Golar LNG (GLNG) 2026 年第二季財報電話會議：第四座 FLNG 驅動擴張

重點總覽

• Golar LNG 公布 2026 年第二季營業收入為 1.3 億美元，EBITDA 為 1.27 億美元，較第一季的 1.06 億美元成長約 20%，主因是 Hilli 帶來較高的商品價格連動收益。
• 淨利為 5,600 萬美元，使上半年淨利達到 1.58 億美元。該公司宣佈發放每股 0.25 美元的季度股利。
• Golar 已確認訂購第四艘 FLNG 船隻，這是一艘預計於 2029 年內交付的 Mark II 改裝船。這項價值 24.5 億美元的計畫將其掌控的液化產能提升 41%，達到每年 1,210 萬噸。
• Hilli 結束了為期八年的喀麥隆合約，期間實現 100% 的經濟正常運作時間，目前正前往新加坡進行改裝，隨後將於 2027 年下半年展開為期 20 年的阿根廷合約。
• FLNG Esperanza 的進度已完成 74%，符合進度且未超預算。航離時間仍目標設定在 2027 年底，隨後於 2028 年下半年在阿根廷開始營運。
• 管理層預計，在未計入商品上行空間與通膨調整前，到 2028 年年度常態 EBITDA 預估將達到約 8 億美元。若 FLNG #4 取得與 Esperanza 相當的條件，該數字到 2030 年可能會突破 12 億美元。

核心財務數據

業務與營運表現

第四艘 FLNG 訂單擴充產能

Golar 向中集來福士 (CIMC Raffles) 訂購了第二艘 Mark II FLNG 改裝船。該單元的現場交付總預算約為 24.5 億美元，比 Esperanza 的 22 億美元預算高出約 10%。管理層將增加的費用主要歸因於長交期設備的通膨、鋼鐵價格以及匯率波動。

該訂單使 Golar 在完全交付後所掌控的液化產能從每年 860 萬噸提升至 1,210 萬噸。該公司正在就長期租賃進行深入談判，目標合約期限約為 20 年，經濟效益介於資本支出對 EBITDA 的 5 至 6 倍之間。

Golar 還取得在中集來福士建造另一艘 Mark II 單元的選擇權，並與勝科海事 (Seatrium) 簽署意向書，涵蓋額外的 Mark I 或 Mark II 改裝。管理層表示，這些安排為打造超過七艘 FLNG 船隻的船隊開闢了道路，但公司將維持一次僅擁有一艘未簽約單元的政策。

Hilli 結束喀麥隆合約

經過八年的營運後，Hilli 於 7 月 26 日交付了喀麥隆的最後一批貨物，實現了 100% 的經濟正常運作時間並累計交付 156 批貨物。目前正駛往新加坡進行價值約 3.5 億美元的改裝與重新部署工作。

該單元預計於 2027 年下半年開始執行為期 20 年的阿根廷合約。管理層預計在未計入商品連動上行收益前，年度 EBITDA 為 2.85 億美元。

Gimi 產能持續超越合約要求

Gimi 在第二季的產量較合約產能高出 15%，並交付了第 41 批貨物。管理層預計較高的環境與水溫將影響第三季表現，隨後在冬季月份將有所改善。就全年而言，公司預計產量仍將顯著高於合約產能。

Esperanza 進度維持正常

FLNG Esperanza 的進度已完成 74%，記錄超過 1,500 萬個工時且無因傷工時損失事件。在該計畫 22 億美元的總預算中，Golar 已投入約 13 億美元的現金股權。

航離時間仍預計在 2027 年底，阿根廷的營運預計於 2028 年下半年開始。該計畫規劃的 600 萬噸 LNG 供應中已有 200 萬噸售出，管理層預計年底前將達成額外的包銷協議。

管理層指引

在 Gimi、Hilli 與 Esperanza 完全投入營運的情況下，管理層預計到 2028 年年度常態 EBITDA 預估將達到約 8 億美元（不含商品上行空間與通膨調整）。

若 FLNG #4 租賃條件與 Esperanza 大致相當，管理層預計到 2030 年年度基礎 EBITDA 將成長約 50%，達到 12 億美元以上。

阿根廷合約提供與商品價格連動的費用，相當於離岸價 (FOB) 每百萬英熱單位 (BTU) 超過 8 美元部分的 25%，此外 Golar 還持有 SESA 10% 的股權。管理層估計，每百萬 BTU 超過 8 美元 1 美元，每年可產生高達約 1 億美元的額外收益。

