Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Ocean Power Technologies Q2 2017 earnings conference call. My name is Leanne and I will be your operator for today’s call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will be given at that time. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Andrew Barwicki, Investor Relations for Ocean Power Technologies. You may begin.

Good morning and thank you for joining us on Ocean Power Technologies conference call and webcast to discuss the financial results for the three-month period ended October 31, 2016. On the call with me today are George Kirby, President and CEO, and Matthew Shafer, Chief Financial Officer. George will provide an update on the company’s highlights for the quarter, after which Matthew will review the financial results for the second quarter. Following our prepared remarks, we will open the call to questions. This call is being webcast on our website at www.oceanpowertechnologies.com. It will also be available for replay later today. The replay will stay on the site for on-demand review. Last Friday, December 9, Ocean Power Technologies issued its earnings press release and filed its quarterly report on Form 10-Q with the Securities and Exchange Commission. All of our public filings can be viewed on the SEC website at sec.gov or you may go to the OPT website, www.oceanpowertechnologies.com. During the course of this conference call, management may make projections or other forward-looking statements regarding future events or financial performance of the company within the meaning of the Safe Harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are subject to numerous assumptions made by management regarding future circumstances over which the company may have little or no control that involve risk and uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to be materially different from any future results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. We refer you to the company’s Form 10-K and other recent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the description of these and other risk factors. And now, I’d like to turn the call over to George to begin the discussion.

Thank you, Andrew. And good morning, everyone. Today, I’ll review our business operations and provide an update on key activities and developments in the quarter. Following this, Matthew will briefly review our financial results, after which Matthew and I will be available to answer any questions. First, we’re excited that the company is continuing to make measurable progress on our business plan on a number of fronts. Throughout the second quarter, we had two PowerBuoys operating off the coast of New Jersey. We announced performance validation of our commercial unit number one, PB3 PowerBuoy. And in December, we retrieved this PowerBuoy to prepare it for shipment to Japan in 2017 where it will go on the Mitsui Engineering and Shipbuilding. This first commercial PB3 has been ocean-tested since July 2016 and has generated over 1.4 MWh of electric power. It achieved a single day peak production of over 30 KWh during its deployment, which is an equivalent hourly average of over 1.25 KWs for that day. In October, we retrieved our precommercial PB3 PowerBuoy, which is currently being upgraded to commercial status as our unit number two. This precommercial PB3 PowerBuoy was used to complete our scope of work per our agreement with the National Data Buoy Center, or NDBC, consisting of integrating and demonstrating a self-contained, ocean-observing payload, also known as SCOOP. The SCOOP was powered by the PB3 and its data was transmitted real-time back to OPT and the NDBC. The demonstration of this combined system met all performance requirements during its deployment and we’re currently discussing next steps with the NDBC. We also installed a marine mammal detection sensor under the precommercial PowerBuoy as part of our agreement with the Wildlife Conservation Society, or the WCS. The objective was to determine the feasibility of a combined system…

Thank you, George. And good morning, everyone. I will now review results for the second quarter of fiscal 2017. For the three months ended October 31, 2016, we reported revenue of $200,000 as compared to revenue of $500,000 for the three months ended October 31, 2015. The decrease in revenue over the prior year was primarily related to the lower revenue from MES during the three months ended October 31, 2016 as compared to the three months ended October 31, 2015, which included revenue from our WavePort contract and billable work under our prior contracts with the US Department of Energy. The net loss for the three months ended October 31, 2016 was $1 million as compared to the net loss of $3 million for the three months ended October 31, 2015. This decrease is primarily attributable to lower selling, general, and administrative costs, and the decline in the fair market value of the common stock warrants liability. For the six months ended October 31, 2016, we reported revenue of $400,000 as compared to revenue of $600,000 for the six months ended October 31, 2015. The net loss for the six months ended October 31, 2016 was $4.8 million as compared to a net loss of $7.2 million for the six months ended October 31, 2015. Turning now to the balance sheet, as of October 31, 2016, total cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities were $12.5 million, up from $6.8 million on July 31, 2016. As of October 31, 2016 and July 31, 2016, restricted cash was $300,000 for each period respectively. Net cash used in operating activities was $6.3 million during the six months ended October 31, 2016, which includes $500,000 of costs related to the litigation settlement and additional legal costs of $200,000 compared with $7 million for the six months ended October 31, 2015. As discussed on prior conference calls, we have taken a number of steps over the last month to reduce our cash burn rate, while focusing our technical, operating, and business development resources on key initiatives, particularly the PB3. We’re encouraged by our recent capital raise in October and continue to remain confident in our cash position. We anticipate having sufficient cash to maintain operations into at least the quarter ended January 30, 2018. With that, I'll turn it back to George.

Thank you, Matthew. Before we move on to Q&A, I would like to take a moment to discuss our product commercialization and business development efforts. Nearly two years ago, we accelerated our strategic pivot from a project based company to a product-based company, with a totally new go-to-market strategy. Over the last two years, we’ve focused on bringing a reliable product to market, one which is designed to survive a 100-year storm, and to have a maintenance-free interval of three years while operating in very harsh and inhospitable environments. To achieve this, our new management team essentially reengineered the product development approach, bringing and implementing best industry practice, design, and validation techniques of new products, which accelerated time to market. Likewise, we’ve been pursuing applications in new markets by spending considerable time on educating stakeholders in our technology and the unique value proposition that it bears. Make no mistake, this is a long-cycle business because entering a new market with a disruptive product, such as the PowerBuoy, requires time for end-user evaluation prior to leading to orders. Let me spend a few minutes to describe what it takes to ultimately generate revenues under the strategic shift initiated two years ago. Both the defense and the oil and gas industries evaluate new technologies against a scale called Technology Readiness Level or TRL, which describes the maturity level of new technology. These qualifications include, among others, a multitude of design specifications and criteria, design and manufacturing procedures, vendor qualification, and technical risk management. In the case of the oil and gas industry, one example of the TRL is based on the American Petroleum Institute’s recommended practices, which generally ranks technology on a scale from zero, which is an unproven concept, to 7 which is a field-proven final solution. Based on the published…

Thank you all once again for attending today's call. And if you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact us. Otherwise, we look forward to speaking with you again next quarter.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today’s conference. This concludes the program. You may all disconnect. Everyone, have a great day.