Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Stoneridge First Quarter 2016 Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will be hosting a question-and-session and instructions will follow at that time. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded over the webcast line. Now, I would like to hand the floor over to Ken Kure, Corporate Treasurer and Director of Finance. Ken, please proceed.

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us on today’s call. By now, you should have received our first quarter earnings release. The release and accompanying presentation has been or will shortly be filed with the SEC, and has been posted to our website at www.stoneridge.com. Joining me on today’s call are Jon DeGaynor, our President and Chief Executive Officer; George Strickler, our Chief Financial Officer. Before we begin, I need to inform you that certain statements today may be forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include statements that are not historical in nature and include information concerning our future results or plans. Although we believe that such statements are based upon reasonable assumptions, you should understand that these statements are subject to risks and uncertainties and actual results may differ materially. Additional information about such factors and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ maybe found in our 10-K filed with the SEC under the heading, Forward-Looking Statements. During today’s call, we will also be referring to certain non-GAAP financial measures. Please see the Investor Relations section of our website for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures. Jon will begin the call by addressing the strategies discussed during our previous earnings calls and our progress on new business plans. George will discuss the financial and operational aspects of the first quarter. George will also review our 2016 sales and earnings guidance based on the trends that we have seen through the first quarter. We prepared and published an earnings presentation to provide more detailed schedules to help your understanding of our first quarter results, trends of our continued improvement and updates on key initiatives to improve financial performance. A copy of these items can also be found on our website at www.stoneridge.com in the Investor Relations section. After Jon and George had finished their formal remarks, we’ll then open up the call to questions. With that, I’ll turn the call over to Jon.

Good morning and thank you all for joining us. I’m pleased to report that we recorded a strong first quarter financial performance, which represents another quarter-on-quarter improvement. The Control Devices and Electronics segments continued to perform well during the first quarter as their combined operating margin including unallocated corporate charges has reached 8% to net sales in the first quarter, which is an improvement from the 4.2% in the first quarter of last year and 7.5% in the fourth quarter of 2015. Both Control Devices and Electronics segments saw significant improvement in operating margins in the first quarter from higher sales at Control Devices, continuous strength in European commercial vehicle sales, currency tailwinds and improved operating efficiencies at Electronics. The results of these segments allowed Stoneridge to overcome the headwinds caused by currency changes in the difficult economic environment in Brazil. The financial performance by the Stoneridge team continues to demonstrate the resolve of our management group working together to deliver on our commitments. This quarter we continue to deliver on our commitment of increased earnings excluding unusual items compared to the prior year. George will provide more detail on this section on the financial performance of the first quarter. During last quarter’s call, I described focus areas for the organization. The diligent efforts of our management team in these focus areas have helped us to deliver consistent financial performance in the face of difficulties we have experienced in certain markets. I would like to highlight a few areas that are driving our consistent performance. Our number one focus for the second-half of 2015 and into 2016 has been and will continue to be the flawless launch of the shift-by-wire programs. Our launch continues to go as planned in the activities in our Canton, Massachusetts and Juarez, Mexico facilities have…

Thank you, Jon. Stoneridge reported a strong adjusted earnings per share from continuing operations of $0.31 per share in the first quarter of 2016, compared to adjusted earnings per share from continuing operations of $0.17 in the first quarter of last year, an improvement of $0.14 a share or an increase of 82% on the combined strength of North America Control Devices, automotive performance and European commercial vehicle performance our Electronic segment. Including our first quarter results for business realignment charges for electronics and PST segment are $0.05per share, which was included on reported earnings of $0.26 per share. We estimate that these charges are expected to yield $5.2 million of benefits during 2016. See slide five, for additional details. Our business unit sales in the first quarter increased to Control Devices by $12.5 million or 15.6%, a decrease in electronics by $3.8 million or 6.7%. Electronics revenues were negatively affected by lower volumes in the North America truck market and to a lesser extent on payable foreign currency translation. PST sales run favorably affected by $7.1 million, because of the weakening of the Brazilian real to U.S. dollar. See slide four for more detail. Passenger car and light truck revenues were $76.7 million in the first quarter, a 17.9% increase over the first quarter of last year sales of $65.1 million, as volumes increased in Control Device products which included new programs in shift-by-wire. In addition North America passenger car market continue to show significant growth in the first quarter of this year, compared to the first quarter of last year. Our business in China, which is part of our control device reportable segment has continued to show improvement with an operating margin of 17.4% in the first quarter, as operating income increased from $200,000 to $1.1 million in…

Thank you, sir. [Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Justin Long with Stephens. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.

Thanks. Good morning and congrats on a great quarter.

Thanks, Justin.

Thanks, Justin.

So first question, I had - I wanted to ask about the 2016 EPS guidance for $1.10 to $1.30. I guess, that didn’t change. Does that exclude the restructuring costs that you saw in the first quarter? So are you using $0.31 of first quarter EPS in that guidance?