根據電話會議中討論的當前與遠期價格，管理層估計在每百萬 BTU 10 美元時，年度 EBITDA 約為 14 億美元；在 15 美元時為 19 億美元。此外亦表示，在 SESA 營運的前三年，更強勁的 LNG 價格每年可額外增加高達 5 億美元，不過遠期市場的流動性隨著時間曲線延伸而有所下降。

風險與關注焦點

• FLNG #4 尚未簽署長期租賃合約。商業里程碑包括條款清單或框架協議、正式合約以及滿足監管條件。
• 所需的批准可能包括出口與環保執照，以及對尚未成為 LNG 出口國之國家稅制的明確規範。
• 長交期設備面臨來自 AI 資料中心、造船與飛機製造業競爭帶來的成本與交付壓力。管理層提及部分零件通膨率高達 40% 至 60%。
• Gimi 的產能在第三季可能面臨因環境與水溫升高帶來的季節性壓力。
• 與商品價格連動的收益取決於 LNG 價格，而遠期市場的流動性隨時間延長而受限。
• 未來的資產層級融資將部分取決於租賃結構與交易對手的信用品質。

分析師問答重點

• FLNG #4 商業化進程：管理層正在縮小多個租賃機會的選擇範圍，並預計獲得一份約 20 年的合約。該流程通常依序推進商業條款、正式協議與監管條件。
• 擴充至四艘以上的單元：在對 FLNG #4 的長期合約有明確把握之前，Golar 不會訂購 FLNG #5。一旦簽訂合約，公司計劃增加資產層級融資，並將資本回收再投資於下一個單元。
• 船廠選擇：未來在中集來福士與勝科海事之間的配額分配，將主要取決於價格、付款條件與交付時程，並可能考量承租人的偏好。
• 未來交付時程：可選擇訂購的單元通常需要約 38 至 40 個月，具體取決於船廠與下單時間。
• 資金能力：管理層表示，為 Hilli 進行再融資並為 Esperanza 安排長期融資，可釋放約 23 億美元的額外流動性。隨著取得更多已簽約 EBITDA，預計槓桿比率不會發生重大變化。
• 戰略檢討：檢討工作仍在進行中。管理層重申，在有重大資訊發布或董事會結束該程序之前，不會對時間點或潛在結果發表評論。

財報電話會議完整逐字稿

---

完整財報電話會議逐字稿

管理層陳述

Operator

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Golar LNG Limited Second Quarter 2026 Webcast and Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded.

I would now like to hand the conference over to your first speaker today, Karl Fredrik Staubo, CEO.

Karl Staubo

Thank you, operator. Good morning, and welcome to Golar LNG's Q2 2026 Earnings Results Presentation. My name is Karl Fredrik Staubo, I'm the CEO of Golar, and I'm accompanied today by our CFO, Eduardo Maranhao, to present this quarter's results.

Before we get into the presentation, please note the forward-looking statements on Slide 2. Starting on Slide 3, we start with an exciting announcement. Overnight, we signed our fourth FLNG unit, which is another Mark II FLNG to be constructed at CIMC Raffles Shipyard in China. That's the same shipyard already constructing our existing Mark II FLNG on order.

The fourth FLNG order will deliver within 2029 and be the earliest available FLNG capacity globally. The order has been placed on the back of strong interest from prospective charters as well as Golar's stated policy of adding additional FLNG capacity once the existing fleet has secured long-term charter commitments.

Across Hilli, Gimi and the Mark II under construction, now named the FLNG Esperanza, Golar has a total EBITDA backlog of $17 billion before commodity upside and before a charter on the fourth FLNG unit.

During the quarter, Hilli completed her 8-year contract for Perenco offshore Cameroon with 100% economic uptime for the life of the contract. Gimi overproduced 15% versus contractual volume and the FLNG Esperanza remains on time and on budget.

As part of the firm order for our fourth FLNG, we have also secured an option for an incremental Mark II FLNG with CIMC Raffles, i.e., an option unit, and today, we also announced a letter of intent with Seatrium Shipyard in Singapore for further incremental growth units utilizing our Mark I or Mark II design. We will provide further color on our growth ambitions later in the presentation.

Our liquidity stands at approximately $1.5 billion, inclusive of the $600 million revolving credit facility secured during Q2.

Turning to Slide 4, we highlight our long-term charter contracts with Hilli, Gimi and Esperanza contracted through 2045 and with a total EBITDA backlog of $17 billion before commodity upside and inflationary adjustments. With our fourth FLNG order, we see potential to meaningfully increase our earnings capacity, and we'll now elaborate on that on Slide 5.

Today's announced order marks a 41% increase in Golar controlled liquefaction capacity, increasing our total fleet capacity from 8.6 million tonnes to more than 12 million tonnes on a fully delivered basis.

