Thank you for joining us for this morning's Navios Maritime Acquisition Corporation First Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call. With us today from company are Chairman and CEO, Ms. Angeliki Frangou, Vice Chairman, Mr. Ted Petrone and Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Leonidas Korres. As a reminder, this conference call is also being webcast. To access the webcast, please visit the Investors section of Navios Acquisition's website at www.navios-acquisition.com. Also on the website, under the Investors section, you will see a corresponding presentation that we will reference throughout this conference call. I would now like to read the Safe Harbor statement. This conference call contains forward-looking statements under the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 about Navios Acquisition. Forward-looking statements are statements that are not historical facts. Such forward-looking statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of Navios Acquisition's management and are subject to risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ from the forward-looking statements. Such risks are more fully discussed in Navios Acquisition's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The information set forth herein should be understood in light of such risks. Navios Acquisition does not assume any obligation to update the information contained in this conference call. Now I would like to outline the agenda for today's call. First, Ms. Frangou will offer opening remarks. Then Mr. Petrone will explain the operational update and industry overview. Next, Mr. Korres will review Navios Acquisition's financial results and finally we will open the call to take questions. Now, I would like to turn the call over to Navios Acquisition's Chairman and CEO, Ms. Angeliki Frangou. Angeliki?

Thank you, Laura and good morning to all of you joining us on today's call. I am pleased with our results for the first quarter of 2015. This has been our best quarter on record. We grew revenue by 29% and EBITDA by approximately 50%. We also generated $20 million on net income, certainly more than we had generated in any prior full fiscal year. We declared a quarterly dividend of $0.05 per share for the quarter resulting in a dividend yield of about 5.5%. We're proud to note that we have consistently paid the dividend since inception aggregating to $0.90 per share. As we have noted in the past, we view the dynamic decline in the price of oil as positive for oil consumption and oil transportation. Indeed the spot rate for our VLCC improved about 90% this year from an average rate of around $27,000 in 2014 to an average of approximately $51,000 for 2015 year-to-date. Capital was increased for Europe and elsewhere. We would expect the oil transportation business to continue to be solid for the foreseeable future. Turning to Slide 2, we have been building scale for about five years. In 2013 and nearly 2014 we reentered the VLCC market and acquired six vessels. Subsequently in November of 2014, we launched Navios Midstream Partners and Midstream MLP with four VLCCs. After the previous NAP is trading above 17% higher than in Asian price while having declared total distribution of $0.61 per unit. The total is then for an intentional purchase NAP only six months ago and exceeded 20%. Slide 3 highlights that we've created several low value. We transformed NNA into a leading package company with a 39 vessel fleet. Based on the first quarter EBITDA, we have the potential to generate $212.8 million in full…

Thank you, Angeliki. Please turn to Slide 11. Since January 2014, we took delivery of nine tankers, six VLCCs and five MR2s. With these recent acquisitions, our fleet under water stands at 39 vessels. Navios acquisition continues the Navios Group policy of locking in secure cash flow with creditworthy counterparties. 2014, we chartered out our VLCCs for total of eight years of coverage, our product tankers for 17.5 years and our chemical tankers for a total of two years of coverage. So upon 2015, we’ve chartered our VLCCs for two additional years of coverage and our product tankers for additional years for coverage. Please turn to Slide 12. Navios acquisition diversified fleet consists of 39 vessels totaling $4.1 million deadweight. The fleet consists of eight VLCCs, 19 MR2 product tankers, eight LR1 product tankers and four chemical tankers. Navios acquisition currently has vessels on the water with an average age of 4.6 years. Since the beginning of 2013 our product tanker fleet in the water has grown a 140% from 12 to 29 and the total fleet in the water grew 105% to 39 vessels. 17 product tankers have delivered since the beginning of 2013. Turning to Slide 14, we have fixed about 88% of our capacity for 2015 in what should be improved conditions. We have fixed just 31.6% in 2016 and about 10% of revenue days for 2017. About 50% of our contracted fleet has profit sharing in 2015. The average contracted daily charter out rate for our fleet is $18,381 for 2015. The rates for 2016 and 2017 are $18,522 and $19,525, respectively. Available fleet days will grow from $14,185 in 2015 to $14,274 in 2016. Please turn to Slide 14. We have gained market exposures for our VLCCs by charting vessels on index point or two…

