Thank you for standing by, ladies and gentlemen and welcome to Dynagas LNG Partners Conference Call on the Third Quarter 2017 Financial Results. We have with us Mr. Tony Lauritzen, Chief Executive Officer and Mr. Michael Gregos, Chief Financial Officer of the company. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. [Operator Instructions] I must advise you that this conference is being recorded today. And at this time, I would like to read the Safe Harbor statement. This conference call and the slide presentation of the webcast contain certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Safe Harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Investors are cautioned that such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties which may affect Dynagas LNG Partners’ business prospects and results of operations. Such risks are more fully disclosed in Dynagas LNG Partners filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. And I now pass the floor to Mr. Lauritzen. Please go ahead, sir.

Good morning, everyone and thank you for joining us in our third quarter ended 30 September 2017 earnings conference call. I am joined today by our CFO, Michael Gregos. We have issued a press release announcing our results for the said period. Certain non-GAAP measures will be discussed on this call. We have provided a description of those measures, as well as a discussion of why we believe this information to be useful in our press release. The earnings for the financial quarter ended September 30, 2017 were within our expectations. There were particular cost items that fell into this quarter that affected the results. One of our vessels completed special survey in this quarter and one of our vessels to Clean Energy was trading successfully however on a relatively weak short-term market. Turning to Slide 2, the Amur River commenced our 5-year special survey in the second quarter and completed the same in the third quarter. We are satisfied that the class surveys included dry dockings were completed quickly and efficiently with only 15 days between arrival to departure at the repair yard. Amur River is on a 5-year special survey cycle like the rest of our fleets, meaning one would expect about 5 years until her next scheduled dry docking. In April 2017, the Clean Energy became available for employment at which time we entered into two consecutive short-term charters with Gazprom to employ the vessels through the end of August 2017. Following the expiration of these charters, the vessel is employed on an additional short-term charter with Petrochina and will continue to be employed on the short-term market until her 8-year contract with Gazprom from July 2018. Although we have been successful in employing the Clean Energy on the short-term market, the market was although improving weaker than her long term charter. Our adjusted EBITDA for the period was reported at $26.4 million with corresponding adjusted income of $7 million. The Partnership reported a net income of $4 million which includes $1.1 million of scheduled class surveys and dry dock costs for the Amur River. Distributable cash flow was reported at $11.3 million. A quarterly cash distribution for the third quarter of 2017 of $0.4225 per common unit was paid on October 19, 2017. The cash distribution is equal to an increase of 15.8% over the Partnership’s minimum quarterly distribution per unit. The Partnership paid on November 13, 2017 a cash distribution of $0.5625 for each of its Series A Preferred Units from the period from August 12, 2017 to November 13, 2017. Distributions on the Series A Preferred Units will be payable quarterly on the 12th day of February, May, August and November at an equivalent of $0.5625 per unit provided the same is declared by the Partnership’s Board of Directors. I will now turn the presentation over to Michael who will provide you with further comments to the financial results.

Thank you, Tony. Turning to Slide 3 of the presentation, our revenues were higher in Q3 at 33.4 million compared to 32 million for Q2, however significantly lower compared to revenues of 43 million in Q3 of 2016. Our results for the quarter were impacted by the one-off charge of $1.1 million related to the fact that one of our vessels completed its special survey in dry dock in the third quarter and the lower revenues attributable to the Clean Energy, which is the only vessel in our fleet currently trading in the short-term market pending delivery into an 8-year charter next year. Comparing Q2 2017 to Q3 2017, we see an increase of 38% in distributable cash flow and 15% in adjusted EBITDA primarily due to the fact that we had 542 available days in Q3 versus 507 in Q2 as a result of less dry docking days and the higher utilization rates on the Clean Energy in Q3. The decline in our Q3 2017 results compared to our Q3 2016 results is as we have mentioned before and natural evolution of the partnership as it evolves from term charters with higher rates and shorter duration to contracts with longer charter duration and lower charter rates. For the quarter our average fleet cash daily charter rate amounted to $65,200 per day and utilization of 97% versus $66,900 per day and utilization of 95% for Q2. Our cash breakeven for the quarter excluding dry docks and cash distributions to our common and preferred unit holders amounted to about $37,300 per day and if we include dry docks in distributions to common and preferred unit holders, cash breakeven amounts to about $70,000 per day per vessel. We expected our gross cash time charter rate for our fleet will be around $66,000…