Assuming that we can achieve contractual terms in line with those achieved for Esperanza last year, we see potential for a 50% increase in our earnings capacity. Our fourth unit is also expected to bring diversification of our earnings backlog, both with regards to charter counterparts as well as geographical exposure.

Today's announced order will also be the world's earliest available liquefaction capacity, at least 1 to 2 years ahead of any alternatives. And this again will drive charter interest in the unit. The incremental options, both on CIMC and through the LOI with Seatrium create a replicable model and a capacity to meet some of the demand we see for FLNG deployments.

On Slide 6, we lay out the overview of the FLNG industry by owner. With our fourth order, we now regained the position as the market-leading owner of FLNG capacity with number of units at par with ENI, but higher in terms of controlled liquefaction capacity. We expect to see another 1 to 3 FLNG orders from the existing owners on this page within the next 6 to 12 months further building on our thesis that the FLNG market will see similar development to that of the FPSO industry, which started in 1985 and now has grown to more than 250 units globally. Golar maintains the position as the only proven provider of FLNG as a service.

Turning to Slide 7. We have laid out the same overview of the FLNG units globally, but here divided by the shipyard of construction. As you can clearly see from the slide, Samsung is the market leader for delivery of FLNGs.

Wison shipyard in China has also built 3 newbuilds and continue to actively market newbuild FLNGs, while Hanwha Ocean delivered 1 unit in 2016 and don't have near-term capacity to add additional units. 2 shipyards on the far right, both Seatrium and CIMC have only ever built units for Golar and only done conversions. The way we see the market today, we do not expect other players actively pursuing conversion candidates. Hence, they are focused on Samsung or Wison.

Based on conversations with both shipyards, we believe Samsung is at the very earliest able to deliver incremental capacity sometime in 2031. We do expect Wison to be in prime position to win 2 large FLNG units in the relatively near future, and then they will also be spoken for, for well into the 2030s.

Hence, the way we see the market right now, we believe the only incremental capacity that can be added with relatively near-term delivery is Golar conversions at Seatrium and CIMC. In addition to yard capacity, we see significant pressure on critical long lead equipment. Equipment like turbines, dual fuel engine, steam generators and cold boxes see significant competition from other industries, including AI data centers, shipbuilding and the aircraft industry.

Hence, further pressure on these long leads further drives lead times for incremental orders. Therefore, we believe today's announcements, both of a firm order #4 and option for another unit at CIMC as well as an LOI with Seatrium secures Golar with a growth trajectory to capture market opportunities ahead of competition. We will remain with our policy of only having one open vessel at the time.

So as soon as we lock in the contract for #4, we're then likely to proceed at #5, but we have no ambition to overextend. Again, this is furthermore in line with our announced strategy and also strategic review that we are looking at alternatives to accelerate our FLNG growth, and this speaks to that statement.

Turning to Slide 8 and an overview of the LNG industry and what's going on in the market as we see it. The industry is set to grow around 40% between 2026 and 2031. As stated on our Q1 call, the 2 largest exporters in the world, U.S. and Qatar, are at the same time expected to increase their market share from 40% to 53% of global supply. Hence, as much as we see a growing market, we see very significant increase in supply concentration.

Turning to the middle graph, geopolitical events make such concentration with increasing uncertainty for offtakers. The world's second largest exporter of LNG, Qatar, was directly hit in military action during Middle East events and the Ras Laffan liquefaction plant has estimates that they will be out by around 17 million tonnes out of a total capacity of 88 million for at least 3 to 5 years.

We, therefore, see a need for the global LNG market to further diversify its supply. This is where we think FLNG will play a vital role. And on the graph on the far right, you can see the location of FLNG projects globally. 6 of today's exporters would not have been exporters if it weren't for FLNG technology.

Where Golar operates, we represent the only export facility. That's true for Mauritania, Senegal, it will be true for Argentina, and it was true for Cameroon before we left the country. Significant proven gas reserves remain stranded, which creates further opportunities for FLNG-led LNG supply diversification.

Turning to Q2 and recent highlights and developments. As stated during the quarter, Gimi delivered 15% above its contractual day rate with a 41st cargo delivered. Hilli ended its 8-year contract in Cameroon with 100% economic uptime since contract startup and 156 cargoes delivered over the 8 years.

The unit is now in transit to Singapore for modifications ahead of its 20-year contract in Argentina. SESA officially named the Mark II under construction, the FLNG Esperanza. We secured a $600 million revolving credit facility. We signed the fourth FLNG order and through the EPC for #4 and the LOI with Seatrium, we made a pathway to increase the fleet to over 7 units.

Turning to Slide 11 with a focus on Hilli. On July 26, Golar delivered its final cargo under our contract with Perenco Offshore Cameroon. We're extremely proud to see the unit have 100% economic uptime since start-up. We're further pleased to see that the redeployment progress as planned. We exited the country and are in transit according to schedule.

