Thank you for joining us for this morning’s Navios Maritime Partners Second Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call. With us today from the Company are Chairman and CEO Ms. Angeliki Frangou, Chief Financial Officer Mr. Stratos Desypris, and EVP of Business Development Mr. George Achniotis. As a reminder, this conference call is also being webcast. To access the webcast, please go to the Investor section of Navios Maritime Partners' Web site, at www.navios-mlp.com. You'll see the webcasting link in the middle of the page, and a copy of the presentation referenced in today's earnings conference call will also be there. Now let me read the Safe Harbor statement. This conference call can contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 about Navios Partners. Forward-looking statements are statements that are not historical fact. Such forward-looking statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of Navios Partners' management, and are subject to risk and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ from the forward-looking statements. Such risks are more fully discussed in Navios Partners' filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The information set forth therein should be understood in light of such risks. Navios Partners does not assume any obligation to update the information contained in this conference call. The agenda for today's call is as follows. First, Ms. Frangou will offer opening remarks. Next, Mr. Desypris will give his overview of Navios Partners' financial results. Finally, Mr. Achniotis will provide an operational update, and an industry overview. Lastly, we'll open the call to take questions. Now, I turn the call over to Navios Partners' Chairman and CEO, Mrs. Angeliki Frangou. Angeliki?

Thank you, Joy. Good morning to all of you joining us on today's call. I'm pleased to announce the results for the quarter. We recorded revenue of $56.5 million, EBITDA of $38.7 million, and $11.4 million of net income. We also announced a quarterly distribution of $0.4425, representing an annual distribution of $1.77 per unit. This annual distribution provides the current rate of about 15.5%, about 2.5 times the yield of the Alerian MLP Index. Navios Partners remains committed to its existing distribution through 2016. We have maintained the distribution throughout the difficult phases of the dry bulk cycle, and are prepared to include this distribution when the shipping market stabilizes, and the market revolves a fair price for consistent cash distributions. Navios Partners diversified in the container segment, which today represents about 45% of the 2015 EBITDA. However, Navios Partners continues to have material exposure to drive back through its 23 dry bulk vessels, which would have been actively managing during the recent deep industry recession. However, the market rates are improving, and we do not believe that this historically low rate environment of the first quarter of 2015 will be repeated soon. Indeed, since July of 2015, the BBI has improved by more than 100%, with take rates improving 5-full base on a recent charter negotiated by Navios Group. There continues to be positive catalysts for clearing the supply overstock of vessels in the form of aggressive demolition. So far in 2015, almost $21 million deadweight zones have been scrapped, representing almost 3% of the global dry bulk fleet, and demolition is projected to reach as much as 5% for the entire year. In addition, non-deliveries of new orders scheduled for 2015 are running at about 40% in the placement of orders for future deliveries have been relatively…

Thank you, Angeliki, and good morning, all. I will briefly review around financial results for the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2015. The financial information is included in the press release, and summarized on the slide presentation on the Company's Web site. Our strong balance sheet and cash flow has allowed us to reiterate our commitments for a minimum annual distribution of $1.77 per common unit through the end of 2016. This provides for a yield of approximately 16.6%. This yield is about 2.5 times the Alerian Yield for MLPs. We would consider increasing Navios Partners' dividend when the market rewards our unit price and the dry bulk market improves. Moving to the financial results, as shown on slide nine. As Angeliki mentioned earlier, we accelerated the dry docking to the extent we could in this low rate environment, and were able to perform dry docking on seven of our vessels. By accelerating this dry docking, we reduced revenues by only approximately $3 million significantly less than what this would have been in a higher rate environment. This acceleration also had the quality of securing compliance for the next 5 years without the additional CapEx required for the installation of the Ballast Water Treatment plant. Revenue for Q2 of 2015 increased by 2.3% to $56.6 million compared to $55.2 million for Q2 of 2014. The increase was mainly due to a 3.2% increase in the time charter equivalent rate at sea in the quarter of $20,679 per day compared to $20,045 per day for the same quarter of 2014, which was partially mitigated by the decrease in available days by 1.3% due to our accelerated dry docking program. EBITDA for the second quarter of 2014 was positively affected by the $17.8 million accounting effect from the insurance…

