Yahoo Finance Oil States International Inc (OIS) Q1 2019 Earnings Call Transcript
Image source: The Motley Fool.
Oil States International Inc (NYSE: OIS)
Q1 2019 Earnings Call
April 25, 2019, 10:00 a.m. ET
Contents:
Prepared Remarks
Questions and Answers
Call Participants
Prepared Remarks:
Operator
Hello, and welcome to the Oil States International First Quarter 2019 Earnings Conference Call. My name is Raina, and I will be your operator for today's call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later we will conduct a question and answer session. During the question and answer session. (Operator Instructions). Please note that this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the call over to Patricia Gill. Director of Investor Relations. You may begin.
Patricia Gil -- Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Thank you, Rayna (ph). And good morning and welcome to Oil States' first quarter 2019 earnings conference call. Our call today will be led by Cindy Taylor, Oil States' President and Chief Executive Officer; and Lloyd Hajdik, Oil States' Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.
Before we begin, we'd like to caution listeners regarding forward looking statements to the extent that our remarks today contain information other than historical information. Please note that we are relying on the safe harbor protections afforded by federal law.
Any such remarks should be weighed in the context of the many factors that affect our business, including those risks disclosed in our Form 10-K along with other SEC filings. This call is being webcast and can be accessed at Oil States' website. A replay of the conference call will be available one and a half hours after the completion of the call and will be available for one month. I will now turn the call over to Cindy.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Thank you, Patricia. Good morning to all of you and thank you for joining us today to participate in our first quarter 2019 earnings conference call.
Following a volatile fourth quarter in 2018 regarding commodity prices we entered the first quarter with a heightened level of uncertainty. However, as the first quarter progressed our outlook improved. Given commodity price increases and a relatively stable, if not improving level of customer spending activity. All of our business segments completed the quarter at or near the high end of our previous guidance and our margins held up well. Our Well Site Services and Downhole Technology segment experienced improved product and service demand as the quarter progressed.
We were particularly encouraged by our Offshore Manufactured Products bookings of $144 million, which led to a 1.63 times book-to-bill ratio for the quarter evidencing improving global offshore demand, which creates better visibility for the balance of the year.
Lloyd will take you through additional details of our consolidated results and also provide highlights of our financial position. I will follow with more details by segment and provide additional comments on our guidance and market outlook.
Lloyd A. Hajdik -- Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
Thanks, Cindy. Good morning, everyone. During the first quarter, we generated revenues of $251 million, while reporting a net loss of $15 million or $25 cents per share. Our first quarter EBITDA totaled $21 million with an EBITDA margin percentage of 9%. Reported EBITDA was negatively impacted by $1 million dollars of severance charges. We recognized an effective tax rate benefit of 1.9% in the first quarter. The effective tax rate benefit was lower than the statutory rate, due to certain nondeductible items impacting the rate. During the first quarter, we generated $34 million in cash flow from operations and spent $18 million in capital expenditures. We generated $16 million in free cash flow, which we define as cash flow from operations, less capital expenditures, and utilized our free cash flow to pay down outstanding borrowings under our revolving credit facility by $16 million. As of March 31, our net debt leverage ratio was 2.6 times and our senior secured leverage ratio was 1.2 times. Well below the allowable maximum ratios of 3.75 times and 2.25 times, respectively. At March 31, our net debt-to-book capitalization ratio was 17% and our available liquidity position at the end of the first quarter was approximately $148 million, inclusive of cash on hand totaling $15 million.
In terms of our second quarter 2019 consolidated guidance, we expect depreciation and amortization expense to total $32 million. Further, we expect net interest expense to total $4.8 million and corporate expenses are projected to total $12 million. Total capital expenditures for the full year 2019, are still expected to range between $65 million and $70 million, consistent with previous guidance.
For the second quarter, our estimated income tax provision will primarily be dependent upon the level of pre-tax results realized compared to the level of nondeductible items in our tax provision. Longer term, we expect our effective tax rate to trend toward the U.S. corporate tax rate of 21%, as our U.S. operations return to profitability.
