Thank you for standing by, ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Star Bulk Carriers Conference Call on the Second Quarter 2015 Financial Results. We have with us Mr. Petros Pappas, Chief Executive Officer; Mr. Hamish Norton, President; and Mr. Simos Spyrou and Mr. Christos Begleris, Co-Chief Financial Officers of the Company. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode and there will be a presentation followed by a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] I must advise you that this conference is being recorded today Monday the 31st of August, 2015. And we now pass the floor to one of your speakers today Mr. Pappas. Please go ahead sir.

Thank you, operator. I'm Petros Pappas, Chief Executive Officer of Star Bulk Carriers and I would like to welcome you to the Star Bulk Carriers' conference call regarding our financial results for the second quarter of 2015. Before, we begin, I kindly ask you to take a moment to read the Safe Harbor statement on Slide Number 2 of our presentation. Turning to Slide 3, the second quarter has continued to be very challenging as reflected in our financial results. We're seeing validation of our consolidation efforts with a significant cost savings per ship, improving our breakeven levels and our bottom-line. Furthermore, we're continuing to pursue a number of actions that will increase our liquidity position in the medium-term. In the second quarter, we recorded an adjusted net loss of $22.2 million, an adjusted EBITDA of $6.3 million on net revenues of $46.1 million. Our fleet currently consists of 70 vessels on the water. We're continuing to take delivery of our eco newbuilding vessels adding 4 vessels in Q2 and 12 vessels year-to-date. We have 20 vessels remaining to be delivered all by the end of 2016. As part of our fleet renewal, we have agreed to sell 12 vessels since December 2014 for total net proceeds of approximately $113 million. During this quarter, we sold four 90's built vessels that did not fit our commercial profile, 2 Capesize and 2 Panamax vessels. Net sales proceeds four completed vessels sales were approximately $18.9 million in Q2 and $44 million from December 2014 through today. We also expect approximately 34.4 million of equity proceeds from the sale of a newbuilding vessel, one 90’s built vessel and the sale and charter back of a modern vessel to be received during 2015 and 2016. One year after the merger with Oceanbulk, we’re seeing…

Thank you, Petros. Let us now turn to Slide Number 5 of the presentation for a summary of our second quarter 2015 financial highlights in comparison to last years. In the three months ending June 30, 2015 net revenues amounted to $46.1 million, 118.9% higher than the $21.1 million for the same period in 2014. Net revenues represent our total revenues adjusted for non-cash items less voyage expenses. The reason we refer to our net revenues is because this figure nets out any difference in revenue recognition between voyage charters and time charters and therefore is directly comparable to other periods. This increase is applicable to the significant increase of the average number of vessels to 69.7 in the second quarter of 2015 from 17 in the second quarter of 2014. Adjusted-EBITDA for the second quarter 2015 was at $6.3 million, a decreased versus last year's figure of $9.6 million. Net loss for the second quarter of 2015 was $65 million or $0.34 loss per share versus a loss of 3 million or $0.10 loss per share in the respected period of 2014. Excluding non-cash items and one-off expenses, our adjusted net loss for the second quarter amounted to a loss of $22.2 million or $0.12 loss per share versus $2.8 million adjusted net income or $0.10 gain per share in the second quarter of 2014. Our time charter equivalent rate during this quarter was $8,616 per day compared to $14,018 per day last year. This is an illustration of the weak second quarter of 2015 compared to last year's rally during the same period. Our average daily operating expenses were $4,598 per vessel compared to $5,208 per vessel during the same period last year, representing an 11.7% reduction. The reduction is even bigger if we exclude approximately $1.8 million…

