Doug Pferdehirt: Mark, I am laughing, because you are spot on it, it’s as if you were in our technology review with our Chief Technology Officer the other day. And the only thing I would add to what you said is, one actually enables the other. So deeper and electrified are actually complementary and electrification will allow us to go deeper. We’ve talked about electrification in the past in terms of allowing us to have a longer step outs. But it’s just ability to be able to transmit hydraulic fluid and the response time, because the further you push it the more friction pressure, the more delays, if you will and to be able to get a response from a hydraulic actuation versus an electric actuation, which can be done very, very quickly.
So, I went so certainly deeper. Now it is only electrification, but electrification will enable deeper. But there’s also other aspects to going deeper, particularly when you think about things like, flexible pipe design. We have the only flexible pipe that will be able to work at the depths that these emerging basins are being developed. It takes a very, very unique design. So there’s other technologies that we’re working on that will also be very beneficial as we move into some of the new basins, which indeed will be at greater depths than we’ve routinely operated out today.
Mark Wilson : Thank you very much. I’ll hand it over.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Daniel Thompson with BNP Paribas. Your line is open.
Daniel Thompson: Hi Doug. Thanks for taking my question and may be continuing on the sort of technology front. Just looking at West Africa, there are a few prospects in your list in areas like Angola, Nigeria that have been set there for quite some time. When we know the operators have been really strict when getting those to a point where project economics are acceptable, I was kind of wondering how many of those projects you’ve refreshed offers on recently or will in the near future? And if you found ways within you’ll works go via through technology or something else to it to bring those costs down to enable sanction while still maintaining the attractiveness to yourselves. Thank you.
Doug Pferdehirt: Good afternoon. It was a very fair question. One we look at oven and I’m actually looking at the Subsea opportunity list as I answer your question. So first of all, as you know to be on the list, there’s an expectation that it would reach FID within the next 24 months. That expectation is aligned with the customer. And in some cases, projects are done here because they’re confidential or their projects that are going to be direct awarded to our company. So they are not on the list. I will tell you looking at the list right here in front of me the same one you are I can confidently say, all but one, as you said are you either going through a refreshed feed study and/or in at some level of a commercial negotiation so actually the vast majority of them?
And I know, I understand the point and I know there’s been some of these have been here a while and some of these have been discussed many times over. But just be very blunt that was before iEPCI, that was before Subsea 2.0. So, when you can deliver a project 12 to 14 months shorter cycle time, it has a big impact on the economics. Now, there’s other reasons that specific to the client that they may be wanting to move a project forward, which is not anything I would comment on. That’s up to them to comment. But that’s what we’re providing to them to help them – to help bring these projects at least bring them to the stage that the customer could if they chose to FID the project.
Daniel Thompson: Thanks. Yeah, makes sense. And maybe one follow-up on Brazil. I wondered if you had any comments on how your bidding strategy in Brazil may have changed just in light of one of your competitors being barred from contracting with Petrobras for the next two years. I mean, do you feel that you guys might be getting some more work there? Or are the opportunities [Indiscernible]? Thanks.
Alf Melin: Look, we’re a company that has very close relationships with our clients. We always look towards the future, not just at the present opportunity and treat our clients with respect is we expect them to treat us with respect and we have a very strong relationship with Petrobras and very proud of the work we’re doing including the award of their first-ever iEPCI, and the first ever application of HISEP in Brazil. So, I would just say that we’ll continue to treat our clients the way that we appreciate them treating us and we believe that is the right way to do business.
Daniel Thompson: Right. Thank you. I’ll turn it over.
Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Kurt Hallead with Benchmark. Your line is open.
Kurt Hallead: Hello everybody.
Doug Pferdehirt : Morning, Kurt.
Kurt Hallead: So, hey, Doug, kind of bigger picture question for you, potentially, right? So, last June, you had referenced you had increased visibility on potential projects that extend out toward the end of the decade you continue to reiterate that in each and every conference call. Yet there seems to be a significant disconnect between what investors want to believe and what you are actually seeing predicated on the discussions, the game plan that that your customers have a it’s probably the biggest disconnect I’ve ever seen in my 35 years in this business. So, you’ve given a lot of input in commentary and data points around what you’re seeing and but what’s driving the conviction of what do you think is driving the conviction of your customer base to pursue these projects, for oil production that’s going to come online in three to five years, when everybody’s freaking out about what oil demand is going to do.
So, what are the oil companies seeing that the investor base may not in your personal opinion?
