Good day ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Bruker Corporation quarterly earnings conference call. My name is Troy and I will be your operator for today. At this time all participants are in a listen-only mode and later we will conduct a question-and-answer session. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder this conference is being recorded for replay purposes. I would now like to turn your conference over to your host for today, Ms. Stacey Desrochers, Treasurer, Director of Investor Relations. Please proceed.

Thank you. Good morning and welcome to Bruker Corporation’s first quarter 2010 financial results conference call. I’m Stacey Desrochers, Treasurer and Director of Investor Relations. With me on today’s call are Frank Laukien, Bruker’s President and Chief Executive Officer; Bill Knight, Bruker’s Chief Operating Officer; and Brian Monahan, Bruker’s Chief Financial Officer; and Tom Rosa, the Chief Financial Officer of our Bruker Energy and Supercon Technologies or BEST business. Before we begin, let me briefly cover our Safe Harbor statement. Various remarks that we may make about the company’s future expectations, plans and prospects constitute forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from those indicated by these forward-looking statements as a result of various important factors including those described in the company’s filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. While we may elect to update forward-looking statements at some point in the future, we specifically disclaim any obligation to do so even if our estimates change. And therefore you should not rely upon these forward-looking statements as representing our views as of any date subsequent to today. Today, Frank will provide an update on the business and certain overall Bruker Corporation financial highlights. Tom will describe the financial results of our BEST segment and then Brian will discuss the financial results of our Bruker Scientific Instrument or BSI segment. I’ll now turn the call over to our President and CEO Frank Laukien.

Thank you Stacey, good morning everyone. We appreciate you joining us today. Before I provide the business update and discuss the financial highlights for the first quarter of 2010, I would like to welcome our new sell side analyst Jose Haresco from Brean Murray, Carret & Co. and Steve Unger from Lazard Capital Markets. Welcome gentlemen. Now starting with the financial highlights, which most of you may have read in our earnings press release issued earlier this morning, in the first quarter of 2010, our revenue was $277.7 million, a GAAP increase of 20.5% or a currency adjusted increase of 12.4% when compared year-over-year to the first quarter of 2009. On earnings in the first quarter of 2010, our GAAP EPS was $0.10 per diluted share, which exceeded Street expectations and which doubled from our first quarter 2009 EPS of $0.05 per diluted share. Included in GAAP EPS for the first quarter 2010 as well as for the first quarter 2009 were non-cash stock-based compensation expenses of negative $0.01 per diluted share in each of those first quarters, 2009 and 2010. In the first quarter of 2010, all four operating divisions in our scientific instrument segment delivered double digit growth year-over-year, which translated into GAAP revenue increase of 16.4% for scientific instruments or BSI segment. Our BEST segment had triple digit growth for the second quarter in a row increasing 156% for the first quarter 2010 compared to a year ago. Concerning new order bookings in the first quarter of 2010, new order bookings from our healthcare pharma, government, and academic customers remain healthy; and the industrial and applied markets continued to improve gradually. Even though we delivered significant year-over-year revenue growth in the first quarter of 2010, we enter the second quarter of 2010 with very strong backlog. In…

Thanks, Frank and good morning everyone. Revenues for the BEST segment during the first quarter of 2010 increased by 156% to $20.7 million compared to $8.1 million in the first quarter of 2009. This is the second quarter in a row of triple digit topline growth at BEST. Excluding the effects of foreign currency translation, first quarter 2010 revenue increased by 141%. The BEST operating loss in the first quarter of 2010 was $0.5 million compared to a BEST operating loss of $2.4 million in the first quarter of 2009. EPS for the first quarter of 2010 for the BEST segment was $0.0 per share compared to a BEST net loss of $0.02 per share in the first quarter of 2009. Losses in the first quarter were lower than projected due to higher than expected revenues as well as lower than anticipated R&D cost. Our development and commercialization efforts at BEST have been paying off and in the past six weeks we announced three significant new contracts; a $7.7 million contract from the U.S. Department of Energies, Brookhaven National Laboratory or BNL for 200 MeV Electron Injection Linear Accelerator for BNL’s next generation National Synchrotron Light Source; number two, a $5.7 million contract from the South Korea based Pohang Accelerator Laboratory for two superconducting accelerator modules; and third, a $2.4 million contract from the Brazilian Synchrotron Light laboratory for state of the art turnkey beam line. All of these projects help to further develop our broad technology platforms that address potentially large emerging markets and clean tech alternative energy and big science infrastructure and help expand BEST’s position as a leading global provider of super conductivity enabled devices and technologies. We also received significant orders from other customers during the first quarter of 2010 and ended the quarter with more than a 500% increase in backlog to over $90 million compared to just under $15 million of backlog at the end of the first quarter of 2009. I will now turn the call over to the CFO of Bruker Corporation Brian Monahan.

