Good morning. My name is Leanne, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Noble Corp First Quarter 2015 Earnings Call. As a reminder, ladies and gentlemen, this conference is being recorded today, April 30. Thank you. I would now like to introduce Mr. Jeff Chastain, Vice President of Investor Relations. Mr. Chastain, you may begin. Jeffrey L. Chastain - Vice President-Investor Relations & Corporate Communications: Okay. Thank you, Leanne, and welcome, everyone, to Noble Corporation's first quarter 2015 earnings call. We appreciate your interest in Noble. A copy of the company's earnings report issued last evening, along with all the supporting statements and schedules, can be found on the Noble website, and that's, noblecorp.com. David Williams will begin our prepared remarks this morning, but before I turn the call over to David, I'd like to remind everyone that we may make statements about our operations, opportunities, plans, operational or financial performance, the Drilling business or other matters that are not historical facts and are forward-looking statements that are subject to certain risks and uncertainties. Our filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which are posted on our website, discuss the risks and uncertainties in our business and industry, and the various factors that keep outcomes of any forward-looking statements from being realized, including the price of oil and gas, customer demand, operational and other risks. Our actual results could differ materially from these forward-looking statements, and Noble does not assume any obligations to update these statements. Also note that we may use non-GAAP financial measures in the call today. If we do, you will find the required supplemental disclosure for these measures, including the most directly comparable GAAP measure and an associated reconciliation on our website. Finally,…

Thank you, James, and hello to everyone. This morning I'll make some brief comments regarding the offshore market while expanding on some of David's earlier thoughts. I will also cover some details on the Noble backlog including new awards and the temporary revisions made to the contracts on our five jackups operating offshore Saudi Arabia that were disclosed last night. In addition, I'll speak to the outlook for the rigs in our fleet with comment on their term availability. Incremental offshore activity remained constrained through the first quarter of this year although there have been a few public tenders for rigs and minimal new fixtures. Direct discussions with our customers have been taking place at a steady pace and we believe some of these may lead to contract signings as we progress through the year. The market is still some way from what we consider a steady state activity but we believe momentum is slowly building. On the supply side, our industry continues to make progress on the long overdue exercise of retiring old capacity. Meanwhile other idle rigs in both the floating and jackup segments are being cold stacked. Of the rigs being cold stacked by our competitors, it is likely a number will never work again as a result of capital expenditure requirements for reactivation and uncompetitive technical specification. Also, it is important to keep in mind that as David previously touched upon, the behavior of the Brent crude oil price is improving, with only a 19% difference between the high and low close in the first quarter of 2015, compared to nearly 40% difference in the fourth quarter of 2014. It's been very difficult for our customers to construct upstream capital spending plans when the price of oil is declining on average 1% to 2% a day…

Our first question comes from the line of Ian Macpherson from Simmons. Your line is open. Ian Macpherson - Simmons & Co. International: Hey, thank you. Great quarter. A quick clarification question, please, on the Aramco deal. I would guess with your Q1 revenue strength that those repricings were not reflected in the revenues you reported. Is that correct? And if not, how will we account for the retroactive portion of that to January going forward? James A. MacLennan - Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President: Ian, thanks for the question. The answer is the first quarter does reflect a portion of it. The accounting is not necessarily intuitive, but following the guidelines. We are spreading the impact over the terms of the respective contracts. And the last thing that I should mention there is to quantify it, it's between $4 million and $5 million per quarter. Ian Macpherson - Simmons & Co. International: Okay. So in other words, your new day rate that you put in your earnings release we can simply plug those in from April 1 forward, and that's the correct method? James A. MacLennan - Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President: Not really. You'll have to calculate a blended rate that's based on the delta that I just gave you in dollars. Ian Macpherson - Simmons & Co. International: Okay. All right. Gotcha. The follow-up, thanks, James. The follow-up, Simon, my sense is that the pricing reset for rigs is probably two steps. First, we get all the renegotiations and repricings out of the way and that probably sets the table for fresh contracting later in the year. Is that how you see it? And if so, when do you hope and expect to get step one completed across your portfolio?

