Good afternoon, and welcome to the Golub Capital BDC Inc.’s June 30, 2015 Quarterly Earnings Conference Call. Before we begin, I would like to take a moment to remind our listeners that remarks made during this call may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements other than statements of historical facts made during this call may constitute forward-looking statements and are not guarantees of future performance or results and involve a number of risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including those described from time-to-time in Golub Capital BDC Inc.’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. For a slide presentation that we intend to refer to you on the earnings conference call, please visit the Investor Resources tab on the homepage of our Web site, www.golubcapitalbdc.com and click on the Events/Presentation's link to find the June 30, 2015 Investor Presentation. Golub Capital BDC's earnings release is also available on the Company's Web site in the Investor Resources section. As a reminder, this call is being recorded for replay purposes. I will now turn the call over to David Golub, Chief Executive Officer of Golub Capital BDC. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Martin. Good morning everybody and thanks for joining us today. I'm joined at Golub Capital’s offices by Ross Teune, our Chief Financial Officer and Gregory Robbins, Managing Director here. Yesterday evening we issued our quarterly earnings press release for the quarter ended June 30th and we also posted a supplemental earnings presentation on our Web site. We’re going to be referring to the presentation throughout today’s call. I'm going to start by giving an overview of the June 30, 2015 quarterly financial results. And then going to hand the microphone to Ross who is going to take you through quarterly financial results in more detail and then I am going to come back at the end and talk about our strategy in the current environment and provide some closing remarks. Let me start with highlights, in short the quarter was very strong. Company generated solid earnings in excess of our dividend. We succeeded in our goal deploying the capital we raised in the April offering quickly and in solid new loans and without any earnings dilution. We grew our Senior Loan Fund meaningfully as we’ve been talking about has been our goal and our credit performance was excellent. Let me dive into some of the details. Net increase in net assets for the quarter or net income was 18.3 million or $0.36 a share that compares to 17.9 million or $0.38 a share for the quarter ended March 31st. GAAP net investment income for the quarter was 15.2 million or $0.30 a share excluding a $700,000 GAAP accrual for the capital gains incentive fee. NII was 15.9 million or $0.32 per share. That compares to 14.8 million or $0.31 a share in the prior quarter. We’re providing you with NII per share excluding the GAAP capital gains incentive…

Great. Thanks, David. Starting on Slide 4 as David mentioned we had total originations of $401.4 million and total exists and sales of investments of $233.6 million, including the 233.6 million is 93.8 million of sales of senior secured loans to senior loan fund. Subject to our approval by a partner in senior loan fund we plan to continue to sell senior secured loans to this fund in the future to enhance returns on these lower yielding, lower risk investments. Overall net investments growth for the quarter was 147.6 million. 13% of the new commitments were in traditional senior secured investments, 78% one-stops, 8% in senior loan fund and 1% in equity co-investments. Turning to Slide 5, these four charts provide a breakdown of the portfolio by investment type industry classification, size, and whether it's fixed versus floating rate. Looking first at the chart at the top left hand side, we saw slight increases in the percentage of both one-stop investments, as well as in our investment in senior loan fund. These increases were offset by a decrease in traditional senior secured loans. These modest changes between the investment categories are consistent with us originating a higher percentage of one-stop investments this quarter, as well as the impact of selling loans traditional senior secured loans from GBDC to senior loan fund. Regards to industry diversification the portfolio remains well diversified by industry. There has been no significant changes in the industry classifications over the past few years. We continue to focus on investing in highly resilient companies with sustainable revenues and EBITDA, and companies with a relatively low cyclicality and low sensitivity to commodity prices. And looking at the charts on the right hand side, the investment portfolio remains diversified by investment size and our debt investment portfolio remains predominantly…

Thanks Ross. We think one of the marks of being a good partner is thinking about things from your partners’ perspective and to that end as we were preparing for today's call we thought about what we would want to ask if we were on this call and we came up with two key questions that I want to talk briefly about right now. The first one is anything changing in your strategy and the second is why have originations been so robust? Let me start with the first one. Is anything changing in our strategy? And the short answer is no. Our strategy is continuing to do more the same. We plan to maintain our asset focus on senior secured loans in one-stops and to maintain balance sheet leverage at about current levels. We plan to as Ross said continue to grow our senior loan fund with the support of our partner RGA, including by selling select lower yielding senior secured assets that are on balance sheet now to SLF and we will then replace those assets with higher yielding one-stops. We see a yield expansion opportunity with this strategy. And we plan to grow only if growing makes sense this isn’t new we have said many times that we’re going to issue new equity if and only if we think it's good for existing shareholders and new shareholders. One of the advantages we have at Golub Capital is that we have a very extensive platform we manage over $15 billion we have ample dry powder and other vehicles so we don’t need GBDC to grow at any particular point in time. In fact our Board at its most recent meeting renewed our share repurchase program so we can buy back shares if it makes sense to do so…

And thank you very much. [Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from the line of Jonathon Bock, Wells Fargo Securities. Please go ahead.

