Thank you for joining us for Navios Maritime Partners Second Quarter 2016 Earnings Conference Call. With us today from the Company are Chairman and CEO, Ms. Angeliki Frangou; Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Efstratios Desypris; and Executive Vice President of Business Development, Mr. George Achniotis. As a reminder, this conference call is being webcast. To access the webcast, please go to the Investor section of Navios Maritime Partners website 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 found there. Now, I'll review the Safe Harbor statement. This conference call could 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 numerous material risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. Such risks are more fully discussed in Navios Partners' filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Company's most recent 20-F. The information discussed in this call 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; then Mr. Achniotis will provide an operational update and an industry overview; and lastly, we'll open the call to take questions. Now, I'll turn the call over to Navios Partners Chairman and CEO, Ms. Angeliki Frangou. Angeliki?

Thank you, Doyce, and good morning to all of you joining us on today’s call. For the second quarter of 2016, we recorded $44.9 million of revenue and $11.8 million of EBITDA. Our results were affected by the one-time impairment charge on the anticipated sale over the container vessel, MSC Cristina. Adjusting for the impairment charge, we have adjusted EBITDA of $29 million and a positive net income. Slide four outlines recent developments. Since the beginning of 2016, we have worked to fortify our balance sheet and we have reduced debt by $44.6 million. To do that, we have repaid $25 million principal repayment of our term loan B in $48.6 million under our bank credit facilities. The $73.6 million debt reduction was partly offset by $29 million increase in debt through our working capital facility. The working capital facility is with ABN Bank and bears the interest rate of LIBOR plus 4% payable by January 13, 2017. We also increased a term loan B collateral package by $48.5 million through the contribution of the container vessel, Yang Ming Unity. During the quarter, we also agreed to sell subject to signing of definitive documentation one of our container vessels, the MSC Cristina for a net sale price of $125.0 million. We expect to receive the proceeds of $106.25 million upon delivery of the vessel and the balance of $18.75 million will be in the form of guaranteed sellers credit payable to us in 16 equal quarterly instalments. The sellers credit will include interest of 6% per annum, totaling about $2.2 million for the term of the loan. We anticipate that the vessel will be delivered to its new owners by January 17th, 2017. Slide five provides the sales of the HMM charter restructuring. As you may know, we have five…

Thank you, Angeliki, and good morning all. I will briefly review our financial results for the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2016. The financial information is included in the press release and we summarized in the slide presentation on the Company's website. Moving to the financial results as shown in slide nine, revenue for second quarter of 2016 decreased by 20.5% to $44.9 million, compared to $56.5 million for Q2 of 2015. The decrease was mainly due to lower time chartered equivalent rate achieved in the quarter of $16,005 per day, compared to $20,679 per day for the same quarter of 2015. EBITDA for the second quarter of 2016 was negatively affected by the $17.2 million impairment loss, recognized on one of our vessels. Excluding this one-off item, adjusted EBITDA for the second quarter of 2016 decreased by 25.1% to $29 million, primarily due to the decrease in revenues discussed. This was mitigated by $1.9 million net decrease in all other costs. Net income, excluding the one-off effect of impairment loss, amounted to $0.4 million. Operating surplus for the second quarter of 2016 amounted to $19.4 million. The replacement and maintenance CapEx reserve was $3 million. Fleet utilization for the second quarter of 2016 was 99.9%. Moving to the six months operations, time chartered revenue for the six months decreased by 20.1% in $90.5 million, compared to $113.3 million in the first half of 2015. . The decrease was mainly due to the decrease in the time chartered equivalent rate achieved in the first half of 2016 or $15,764 per day, compared to $20,248 per day in the first half of 2015. EBITDA for the first half of 2016 was negatively affected by the $17.2 million impairment loss, recognized on one of our vessels. Excluding this one-off…

Thank you, Efstratios. Please turn to slide 15 and the dry bulk market fundamentals. Growth in world GDP generally coincides with growing raw material demand for steel and energy production, particularly as emerging markets urbanize and industrialize. According to the IMF, the rate of world GDP growth declined between 2014 and ‘14 and is expected to remain stable at 3.1% in 2016. The rate of growth is forecasted to increase to 3.4% in ‘17. Emerging and developing markets are expected to grow by 4.1% in ‘16 and 4.6% in ‘17. Between 2014 and 2015, dry bulk trade remained flat with 2016 forecast to show a small increase of about 1% to 2%. Turning to slide 16, Global seaborne iron ore demand has been surprisingly high for the first half of the year. The imports of iron ore into China have exceeded most forecasters’ expectations. Through June, Chinese iron ore imports were up 9% year-on-year. This is the results of the displacement of low quality expensive Chinese domestic production, which is down 6% through June, with high quality low cost iron ore from Australia and Brazil. Chinese steel production rebounded in March and has remained above last year’s levels since then. The Chinese government committed to a controlled restructuring of the steel industry with cutbacks in production alongside stimulation demand. Steel production in China is expected to fall by about 1% in 2016. Steel exports from China remained robust and are up by over 9% year-on-year. Australian and Brazilian iron ore producers are getting market share from higher cost producers. At the same time, the price of delivered iron ore to China has increased recently, showing a healthy demand in their fix load China stimulus program. Please turn to slide 17, the Chinese domestic coal industry seems to be going through…

Thank you, George. We open the call to questions.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Chris Wetherby of Citi.