Thank you, Michael. Let’s move on to Slide 8 to summarize the Partnership’s profile. Our fleet currently accounts 6 high specification and versatile LNG carriers with an average age of about 7.3 years in an industry where expected useful economic lifetime is 35 years. We have a diversified customer base with substantial energy companies namely Gazprom, Statoil, Petrochina and Yamal LNG, which the latter is a joint venture between Total, CNPC, Novatek, and the Silk Road Fund. Our contract backlog is about $1.46 billion and our average remaining charter period is about 10.1 years which compares well versus our peers. Our vessels have also served customers such as Shell, Qatargas, RasGas, Marubeni, Woodside, CPC, North West Shelf and several other major oil and gas companies. We therefore have a large customer base that we are able to contract with. Moving on to Slide 9, our fleet of LNG carriers are largely fixed on long-term charters with strong and reputable energy companies. Drivers for these charters were the characteristics of the fleet including its ice class notations and our organization’s track record. The contractual relationship between our customers and the vessels are on a time charter party basis. Under a time charter party, the charterer pays a fixed day rate to the owner regardless if the vessel is being used or not and all major variable costs such as fuel cost are for the charterer’s account. There are also no early termination rights for convenience for the charterer. Therefore and coupled with our multiyear employment profile, the Partnership enjoys visible and stable contract revenues that are not directly affected by oil or gas prices. We have minimum capital requirements, which provides significant free cash flows. Compared to other shipping segments, LNG shipping is the highly industrial segment where owners and charterers…

Thank you very much indeed. [Operator Instructions] And your first question from Stifel comes from the line of Ben Nolan. And your line is now open sir.

Yes. Thanks. Hey, Tony, Michael a couple of questions. First, I was going to see if you could maybe shed a little light on where things stand with respect to the recontracting of the Arctic Aurora, Statoil has been in the market whether tender on that, and just curious if you could shed some light on where it stands and how you think about employment in that vessel?

Thank you very much for that question. As you may know that is the Statoil requirement is a tender process. So far Statoil has not concluded that tender. So I guess we will be able rather to share some light on that in the coming weeks.

Okay. And then secondly as it relates to Yamal vessel, obviously it sounds like they are going to be loading a cargo imminently which is as far as I have heard it actually a little ahead of schedule when thinking through when your vessels go on contract, is there an opportunity for some of those contracts to maybe start at the front end of the delivery period or maybe even earlier than the scheduled delivery period?

Yes, thank you very much Ben for that question. Well, I mean we have the same understanding as you that Yamal is very much on time and rather accelerating their shipping demand. I think time will show how they will sort out their shipping needs that maybe potentially earlier than the contracts that we have with them. So, we think these are natural questions that Yamal will need to address in the near future.

Okay. And then just two more quick ones then actually it’s been in the news, you guys placed an order for FSRUs in China or the parent company placed orders for FSRUs and China didn’t see a mention of that in here. But could you maybe talk through how you think of that and how it might correlate to the – eventually to the partnership and are there contracts on those vessels?

Yes, thank you. So, there are no contracts on those vessels. These are orders without employment and how they relate to the partnership I think we also need to address going forward.

Okay. And then lastly for me this is sort of a more broad-based question, Tony, you made a comment along the lines of thinking through distributions on a go forward basis, are you going to marry them or partner where it’s going to be reflective I guess of the distributable cash flow. Obviously, the distributable cash flow in the near-term has been coming down a little bit. Is it – should I take that to mean that if as the distributable cash flow is a little bit less that you might think about ratcheting back the distribution a little bit as well?

Yes, hi, Ben, this is Michael. I think in our call earlier, we outlined the operating factors which will affect, let’s say, how much distributable cash flow we are going to generate in the near-term and in the longer term. We have some pretty good visibility. But there are some moving parts out there. At the end of the day, there are many things that we can look at when we look at coverage ratio and distributable cash flow, because we can only pay that the cash distributions which reflect how much money our ships are actually making. So, I don’t think the board or us are in a position to make a decision on that at this particular stage, because we feel relatively comfortable. We could do a dropdown which depend on the situation. We could buy third-party assets. There are many things that could be done. So, I think that’s where we stand at this particular point.

Okay, that’s helpful. And I said it was last, but with respect to dropdown, I mean, it’s been a while since you have done one and I think cost of capital has one of the issues, where do you stand in that respect now?

