.8M) · 16.1% |
| Services for Ops | ($9.1M) · 5.7% | ($5.2M) · 3.9% | +73.4% | ($5.2M) · 4.1% | ($2.8M) · 2.6% | ($2.5M) · 3.1% |
| Logistics | ($1.1M) · 0.7% | ($0.1M) · 0.1% | +1631% | ($1.5M) · 1.2% | ($1.0M) · 0.9% | ($3.8M) · 4.8% |
| Engineering | ($9.2M) · 5.8% | ($4.6M) · 3.4% | +99.6% | ($2.7M) · 2.1% | ($3.2M) · 3.0% | ($1.9M) · 2.4% |
| General Services | ($7.3M) · 4.6% | ($4.5M) · 3.3% | +62.1% | ($2.6M) · 2.0% | ($2.6M) · 2.4% | ($1.3M) · 1.6% |
| Goods Transport | ($4.0M) · 2.5% | ($2.7M) · 2.0% | +51.4% | ($3.8M) · 3.0% | ($4.0M) · 3.7% | ($2.8M) · 3.5% |
| Taxes & Other | ($0.4M) · 0.3% | ($0.0M) · 0.0% | — | ($0.1M) · 0.1% | ($0.1M) · 0.1% | ($1.0M) · 1.3% |
| Running OPEX | ($108.4M) · 68.4% | ($88.9M) · 66.0% | +22.0% | ($97.0M) · 75.9% | ($82.4M) · 76.5% | ($68.1M) · 85.4% |
| Extraordinary | ($7.1M) · 4.5% | ($8.3M) · 6.2% | −14.1% | ($9.3M) · 7.3% | ($3.9M) · 3.6% | ($2.6M) · 3.3% |
| Cost of Revenue (raw) | ($115.5M) · 72.9% | ($97.1M) · 72.1% | +18.9% | ($106.3M) · 83.2% | ($86.2M) · 80.0% | ($70.7M) · 88.7% |
| RDM (raw) | $43.0M · 27.1% | $37.6M · 27.9% | +14.3% | $21.5M · 16.8% | $21.5M · 19.9% | $9.0M · 11.3% |
| + OPEX→CAPEX reclass | $10.5M · 6.6% | $7.2M · 5.3% | +46.1% | $9.0M · 7.0% | $5.0M · 4.6% | $1.3M · 1.6% |
| Adjusted RDM | $53.5M · 33.7% | $44.8M · 33.2% | +19.4% | $30.6M · 23.9% | $26.4M · 24.6% | $10.3M · 12.9% |
Three cost lines lost intensity YoY.
- Workforce & Labor — 38.6% → 34.3% (−4.3pp) · the dominant driver of 2025 margin uplift
- Extraordinary — 6.2% → 4.5% (−1.7pp) · LUG 2024 spike did not repeat
- Spare Parts — 14.7% → 14.4% (−0.3pp) · essentially flat — absolute $ rise is mechanical (revenue +17.6%)
Five cost lines moved against margin.
- Engineering — 3.4% → 5.8% (+2.4pp) · DRAVUS-led rig projects, doubled YoY in $
- Services for Ops — 3.9% → 5.7% (+1.8pp) · concentrated on AXIMA, MIDIR, DRAVUS
- General Services — 3.3% → 4.6% (+1.3pp)
- OPEX → CAPEX reclass — 5.3% → 6.6% (+1.3pp) · catch-up sustaining CAPEX surfacing in OPEX
- Goods Transport — 2.0% → 2.5% (+0.5pp)
Fleet RDM flat at 33.7% —
but every rig's trajectory differs.
Per-rig normalised Adjusted Rig Direct Margin YoY view. Fleet steady at 33.7% (+0.5pp), but 4 of 6 rigs moved by >5 pts YoY. AXIMA — fleet #2 performer — dropped −8.2pp despite holding the premium position. MIDIR collapsed −17.9pp and turned loss-making. LUG recovered +34.4pp from a one-off-heavy 2024. Per-rig dollar swings of $0.9M–$8.5M.
| Rig | 2025 RDM% | 2025 RDM $K | 2024 RDM% | 2024 RDM $K | Δ pp | Δ $K | Trajectory |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXIMAPremium JU | 39.5% | $15,504 | 47.7% | $21,109 | −8.2 pp | −$5,605 | Gave back 2024 peak · still #2 in fleet |
| BANBAStandard JU | 36.3% | $12,098 | 25.7% | $6,012 | +10.6 pp | +$6,086 | Consistent recovery · workforce normalised |
| NUADAStandard JU | 41.1% | $14,141 | 39.7% | $11,966 | +1.4 pp | +$2,175 | Stabilised at fleet-best margin |
| LUGPlatform | 37.1% | $8,842 | 2.7% | $344 | +34.4 pp | +$8,498 | Recovered from 2024 extraordinary spike |
| MIDIRLand | −10.7% | −$1,449 | 7.2% | $844 | −17.9 pp | −$2,293 | Structural deterioration · turned loss-making |
| DRAVUSLand | 23.5% | $3,325 | 33.8% | $4,188 | −10.3 pp | −$863 | Gave back most of 2024 gain |
| Fleet | 33.7% | $53,468 | 33.2% | $44,763 | +0.5 pp | +$8,705 | Headline flat % · $8.7M $ uplift on revenue scaling |
Spare Parts +6.1pp · Engineering +3.2pp · Gen Services +2.6pp.
Premium-JU best performer in 2024 (47.7%) gave back margin in 2025. Spare Parts jumped from 9.1% to 15.1% of revenue ($4.0M → $5.9M). Engineering doubled from 3.8% to 6.9%. Both consistent with an investment / maintenance-intensive year. Margin still strong at 39.5% — but no longer at peer-leading level.
Spare Parts +11.7pp · Services +5.3pp · Engineering +4.7pp.
From thin-margin to loss-making in one year. Spare Parts almost doubled (13.8% → 25.5%). Services jumped 7.6% → 12.9%. Engineering +4.7pp. Gen Services +3.0pp. Combined OPEX intensity reached 114.9% of revenue. Cost-side intervention is the only path to recovery at $40K dayrate.
Spare Parts +3.4pp · Services +4.1pp · Engineering +2.7pp.
Land rig retraced most of 2024's gain. Spare Parts 19.8% → 23.1%. Services 6.0% → 10.1%. Engineering 2.7% → 5.4%. Plus Extraordinary +2.9pp. Pattern mirrors MIDIR — same cost categories under pressure on the land segment.
LUG +34.4pp · BANBA +10.6pp · NUADA +1.4pp.
LUG's 2024 Extraordinary spike (23.3% of revenue) did not repeat in 2025 (3.5%) — explains 20pp of the recovery. Workforce normalised −15.8pp. BANBA's improvement driven by Spare Parts dropping 10.4pp and Workforce −4.0pp. NUADA stabilised on lower Spare Parts (-7.0pp) and Workforce (-3.5pp). Common thread: cost-base normalisation after 2024 one-offs.
