Good day everyone, and welcome to Kosmos Energy's Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2015 Conference Call. Just a reminder, today's call is being recorded. At this time, let me turn the call over to Neal Shah, Vice President of Finance and Treasurer at Kosmos Energy.

Thank you operator, and thanks to all of you for joining us today. This morning we issued our fourth quarter earnings release which is available on the Investors page of the kosmosenergy.com Web site. We anticipate filing our 10-K with the SEC later today, which will also be available on our Web site. Joining me on the call today are Andy Inglis, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; and Tom Chambers, Chief Financial Officer. Following our prepared comments, we will have a question-and-answer session. Consistent with prior calls, I request that you ask only one primary question and one follow-up question. This will help ensure we get to everyone on the call. If there are questions that we aren't able to get to within our one-hour timeframe, please contact me later today. Before we get started, I'd like to mention that this conference call includes certain forward-looking statements based on our current expectations. The risks associated with forward-looking statements have been outlined in the earnings release and in our SEC filings. We may also refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures in our discussion. Management believes such measures are important in looking at the company's historical and future performance, and these are commonly referred to industry metrics. These measures are provided in addition to, and should be read in conjunction with, the information contained in our financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP and included in our SEC filings. At this time, I'll turn the call over to Andy.

Thanks, Neal, and good morning everyone. 2015 was a successful year for Kosmos. Our basin-opening well at Tortue set the tone for the year and marked the beginning of a successful series of exploration and appraisal well. We also made significant progress in Ghana, where Jubilee continues to deliver, and the TEN development remains on budget and on schedule to produce first oil in the third quarter. As we look forward to the rest of 2016, we are well positioned both operationally and financially to create value for our shareholders. As I go through my remarks today, there are four points I want to emphasize. First, Kosmos has the financial strength to invest through the cycle focusing on activities that will create long-term value. We remain disciplined in our capital allocation and will continue to protect our balance sheet. Second, our Ghana asset provides both high margin cash flow and significant growth. We expect net production to grow around 50% from 2015 to 2017. Third, we're just beginning to unlock the value and potential of our acreage offshore Mauritania and Senegal. We have had three major gas discoveries thus far and remain convinced of the basin's potential for significant oil resources as well. And fourth, we continue to plan for the future by high-grading our exploration portfolio. We view this period in a price cycle as a time of opportunity. I'd like to begin by highlighting the strength and stability of Kosmos' business model. Possessing the financial robustness to manage through market turbulence is the fundamental part of the strategy for a resource company that has a long-term vision. In a world of price volatility, it is essential. Since inception, Kosmos' business was designed to execute through the cycle. The quality of our assets and our prudent approach to managing…

Thank you, Andy, and good morning everyone. As Andy mentioned, we exited 2015 in a favorable financial position. Total corporate liquidity was 1.8 billion at year end versus 1.9 billion at year end 2014, and we are very well positioned to execute our plans in 2016. We finished the year with nine crude oil liftings, three of which occurred in the fourth quarter in line with our revised guidance issued on the third quarter conference call. This generated full year 2015 oil revenues of $447 million, excluding $225 million of derivative settlement. When you add our revenue to our settled hedges, it reflects a real life price of approximately $78.73 per barrel in 2015. Fourth quarter and full year revenues were down compared to 2014, primarily as a result of lower oil prices. At the end of the year the company was in an underlift position, having sold approximately 117,000 barrels less than our entitlement. For 2015, we generated a net loss of $70 million, or $0.18 per diluted share and in the fourth quarter generated net income of $24 million or $0.06 per diluted share. Adjusting for the impact of one-time items that affected the comparability, the company generated a net loss of 66 million or $0.17 per diluted share for the full year of 2015, and net income of $18 million or $0.04 per diluted share in the fourth quarter. On the cost side, operating expense in the fourth quarter was $30 million or $10.50 per barrel sold, representing a sequential decrease to a level more in line with our second quarter rates. For 2015, we averaged operating expense of $12.34 per barrel, above our annual guidance is the result of higher workover expense and non-routine maintenance on the FPSO, including expenses to repair the gas compressor in…

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Ryan Todd with Deutsche Bank. Please proceed with your question.