Once the modification work has completed, we will sail to Argentina, where we will start a contract in the second half of next year, where we will generate $285 million of annual EBITDA before further commodity upside.

On Slide 12, we would like to extend our gratitude and thankfulness to our partners, SNH and Perenco for solid cooperation over 8 years in Cameroon. In addition to LNG export, the project has created meaningful value to the local economy and people.

Golar's operations employed more than 100 Cameroonians or more than 40% local content on board the unit. In addition to significant scholarship and training courses, we have spent $80 million in local procurement and generated more than $1.5 billion in cash earnings to Cameroonian state interests.

We've also voluntarily invested in critical infrastructure in country such as water holes, streetlights, school renovations, new sports centers, et cetera. We're motivated to work together again on potential gas monetization in Cameroon and hope to be back in the near future.

Turning to Slide 13 and the Gimi. Gimi continues to produce above contractual levels. During the quarter, we produced 15% above the contracted capacity. That's despite the fact that we are coming into summer months and liquefaction plants are sensitive to both ambient and water temperature. Hence, we're extremely pleased with this performance. We do expect to see continued impact of high temperatures during Q3 before we see improved performance when we enter the winter months. Over the year, we do expect the unit to produce meaningfully above the contractual capacity.

Turning to FLNG 3, the Esperanza project remains on schedule and on budget. We're now 74% complete on the conversion progress with more than 15 million manhours completed without lost time incidents. The unit remains on track for sail away by year-end 2027 and to start operations in Argentina in the second half of '28. Today, we've spent around $1.3 billion in cash equity into the conversion project out of a total budget of $2.2 billion.

On Slide 15, we're also progressing the required infrastructure in Argentina. SESA, our contract counterpart in which Golar is a 10% shareholder, are now progressing critical infrastructure, including pipeline connections required for the start-up, warehouse for operations support, supply both feeder vessels and crew vessels, and we're also marketing the LNG offtake. The first 2 million tonnes of the total 6 has been sold to securing energy for Europe. And we have now seen multiple offtakers bidding for the next 4 million tonnes, and we expect more offtake to conclude before year-end.

Turning to Slide 16. We have now confirmed our final investment decision for our fourth FLNG unit. The unit will be similar to the Esperanza currently under construction. The total CapEx budget has increased on the back of inflationary pressure for -- in particular, for long-lead equipment globally. And we have a CapEx budget now of around $2.45 billion versus around $2.2 billion for the Esperanza.

Even with this approximate 10% increase in cost, we see this as highly competitive, both compared to an FLNG newbuild and certainly in relation to the cost inflation observed on other offshore and shipping assets globally in the course of the last 2 years, which have grown meaningfully more than 10%.

We expect significant synergies to be realized from building a repeat design and from having 2 units with overlapping construction at the same shipyard. We have secured a donor vessel for the conversion. And we are now in advanced discussions for long-term employment for the unit. We do not expect to add additional units until we have clear visibility on the long-term charter for the unit now ordered.

However, once we do, we turn to Slide 17, and we have a very clear path as to how we may grow beyond unit #4. Firstly, we -- the order we placed overnight includes an option for a third Mark II FLNG at CIMC Raffles in Yantai, China.

As earlier stated, we've also signed an LOI with Seatrium. Seatrium is the shipyard that constructed both the Hilli and Gimi and also the shipyard that will conduct the Hilli modification work this year and next year. That LOI reserves slot reservations for either a Mark I or a Mark II design FLNG.

In addition to the shipyard capacity, we have secured options for incremental long lead equipment. We have identified and are working to secure additional donor vessels, and we're certainly advancing charter discussions for long-term employment with multiple counterparts. With the agreement signed today, Golar is laying out the groundwork for accelerated FLNG growth in the years to come.

I'll now hand the call over to Eduardo to take us through group results.

Eduardo Maranhao

Thank you, Karl, and good morning, everyone.

Moving to Slide 19. Q2 was another strong quarter for Golar with continued operational performance across our FLNG fleet and a meaningful increase in EBITDA. Total operating revenue was $130 million in the quarter, with FLNG Gimi continuing to perform above contractual levels, delivering earnings approximately 15% above contracted base rate during Q2. We also completed the final legacy O&M contract relating to the FSRU Italis LNG, further completing our transition into a pure-play FLNG infrastructure company.

EBITDA increased approximately 20% quarter-on-quarter to $127 million compared to $106 million in Q1, primarily driven by higher commodity-linked earnings from Hilli. Hilli generated $37 million of commodity-linked earnings during the quarter compared to $10 million in Q1, demonstrating once again the meaningful commodity upside embedded within our contracted earnings base.