Thank you, Christos. Please turn now to Slide Number 9, where we summarize the agreements with our yards and their effect on the Company's liquidity. Overall, we have been continuously cooperating with the yards, building our newbuilding vessels [indiscernible] payment terms and delivery schedules in the difficult market environment. Our agreement is summarized as follows; deferral of 334.2 million of pre-delivery and delivery installments from 2015 to 2016, approximately 100 million of which is equity CapEx. This is an important achievement which improves the payment and delivery schedule of our vessels; equity savings of 11.6 million by the cancellation of one newbuilding vessel acknowledged the cost to the company; a further reduction of 25.8 million in CapEx, out of which 18.7 million in equity CapEx through agreements with the yards to reduce the cost of newbuilding vessels. And estimated increase in the value of our newbuilding vessels by 21 million by shifting deliveries from 2015 into 2016 as the vessels will always be one year younger. The graph illustrates both the shift in CapEx payments, as well as the reduction in the total amounts the company will need to pay to take delivery of its fleet. At the bottom of the page you will also see our updated CapEx schedule as of August 26, 2015 adjusted for the agreed change and cancellation of newbuilding vessel, changes in payment prices and delivery schedules. Through this agreement the companies have three distinct benefits; first, improved liquidity; second, better timing and delivery of our equity building fleet when charter rates may have improved; and third increased resale value of these vessels in the long-term by taking delivery a year later. Please turn now to Slide 10, where we summarize our operational performance for the quarter. Unlike many of our competitors, we managed our…

Thank you, Simos. Please turn to Slide 13 for a brief update of supply. During the first seven months of 2015, more than 22 million deadweights has been scraped and/or committed for demolition. This compares to 16.2 million deadweight demolished throughout 2014. The Capesize fleet stands today at similar levels to November 2014. Reported new dry bulk orders for 2015 year-to-date are at 4 million deadweight, this compares with 55 million deadweight order during the first seven months of 2014. Owners discipline during second half 2015 and 2016 remains the key for sustainable recovery to take place. The order book decreased from 25% to 17.5% of the fleet over the last nine months and a significant share of the existing order book will never be delivered as indicated by the increased conversion and consolidation activity that took place during the first half of 2015. We therefore expect dry bulk fleet growth in 2015 to remain between 2% and 3%. Between 2016 and '17, dry bulk supply should be limited due to increased orders from other shipping sectors and consequent limited first year yard capacity. Let's now turn to Slide 14 for a brief update of demand. Dry bulk trade growth during the first half of 2015 experienced a sharp slowdown mainly as a result of the ongoing commodity price correction that began in the second half of 2014. The steel industry is the most important sector for dry bulk trade and was significantly affected. During the first half of 2015 global consumption of steel products experienced a decline that forced international steel producers to adjust production. These development consequently affected demand for raw materials related to the production of steel and also led to a slowdown in energy consumption with a negative impact on thermal coal requirements. Dry bulk trade…

Thank you, Petros. So we've had obviously a very challenging first half of the year but we've been actively improving our liquidity position through a variety of measures. We've taken actions that we think increased our NAV by about $58 million through cancellations of vessels, price adjustments that we've achieved and postponements of vessel delivery which we think makes the vessels when delivered more valuable. We've completed the sale of 9 90’s built vessels that did not fit our commercial profile and we've agreed to sell three more vessels in 2015 and 2016 which will improve our liquidity. We proactively went out to our banks and arranged wavers and relaxation of some corporate convenient until the end of December 2016 while we've now fully arranged all financing for our remaining newbuilding vessels. So through these efforts we have 249.1 million of cash as of August 26th which we believe will enable the Company to sustain a long downturn. We've created an attractive platform with Star Bulk. As you know it's the largest U.S. listed dry bulk operator, which has pretty significant scale at this point and an experienced and efficient in-house commercial and technical management. And the platform has the backing of more than 14 banks and two leasing companies and a core shareholder base that has shown its commitment to the company. We have strong corporate governance. Our Board of Directors has the majority of its members nominated by institutional investors and finally although the market environment has been challenging, we’re looking into the future to improving market fundamentals and hopefully an opportunity for the dry bulk market to recovery. We’re confident that when the recovery comes Star Bulk will be in a position to take advantage of the improved rate environment with its modern fleet and to secure profit for its shareholders. So without taking anymore of your time, I will now pass the floor over to the operator to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you very much indeed sir. [Operator Instructions] The first question from Deutsche Bank comes from the line of Amit Mehrotra. Your line is now open.

