Good day, and welcome to the KVH Industries’ Q4 and Year-End 2016 Earnings Conference Call. Today's conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Don Reilly, Chief Financial Officer. Please go ahead, sir.

Hey, thanks operator. Good morning, everybody. Thanks for joining us today to discuss KVH Industries’ fourth quarter results and our guidance for the 2017 first quarter and the full year, all of which is included in the earnings release we published this morning. With me on the call this morning is Martin Kits van Heyningen, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer. The earnings release is available on our website and also from our Investor Relations department. If you would like to listen to a recording of today’s call, you can access a webcast replay on our website. If you are listening via the web, feel free to submit questions to ir@kvh.com. This conference call will contain certain forward-looking statements that are subject to a number of assumptions and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed in these statements. We undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements. We will also discuss certain non-GAAP financial measures and you’ll find definitions of these measures in our press release as well as reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to comparable GAAP measures. We encourage you to review the cautionary statements made in our SEC filings, specifically those under the heading Risk Factors in our form 10-Q filed on November 3, 2016 and the Company’s SEC filings available directly from Investor Information section on our website. So, at this time, I would like to turn the call over to Martin. Martin?

Thanks you Don, good morning everyone and thank you for joining us today. I'm pleased to report that we ended 2016 on a positive note coming in at the top of our guidance range for revenue and beating our adjusted EPS and EBITDA. Fourth quarter revenues were 43.9 million and our non-GAAP earnings of $0.13 per share exceeded our guidance range which is $0.05 to $0.10. Don will cover the numbers in detail shortly, but first let's take a look at our key business areas starting off with mobile broadband, which going forward we'll call our mobile connectivity business to better reflect the wide range of products, content and value added services we offer beyond just broadband communications. As we discussed in past calls, 2016 was a challenging year in the global commercial maritime markets. As a result, VSAT airtime revenues were up but just slightly year over year. Many shipping companies are losing money and don't have a lot of capital to invest in broadband solutions even if it will eventually save the money. We have a new program that addresses that and I'll be talking a lot more about that in a minute. But despite the short-term economic challenges, KVH’s position in the maritime market continues to be very strong. I'm proud of what we've accomplished since launching our maritime broadband service ten years ago. I'm excited about the new initiatives to build upon our success in the years ahead. We've now fielded more than 7,000 maritime VSAT systems. The latest research report from NSR released last spring concludes the KVH has a market share of 29% of maritime Ku-band VSAT units just still the largest share by far even after the significant merger and acquisition activity of our competitors. Our compound annual growth rate of our maritime…

Thank you, Martin. So now I'd like to discuss in more detail the financial results of the company for the fourth quarter. To start with, I’d to call your attention to the fact that we've changed our segment reporting this quarter, where previously we viewed ourselves as operating in two geographic segments, in the fourth quarter based on a number of organizational and other changes we've implemented, we determine that we have two reportable operating segments based on product lines that’s mobile connectivity and inertial navigation. In our 10-K that we’ll file in a few days, you’ll see us discuss our business more along the lines of our two segments. As Martin mentioned earlier, our fourth quarter revenues were $43.9 million which is at the high-end of the guidance range we gave previously and was 19% lower than the fourth quarter of 2015, which was anticipated due to the large TACNAV shipments we recorded last year and due to currency exchange fluctuations in the British pound. The British pound adversely impacted our fourth quarter revenues by approximately $1.6 million or 17% of content and training revenues and 4% of total fourth quarter revenues. On a constant currency basis, content and training revenues actually increased 4% year over year. Product revenues for the fourth quarter decreased $8.6 million or 32% to 18.6 million from 27.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2015, due to a decrease in mobile connectivity product revenues of 1.7 million or 16% and a decrease in inertial navigation product revenues of $7 million or 41%. Service revenues for the fourth quarter decreased $1.4 million or 5% to 25.3 million from 26.8 million in 2015, mostly due to a decrease in our content and training revenues again due to the weakness in the British pound. Our broadband airtime…

[Operator Instructions] And we will take our first question from Ric Prentiss with Raymond James.