Thank you, Stratos, and good morning. Please turn to Slide 17. As Angeliki has already mentioned, Navios Partners has shifted its focus on the container segment, where industry fundamentals are improving, providing us with stable, long-term cash flows. As you can see on the chart, there is a strong correlation between annual GDP growth, and the expanded container traffic in both the USA and Europe. The IMF forecast U.S. GDP growth at 1.7% in 2015, and 3% in '16, and Eurozone GDP growth at 1.5% this year and 2.5% next year. With increased disposable income from lower oil prices, container demand should grow further. Moving to Slide 18, over the past 18 years, container trade has expanded at a 7.5% CAGR. The rate of growth has been increasing since 2012, and is expected to continue to increase by over 5% in '15, and by 6% in '16. Turn to Slide 19. At the end of June, 2015, the container fleet consisted of 5,157 vessels, of just under 19 million TEU capacity. After the end of June, 830,000 TEU had been delivered, versus 890,000 projected, giving a non-delivery rate of 7%. Scrapping of older vessels has continued, and after the beginning of July, 2015, 48 vessels with a capacity of 90,000 TEU had been demolished. Last year, 201 vessels delivered, and 172 vessels were scrapped, which expanded the TEU capacity by 6.5%. Estimates are that net fleet growth on a TEU basis will be about 7%. Fundamentals improved further in 2016, where net fleet growth is forecast to be close to 5%, lower than the 6% estimated increase in container demand. Moving to Slide 20 and the dry bulk market fundamentals. World GDP continues to grow, creating raw material demand for primary industries, particularly steel and energy production. This is especially…

Thank you, George. This completes our formal presentation, and we will open the call to questions.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of Amit Mehrotra of Deutsche Bank.

First question is just on the decision not to exercise the option in June for the 13,100 TEU vessel. Just curious about what the thinking was that led to that decision. Was it less optimal financing environment, or something else that drove that decision?

Number one is we had negotiated the free options, so this was free for the Company, and we saw debit and credit market, so we decided that this was not the right environment to take the risk. We can always develop very good and attractive deals, so we thought that the best decision on the kind of conditions that were in June is to be more conservative, as you can always develop other deals.

One question just to follow up, for Stratos, the pro forma coverage calculation of 1.04 times, I believe that's exactly the same as what was provided in the first quarter, but the first quarter had the assumption of the option being exercised, so I'm just trying to understand why the pro forma coverage didn't change at all, despite basically one vessel coming out of that calculation. A - Stratos Desypris Amit, the fact is that the Company performed better in this quarter, so we have sequentially have improved coverage so despite the fact that we removed the pro forma calculation for the one container vessel still by doing the same calculation and also accounting for the dry dock that happened in this quarter, you see that the coverage ratio remains more or less the same as the previous quarter.

And just to add something to Stratos, you have to realize and I think we added a page in Page 5 on our presentation, the recovering environment on the dry bulk can provide quite a substantial improvement on our unit coverage. For every 2,000 that we get above on profit sharing which is about $5.6 million for 2015, you can automatically improve by 15% your pro forma coverage.

So Stratos, the fourth quarter run rate pro forma coverage should be at that 1.04 times, right?

Correct. I mean, even if the market continues to improve, and we see the profit sharing, this might be even higher.

Okay, one last question, and then I’ll hop off, is just on the net leverage. The 32% just seems maybe less optimal, and I understand you want to be more conservative. But given the more increased duration of the entire portfolio, and the visibility that you now have on the dry bulk, I would imagine that you may be more comfortable going up to a higher level. So with that being said, I mean if that's true, could we expect one or two maybe smaller acquisitions before year end, that could be funded entirely with debt, as well as optimize the capital structure?

We always review the debt and the market conditions, because that is also a function of how you perceive the market. The dry bulk market is recovering well, so it gives a good positive -- is recovering at a pace that strongest and I expect, so with that in mind, we will adjust our businesses.

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

Hi, this is Alex in for Chris. Just question on the dry bulk side, can we get an update on the potential dry bulk recovery upside that you alluded to, and if there's any desire to put more capital in the dry bulk sector? Thank you.

It's not a matter of putting more capital, we already have a good substantial -- you have a lot of dry bulk base is about 3,000 profit sharing and open days and you have another 3,000 contracted. So you realize have a good portfolio, 23 vessels to capture this upside. And in reality, this is a way that you'll get recovering rates which are still about 300% of the Cape rate improving and 150% on the Panamaxes. So we're not saying there will be a straight line, you definitely will have greens [ph] and plateaus, et cetera, but directionally it is improving because you have net fleet growth on the Capes is negative, overall net fleet gross will be 1% or 2% as George said, and you have that second half of the year we'll have more demand for cargo, so that creates a good balance.