Great, thanks. Good morning and good results, gentlemen. Maybe you addressed this some in the comment, but can you walk through a little bit the -- I guess what you would view as your potential options for either the development or the modernization of the resource at Mauritania and Senegal? I know that that is potentially an option right now for Chevron on the backend. At what point do you -- would you consider opening up to a broader process to take market interest, and what would be the potential timing in terms of how you think about timing and development over the next couple of years?

Yes, good morning, Ryan. Well, look, I think the first thing is I think we are confident as a result of the appraisal drilling that we've conducted today, and if Ahmeyim-2 comes in on prognosis, you know, on West Tortue, we've got 15 Tcf of gas in what we believe is a very simple launch gas accumulation. Therefore, fundamentally we have a resource which we believe is cost competitive [indiscernible] from an upstream perspective, but I think it's important that we do enough work to understand the most cost effective way from midstream solution. And as I said in my remarks, I think we see the rapid rate at which FLNG technology is moving forward that it can provide us with a very cost effective midstream solution. So I think the first -- the workover in the next quarter will be to integrate the appraisal work, and around midyear I think we would have done the conceptual thinking to outline what we believe will be a demonstration of a cost effective resource. At that point, we'll then decide the route we go. I think there is a route around partnering with a major, we discussed Chevron; we are in discussions. It will be great to work with them, but there were several other majors that are also seeking to get an entry into the position. So we have added a lot of value here through the appraisal program. And I think it's important that we evaluate the route through a potential farm-down to a major, and equally well there are other solutions available today, a contracted developer approach where we would seek a different development partner. So I think you can probably see us coming to a decision on that in the second half of the year. I am not sure we need to go into a sort of public data room on this. We know who it is we want to work with, and I think it will be a smaller conversation rather than a larger conversation.

Great, thanks. That's helpful. And then maybe on spending, can you talk about what the level -- I appreciate the color in 2016, I guess can you talk about the expectations for what happens to capital spend in 2017, how much rolls off, what's kind of the minimum level spend or an appropriate level of spend looking into 2017? And then, maybe you talked about cash flow neutrality from 2017 forward, is that -- what level of capital and oil price does that assume?

Yes. Look, what I would say on that, Ryan, is -- what's clear is we’ve been through a period of very heavy spending in Ghana with sort of getting TEN up and running. In 2017, clearly that spend rolls off and we see positive cash flow coming out of Ghana. What I am not going to do is give you the price tag on which we are working in '17, or therefore what is the exact point of cash flow neutrality, but what we do have in '17 is significant financial flexibility. And I think that's the big message coming back to you is that discipline around the environment of the time, and we're not predicting a high price environment. We are predicting quite a moderate environment. And given that moderate environment, the cash flow that would be coming from Ghana, given the limited amount of CapEx going in, the exploration program will be tailored to that. And I think that will still give us the opportunity of drilling the right wells in the right order. So I believe we are actually at that sweet spot now of being able to run the business in the right way. And I want to come back and make a big emphasis on my remarks which we is we're a rifle-shot exploration company, we do our homework well, and we drill prospects when they are ready. And I believe the maturation of Mauritania and Senegal versus a free cash flow coming from Ghana will enable us to get that synced up.

That's great. What is the net roll off in capital in Ghana year-on-year as you look into '17?

The net roll off, so if you look at Ghana spend today is a couple of hundred million dollars and a majority of that is on TEN. Clearly, we have limited with sort of no drilling on TEN in the first year, limited drilling on Jubilee, that's a significant reduction.

Okay. That's helpful. Thanks.

Right. Thanks, Ryan.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of John Herrlin with Societe Generale. Please proceed with your question.

Yes, thanks. Andy, could you be little bit more specific on [Teranga] [ph] in terms of the size of the prospect, I mean, what are you looking for there? Can you describe it more?

Yes, I think so if you go to -- and I'll say more about this during the week when we were in [indiscernible] with some pictures, but if you can think of the -- this is the Cayar Profond block, John. The [Teranga] [ph] prospect is fed by the Senegal River system. It's the same depositional system that has fed Tortue. So we have got sort of confidence now through the seismic on the Cenomanian reservoir system. So, it's a Cenomanian reservoir target. They are structured very similar to [Teranga] [ph] at the structural stratigraphic trap. The big difference between the two is that we're in the southern part of the Senegal basin. This is where we believe the Albian source is oil mature, and that's the key difference between the two prospects where -- and we have the Cenomanian over line directly what we believe is an oil mature Albian source, which is feeding the prospects, and the prospect size is about half a billion barrel.

