Good day and welcome to the First Financial Bancorp Fourth Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call and Webcast. All participants will be in listen-only mode. [Operator Instructions] After today’s presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. [Operator Instructions] Please note, this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Eric Stables, Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, Keith. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us on today’s conference call to discuss First Financial Bancorp’s fourth quarter and full year 2015 financial results. Discussing our financial results today will be Claude Davis, Chief Executive Officer; Tony Stollings, Chief Operating Officer; and John Gavigan, Chief Financial Officer. Before we get started, I would like to mention that the press release we issued yesterday, announcing our financial results for the quarter and full year is available on our website at www.bankatfirst.com under the Investor Relations section. Additionally, please refer to the forward-looking statement disclosure contained in the fourth quarter 2015 earnings release, as well as our SEC filings for a full discussion of the company’s risk factors. The information we will provide today is accurate as of December 31, 2015, and we will not be updating any forward-looking statements to reflect facts or circumstances after this call. I will now turn the call over to Claude Davis.

Great. Thanks, Eric, and thanks forth those joining the call today. Yesterday afternoon we announced our financial results for the fourth quarter and for the full year of 2015. And before I turn over the call to Tony and John to discuss our results, I wanted to recognize the outstanding effort of all of our associates who made our success possible and their hard work resulted in a strong 2015 as we celebrated our one year anniversary of being in the (Inaudible) Ohio market which has performed well about our expectations as well as the completion of the Oak Street acquisition which we think along with our franchise finance business gives us a great alternative to our core community banking markets in two nationwide lending platforms. And finally, we had great results in producing a 15% year-over-year net income growth. Overall, I continue to be pleased with the progress we make in building a company that can consistently and responsibly produce top quartile results. I believe that our company is well-positioned to grow organically with mid-to high single-digit annual growth rates, as well as continue to take advantage of acquisition opportunities when they develop and meet our strategic objectives. And with that, I want to turn the call over to Tony.

Thank you, Claude. Net income for the quarter was $19.8 million, an increase of $1.2 million or 6.6% over the fourth quarter last year. Earnings per diluted common share were $0.32, with return on average assets of 0.99% and return on average tangible common equity of 12.98%. Excluding approximately $1 million of pretax non-operating expenses, which were primarily related to severance benefits accrued during the period, net income was $20.5 million or $.33 per diluted common share. Return on average assets was 1.02%, and return on average tangible common equity was 13.4%. Net income for the full year was $75.1 million, an increase of $10.1 million or 15.5 % over the prior year. Earnings per diluted common share for the year were $1.21, with return on average assets of 1% and return on average tangible common equity of 12.66%. Excluding approximately $5 million of pretax non-operating expenses, primarily related to severance benefits, expenses related to the acquisition of Oak Street, and adjustments to reserves for litigation related items, net income was $78.3 million, or $1.27 per diluted common share. Return on average assets was 1.04% and return on average tangible common equity was 13.2%. Consistent with our comments over the last few quarters, we continue to see good opportunities to organically grow our balance sheet, with competitively priced high-quality loans and low-cost core deposits. End of period loans increased by approximately $173 million or 13% on the annualized basis compared to the linked quarter, exceeding our long-term expectations of mid to high single-digit growth. Average loan balances increased $212 million, or 17% on an annualized basis during the period, despite more than half of our period end loan growth coming in the final week of the quarter. End of period deposits increased by $98 million, or 6% and average total…

Thank you, Tony, and good morning, everyone. Net interest income for the fourth quarter was $66.1 million, an increase of $2.9 million, or 4.6%, when compared to the linked quarter. A strong organic loan growth was complemented by the full quarter’s the impact of the Oak Street -- of the acquired Oak Street loan portfolio and was also impacted by a full quarter of subordinated debt. Primarily driven by the same two factors, net interest margin was 3.69%, on a fully tax equivalent basis, compared to 3.67% in the prior quarter. The effective yield earned on the loan portfolio increased 10 basis points from the third quarter to 4.62%, primarily as a result of the higher yielding Oak Street loans. The effective yield earned on the securities portfolio increased five basis points to 2.44%, benefiting from reinvestment mix into higher yielding securities in recent periods. Non-interest income for the fourth quarter was $15.8 million, declining 22% compared to the linked quarter, with the most significant driver being a $3 million decrease in accelerated discount on covered and formerly covered loans as the number of size and loans that prepaid during the period declined. Other fee income sources also contributed to the linked quarter decline, as client derivative fees came down from the exceptionally strong performance in the third quarter and gain on sale of mortgage loans was impacted by seasonal and other industry factors. Additionally, distributions from our limited partnership investments and gain on sale of securities also declined from the third quarter. Non-interest expense decreased $1.7 million or 3% from the prior quarter to $51.3 million, primarily related to $4 million of acquisition related and other non-recurring expenses during the third quarter, partially offset by higher incentives, severance, healthcare, and OREO related costs during the third quarter. Turning to…

Great. Thanks, John. And Keith, I think we can open the call for questions now.