Spare Parts is the common 2025 cost driver across underperformers.
Three of four declining rigs (AXIMA, MIDIR, DRAVUS) saw Spare Parts +3 to +12pp YoY — collectively ~$5M absolute increase. Engineering up on 5 of 6 rigs (fleet line +100% YoY). Worth tracing 2025 maintenance / project schedule to determine whether this is catch-up spend (one-year) or a new baseline.
MIDIR overspends 6 of 8 categories —
NUADA the low-cost benchmark.
Cost categories as % of theoretical revenue, per rig. Fleet average shown for reference. Cells highlighted by deviation from fleet: red = >5pp above · amber = 2–5pp above · green = >3pp below. Within-jackup highlight: AXIMA's Spare Parts 15.1% is highest among the three jackups (BANBA 11.2% · NUADA 10.0%) — worth surfacing despite being only +0.6pp above fleet average.
| Rig | Workforce | Spare Parts | Services | Logistics | Engineering | Gen Services | Goods Trans | Extraordinary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXIMAPremium JU | 31.7% | 15.1%highest among JUs | 3.6% | 0.2% | 6.9% | 4.5% | 1.5% | 3.0% |
| BANBAStandard JU | 33.7% | 11.2% | 4.7% | 0.1% | 7.4% | 4.0% | 2.2% | 3.6% |
| NUADAStandard JU | 30.0% | 10.0% | 6.1% | 0.1% | 1.9% | 3.1% | 3.9% | 6.3% |
| LUGPlatform | 32.0% | 12.9% | 3.5% | 0.0% | 6.5% | 3.9% | 1.4% | 3.5% |
| MIDIRLand | 51.9% | 25.5% | 12.9% | 2.2% | 8.0% | 9.8% | 4.6% | 6.7% |
| DRAVUSLand | 40.9% | 23.1% | 10.1% | 4.6% | 5.4% | 5.8% | 2.8% | 5.9% |
| Fleet avg | 34.3% | 14.5% | 5.7% | 0.7% | 5.8% | 4.6% | 2.5% | 4.5% |
6 of 8 categories above fleet avg.
Workforce +17.6 pts vs fleet (51.9% vs 34.3%). Spare Parts +11 pts. Services +7 pts. Cost structure cannot reach profitability at $40K dayrate without intervention.
Workforce + Spare Parts hot · logistics elevated.
Workforce +6.6 pts (40.9% vs 34.3%). Spare Parts +8.6 pts (23.1%). Logistics +3.9 pts — combination drove 2025 RDM down to 23.5%.
15.1% of revenue on Spare Parts — highest of the three jackups.
BANBA 11.2% · NUADA 10.0% · AXIMA 15.1% (+3.9pp vs BANBA, +5.1pp vs NUADA). Absolute Spare Parts spend $5.9M on AXIMA vs $3.4M NUADA, $3.7M BANBA. Combined with Engineering +1.1pp vs fleet (6.9% vs 5.8%), AXIMA is running a maintenance-intensive 2025 — the same pattern that explains the −8.2pp YoY RDM drop. Worth tracing whether this is one-year SPS catch-up or a new baseline.
Low-cost across all major categories.
Workforce −4.3 pts (30.0%). Spare Parts −4.5 pts (10.0%) — fleet-lowest. Engineering −3.9 pts (1.9%). Same dayrate as BANBA but +5.1pp better margin. Useful internal benchmark for the other JUs.
CAPEX intensity —
5–10% healthy, outside a red flag.
Capital intensity per rig per year. Industry rule of thumb: sustained 5–10% reflects healthy reinvestment. Red highlights all values below 5% (under-investing · deferring maintenance) or above 10% (over-investing · capital absorption above norm). Almost every Dixstone rig-year sits outside the healthy band — the few exceptions are highlighted in plain text.
| Rig · CAPEX / Rev | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 5Y avg |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXIMAPremium JU | 6.1% | 3.0% | 3.2% | — | — | 4.6% |
| BANBAStandard JU | 3.6% | 5.1% | 3.2% | 3.0% | 1.4% | 3.4% |
| NUADAStandard JU | 2.6% | 3.0% | 16.7% | 9.0% | 2.0% | 6.0% |
| LUGPlatform | 1.7% | 4.4% | 3.9% | 3.4% | 2.3% | 3.0% |
| MIDIRLand | 11.0% | 12.4% | 12.4% | 4.0% | 1.7% | 8.2% |
| DRAVUSLand | 22.3% | 14.0% | 6.4% | 0.3% | — | 12.5% |
Four CAPEX clusters —
over-investing, investing, steady-state, divesting.
Per rig: 2025 single-year view alongside the 5-year cumulative (2021–2025) view. The 5-year basis smooths SPS-cycle lumpiness and reveals structural patterns. Four distinct capital-deployment postures emerge — including a divesting cluster (LUG, NUADA) where recent-year CAPEX has fallen so far below maintenance norm it reads as capital starvation rather than steady-state.
| Rig | CAPEX ($M) | CAPEX / Revenue | CAPEX / Op Day | CAPEX / OPEX | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | 5Y total | 2025 | 5Y avg | 2025 | 5Y avg | 2025 | 5Y avg | |
| AXIMAPremium JU | $2.38M | $5.59M | 6.1% | 4.6% | $7.7k | $5.4k | 9.6% | — |
| BANBAStandard JU | $1.19M | $4.25M | 3.6% | 3.4% | $3.3k | $2.7k | 5.6% | — |
| NUADAStandard JU | $0.88M | $7.00M | 2.6% | 6.0% | $2.4k | $4.8k | 4.7% | — |
| LUGPlatform | $0.41M | $2.83M | 1.7% | 3.0% | $1.1k | $1.7k | 2.8% | — |
| MIDIRLand | $1.50M | $4.90M | 11.0% | 8.2% | $4.1k | $2.8k | 9.6% | — |
| DRAVUSLand | $3.15M | $5.80M | 22.3% | 12.5% | $8.6k | $4.3k | 24.0% | — |
| Fleet | $9.51M | $30.37M | 6.0% | 5.4% | $4.5k | $3.4k | 8.8% | — |
DRAVUS · MIDIR
CAPEX / Revenue > 10% — capital not earning back fast enough. DRAVUS 22.3% in 2025 is fleet's highest; MIDIR 11.0% compounds with negative RDM. Land rigs running at jackup-level capital intensity is anomalous for a mature operating cohort with no expansion programme — flagged on slides 23 + 43 as the primary candidate for a CAPEX-line review.
AXIMA
Premium-JU at 6.1% in 2025 — within healthy band, reflecting a maintenance-intensive year. 5Y avg 4.6% sits just below the band, but the trajectory has lifted as the rig matures into its second SPS cycle. Payback strong at $130K dayrate, 39.5% Adj RDM. Worth confirming via FY26 plan whether 6%+ becomes the new run-rate.