Net income was $56 million in the quarter, bringing year-to-date net income to $158 million. And consistent with our capital allocation framework, we have declared another quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share in Q2.

Now moving to Slide 20. Our balance sheet continues to provide substantial flexibility to fund the next phase of FLNG growth. At quarter end, total cash stood at approximately $900 million and net interest-bearing debt was approximately $1.8 billion.

In July, we further strengthened our liquidity position by closing a new $600 million revolving credit facility, which currently remains undrawn. Including the RCF, we have approximately $1.5 billion of available liquidity.

At the same time, we have now equity funded approximately $1.3 billion of the FLNG Esperanza conversion, leaving significant embedded financing capacity across our asset base. As illustrated on the right, optimizing the financing of Hilli and locking long-term financing for Esperanza could release approximately $2.3 billion of incremental liquidity.

Discussions on both transactions are advancing. Together with our existing liquidity, operating cash flows and potential proceeds from asset level financing, that will provide substantial capacity to fund FLNG #4, while preserving balance sheet flexibility for further growth, as explained by Karl. The timing in terms of FLNG #4 asset level financing will ultimately be aligned with its long-term charter and our broader FLNG growth opportunities.

Now moving to Slide 21. I would like now to spend a moment on this slide here to talk about the commodity-linked component of our earnings, which has become increasingly relevant given the strengthening LNG price environment.

Hilli provides a useful demonstration of the value of this structure. Over its 8-year contract in Cameroon, Hilli generated over $650 million of commodity-linked earnings before all the hedging proceeds, which we achieved during that period.

Our contracts in Argentina also give us meaningful upside participation. Under the Hilli and Esperanza charters, Golar receives a commodity-linked fee equivalent to 25% of FOB prices above $8 per million BTU, while our 10% ownership in SESA provides additional commodity exposure.

As we previously highlighted, every $1 per million BTU above $8 can generate up to approximately $100 million of incremental annual earnings to Golar. Importantly, LNG offtake indices and forward prices have strengthened materially since early this year.

Based on current and forward pricing, we estimate that this movement could increase the value of our commodity exposure by up to $500 million per year during the first 3 years of SESA operations. While forward market liquidity naturally reduces further out in the curve, the important point here is that this upside sits on top of our long-term contracted earnings base.

If we now turn to Slide 22. Now this slide brings the 2 key components of our model, a highly visible contracted earnings base and a significant commodity-linked upside. With Gimi, Hilli and Esperanza fully operational, we expect an annual run rate EBITDA of approximately $800 million by 2028 before commodity upside and inflation adjustments.

If FLNG #4 is contracted on terms broadly comparable to Esperanza, annual EBITDA has the potential to increase by approximately 50% to more than $1.2 billion by 2030. And importantly, that remains the base contracted earnings.

On top of that, our Hilli, Esperanza and SESA exposure provides meaningful participation in LNG prices. At $8 per million BTU, as you see on the graph, we would expect annual EBITDA of more than $1.2 billion. At $10, this increases to $1.4 billion, while at $15, which is the current forward prices for next year, that would imply approximately $1.9 billion in EBITDA to Golar.

And to illustrate the embedded upside potential, if we apply the LNG pricing that we saw in 2022, we would see potential annual EBITDA approaching $4 billion. The key takeaway is that we have a highly visible contracted earnings base capable of exceeding $1.2 billion annually with our FLNG #4, together with substantial additional upside if LNG markets remain strong.

Now turning to Slide 23. One of the key attractions of FLNG is that it provides buyers with geographically diversified LNG supply while offering very compelling economics to reserve owners. The illustration on the left shows the economics for a 3.5 MTPA Mark II FLNG based on current forward LNG prices.

Including upstream feedstock gas, the cost of liquefaction, shipping and regas, we estimate an all-in delivered LNG cost of under $8 per million BTU. If you compare that to a 1-year forward LNG price of approximately $15 per million BTU, this leaves a very significant margin for the charter. At approximately 90% utilization, a 3.5 MTPA FLNG would deliver around 50 cargoes per year.

On these assumptions, that translates into approximately $1.3 billion of annual operating margin for the charter or around $25 million per cargo. Importantly, these economics come together with the strategic benefits of FLNG, shorter time to market, access to geographically diversified gas resources and reduce the dependence on a limited number of large onshore LNG supply locations. This combination of attractive economics and supply diversification provides a compelling proposition for prospective FLNG charters.

So in summary, Q2 was another strong quarter for us. We continue to deliver operationally. Our contracted earnings base provides significant long-term visibility, commodity exposure offers substantial upside and our balance sheet provides the capacity to fund the next phase of FLNG growth. With attractive economics supporting demand for additional units, we believe we are extremely well positioned for the opportunities ahead.