And at this time, I'd like to turn the call back over to Cindy, who will take you through the details for each of our business segments.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Starting with our Well Site Services segment, we generated $108 million of revenues, which was at the upper end of our guided range and $13 million of EBITDA in the first quarter of 2019. These results were negatively impacted by disproportionately, lower utilization of our land drilling rigs. As customers temporarily shut down their drilling programs. Following the material decline in crude oil prices in the fourth quarter of 2018. Utilization of our land drilling rigs, averaged only 12% in the first quarter of 2019, compared to 30% in the fourth quarter of 2018.
In our Completion Services business, we experienced a 7% sequential revenue decline, which was concentrated in the Mid-Continent region and the Permian Basin. EBITDA was negatively impacted by $752,000 of severance cost as we continue to streamline our operations to improve the efficiencies of our service offerings. With revenue declines in both the drilling and completion services businesses along with the severance cost incurred, our segment EBITDA margin averaged 12% in the first quarter of 2019 compared to 15% reported in the fourth quarter of 2018. While our margins declined sequentially, they were slightly ahead of the midpoint of our guidance.
In our Downhole Technology segment, we generated revenues at $54 million and EBITDA of $9 million with an EBITDA margin of 17% reported in the first quarter. Segment results were positively impacted during the quarter by increased demand for completion, intervention, and perforating products, which led to improved manufacturing facility cost absorption due to higher levels of throughput. Further, the non-recurrence of patent defense costs for litigation, which wrapped up in the fourth quarter of 2018, also positively impacted the sequential EBITDA margin comparison.
Given press (ph) on the integrated gun systems in the market, we wanted to provide you with an update on our technology and progress to market. Field testing and early commercialization efforts continue on our integrated gun system, addressable switch, and other associated Downhole Tools. GEODynamics patented and proprietary system is provided completely assembled with the entire complement of components required for our plugging part of operation.
All that is required at the Well Site location is removing shipping thread protectors and screwing the guns together before running the system Downhole. We believe that our design makes for the safe and most efficient perforating system available, and is certified to be intrinsically safe by Franklin Applied Physics. Operators continue to request GEODynamics best in class perforating technology combined with the safety and efficiency provided by fully factory loaded system.
We have expanded our engineering and product development staff and have commissioned our gun loading facility with a multi-year ramp in production planned in the 2020. This system further builds on our industry leading perforating offering through GEODynamics and reinforces our commitment to help operators make better wells. Our technical solutions group is providing tailored support to our Wireline and operator customers delivering our product offerings from our manufacturing location to the well site.
This group is an investment in our future and affords us the opportunity to deploy both personnel and integrated product solutions directly to the well site to ensure product quality and performance is maintained. This group continues to work in support of field trials for our newer technology. Ultimately as trial products are brought to market, the group will generate revenues sufficient to offset their cost.
We expect to recover market share and sales in our engineered perforating solutions business, once our proprietary integrated gun system is fully commercialized. In our offshore manufactured products segment, we generated revenues of $88 million, EBITDA the $11 million and a segment EBITDA margin of 12% during the first quarter.
This 8% sequential decrease in segment revenues was driven by lower military product sales and service revenues partially offset by higher project driven product sales. We received a major project award during the first quarter for production facility content destined for South America. Our orders booked in the first quarter totaled $144 million resulting in a 31% sequential increase in backlog and a book-to-bill ratio of 1.63 times.
This is our highest reported backlog level attained since June of 2015 (ph). Conversations with our customers regarding deepwater offshore project sanctions for 2019 continue to be constructive and visibility for additional project awards is developing favorably.
I would now like to share our thoughts on our market outlook for the second quarter.
Our consolidated second quarter results are expected to improve sequentially driven by higher levels of drilling and completion related activity in the U.S. as well as greater contributions from our Offshore/Manufactured Products segment. Our outlook for U.S. spending activity by our customers is predicated on a supported commodity price environment given WTI crude prices which have recovered 45% from year end to a price of $65.66 per barrel. Further improved project driven activity within our offshore manufactured products segment is expected to lead to sequentially higher revenues for this segment. With this supportive commodity price environment, we are estimating that second quarter 2019 revenues for our Well Site services segment should range between $119 million and $126 million dollars with segment EBITDA margins expected to average between 14% and 16%.
