Welcome to the IDT first quarter fiscal 2009 earnings conference call. (Operator Instructions) It is now my pleasure to introduce your host, Mr. Jim Courter, Chief Executive Officer for IDT Corporation.

Good afternoon and thank you for joining us. It's Jim Courter. I'm here with Steve Brown, IDT's CFO to report to you on IDT's performance during the first quarter of IDT's 2009 fiscal year for the three months ended October 31, 2008. Before we begin, please recall that any forward-looking statements we may make during the course of this call either in our prepared remarks or in the Q&A period that follows, whether general or specific in nature are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those which we anticipate. These risks and uncertainties include but are not limited to specific risks and uncertainties discussed in the reports that we file periodically with the SEC. We assume no obligation to update any forward-looking statements that we've made or may make or to update you on the factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those that we forecast. Now we'll get started. I'll begin by addressing key shareholder concerns from a company wide perspective and discussing some important developments. Steve Brown will follow with an analysis of the performance of each of our businesses. Liore Alroy, CEO of IDT Telecom and Chairman of our Executive Committee is not going to be on the call due to an illness. I've invited Claude Pupkin the head and CEO of our Shale Oil subsidiary AMSO to join us for the questions. Those of you who joined us on the last call may remember that I characterized the fourth quarter's results as a tale of two cities. That is, the bottom line numbers for the last quarter reflected a host of one time events including Legacy restructuring costs and write downs related to the declining global financial markets which tended to obscure significant improvements and…

For the most part, I'm going to echo the remarks that you just made and provide additional details for our shareholders. As you said, we do feel that we are moving in the right direction to deliver the financial results consistent with the goals described several months ago by our Chairman, Howard Jonas. A very important note to look at this quarter's results; it should be noted that the positive adjusted EBITDA that you spoke about of $3.5 million for this quarter was not enhanced by any special one time event to true up, but represents the turn around and discipline of our core businesses that we have been promising. Obviously we are not satisfied, and there remains much work to be done. We continue to see strong competition in our retail communications businesses. The strong gross margins delivered by IDT Energy this quarter may not be sustainable quarter to quarter. Our turn around strategy in Carmel, while leaving us cautiously optimistic is still in its infancy and IDT corporate expenses which continue to be a major focus are still too high. That said, we are focused on and we are dealing with all these issues and we feel that we are on track with our corporate turnaround. Perhaps the only negative surprise this quarter was our below the line loss in the other income loss line of $21.2 million. This loss consists of two components. One was the final write down of the Altura Securities which were backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and we discussed that last quarter. The final write down was $6 million this quarter, wiping out the bulk of that investment. We also wrote of $14 million of losses pertaining to our long term investment in hedge funds which is due to the decline…

(Operator Instructions) Your first call comes from Clayton Moran – Stanford Group. Clayton Moran – Stanford Group: Your SEC filings indicate that the IRS has moved on to 2005 through 2007. Can you give us a sense if there's a dispute there or if we might see another potential tax liability as a result of this new audit?

Since we have been a public company we have been audited every year, every year we've been a public company so the fact audits continue is just a fact of life of being a large business even though we're not as large as we used to be, but we are a large business in New Jersey. That said, we have characterized the disputes with the IRS, in our filings we have never made any significant changes in our tax liabilities in the way we accrued things from day one. Even though we did have a negotiation with the IRS to finalize the shortage, it was a very immaterial change in the total liability. The only major difference was when we were discussing what was long term and what was short term. The company has always felt that the tax liability is deducted and there's nothing in any thing that we have knowledge of any orders or any entity that we're aware that would require any additional disclosure or accrue any additional liability.

Your next question is from [Michael Traynor – Milwaukee Private Wealth Management]. [Michael Traynor – Milwaukee Private Wealth Management]: With regard to the shale oil, what level do you assume you need to have crude trade at in order to be competitive with your end product?

It's fairly early in our R&D work to be able to give you a thorough answer to that question. The preliminary numbers that we've run which happen to be consistent with some of the majors who are involved in the business show a cost of production roughly $40 to $45 a barrel range. We are several years, quite a few years from getting in a position to be in commercial production and we strongly believe what Jim referred to earlier which is the long term prices are going back up. So we feel fairly confident that there will be significant margin between our operating costs and our external market price of oil. However, as I said it's still early in the game. [Michael Traynor – Milwaukee Private Wealth Management]: Are these production costs similar to what you've heard from other folks outside of the Colorado area, for instance in Baken and did you mention anything about the work you're doing in Israel during this call earlier?

I'll take those two questions separately. With respect to Baken that is not oil share. That is oil shale in the same way we're working Colorado. That's traditional, conventional oil that is caught between layers of shale but it's already in liquid form. The oil shale that we're talking about in Colorado is basically rock that contains a material called karogen that once it's retorted which basically means you heat it up, it converts into a synthetic crude oil. So they're not comparable. The cost of the production that I was referring to that are consistent between our estimates and those that some of the majors talk about are in terms of cost of production in Colorado.

I did not mention Israel and our oil shale initiative on this call, but I did last quarter, the fourth quarter. I mentioned Israel, and we're in a situations there where we are a company, the only company that received a three year lease to do exploration, research and development and that effort in Israel is separate and apart from the efforts in the United States but there's nothing new to report in respect to Israel so I didn't mention it on the call. [Michael Traynor – Milwaukee Private Wealth Management]: Is the potential oil shale in Israel the Baken type or more the kerogen type in Colorado?

It's more like the karigen type in Colorado. The nature of the deposits there are different in the sense that it's dryer there, so some of the water issues that are so publicly discussed about Colorado are easier to deal with in Israel. But it is the type of oil share that you have in Colorado and Utah and perhaps it's helpful for you to know that there's been a lot of press associated with major contracts that both Shell and other major oil companies are making into oil shale in Jordan, and the Jordan oil share deposit and the Israeli oil share deposit are part of the same geographic area.

There are no further questions at this time.

Thank you very much. We'll talk to you next quarter.