Good morning. This is Prashanth on for Chris. I guess my first question I wanted to talk about the Cristina sale. I wanted to get a little bit more color on the motivations or thought process behind the sale of that vessel. And also, you don’t have any maturities until 2018, so kind of wanted to get a sense of how much of that cash will be used to pay down debt? Are there other maybe uses of the cash proceeds from those sales? Just a little bit more detail on sort of what was behind the [indiscernible] particularly given that - acquired, I guess, back in just 18 months ago?

I think one of the issues we have seen in Q1 vessel [ph] values moving at a level that we have been ever before. And even though the company was very well contracted and with good cushion, we had to do a lot of prepayments, we have to do around $75 million of prepayment in order to have the loan to values been rectified. So, being conscious about it, more we used to - we are selling MSC Cristina which is a good vessel with good cash flow and that also gives us the opportunity to really generate additional cushion and cash up front. Overall, we are very well contracted and you can see that in the rest of 2016, we have about 1,400 days open and even in today’s environment, exact today’s rate, have about 45 million of cash generation. This creates additional cushion and that provides us, you know, we like to be conservative on this environment and to see - 2017, how the markets develop.

Okay, thanks Angeliki, that makes sense. And so, following the sale of Cristina, you are within where you feel comfortable on LTV and in terms of covenant?

Yes, I mean we’re having full compliance of our LTVs, but you always have to have extra cushions and that’s the reality, and that’s how we took the decision.

Okay, that makes sense. Looking at the dry bulk of the fleet, there is a couple of smaller, older vessels, sort of wanted to know about the disposition of those and I guess broader picture, given the environment or further asset sales either on container or the dry side, consideration - I am not - rationally maybe look for recovery, I just kind of wanted to get a sense how you think about that or that’s something that you just would be more opportunistic with?

I think at this point, we have a very clear fleet definition. We have a clear cash flow. You’ll see the interesting thing is most probably you have it in your model, I think, you can see from the disclosure we have, apart from 2016, if you move to 2017, NMM is a unique company your contracted revenue of $122 million more than covers the total expenses and you have a net cash of $21 million with about 6,000 open days more or less. So, with that in mind, you realize that you’re in a good platform, you’re there to be able to capture - have a good cash generation and to see the opportunities and maybe at - on different vessels that you see as a best, more attractive asset class.

Okay, that makes sense. On the charter restructuring, I think this is maybe in line or slightly better than what we may have expected coming into earlier this year or - I just wanted to sort of circle the bases in this picture, are there other charters that maybe - like parties that may want to renegotiate at this point? Or do you see that that is sort of like the big risk is now kind of behind and we should sort of be in settled through this recovery now?

There is no other counterparties that is part of NMM, I mean, as you all know, there is Hanjin, but Hanjin is not part of the charterers of NMM. If you can see on the HMM, because this is not really - charter 11, it was reorganization.

Okay.

Sorry, I made a mistake. There is two vessels of Hanjin in NMM, and that most probably we’ll follow the same kind of roadmap as HMM, this, as you know, Hanjin is their largest container company of Korea and - I mean what we see is that Korean development path supports Hanjin and also the major - they sponsor Korea lines and most probably we’ll follow a similar idea. I mean distractions at Navios, the way that Navios look at this is that immediately upon receiving also conversation we wanted to remove risks, so we solved our sales, automatically we have a benefit of $16 million net cash benefit for ‘16 and we are cash neutral until second half of ‘18. So, this makes a full visibility on our cash flows, it takes the risk out and in HMM, Korea Development Bank is a major shareholder with a low cap for full year.

Okay. Thanks for the time, I’ll turn it over. Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next question comes from the line of Noah Parquette of JP Morgan.

Thanks. I want to ask - obviously you guys are being conservative here about your liquidity, can you talk a little bit about further out - what kind of roadmap or strategy you have to return a dividend - started to go back negative and how you think about that timeframe?

Again, we value there might be a structure and this is - as you know, today the market has - even though with very slow cash flow contracted revenues and we have these cash flow - with a condition of a dry bulk container market, I’ve seen that doesn’t make a lot of signs. But as market - I think we have cleared the bottom of dry bulk and we have 600 - and I think this is now moving upwards at slow base, but is moving. As soon as we see that this built here for cash flow, this is a platform that can easily turn to a MAP dividend when you see the normality of this market. We have to admit that we have periods that were very, very unique on dry bulk and CP.

Okay. And looking like you [indiscernible] straight liquidity and cash flow situation, so it seems like a lot of opportunity to create value, what kind of things are you thinking? Would you consider share repurchases here, given the math of discount?

The first thing is that we like to see stability. You sure with - even though with the solid cash flow, we needed to do a lot of prepayment, number one priority is stabilize the distractions, stabilize the conditions, because of plenty of cash flows, and then you have all the choices which we’re very well aware of providing additional value, but I think that will be our priority number one.

