Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Ambac Financial Group's Third Quarter 2015 Results Conference Call. At this time all participants are in a listen-only-mode. Later we will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will follow at that time. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference call may be recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Abbe Goldstein, Head of Investor Relations and Corporate Communications. You may begin.

Thank you, Nichole. Good morning, and thank you for joining today's conference call to discuss Ambac Financial Group's third quarter 2015 financial results. We'd like to remind you that today's presentation may contain forward-looking statements which are based on management's current expectations and are subject to uncertainty and changes in circumstances. Any forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance or events. Actual performance and events may differ, possibly materially, from such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause this include the factors described in our most recent SEC filed quarterly or annual reports under management's discussion and analysis of financial conditions and results of operations and under risk factors. Ambac is not under any obligation and expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Today's presentation contains non-GAAP financial measures. The reconciliations of such measures to the most comparable GAAP figures are included in our earnings press release which is available on our website at ambac.com. Please note we have posted slides on our website to accompany this call. Our speakers today are Nader Tavakoli, Interim President & CEO and David Trick, our CFO. At the conclusion of their prepared remarks, we will open the call for your questions. I will now turn the call over to Mr. Tavakoli.

Good morning. Thank you, Abbe, and thank you all for joining us for today's call. We are pleased to report that we had another excellent quarter at Ambac. As David will detail in a few moments, during the quarter we reported operating earnings of $170.5 million or $3.77 per fully diluted share. Despite writing off our goodwill that was created when we emerged from bankruptcy we now have GAAP book value of $30.10 per share and adjusted book value has now increased to $17.81. Since emergence from bankruptcy in mid 2013 we have generated an aggregate of over $2 billion or $44 per diluted share of operating earnings. Just this year, we've generated $684 million of operating income an increase to adjusted book value by over $10 per share. Operating earnings are result of improved conditions in the housing and credit markets, but also in large measure from our active asset liability management efforts including success in investments, including investments in our own insured bonds, commutations, litigation efforts and other risk and loss mitigation and portfolio optimization activities. And we've achieved this despite increasing reserves related to certain of our public finance exposures and continuing to carry significant hedges against our interest rate exposure. While we are pleased with our financial performance, we're equally pleased with the continued execution of our strategic initiatives and operating improvements throughout the company. For example, during the quarter we restructured our portfolio risk teams from three to two and in the process streamlined reporting and functionality. As a result of this and other initiatives we've undertaken year-to-date we have now reduced headcount by 8%. We've also undertaken a comprehensive review of all of our expenses and vendor relationships and are taking steps to cut costs wherever possible. We believe strongly that it's incumbent upon…

Thank you, Nader. We experienced a net loss of $391 million or $8.66 per diluted share in the third quarter of 2015, compared to net income of $282.7 million or $6.05 per diluted share in the second quarter of 2015. However, non-GAAP operating earnings were $170.5 million or $3.77 per diluted share in the third quarter of 2015 compared to $266 million or $5.70 per diluted share in the second quarter of 2015. The third quarter net loss was driven by $514.5 million of goodwill impairment charge. Excluding the impact of this one-time impairment charge our results for the third quarter were impacted by a lower benefit within loss and loss expenses and derivative product losses caused by a decline in interest rates, which was somewhat offset by higher accelerated premiums earned and higher net income from the change in fair value of credit derivatives. Net income was also adversely impacted by net VIE losses compared to net VIE income in the second quarter of 2015. As a result of the application of Fresh Start accounting in connection Ambac’s emergence from bankruptcy in 2013, goodwill of $514.5 million was recorded representing the excess reorganization value which could not be attributed to the fair value as specific identified tangible and intangible assets. As of September 30, 2015 Ambac concluded that goodwill was fully impaired. The goodwill impairment charge results from a substantial decrease in the Financial Guarantee reporting unit’s fair value which is derived from the market value of Ambac’s equity securities simultaneously with an increase in the estimated fair value of the individual or net assets, such that the fair value of individual and net assets now exceeded the Financial Guarantee unit’s fair value. The fair value of the reporting unit decreased due to the material decrease in Ambac’s market…

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Andrew Gadlin of Odeon Capital Group. Your line is now open.

Thank you and good morning.

Good morning, Andrew.

Good morning, Andrew.

On the HTA cancelation of the policy, could you talk about that a little more? It’s not clear. It sounds like Puerto Rico had bought the bonds and that enables the company to demand cancelation of either the policy or the bond, am I getting that right?