So with that, I'll hand the call back to you, Karl.

Karl Staubo

Thank you, Eduardo.

Turning to Slide 25 to summarize. Golar is the leading global FLNG player controlling a fleet of 12.1 million tonnes per annum. Through our operations to date, we've delivered 100% economic uptime and delivered 197 LNG cargoes. Our backlog stands at $17 billion before commodity upside and inflationary adjustments and with further upside in a potential charter for our fourth FLNG unit announced today.

Assuming we can fix that unit in line with our last fixture last year, we have a potential to grow our annual earnings by 50% or to north of $1.2 billion by 2030 before commodity upside and inflationary adjustments. We see that FLNG is an increasingly relevant source of global energy security and supply diversification.

We are strategically positioned for growth. And with the announcements today, both with CIMC and Seatrium, we're well positioned to capture the market opportunity significantly ahead of any incremental competition from alternative suppliers.

We maintain a disciplined capital allocation focused on shareholder returns, and we still have capacity under our share buyback program. We continue our quarterly dividend with significant capacity for further growth as the fleet deliver to their long-term contracts.

With that, I'd like to hand the call over to the operator for any questions.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] And the question comes from the line of John Mackay from Goldman Sachs.

分析師問答

John Mackay

Congrats on the fourth vessel announcement. I wanted to pick up on a couple of things you've been talking about. Maybe can you just walk us through the path to commercializing that vessel and signing a customer. And you talked about maybe framing up the economics on the last vessel, but maybe broadly talk about target return profiles in this context.

Karl Staubo

John, if you follow the sequencing of both our previous speculative orders and our announcements year-to-date, we have been focused on evolving the charter opportunities to narrow down the design. We were contemplating either Mark I or Mark II. But with the visibility we now have, we see the best value proposition to be a Mark II order, which is why we ordered that one.

We expect then to further narrow down the charter opportunities and to secure a long-term charter for the unit where we maintain sort of a 20-year duration plus/minus. And we remain with our guidance in the 5 to 6x CapEx to EBITDA sort of range.

John Mackay

And just to clarify, that -- how should we think about kind of the remaining time line and milestones for us to watch? For signing the customer?

Karl Staubo

There are no standard process for fixing an FLNG because the only ones who've ever done them as a service is Golar, and they've all been quite different, to be honest. But the typical first step is a signing of either a term sheet or a framework agreement that sets out the key commercials. Sometimes it's binding, sometimes it's not, but it is certainly a milestone, if that's achieved.

From there on, we will then evolve the term sheet or framework agreement into a full contract. And then the third step is typically then to lift all CPs thereafter, which are typically regulatory, both in terms of export license and the environmental license required. And in certain countries, which are not yet LNG exporters, you also need clarification on the tax regime. So 3, call it, key steps, signing of term sheet, signing of definitive contracts and lastly, lifting of CPs.

John Mackay

And second question for me, Karl, you mentioned the potential for 7 vessels. I understand there's a couple of moving pieces here and the time line, like you said, can move around. But maybe in a, let's say, a blue sky scenario, how would we think about kind of pace of deployments and being able to get to that fleet of 7.

Karl Staubo

So first off, it's on the yard capacity side. We have ordered unit #4 today. We have an option to do unit. We will not commit to that being CIMC or Seatrium in that order. But for simplicity, unit #5 then with a fixed option at CIMC and Unit #6 and 7 at Seatrium, but it may not be that exact sequence. The fifth could be Seatrium and the sixth could be CIMC, if you understand. That's what we've already locked in today with the contract signed at CIMC and the LOI with Seatrium.

In terms of sequencing, we remain with our very clearly stated policy that we are not going to have more than one open FLNG at the time. Hence, we're not considering ordering unit #5 until we have clear visibility for a long-term contract on the fourth unit. Once that is locked in, we will then proceed with the fifth, and we'll continue to replicate that model as we grow. Once we secure long-term contracts, we will then attach asset level financing to the then derisked FLNG and recycle that capital into the consequent unit.

Operator

And the question comes from the line of Alexander Bidwell from Webber Research & Advisory.

Alexander Bidwell

So with the LOI with Seatrium covering either a Mark I or Mark II and then you've got the option for a third Mark II at CIMC. Can you talk us through how you're thinking about shipyard selection for your next unit? Is there -- are there any differences between going with one or the other?

Karl Staubo

So we have spent -- we've obviously built 2 units with Seatrium in the past, both of them being Mark I. And we are in process of building a Mark II with CIMC. Given that, that unit is now 74% progress, we feel comfortable ordering the second unit there.