And my last question is about the distribution. You guys mentioned minimum distribution through 2016. We were wondering what needs to happen for -- it seems like there's a bit of a breathing room for the upside, and if there's -- what needs to happen for that to kind of go up? And for visibility through '17, do you require a better rate environment, or more acquisitions, or?

We have more than one and a half year visibility on our distribution, and as markets recovers, and when our share price starts improving, I think that will be in the cash for distribution growth.

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

I have - well I have a couple of questions. First of all, on the Samsung Logistics default, just for clarification, Angeliki give the $5 million of potential maximum exposure that you thought you might have, is that net of the insurance coverage or that is inclusive of the insurance coverage that you have? A - Angeliki Frangou This was a full mitigation of the insurance and everything that is impact.

Okay, so after insurance it would be $5 million, okay. My next question relates to the dry docking, how much more, I should call it, front-end loading the dry docking program should we expect in the back half of this year?

We have another seven vessels in Q3, I think that was a very good strategy, having the financial flexibility to actually do the dry docking on the lower part of the side of the earning capacity makes it possible to reduce your loss in revenue. And secondly, you've got five years certificate without having the ballast water treatment CapEx. So I think there is a twofold benefit, and I think and Navios Partners took the opportunity to really fully develop a strategy doing seven vessels in Q2 and seven vessels in Q3.

Okay, so any thoughts on Q4, or is it -- that would be a benefit?

Exactly

Okay.

I told it’s until -- much later in end of '16.

And then my last question gets back to Amit's first question on the decision to not execute the option for the container ship. And while I fully appreciate that you guys have ample opportunities as you've shown in the past to do pretty attractive deals that one did seem to be exceptionally accretive potentially. And in addition to the bank debt market, I'm sure that the cost of capital was probably -- prohibitively high from an equity perspective. When thinking about that, I know that you guys are fully committed to the dividend, but have you ever considered maybe not paying as much of a dividend in order to resource some of that capital to some of these projects that are really accretive?

First of all, it has to be agreed to all the shareholders, and in no less than -- we are able to do the dividend distribution, and we believe that we can develop and source other accretive deals, and that will execute on them. But we felt uncomfortable was a really volatile credit market, which we didn't want to take a risk, and necessarily when you don't know if the volatility will remain or disappear.

Okay, so I guess the answer to that is that, sort of cutting to it, is that you can replicate it at another time, and so not change the strategy for the near term simply for a deal I suppose, right?

Exactly.

Your next question comes from the line of Shawn Collins of Bank of America.

So on Page 6, you cite the strategic decision to perform dry docks in advance. Can you just touch upon the requirement for the ballast water treatment for your fleet? For example, when is the requirement due, what's the timing around it, how much does it cost per ship, and how much time would it require for each ship to be treated, to have this system installed?

This is part of a-- it can be done as part of the next special survey, so it will not be part of any additional situation. And as you know this kind of requirement will come into force, we will also have more exact -- approve that, and cost usually comes down as -- keeping technology develops, and systems develop, the overall cost will be substantially lower. So instead of having something in front of you, you have the ability to do it on your next schedule special survey, which will absolutely provide a better use of your cash and a better cost overall.

Second question, so recently Asian shipyards have been in the news with large financial losses. I know you have strong relationships with the yards, and have been working with them for a long time. Do you expect any potential consolidation or rationalization or any change to the business models of the large shipyards in the future, or the near term?

I think what you're having is China is rationalizing, building up TEU capacity and that is a reality. And then you see that there is different focus on different sectors in Japan, especially in Japan now that dry bulk is not the favorite sector. So you will have -- consolidation will happen because of credit conditions in China, and overall tightness of credit, and in Japan and South Korea, they are focusing on more higher revenue vessels.

And just my last question, obviously Greece has been through a volatile, tumultuous time and continues there. And I know we have touched base on this offline before, but any operational impact from the social and political situation in Greece on your Company's operations?

Actually shipping is a service provider, so you really need telephone, Internet connection in the national airports. So, for Navios there is no really impact. And we are always -- we have offices as you know, in Antwerp, New York, Monaco, and Singapore, so the Company operates about a third -- the Group operates about a third of the vessels from Antwerp and Singapore so we can very quickly have alternative plans and contingency plans in case of something. But we didn't have any problem, to be honest. This [closure] [ph] did not affect at all our business or operations.

Ladies and gentlemen, I apologize, but we have reached the allotted time for questions and answers. I will now return the call to Mrs. Angeliki Frangou for any additional or closing remarks.

Thank you very much. This completes our second quarter earnings call. Thank you.