BANBA
Standard JU at 3.6% in 2025 (5Y avg 3.4%) — settled, paying back, RDM recovering (+10.6pp YoY). At the low end of the healthy band but consistent across 5 years — pattern reads as disciplined sustaining-CAPEX, not capital starvation. Reasonable benchmark for the rest of the JU cohort once Cat IV recert programme rolls out.
LUG · NUADA
Recent CAPEX collapse: LUG at 1.7% (2025) with a steady decline 2.3% → 3.4% → 3.9% → 4.4% → 1.7%; NUADA at 2.6% (2025) with 2024 also at 3.0% — well below the 2023 SPS spike (16.7%) that suggested an active life-extension intent. Two consecutive years of sub-3% on operating rigs reads as capital-starvation / divesting posture rather than steady-state. Both rigs are profitable today (LUG 37.1% RDM · NUADA 41.1% RDM) — current behaviour suggests deferring sustaining-CAPEX to extract cash, not investing for continuity. Worth a strategic conversation: is this intentional (planned end-of-life harvesting) or accidental (deferred maintenance)?
$563M revenue, $30M CAPEX, 5.4% intensity —
per-rig spread tells the story.
Five-year cumulative income statement and capital intensity per rig. Adjusted RDM% and CAPEX/Revenue together identify which rigs paid back capital and which didn't.
| 5-yr Cumulative | AXIMA | BANBA | NUADA | LUG | MIDIR | DRAVUS | Fleet |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operating Days | 1,030 | 1,593 | 1,470 | 1,677 | 1,767 | 1,344 | 8,881 |
| Theoretical Revenue | $121.3M | $125.9M | $116.2M | $94.0M | $59.5M | $46.3M | $563.2M |
| Adjusted RDM | $51.4M | $32.3M | $32.5M | $29.0M | ($1.2M) | $10.7M | $154.7M |
| Adjusted RDM % | 42.3% | 25.6% | 28.0% | 30.9% | −2.0% | 23.2% | 27.5% |
| Adjusted CAPEX | $5.59M | $4.25M | $7.00M | $2.83M | $4.90M | $5.80M | $30.4M |
| CAPEX / Revenue 5Y | 4.6% | 3.4% | 6.0% | 3.0% | 8.2% | 12.5% | 5.4% |
AXIMA — 42% Adj RDM · clear payback leader.
5-year Adj RDM $51.4M vs $5.6M CAPEX = 9.2× capital-payback ratio. LUG follows at 30.9% RDM. NUADA, BANBA fall below the 30% margin threshold over the 5Y window — capital deployed but margin returns insufficient to compound at peer level.
MIDIR · DRAVUS — capital not earning back.
MIDIR: $4.9M CAPEX vs ($1.2M) negative cumulative margin. DRAVUS: $5.8M CAPEX vs $10.7M margin = 1.8× payback (below the >5× threshold typical of operating rigs).
Land rigs at jackup-level capital intensity —
MIDIR & DRAVUS spend has no operational payback.
Both Dixstone land rigs run materially above the typical land-rig sustaining-CAPEX band of 3–8% of revenue. MIDIR sits at 8.2% with negative cumulative margin. DRAVUS is far above at 12.5% — 2025 alone saw 22.3% CAPEX/Revenue. Worth scrutinising what the CAPEX is buying.
$4.9M CAPEX · ($1.2M) negative Adj RDM.
Capital invested far exceeds the gross profit it generates. 5Y CAPEX/Revenue 8.2% — above the land-rig steady-state band. Workforce overload (51.9% of revenue in 2025) + Spare Parts 25.5% + Services 12.9% means there's no margin headroom to absorb high CAPEX. Capital deployed without operational payback.
$5.8M CAPEX · 1.8× capital-payback ratio.
Land rig running at jackup-level capital intensity (12.5% vs 3-8% land norm). 2025 alone: 22.3% CAPEX/Revenue with $3.15M CAPEX vs $14.1M revenue. The 5Y view shows this isn't a one-year anomaly — pattern persists across 2023 (6.4%), 2024 (14.0%), 2025 (22.3%).
3-8% of revenue is the sustaining-CAPEX norm.
Based on US/Canada land drillers: H&P (12% but includes growth), Precision (11%), Nabors (18% — includes Saudi JV growth). For a mature operating land rig with no expansion programme, 3-8% reflects ordinary recertification + spare-part replacement + occasional component upgrades.
Audit MIDIR & DRAVUS CAPEX program.
Separate sustaining CAPEX (recertification, planned maintenance) from growth CAPEX (upgrades, life-extension). Test whether current spend reflects deferred-maintenance catch-up or genuine over-investment. Tie 2026 CAPEX budget to operational payback requirements (5× minimum on 5Y horizon).
Interim target: 44.8% RDM at 2–4% NPT (peer median) —
profitability is the intersection, not NPT or spend alone.
A 44.8% margin (peer median of Borr 44.8% · Shelf 44.9% · ADNOC 46.7%) cannot be reached by NPT improvement alone (cost-base too high on every rig) or by spending compression alone (NPT lost revenue too large on most). The target is the intersection. This slide reverse-engineers the math per rig: revenue if NPT were 2%, cost ceiling for 45% RDM, current cost, and the resulting daily PO/GR ceiling. Tangible numbers Dixstone management can hold each rig to. 44.8% is the Premium/Standard JU peer median (Borr 44.8% · Shelf 44.9% · ADNOC 46.7% · Velesto 49.0% · ADES 60.7%) — the segment-matched benchmark to hit.