So when it comes to the next unit and the yard selection, we are clearly comfortable with both shipyards. So it will come down to price, payment terms and delivery. And to the extent that is relevant, there may be a charter preference for one yard over the other. But in general, it has to do with the price payment terms and delivery. That's the key decision maker. And then if it's Mark I, it's very likely to be Seatrium anyway.

Alexander Bidwell

And then just for a quick follow-up. Can you talk us through the, I guess, the delta in budget between the FLNG Esperanza and the second Mark II conversion? I think it's $2.2 billion versus $2.45 billion.

Karl Staubo

Yes. So as we said, that's around a 10% increase. That's mainly driven by very significant cost inflation on long lead equipment and also impacted by steel prices and currency fluctuations. But if you look at some of the long leads typically have 40% to 60% cost inflation. So the fact that the overall unit is, call it, only up with 10%, obviously, it's still meaningful, but we think that is a testimony to the very significant work that we've done over the course of this year, both with regards to long lead items and negotiating with the shipyards. I would also like to highlight that when we say that this is the price, that's the all-in price. meaning it includes the EPC with the shipyard. It includes crew training, bunkering and transport from yard site to contract sites and also the mooring system that we anticipate using. So it's delivered cost to site.

Operator

And the question comes from the line of Sherif Elmaghrabi from BTIG.

Sherif Elmaghrabi

First, very simply, what drove the decision to order a Mark II? Is that indicative of where conversations with charters have progressed? Because a quarter ago, you guys talked about pretty big range in terms of looking back in capacity.

Karl Staubo

You broke up a bit at the end there, but I think we got the question. So the primary reason for going with that unit is that's where we see the strongest charter engagement for relatively near-term employment of the unit. It's also where we see the most attractive CapEx per tonne and OpEx per MMBtu. I think both the economics to the client and the charter interest and the gas reserves in question at the moment, it's the most actively demanded unit we have, and therefore, we felt comfortable doing that also on the back of the solid performance by the shipyard in constructing the Esperanza, which is now 74% complete.

Sherif Elmaghrabi

And then for the 2 to 3 options that you hold, can you tell us -- and I apologize if I missed this, but can you tell us when do these additional options expire and kind of the lead time for those units for when they would hit the water would be helpful.

Karl Staubo

We don't want to go into details as to exactly when they expire because commercially, that's a little bit sensitive, and we think we can drive better value with holding that for ourselves for now. In terms of delivery, you're talking around 38 to 40 months, subject to which shipyard and what the time.

Operator

And the question comes from the line of Chris Robertson from Deutsche Bank.

Christopher Robertson

Just looking at the next opportunities here, Argentina was unique in the sense that had 2 FLNG units in one country. Are there any commercial opportunities here as you've FID-ed the fourth one that a fifth vessel could go to the same local and kind of a 2-for-1 deal? Or are the commercial opportunities you're looking at more geographically dispersed?

Karl Staubo

Both. There are places where you can do both, and there are people that only want one. But I think to give you an example, Argentina took 2. But Argentina, if you look at the project with YPF, ENI and XOG, they're also talking about adding 2 units there, both of them 6 million tonnes. So that's another 12. So obviously, there's meaningful capacity to significantly boost Argentina.

You have other countries like Mozambique, which are now taking 2 units from ENI. And there are several other countries like that where there's room to put multiple units. So the answer is, yes, we can definitely look at multiple deployments in certain geographies. But for us, it tends to be just to start with one and then build on that. But with the option package we now have, we can talk to both.

Christopher Robertson

And just as a follow-up. So now that FID has been announced on the fourth unit and a clear pathway here for additional units, can you contextualize this around the strategic review that's still ongoing? And when do you expect that process to be concluded? And any updates there?

Karl Staubo

As we stated in the announcement on the strategic review, the rationale for the strategic review was twofold. One, Board and management believes there's a value discrepancy between public market pricing and potential other parties valuation of the existing business. And the second and at least equally important rationale was to accelerate FLNG growth on the back of the market development that we see.

I think today's announcements very clearly point out what we want to achieve in terms of FLNG market acceleration. When it comes to the strategic review, you are right that, that is ongoing. And as we've stated in the strategic review press release, we will not give any comments on the review itself, neither the outcome nor the timing until we have material information to share or the Board has decided to call it off. So we expect that to revert to the market with that in due course. But in the interim, we're not giving any specific comments to it.

Christopher Robertson

Got it. If I could ask one follow-up question. Just to reiterate the guidance, the current guidance around Hilli and it going to the yard, is it the same time line, same budget, CapEx budget for the refurb and redeployment?