Hi guys it's Fin O'Shea for Jon Bock, thank you. Just one small question first was from a top line perspective was this quarter impacted at all in timing as in early repayments and late originations or was this a pretty clean top line yield?

We had a significant amount of deal closing activity in the month of June. So I’d say there was some disproportionate weighting of new activity towards the tail end of the quarter.

And then a more general question, as you move sort of looking at portfolio yields you have been moving out marketing and with commentary today you are at least not going to loosened your standards so would this impact your ability or even willingness to make equity co-investments which have been a good contributor to your credit performance in the past?

We've always been selective about making equity co-investments. We continue to use the same mentality and approach that we have historically used Fin so I think we have never counted on equity gains as being central to our strategy. I don’t anticipate that changing in the future.

And our next question comes from the line of Troy Ward. Please go ahead.

Hi David if you could just speak a little bit about we constantly have heard how banks are pulling back and how that affects the market, but obviously with GE Capital pulling out I think it might be even more direct impact on your business. Can you speak to that a little bit and also what do you think the long-term ramifications of such a big player moving out of your competitive ranks?

Sure so to just refresh the fact set for everybody on the call GE Capital determined in the early part of last quarter that they were going to divest a series of businesses in an effort to help GE achieve the status of no longer being a SIFY or Systemically Important Financial Institution and over the course of the quarter GE put its middle market lending business GE Antares up for sale GE Antares has as I understand it have been sold per contract but the deal has not yet closed to Canadian Pension Plan so I think first of all most important thing is GE Antares isn’t going away it is going to continue to exist under Canadian Pension Plan’s ownership we have a lot of respect and admiration for our colleagues at Antares. We think they are very good at what they do we do a lot of business with them we anticipate continuing to do a lot of business with them in their new capacity. I think that this is more a story of continuity than of change. There is however one important change that will come with the transaction. We predicted and we were right that the middle market lending business would be sold to a non-bank player and Canadian Pension Plan is a non-bank player and they are financing their acquisition of Antares in a manner consistent with a non-bank which means specifically in this case they are financing it with a large amounts of loans from banks and in particular loans that are led by Deutsche Bank and Credit Suisse. So their cost of capital in their new ownership models is going to be meaningfully higher than it was when they could just call GE headquarters in Fairfield and say send money it's nice to have a triple A bank parent to be able to call and say send money it is a bit like being to the camp I would like that, but as an independent company they are no longer going to be able to do that, so we anticipate that not having access to the inexpensive financing that the GE has long had is going to be a strategic disadvantage and Antares is going to need to learn how to manage and they will and they are not going away and we anticipate there will be some opportunities for us to gain some share but we don’t anticipate this is going to be a gargantuan change.

But longer term based on your cost to funding commentary it would seem to be all else equal that should lead to maybe potentially flood in water spreads for the assets in the future?

There is an argument that says that first let me give you a counter argument which is the GE Antares business has long had a strategy of being mostly a syndicator in another words they arrange new loans they keep a piece but mostly they sell the rest of it to other buyers so they have historically needed to place their originations at a level that would enable them to find willing buyers to purchase the remaining part of the loan. And my expectation is that in their new ownership they are going to continue with the strategy of being mostly in the syndication business. So I think there maybe some reason for some modest pressure on spreads upward pressure but I don’t know that it's going to be that meaningful again I think our judgment is more continuity than change.

Just kind of along that theme but stepping down from the big players in the space going by what you are talking about syndication and such are you seeing any with all of the other things going on in the space and particularly in the BDC space where folks have been more capital constrained. Are you seeing any higher degree of maybe books available out there loan packages not necessarily from the BDC but from maybe other players I mean what's and what's your appetite when you think about potential for getting a portfolio of loans from another lender.

So we've always been interested in being a potential buyer for portfolios of loans that become available and in our experience this tends to be a cyclical opportunity and what I mean by that is that some lenders get themselves into trouble in downturns often the trouble isn’t necessarily that the underlying loans that they've purchased are going bad often the problem is that they've financed their loan portfolio with some kind of mismatched inappropriately short-term financing that blows up on them so during the last downturn we were an active buyer of loans and portfolios of loans in the last couple of years there has been relatively little activity in the space could that change, sure I think we’re more likely to see a significant uptick though after the credit cycle turns.