It's difficult to anticipate what other discussions may lie ahead of us. But yeah, I generally agree with your proposition. I do think that there's still some ways to go with the discussions at various contractors have on the table until those discussions are concluded. And then I think more importantly once we get into the second half of the year and we start to approach the 2016 operator budget process, then I think we'll start to see what the industry price reset does in terms of stimulating what we refer to, as steady state demand. As you know, over the last six, nine months we've seen probably the quietest time in the market, certainly in my time in the industry which is some 20 years. So I agree with what you're saying. I think that people are clearing the decks and then everyone's waiting to see what the second half of this year holds. Ian Macpherson - Simmons & Co. International: Okay. Good luck with it. Thanks.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Jud Bailey from Wells Fargo. Your line is open.

Thanks. Good morning. Question. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Good morning, Jud.

Question maybe for James just circling back on the dividend. It sounds like for this year you seem pretty comfortable with your liquidity and contracted cash flow. I was wondering if you could comment as we look into 2015, you have a lot of floaters that are rolling off contract. You have a lot of liquidity through your revolver, cash, et cetera. But can you comment that if you – are you comfortable taking on more debt next year to maintain the dividend if contracts roll off – if rigs roll off contract and market conditions stay depressed? Would you be comfortable continuing to lever up the balance sheet to continue paying the dividend? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Jud, this is David. You're getting way ahead of what we've guided to or what we've talked about, I think. I think what we've said is and what we continue to see is we're comfortable with the dividend where it is, and we're comfortable where we are this year. We do have some exposure next year. I wouldn't characterize it as a lot of floaters rolling off for 2016. We do have some additional exposure. I think we've got about $2.5 billion already in the contract for next year. And that compares to about $2.9 billion we had in the contract when we started, about $3 billion when we started this year. We're good this year, and we're good next year. With the liquidity we've got both in cash and the revolver, I don't know that it would be necessary to go back to the market to meet our additional demands with or without the dividend for several years. So if we were to decide to do something, it would be strategic in nature and not necessity. I think we have plenty of liquidity as far as you look at the debt maturities we've got and the other requirements we've got. As far out as I can see, we're in pretty good shape.

Okay. Thank you for that. And then my second question is, I'd just be curious as we get farther into the budget year, has the dialogue with customers changed? And obviously you're probably trying to renegotiate a lot of contracts. But I'm curious as rates have really come down, operators are trying to get their costs down. Has the scale of the dialogue changed at all to give any sense of optimism? Or is it still the same in terms of releasing rigs and just trying to renegotiate contracts?

I think different operators have different perspectives based on what their contracted position looks like. I do think that even those operators who had cash flow constrained budgets for this year, the absence of decision making in terms of near-term activity persisted for some time until they got a read on where the oil price was going. I think the reduction in the amplitude of the volatility of the oil price, as we commented in that prepared section of this conference call, that is on an improving trend. So we do believe that some of the money that should have been spent in the first half of this year may break loose in the second half. But that's at the margin, we still have a long ways to go, I think, before we can start talking about demand recovery.

All right. I appreciate it. I'll turn it back. Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Praveen Narra from Raymond James. Your line is open. Praveen Narra - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: Hey. Good morning, guys. Very strong quarter. I think you guys mentioned lower labor costs. Could you give us a sense for how much savings you were able to get from this this quarter? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: This is David. I'm not sure I heard exactly what you said. You were asking about lower labor costs. We have not gone through and cut salaries for our guys offshore. I mean it's taken, they went years and years without any salary adjustments, they did get some accelerated adjustments for the two years. But we have cut out any retention devices we had and ceased salary adjustments that we had in place. We've also had some reductions in force in places around the company where we were able to. So that's the way we've been working labor. We have not cut our labor costs to date. I think James mentioned in his discussion about $13 million. Praveen Narra - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: Okay. That's helpful. And then in terms of looking forward for M&A and kind of the leverage metrics. If there was attractive M&A out there, would you be willing to lever up further in order to do that? Or are you kind of comfortable with that 40% level and don't really want to move too much higher? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: I guess it goes to how you define attractive. We're very comfortable where we are. We're sitting on almost $9.5 billion of backlog, we were able to add – Simon and the marketing guys were able to add over, almost five, well over five years of commitments in jackups this year. On the commitments on the three rigs in the Middle East, we are having some positive conversations with other people. So our comfort with debt would depend on what the deal looked like and our view of the forward market at the time. We are within our kind of guided range of what we're comfortable with from a debt perspective. Given the state of the market we are watching our investment grade and that's important to us. But strategy and opportunity are where you find them, and we'll continue to monitor the market and see what's out there. Praveen Narra - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: That's very helpful. Thanks a lot, guys. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Thank you.