Thanks, Tom. Since Frank already commented on the first quarter financial highlights for overall BRKR and Tom provided a summary of BEST, I will focus primarily on our Bruker Scientific Instruments or BSI segment. On the topline for the BSI segment, during the first quarter of 2010 revenues increased by 16.4% to $260.3 million compared to $223.6 million in the first quarter of 2009. Excluding the effects of foreign currency translation, BSI revenue increased by 8.6% year-over-year. As Frank said earlier, all four operating divisions within BSI delivered topline GAAP growth with higher growth rates from the divisions, which benefited more from stimulus related orders, specifically Daltonics and BioSpin. Now moving further down the income statement, gross profit margin for BSI in the first quarter of 2010 was 47.1% compared to 45.3% in the first quarter of 2009. BSI GAAP operating margins expanded by 340 basis points year-over-year with operating income in the first quarter of 2010 of $27.7 million or 10.6% of revenue, compared to operating income of %16.1 million or 7.2% of revenue in the first quarter of 2009. The operating margin expansion at BSI is a result of a number of factors including higher margins associated with revenues from high end instrumentation, some of which is directly attributable to the various global stimulus programs. Additionally, a ramp in volume of recently introduced products, which were designed to carry higher gross margins than previous generations of products continued strict cost controls and lastly leveraging fixed cost with higher revenue volume. On the bottom line, GAAP net income for the BSI segment in the first quarter of 2010 was $17.2 million or $0.10 per diluted share compared to net income of $10.2 million or $0.06 per diluted share in the first quarter of 2009. Before I turn the call…

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from the line of Jon Wood. Please proceed. Jon Wood – Jefferies & Company: Is it possible to quantify the revenue impact from the ACCEL acquisition?

Yes Jon, this is Tom Rosa. The revenue associated with ACCEL was around $6.5 million in Q1. But one thing I would just caution is that the lines between what was ACCEL and what is the rest of BEST are starting to blur. We’ve done some integration of R&D personnel between the two companies but roughly $6.5 million, which was about in line with the average of three quarters from 2009. Jon Wood – Jefferies & Company: Okay, thanks a lot. And, Frank, is it possible to sort of quantify whatever stimulus related – is possible to parse out the stimulus related revenue in the first quarter?

Hi, John. That’s also getting very difficult. We had some revenue, for instance for Japan in the first quarter from stimulus or their special supplementary budget, there is still other inventory trends in Japan as well in Asia and Europe that hasn’t been recognized yet. So we had some – we know probably every quarter will have some inventory, sorry some stimulus related revenue but we cannot really break it out. Jon Wood – Jefferies & Company: Okay, thanks. And then just in AXS and Optics, were these two divisions up on an organic basis in 1Q10. I guess what I’m getting at is were any of your more cyclical or industrial product lines still down in the first quarter?

They were all up, they’re all quite healthy. They all had GAAP revenue growth in the double digits. Jon Wood – Jefferies & Company: And did you see –

(Inaudible) currency, they were all up in the first quarter. Jon Wood – Jefferies & Company: Okay, great. I mean how is the momentum tracking? I mean do you see the industrial related markets continuing to improve into the second quarter?

Yes, John, I think that’s our impression. And so, particularly the AXS, which is always most sensitive to that even though they have some academic and research customers as well and some of their businesses that are almost 100% exposed to the industrial metals economy or cement. It is really getting quite a bit healthier. So there is good momentum. I’m still not calling it rapid growth but there is clear continued momentum in industrial markets as far as we can tell.

Your next question comes from the line of Ross Muken. Please proceed. Mike Cherney – Deutsche Bank: Hey guys, it’s actually Mike Cherney in for Ross today. Congrats on another great quarter.

Thank you. Mike Cherney – Deutsche Bank: So, Frank, just quickly, obviously, you had some positive commentary noted both on the call and then the press release. You were talking about the outlook, obviously the backlog is growing very strongly. Should we take your lack of commentary directly on kind of formal guidance in the outlook to assume that you guys are really reiterating guidance?

No, we don’t. As you may know we give our annual goals and we do not update or give quarter guidance. So it is our habit that we do not give or update quarter guidance, and therefore I would not interpret that we stick to our annual goals. But I think we’re slightly more optimistic than what we gave originally but we do not quantitatively update that every quarter. Mike Cherney – Deutsche Bank: And then just quickly, from a geographic perspective, can you guys give us a little sense of – you talked about the end markets but just more geographically where you saw strength versus what areas may have been still potentially weaker and kind of going forward if you have similar thoughts on those geographies.