Yes, you’re exactly right, Andrew.

So when would these bonds you put it as part of a strategy for them or did they do this in conjunction with the company? I’m just trying to understand how this came to be and obviously could it be done again and either for this company or others?

Yes, some of that would require me to speculate about things that I don’t know in terms of their strategy and so on, but the bonds were repurchased by the HTA some time ago and we discovered that and we worked with them to persuade them that the legal obligation here was to do what they have done.

Got it, and do you have any idea and the press release says that it will be expected to close shortly, any idea on timing?

Yes, as we said in the press release, we expect this to be completed very shortly and yes.

Okay. And then on the new initiative involving OREO and I guess also on the strategic portfolio of military housing bonds, can you talk about those two initiatives and particularly in regards to the OREO properties, how big can that be, what kind of investment hurdles does the company have in mind and maybe just talk about that strategy a little bit?

Yes, the OREO is still a relatively small pilot sort of program, but we’ve discovered in doing some analysis of our homes that go into foreclosure in the OREO process that there is significant value disruption even with respect to homes shortly after they go through that process it is clear that the process destroys value. I don’t think that is a shocker to people from an anecdotal or other perspective. And given the significant amount of property that we have that go through these processes we want to see if we can recapture some of that value and it’s really as a simple as that. We’re going to start it with – we're going to do it with partners and vendors and walk before we run in terms of our entry into this. In terms of return profile, we are not being overly ambitious in terms of what we expect to get and hoping that we will be surprised to the upside. Our most important priority is to mitigate the risks of downside as it relates to this and again we’re starting this out very modestly and we will evaluate it as we go, but are confident that we can capture some value for Ambac that's destroyed in these processes. I will let David handle the military housing.

Andrew on military housing it is actually a good sort of demonstration of our efforts in the asset liability management front, but the opportunity really arose through our risk management teams working with counterparty and being in communication with the counterparty who is a large owner of military housing bonds. So they expressed a desire to structure a transaction which would help them with some capital relief for their balance sheet, so the risk in asset teams here engaged to structure a transaction with the counterparty that essentially created a subordinated tranche of a portfolio of Ambac wrapped RMBS, which gave the counterparty some capital relief for their balance sheet and provide us a nice return on portfolio that we’re intimately familiar with and already on the hook for in terms of insurance claims. So overall it’s a great transaction and if we can create similar transactions with other portfolios of Ambac wrapped positions we'd be happy to do it.

Okay. You essentially bought the risk piece at an attractive price and effectively commuted, would you expect to be any real risk that you might have, is that…?

Yes, no, I wouldn’t actually say is, it was a commutation. It is just strictly a repackaging of cash bonds that the counterparty had. So it shifted their risk profile in terms of the packages securities that they own and we were happy to take back that risk, because as I had mentioned we already fully guarantee those bond positions and know that package of securities very intimately. So we in effect did not take on a new risk by doing the transaction, but at the same time restructured it in a way that will give us pretty attractive return on our investment.

Okay, great and then finally on the goodwill, will try a David question as well, just to make sure I understand it, the market cap declined alongside the asset mark-up is what basically says there is not much value being attributed for goodwill, is that right or?

First let me emphasize two things, one that we had always expected to write-off the goodwill. All the - 100% of the goodwill is associated with the financial guarantee insurance closed block and so therefore at some point in time we would have to write-off that goodwill. And secondly, the goodwill impairment as I mentioned in my prepared remarks had no impact on our adjusted book value, operating earnings or statutory net income or statutory surplus or tax. So with that said, there is really just two factors that mathematically contributed to the impairment of the goodwill and effectively those two factors were the fair value of the financial guarantee business which is mostly driven by our stock market value, excuse me, and the fair value – estimated fair value of our net assets. And unfortunately through the year, we experienced rather significant decline in the fair value of the reporting unit due mostly to a drop in the stock price. So throughout the year, the fair value of the financial guarantee unit dropped by about $750 million, while at the same time the fair value of our financial guarantee net assets improved by about $1.7 billion. So the result of that is that the fair value, the financial guaranty net assets are now greater than the fair value of the reporting unit. So in the sense the valuations have flipped from the time line, the value of the unit as mostly reflected by the stock market valuation was greater than that of the net assets. So that flip resulted in the impairment of the goodwill and besides the drop in the stock price, the other factors that contributed to the flip if you will is the change in liabilities at the insurance company which have declined in value mostly due to improvements in the incurred losses as well as some wider credit spreads on our Ambac insured positions.