Karl Staubo

I'm not sure if I understood it. So the refurb budget is around $350 million from the day we depart Cameroon until the day we arrive in Argentina and well into commission in Argentina.

Operator

And the question comes from the line of Jostein Aschjem from Clarksons.

Jostein Aschjem

So I was just wondering about the schedule for the CapEx of the new FLNG unit. Do you aim to take delivery of the unit by 2029? And then how should we think about kind of the sequence and timing of the CapEx related to that unit?

Karl Staubo

Sorry, the CapEx on #4?

Jostein Aschjem

Yes.

Karl Staubo

So the CapEx on #4 is meaningfully improved from the Esperanza. So that's been part of negotiating the yard contract. And to be fair, it is quite offsetting on the 10% cost increase that we have meaningfully lower capital outlays, in particular, in the first 2 years of the construction period, which is the same period of time until the Esperanza is fully operational.

So the CapEx curve have been negotiated substantially lower than that of the Esperanza, but it's still a pay-as-you-go payment terms and not sort of a shipyard fixed installment type of -- or for traditional commercial ships.

Jostein Aschjem

If I may, a follow-up on the optional units that you have secured or the options that you have, will you start ordering long lead items for those? And how far will you be kind of willing to commit to, for example, long lead items on those units for the next couple of years?

Karl Staubo

So the way it works is when we place the firm orders for unit #4, as part of that firm order, we then negotiated packages for a potential unit #5 for the majority of them at absolutely no incremental cost and some of them at a very, very low incremental cost in total for all of them, less than $1 million. That obviously has a time constraint.

In many cases, that time constraint can be extended. But if you do go and extend the time constraint, you're likely to then get a later delivery slot because there's very significant pressure on these long lead items. But we're pleased to have obtained the options that we have obtained at very limited to no cost incremental to that of the order itself.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] And the question comes from the line of Sunil Sibal from Seaport Global.

Sunil Sibal

So I think you touched upon your potential counterparties for the fourth vessel. I was curious how do you think about geographical as well as credit preferences for the fourth counterparty? Is there something specific we should be looking for as far as especially the credit quality of your fourth counterparty is concerned?

Karl Staubo

It's a good question and to answer it is slightly different. Every time we have these calls, we get all of the same questions from investment banks and investors. But this is an open call. So potential charters, shipyards, equipment suppliers and many other people are listening to this call. So we weigh our words carefully.

We are in advanced charter discussions in several different geographies. Some of them are to NOCs, some of them are to independents and some of them are to IOCs. Subject to the credit quality of the counterpart, they are likely to demand slightly different contract structures, but that also then comes with at least different perceived risk, although I believe we have been very successful at structuring around such risks in the past.

At the end of the day, an FLNG is paid by the client who buys the offtake gas. And the good thing with LNG is that there are no bad credit buyers. There are typically countries, very big industrial groups or the world's largest traders that are offtakers there. So subject to where you operate, the contractual protections are the most important, but we do recognize that financeability increases, if we charter to sort of IOCs.

But then again, as we've previously explained, they are less likely to share commodity upside and so forth. So at the end of the day, for us, it's a trade-off. What we look to are economic returns and, of course, equity returns. And then leverage plays a part of that. But at the end of the day, we believe that the market position with the lowest CapEx per tonne in the industry, the best operational performance and the earliest delivery in a world with increasing geopolitical pressure for supply certainty puts us in a very unique position to drive value to Golar and its stakeholders.

Sunil Sibal

And then one clarification. I know with your previous projections for the 3 vessel case, I think you're ultimately looking at the 3 to 3.5x kind of a leverage once all the 3 units are up and running. Now that you're looking at the fourth one, should we be thinking about ultimate desired leverage in the same range? Or do you think you could be a little bit more even aggressive in that range now that you're kind of diversifying the fleet and all that?

Karl Staubo

What we've proven to -- you are right that on a net debt-to-EBITDA ratio, that's where we are at the moment. As Eduardo explained, there's significant capacity to free up a few billion dollars of liquidity if we relever the Hilli and add asset level financing on the Esperanza. We've proven in the past with the financing of Gimi in November, December last year that subject to contract counterpart and contract structure, we have done asset level financing at 5.5x.

We don't want to overextend the balance sheet because we want capacity to continue to add attractive growth projects. But as we lock in more EBITDA backlog, we expect the ratio to not meaningfully change.

Operator

Dear speakers, there are no further questions for today. I would now like to hand the conference over to the management team for any closing remarks.

Karl Staubo

Thank you all for dialing in today. We are very excited with today's announcement and developments, and we look forward to speak to you again on the future development of the company as we continue to grow within the FLNG space. We wish you all a great day and hope to speak soon. Thank you.

Operator

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now all disconnect. Have a nice day.