Okay, alright. Thanks.

Thank you.

And ladies and gentlemen, we have reached the allotted time for question. Our final question will come from the line of Amit Mehrotra of Deutsche Bank.

Hey, thanks. Good afternoon. I appreciate you squeezing me in here. Well, first of all, congratulations on all the developments since the first quarter call. I have a few specific questions for Angeliki or Efstratios. Just following up the question on the sale of the Cristina, I may have missed it I just wanted to know what the net cash proceeds are of the $125 million, how much will actually hit the balance sheet as cash and how much would actually go down to pay down debt?

Amit, there is a loan that is associated with this vessel, which is approximately - today it’s approximately $72 million of balance, so out of the $125 million, you’ll have to repay this loan and the remainder will be cash on the balance sheet plus the note that is payable in the next four years.

Got it. So, if I look at pro forma cash balance of the company from the end of the first quarter - sorry, the end of the second quarter, add the HMM sale security proceeds of $21 million, plus maybe $53 million or little less than that, you’re looking at pro forma cash balance of a little under $100 million, is that right, Efstratios?

Yeah, but don’t forget that you have approximately $19 million that will be payable out of the 125, around $19 million will be payable in instalments over the next four years. So, you need to…

Right. So, it’s a little over $80 million in pro forma cash balance?

Yeah, on a pro forma basis, this calculation makes sense.

Okay. So, if I take the $82 million or $80 million of pro forma cash balance and add it to, I guess, your annual operating cash flow of say, $80 million plus or minus, you’re still kind of well below - from a cash balance standpoint, well below what you need to repay or deal with the 2018 maturities, so the question is, is that - first of all, is that math correct? And how do you think about your ability to address that cash call in 2018, which is really not that far away and maybe it’s just more opportunities like what you did with Cristina to maybe crystalize or pull forward the annual cash flows?

You have to realize that this is a - there is one thing that is important is that the LTV is about 80% on the term loan, so you do not have here value that does not reflect in today’s market. The bank - also your bank loans are about around 70%, it’s 70%, let’s say, so it will be refinanced, so you have the ability to really refinance this, and you will be generating, let’s say, $75 million, $45 million this year, then for the remaining of the year, let’s see about $80 million excluding the sale of the Cristina adding that - you have quite a significant cash flow. I cannot imagine a lot of companies with this kind of cash generation.

If I understood you correctly, basically, Angeliki, what you’re trying to say is that, a lot of the surplus cash flow between now and then will go down to pay the LTV of a company, which then can be re-collateralized to roll the remaining balance in 2018, is that right?

Yes, I mean you’ll get a loan, I mean you’re never zero debt. So, you’ll have - you will get a loan of 60% to 70% of debt, so you’re not going to be zero, additionally, to realize the chartered adjusted evaluation because on the term loan, there is an additional, very significant cash flow associated with the container vessels that are in there apart from the chartered free evaluation. Re-structural model, if you sit down and you look at what is really the cash flows, quite significant. I mean you do your own calculation, you see what we are discussing, maybe double the values of whatever of the [indiscernible].

Okay. Yep, that makes sense. So, given - I guess the operating cash outlook for the company, your ability to pay down debt between now and 2018 and then roll the remaining balance over which makes sense, you’ve effectively de-risked the business in a tough environment. Now, with that being said, I mean there are other areas that that Navios complex specifically holdings that has not been de-risked and the question I have, Angeliki, you talked about sort of your support of MLP business model, but when the distributions are at zero, and I would say line of sight probably not going to increase in the near-to-mid future, just wanted to understand why you have such a high commitment through the MLP business model specifically for NMM? And one last sort of follow-up to that, would you ever consider collapsing NMM into NM to take advantage of those cash flows or is that just maybe completely off the table given the dilution that would entail for NM equities?

I cannot comment on these, but about - and on the commitment to the MLP, we value MLP. We have seen - we have one of the companies that we dedicated earlier on and we have seen the goals and the business structures. The way we view our company sees, on a conservative basis, would make sense on the shipping environment at that time and would it make sense for the company going forward. So, NMM has solid cash flows, and went through a very tough shipping evaluation - shipping market, which we navigate it nicely. So, at this point, we will review our options as we go forward.

Okay. I thought I tried to ask that question, but I understand your answer. One last quick one from me is, one thing I noticed, maybe this one is for, Efstratios, I noticed the amounts due on the balance sheet to the relative parties was pretty high last quarter and it came in - I think it was cut in half in the second quarter, just wanted to understand sort of was that just a pull forward of some management fees or how should we think about that, because that balance was quite high last quarter?

The balance mainly is a timing issue. Some of the vessels [indiscernible] that a lot of things that add to this balance and also there just to mention, we’re also including their some balance from the Navios Europe and it is not we participate with working capital. So, naturally this balance will come down as we repay our obligations toward these companies.

Right. Okay, guys, that’s all I had. Thank you so much, appreciate the time. Thank you.

Thank you.

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

Thank you. This completes our second quarter earnings.