| Rig | Ops days | Dayrate | Today | Target (2% NPT · 44.8% RDM) | Cost gap to ceiling | Primary lever | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPT | RDM | Revenue | Cost ceiling | Current cost | |||||
| AXIMAPremium JU | 310 | $130K | 2.7% | 39.5% | $39.5M | $21.8M | $23.7M | +$1.9M | NPT minor + GR cut |
| BANBAStandard JU | 365 | $100K | 8.7% | 36.3% | $35.8M | $19.7M | $21.2M | +$1.5M | NPT major + GR cut |
| NUADAStandard JU | 365 | $100K | 5.8% | 41.1% | $35.8M | $19.7M | $20.2M | +$0.5M · closest | NPT moderate · minor GR |
| LUGPlatform | 365 | $70K | 6.7% | 37.1% | $25.0M | $13.8M | $15.0M | +$1.2M | NPT moderate + GR cut |
| MIDIRLand | 365 | $40K | 6.9% | −10.7% | $14.3M | $7.9M | $15.0M | +$7.1M · structural | Workforce + GR + NPT |
| DRAVUSLand | 365 | $40K | 3.3% | 23.5% | $14.3M | $7.9M | $10.8M | +$2.9M · cost cut | GR cut · NPT minor |
| Fleet | 2,135 | — | 5.7% | 33.1% | $164.7M | $90.9M | $106.0M | +$15.1M | NPT + cost · combined |
Daily PO/GR ceiling per rig · assuming current workforce held
| Rig | Cost cap (44.8% RDM) | − Non-GR cost | = GR budget | ÷ Ops days | = GR ceiling / day | Current GR / day | Verdict · daily cut |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AXIMA | $21.8M | $13.6M | $8.2M | 310 | $26.4K/day | $32.6K/day | Cut $6.1K/day (19%) |
| BANBA | $19.7M | $12.4M | $7.3M | 365 | $20.0K/day | $24.1K/day | Cut $4.0K/day (17%) |
| NUADA | $19.7M | $12.5M | $7.3M | 365 | $19.9K/day | $21.3K/day | Cut $1.3K/day (6%) · closest to target |
| LUG | $13.8M | $8.5M | $5.4M | 365 | $14.7K/day | $17.9K/day | Cut $3.2K/day (18%) |
| MIDIR | $7.9M | $8.0M | −$0.1M | 365 | −$0.2K/day | $19.4K/day | Impossible · workforce > cost cap |
| DRAVUS | $7.9M | $6.6M | $1.3M | 365 | $3.5K/day | $11.5K/day | Cut $8.0K/day (69%) |
NUADA
Only $0.6M over cost ceiling and 5.8% NPT (vs target 2.0%). The most achievable path to 44.8%: minor GR discipline (−$1.5K/day, 7% cut) + close 3.8pp of NPT. Already at 41.1% RDM despite higher-than-target NPT — confirms NUADA's cost structure is best-in-fleet. NPT 5.8→2.0% recovery alone would lift RDM to ~44%.
AXIMA · BANBA · LUG
All three need modest cost compression PLUS NPT recovery. Cost gaps $1.2M–$2.0M · GR/day cuts 18–20%. AXIMA needs $6.4K/day cut (already 2.7% NPT — so primarily a spending story). BANBA needs $4.2K/day + biggest NPT jump (8.7→2.0%) — every pp of NPT recovery ≈ $1M revenue at $100K dayrate. LUG needs $3.3K/day + NPT 6.7→2.0% · TDS + Pump intervention.
MIDIR · DRAVUS
MIDIR overspends cost ceiling by $7.2M even at 2% NPT — workforce alone exceeds the entire allowable cost cap. GR ceiling math goes negative. Cannot reach 44.8% RDM without workforce restructure (slide 45). DRAVUS needs $2.9M cost cut (mainly GR from $11.5K → $3.5K/day, a 70% reduction) plus NPT 3.3→2.0%. For land rigs, 44.8% sits well above the land-peer median (32.8%) — for these two rigs the realistic interim is 30–35%.
Rig One-Pagers
One slide per rig — operating KPIs, P&L snapshot, NPT equipment drivers, and 2025 top-5 material groups for PO / GR / IO. Six rigs: AXIMA · BANBA · NUADA · LUG · MIDIR · DRAVUS.
External Peer Benchmarking
Now compared against 9 listed peer contractors. Segment-matched per-rig benchmarks: dayrate · NPT · Rig Direct Margin · FTE · 5Y CAPEX intensity. Where Dixstone stands out on the cost-base and capital-deployment axes — the Outlier Map closes Phase 2.
The peer set —
9 listed contractors, ~1,200 rigs.
Dixstone's 7-rig fleet spans premium jackup, standard jackup, platform and land — so the peer set is deliberately broad: pure-play JU operators (Borr, Shelf, Velesto), pure-play land drillers (Helmerich & Payne, Nabors, Precision), and blended-fleet contractors (ADES, ADNOC, Valaris). Comparison is segment-matched, not entity-level.
| Contractor | Fleet type | Total Active | Jackups | Floaters | Land | Platform | Region |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DIXSTONESubject | Mixed | 7 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | West Africa |
| Helmerich & PayneLand + Platform | Land-heavy | 367 | 0 | 0 | 360 | 7 | US + Intl |
| Nabors IndustriesLand + Platform | Land-heavy | 269 | 0 | 0 | 242 | 27 | Global (incl. SANAD) |
| Precision DrillingLand | Land-pure | 184 | 0 | 0 | 184 | 0 | Canada + US + Intl |
| ADNOC DrillingBlended | Mixed | 140 | 48 | 0 | 92 | 0 | UAE |
| ADES HoldingBlended | JU + onshore | 123 | 50 | 0 | 40 | 0 | MENA + intl |
| ValarisJU + ARO only · floaters excluded | Jackups segment | 33 | 33 (24 owned + 9 ARO JV) | 0 | 0 | 0 | Global |
| Shelf DrillingStandard JU | JU-pure | 33 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 0 | MENA + SE Asia |
| Borr DrillingPremium JU | JU-pure | 24 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Global |
| Velesto EnergyStandard JU | JU-pure | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | SE Asia |
A high-dayrate environment.
Utilisation is tightening.
Reliability is rising as a differentiator.
With newbuild supply absent and dayrates at multi-year highs, operator uptime carries an increasing share of the competitive variance — alongside rate.
Fleet utilisation 97.5% — at or above every listed peer.
Cycle is being captured in full. AXIMA reliability sits in the segment top quartile. Standard JU and land segments at 100%.
Each rig vs
its direct peer set.
AXIMA vs Borr · ADNOC · ADES · Valaris-JU · Velesto
BANBA & NUADA vs Shelf · Valaris · ADES
MIDIR & DRAVUS vs Helmerich & Payne · Nabors · Precision
LUG vs Helmerich & Payne · Nabors · Precision
CAPEX / Rev · methodology: Peer comparison intentionally omitted for CAPEX — a material share of Dixstone's capital outlays has been funded by sole-customer Perenco, making external peer benchmarks not directly comparable on a like-for-like basis. The 5-year average (sum CAPEX 2021–25 ÷ sum Theoretical Revenue 2021–25) is shown as the internal-only reference, smoothing single-year SPS-cycle lumpiness.
A summary view across the fleet.
Four observations from the FY25 segment-level benchmarking — one per business line, plus one on the balance sheet.
Best-in-segment reliability.
2.7% NPT — top quartile against every premium-jackup peer. Operational asset, not yet priced in.
Above-peer dayrate; below-peer NPT.
$100K dayrate leads the standard-JU peer set. NPT (8.7% / 5.8%) lags Shelf's 0.6% — the operational gap.
Loss-making at FY25 economics.
−10.7% gross margin vs land peers at 29–40%. Cost structure (51.9% payroll, 103.9% O&M) is the issue.
$25.2M dead-stock.
56% of total inventory. Working-capital trap on a 12-month timeline — discrete and isolatable.
Where Dixstone is a peer-set outlier —
four positions worth flagging.