Okay, great. Next one from me is with Chevron, is there is a drop dead date in terms of you giving a yea or nay to the backend agreement?

No, there isn't. Chevron failed to make their mandatory election to back in to the Mauritania blocks by the original required date. And as a consequence, they have withdrawn -- they have made us a counter-[proposal] [ph] which we are currently discussing with them. It would be great to work with them, but as I said to Ryan, we've got significant interest from other majors. So for us, it's really about ensuring that we find the best way forward now, and since -- over the last year, as I said, a lot's happened here. We drilled three successful wells. We have updated our petroleum system analysis. We know a lot more about the basin now. It's got significant potential. And therefore, we need to find the right partner for the long-term. So that's where we are, John.

Great, thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Edward Westlake with Credit Suisse. Please proceed with your question.

Yes, good morning, and congratulations on the results that you [indiscernible] the 12 months. Just express question on the floating LNG, obviously, an onshore scheme would have the ability to have larger scale where FLNG tends to be smaller. I mean, maybe walk through the plan if you do go down an FLNG route, I mean presumably you need three, four vessels to produce that type of resource.

Yes, what's interesting, Ed -- and it's great question, is -- and I sort of worked at this for a quite a long time in my career, I think the industry has gotten into a mindset of sort of big is beautiful, and it's credit projects that are actually too large. And therefore, this idea that you are going to get efficiency through scale hasn't been born through. And I think that's the result actually of the last sort of five years of development where scale actually hasn't led to efficiency. So I think it's time to think differently. And our approach is to say that there is a cost competitive size, and I think it's probably in the 2-3 million ton size. Clearly if you then sort of design one and potentially build two, you get a 5 million tons and actually you can scale beyond that. So, I think it's a question about you can create the same scale and actually think you can create the same scale at lower capital inputs than trying to do the large project first. And I think the industry has demonstrated irrespective of the operator that the large scheme hasn't delivered the capital efficiency. So I think that's my mindset here. And I don't think that starting with a more modest scheme necessarily negates the fact that you can't build it rapidly to a 10 million ton scheme if that is what supported by the resource which I think it clearly would be. So that's the thinking. It's a very simple point, but I believe we've done enough work now. I am thinking through some of the concepts and learning from history that I think there is a more efficient way of doing it.

And it would make a lot sense in terms of looking at how the whole environment for that asset actually works?

Yes, absolutely. Yes, you add to it therefore ability to sort of bring some [indiscernible] gas to the country earlier; it enables you to establish a working environment in countries that are relatively immature from a development perspective. So, it has lot of other collateral advantages. But the core thesis is what is the most capital efficient way to do this. And I don't believe big is necessarily right because big means complex and complex has led to massive overrun.

Okay. So second question is more related around the turret and the bearing in Jubilee and obviously Tullow is the operator. Obviously, one strives to a lot of reading as to what would happen and how just good it is workout if a bearing is going fail, but maybe just walk us through what would be the worst scenario if say the bearing did fail and need to be replaced?

Yes, well, look, we talked to you about it I think it was on Thursday. It's now Monday, right? So, we want to be very open in the disclosure which is what we did. What's happening now is there is a bunch more diagnostic work going on. And I think to be honest, Ed, we need to go through that piece of work and really understand what it is we are dealing with. And from there, we can clearly describe what the worst case scenario is from -- I think it's actually it will be premature to speculate about that. And therefore, I don't want to do is get ahead of the issue. I think what we need to do is do the work. We've got a lot more investigation work to do properly describe the potential issue. And when we've done that, we can come back to you and describe the scenarios. And I think genuinely you have got to give us a little bit of time to do that. All of that said, there are many potential solutions spread mooring is a potential solution in water depth than the mid ocean condition. So, there are many potential solutions out here. So, -- and in the meantime of course, most important thing is that with a vessel heading being controlled by turret production continues as normal. Okay?

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of David Gamboa with Tudor Pickering Holt. Please proceed with your question.