And our next question comes from the line of Gregory Lewis from Credit Suisse. Your line is open. Gregory Lewis - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Yes. Thank you and good morning. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Good morning. James A. MacLennan - Chief Financial Officer & Senior Vice President: Good morning.

Good morning. Gregory Lewis - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): David, I realize it's still kind of early innings with the BSEE [Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement] announcements and new potential regulations coming out. But as Noble looks at these potential regulation changes, would you, how is the industry positioned? Is this something that is going to be easily absorbed or are there going to be actual step changes that we think needs to happen on an operational and even on a beefing up equipment and actually having to deploy more equipment to meet these regulations. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Greg, the answer is we don't know yet. Obviously we're deeply involved in the – they've issued guidelines for comment. We are commenting on those. We are working closely with the API, the IADC, the Well Control Institute, other groups that we're involved in – all those groups we're involved in and other interest groups we're involved in. These prospective rules are getting a lot of attention. And so it's too early really to say where BSEE takes it. If they wake up and say everything's got to be compliant Tuesday, the industry is not prepared, it's not in a position to deal with that. And particularly now since we don't know what the rules are going to be. So this is a process, not a point in time. And so I can tell you that in my conversations with government officials, they recognize that the industry has done a much better job and they're much more comfortable with the science and technology in a post-Macondo world. I don't think they want to shut the industry down. They don't want to burden the industry too much. So my expectation is there will be a collaborative approach that the industry, that whatever government comes up with, they will give industry time to deal with it. That's what we expect is reasonable, and that's what we expect to come. So we're trying to collaborate with industry now, and we expect to be collaborative with government and have rules that accommodate their needs and our capability. So that's all we can read into it at this point. Gregory Lewis - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Okay. Great. And then just one other one for me. On the Danny Adkins in the fleet status, it looks like that rig's scheduled to come off next – in early June. Do we have any sense for where that rig is currently in the process of drilling at its current well? Or maybe when that rig was spudded?

Yeah. As much as I'd like to, we're really not in a position to talk in any detail about our operator's work programs. It's a matter of great sensitivity. So all I can point you to is the indicated expiration date in the contract status. And we'll issue an update when we're able to. I'm sorry I can't provide any more detail than that. Gregory Lewis - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Okay, guys. Thanks. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Thank you, Greg.

Our next question comes from the line of Dave Wilson from Howard Weil. Your line is open. David Thomas Wilson - Scotia Capital (USA), Inc.: Good morning, gentlemen. Thanks for taking my questions. Just following up on the Danny Adkins. Simon, I know you've expressed confidence on a follow-on contract. But as we get closer to that, can you share the timing as far as that follow-on work. Will it be in direct continuation? Or will there be a period of transition time or something like that?