Six per-rig metrics normalised to comparable per-rig basis across the 9-peer set. Inventory, capital intensity and crew-per-rig sit at the extremes; revenue per rig sits comfortably above peer median; CAPEX is structurally below.
| Metric | Dixstone | ADES | ADNOC | H&P | Nabors | Precision | Borr | Shelf | Velesto | Position |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inventory · $/rigFY25 BS / fleet | $6.46M | $2.05M | $1.99M | $1.38M | $0.35M | $0.19M | n/a | n/a | $3.95M | 🔴 Highest |
| Inventory turnoverCOGS ÷ Inv | 2.5× | 2.8× | 9.4× | 7.9× | 20.4× | 25.3× | n/a | n/a | 4.6× | 🔴 Lowest |
| Headcount / rigEmployees ÷ fleet | ~85 | 65 | n/a | 67 | 52 | 27 | 85 | 117 | 108 | 🟡 Top of pack |
| Land FTE / rigMIDIR · DRAVUS | 72 / 66 | — | — | ~50 | ~50 | ~27 | — | — | — | 🔴 Highest |
| Revenue / rigFY25 Theoretical | $22.6M | $14.5M | $35.0M | $15.9M | $11.9M | $7.2M | $37.8M | $14.8M | $35.5M | 🟢 Above median |
| 5Y CAPEX / Rev2021–2025 | 3–13% | 26% | 26% | 12% | 17% | 11% | 22% | 20% | 19% | 🔴 Lowest |
Three of the four outliers point to cash locked up in operations.
Inventory $/rig (3× peer), inventory turnover (3× slower than peer median on COGS basis · ~145 days of operating cost in stores vs 14–80 days for peers), and land FTE/rig (1.5× the peer norm) all describe the same underlying pattern — capital and headcount tied up beyond what operating need justifies. Combined cash-release opportunity sits well above the $10–15M dead-stock release already quantified.
Revenue capture per rig is healthy.
Dixstone earns $22.6M per rig vs peer median ~$15M — premium dayrates are being achieved. The issue is on the cost-base side (inventory, headcount, OPEX intensity) and the capital-deployment side (under-investment in CAPEX). The revenue side is not the gap.
Low CAPEX could be contributing to elevated NPT —
inflated inventory driving up OPEX.
The four diagnostic threads in this deck — bottom-quartile CAPEX, Cat IV recertification surfaced as the LUG audit's only Critical finding, NPT running 2–3× peer median on four of six rigs, and spare-parts cost climbing +3 to +12pp YoY on the underperformers — fit a single causal chain. Worth scrutinising as a hypothesis before sizing recovery actions.
Lowest sustaining CAPEX in the peer set.
5Y fleet CAPEX/Revenue band 3–13% sits below every listed peer in the comparison set (peers 11–26%). Land rigs MIDIR (8.2%) and DRAVUS (12.5%) are the exception — and that's a separate over-spend question (slide 23). Across the Premium and Standard JU rigs, sustaining-CAPEX runs below the level peers maintain to keep equipment in cycle. Deferred recertifications and component replacements are a logical consequence.
LUG audit raised Cat IV as the only Critical item.
The LUG operational audit surfaced Cat IV recertification as the single Critical finding — paired with home-made Excel PM trackers and discarded task sheets. The fleet-wide asset register / certification ownership gap is not isolated to LUG; the deck flags it as a role-definition issue across the Drilling Assets Manager scope. Equipment running past its certification window is the natural consequence of sustained under-investment.
Failures shift onto run-time and the spare-parts bill.
Out-of-cert equipment fails more often → NPT climbs (4 of 6 rigs at 5.8–8.7%, vs peer median 3.0%). Unplanned failures get patched with unscheduled spare-parts buys → spare-parts cost jumped +3–12pp of revenue YoY across the three underperforming rigs. Engineering cost doubled fleet-wide. Same dollars, wrong line: CAPEX saved becomes OPEX paid, plus the revenue forgone to NPT.
Four threads converge on the same hypothesis.
- Slide 36 (Outlier Map) — Dixstone 5Y CAPEX/Rev lowest in peer set (3–13% vs 11–26%)
- Slide 39 (Pillars · Pillar 2) — Cat IV recertification = single Critical audit finding; PM record-keeping informal
- One-pagers (slides 25–30) — NPT 5.8–8.7% on BANBA/NUADA/LUG/MIDIR/DRAVUS vs peer median 3.0%
- Slide 18 (RDM Evolution) — Spare-parts cost +3 to +12pp YoY on AXIMA, MIDIR, DRAVUS; Engineering cost doubled fleet-wide
The hypothesis is testable, not proven.
- Per-equipment cert status by rig is not yet in the deck — only the LUG audit surfaces it. A fleet-wide cert register pull would confirm or refute the scale.
- If the 2025 spare-parts spike is genuine catch-up CAPEX-reclassed-to-OPEX (planned), not unplanned, the OPEX line will normalise in 2026 — that's also testable from the 2026 budget vs PM schedule.
- NPT codes need to be decomposed: a substantial share could be third-party / mud / well-related rather than rig-equipment-related. The per-rig NPT-driver bars on the one-pagers suggest equipment is the dominant category, but a code-level audit is needed before committing to CAPEX as the lever.
Recommendations &
Roadmap
Three pillars surface from the diagnostics. Each pillar has measurable evidence and concrete actions — sequenced as quick wins (weeks) and structural fixes (months). Five impactful actions and a five-step execution plan close the deck.
Three workstreams —
each with evidence and concrete actions.
Three pillars surfaced from the LUG audit and the inventory diagnostics. Each pillar has measurable evidence already documented in this deck and concrete actions to address it.
Supply Chain
Procure-to-pay, issue-out and inventory hygiene. The diagnostics show $33M of fleet inventory above bracket and $25.2M of dead stock at 3-year threshold — both rooted in process gaps.
Maintenance & Certification
Asset-integrity discipline at the rig. The audit raised Cat IV recertification as the single Critical item — paired with home-made Excel PM trackers and discarded task sheets.
Systems & Culture
Bridging shore engagement and rig-level practice. Local home-made tools persist alongside SAP because adoption, training and governance are uneven.
Six process gaps drive over-stocking —
seen in the LUG audit, reproducible fleet-wide.
Manual Excel + email cycle.
Problem · Time-consuming, loosely controlled, produces delays, inaccuracies, duplications and omissions.
Action · Implement MR cycle approval in SAP — initial request from Mech/Elec/STP only, then Matman creates and routes the SAP MR. Instant qty-on-hand, on-order, min/max visibility plus full traceability.
Six conflicting versions of how IOs happen.
Problem · Warehouses open without control, no log books, no daily SAP entries. Whole month of Feb 2026 captured only 26 line items.
Action · Lock warehouses → log books at every container → daily SAP issue-outs by rig Matman → central Matman audits daily → senior accountability (STP, NTP, Sr Mech, Sr Elec, HSE).
MB52 inaccurate vs SAP.