These estimates reflect improved utilization levels for our land drilling business as our customers have already begun to resume their drilling programs following the temporary shut down in the first quarter, along with increasing levels of completion activity in the U.S. shale plays and international regions in which we operate. For our Downhole Technologies segment, we currently estimate that our revenues will range between $53 million and $56 million with segment EBITDA margins averaging 17% to 19% in the second quarter.
In our Offshore/Manufactured Products segment, we are forecasting that second quarter revenues for this segment will also increase sequentially and range between $92 million and $100 million buoyed by a higher starting backlog level, which will begin to convert into revenues. Segment EBITDA margins are expected to average 12% to 14% depending on product and service mix. To conclude, our second quarter revenue and EBITDA at the midpoint of our guidance ranges is up sequentially for all of our businesses. As discussed, we continue to believe the opportunity set for major deepwater project sanctions is trending positively in 2019 as evidenced by the significant deepwater project award we booked in the first quarter.
This award coupled with a favorable outlook for additional project FIDs will benefit our Offshore/Manufactured Products segment. U.S. customer spending trended up as we progressed through the first quarter setting the stage for a sequential improvement in our Well Site services and Downhole Technology segment. We remain focused on developing technology advancements across all of our segments helping our customers make better wells while carefully controlling our cost generating positive free cash flow and generating positive returns on our invested capital.
That completes our prepared comments. Rayna (ph) would you open up the call for questions and answers at this time please. Rayna (ph), would you open up the call for Q&A?
Questions and Answers:
Operator
Thank you. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. (Operator Instrucation). Our first question comes from Praveen Narra of Raymond James. You may begin.
Praveen Narra -- Raymond James -- Analyst
Hi, good morning, everyone.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Hi, Praveen.
Praveen Narra -- Raymond James -- Analyst
Hi, I guess, I guess if you could start just on the change in the macro environment in terms of oil prices going, moving higher. Can you talk about how your customers post budget is have kind of progressed, obviously it sounded like March was better than the rest of the quarter, but how are you thinking about the 2Q and the second half of the year in terms of what kind of indications you're getting?
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Well, and I realized there's kind of a different set here. When I talked about Well Site Services and Downhole Technologies, we're really primarily driven by U.S. land shale play activity, and of course that's what everybody's trying to get your arms around, what I can say is, when the prices collapsed in Q4, every customer I'm associated with and know, was reassessing their budgets, their plans, really doing scenario planning. It was most evident for us with our land drilling operations, we drilled these wells very quickly. They tend to be a little more discretionary and generally when crude prices fall below 50 you see a significant quick reduction in activity.
That being said, we also saw a slowdown in our completion services, not to the degree we thought, but as we progressed through the quarter, we fairly quickly realized that whatever happened to crude prices, whether that was driven by technical trades, etc., we saw a relief fairly quickly, about in January anyway. And again more people were really solidifying their plans, and so as you suggested, we did see continual improvement throughout the quarter with obviously, March exiting at a higher rate than we had in January. And of course, it's now April 25th, we're roughly one month into the quarter, but at this stage, we're seeing a continuation, if not modest improvement of exit rate in Q1 for land and we see no indication by the customers that we work for that that's really going to change and go reverse itself in Q2. So that's the best guidance, it's the tough part about shale land, the visibility is just shorter. And I can only tell you what we've experienced at conversations that we've had, and I would also tell you, as it relates to Well Site Services, of course, drilling we're already seeing quite a lot of those rigs go back to work. So the guidance that's embedded for Well Site Services, again disproportionately down on drilling, on the way back up, it'll be disproportionately weighted toward drilling, because again pretty significant utilization decline in Q1 that we are already seeing a fairly significant recovery back to fourth quarter levels.
As it relates to manufacturing offshore products. These are longer lead time, as you know. Visibility for us is really what projects are in the market, which FIDs are out there, but bookings and quoting activity, project awards are significant for us. Having a book-to-bill ratio of 1.63 times, really bolsters our confidence in both our, I'll call it soft book-to-bill ratio that we provided last quarter, both in terms of absolute dollars as well as timing of receiving those awards and backlog really fuels our major project work that has been buoyed for us quite frankly, the last couple of years. So, it's hard for me not to feel a little more enthusiastic about our outlook for the balance of 2019, relative to where we've been over the last couple of years.