Okay, got it, thanks. That is it from me.

Thanks Andrew.

Thanks.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Dennis Chow [ph] with Longview Investments. Your line is now open.

Hi, I just want to reconcile the successes you've had in managing the assets and liabilities at AAC versus your failure to manage capital at the AFG level. I mean, given your pristine balance sheet I find it is hard to understand why you haven’t engaged in greater repurchases of your warrants as per the per value implemented at the end of June and why you haven’t found more creative ways to work around the 5% shareholder limits report [indiscernible] NOLs. I was just wondering if we can get you to go over these issues and what it would take for you to sort of step on that side of gas pedal more?

Sure, first let me say with regards to the warrant repurchases we previously announced we did have a program that was $10 million program. We spent about half of that amount on warrant purchases and then later in the third quarter as we also announced we had some parameters around the terms under which we could acquire those warrants and one of those parameters was related to the underlying volatility metric with regard to the warrants. During a good portion of the quarter, the volatility of those warrants was outside the parameters of the program. And with regards to buybacks and the NOL and the 5% limitation, we have researched that issue rather extensively and as we have talked about in the past have enormous appreciation and value placed in that NOL. There was nothing that we're going to do to risk that NOL and it’s an important part of our growth component and growth strategy going forward. So if there was a way around the 5% limitation with regards to the stock buybacks without damaging or risking that NOL, we certainly would at this point have found it. We've engaged not only internal professionals, but external professionals in terms of exploring the options there and unfortunately we have not found a way for us to avoid tripping NOL or 5% holder limitations via a stock repurchase program. So in the spirit of preserving that very valuable asset we have not engaged in the stock buyback program.

I mean, have – just a quick follow up, have you explored the possibility of doing a tender offer that includes any specific targets shareholders that would go over the 5% limit under normal share buyback provision? In other words specifically work with those large shareholders that would take you over the 5% limit in the context of a structured repurchase offer?

Yes, sure I mean that's certainly one option that we considered, but at the same time for that to work effectively is each one of those shareholders has to agree to proportionally purchase a paid in that program and that’s something that we’ve seen as likely to occur.

Got it, thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of John Knapp of CCM Opportunistic. Your line is now open.

Thank you. Nader, David, I hope you all are doing well. Your numbers are certainly impressive.

Good morning. How are you, John?

Fine, thank you.

Thank you, very much for the nice words.

I want to address what I view as the elephant in the room, which I guess is somewhat dangerous to do. There was an 8-K filed which extended Nader, your position as interim CEO through October 31, is that correct?

That’s right.

So, being from Texas we tend to believe in the jockey as much as the horse and we’re rather impressed with the job that you done Nader, both at energy, intelligence, presence and importantly character. Would you like to continue in your capacity as CEO on a permanent basis? That’s the first question and the second question is what impedes that from happening?

John, we haven’t made a public – I haven’t made a public announcement about my desire or lack of desire to do this on a permanent basis. So unfortunately I appreciate your comments and your support, but this is not the right time to do that. The Board has been actively engaged in a search and evaluation process. We have a very diligent Board that’s working extremely hard and being a very good support to the management team and John I’ll just say that as you can see on this call, the interim labels that I wear and David wears to some extent at AAC have not bridged our ability to move this company along and execute on important initiatives and such strategy. So, this current situation has been working and has not impeded our ability to succeed and for now it’s the construct that we have in place as the Board continues to deliberate what to do.

Thank you, Nader. Please note that we're happy shareholders with you in the saddle. That’s it.

I appreciate it, thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Alex Klipper of Bank of America. Your line is open.

Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my call.

Hi Alex, hi.

One very quick question and then a couple more, I mean nuance questions. What percent of the Ambac insured RMBS and claims do you guys actually own now and I know that's something you’ve give us in prior quarters, but I don’t think I heard it.

It’s about 28%. It hasn’t moved since last quarter.

Okay, great and then can you kind of discuss the decision making to sell down your portfolio and raise cash, was that in anticipation of the liquidity event or related to either exiting rehabilitation or was it truly strategic and sort of what got you excited to go back into the market?