In that guidance, Justin, we are using the $0.26. I mean, it was - we’ve incurred the expense of $0.05 a share. But as we mentioned, we have benefits that represent $5.2 million over the course of the year. So some of those offset each other, and so we’re still performing within that guidance.

Okay. That’s helpful to clarify. And then, maybe following up on that, so the overall EPS outlook didn’t change, but I am curious if any of the underlying assumptions within that guidance moved around, whether it’s a better first quarter than you expected, any change to the shift-by-wire cadence, your macro-assumptions etcetera. Could you just provide some more color on how that outlook has evolved since the beginning of the year?

Well, Justin, I guess the best way to say it is that we’re very pleased with our results. And overall, and I think Jon said it very well early in his materials that how we look at this thing is this is a commitment from what each one of our business shipments in Electronics is performing a little bit better than what we thought. Control Devices was just slightly off, because of the delay at some of the shift-by-wire mostly in Asia market. And then, Brazil clearly was more of a struggle than we expected. But in the aggregate, we still feel in Stoneridge that we’re feeling very comfortable with how we’re performing in the first quarter and then how that looks for the outcome for the year.

And Justin, just with regard to shift-by-wire, we watched that really closely. And we don’t believe at this point that what we see in the first quarter from a customer pull perspective will impact us on the full year. We actually believe that that will be caught up and that’s what we see in early releases as well.

Okay. Great. That’s all really helpful. And maybe following upon shift-by-wire, Jon, you mentioned the hybrid win and that’s good to hear about. But I wanted to ask about your ability to continue leveraging that product on additional platforms or with additional OEMs. Just based on the pipeline of opportunities, you’re seeing today and conversations you’re having with customers. Are there any of those additional opportunities that you think could be - could materialize in the contract announcements at some point later this year?

I think this first hybrid - this hybrid win, Justin, is an example. We continue to work with other customers and with our current customers on expanding the penetration of the product, the fact that we’ve been able to find an application that’s outside of what was the standard approach tells us that there is room to continue to grow this. At this point, I can’t say that we have anything that is imminent. But what we know is that our customers are pleased with us, they’re pleased with the product. And we’re getting the opportunities to work with engineering with our customers to try to solve their problems and use the shift-by-wire capabilities to do that. And that’s where this hybrid program came from.

Okay. Great. And maybe one last one from me. I wanted to ask about the mirror replacement opportunity as well. Could you just provide an update on how some of those conversations are going, now that you’ve had a little bit more time to market that product? And similar to what I ask on shift-by-wire, are there any contract opportunities that you think could materialize at some point this year on that front?

We are continuing to be very bullish with regard to the opportunities from MirrorEye, both in the European market and in the North American market. Although, we believe that the past [ph] market will be different in North America than it is in Europe. We do believe that there will be at least one customer that makes a sourcing decision in 2016, probably later in the year. And we continue to work to expand our capabilities there and support customers both in North America and in Europe with development vehicles, demonstrators and then also working with fleets. And you will see some announcements from us with regard to what we’re doing at trade shows and tech shows to get the word out, particularly with a large fleet, so we believe that there will probably be an OEM award sometime toward the end of 2016 and hopefully some lead fleet adoption in, if not by 2016, early 2017.

Okay. Sounds great. I appreciate the time.

Thanks, Justin.

You’re welcome, Justin.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Jimmy Baker with B. Riley & Company. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.

Hello, good morning guys. Thanks for taking my questions.

Hi, Jimmy.

Just first wanted to stick on the new program award. So could you just talk about how you expect those to impact your gross margins and operating margins once they ramp. And then it looks like the material changes to your new business backlog are really focused on 2019 and 2020. Is that just the timing of the majority of these new awards or are there any pushouts to be aware of in the existing backlog?

Jimmy, let me answer the first piece of the question first. These are not pushouts. These are just the typical program timing where in 2016, we’re talking about primarily programs that would be 2018 or 2019. But I can tell you, we mentioned in our discussion earlier about a European electronics award, that award will start to impact us toward the end of 2017 and in the 2018. It is a vehicle refresh that the customer is doing. So we typically think about at least two years if not three years for most of our control devices and electronics awards. But we are seeing a couple that are going faster than that. So you’re right that the primary impact is 19 and beyond, but we are seeing some things that we fill in toward the end of next year and early into 2018.

And we did have some fill-in in 2017 and you’re right is that we have a little bit, still we work on 2018 and that’s where our focus has been and can we get something in that area. So but overall Jimmy, it is going across the whole five year period, but it’s mostly 2017 through 2020 and 2018 is still little bit light from our perspective.

Okay. Sure, very helpful. And then just, I guess, we previously only gotten this from you annually in annual update. I mean, Jon, is it a practice that you’re intending to adopt that will give these updates quarterly now or I guess, periodically as material changes occur in the backlog. How should we just think about this update going forward?