Praveen Narra -- Raymond James -- Analyst
Right. That's super helpful. I guess if we could switch to integrated gun quickly. Just to make sure, in terms of full commercialization, it still sounds like you expect that to be done in Q2? And could you also talk about the pace of the production ramp up as that reaches into 2020?
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
So, I want to be clear that first of all, we through GEODynamics acquisition, and their long history on engineered perforating solutions, we're already a leader in this space. We already lead in terms of the components that are integrated into the gun system. So I don't necessarily think of this, as a revolutionary brand new product as much as it is, much enhanced delivery system. So what we're, in other words, we have, I think, the best shaped charge in the business. So that's going to be integrated. We manufacture both long guns and short guns that is going to be part of the package.
What is less, I would say, known at this point, is the switch and the packaging of that integrated gun and so, I feel good about where we are. We are in field trials. When you do field trials, some of them are absolute 100% successes, some of them require a little bit of tweaking, and so we're kind of working through that in the current quarter and do expect commercialization fairly soon, whether it's late this quarter, early third quarter, again as you see in our first quarter results, we have actually showed some improvement on perforating solutions without having the integrated gun. We just firmly believe that our customers are looking for the improved reliability operating efficiencies and ease of running, which means packaging products we already have into that integrated gun system, but I do think we're on track.
Praveen Narra -- Raymond James -- Analyst
Perfect. Thank you very much and congrats on a good quarter.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Thanks Praveen.
Operator
Our next question comes from Ian Macpherson of Simmons. Please go ahead.
Ian Macpherson -- Simmons -- Analyst
Thanks. Good morning. I believe that congratulations are in order this morning, Cindy.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
I'll take it any day. Thanks Ian.
Ian Macpherson -- Simmons -- Analyst
Yes, for sure. I would infer, correct me if I'm wrong, that the majority of the step up in your orders in the first quarter pertained to the large production facility package booking or was there also a step up in your, call it base load orders in addition to that?
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Well, I have I'll just give general agreement, of course this was a significant order for us, and a welcome one on many fronts. One, because of its size, but two, it is weighted toward our most proprietary products if you will, kind of our core production infrastructure, floating production infrastructure products, so good. I will tell you though that our base business would have yielded a book-to-bill ratio north of 1 even without it, but not by a tremendous amount, but if you look back the last couple of years, we've been at or slightly above a one-to-one book-to-bill for the last couple of years without any major project awards. And so now having that, it really did elevate that book-to-bill ratio far north of 1.5 times.
Ian Macpherson -- Simmons -- Analyst
Okay, that's very helpful. Thanks, and then it sounds like you, you're more comfortable and encouraged with the 1.3 to 1.5 target for this year, and there are other significant awards that are in play for you later. Can you talk to what the gestation period looks like for the one that you just got and others going forward? And how we should think about your conversion out of backlog going forward relative to the recent standard?
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Yes. Well, I think we're in great shape. Number one, we've been much busier in our manufacturing facilities in past years, and so they're eager to get to work and will be very attentive to quality, timely delivery, and on budget type performance for the orders that we are getting. So, I would say that's obviously good news. When we talk about our subsea production infrastructure, these obviously require a lot of front-end engineering and materials procurement. We'll start to recognize revenues this year, but it won't be immediate because of the fact we do percentage of completion but the front-end engineering then lend a lot to revenue recognition. The good news is, other areas of backlog bill, particularly our standard connector products, is a little bit shorter duration in terms of revenue recognition and most of the sequential improvement in revenues and EBITDA that we guided to is really driven by standard connectors at this point as opposed to a lot of revenue recognition from this large order. If that answers your question, Ian?
Ian Macpherson -- Simmons -- Analyst
Absolutely. But, generally speaking, the bigger POC projects will convert typically within a couple of years?
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Normally, I would say 18 months or less. I haven't studied this one particular order at this point, but normally I would say 18 months or less for that one. The good thing is though again it starts fairly immediately lending itself to engineering cost absorption, and down the road, of course manufacturing facility cost absorption.
