Welcome to the Globalstar, Inc. Third Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call. My name is Beyanka [ph] and I'll be your operator for today's call. At this time all participants are in a listen-only mode, later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session, please note that this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the call over to your host Mr. Jay Monroe Chairman and CEO. Mr. Monroe you may begin.

Good afternoon everyone and thank you for joining the third quarter earnings call. I’d like to start today’s call by welcoming Kenny Young as the newest member of Globalstar’s Board of Directors. Kenny joined us from LLC, where he served as President and CEO. LCC is the world’s largest independent wireless infrastructure engineering and services company with over 8,000 employees operating in 51 countries. Penny is going to be a significant asset for Globalstar as we continue to build up the company’s geographical presence in consumer and B2B distribution channels and will be a valuable resource as we evaluate PLPS infrastructure and partnership opportunities. On today’s call I’ll provide an update on both the regulatory and operational front followed by a review of the quarterly financial results provided by Rebecca. We’ll then conclude with Q&A where Tim Taylor will join us. Please note this call contains forward-looking statements and tended to fall within the Safe Harbor provided under the security laws factors that could cause results to differ materially are described in the forward-looking statements section of today’s press release and in Globarstar’s SEC filings. The activity in the TLPS proceeding was comparatively mile during the summer months of July and August, but the milestone event for the quarter was our submission of a seminal ex parte filing in early September. This filing provided a summary of TLPS testing over a three month period in Chicago testing conducted by our technical advisors Roberson and Associates. While there has been extensive data submitted into the record to-date this filing was the first to highlight the capacity expanding opportunity in a real world uncontrolled RF environment precisely what the SEC asked us to do. To summarize the data in our 40 page ex parte by adding TLPS to existing 2.4 Wi-Fi networks.…

Thank you, Jay and good afternoon everyone. As Jay mentioned, we continue to experience significant growth in our subscriber base, driven by expansion in new and legacy international markets and attractive equipment pricing. Today, I will go over the primary factors impacting our key operating metrics and will also provide an update on our liquidity positions. First, as shown on slide 13, total revenue increased slightly compared to the prior year’s quarter. We continue to show meaningful growth in our subscriber base [Indiscernible] reported this increase, however although average Duplex, SPOT and Simplex subscribers increased substantially by 18%, 11% and 12% respectively as compared to the third quarter of 2014 continued pressure on revenue from currency effects and a decrease in equipment selling prices has offset this growth. Total service revenue increased 6% during the third quarter of 2015 compared to the prior year’s quarter driven primarily by higher service revenue from our SPOT subscriber base, which grew a 11% on average from the third quarter of 2014. Growth SPOT subscriber additions in market outside of North America which were up over 50% during the last 12 months ended September 30, 2015 compared to the prior year period propelled this growth. Additionally a 6% increase in SPOT ARPU also added to the increased SPOT service revenue, this increase which driven by the higher price tracking feature introduced with our SPOT Gen3 device at subscribers of this latest SPOT model have now doubled since the third quarter of 2014. Duplex service revenue which decreased 300,000 from the prior year quarter continued to be burdened by the strengthening dollar, there were no change in exchange rates since the third quarter of 2014. Duplex service revenue would have been $800,000 higher in the third quarter of 2015. Duplex revenue is particularly sensitive to…

[Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from Jim McIlree from Chardan Capital. Jim please go ahead.

Thank you and good evening everyone.

Good morning

Jay you’ve talked about – I don’t know if you call that test or a demo at the Washington School for Girls, is this the last one that you think you are going to have to do or do you think are there more lined up, more test lined up like this?

Jim, there are not more test lined up at this time and we don’t even necessarily have to be doing the test there and it’s a very convenient location for policy makers and others who have wanted to see this live, so it was a logical place for us to do it, but no, we don’t have plans for a more demonstrations at this time and we don’t think that they are necessary to the FCC process either.

Are you aware at the FCC to ask any of the opponents of TLPS to do their own test something similar environments to demonstrate that all of the negative features they claim TLPS’ actually occur?

Anybody who really has significant complaints that wanted to test that could have easily tested over the last two years, none of them did so, you can query why they wouldn’t, but the obvious answer is that by testing they would just demonstrate what they don’t want to see. Clearly the FCC would have entertained test have they been done by anyone, but simply nobody did that and you have to question the motivations for why they did not.

Can you help me understand why this had taken so long, I have never seen a process they [indiscernible] with FCC, and it just makes the question, what in the world are they objecting to that, but decisions has been made yet and this is almost going on [indiscernible]?