A few highlights perhaps. I think the bookings and orders in the U.S. were really pretty decent in the first quarter and some of that is related to stimulus spending in the U.S., not coming through rapidly but coming through as at least a steady trickle now, that this started last year but it started much later than everybody had anticipated including ourselves but it’s continuing. So the U.S. overall was good. In Japan even though there is less stimulus orders, which mostly come through universities, those mostly came in last year and in the first quarter we saw that the industrial customers in Japan are clearly picking up. China has been strong all along. India is coming back nicely already in the fourth quarter and now also in the first quarter. And maybe those are some of the geographical remarks where something has really noticeably changed or at least incrementally changed.

Your next question comes from the line of Tycho Peterson. Abigail Darby – JP Morgan: Hi, this is actually Abigail Darby sitting in for Tycho today. Frank, could you dig a little bit more into the kind of trends in the relative divisions, I know you said they all grew in the double digits. Or is it possible for you to kind of help us maybe rank the divisions in terms of the stronger growers versus maybe laggers, particularly interested in trying to get a sense of growth between the AXS and Optics versus Daltonics.

I think this was done in part already. In our earlier statements, as I said all four scientific instruments divisions grew in the double digits in GAAP, and they obviously all had pretty healthy growth. There was slightly faster growth in those that had more stimulus exposure and those were specifically the Daltonics Life Science Mass Spectrometry business and the Bruker BioSpin Magnetic Resonance business, but all of them had really very healthy growth. It’s very sustained and across the company with Daltonics and BioSpin growing a little bit faster than AXS and Optics, but even those divisions had double digit growths. So we’re really very satisfied with them. And I think that gives you a little bit of color. Abigail Darby – JP Morgan: Okay. And then trying to dig a little bit more into the BEST Division, you announced a number of smaller, I guess contracts from the last couple of weeks. When can we expect those contracts to be recognized in terms of revenue? Could we expect to see them in two half ‘10 or are they more 2011 events?

This is a combination of both. We expect revenue primarily from those contracts in 2011, but probably important to note that one of those contracts, I just want to point this out, on the Brookhaven order for about $7.7 million, that actually was received in April. So you didn’t ask about backlog specifically but that’s not in our backlog number. So inclusive of that, we’re actually coming into Q2 with approximately $100 million plus backlog. Abigail Darby – JP Morgan: And then on profitability in BEST, you were pretty much breakeven for the quarter. As you know the revenue and the run rate in that division now, if that continues should we expect you to maintain profitability or was there something unusual about 1Q that helped you breakeven at that level.

Well, just to clarify, we had about $500,000 loss in Q1 ‘10, which was dramatically down from a year ago. But there were some very helpful factors in Q1 that may not repeat in future quarters. And particularly we mentioned R&D spending was a little bit later than we expected because we really were focusing on some commercial orders in Q1 with our R&D personnel. We also had better topline gross margins in our commercial businesses than we expected or that we had a year ago, so that is sustainable. And then third there was some depreciation expense delays because some of the equipment that we are commissioning this year probably won’t be fully online until the second half of the year. So we expect depreciation expense to increase going forward. So the second part of the year will be – we should see higher losses than the first half.

This is Frank and I’d like to follow up on that just to make sure that the big picture is it’s still what we said when we gave our goals for 2010. We intend to invest aggressively in this BEST segment and therefore we are not – even though we are getting in the first quarter where the loss is relatively low, and we’re delighted but it is not our goal to drive this to breakeven this year or next year. We’ll continue to invest aggressively. Within our business plans, we had looked at $6 million to $8 million net loss for that division for the full year. And so there is no significant change here. The priority there is to grow very rapidly, to gain market share, to develop the technologies and marketing development as we had stated before even though we are delighted that the loss in the first quarter was quite a bit lower than what we even had anticipated.

Your next question comes from the line of Derik De Bruin. Please proceed.

Hi, this is actually Darren [ph] for Derek, thanks for taking the questions. Just wondering if you guys can make a couple of comments on what you are seeing in pharma and biotech specifically whether there is a significant difference between the two, and then also maybe the difference between larger and smaller customers.

Yes, Darren, this is Frank Laukien. Pharma has been quite good for us. I mean there’s no new trends in Q1 here, but generally in the last few quarters pharma including big pharma is quite selective in what they’re buying. But if they have – if there are new tools out there that give them better or more reliable or more specific information, they do purchase them. And we’ve also observed that when big pharmas merge, they’re not going to these complete capital expenditure freezes anymore that maybe they did a few years ago. So biotech has generally other than very big biotech, which is almost like a big pharma, biotech we have not really seen yet a significant increase in capital expenditures. I know the fundraising climate for those guys has improved a little bit but that has not, at least not noticeably resulted in any increase in spending. So biotech, smaller biotech in particular that depends to some extent on the capital markets are still fairly cautious as they have been.

Okay, great. And then on academic and govern markets, I know that NAH stimulus is helping tremendously but outside of that, are customers talking about having more flexibility in placing orders now that endowment seems to have stabilized a bit?