Ian Macpherson -- Simmons -- Analyst
Very good. Thanks, Cindy.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Thank you, Ian.
Operator
Thank you. Our next caller is Stephen Gengaro from Stifel.
Stephen Gengaro -- Stifel -- Analyst
Thanks. Good morning, everybody. I guess, Cindy, two questions. To start with, on the Offshore/Manufactured Products side, the order flow you're seeing right now, I know there's sort of an overhead absorption positive that we hopefully see as as you see this backlog unfold on the income statement, but how is the pricing looking right now as far as what you're bidding on versus kind of what you've seen over the last year.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Pricing, this is kind of one of the issues we have, in the sense that the more that we are weighted toward our proprietary products, I would say, the less pricing pressure that you're getting, because these are more project oriented economics, not necessarily individual component price competition. We have tried to be responsive to the needs of our customer in terms of providing the most cost effective equipment that we can. We've also reduced our cost in the process. You've seen that through streamlined manufacturing and to some degree of course headcount reductions over the last three or four years or so. Again, for this type of product, I just generally say with that combination of events, we expect similar margins to what you witnessed in our history.
Stephen Gengaro -- Stifel -- Analyst
Okay, thank you. And then my second question, might be for Lloyd, and you removed from the disclosure the completion service job tickets and average revenue per ticket, which quite honestly, always confused me anyway, but that being said, when you look at your completion services piece of Well Site, how should we think about that revenue growth relative to either rig count growth or complete frac stage growth? Will it be sort of inlineish, will it be a little better, and could you remind us kind of what portion of that businesses is U.S. land?
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
I'm gonna start with that and just explain why we did take that disclosure out and it's exactly what you just said we were probably as confused as you were. And then you say why is that, everything is changing, and what worked and everybody else is trying to do is create efficiencies within our own operations and generate free cash flow, and you know to the extent that we might have held a ticket open for weeks as an example across month end, we're billing quicker, and so yes, you have a greater number of tickets, but you really have a greater number of revenues. We acquired Falcon. So our mix of ticket counts is also different today than it was kind of pre the Falcon acquisition. And then our customers have changed. They are truly focused on every day every hour of efficiency. They're not necessarily going to hold equipment out from one well to the next, which they might have done, quite frankly, in prior periods, and so we recognize what you do is that this is not really lending itself to meaningful information for us or for an analyst whereas it used to and it used to correlate to drilling rig count, then with the really change and completion activity, we said it correlated more to well count, which aren't really readily available or as accurate as probably the rig count is. So, again we never take away information we think is useful to you, we felt like this was not only not useful it might have even be confusing. So that was question 1, then question 2, what are we more tied to? It would be well count. There's always going to be nuances in terms of equipment mix on given jobs, some more proprietary, some less proprietary, different prices. But generally speaking, well count, these are not Downhole consumable, so they don't vary necessarily with horizontal footage or stages completed like my Downhole Technologies business. So, well count is really the better driver there.
I think you asked one more question, I was hopeful that Lloyd would answer, and I almost forgot what it is.
Lloyd A. Hajdik -- Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
Yes, Stephen you asked about geographic mix on completion services.
Stephen Gengaro -- Stifel -- Analyst
Yes, Lloyd, thanks.
Lloyd A. Hajdik -- Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
Yes, pretty consistent, first quarter was 84% U.S. land and the balance between U.S. Gulf of Mexico offshore and international.
Stephen Gengaro -- Stifel -- Analyst
Okay, great. And thank you for the color. That's very helpful.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Thanks, Stephen.
Operator
The next question comes from George O'Leary of Tudor, Pickering, Holt. You may begin.
George O'Leary -- Tudor, Pickering, Holt -- Analyst
Good morning, Cindy, good morning, Lloyd.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Hi, George.
Lloyd A. Hajdik -- Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
Good morning.