Well, I don’t think anything has really changed given our cost of capital doing a dropdown from our sponsor is a challenge. So, I think if everything else remains unchanged that would be – that would be relatively unlikely. So we are open to look at other type of acquisitions or deals, which could be more accretive to distributable cash flow in the longer term. So we’re very open-minded and flexible in that respect.

Okay, alright. I appreciate it. I’ll turn it over. Thanks.

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

Yes. Hi, guys and thank you. Just want to follow up on the previous question about the drop downs. First of all, what would be the order of this dropdowns, how are you going to view the fully owned vessels by response or in terms of priority versus the other Yamal vessels the Arc-7 that they are only 50%. And if you can give us an idea of how we are going to think of the dropdown prices given the fact that some of their own vessels they are little bit older than the new building of the Yamal vessels?

Yes. Hi, Fotis. I think that goes back to what I was saying before that in order to dropdown and make the numbers work given our cost of capital that the multiple is going to have to be very, very low. And that’s – that means the price would have to be something that the sponsor would have to consider it would more certainly have to be a book los from the sponsor side. And that’s the consideration of the sponsor would have to make. So I think that’s – that’s part of the challenge. Now in terms of priority, which vessel, yes now we’re going to have – we have the Clean Ocean and we were very eminently going to have the 2 Arc-7s, which are coming online and we’ll just – we’ll just have to see it’s hard to say which if – if the windows are open and our yield improved significantly and it make sense, which of these vessels will be dropdown.

Thank you, Michael. My understanding from your answer is that the sponsor would be willing or will be open to consider a sale at the book loss or are there any other alternatives in order to help the partnership with the issue of its cost of capital, for example, taking some preferred or some other form of capital, which is not going to be that as expensive as the common equity capital. Any thoughts on that?

Absolutely. Everything will be considered. I cannot speak for the sponsor on whether the sponsor will take a big loss, because that’s something which is sponsor would have to decide and I presume this would not be a very easy decision, but I think at the end of the day the sponsor is very supportive of the partnership and will consider any – any option that you know can make the partnership in the more robust financial condition even more than there is now which it is already in the very robust condition.

Thank you, Michael. That’s very clear. Can you also comment about how you think of the refinancing of the unsecured notes – do you think that we should model it, is it a new unsecured note or this is going to be something that will be played out through the dropdowns?

As I said before, we will be proactive in addressing the maturity of this note. Most likely, it will be refinancing with another unsecured notes. So, it’s a watch the space situation, but we are proactively looking at something there.

Thank you. One last question for Tony, regarding the market, Tony, we have seen spectacular improvement of the short-term market. I am wondering how much of this improvement is seasonal, how much of this improvement is because of the fundamental tightening of the market? What shall we expect in the short-term market beyond the winter? And if you have seen improved activity in the period market either the aggregators or end users looking to charter vessels under period contracts in any meaningful way?

Yes, thank you. Thank you, Fotis for that question. Look, we last year at about the same time we also saw a spike in the market. At that time, the spike was largely driven by an arbitrage between the Pacific and the Atlantic. Now, we are seeing a much – what appears to be a much broader improvement, which is driven by first of all, supply of LNG. There is substantial increase in LNG output that needs to be transported somewhere. We see a lot of these issues in the Middle East that are keeping oil prices and oil prices relatively high compared to what it used to be and then now. And then we see significant buying interest in the Far East, in particular, from China. China is really importing LNG beyond what most people had. So, it seems like the improvement this time around versus last year is broader and more robust and we think it will last in a much longer period going forward in particular, because supply of LNG keeps increasing every quarter now. And we can only look at the forward curve and then we get a quick – very quick reaffirmation that all this LNG is coming. Of course, there are a number of ships that are also being constructed which will be delivered during next year, but we have reasons to believe given the broadness of the improvement in the market that this is here to last for longer period.

Thank you very much, Tony. Thank you, Michael.

Thank you very much indeed, sir. And as there are no further questions in the queue, we shall pass the floor back for closing remarks.

So, we would like to thank you all for your time and for listening in on our earnings call and we look forward to speaking with you again on our next call. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much indeed gentlemen. And that does conclude our conference today. Thank you all for participating and we may now disconnect. Thank you, Mr. Gregos, Mr. Lauritzen.