Well we haven't secured the work yet. I think I was expressing a degree of confidence. We'll see if that's misplaced here in the near term. But yeah. There's a possibility of gaps. There's a paucity of opportunities in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico right now. We believe that we're particularly well-positioned. That rig is performing in an excellent manner right now, particularly relative to the rigs that we believe we're competing with. Other accounts are more than that unfortunately, Dave, the competition's quite intense. But we believe that the good work our crews are doing out there on that rig, the specification of the rig, and the total value proposition that Noble provides to our clients will see us through. Well certainly that's our expectation at this time. David Thomas Wilson - Scotia Capital (USA), Inc.: Great. Thanks for that, Simon. And then, as an unrelated follow-up on the cost front, I wanted to circle back on that. As you guys mentioned, Noble's had several initiatives in place for quite a while now, and we're obviously seeing the results of that in higher revenue efficiency and lower costs. But something in the release that stood out to me, in that rig repairs were minimized, and I apologize, but my immediate reaction was kind of an oh no, is this just like the pre-Macondo era, where maintenance was foregone by some rig owners? And not only – they really had to pay for it later on. Can you clarify that? I think James might have touched on that, but can you clarify what you meant by, those costs were being minimized? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Absolutely. Absolutely not are we skipping on maintenance that needs to be done. We're running an efficient operation, and when something doesn't break, you don't need to send a bunch of people out there to fix it. So, we're very well-spared up. We have a lot of rigor built in to our maintenance programs. So no, we are not deferring maintenance that needs to be done. We're not cutting corners. Quite the contrary. The level of rigor in our program right now is probably stronger it's ever been. And the reason the rigor is in there is to prevent future failures. So I think what we're doing is, reaping the benefits of forced compliance to our programs, and the crews are getting it. And the long-term strategy of doing it right the first time is paying off for us. But absolutely not. We are not skipping things need to be done. David Thomas Wilson - Scotia Capital (USA), Inc.: Great, glad to hear that. I'll turn the call back over. Thanks, Dave. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: You bet. Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Dan Boyd from BMO Capital. Your line is open.

Yeah. Thanks. Just following up on that one, in a little more detail maybe. The OpEx came in 10% lower than your guidance. So can you maybe just help us understand where the surprise was, from your end, in the quarter? And also, just on R&M, recognizing you're not cutting any corners, do you have an opportunity to save money by taking spares off of rigs that are either being cold stacked or scrapped, that's going to save you money over the next couple years? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: Dan, without getting, in your second question, inventory management supply chain issues, the answer is yes. That's one of the things that we've been working on pretty vigorously for the last several years, is a better tracking policy, a better tracking protocol. There are contractors out there that talk about how consistently they use the same piece of equipment, how standardized they are. If you look at our deepwater rigs going back to the Beard, Day, Adkins, Boudreaux, both Globetrotters and all four HHI ships, all have essentially the same BOP stack. The Bullys, our Cameron stacks, they're a little bit different. But – and then the rigs before that, the EVAs and the (49:18) they all have the same BOP stack. So we have a very standardized fleet. We train very hard on that. We have spares that are consistent from one theater of operations to the other, and from one rig to the other. So, it's all about risk management and having the critical spares in the area to support any given operation in that place that you can. Otherwise, you pull it from inventory and replace it as you go. So yes, we're getting better at that. Yes, we've done a lot of that over the last few years. And that's certainly one of the things that we can work on. In terms of the other savings that we talked about. It runs the gamut of operating efficiency, in terms of how many extra people we work in the fleet. And it goes to every facet of the company. The class of air travel we use, the amount of air travel we fly, the number of meetings that we can conduct via video conference versus being in person. How many people we hire. We've had a hiring freeze now on for months, if not longer. So everything we can push on to drive efficiency, without affecting the safety and the efficiency and the environmental stewardship that we operate within, we'll push on. So, without getting any more granular than that, if you can think of it, we've tried it, and are continuing to.

Okay. And then just a follow-up, more of a clarification from some comments earlier. Looking at contract renegotiations, typically we see them more from national oil companies than from IOCs. Is your expectation that that remains the same? Or is it constant? Or do you think IOCs, just given the dramatic change in the market, might look to renegotiate contracts over the next few months?