George O'Leary -- Tudor, Pickering, Holt -- Analyst
My first question is really one more out (ph) of intellectual curiosity than anything else, but given the other thing we're hearing about from some of the wireline players is also increased demand for these quick connect guns, and then maybe some disintermediation of the wireline players whereby the E&Ps go direct to the manufacturers of the charges themselves, and try to be more selective with the charges, I guess. Could you talk about the the interplay there between quick connect versus integrated guns? And then secondarily, if you're seeing E&Ps coming to you guys more often, to GEODynamics more often to buy those charges directly.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Hi, George, thanks for the question. You did cut out briefly, I think I heard all of the content, but if I missed anything, just kind of repeat the question after I address your question.
George O'Leary -- Tudor, Pickering, Holt -- Analyst
Sure.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
So, I mean you're definitely hitting on a point, and at my (ph) big picture stand back and look at it, our customers are going to dictate how they want things performed at the Well Site Service companies or not. And they're looking for the most efficient, most effective, and most cost, lowest cost option to bring that to market in the safest fashion possible. You were talking about the differences between basically products shipping to the well site, being assembled on the well side by wireline companies collectively as an industry, that is both products suppliers, service companies, and the E&P customers have all said, I want this done more safely and more efficiently, because at the end of the day most of the, quote-unquote, issues that occur or misruns that occur are human errors at the well site. We all talk about the difficulty in attracting and retaining skilled labor. So that kind of variation when you know that human error can cause problems at the well side. If there's any way that the industry can mitigate that then we have an obligation I think to do that in support of our customers and quite frankly in support of safety at the well site, that is really what this movement to the integrated gun system is all about. Now that being said, how best to deliver that? Do you ship it straight from the factory and make it as simple as possible for a wireline gun loader to do it on location? Do you send your own personnel out to ensure that it is absolutely run with the standards? That's all evolving quite frankly, and it will evolve in a manner that is most supportive of what our customers are looking for at the well site. So there's no one single answer to that. As I understand it, there's roughly 48 or 49 wireline companies in the Permian Basin alone. All of them handle this work differently and so one answer does not apply to everybody quite frankly, and the majors execute and perform these services differently than selected other wireline companies. And so the trend is clearly what I enunciated, but there is no one single answer today any way that suits all operations and all customers.
George O'Leary -- Tudor, Pickering, Holt -- Analyst
Okay, great. Yes, you hit all my questions, very helpful findings, Cindy, I appreciate it. And then maybe just one more from me, on the Offshore Products side, the big South American production award underlying book-to-bill sounds like it would have been north of 1 even without that, that larger what I think last time we spoke, you had mentioned that Southeast Asia was also a region where you're expecting to see some pickup. Have we -- is that still on to come and might there be some more large awards from that region or are there other regions, other geographies where you're also seeing green sheets that could also provide a tailwind to orders as we progress for the rest of the year.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
I'll just say yes, yes, and yes. And so what did that mean, yes we're still seeing some bidding and quoting activity that is attractive and interesting in Southeast Asia. Yes, we do expect to see at least one if not a couple of significant project awards out of that region. And then yes there are other basins of interest when we talk about South America, this most recent award, I don't mind, it's Guyana, and we talked about Southeast Asia, but we're bidding work elsewhere, Gulf of Mexico, Brazil, I'd say a lesser extent in other regions, but we're really, right now we're kind of talking about our large (inaudible) conductor casing, connectors, we're talking about subsea floating production facility work. There's also an uplift in terms of kind of drilling equipment, mostly inspection repair upgrade type work. And there's also a little bit of a lift on development drilling, which again that feeds into our, we call them, standard connectors, large diameter (ph) conductor casing and connectors. So a little bit of a uplift across the board and I should also say, even though we do have military work and we're expecting some renewed interest in backlog coming from military as well.
George O'Leary -- Tudor, Pickering, Holt -- Analyst
Awesome, thank you, guys, very much for the color. Thanks, Cindy.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Thanks George.
Operator
Thank you. Our next question comes from Sean Meakim with J.P. Morgan. You may go ahead.
Sean Meakim -- J.P. Morgan -- Analyst
Thank you, hi, good morning.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Good morning.
Sean Meakim -- J.P. Morgan -- Analyst
So, Cindy. I think the original bogey for commercialization on the integrated system was for the second quarter. So the timing (ph) could slip a little bit, can you just give us a little feel for the puts and takes in terms of what you're trying to accomplish to get that toward across the finish line?