Yes. Thank you. We will now begin the question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] And the first question comes from Scott Siefers of Sandler O'Neill & Partners. Scott Siefers - Sandler O'Neill & Partners: . :

Hi, Scott.

Good morning, Scott. Scott Siefers - Sandler O'Neill & Partners: Okay, John. Maybe this first question is for you, you suggested that the most volatile line in the fee base that accelerated discount will likely be, if I interpreted it correctly, will likely be down year-over-year in 2016, are you able to give any more color on kind of potential order of magnitude just because of the couple of million dollars swing that it can have sort of quarter over quarter? Is there any way to kind of capture how high or low you think you can go just given the size of total remaining balances?

Yes, Scott. I mean it’s obviously tough to predict borrower behavior there, but I think based on our best estimates, we don’t think the fourth quarter is necessarily indicative of a new run rate. If you look at the earlier quarters in 2015, second and third quarters, both included some significant prepay activity on some covered or formerly covered franchise credits there. We don’t necessarily expect that to repeat. So if you kind of look at fourth quarter versus the earlier quarters and somewhere in the middle is probably a decent indication of what we expect for 2016. But again, tough to predict borrower behavior there. Scott Siefers - Sandler O'Neill & Partners: Okay. Yes and I understand, but that’s – that’s kind of narrowing it down a bit is helpful nonetheless. So, thank you. And then second question was just on the margins, so as I looked at it, it came in maybe a little better than I thought and I think than you guys had suggested as well. So maybe John if you could give a little bit of what you thought the big puts and takes were because the only noise was the full quarter inclusion of Oak Street, but it sounds like now that that’s fully embedded in the run rate, still expecting the margin to hold firm which is the favorable delta relative to how the organic margins have been behaving last year, so maybe your thoughts on sort of the major drivers in the fourth quarter? And then to the extent you can give any glimpse out beyond the first quarter that might be helpful as well please?

Sure, Scott. In the fourth quarter, I think you know the major puts there, it was really the full quarter’s impact from Oak Street, as well as the full quarter’s impact from sub debt, and those were largely as expected, some on the production mix and fee volatility came in relatively in line with our expectations. I think if you look back last quarter, we had guided towards stable, but probably plus or minus few basis points and I’d say we came in line with that. Going forward, obviously, Oak Street and sub debt are now baked into the quarterly run rate. We’ll see here in the first quarter the full impact of the December rate hike that should help close the spread between new originations and payoffs, though I don’t know that it entirely closes that gap there, we’ll get some lift on the portfolio, on the balance of the portfolio on floating-rate loans there. So we expect that to be, as I noted in my interest rate sensitivity comments there, modest positive there. So, again, it really comes down to what’s the production mix and prepayment activity during the quarter.

And this is Claude, Scott. I would also add I think just we’re a little, I’d say, cautious just given the market volatility and what’s going on with the rate curves. And so and we are cautious about going too much further than the first quarter. Scott Siefers - Sandler O'Neill & Partners: Yes. Okay. Fair enough. All right. That’s good color. So thank you very much, guys.

Thanks, Scott.

Thanks.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Emlen Harmon with Jefferies

Hi, Sgood morning, everyone.

Good morning, Emlen.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I think it is the last quarter that you are going to give us kind of what the Oak Street contribution was, on just kind of one last (Inaudible) on what we should expect for 2016, you said $0.04 this quarter, is that a fairly representative run rate in terms of what you think they are going to be able to do on a quarterly basis, so do you feel like that was maybe high or depressed for any particular reason?

Hi, Emlen. This is Tony. I think Oak Street, when we made the original announcement, we had modeled their contribution at that time of $0.16 to $0.20, and they’re coming, they are tracking on that. At this point, we don’t see any reason to change that. So, I’d say the meeting expectations right now.

Got it. Okay, thanks. And then you guys have started to utilize the share buyback a little bit more the last couple of quarters, is that something we continue to see next year, and just kind of how are you thinking about how you deploy that, are you trying to be opportunistic? I know the capital stack is a little thicker now that you’ve got the sub debt in there, does that change your appetite at all? Just kind of curious on your appetite for the buyback.