I think those conversations have already started with the IOCs. I think an interesting development of the market in recent years is, the state oil companies have become far more important, in terms of the amount of demand that they generate. So there's been somewhat of a change in the pecking order, in terms of the influence of the respective market participants. So I think the IOCs are conducting those discussions across the peer group. I think that the state oil companies have just been an early mover in that process. David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: I'll add to that, Dan, that you've got to keep in mind that the NOCs often will build some of these opportunities into their contract structure, where the IOCs don't necessarily have that. And so it's a function of what we have to do as a contractor to satisfy the needs and the demands of our customer. Some of our customers don't have that right. And we're happy to negotiate rates if there's something in it for us with those people that don't have the right. The people that have the right, every contract has an implied right to perform. And if we don't perform, we're handing the customer a stick to beat us with. But some of the operators, some of the NOCs have that right, and some of the IOCs do not. So because an operator calls and says we want to lower the rate, does not necessarily mean that we have to comply. It means that we're certainly willing to comply if there's something in it for our shareholders.

Okay. So you wouldn't want to do it without something such as extended term or picking up other rigs? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: I wouldn't want to do it unless I had to. So unless there were something in for me. If you, and when I say if we have to, if you're working for certain operators and it's pretty well-known who they are, NOCs, largely, they have those rights. Certain other downtime provisions will, can lead to those rights. So there are things that precipitate the conversation. If the operator doesn't have the right, it doesn't mean we won't entertain the conversation. It just means there needs to be something in it for us. We're a public company giving away money because we don't have is not part of our normal process. So if David William's oil company calls up Simon and says I'm paying a high rate and I want to cut it, Simon may or may not be willing to undertake that conversation unless I'm willing to give him more term or give him something that has value to him. So it's a negotiation. It's not a gun to the head.

Yeah. And I think just as a final thought, I think that operators gain, stand to gain so much more by focusing on improving their efficiency and performance i.e. the value proposition rather than price. And some of the more enlightened clients, I'm pleased to say, are taking that approach. Jeffrey L. Chastain - Vice President-Investor Relations & Corporate Communications: Okay. Leanne, we're going to take one final question, please.

And our last question comes from the line of J.B. Lowe from Cowen & Company. Your line is open. J.B. Lowe - Cowen & Co. LLC: Hey. Good morning, guys. Thanks for sneaking me in at the end. I just had a question on some of your previous comments when you said that, I think David it was you in your prepared remarks, when you said that 4% of the floater fleet was at risk of cancellation. Is that, are those things that have already been announced? Or can you provide some color on that? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: I'll let Simon comment on that. I think what we're doing is taking assessment of the floater fleet that we think that's out there under construction that's been announced. It probably includes some Petrobras stuff. But I'll let Simon comment on that. It was in my prepared remarks, but I'll let Simon comment.

Yeah. I believe we're talking to the early 30s number of terminations that have taken place thus far, and also the impact of what we anticipate coming out of the Seshay (55:14) issue down in Brazil right now. J.B. Lowe - Cowen & Co. LLC: Okay. Gotcha. And my follow-up question is on the $350 million major projects that you guys are guiding for in 2015, is that pretty much locked in no matter what occurs in the market environment? Or if some of your rigs don't get follow-on work that you may be anticipating, could that number end up coming down? David W. Williams - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer: I would say there's probably not a lot of flex in that number. A good bit of that number is pre-ordered stuff that's still to be delivered. So it's already committed, long lead-time items. So it might could flex a few percentage points one way or the other. But given our level of utilization and what our contract status, we can't fit too many programs in. They might could slip, so it could probably come down some. I doubt, it couldn't go up. J.B. Lowe - Cowen & Co. LLC: All right. Thanks so much. Jeffrey L. Chastain - Vice President-Investor Relations & Corporate Communications: Okay. We're just before 10:00 Eastern, so we're going to go ahead and conclude the call. For those of you left in the queue, John Breed and I will be contacting you over the course of the day to address your questions. Thank you for your participation on today's call and your interest in Noble. Make a note, please, that our second quarter 2015 results are scheduled for reporting on the 29th of July with a call to follow on the morning of the 30th. And we'll confirm those dates as we get closer. Leanne, thank you for coordinating the call, and good day, everyone.