Thank you, Ted. Now we'll discuss the financial results for the first quarter of 2016. As shown on Slide 39, our operating metrics for the first quarter of 2015 have significantly improved compared to the same period in 2014. We were able to benefit from the strong tanker market through our VLCCs that are fixed on floating rate and the profit sharing on the majority of oil charters. Furthermore, the available days of oil fleet increased by 12% from 3,079 days to 3,458 with fall of vessels continuing to our results for the first time since we started operations. Revenue for Q1 2015, increased by 29% to $78.6 million from $61 million in Q1 2014. We enjoyed almost 100% fleet utilization and an increased time charter equivalent of $22,521 per day compared with $19,544 per day time charter equivalent in Q1 2014. Operating and voyage related expenses were $25.2 million and G&A expenses were $3.2 million. We continue to demonstrate significant EBITDA growth. EBITDA for Q1 2015 increased to 53.2% from $21.6 million in the same period of 2014. Other expenses include depreciation and amortization of $15.2 million and interest expense and finance cost of $18.2 million. Net income improved by $32.8 million from a net loss of $12.8 million in the first quarter of 2014 to a net profit of $20 million or $0.13 per share in the first quarter of 2015. I would like to remind you that EBITDA and net income in Q1 of 2014 had been negatively affected by the $10.7 million impairment loss related to the sale VLCCs singular plant and the $2.2 million loss related to a default charter. As you can see on the graph at the bottom on slide, should we commence operation in 2010, we have grown our operating metrics significantly…

Thank you, Leo. This completes our formal presentation. We'll open the call to questions.

Our first question comes from the line of Amit Mehrotra of Deutsche Bank.

Yes thank you good morning excuse me congrats on the good results. Angeliki, the company is generating some nice cash flow obviously, which begs the question of cash deployment and I’m specifically talking about the leverage profile of the company, which has been coming down and the question is do you expect the net leverage to continue coming down or are you sort of comfortable with where you are today. And also would you consider increasing the dividend given the cash visibility and profile of the company?

We believe that with the current rate we will be able to really have a strong generation as were waiting to see how good these development and we see that there is a healthy, very healthy levels that remain. So we’re committed on deleveraging one, which we did also this quarter. If you have seen, paid some liabilities, got also delivery of our two vessels and as we will progress, we will see some deleveraging and of course return to shareholder via either increase and increase dividends or buyback.

Okay, could you just be a little bit more specific in terms of could we see net leverage in the high 50% level, say this time next time year based on the cash flow generation?

Yes.

Okay, fantastic. And then just one follow up to that, you mentioned share repurchase it doesn’t look like the company has done any share repurchase since the $50 million authorization back in December. Can you just update us on what your thinking is with respect to sort of the utilization of that authorization?

This is a -- the buyback is in place. What we’re seeing is that, evaluation of our internal evaluation of the company has increased. You have seen that today we have about a $1.27 per share cash from NAP that provides us an divisional volume for our company and we’d reviewing the buyback.

Okay. Can I just ask one industry question and then I'll hop off. The crude tanker market, the product tanker market obviously two different markets, just would love to get your comparing contrast on the two different markets. Both are seeing improvement, but maybe the crude market is a little further along in terms of the rate inflection. So can you just give us some of your thoughts on maybe the pluses or minuses as you see it for both segment at this point in the cycle? Thank you.

I think the -- one of the plus and minuses that's actually affecting both markets is the new refineries that are online and coming online in the Persian Gulf. You’re getting a lot of work for the LR1s and its also creating crude that has to be moved from the Atlantic back out to the Pacific. Think about if you see our chart, you can see the Saudi, they're up another two million barrels a day in terms of clean product. So that’s one VL, right the day that's it's not moving from them. But when you replace it, you have to replace it from the Atlantic. So it’s almost another VL on top of that. It’s a 1.9 ratio to 1. So I think that’s helping both. I think, the net fleet growth versus ton mile issue is a very -- it’s excellent for crude. It’s just very good for product. That’s probably the difference. You’re getting hardly any new building deliveries in terms of the crude, but on the product it's going to be a little bit more maybe 3.5%, 4% on the MRs where you’re going to be what 1.5% on the Vs, 10 Vs. Most of that is going to be soaked up by Chinese SPR fill. So the volumes and the distances for both clean and crude are continuing to move at greater speed up within too far.

Got it, okay, that’s very helpful. Thank you very much.

Thanks.

Our next question comes from the line of Ben Nolan of Stifel.

Hi, thanks. I guess my question, first question has to do with where you guys are thinking about maybe -- perhaps as it relates to potential dropdowns, but obviously is not very many vessels in the existing fleet at the sponsor level that have what I would call ideal MLP dropdown charters long term fixed rate charters. Are you seeing much appetite among the charters for your existing vessels to do this sort of fixtures or is that even something that you're really contemplating are you preferred to have them the more spot oriented exposure there?