That's yes to most of those things. I think we had to talk about this on our last call. We had executed it before the last earnings call, but this is a program that we had transaction that we had executed actually in the past. As you know, we have some limitations on our ability to repurchase our own insured securities through our investment portfolio and the transaction, the resecuritization transaction not only raises liquidity at what we think is attractive rates, but also frees up capacity in the investment portfolio to make additional acquisitions or own securities. So, and in addition, the limitations that we have within the investment portfolio with regards to our buying our own raps, distressed raps also impacts our ability to make investments in other sort of calls, sort of high-yield investment classes. At the same time, we had and have been working as you know on the recapitalization of AAC which would also require some additional liquidity. So there were a whole host of strategic reasons, tactical reasons why we did that transaction. We’re also very disciplined with regards to how we invest money. So we felt like by the time the deal actually closed that more strategic and smart thing to do given circumstances in the capital markets were to pull back on any real aggressive investment into the capital markets other than those few selective items I had mentioned on the call which were both timely and time sensitive.

And are you guys still holding that cash or did you reinvest some of that back into…?

We would generally focus to long cash.

Got it. And then just sort of more a nuance question, but I guess did you find that some of the weakness in your equity and perceived credit in the quarter, did that create any new commutation opportunities? Did you find reverse inquiry, were people coming back to you and saying, you know what, we'd like to cut a deal? A - Nader Tavakoli Yes, what was so much surprising during the quarter is that our raps didn’t really widened that all that much and we did not see particularly appealing opportunities during the quarter and as David just laid out, we made a strategic decision for the time being for the various reasons you outlined to be long cash. So we’re in the market all the time looking opportunistically for ways to commute our obligations.

Got it and the final question is just on the student loan commutation, it was - can you give a little more color on kind of what that is, is it more troubled student loans or is decent stuff?

No we generally try to avoid commuting the decent stuff and focus on the troubled stuff and we’ve done a pretty good job and the team here has done a really stellar job in terms of focusing on that book as you probably know. There is really a couple remaining distressed positions and this one is one of the few remaining on the books, it’s about $250 million of net par outstanding and we hope to have that closed within the next couple of weeks.

Great, all right. Thanks guys.

Sure.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Nancy Stuebe of Gabelli. Your line is now open.

Hi good morning everyone.

Good morning.

Good morning, Nancy.

I just want to ask a question something you had in the press release where you said that there were larger derivative product losses, caused by steep declines in interest rates, and I’m wondering if that has changed somewhat now that interest rates look like they are going to go the other way and if you have any thoughts about how that's going to look going forward?

Sure. So you also notice Nancy we in our comments about the insured portfolio and the performance of particularly the RMBS and student loan books, many of our comments focused on the benefit that we experienced there during the quarter from the lower interest rates. So that’s why we’ve maintained any sort of position in the derivative books because our insured portfolios are sensitive to interest rates and we try not to be betting too much on interest rates and with the passage of time to a larger degree our RMBS book in particular is almost more become sensitive to rates than it is to HPA. So with the quarter as you know interest rates have moved up in the third quarter, so all things in the fourth quarter sorry. So all things being affected, being equal we would expect to have gains in that derivative portfolio offset by some losses in the RMBS and student loan portfolios that are purely interest rate driven.

Okay. And just as a conclusion I want to reiterate that we’ve been very happy with you and Nader and I know you say it doesn’t impede your ability to manage the company, but just looking at the impact on fair value, I think having somethings settled might improve that, that market cap of yours? Thank you.

I appreciate that, thank you.

Thanks Nancy.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Jatin Dewanwala of MetaCapital. Your line is now open.

Hi good morning. I had a couple of questions somewhat related to the previous caller's question. The first one is that on RMBS you took in a benefit of $179 million and you mentioned that it was largely driven by a decline in interest rates, is that because you project the excess interest recoveries to be higher or was it because of some other factors?

The main driver there is the excess spread recoveries, yes.

Okay.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Charles Post with Sterling. Your line is now open.

Good morning everybody. Couple of questions for you, on the Highway and Transportation Authority transaction that hasn’t occurred, is that looks like [indiscernible] sort of matches that amount, is that correct?

Yes, it’s one series of bonds.

Okay.

And you are right.

Okay, thank you. And then in the stat filings there is the mention of two new entities being created [indiscernible] Asset Management, can you tell me what those two entities are, are they being useful?