Hi, good morning gentlemen. I have two questions please. So the first one just a clarification I guess around the Mauritania and Senegal LNG project. You mentioned how probably around midyear we will have some sort of idea of concept selection of best midstream solution for the project. I was just wondering if you could give a bit more color around any further milestones that you would need to see for -- before taking an FID on this project and some idea around the timing of this. I believe you said probably second half of the year you probably would be deciding on the procedure for just to confirm. And the second one, just on Jubilee, you have mentioned how big fields get bigger on time -- I think you guys mentioned in the past that Jubilee could reach around 120,000 barrels per day or probably even reach more above that main pipe capacity, but guidance for this year is around 100,000 barrels a day, just north of that. I just was wondering if you could give us some color of your thought around how the field group will perform in the future if you still think the table has reached that 120,000 barrel per day mark exceeded, and if so, how long can that be maintained? Thank you.

Yes, David. Let's start with the Jubilee question and come up to margin in Senegal. Just wanting to clarify a point which we continue to make, which is 120,000 barrels a day is the production number and there is a shrinkage factor to go from sales to production. So, actually in the fourth quarter we had -- our gross sales were around 106,000 barrels a day, which actually on a production basis is probably -- you get the math wrong now, but about 112,000-113,000 barrels a day. So, actually in the fourth quarter, the field was pretty close to its 120. And of course that's an average for the quarter. So on certain days it was absolutely that. So, it's a mathematical problem that we need to keep going around, which is the conversion from production to sales, and then sales with maintenance build into it, which is really the issue for 2016 is that we've got a two-week shutdown. So we can't do the math when you put the two-week shutdown into it, you take the exit production rate from the fourth quarter of 2015, the numbers are pretty close. I think and internal piece is the production is going to be a little lighter I think in the first half, where we're catching up on some injection issues that we've had, but fundamentally the capacity is that. So I think's the -- the field continues to perform, and what I would highlight is the gas export has been remarkably reliable actually, given the nature of the system through to the gas pile generation. So that to me was one of the big risks that we have to remove in 2015. So I think that's the Jubilee production story. In terms of Mauritania and Senegal, again, just to be very clear, David, what I said was we're the process now of integrating on knowledge of the gas resource with the final appraisal well, our gas appraisal well, which is Ahmeyim-2. We then put that with the early thinking we got on the most competitive way to develop the resource, the concept thinking, that sort of going to come together by mid-year, and in parallel we are in discussion with a number of parties about that potential participation. We would make a decision on that participation in the second half of '16. And that would allow us then to move forward with the necessary work in '17 to bring this to an investment decision. So I think the investment decision in some ways out, at least for the backend of '17. So what we are looking to do I think is first is what's the right way to develop this resource and ensure we've got alignment with the potential partner around that.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Pavel Molchanov with Raymond James. Please proceed with your question.

Hey guys, thanks for taking the question. So kind of a high-level one first, from the first field you started up to the second, it's been roughly six years, do you have a sense of how long it will take for your next development, whether it's LNG or perhaps something else to get to production?

Great question, Pavel. I would say that it's going to be the early part of the next decade; there maybe that six-year cycle is probably right.

Okay, and -- okay, fair enough. And is there any realistic prospect that something other than Mauritania LNG could come at ahead of the LNG project? So, is there anything on deck that could be an accelerated development versus LNG?

Well, clearly, there is lots of ins and outs in that. If I take the question maybe how it's input, I will be looking at inorganic opportunities that could potentially accelerate. We obviously continue to throw all possible opportunities. We believe we create value through our differential quality of our exploration portfolio, and focus on ensuring, we are targeting big things that work at a very competitive oil price and therefore, and we believe the things that we will test in Mauritania and Senegal, the three oil test will absolutely be competitive in that regard. So the question is if we had an oil discovery what it can be time-wise with the process of monetizing Tortue, and I think the answer would be if it is a scale on the court and we believe that, then absolutely it could.

All right, fair enough. I appreciate it guys.

Right, thanks.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Petr Grishchenko with Imperial Capital. Please proceed with your question.

Hi guys, thanks for taking my question. Just one question with liquidity, what do you expect result of the March re-determination look like? In your mind, are there any commitment amortizations for next year?

Yes. Well, I will pass it over to Tom, Petr.

Yes, Petr, there is no amortization this year or in '17. And obviously the March re-determination will be dependent on what the actual price deck is, and we have just started those discussions, but overall we think it will be relatively de minimis. And when you get to the September re-determination we will have TEN added to the approved reserve base. So, overall year-on-year, we think we will be in pretty good shape.

