Welcome to the U.S. Global Investors webcast; U.S. Global Investors Earnings Announcement for Third Quarter 2013. Please note that the slides you see on your screen are controlled by the presenters. You may submit questions during the webcast. Simply enter your question in the dialogue box at the bottom of the screen and click submit. Also, you may download a PDF of today's slides by clicking on the resources tab and the tab center area of your screen. You can switch back to the presentation slides by clicking the slide tab. We would like to begin by introducing Susan Filyk, Investor Relations at the U.S. Global Investors. Ms. Filyk.

Thank you. Welcome everyone to our webcast announcing results for the third quarter ended March 31, 2013. The presenters for today’s program are Frank Holmes, U.S. Global Investors’ CEO and Chief Investment Officer; Susan McGee, President and General Counsel, and Catherine Rademacher, Chief Financial Officer. During the webcast, we may make forward-looking statements about our relative business outlook. Any forward-looking statements and all other statements made during this webcast that don’t pertain to historical facts are subject to risks and uncertainties that may materially affect actual results. Please refer to our press release and corresponding Form 10-Q filing for more detail on factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from any others described today in forward-looking statements. Any such statements are made as of today and U.S. Global Investors accepts no obligation to update them in the future. If you have a question for us you can submit it at anytime during the webcast. Simply type your question in the dialogue box at the bottom of the screen and click submit. If we aren't able to answer your question during the live presentation, we will follow up with you individually. Now let's go to Frank Holmes, CEO and CIO, for an overview of the quarter. Frank?

Thank you, Susan. As forward-looking statements, passed okay. Well, sorry about the delay; we’ve been getting this presentation going. We got as seem to be a period we lost on the loop and I am happy we're on slide now and I am going to try to speak quickly so that we don’t waste any time because we're big believers that time is money. So the U.S. Global is a boutique publicly listed investment advisor, specializing in gold, natural resources and emerging market opportunities around the world. Our strengths are, we're go-to stock for exposure to emerging markets and resources. We're debt-free, strong balance sheet with reflexive cost structure and we pay a monthly dividend and our focus on a return on equity discipline. Our top institutional holders of growth, The Royce Funds with 15%, Financial Investment Management Group, 14%, Perritt Capital Management with 4% and Fidelity Research, 4% and Team Financial Managers 4%. What is interesting for some investors that Sun America was a large shareholder with a change of the guard of their portfolio manager, the new portfolio manager didn’t want to own micro caps, so they’ve been selling their position out this past quarter and I think they better start; in fact they put some additional pressure on GROW. But that’s behind us now and we have a new audience of shareholders and we have had some of our existing shareholders increase the position. When we take a look back at GROW, our market cap is just under $60 million. We're proud of still that over the past decade, our annualized compound rate of return is over 15% and our focus as I will mention through the presentation is what does it take to improve our returns in capital over a three-year running basis or 36 months…

Thanks, Frank. Good morning. I want to just summarize our financials and beginning on page 26. We reported total revenues of $4.77 million for the quarter, that’s down 13.8% from $5.54 million we reported for the same quarter last year primarily for the following reasons. In total, mutual fund advisory fees did increase by 262,000 or 9.2% compared to the same quarter last year, but keep in mind the two main components of the advisory fees are management fee and performance fees. The performance fees of 109,000 were received from the funds during the current quarter, compared to 1.1 million that was paid out to the funds during the comparable quarter of the prior year for an increase in performance fees of 1.2 million year-over-year. However, offsetting the increase in performance fees was $984,000 decrease in mutual fund management fees as a result of lower assets under management. Also, investment income decreased by 481,000 or 104% primarily due to unrealized losses on trading security. Our distribution fee revenue declined by 268,000 or 28% also due to lower assets and transfer agents fee revenues decreased by 195,000 or 23% as a result of the decline in the number of shareholder accounts and transaction. Moving to the next page, total expenses for the quarter were 4.69 million, a decrease of 56,000 or 1.2% and first platform fees decreased by 212,000 or 24% as a result of lower assets held through the broker dealer platform. Secondly, employee compensation benefit did decline by 77,000 or 3.3%, primarily as a result of lower performance based bonuses. Somewhat offsetting these expense reductions advertising increased by 187,000 as a result of lower than normal activity in the prior year. On next page, we show net income for the quarter of 41,000, as Frank said flat that compared…