Sure, and this is Claude. The board looks at it every quarter, so we were taking a look at that as well as the kind of other capital options. I would say at this point it’s not likely, at least in the next quarter or two that you’ll see much on the repurchase side mainly due to the strong organic growth that we are seeing and as Tony kind of mentioned in his script the really strong late fourth quarter kind of growth. So we want to be cautious and make sure that we preserve that capital for our growth opportunities both organic and acquisitive. So I don’t see a lot right now happening in the repurchase area.

Got it. All right. Thanks for taking the questions.

You bet. Thanks.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Jon Arfstrom with RBC Markets.

Good morning.

Good morning, Jon.

Good morning, Jon.

Good morning.

Just a follow up on that loan question, maybe for you Tony or Claude, just talk a little bit about the late fourth quarter growth if there is anything unusual there broad-based, give us your thoughts as to why it happened late in the quarter?

This is Claude, Jon. It was across multiple business units which is a positive and I don’t know that I could pinpoint at anything macro driven other than just several different things lined up that caused them to close literally in that last week to two of the quarter. And we also have some we carry over into January. Nothing of note other than it was across the board and I think activity in general in the fourth quarter was strong, but particularly strong late.

Okay. And it looks like some of this when I look at the period end balances is commercial real estate and construction, can you just give us your thoughts on the health with that business in your markets?

Yes. I mean we had some we’ve been talking most of the year about, we’ve seen strong construction demand, some of that funded up – started to fund up some more in the fourth quarter, so we saw some of that. I would say late in the fourth quarter, we saw as much on the C&I side across Oak Street franchise in core C&I business. Some of that can show up in the real estate line, because it may be owner occupied real estate, that’s a part of that package that we may do for a particular company. So, what we noticed is that it was a pretty good blend or mix between real estate or commercial real estate, or investment commercial real estate in C&I along with the owner occupied. As it relates to the question on the health of the commercial real estate market, it continues to be strong. We see lease-ups happening as modeled or better than model, we continue to see the permanent market taking kind of loans out earlier than we’ve ever experienced. So at least to this point, we’ve seen a pretty strong and healthy market and obviously, it’s by sub category, so there are certain categories that still are soft that we don’t do a lot of blending into, but those that we have been continue to be solid.

Okay. That’s helpful. And then, John Gavigan, just a quick question, I appreciate all the help on the modeling and expectations. You talked a little bit about Q1 seasonal factors, I’m assuming you’ve seen a little bit higher comp, maybe little lower service charges and possibly mortgages that are both the items you are referring to, is there something else?

Yes. Those items you mentioned as well as fewer days in the quarter.

Okay. All right. Okay, that’s it. Thank you.

Thanks, Jon.

Thanks, Jon.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Erik Zwick with Stephens, Inc. Erik Zwick – Stephens, Inc.: Thanks. Good morning, gentlemen.

Good morning.

Good morning. Erik Zwick – Stephens, Inc.: With regard to the severance expense that was recorded in the quarter, I’m curious, is that related to general year-end trimming or was there a particular business line that had some room additional efficiency improvements?

No. It was just general activity, it was not related to Oak Street, so just things that happen over the course of the year. Erik Zwick – Stephens, Inc.: Thanks. I’m curious if you could provide a little more color on that one commercial loan that was added to the classified bucket, was there a particular industry or a borrower situation that that led to the downgrade there?

Yes. It was a specific borrower situation that we think is just a short term issue, but it did impact current performance and we felt that it needed to be identified as a TDR and managed appropriately. But as John mentioned, we don’t expect to see a loss there and we think based on the current performance review that sometime in 2016, we will see that credit improve and be potentially upgraded. Erik Zwick – Stephens, Inc.: Great. And then, finally, you kind of mentioned you’ve been in Columbus for over a year, acquired Oak Street in 2015, I guess how do you view your desired balance between organic and acquisition growth today and how would you classify sellers expectations?

Yes. Our primary strategy has always been and our preferred strategy is always to grow organically and then to supplement it when it makes sense with the strategic kind of acquisition opportunity and I would say that’s still where we are, I mean our strong preference is to focus on organic growth. We continue to look at are there product line extensions that we could potentially take a look at, whether that’s in the lending space or in the wealth management area. And then on the whole bank side, we’re always having conversations, I think expectations are, I wouldn’t say have changed from where they were over the last year or two, and we look at them all based on what we think the right approach for us is in terms of market penetration or market expansion. So we think we are still on the good spot, continue to grow organically and if the right deal comes along, we’ll take advantage of it. Erik Zwick – Stephens, Inc.: Great. Thank you for the commentary.