Problem · Annual wall-to-wall + bulk SAP upload, far too infrequent. Personal Excel inventory not shared with SCM. Items without SAP No. simply aren't logged.
Action · One-off wall-to-wall reset → enforce daily SAP issue-out discipline → weekly cycle counts → ban local Excels, SAP as single source of truth. SAP material-master created at first arrival, with zone allocation.
Central warehouse >$5M for one rig.
Problem · Orders of magnitude above peer benchmark. Fleet inventory $33M above best-practice ceiling.
Action · Mandatory consumption check before each PO at 6M / 12M / 3Y thresholds. Apply per-rig min/max caps. Cross-plant SAP visibility for inter-country and inter-rig transfers before any external purchase.
Items coded at HQ-only level — no country-base segregation.
Problem · Buyers and Matman cannot see country-base specific stock, transfers between bases, or country-level usage patterns.
Action · Roll out SAP material codes at country level (CMR, CGO, GAB, RDC, etc.). Ties consumption, inventory and PO to the country-base where the rig actually operates — unlocks transfer logic before each new PO.
PO buyers don't see prior consumption.
Problem · PO buyers do not see prior consumption history of the same material at PO creation time. POs created blind to whether the rig actually issues the item out — driver of over-stocking.
Action · Add 6M / 12M / 36M past-consumption fields directly into the SAP PO screen. Buyer & approver see consumption trend at point of purchase. Mandatory check above $25k thresholds.
200+ material groups · overlapping & ambiguous codes confuse buyers and analytics.
Problem · The current SAP material-group taxonomy carries 200+ codes with overlapping scope (e.g. MECHA vs ROT_MACH vs DRIL_HDLG share rotating-component spend · DRIL_CTRL vs BOP-specific codes overlap · service codes ELE_SRV / MECH_SRV / STRUC_SRV duplicate intent). Buyers split orders inconsistently, analytics roll up imprecisely, and dead-stock identification by material category becomes unreliable. Confusion compounds at every reporting layer.
Action · One-off taxonomy review — collapse the 200+ codes into ~30–40 unambiguous categories aligned to industry standard (e.g. IADC's spare-parts classification or NOV's equipment taxonomy). Each material assigned to exactly one group with clear definition + examples. Migration mapping table → bulk re-classification via SAP MM03 → mandatory training for buyers and Matman. Unlocks reliable PO analytics, dead-stock by category, and cross-rig benchmarking on like-for-like spend.
Lift maintenance from rig-local Excel —
to fleet-grade CMMS with OEM-aligned PMs.
CMMS Rollout (MM Fusion)
Problem · Locally-developed Excel PM tracker, only 88 equipment lines on the mechanic sheet, no equipment change-out history. Inadequate for an offshore rig with millions in equipment.
Action · Deploy MM Fusion (or SAP-based CMMS) across all rigs. Migrate PM master from Excel into CMMS — measurements, clearance recordables, task evidence. Mandatory across fleet.
OEM-Based PM Instructions
Problem · PM task content currently a free-form text field on Excel — operator-defined intervals and steps, drift from manufacturer recommendation.
Action · Replace free-form PM steps with OEM-published instructions per equipment model. Lock task templates in CMMS — only Maintenance Manager can edit. Quarterly review against OEM bulletins.
PM Records & Asset-Number Discipline
Problem · Printed PM sheets discarded after Excel entry. Zero historical measurements. PMs occasionally booked under wrong asset number — kills traceability and equipment-history value.
Action · Mandatory record retention — every completed PM filed (scanned + CMMS attachment). PMs MUST be booked under the correct asset number — Maintenance Manager validates daily. Builds the equipment history needed for predictive maintenance.
Get the asset register clean and live —
PMs, POs & certs depend on it.
Rig Asset Register — Full Log & Update
Problem · Asset register incomplete and stale. New equipment added to rigs without proper SAP / CMMS asset creation. Removed equipment not retired in the system.
Action · Run a one-off asset re-baselining campaign per rig (visual + serial-number audit). Then enforce: every equipment movement on/off rig generates a CMMS asset transaction. Asset Manager owns weekly reconciliation.
Asset Transfers — Both Systems in Sync
Problem · When equipment moves rig-to-rig or rig-to-base, transfer is recorded in finance but not in CMMS — PM history orphaned, certifications lost, asset effectively becomes new.
Action · Build a single asset-transfer workflow that updates BOTH the asset master AND the PM/CMMS system in one transaction. PM history follows the equipment, not the rig. Mandatory before ANY equipment can leave a rig.
Rig Equipment Certification Tracker
Problem · Most major equipment missing Cat IV inspection and recertifications — flagged by the audit as a proven source of major NPT and incidents. No fleet-level visibility on what's expired.
Action · Implement a fleet-level certification tracker (per asset, per cert type, expiry, evidence). Cat IV recertification campaign starting with critical-rotating equipment. Operational release tied to certification status.
Lift JU sustaining CAPEX to ~7% —
bring MIDIR / DRAVUS to the 3–5% land norm.
Dixstone fleet 5Y CAPEX/Rev sits at 5.4% average · 3–13% range — bottom of peer set (peers 11–26%). But the within-fleet split is inverted: Premium/Standard JU (where 7–9% is the industry standard) sit at 3–6%, while land rigs MIDIR/DRAVUS run at 8–12% (vs 3–8% land norm). Both directions need to converge.
Add ~$3M / year of certified sustaining CAPEX on AXIMA, BANBA, NUADA.
Prioritise Cat IV recertification of critical rotating equipment (BOP, TDS, drawworks, top-drives, power generation). Sequence: campaign-style 12-week recert blocks per rig, ideally during planned downtime. Sized: $3M lift across 3 rigs × ~$1M each — restores them from 3–6% to the peer-band 6–8%.
Expected return · NPT drops 2–3pp on BANBA (8.7% → 5–6%) and NUADA (5.8% → 3–4%) over 12–18 months = $3–4M/yr revenue recovery at $100K/day × 30–40 operating days.
Run a 6-week CAPEX-line review on the 8–12% land-rig spend.
Land rigs running at jackup-level capital intensity is anomalous (see slide 23). Two hypotheses to test: (a) deferred maintenance catch-up — legitimate one-year spike, returns to 3–5% in FY26; or (b) structural over-spec — reclassed OPEX, replacing parts that should have been recertified. Pull line-item CAPEX detail for both rigs 2023–2025.
Expected return · If (b), compress to peer norm releases $1.5–2M/yr on these two rigs (8–10pp × $13M average revenue).
Right-size land manning from 72/66 to ~60 FTE —
releases ~$2M / year.