No, we see bigger charters. We have seen the ability to fix for longer periods and we have some vessels that they will see the profile therefore the initial drop down. So as we’ve already committed NAPs contemplating to have at least two drop downs, I think that's going to be very feasible.

Okay and you’d said the market at movement with respect to those long-term charters is sufficiently high enough that it’s a level at which you would contract.

You’re getting that, it will benefit first is the first stage of what we would say on the trading side is the mating dance right. I think now that Q2 numbers in terms of returns has been as high as Q1 as quite a lot of people to the table for discussions and that’s the beginning. As we say, you need to volume the pickup before you get going. So we’ve already started having discussions with others in terms of deals longer than one year.

And that is primarily in VLCC side or also sort of rolling over into the product mix as we'll?

On the products we have done a year deals already and we're seeing now on the LV which is really the market where we have -- the rest of that also there kind of day drop downs.

Okay. Sure. Alright, well, my next question I guess has to do with the deal that was done with HSH and I realize that it’s not an enormous deal with respect to magnitude, but it is interesting nonetheless. I guess my question was, how much of that capital is allocated to NNA, what’s the ticket size on this part of the platform.

On the $-14 million investments there is about $5 million, $6 million representing about 47%.

Okay. And just curious on that, is this obviously is the second deal of that type that you’ve done is there a solid pipeline of similar transactions would you say or they still sort of maybe categorized as one off opportunistic, maybe it happens every once in a while maybe not, how should I think about that?

I think there's plenty of vessels in those portfolios and we know and if it attractive, this will be -- it takes little bit longer for this kind of drag to finalize, but I will expect that we’ll be participating in the third transaction.

Okay. And lastly I guess with respect to sort of the tanker side obviously your charter rates are higher, assets values are little bit higher, arguably haven’t moved as much as the cash flows have, how do you think about acquisitions at this point? Have you feel like you’ve adequately bottom tick the market, which you guys have done phenomenal job of and will sit on the sidelines for a little while or you still think that asset prices are pretty attractive here?

We believe that there will be opportunities. We’re not in the phase where we will buy in 15 vessels a year. I think that -- we’ve moved away from that position but on vessels that are promptly very close to coming to the water with sales I think we’ll opportunistically look because let's not forget. the dry docks have suffered big devastation and obviously simply has suffered. So whenever you have mix fleet of companies with exposures in different sectors, they may need liquidity event. So this is the kind of opportunities that now we’re always is very inclined to step in quickly and we’re watching very closely what is under construction and what vessels slightly more than out for sale.

Okay, well that’s interesting and I don’t want to take up too much time, but obviously the dry dock is a different platform containers, within NNA’s is it something that you guys would look to branch out away from the West side, potentially just sort of if the opportunity arises.

No, we’ll have pretty very much crude and the product I think is an assembly. This is the beginning of the good cash flow generation. If you see just taking in consideration is just one quarter and we have $20 million net income, more than we have generated entire last year. And if you see some sensitivity as we have put in place nine, where you can see the free cash flow sensitivity with different rate assumptions and think how to do develop that really provides with very good free cash which can bring it close on either returning to our shareholders deleveraging our opportunistically buying couple of vessels.

Okay, that’s helpful. I’ll turn it over. Thanks.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Chris Wetherbee of Citi.

Good afternoon guys. When you're balancing the product versus the VL side, I’m just trying to get a sense, what’s more attractive right not in terms of asset acquisitions? Is it product or is it on the tanker side where we’ve seen a little bit of stronger recovery so far?

It is very strong on the VA definitely, but you can see also cash from LL1 we have done on that profit sharing, which is product position. We have 50% of LVC that still generated $19,000 a day. So you realize that depending on the amount of cash you want to redeployed you may on the product tanker you may have more sellers, more vessels. On that it is more selected group and you have to find ways to point of stress. The returns there always we’ll have a much bigger return on the VA, but we do it in a -- we see it in a company what cash flow generation versus what visible return we can have.

Okay. So little bit of balance but maybe more liquidity on the product side is that fair to say?

Yes.

Okay, that’s helpful. When you think about NAP and the ownership assuming a couple of drop downs this year how do you think about your pro forma ownership, let’s just look out towards the end of 2015 of that vehicle?

At this time, we’re at a very high level. We own about 57.5%. We have a $190 million investment there. As we’ll be doing much work as each way and then after the first year and you start dropping down, we’ve been aiming to create a preferable conversion overnight. You will most probably believed yourself from that point, but we’ll have the position we have. Honestly we like the cash flows and the cash generation. You will -- today we’ll get distribution to generate over $18 million on dividend.