Well certainly these processes take different length of time in many cases, you can talk about the process that we are involved in now, as being something that lasted for multiple years, but in reality it was posted into the public record in February of last year. So, viewed from that perspective the processes only been out in the open and ripe for people to entre comments and do things into the record, for something like 18 months. So, I think that’s the real period of time and in the world of FCC when someone is talking about an important decision like this one and they take on and when you consider intervening processes that were going on at the FCC particularly the Comcast Time Warner merger and then the AT&T, Direct TV merger. The auction that’s in place last year and 600 auction which is very complicated this year. The FCC takes gets preoccupied with a lot of complicated issues and sometimes something that we consider to be this important is not first on their list. These are all people that are trying hard to do a good job and sometimes it just takes longer than we in industry would like it to take, but I don’t think it’s from a lack of trying, and I don’t think it’s really too long, it’s just a watch part, never boils matter for you, and we’re sitting around the edge of that part steering at it at the whole time.

Thank you. And our next question comes from Jason Bernstein from Odeon Capital. Jason please go ahead.

Hi guys. In a few of these preceding most notably LTE-U the FTP is everything we want the industrial players to try and find some consensus we’re going to stay out it for now and hopefully we don’t want to get involve as we don’t have to. Do you think the delay could have something to do with hoping that you guys I mean our position reach un-consented similar to the five gigahertz preceding and if that is a potential reason for the delay? Is there any hope of that taking place here?

Jason as you look at the period over the last year, we went from having very significant technical complaints registered in the preceding to almost a completed mission now, but that is not the case. We really firmly believe that there was never any harmful interference, so Wi-Fi standard and I think everybody understands how the Wi-Fi standard works kind of rewind so the question that was asked a moment ago about why people didn’t do testing. When we got together as a group in the kind of process that you were describing at the tail end of last year the FCC said we’ll look, if everybody can’t reach common understanding, let’s do a little bit of testing and all agreed that that testing should take place at the FCC. A testing took place in March and again in April, the first being the test results, some of which were in the presentation today by the way I misspoke on the page, I said 10, but page 4 shows the waterfall that was tested in the FCC in March. Then the FCC did its own testing in April, we augmented the record with this major filing in September and basically speaking people have stopped technically arguing about interference and issues like that, so we have made substantial progress during the last year, the last filings into the record were predominantly policy filings and Google made one of those, but – was just that, it was a policy filing, because technically they acknowledged that, well I guess they didn’t technically acknowledge, but they acknowledged that the benefits to the consumer were clear and obvious. So we have engaged many of these companies as we have told you in the past, there are competitive reasons for them to ones that slow down TLPS, they’ve offered their own services, they offer Wi-Fi first services, we would certainly have a better, cleaner Wi-Fi first service and we have compromised continuously by doing things like refining the network operating system moving away from LTE-U and so forth and we think all of those things have been powered and therefore that this process will likely wind-up in the near-term. Will there be another meeting that the FCC request with the parties in the room again another time, I don’t know, but I don’t think it’s really necessary at this point, the FCC has all of the information that they need to make their decision.

Thanks Jay and if I could follow-up on – some of the testing questions, just to clarify the demo at the FCC representative that the opposition sent. They were allowed to have the room to themselves and do a setup however they wanted to, is that correct?

That is correct, they could setup a protocol and test to that protocol, they did that, I think the FCC looked at the protocol that they wanted to test when they saw it live and asked the question everyone in the room, why would you test like that, because of the way that they expected out, as I understand the representative that was their set well that’s because that’s the test we filed with you that we were going to do, but that was not considered to be a very valid test by the FCC, along in the short of it was they were given absolute [indiscernible] access to come in and work for days, we were there for a week straight and able to setup anything, anybody wanted to test in an any environment and we did a lot. The other side did not actually do very much and that showed when they made their filings, some of which were they called in conclusive and much of the data from that side was never released to the public, as you know we released our data nightly everyday when we finish the tasks. Then the FCC did their own tasks, which were characterizing access points and so forth a few days later in April and they filed a report of some 100 pages at that point on the testing that they did as well. I don’t think anybody took issue with what the FCC did. So it was a substantial amount of testing that went down.

Okay, great, appreciate it. Thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you. And our next question comes from Kevin Roe from Roe Equity Research. Kevin please go ahead. Your line is open.

Thank you. A couple of questions for Jay and one for Tim. Jay OET at the FCC what’s your sense of what they’re doing right now? Are they still pouring through data or they asking you for more data, this new test it’s going on at the Washington school for girls in DC. Are you collecting data there and giving it to them for review just – if you could give us a sense if the engineers are still busy at OET?