We benchmarked peers and best practice and set the operating norm at ~60 FTE for an international land rig. MIDIR at 72 and DRAVUS at 66 sit above it. That gap maps directly to MIDIR's 68.5% workforce intensity (2024) — the single biggest reason it tipped loss-making. The same gap exists on DRAVUS at lower magnitude.
| Rig / Peer | FTE / rig | Workforce cost / rig | WF % of revenue | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIDIRDixstone Land | 72 | $7.1M (2025) | 51.9% | Cut to ~60 FTE over 12 mo → −$1.2M/yr |
| DRAVUSDixstone Land | 66 | $5.8M (2025) | 40.9% | Cut to ~60 FTE over 12 mo → −$0.6M/yr |
| H&P (US Land)Peer benchmark | ~50 | ~$2.5M est. | ~16% | — |
| Nabors (Global Land)Peer benchmark | ~52 | ~$2.5M est. | ~21% | — |
| Precision (Canada/US)Peer benchmark | ~27 | ~$1.5M est. | ~20% | Lowest-FTE land operator in peer set |
Likely concentration: expat ratio + shore-overhead allocation.
Land rigs in peer set typically run with 5–10% expat ratio; Dixstone's land staffing pattern (Cameroon, Congo, Gabon) likely sits well above that. Each expat carries 2–3× the loaded cost of a national operator. Recommendation: 4-week expat-ratio review per rig — identify roles convertible to national hires within 12 months. Secondary: review shore-overhead allocation methodology (Drillsight engineering / SC / HSE allocated per-rig may be over-loaded on land).
Two-crew rotation peer-standard for land; check if Dixstone runs three.
US/Canada land peers run 2-crew rotation (28/28 or 14/14) — peer FTE figures reflect this. If Dixstone runs 3-crew rotation on land (legacy offshore-style), each crew position requires 1.5× the headcount of 2-crew. Worth confirming: a single rotation-model change would close 30–40% of the FTE gap without role reductions.
Clear $15–23M of dead inventory over 12 months —
three peer-benchmarked levers to stop the build-up.
Dixstone fleet inventory ends 2025 at $45.2M total · $6.46M / rig — 3× the peer median ($1.99M / rig) and the slowest inventory cycling in the peer set (145 days of operating cost in stores vs peer range 14–80 days · slide 36). Three distinct release levers, sequenced by feasibility.
Release $10–15M from 3-Y no-movement SKUs.
Slide 12 quantified $25.2M dead stock at 3-year threshold — 56% of fleet inventory. Bond-yard auction design + SKU-level scrap policy. Immediate first step: off-site demobilisation to town staging facility to halt carrying cost. Industry experience: 50–65% recovery on dead-stock auction.
Feasibility · High · within current systems · Cash · $10–15M
Release $3–5M from duplicate active SKUs.
Slide 11 shows fleet inventory $33M above best-practice bracket. Same critical-spare often held redundantly on 3–6 rigs because country-base SAP segregation prevents visibility. Pool inventory by SAP material code at country level (CMR/CGO/GAB/RDC); enforce transfer-before-PO logic on items >$25K. Brings duplicates down by ~30–40%.
Feasibility · Medium · needs SAP country-level codes (slide 40 action) · Cash · $3–5M
Avoid $2–3M of new over-stocking annually.
Past-consumption (6M/12M/36M) embedded in SAP PO screen at point of purchase. Mandatory consumption check above $25K threshold. Stops the re-stocking pattern that recreates the dead-stock problem after clearance. Plus: country-level min/max caps with hard system enforcement.
Feasibility · Medium · needs SAP screen development · Cash · $2–3M/yr avoided
$15–23M one-time release · $2–3M/yr ongoing avoidance
Sequenced: dead-stock clearance ($10–15M) → cross-rig pooling ($3–5M) → consumption-driven PO discipline ($2–3M/yr). Plus elimination of recurring write-down risk on dead inventory.
Inventory / rig: $6.46M → ~$2.5M (still above peer median but credible glide path)
Phase 2 targets (24–36 mo) to lift inventory turnover from 2.5× to ~6× — requires the consumption-discipline lever fully operational and country-base SAP coding live across all rigs.
Four segments, four recovery profiles —
each with a peer-anchored RDM target.
Fleet 33.7% RDM masks rig-level divergence. Each segment has a distinct gap to peer best and a distinct cost-driver profile. Recovery plans must be segment-matched — not fleet-uniform.
| Segment · Rig(s) | 2025 RDM | Peer best | Gap | Primary lever | Target FY26 | Δ vs 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Premium JU · AXIMAvs Borr / ADNOC / ADES | 39.5% | 60.7% | −21pp | Reverse spare-parts +6pp YoY · cert/PM discipline | 42–45% | +3–6pp · $1–2M/yr |
| Standard JU · BANBAvs Shelf / Velesto / Valaris | 36.3% | 49.0% | −13pp | NPT down from 8.7% → 4% · Power Gen + BOP campaign | 42–45% | +6–9pp · $2M/yr |
| Standard JU · NUADAvs Shelf / Velesto / Valaris | 41.1% | 49.0% | −8pp | NPT down from 5.8% → 4% · Power Gen + BOP campaign | 44–46% | +3–5pp · $1M/yr |
| Platform · LUGvs H&P / Nabors platform | 37.1% | ~40% | −3pp | TDS overhaul · Pump (25% NPT) · maintain through cycle | 38–42% | +1–5pp · $0.5M/yr |
| Land · MIDIRvs H&P / Nabors / Precision | −10.7% | 39.9% | −51pp | Crew restructure · contract reprice · reassignment | 10–15% | +20–26pp · $3–4M/yr |
| Land · DRAVUSvs H&P / Nabors / Precision | 23.5% | 39.9% | −16pp | Reverse spare-parts +3pp + Engineering +2.7pp YoY · CAPEX compress | 30–33% | +7–10pp · $1–1.5M/yr |
| Fleet | 33.7% | ~46% blended | ~−12pp | — | ~40% | +6pp · $8–10M/yr |
Total prize: $25–35M / yr margin uplift
+ $15–23M one-time dead-stock clearance.
Sum of all recommendation levers, sized against peer benchmarks. Roughly 80% of the uplift sits on three rigs (MIDIR, BANBA, DRAVUS) where the gap to peer best is widest. Margin uplift compounds — Adj RDM moves from 33.7% (FY25) toward ~40% (FY26 target glide path).
| Lever | Source slide | Annual uplift | One-time cash | Horizon | Feasibility |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPT reduction · BANBA + NUADAPower Gen + BOP campaign | Slide 44 (5 Actions) · Slide 43 (CAPEX) | $3M/yr | — | 9–12 mo | High |
| NPT reduction · LUG + MIDIRTDS overhaul | Slide 44 | $1–2M/yr | — | 9–12 mo | High |
| MIDIR loss-making turnaroundCrew / reprice / reassign | Slide 46 | $3–4M/yr | — | 6–9 mo | Strategic |
| DRAVUS margin recoveryCost-side intervention | Slide 46 | $1–1.5M/yr | — | 12 mo | Medium |
| AXIMA margin protectionSpare-parts + cert discipline | Slide 46 | $1–2M/yr | — | 9–12 mo | High |
| Land workforce optimisationFTE 72→50 + 66→50 | Slide 44 (Workforce) | $3M/yr | — | 12 mo | Medium |
| CAPEX compression · MIDIR/DRAVUSLand norm 3–5% vs current 8–12% | Slide 43 (CAPEX) | $1.5–2M/yr | — | 12 mo | Medium |
| Inventory carrying cost savingReduced WC × WACC | Slide 45 (WC) | $1–2M/yr | — | 12 mo | High |
| TOTAL — Annual margin uplift | — | $14–18M/yr | — | FY26 H2 | — |
| Inventory dead-stock releaseBond-yard + cross-rig pooling | Slide 45 (WC) | — | $15–23M | 12 mo | High |
| Avoided over-stockingConsumption-discipline POs | Slide 45 (WC) | $2–3M/yr avoidance | — | Ongoing | Medium |
Initiatives by horizon —
quick wins in weeks, structural fixes in months.