Yes sure, both of those entities are – were established in connection with Nader’s comments with regards to us investing in OREO and so both of those entities are established to help facilitate that program.

Okay. Is there a capital commitment amount for those two entities?

There is no real capital commitment amount. We obviously need in order to effect the program, we need to allocate some money to the program to acquire houses and do the acquire the real estate, excuse me and do the work on the properties you need in order to make the returns on that investment. So we will be allocating portion of our investment portfolio to that program, but there is no required commitment per se.

[Indiscernible] The reason for the drop in reserves on the student loan portfolio or is…?

There is a little bit in there related to that, but the majority is the student loan benefit for the quarter is related to interest rates and presuming as I know we will get the commutation executed the bulk of the benefit of that will be experienced in the fourth quarter.

Okay. And then you’d meet that $21.4 [ph] million the partial payment was that from the city unpaid interest amount?

Yes, in my prepared remarks I'd mentioned that we actually commuted a large portion of the what I call the stub, the interest stub, the city stub and that was also associated with that.

And that leaves about $17 million out there, is that correct or?

A little bit less than that. I hesitate to get into too many details, those were subject to a little bit of confidentiality around the story, pricing of that and the and the counterparty so…

Okay, and the last question is you had about $5.5 billion in investments last quarter and now it's about $5.7 billion. How much of that is either selling down or how much of its cash from operations for the quarter? Marking the personal [ph] that's a nice increase.

Yes, there's about $139 million of that is the proceeds what remains in terms of proceeds from the [indiscernible] securitization with a transaction versus while we sort of raised liquidity the assets don't come off the books. So there is about $136 million of that increase relates to the resecuritization. So it's about $70 million odd associated with the military housing purchase that didn't settle during the quarter. They will settle in the fourth quarter and so if you notice on the balance sheet there is also large securities payable a portion of which relates to military housing transactions closed, traded on September 30 and the rest relates to total return performance and cash flows from the business.

Okay and in this on sort of in that same vein, between investment income of a portfolio in cash installment premiums, did that run in about $250 million to $300 million a year is that a ballpark number?

That’s ballpark.

Yes, that sounds about right.

So then let's just say 275 and you have about $100 million of cash operating expenses?

Total operating expense is about $100 million, not all that is cash. I'd say I would get some depreciation in there. We have some non-cash comp in terms of our performance units and RSUs, but that's probably maybe about $5 million a year and so about $95 million of cash operating expense.

Alright, so you were $175 before losses which the majority of losses you have way out there. So and most of that cash flow would be protected. So we should be building nice cash balances assuming no commutations and other things to happen, is that correct?

That's our expectation, yes.

Okay. Great numbers, thanks guys.

Thanks.

Thanks Charles.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Michael Cohen of Opportunistic Research. Your line is now open.

Hi guys, can you, hi thanks for taking my question. Can you provide an update on EMC case where Judge Romulus [ph] ordered mediation or arbitration?

Yes Michael thanks for the question. Unfortunately I can't talk about the details of our mediation proceedings. These things are done as you know under confidentiality and about all we can confirm is that Judge Romulus [ph] ordered it.

Can you confirm as to whether or not they were scheduled and actually took place? Not necessarily the outcome of such or if they are scheduled to take place and haven't taken place yet?

No, I can confirm that they took place pursuant to the Judge’s order.

Okay. Great, and then if I'm not mistaken did you guys file another lawsuit against Bank of America and Countrywide sometime in July?

Just give me one second on that Michael, not that I'm aware of. Yes, as you know we filed a [indiscernible] review case. The case is related to the [indiscernible] review matter at the end of the year. We filed one of those cases in Wisconsin and we just filed a parallel sort of case in New York in order to be protective. The case that we filed in Wisconsin was dismissed without prejudice at trials. We are appealing that dismissal, but in order to be protective for various reasons I cannot get into we filed a parallel case in New York.

Okay great, thank you.

Thank you. At this time I'm showing no further questions. I'd like to hand the call back over to Nader Tavakoli for any closing remarks.

Thank you, operator, and thank you all. We recognize there has been some volatility in our stock price and we appreciate the support and the patience of our shareholders. Some of what's going on is obviously not in our control fully. But you can be assured that with respect to those things that are we're working tirelessly and creatively to pursue the company's interests. We appreciate your support and look forward to talking to you on the next call.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's conference. That does conclude today's program. You may all disconnect. Have a great day everyone.