My first question is on the price concessions, I guess totaling just under $26 million that you guys were able to secure last month. I mean I look at that as sort of a sign of your strong relationships with the shipyards, but I'm just trying to understand if -- was there anything that the company had to give in exchange for those sizable concessions either right now or in future commitments and should we expect more announcements on this front maybe until second quarters?

The answer Amit is that you are correct, that this has to do with our being a big customer and having excellent relationships with our yards. And we achieved these price concessions without making any commitments or giving anything up it is based on the relationship and the state of the market.

And then just the second part of that question, is this all we should expect or is there more activity on this front that we can expect future announcements so?

We're always working to do better for the company and we may have more announcements of news in the future, at the moment this is all we've got to talk about.

Just one more sort of industry related question on the disruptions. If you've seeing any disruptions recently given some of the things that happened in China from the explosion in Tianjin and then also the volatility in the markets, you're one of the few companies that are reporting results after those events. So love to get sort of your perspective on any impacts you are seeing if anything in terms of activity levels from a chartering perspective?

I mean I would, [indiscernible].

The -- a major effect for now as far as delays of vessels are concerned, it’s just a little bit only. Now whether there's any damage to goods, I would suppose this is less damage to any drybulk cargos and probably more to other cargos or vessels, so I don't think this will have a major effect. If anything it would be very slightly positive but I think that's about it and probably they will need to affect some repairs which obviously requires import of raw materials, but I don't consider it a major issue.

You had two vessels into Tianjin when the explosion happened?

We had two vessels there I think the delay was I mean in fact…

[Indiscernible].

Yes.

Just a couple more just quick ones, the 698 million of remaining newbuilding payments, how much debt are you guys expecting to draw down against those commitments?

Hi Amit, this is Christos. It would be approximately close to 600 million given that a lot of the remaining newbuildings are the vessels where we have bare bolt financing from financial leasing institutions in China that give us 80% of the contract price.

One last question is that, we've got a month left I guess in the third quarter here so if you can just give us some color on you know the TCE how that's trending in the quarter and I thought the utilization dipped down obviously because of the drydockings, could you just give us an update on the drydockings in the second half of the year, and that's it from me, thanks.

Amit, the utilization is, I mean the incomes are better than the first two quarters, I would rather say to the tune of 20% or a bit more perhaps, we have drydock this year, we plan to drydock, we plan to drydock 34 vessels, we've already drydocked 20 but as the rules for the [indiscernible] plans are evolving we may drydock a few more and leave a few others for next year. So there's going to a few less drydockings than we expected.

Thank you very much sir. Now from UBS your next question comes from the line of Spiro Dounis, your line is now open.

Just wanted to follow-up one of Amit's questions there on purchase price reductions. Just wondering and I think you might have touched on this but I think missed it. Just how should we be thinking about the 26 million in savings from a financing standpoint, does that free up debt capacity or is most of that savings on the equity CapEx front?

It frees up both debt and equity and I think we gave the figure, hold on where is it.

I think I heard 18 million I equate but I wasn't sure.

That's very correct it's 18.7 million in equity CapEx.

And last time I think when we spoke I think I mentioned a lot of the fundamentals are kind of going in the right direction in terms of layups and scrapping and it seems to continue but I guess slowed a bit especially with rates going up. Just wondering from a layup perspective have you guys seen a strong supply response when rates ticked back up or if a lot of these vessels in layup stayed in layup?

There's -- we didn't see that many vessels in layup, so we do not think that there would be a material effect on the supply of vessels by too many vessels reactivating. What will happen is potentially ships -- vessels will increase their speeds, but the market went up for about two weeks and then it's not, it's down again so I don't think that ship owners react to such short-term fluctuations, so I don’t think there's going to much of a difference from the supply side from that.

Well, yes that's it from me, pretty straightforward quarter. Nice job taking a few more boxes this quarter, take care guys.