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Well it's just basically, we want extremely high reliability, 90% to 94% reliability, we want that to be improved. We want ideally zero misruns on your field trials but it's not that an incredibly high reliability factor. And we're getting there, we're close to that at this point in time. I don't probably need to go through the very, very technical nuances that are involved there, but just think about limiting misruns to a very low level.
Sean Meakim -- J.P. Morgan -- Analyst
No, that's very helpful, that's the thing (ph) that I was looking for, and then I was looking to get your latest thoughts on the competitive dynamics in that business, the one, four players, higher barriers to entry. It seems folks tend to play nice in the sandbox historically, but there's been a shift in customer adoption of these integrated systems, it seems you're taking off rather quickly. So there's a bit of a race ongoing, and so I just love to hear more how you're viewing the competitive dynamics in light of, seems like boom is making some strong inroads along with Titan, and then you know Core is now commercial with their integrated switch. Just how that's shifting versus what the market maybe had looked like for some period prior to this changing customer behavior?
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Yes, I think Sean I'll comment just a little bit further, but this is one product within a whole suite that we are developing within our Downhole Technologies segment alone. So, I don't want to overplay this hand, but I'll just simply say GEODynamics has absolutely been a leader, if not the leader in engineered perforating solutions for years. This is, as I said, more of an improved delivery system of technologies that were components before, that we're now integrating more into a system delivery. We are very cognizant of the competition we have. We are respectful of the competition that we have. But we also believe that we are a clear leader in this space.
And these things don't -- we maybe talking about them more in the last quarter or two simply because of some other companies that are very much weighted toward the single product, where we are multifaceted, at the end of the day. But this has been under development for years. And when you talk about an addressable switch, this is not something you dream up in one quarter and bring it to market the next.
These are highly technical, highly complicated, highly regulated service delivery options to our customer base, and so, I don't think that the competitive landscape per say has changed, what has changed is our customers' desire on how that is going to be delivered to the Well Site.
Sean Meakim -- J.P. Morgan -- Analyst
Very helpful. Thank you, Cindy.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Thank you.
Operator
Thank you. Our next question comes from Connor Lynagh of Morgan Stanley. You may go ahead.
Connor Lynagh -- Morgan Stanley -- Analyst
Yes, thanks. I was wondering if we could turn back to the completion services business, margins on EBITDA line of, and kind of bouncing around in the mid to high teens. I'm just thinking higher level here. What does it take to get those higher from here, is it geographic mix, product mix, pricing. What do you think about that.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Well I would generally say all those factors would be helpful, but I'll generally say what I've said in the past, I just need more work, and our margins are creative margins from almost every product line because we have a high level of field infrastructure across all of the lower 48, quite frankly, we support international operations as well that's both through machining, technology, valves, district levels support, product line support, I think you get the point. So I just would love to see more work, if that were more geographically diverse that would also be very helpful. I've said in the past, and I would reiterate again, when you've got about half the U.S. rig count located in one basin and so many service companies chasing that work, it puts downward pressure on price. I mean that, so geographic certainly would help, you and I both know that price is always helpful but I don't count on that. I'm not counting on that for quite some time. I think what we need to do is scale the business, control our cost as we described in our conference call notes and those incremental margins should fall out.
Connor Lynagh -- Morgan Stanley -- Analyst
Got it. Thanks. And I think you've spoken in the past about some content shift in the U.S. away from your higher technology products. Has that fully reversed at this point or is there still more room to go on that front.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Yes. I don't think that has shifted, and in fact, we still favor a couple of our high end product lines that are proprietary, are our isolation tools and equipment as well as our extended reach technology through the temporary (ph) tool. Those are in fact, I think gaining broader adoption, but our mix is different, largely because of the Falcon acquisition, that maybe what you're thinking about which puts us more weighted toward Flowback. While this is high end Flowback work, it's not quite the same as the more proprietary patent protected equipment that we have in some of our other product lines.
Connor Lynagh -- Morgan Stanley -- Analyst
Got it. That's helpful. I'll turn it back. Thank you.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Thanks Connor.
Operator
Thank you. Our next question comes from Ken Sill of SunTrust. You may go ahead.