Thank you, Catherine. And thank you for our shareholders for listening and I’d like to take just a couple of minutes to go over two significant events that occurred over the past quarter. U.S. Global value is to be performance and results oriented. And to that end, we are proud of the many Lipper awards certificate and [mindful] that accumulated since 2000. Our vision for the firm is to make people feel financially happy and secured and that their wealth is consistently growing and each of those illustrates how we have accomplished that for our shareholders over the long term. In addition over the past quarter, the funds maintained their long-term outstanding record among Lipper’s entire universe of nearly 10,000 mutual funds. And as of end of the quarter, four of our funds were ranked in the top 10% over ten years. Four of our funds also have an overall rating of three or four stars according to Morningstar. At the end of the quarter, the near term tax free fund was rated four stars. The Gold and Precious Metals Fund was the four star fund and the funds with three stars included the Global Resources Fund and the All American Equity Fund. Our focus on education also has been nationally recognized. Our marketing and investment teams have received numerous awards for excellent in education and we do look at as a goal to inform our investors and advisor universe that are out there. We do think that as Frank mentioned the ETFs will help us to better monetize about thought leadership like Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn have helped us and other companies to monetize our brand. Two publications that have received awards here are free weekly e-newsletters. Each Friday our investor alert and advisor alert are emailed to investors…

Thank you, Susan. So in this visual I would like to point out to people is this whole idea this concept of managing expectations and like to us to try to make this objective as possible and really like to go back to the past decade and we look at the yearly volatility which is the math and what you can see is the non-event 70% of the time, it’s a non-event for growth to rise over 100% over 12 months and they can correct 50%. Its just recognizing why is that, well, we are known for our gold funds and gold funds have a plus or minus volatility of 35%. Oil has a plus or minus volatility of 35%. That means it is 70% of the time a non-event for those asset classes that rise 35% over 12 months or fall 35%. Interestingly, enough bullion is less volatile than the S&P 500. Emerging markets is plus or minus 30%. Well, our big revenue generators are gold funds, resources, our emerging euro fund, these are all significant in generating revenue, but the underlying asset classes themselves have an inherent volatility that we ignore and so we are very cognizant of having a very reflexive cost structure where salaries are low and bonuses are tied into fund performance and asset levels. And that's how we manage our world and we've also done that and we’ll log on the next visuals card counting. You can't do as in Vegas, but you can do it in the capital market and that's what's makes us so exciting as managing expectations and we like to share with investors anticipate and participate how often is GROW as a company gone up 10% or fallen 10% and the frequency of this taking n place over any 20…

Thank you, Frank. Now we will take some questions. To ask a question please type your question in the dialogue box at the bottom of the screen and click submit.

One of the questions, I would like to share this with Susan and now Susan is institutional class was lowered to $1 million to be more competitive. Are you seeing any success with that and your expense ratios are higher than average is that because of you also have many small retail investors and do you advocate that they have 5% in gold equities that just basically when you take a look at the average retail investors that means you are going to have small accounts and the regulatory costs are higher. Is that reason why or is there other factors?

On the first question yes we did lower than minimum account balance on our three institutional share classes from $5 million to $1 million and that has been very successful, particularly with the advisors out there. They do like to deploy a little bit of money at a time and the $1 million minimum allowed them to meet some of their investing strategy. And on that note we are going to be adding institutional classes to two more of our funds, the golden precious metals fund and the emerging euro fund. So those should be available at the end of the summer and then on the expense ratio as we do pay particular attention to the fund expenses trying to keep expenses as low as possible, and on small funds it is a challenge. We have some fixed expenses that are spread over a small asset base and therefore these two higher expense ratios and what we would prefer. As Frank mentioned earlier in the presentation, we do have a significant retail base and a significant direct retail base and these investors tend to have smaller accounts. So smaller accounts tend to drive those expenses that are related to transfer agency costs.