Thank you very much indeed sir. Now from Stifel, you have a question from the line of Ben Nolan. Your line is now open sir.

My first question has to do with your I suppose it’s the efficiencies and the scale that you've been able to gain and pretty remarkable cost per vessel on a – certainly on an operating perspective but more importantly I think maybe even on a G&A perspective, curious to see if this is sort of the finish that you can cut things or if there might be a little bit more to go and then maybe from an overarching perspective, I think it's always been the thought that economies of scale with respect to cost reductions are challenging thing to actually effect in shipping in general but clearly you have been able to do it, from a longer term perspective and I know you're hands full at the moment but from a longer-term perspective, is this something that didn't make sense to grow a fleet to 500 vessels or something like that if you can in fact realize these kind of economies of scale?

Let me take the first part and I'll pass it to Petros. Just to emphasize, on the G&A we're not cutting, what we're doing is adding vessels to a nearly fixed G&A expense base. I mean not actually fixed, but the G&A is growing much more slowly than the vessels are increasing which is how the G&A is coming down and.

Ben, we also need to sleep from time-to-time, to get to 500 vessels. I think that it's important to have a bigger company as Hamish said also, we -- our G&A actually covers everything, we do everything in-house so -- and as the company grows bigger we will do more things in-house and therefore that is the advantage of lower costs and we also wave our flag, our own flag, so we avoid the intermediaries and stuff like that so, this -- I think on the G&A front, certainly it will definitely get even lower as we get more vessels in but it also helps a lot on the operating expense side exactly because we do everything directly.

And clearly, comparatively you guys do a pretty good job at that and I appreciate again that you have the fleet and you have your hands full but just maybe circling back around I mean as the -- do you feel like this is something that can be replicated in terms of or continuing to add to a much larger scale overtime?

Look Ben, we are continually working on improving the organization and making it easier for the organization to grow while allowing top management to get enough fleet. And as we further refine our organization we should be able to grow the fleet significantly.

And my second question has to do with the one vessel that you guys have on the sale leaseback, once it's delivered on to your base. First just kind of curious, if you can give a little context around the economics both in terms of -- well primarily in terms of the charter rate that you have and then looking forward maybe is this something that you might would do even with a longer tenure perhaps in terms of to sort of the point early maybe growing the fleet and as certainly also helping to offset some of the capital cost that you have?

Yes, so I think we can't talk too much about that, at this point we are going to be making a more detailed announcement soon enough. Suffice to say, a sale with a charter back from Star it's an operating charter not a financial lease. So, it's not particularly long-term and we don't know if we do any more of those, it's not something that we're currently planning to do more of. But we will be getting details of that out yes.

Thank you very much indeed sir. And your next question from Morgan Stanley comes from the line of Fotis Giannakoulis. And your line is now open.

I would like to follow-up on Ben's question about the impressive reduction in your operating expenses. Can you give us a little bit more details where these reductions have come from and if you can also give us guidance on your drydock schedule over the next year and a half?

Fotis it is Petro hi, [indiscernible] mostly from renegotiating contracts with various suppliers, from insurances and I would say this is most of the reductions that we've managed to achieve. As far as the drydocks are concerned, as I was saying before we were going to do 34 of the drydocks this year and very few next year, I think next year would have been like three or four only. Now, we've already done 20. We'll do probably another seven and eight and therefore next year we should probably have about maximum 10 drydocks, probably.

Thank you, Petros. So, is it okay to assume something like between $4,000 and $4,500 operating expenses going forward? I'm just trying to get an idea of how we should model the expense side?

Yes, yes.

Thank you.

[Indiscernible].

And regarding the order book you mentioned that your view is that there are going to be a lot of delays and there have been already some conversions into other sectors. Clarkson steel shows an order book of close to 20% over the next three years, what would it be your big estimate about the order book, the real order book and the fleet growth next year?