Kenneth Irvin Sill -- SunTrust -- Analyst
Yes, good morning. This is a much more fun call and some (inaudible) -- congratulations for helping all of us there.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
I'd like to be on the receiving end of that.
Kenneth Irvin Sill -- SunTrust -- Analyst
Yes, it's nice for a change. I just really have a kind of big question. So we've seen a nice rebound in oil prices, but we know historically that the international market just moves more slowly. In North America, at least on the rig count basis there's usually a three month to six month lag, so it sounds to me that what you're seeing is your customers have kind of come out from under the tables, but it doesn't sound like there's actually been much response to the commodity price improvement in North America and maybe not any at all internationally? And could you kind of talk about how you think those two markets will progress if we stay in a $60 to $70 oil world, through Q3?
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
I think you hit on a point, that has been true for many, many years. But, I think the other key element here is that both international and deepwater tend to be longer lead time type opportunity. So while we're really now seeing inflection obviously in project FIDs bidding quoting activity, that has been going on for quite some time, this isn't (ph) like the light went off when crude oil prices either went down in Q4 or recovered the 45% they have to date in 2019. So these are real are real projects, with real economics, and generally we know long range pricing outlook as opposed to spot pricing outlook, and so I'm gonna agree with everything you said, but say this has been a long time coming in terms particularly of the deepwater field development efforts, that we are seeing internationally will move slowly, but it also tends to have legs and commitments and just realize the customer base is so totally different.
Whether these are NOCs, the large IOCs, and once they commit to projects and ramping an activity, almost out of necessity you have to carry it through, because you will have mobilized equipment, often times you've entered into long term contracts or arrangements with suppliers. It's just a bit different than when you're doing everything on a well by well, pad by pad basis in highly competitive basins like the Permian.
So they just operate as you know, can so very differently. I've been with so many of my investors, I understand what they are looking for not only from our company, but for our competitors and our customers. I think that fact alone is what is quelling a bit of the activity on shale plays, on land in the U.S., and I'm not sure you should inflect what you normally would, when you see this level of pricing, because of the cash flow ROIC demands of the owners of these companies in the United States.
And so, I think there's a different dynamic here in play, than just movement in crude oil price.
Kenneth Irvin Sill -- SunTrust -- Analyst
Yes, this is the big debate among investors is all the (ph) public E&P guys saying, we're not going to change our budgets no matter what. But the capitalist in me says, somebody will spend more money at $65, than they would have it at $55 at some point. I just don't know how much the market will respond to that. I don't know if you got (multiple speakers)
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
I won't tell (ph) on that, won't it. Yes.
Kenneth Irvin Sill -- SunTrust -- Analyst
Yes. Okay. but you know so it's encouraging that we're seeing the -- the rig business pick up, because obviously that's kind of front edge of things at least for you all.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Yes. It is, and of course we supply the Downhole products at the rig site too, and so having sequentially up performance there. That's also what lead obviously to completing a well.
Kenneth Irvin Sill -- SunTrust -- Analyst
Okay, well, thank you.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Thanks, Ken.
Operator
Thank you. There are no more questions at this time.
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Okay. Thank you so much, Rayna (ph). Thank you to all of you who have dialed into the call and spent the time to give us some questions and answers that you are interested in and concerned about. I know it's an incredibly busy week, again thanks for your time. We look forward to catching back up with you at future conferences or our next conference call. Have a great week.
Operator
Thank you ladies and gentlemen. This concludes today's conference. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.
Duration: 50 minutes
Call participants:
Patricia Gil -- Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Cindy B. Taylor -- Chief Executive Officer and President
Lloyd A. Hajdik -- Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
Praveen Narra -- Raymond James -- Analyst
Ian Macpherson -- Simmons -- Analyst
Stephen Gengaro -- Stifel -- Analyst
George O'Leary -- Tudor, Pickering, Holt -- Analyst
Sean Meakim -- J.P. Morgan -- Analyst
Connor Lynagh -- Morgan Stanley -- Analyst
Kenneth Irvin Sill -- SunTrust -- Analyst
Transcript powered by AlphaStreet
This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.
More From The Motley Fool
Motley Fool Transcribers has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