Got it. And you mentioned two and a half times leverage, I believe, in '15, what do you see most drawing on the revolver?

Drawing mostly on the revolver, is that what you said?

Yes. What do you see in the drill down in the revolver?

Most of those come -- we're not going to drill anything on the revolver. It will all be out of the RBL.

I mean that's what I'm in, one type of drill down you…

Typically about 400.

400, got it. And lastly if I may, I'm looking at your -- given the [indiscernible] and reserves, can you provide a color on the revision of estimates of 10 million in prudent reserves?

I'm not following your question.

You have revision and estimates in the prudent [technical difficulty] 10 million.

Right.

And I'm just wondering what portion I guess if you can sort of provide more color, like, what amount was declined in reserves due to lower oil prices versus increased due to reserve economics?

Well, I mean, Petr, come back with -- you can chat with Neal later, but I think the basic story is that we are seeing reserve growth in Jubilee more than offset the price deck and that's where the growth is coming from.

Okay, great. That's all I have guys.

Probably an important point to emphasize is that despite the lower price deck, that was reserve source at Jubilee, which led to the more than 110% reserve replacement across the Ghana asset.

Yes. Petr, most of that was reserved, there was very little price intact.

Interesting, thanks a lot guys, thanks.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from the line of Al Stanton with RBC. Please proceed with your question.

Yes. Good morning, guys. Just a question about the decision to park the rig, in terms of when the decision was made and also why, I mean it's obvious why, but in terms of whether that was a eureka moment, and with the issue of timing to return to drilling wells, you have accelerated the well in Senegal, why is [indiscernible] to accelerate the wells in Mauritania and drill them ahead of the previous schedule, do the math a little bit quicker on prospect sizes and probabilities?

Look Al, I know -- I guess it's all good questions, I think the fundamental part, which I hope was clear was on remarks is that we believe very strongly as a company around the discipline of the exploration process via patrolling system analysis work, that allows you to properly evaluate the prospectivity and drill the best prospects first. The acreage in Senegal and the seismic that we had -- there we shot in 2015, you know, what came from that is that our understanding of Teranga, it's the same Senegal river system, allowed us to get a lot of confidence in the reservoir, allowed us to get confidence with the shopping [ph] geometries. And therefore with a combination of the well results in terms of the geochemistry gave us confidence that we had a real potential in the South. I think what we are saying on the other prospectivity is that we see three independent tests, but we need to do further work, and our further work in the outboard requires us to shoot additional seismic, which drives the timing of those wells. And clearly in the North, we've got further work to do on the reservoir system, [indiscernible] river feeding and the Senegal River feeding. So I think this is all about ensuring that we do the right work, remain disciplined about it, and [indiscernible] driven, and that will be a fundamental way in which we work. So we still see real valid tax on the inboard Mauritania, outboard Mauritania and Senegal, but there is going to be further work, and we think that work will be completed in 2017, not this fall.

So, when drilling restarts in 2017, should we expect you to drill the prospects you already identified, or should we expect other things to -- either come into the portfolio or come -- reach the similar stage of maturity?

Well, look, today I'd like to say we haven't paid the prospects. We see an oil test in northern Mauritania, and we see an oil test either in the outboard of Mauritania or Senegal. And then I think we are clearly shooting seismic in Suriname his year on Block 42. I think that will high grade into an oil prospect, and we have the existing prospects, which is already [indiscernible] in Suriname. So I think they're going to be live. If there is oil test, we're going to have to figure out the right order to do those tests. Some of that will depend on partners as well.

If I may, can I ask one last question. You're in a similar position on the development side, being rig-rich, should we push the teak area and the Greater Jubilee continue development further to the right as well, or do you see that happening in 2017 as well?

Well, in terms -- we have submitted the plan of development for Greater Jubilee, which includes mahogany and teak. We're not in discussions with the government. So I think the timing of that will depend on the pace at which those things move forward.

Fair enough. Thank you.

Okay. Thanks, Al.

Thank you. Since there are no further questions at this time, I would like to turn the floor back over to Neal Shah for closing comments.

Thank you, operator. We appreciate all of you joining us today, and your interest in Kosmos. If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Thank you very much.