And our next question comes from the line of Doug Mewhirter. Please go ahead.

My question about GE Capital was answered very completely I just one other question regarding the senior loan fund, and I know there is a -- the entirety it seems to be from asset class the entirety of the growth of the senior loan fund has been from Golub selling assets, first lien assets into the fund, do you anticipate the fund to have more organic growth in the future or will you continue to use Golub the sort of a conduit where you are sort of the away-station for assets before they get sent to the fund or some combination?

I think some combination is going to be the right answer.

And do you think that the -- when do you anticipate that the fund being more of an organic originator of loans in proportion to its total growth?

I am not sure I understand your question.

Where the fund -- when will the fund start adding I guess meaningful assets to it directly rather than going through Golub like you did this quarter?

Honest answer, not sure, we right now have significant on balance sheet assets that are lower yielding that we think are appropriate candidates for consideration by ourselves and by our partner to be sold to SLF, we also think there maybe circumstances that arise in the future where it makes sense for SLF to consider purchases other than from GBDC’s balance sheet. So I think we’re going to be opportunistic on that front.

And just could you just remind me what the capacity for Golub to invest in the sub-notes and equity is what the sort of the term loan capacity is right now in the SLF?

Well, I can answer it in the hypothetical and in the practical. So in the hypothetical this investment in SLF is subject to the 30% limitation we are very, very, very far from the 30% limitation right now, the 30% limitation would be in excess of $400 million investment by Golub Capital in SLF, right now we’re under 100 million. Practically speaking right now, we’re limited by what we think is the right pace of growth for SLF because the ability to increase the GBDC investment in SLF is at our discretion obviously in cooperation with RGA.

And our next question comes from the line of Leslie Vandergrift with Raymond James. Go ahead.

I just had a quick question about the yield on the SLF going down quarter-over-quarter the total return. You mentioned some unrealized offers on some middle market and probably syndicated loans in there I was curious if you could give some color over if those are one off or something we need to be looking at further just a little bit more information in detail there?

There is going to be some natural volatility in the ROE of SLF from quarter-to-quarter, I don’t think there is anything to worry about there if that’s your question are there any pending credit blow ups in there, we don’t see anything that is on the horizon.

I guess a bit specifically with this quarter going down was it ones that you had just sold down or were these from when you were just moving with the SLF to begin these recent unrealized offers obviously it has been volatile and it's been increasing in the past few quarters over and over, but the decrease in annualized total return for this quarter what was the issue there?

There is quite a few kind of broadly syndicated loans in there and a broadly syndicated loan market has been a little kind of volatile quarter-over-quarter and so there were a handful of marks done on deals that went from 99.5 down to 99 and then kind of one or two middle market names that they have brought down one or two. So, again as David mentioned there is nothing here that hit our watch list or we feel hasn’t permanent impairment of any sort it was just being kind of a handful of marks that went down.

Okay, all right. Thank you.

Yes, and again we do risk rated loans here we have -- just have that here, but again 95% of loans have risk rating of four or five within SLF as well very similar to GBDC.

[Operator Instructions] Our next question comes from the line of Cliff Rackson with Rackson Asset Management. Please go ahead.

I wonder if you could talk a little bit about the impact of the LIBOR floor in association with interest rates, short rates going up over the next three months to a year. What LIBOR, is it three months LIBOR or one month LIBOR or you have had to and how much of those that have to go up for to begin to impact your spreads between the rate you're getting and the rate you are paying with this all so some of it is LIBOR based?

So I am going to answer that question, I think it would be useful if the folks could flip to Page 14 for my answer, so let's talk about the asset side first. On the asset side virtually all of our assets are floating rate and virtually all of those assets are subject to LIBOR floors in most cases the LIBOR floor is 1%. There are few that are lower a few that are a little higher but most of them are 1%. So very specifically increases in LIBOR between where it is at now and 1% will not result in increase in interest income, so small increases in LIBOR actually hurt us a little bit from an earnings standpoint. There is a chart on Page 85 of the 10-Q which actually shows you some sensitivity analysis that relate to this question. On the liability side we have primarily LIBOR denominated debt. Our SBIC debt which you can see at the bottom of Page 14 is it sticks at roughly 3.7% but the predominant portion of our debt is LIBOR denominated in general it is a three month LIBOR and so to hit the headline here, the headline is that increases in LIBOR from where we are now to about 1% modestly bad for GBDC increases over 1% quite good for GBDC with almost a one-to-one relationship between increase in GBDC’s, ROE and increases in LIBOR?

And gentlemen there are no further questions

Well, thanks everybody again for joining us this afternoon, and enjoy its nice debate. Take care.