Thank you. I have some other questions here. Will Galileo funds be available to US investors later? We will consider that definitely. Their model of monthly dividend paying small cap value is very attractive to us and so we're looking at that. At the same time we're looking at that relationship and it's going to, as we mentioned earlier, at BTS, who will be a better model for us coming out with that. The next one is do you own some BRK shares? (Inaudible) reasons. So if it's not in the top 10 holdings, I am sorry, we can’t comment on that. Can you talk what the offshore funds are? I hear ones there was a dividend. One of the funds are dividend oriented and so one of the part there is having, it's a different model marketing offshore funds and so we are focused on that on a monthly dividends for that fund by having a small fund of 5.5 million. The expense ratios are higher, so those expense ratios are going to drop, demand is going to drop. Any management (inaudible) so that they remain very competitive and attractive. So that they can be able to pay out that 6% yield of 50 basis points a month. So that’s something that we’ve had conversations with. We are sub-advisors of those funds to the group in Bermuda. Timeline for EPS (inaudible) roll-outs, will it be replicating current open end strategies. Well the timeline is subject to regulatory process. Correct Susan.

That it takes 9 to 10 months to get through the regulatory process for [ETF].

And we hope to have things filed by the end of this month for that and I think when it comes to looking at that. It would be similar but I think when you go to rules based, you create a little more boundaries and I guess there is greater opportunities such as I don’t know exactly what the ideas because one of the things in the space of ETFs is personal advantage is critical and how you bifurcate, your need that one of things that really woke us up was just seeing PIMCO’s Total Return Fund. We could not off their mutual fund with ETF and bring in $10 billion of assets. You can have a lower management fee because you don't have enough paying 40 basis points all up to a distribution platform fees. So automatically you are more attractive for those retail investors and it seems that’s where investors are going for growth. So will it replicate? Yes, but not a 100% because the rules based still gives us that flexibility to be able to rebalance and we have to make sure they had a unique aspect that they are going to the assets and that’s going outperform. So when it comes to gold, our job will be outperformance, the big HUI Gold Index and the GDXJ. We are seeing like the GDXJ is just phenomenal that gold stocks that never meet our fundamental models, go up only because of money folks, that’s all, and you want to be cognizant of it and we follow performance and (inaudible) going to GDXJ, we see the dogs in that ETF rising with nothing to do with the work we have done on fundamentals only because of money flows. So we have to become very cognizant, so we think having that ETF that we will be able to much more easily compete and beat that ETF and attract assets for it. And I think the ETF suite management fees will be at the same price, lower price, there will be price that will be competitive, that’s a key for you, it's been competitive. But we find it really quite interesting that many of the MLPs even the new bond funds we saw come out are 85 basis points management fees and they are not paying this platform fees. So if you are at 85 basis points, it doesn't really take that many assets, I think Susan we calculated that you need $20 million and 85 basis points to breakeven.

And 20 to 70.

And if you are going at 40 basis points you need something like $50 million, the 40 basis points you need something like $40 million of breakeven on those types of products but we are not going to just give it away because we are going to be active, we are going to have to active basis, so we can’t turnaround and just make it to compete with [Eye Rock] shares but we do believe that in our model because we are back testing it we think before we come out with it for going back five years, 10 years looking at different cycles that we will have a competitive advantage because that’s most important thing investors. Other questions, Susan.

Thank you for the questions. This concludes U.S. Global Investors earnings webcast for the third quarter of 2013. This presentation will be available for replay on our website at usfunds.com. Thank you all for your participation today.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's conference. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.