Well, the total order book is a handwritten 33 million tonnes so we calculate it at 17.5%. I think that the order book for a next year is about 60 million tonnes, but there's also going to be slippage from this year probably around 25 million to 30 million, very rough numbers, I don't have them in front of me. So in theory the order book for next year could be 85 million tonnes, but if you deduct from that 25 million to 30 million tonnes of further slippage that will go to 2017 and then as I personally believe that the first six months of next year are going to be challenging again as they were this year. I think we'll see scrapping of about 30 million tonnes. Therefore, overall in my opinion, we will see about net deliveries for 2016 of between 27 million and 30 million tonnes which would be about 3.5% of the fleets so. And then the balance of about 60 million tonnes will be coming in 2017 and '18 and depending on how much more people will order, and that's why we keep on saying here that it's extremely important that ship owners contain themselves and don't order going forward.

And can you tell us how do you view the ship owners behaving beside your hope given the fact that it seems that ship building got the capacity is quite high and utilization of the ship yards -- the ship yards operate at very low utilization, have you seen any steep reductions in the pricing of the newbuildings that can trigger a new wave of ordering in the next year?

Your [indiscernible] if you have hopes that the margins will compensate, I mean when the market is at where it is right now, it's not so difficult to -- so is to order and that's why we've only seen like 3.7 million tonnes ordered up-to-date. I mean otherwise people would have been ordering. I think that shipyard prices will probably drop a bit and that's especially through in Japan. However, there is no so much yard availability right now, I mean it's '16 is also close of course. 2017 is probably close to almost 99 plus percent. So, what we would be talking about would be 2018, which is wide open. And therefore it depends on the behavior of ship owners for 2018. I think that for as long as the market is not showing great prospects people will not order. I'm not talking about [Violet] for example because they have different reasons potentially to order even although perhaps not even for them, it would be a good idea to order right now. But as far as ship owners are concerned, you see orders very far apart and rather small ones. And I think that will continue. I mean now if at some point you see $50,000 on the Capes, yes, people will start ordering again and I don't see this happening very soon.

And can you explain to us what happened in the previous month that we saw a rates for Capes moving up even up to $20,000 for a couple of days? What drove the market higher, was it restocking of China, where is it more cargos of from Brazil, and how do you see the flow of cargos, is Brazil delivering the increase in iron ore that it was expected and how do you view this going forward?

The reason that market went up very briefly was that the Atlantic didn't have many vessels therefore the charter were obliged to pay up to get the few vessels that were available. And also Brazil was exporting at a very higher rate of iron ore, that’s true what you said. And then Brazil stopped a couple of weeks ago, 10 days ago. And as we know Brazil is amazingly important for iron ore trade because the voyage from Brazil to -- the long voyage from Brazil to China is 2.5 times longer than or 2.7 times longer than the one from Australia to China. And if that happens, it's going to be positive. Now from what we read that Brazil is going to increase exports the second half of this year substantially, also Australia will have more capability of exporting higher quantities but Brazil is more important. During the first half of 2015 Brazil only increased their participation of Chinese imports by only 1% from 18% to 19% where Australia went from 56 to 64. So that didn't help us a lot. We are counting on the second half of the year because they have announced that they have 30 million tonnes extra to export. So that’s very important, and if it happens, we might see a relatively strong quarter.

And my last question is, if this improvement comes in the next quarter, do you think that this is going to give more opportunities for period chartering and would you be willing to lock some of your open capacity under period contracts and at what levels that would be attractive for you?

You've just revealed our plan to the public. Yes, now under what levels, what we would be doing is we would be fixing forward and as we have a huge fleet as you know, we might start at levels that make already sense and then keep on fixing as the market moves. Now, you don't want me to start on specific levels on each type of vessels, but I would say probably mid-teens on Capes would be decent figures and high single figures on the other two types of vessels would be decent figures.

Thank you very much indeed sir and there are no further questions at this time. I should pass the floor back to you for closing remarks.

Okay. Thank you, operator. Thanks everyone for listening and thanks for the excellent questions.

I give many thanks to all our speakers today. That does conclude our conference. Thank you all for participating. You may now disconnect.

Thank you.