You bet.

Thank you. And the next question comes from Andy Stapp with Hilliard Lyons.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning, Andy.

Could you talk about any exposure to energy you might have?

Zero to very limited, I mean that may be some tangential groups or areas that may have energy as a part of the client base, but nothing material at all.

Okay. And what type of construction and commercial real estate were you finding I think for example multifamily, office, retail etcetera?

Yes, the bulk of it would be multifamily, healthcare and then that may be specific properties say in office category that may be a build to suit that we are helping to finance, but I would say the two largest categories we have seen have been more in the multifamily and healthcare spaces.

Okay. Great. Thank you.

Thank you. The next question comes from Daniel Cardenas with Raymond James.

Just given how your capital levels have kind of trended back to where your stated goals are, how should we be thinking about your dividend payout ratio?

Yes, Daniel. Our capital ratios have gravitated around our target levels that we’ve been public about and we continue to see an improvement in EPS. So, that’s obviously our payout ratio has declined as a result. What we tend to look at, as I mentioned earlier, we kind of review this every quarter with the board, is what’s our growth prospects first. And if we feel like we’ve got strong growth prospects, we’re going to retain the capital for that first and then if we’ve got excess capital that’s generated, then look at dividend or other growth opportunities. So at this point, we feel comfortable where we are both from supporting our growth as well as our current dividend level.

Okay, thanks. And then just in terms of competition, I’m sure competition remains intense, but are you seeing any wholesale changes in structural – on the structural side from your competitors?

I wouldn’t say – pricing is probably the most significant part of the competitive landscape. I would not say wholesale changes on structure, I would say there are selective or individual transactions where we see that occur, but at this point, I would not suggest that it is wholesale at least in the categories where we are lending into.

Okay. Great. And then one last question on the deposit side, just competitive factors there, or are you seeing any pickup in competitive factors as it comes to deposit pricing?

I don’t think we’ve seen any pressure yet on the pricing side for deposits. So everybody seems to be staying pretty disciplined at this point.

Okay. Great. Thanks, guys.

Thank you.

Thank you. (Operator Instructions) And the next question comes from Chris McGratty with KBW.

Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking my question.

Good morning, Chris.

Good morning. I’ve got a question on the investment yields that were kicking up last few quarters, could you elaborate in terms of what you’re buying and maybe what the current (Inaudible) was in the past few quarters?

Yes. Specifically, in terms of what you’re buying, it’s not that different than what we’ve traditionally bought in the portfolio primarily, agency mortgage-backed securities, and CMOs as well as some private label CMOs and munis that are highly rated. We have taken advantage of our portfolio duration, had come down to the low threes we’ve gone out a little bit on duration, on the reinvestments to pick up some yield there. Overall, the portfolio duration is fairly short, a little under 3.5 years. We feel good about where we are at there.

Okay. So that was the driver, do you kind of go (Inaudible) a little was the driver of the mix (Inaudible) is that right?

Correct, correct.

And then, maybe if I could on the loan yields, obviously they are moving in the right direction, and I would imagine part of that is because of the deal, anything unusual in the 4.62% loan yield that’s in the quarter, what’s related to elevated loan fees or is this kind of decent barometer going forward?

No, I would say nothing unusual there, as you said, it was largely driven by the higher yielding acquired portfolio and the full quarter impact.

Got it. And then last if I could on the size of the investment portfolio, with similar sized, whether there could be dollars or proportion of earning assets still right way to think about the size of the balance sheet?

Yes. I think dollar wise where we ended the year, I don’t see is necessarily increasing the size of the portfolio. Depending on our growth opportunities on the loan side, you could see the size of the portfolio migrate down a little bit during the year, it’s just one of those things that the balance on an ongoing basis depending on our growth opportunities. Chris McGratty – KBW: Great. Thank you.

Sure.

Thanks, Chris.

Thank you. And we have a follow-up question from Andy Stapp withHilliard Lyons.

Yes, thanks. Just to follow up on the commercial real estate lending, just wondering what type of cap rates you are seeing on the multifamily and office projects you are funding I’d say?

I would need to get back to you in terms of what the appraisers are using, obviously we get to that kind of full appraisal and appraisal review process. So we would need to get back to you on kind of specific there, but it is market based, I don’t have that number in front of me.

Okay, all right. Thank you.

You bet.

Thank you. And as there are no more questions at this time, I would like to turn the call back over to for any closing comments.

Great. Thanks, Keith. And this Claude, again, thank everyone for participating in our call. Thank you.