That is a good question. I would like to think that yes, but I don’t really have any specific evidence or nice anecdotal stories on that from recent – I think that’s a reasonable assumption, but I’m not sure that I have the data to confirm that but I think that’s likely to get a little bit more relaxed. Keep in mind that university budgets are not – they’re all designed to respond slowly to changes. So in a big drop in endowments, they do not immediately stop all capital spending, it’s more spread out over five years. And as the endowments recover essentially all private university budgets are engineered, so they respond to that a little bit more slowly as well, but the trends feel they are good or improving.

I see, thank you. Okay, and then just lastly, you guys have successfully introduced several new products over the last year. So when you look at the Varian portfolio and I realize that you haven’t officially taken control there, but I’m wondering if you can offer some broad thought on perhaps updating some of the products there or maybe introducing some new lines based on those existing technologies.

Of the three product lines that we are to acquire, is that what you’re referring to Darren?

Yes.

Okay, when that deal closes we expect that within a few business days after the closing that we will have a follow-on press release and give some color on those product lines and our expectations going forward. But since they’re not ours yet, they’re Varian, Inc. product lines at this point, we just don’t think it would be appropriate for us to comment on them yet. So bear with us, hopefully it’s a matter of not very many weeks now.

Your next question comes from the line of Errol Rudman. Please proceed. Errol Rudman – Rudman Capital: Can you update us on BEST?

Could you repeat the question?

Could you be more specific, Errol? Errol Rudman – Rudman Capital: In terms of how you have progressed in your plans to distribute stock and the timing and the method of distribution?

We are exploring different financing options as we’ve discussed before. We’re not prepared to getting into specifics on how that might occur in the future. Errol Rudman – Rudman Capital: Okay. Could you give us a broad – I don’t mean to pin you down but can you give us a general outline? Is it more likely to occur in the third quarter or the fourth quarter of this year?

We haven’t given specific guidance, Errol, on that. We’re focused on trying to operate the business and grow it as fast as possible and we’ll see what that results as time progresses. We’re quite pleased with the quarter, we’ve already talked about the numbers, the growth has been excellent, topline and in backlog and we’re trying to continue to drive market development and operational improvements just like the rest of the Bruker.

Our general goal would be to have a strategic financing for BEST and it will not be in the first half of this year. Our goal would be to do that in the second half of the year. Errol Rudman – Rudman Capital: Okay. I completely agree the results were terrific and we thank you as shareholders for these results, and the suggestion wasn’t that you get distracted but rather that you keep up the good work and that we can see in more detail and get ready for the distribution when and if it occurs. Thank you very much.

(Operator Instructions) Our next question comes from the line of Jose Haresco. Please proceed. Jose Haresco – Brean Murray, Carret & Co.: Can we focus on the European side? We heard a lot of CapEx companies talk this quarter but Europe being a little bit slower and China a little bit slower, obviously there’s a lot of news in Europe going on right now. Frank, what is your outlook on Europe, has it changed? How should we think about the business overall? And is what we’re seeing in Europe it has more of and having more of a neutral effect on you guys since you are really tied more to the government research spending. And related to that, Brian, how should you think about the foreign exchange these days?

I think fairly the countries that are in the headlines Greece and maybe Portugal have not been significant buyers for us at all. So that effect is absolutely de minimis or almost nil quite honestly. The major European economies are recovering and that is noticeable. So demand in the major European economies is increasing. Spain was a little bit weak last year, and so that we don’t really have good visibility on that although some good orders have come in recently, they’re particularly also for our MALDI Biotyper, which comes from a totally different part of money if you like. So I think Europe is actually quite healthy for us with good gradual recovery and this financial crisis that affects a few countries from which we normally wouldn’t get any orders anyway really doesn’t have any effects on our business. It does have an affect on exchange rates, of course, and quite honestly the effect on exchange rates with dampening the Euro a little bit is quite welcome from our point of view. Jose Haresco – Brean Murray, Carret & Co.: Okay. This is a question for Tom. Tom, any progress on the fault current limiters or the crystal growth projects that we’re talking about the quarter?

Yes, we’re continuing to make progress, Jose, those as you know are two of our primary R&D initiatives. The crystal growth magnet is targeted for first prototype at the end of this year 2010. The fault current limiter is targeted for initial deployment in the grid in the early 2012 timeframe. So neither will have a material impact on 2010 topline, but we are investing in both areas quite heavily right now and satisfied with the progress we’re making.

Your next question comes from the line of Robert Carlson. Please proceed. I apologize if there (inaudible) put you on mute at this time and there are no questions in queue.

Are there no further questions?

No sir, not at this time.

Okay, alright. Then thank you all for joining us today. We appreciate your interest, and this concludes our earnings call. Thank you and good bye.