Yeah. Jimmy, I think the point here is we want to make sure when there is some material item to discuss that we’re providing clarity on that as rapidly as practical. And so we made the decision that it make sense, because the change in that new business was so material that it make sense to talk about it now. So hopefully, this is that will have the ability and the need to talk about this every quarter, but our commitment from our side is that we will update you as there is a material change. And certainly with the discussions that we had on MirrorEye, the discussions that we had on shift-by-wire, anytime that we have an update on one of those specific programs, we’ll make sure that we’ve communicated appropriately.

Okay. I appreciate that. And then lastly, just when you look at the reduction in operating expenses, how much of that would you say is headcount reduction versus a currency impact. And I guess comparing your guidance today to when it was last updated, exchange rates have become a bit more favorable for you. So I guess going back to your response with Justin’s question you’re maintaining the earnings guidance. But could you just talk about the tailwind on a full year basis versus the prior assumptions that you see if FX rates hold at current levels?

Jimmy, we - and we talked a little about this. And some of the currency tailwinds we’re now seeing is, we’re truly trying to evaluate are they sustainable or is this separateable [ph]. In fact, lot of this has been driven by the oil prices. It’s been the dollar weakness and that seems to have stalled at least from the oil standpoint. Jon and I both have both been in Brazil over the last three weeks and they’ve got unique situation going on with Congress is now elected to make a change at the Presidency and the top four cabinet positions. And as a result of that the currency and the real is now down to R$3.43. I haven’t checked this morning, but it was running around R$3.98, R$3.80 that’s been a significant benefit for us. Now, one of the issues with PST and why we haven’t really talked about or looking forward is that we’ve had some inventory build in some of the audio lines in terms of what the consumer is buying. So it’s delayed some of our purchases. And so, that will have an effect that I would venture guess, in Brazil, we’ll talk more of that on the second quarter, because I think we’ll have a much better idea. Just to give you some of the current consensus in Brazil, that if the change in the Presidency does not happen, they’re talking about change rate potentially going back to R$4.20 or R$4.50. In the case where it does happen, they’re saying it’ll probably settle out around R$3.20, so that will be a nice tailwind for us. In Europe, the euro has gradually gone up with the prices of oil stabilizing. The euros sitting at about $1.15 now, our budget was $1.10. That will help us in…

Sure, sure, that’s helpful, George. Just the first part of my question, can you help quantify the operating expense reduction between headcount versus currency impact?

The most of the - and you’re talking about the restructuring cost?

Well, I’m actually talking about it in aggregate the SG&A and D&D reduction on a year-over-year basis or even sequentially whichever you actually think are more appropriate for this?

We’ve actually taken - the restructuring cost, to give you an insight into that, we realigned our engineering workforce and that was really to improve skill-sets and capabilities. At the same time, we took out 19 engineers in that process. We’ve taken out 165 people in Brazil. That was - many of those people were in the Manaus manufacturing facility, but we went across-the-board in engineering, SG&A and all the support services. So there has been significant headcount reduction, probably in the range of 180 people in the first quarter. So lot of it was not driven by currency other than in Brazil where you do get the significant influence of the currency there. But for the most part, we are gaining on efficiency. And as you see in our SG&A it is flat compared to what it was last year. And we estimate that we’ll continue to manage that level.

Okay. Very helpful. Thanks for the color.

You’re welcome, Jimmy.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from the line of Tristan Thomas with Sidoti & Company. Your line is now open. Please go ahead.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Just two quick follow-on questions regarding MirrorEye, first as you alluded to different pass-cycle [ph] in market in North America as opposed to Europe, could you maybe provide a little more color on that, and then, also maybe a potential timeframe what your expectations are? And then the second question is regarding the OEM sourcing decision. Can we assume that’s a European OEM?

So let me answer the question with regard to the aftermarket. Because the way vehicles are designed and certified in Europe, you don’t see a retrofit play for this activity. And because the legislation, the vehicle legislation allows for the replacement of a mirror with a camera in Europe, that’s why we believe it’ll go through the OEMs. And, yes, it’s European OEM that will make that sourcing decision toward the end of this year that we believe. So that’s point number one. The second point is, in the U.S. legislation still requires a 50 square inch mirror on the vehicle. That legislation has not been changed. So we look at it as - now the value proposition is more from a safety standpoint than it is from an aerodynamic standpoint. And we’ve been working with OEMs to demonstrate what the product looks like and how their vehicles would look. And we got a demonstrator truck that is running around all of the U.S. to get feedback both from OEMs and from fleets. But what we believe here is that there will probably be a fleet adoption for the safety benefit before there is an OEM that would make the change, because there is not a legislative drive to make the change here.

Okay. Perfect. Thanks, guys, a great quarter.

Thank you.

Thanks, Tristan.

Thank you. There are no further questions. I will now hand the floor back to Jon DeGaynor, Chief Executive Officer of Stoneridge for closing comments.

Well, I want to thank everybody for their time today. And just to reiterate George’s point, we’re really excited about the momentum that the organization has and how the quarter has looked and what we have going forward into 2016. Thanks all for your time.

Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today’s program and you may all disconnect. Everybody have a wonderful day.