Quick wins need no system rollout and can launch within weeks. Structural fixes require platform deployment, training and policy.
Process & discipline
- ① Lock all rig warehouse containers; place issue-out log books at each entrance.
- ② Mandate daily SAP issue-outs by rig Matman; central Matman audits daily.
- ③ Apply the 6M / 12M / 3Y consumption check before approving any PO.
- ④ Design rig-level dashboards — GR, I/O, new PO, OPEX, CAPEX, NPT, overdue PMs, overdue Cat IV inspections.
- ⑤ Publish a rig-by-rig Cat IV certification status tracker and a 12-week recertification campaign plan.
- ⑥ Mandatory PM record retention — every completed task filed (hard copy or scanned) with measurements.
Platform & organisation
- ① Adapt org structure — focus on Supply Chain & Assets; appoint senior SC and senior Asset leads as dedicated heads.
- ② MR-to-PO cycle in SAP — replace the manual Excel + email loop end-to-end. Stop Rig Managers manually copy-pasting POs into trackers.
- ③ Performance Engineer to share rig-level dashboards & metrics daily across the fleet.
- ④ Supply Chain manual / playbook — single fleet-wide standard (MR, PO, IO, transfers, master-data).
- ⑤ SAP material-master at country level + past-consumption fields embedded in PO screen.
- ⑥ CMMS rollout (MM Fusion or SAP) with OEM-based PM tasks and recordables.
- ⑦ Global capital-equipment pool with a fleet-level certification tracker.
- ⑧ Review Land rigs (MIDIR, DRAVUS) cost structure & business model — workforce, expat ratio, CAPEX intensity all out of land-rig norms.
Where the data points to actionable impact.
Power generation & BOP are the shared NPT culprit on both jack-ups.
BANBA (8.7%) and NUADA (5.8%) flag identical top-two equipment groups in 2025, excluding miscellaneous. Power Generation accounts for 21% of BANBA's NPT hours and 40% of NUADA's; BOP systems account for 11% and 26% respectively. Both rigs pointing at the same failure modes opens the door to a shared root-cause programme — common PM protocols, aligned spares strategy, and joint crew competency uplift — closing both rigs toward the 3–4% peer benchmark simultaneously. Recovery: 4–6 operating days per rig at $100K/day.
TDS is the dominant NPT driver across LUG and MIDIR.
LUG (6.7%) and MIDIR (6.9%) both show TDS as the primary NPT contributor in 2025: TDS accounts for 34% of LUG's NPT hours and 49% of MIDIR's. LUG's second contributor is the Pump (25%); MIDIR's second is the BOP (13%). A TDS-focused overhaul and preventive maintenance cycle — ideally coordinated across both assets — represents the single highest-impact intervention for this segment. Recovery: 3–5 operating days per rig annually.
Address MIDIR's loss-making unit economics.
FY25 gross margin −10.7%; payroll 51.9%, O&M 103.9% of revenue. Three options on the table: crew restructure, contract reprice, or rig reassignment. Single-rig P&L swing of $3–4M.
Clear the $25.2M dead-stock position.
56% of total inventory locked in non-moving SKUs. Dead-stock is not cost-free or harmless to carry: it degrades cycle-count accuracy, consumes warehouse space, and pulls the materials team toward non-relevant items — precisely the conditions that erode stockout protection on the SKUs that actually matter. Industry practice is systematic clearance: bond-yard auction, SKU-level scrap policy, and cross-rig pooling. At minimum, off-site demobilisation to a town staging facility halts carrying-cost accumulation immediately and restores focus on active inventory management. Expected dead-stock cleared: $10–15M over 12 months, plus elimination of recurring P&L write-down risk.
Reinvestment cadence sits at the cohort floor.
CAPEX 4.07% of revenue vs peer median ~11% (Borr 4.6%, Shelf 9.4%, Nabors 23%). Critically, current spending is weighted toward equipment replacement rather than API recertification of existing assets — the inverse of industry practice. Peers prioritise API recertification to maintain equipment longevity, suppress NPT, and reduce replacement costs over the asset lifecycle; Dixstone's pattern suggests the opposite sequence — replacing equipment that recertification would have extended. Sustained underinvestment in recertification compounds into accelerating NPT, shortened useful life, and concentrated SPS-cycle exposure. Worth surfacing into the FY26 capital planning cycle.
From insight to execution.
-
01
Standard JU NPT programme — BANBA & NUADA · Power Generation & BOP focus
Shared root-cause review targeting Power Generation (BANBA 21%, NUADA 40%) and BOP (BANBA 11%, NUADA 26%) — the two common failure modes across both rigs in FY25. Joint PM schedule rebuild and spares alignment. Target: both rigs below 4% NPT by FY26 Q4.
-
02
Platform & Land NPT programme — LUG & MIDIR · TDS focus
TDS-led intervention: TDS accounts for 34% of LUG NPT hours and 49% of MIDIR NPT hours in FY25. Coordinated TDS overhaul and preventive maintenance cycle across both assets. LUG Pump (25%) and MIDIR BOP (13%) addressed in parallel. Target: LUG and MIDIR below 4% NPT by FY26 Q4.
-
03
MIDIR options review
Eight-week structured review of the three options (crew restructure / contract reprice / reassignment) with a financial model per scenario and a board-ready recommendation.
-
04
Inventory rationalisation programme
Twelve-month execution. Bond-yard auction design, SKU-level scrap policy, cross-rig pooling protocol, monthly KPI cadence. As an immediate first step: off-site demobilisation of dead-stock to town staging facility to halt carrying-cost accumulation.
-
05
Quarterly peer-benchmarking refresh
The benchmarking dataset refreshes against new peer disclosures each quarter. One executive readout per quarter — flagging deltas worth acting on.
Where Dixstone stands —
and where the data points next.
Operational signal on standard jack-up and land. Working-capital signal on inventory. A reinvestment watch-item on the balance sheet. Quantified, segment-matched, and traceable to source.