Okay. No that makes sense -- makes sense to me. My last question I guess is maybe sort of prioritizing uses of cash a little bit. I’m a little surprised to hear the commentary around the share repurchase deleveraging certainly understand potentially where we are in the cycle would seem that paying down debt and buying ships would arguably be sort of the first usage of cash. Am I thinking about that right? Just thinking about maybe being opportunistic so leaving that opportunity to buy back shares on the table or how should I be thinking about that prioritization of cash flow uses?

Listen, deleveraging is number one as we always have said, as we approach -- when you approach mid-cycle level we’ll have to more de-lever. On opportunities, the cash flow generation as we see can be very healthy. So it will give you the opportunity to buy couple of vessels. The repurchasing we see that a very nice way to return to our investors instead of just doing a dividend increase only. The reason for that is that other companies have started given dividend today. Navios has already given we have provided over almost a $1 in dividend back to our shareholders. We're consistent on our dividend distribution, but one thing we like is that we never change -- we’re very careful of how we increase our dividend. So on ways that on the free cash that we're generating, deleveraging is definitely important opportunity, buying couple of vessels you’ll still have plenty of liquidity and then you find ways to return back to our shareholders.

Okay. That makes sense, certainly a lot of cash generation, so that’s a very high quality problem to have. So thanks very much for the time. I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Spiro Dounis of UBS Securities.

Good morning thanks for taking the question. Yeah just following up on maybe the state of VSMP market and being out in the market and buying vessels it sounds like you're watching it closely. We’ve heard 10% of the VLCC market is up for sale, but agreeing on price has been difficult. I was wondering if you can give us a sense of what the markets look like in the midsized, crude fleet or even the product fleet. Is there a same level of vessel up for sale and maybe owners can’t be on a price or how that market looks?

You’re meaning the sales marks and on product.

I’m sorry.

Sorry, can you please in which segment, I think…

Yeah, just both on may be Suezmax and Aframax or for crude and then just across the product spectrum, how does that market look? How much is up for sale right now and are both parties are agreeing on prices a little here or there?

I think there is a -- as you have other number of vessels, you have more opportunities and choosing -- going away from doing a very big purchase like may the operations and trying to choose one and two will provide you the best deal. Trying to do a major deal most probably with pay a premium. So doing a vessel acquisition opportunistically will provide you a better situation and as a goal, you got away from the VL ability to find more builds is clearly I agree with you.

Got it. Thank you. And then just in terms of MLP friendly, I guess charters of vessels, shuttles, tankers are up and brought up as maybe a potential vehicle or asset to use in that avenue, would you -- is that something that you looked at in the past and maybe decided against it. I’m just wondering what your thoughts are there?

Listen we like very much of VAs. We see that there is going to be nice opportunity, they provide long durations and we see that they find here as I said earlier, the five-year period is coming and you can find it with very attractive means.

Got it. Appreciate the color. Thank you.

Thank you.

Our final question comes from the line of Michael Webber of Wells Fargo.

Hi, this is Donald stepping in for Mike. Taking a shorter term view on the upcoming quarter, can you comment on what percent of your Q2 revenue days have been booked to date and generally have those numbers compared directionally with the previous quarter?

I think you have almost everything in Page 7. You have a lot of the -- we'll give you how that the nine months of development. So you have exactly how we're open and let say on charter 423, we see over $63,000 per day. The Q2 is developing on the same level if you take average earnings on the VL say much too long and on the product tankers, we can even see a stronger market on a low line. So I think that looking in May, almost half of the quarter is complete we can see that Q1, it looks developing at the same level or better to Q1.

Okay. Thank you for that. And then just a general question on the overall asset cycle, we’ve seen pretty strong earnings, pretty robust sentiment among owners, but there has been a lack of S&P activity, but I think based on your previous comments that you’re starting to see charters reach out for longer duration charters, maybe more two, three year deal. Is that the shoe that you think needs to drop to increase S&P activity at this point in the asset cycles where owners can lock in that longer term coverage after acquiring vessels and is that something that you would look to do and ahead of potential acquisition?

Yes even though usually owners like to be more sport, but when we see the period market developing, that gives them a benchmark to evaluate, return on your investment. So yes, I think that by seeing more multiyear transaction, you can say okay, this sounds reasonable on values.

Okay. I appreciate the color. Thank you.

Thank you.

That was our final question. I will now like to turn the floor back over to Angeliki Frangou for any additional or closing remarks.

Thank you. This completes our first quarter results for Navios Acquisition.