Sure. Kevin when we got together with the FCC in at the tail end of 2014 and they asked us to do some demonstrations, the first one we just talked about a lot that took place in the FCC to the one in this summer at the University in Chicago, were all because the FCC said, please compile some real world information from us with TLPS in the while in normal uncontrolled RF environments and submit that information to us. So we did the test at the OET itself and then we did test in Chicago. We will file the information from the Washington school into the record here in a little bit and that is also unsure is something that the FCC appreciates receiving. We expected FCC members will go to the school and observe it alive as well. As for the work that they are doing inside OET and we really don’t have director’s ability into that Kevin. They do their work in private and when they are ready to talk about it, they call us and we meet with them and then we file the Ex Partes, explaining what the meeting was about, we know that they are working, we just don’t know precisely what they are doing.

Okay, that’s helpful. On LTE-U, have you had any discussions with the cable industry post your willingness to not deploy LTE-U or has there been any feedback from the cable industry or the telecom industries any of the major players on that in regards to the preceding?

I have not had any conversations directly with them, but there have been some back channel conversations and I think it’s clear that they were very appreciative of the position that we took in LTE-U, they didn’t – they are worried about it and until it gets figured out by the FCC, we just did not want to be a part of that battle. So for us it’s a no-brainer and we’ve got the ecosystem that exist with Wi-Fi, it’s always will be intended to do and therefore we were pretty happy putting that on the record. So we think it’s helpful to them, we know that the network operating system is a huge help to all parties because it really means that for all times you got a solution that can help if something goes wrong from an interference perspective. I anticipate that we will get calls and say there is interference and when a call like that happens will turn down the TLPS from access points in that region and the interference won’t go away because it’s coming from something else that will never really be coming from us, but having that kind of comfort available to the FCC is a tremendous advantage and to other parties who will deploy services in other of the Wi-Fi is hugely helpful to know that there is a technical turndown mechanism if there is a ever a problem out there.

Thanks Jay and Ken, could you walk us through again the sources and usage of cash for the next 12 months, how much runaway does your $88 million of liquidity get you?

Sure, yeah and so total liquidity including the DSRA is 126, taking the DSRA out you do get to about $88 million of current liquidity. For the rest of this year, there is $9 million of CapEx, total principle commitments are $3 million and interest is $10 million through December, so totaling $22 million at the end of the year. Looking out through the end of 2016, there is an incremental CapEx commitments of $5 million principle will total just under $33 million in 2016 and interest obviously variable based on 6 month LIBOR will total about $20 million. So total capital commitment in 2016 totaled $58 million, so combined with the balance for 2015 that’s about $80 million, $88 million of course of current liquidity plus we have operating cash flow which conservatively will be in $20 million or so, through December 31 of 2016 that totals $108 million. So in terms of excess liquidity on a projected basis at December 2016 that’s just under $30 million.

Okay, thanks guys.

Thank you.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions]. And we do have a follow-up question from Jim, Jim please go ahead your line is open.

Yes, thanks a lot and sorry about the last question, my phone dropped you. Jay, what’s plan B, what happens if the FCC comes back and they say we’re going to put this on the shell, so they come back and they say, yes, we’ll let you do it, but we are going to severely restrict it or [indiscernible] no. What you do at that point?

Jim, we are completely entirely focused on TLPS and so we are not really concerned about the FCC coming back and altering the approval and some fashion that makes it less usable nor walking away from it, it just too important for the FCC and now that they have seen the results, I believe strongly that they will approve it and relative near term now. The spectrum that we own never goes away and it never goes away globally. And so, if there is something else that we would want to do with other of our spectrum [indiscernible] in the future we can do that, but we are totally maniacally focused on getting this through the FCC and the TLPS format, the unique service, that will be a great service, eventually it will be a global one, just is too important, we will keep focusing on it every day.

And in terms of the global approval, can you update us on that [indiscernible] getting that accomplished?

Sure, I think as we have mentioned previously, we have been contacted by several countries around the world that are interested in having Globalstar applied for TLPS in their markets as well and our position with them has always been that we need to get through the U.S. first and then after the U.S. we’ll roll out to these additional markets. As you’re aware we have relationships around the globe. We have relationships in anyplace that we have service and more specifically in anyplace where we have gateways and ground stations and things like that and as a result we have good contacts in these countries. We are at the World Radio Conference now which is taking place in Geneva, and then we are having conversations there with delegates of many countries and socializing this a little bit further, but the good news is we have been receiving in bounce on the subject and we’re responding to each and every one of those. So we think it’s, after it goes in the United States there will be a lot of places in the world where the process will go pretty quickly we expect.

Okay, that’s helpful. Thanks a lot and good luck with everything.

Okay, well it looks like the last of the questions for the moment. Thank you all for joining today. We appreciate it and look forward to talking to you again after the yearend. Thank you all.