Thanks. Good morning. Hey, obviously, a very transitional year, coming up and investing for the future. One lead question I think would be, you've shown us the view for ‘17 where you’re going to spend the CapEx, you’ll spend some more OpEx to hit the items that you mentioned of high throughput satellites and subscription and low cost FOG and TACNAV APNT, can you give us some color on your visibility in making these investments on what that significant opportunities might be in ‘18, ‘19 and ‘20, just to get a sense of how you guys did your ROIC to look at making these changes?

Right. I think one of the things we did is we look at, as I mentioned in my portion of the call, if we look back over the last five years and look at what the growth rates were and really look at the opportunities through the size of market and we think that if we get back to those kind of growth rates, we're getting a very significant growth over the next three to four years. So, and the changes that we're making now, we're expecting to start to see that this year. So we expect to see the growth in services revenue to be approaching double digits as we exit this year. So that's kind of like at a high level. So we don't - obviously we won’t start giving guidance for ‘18 yet, but we do expect to see a significant payoff here. So we're pretty optimistic.

Okay. And then on the TACNAV specifically, you mentioned only being a limited number of orders in there. Is that really a function of when you think it's going to book and ship and that you're being conservative it might hit ‘18 instead of ‘17 or and also maybe if you could update us on the size of that order that's being anticipated?

Yeah. So the ones that we're not including in the forecast are or including a small portion there are over $40 million. So I think we've been advised by many of our investors to not include these discrete items in guidance, because it just creates problems when the timing changes. So we're trying to be more conservative here. But to answer your question on timing, we do expect the orders to happen this year. The timing is hard to call and also the delivery schedule would be difficult to forecast. So that's why we're assuming that we’ll get the orders, but we’ll only ship a little bit this year and we're optimistic that that’s a reasonable assumption, but there's more upside than there is downside in the TACNAV guidance now.

Got you. And if it didn't quite deliver this year, it would be in the early part or within ‘18?

Yes. It would be all in ‘18, anything that didn't ship in ‘17 would all be in ‘18.

Okay. And then the final one for me is, as you look at developing the low cost FOG for autonomous cars and other vehicles, imagine the order of magnitude cost cut, but can give us an idea of how long it's going to take to get the technology to where you want it to be ramping to the scale you want and who else you're facing and competition for that, what looks to be a large market, but just trying to gauge the time to get to be able to deliver it and who the competition is and it's a long sales cycle, the break into somewhere that platform I would expect.

Right. So the good news is that we're already designed into most of these platforms. So we're the incumbent there. We probably will deliver between 1000 and 1500 systems in 2017, as more vehicles start to get out on the road and those are forecasts that we have from our customers. So we're delivering now and they're perfectly happy with the performance and the size and everything. They're not happy with the cost going forward, but for today's quantities, we're fine. But we’re anticipating, so what's going to happen is that we’ll continue to deliver, the cost will come down a little bit, but to get this order of magnitude type cost, it will switch to a new design and that will be a running change as soon as it's ready. But in the meantime, we're making incremental cost reductions as the volumes ramp.

Okay. And the sales cycle as far as how to break in to that, you said you’re the incumbent, but just trying to think of what the ramp or the pacing might look like?

Yeah. So that’s - I think, we don't see any big ramp in 2017. I think 2018, we've been given forecasts that are in the tens of thousands of units. How real that is, we don't know, but that's what our customers are saying. So - and then it would ramp to hundreds of thousands and we're hopeful that eventually those become millions. It mean the forecast is that 15% of cars will be self-driving, which would be 15 million vehicles. There's about 100 million vehicles built per year. So it’s a big market, big opportunity and that's why we're - we don't want to just be the incumbent and be designed in for the prototypes.

And we will now hear from Rich Valera with Needham & Company.

Yes. Thank you. Just wanted to follow-up on the disposition of some of your TACNAV orders. You'd specifically talked about 15 million of orders being pushed out of the fourth quarter of last year. I think seven of that you said was built and sitting in backlog and there was another 8 that had been specked into some vehicles and you were kind of I guess awaiting a final PO on that. Are those specific orders included in the ‘17 forecast?

Yes.

Okay. And that would seemingly cover the whole forecast, if you're going to be flat year-over-year, I mean, and I use my math right on that?

Yes. I mean not everything is one for one, so some of it is weighted averages, a bunch of different orders, but you're thinking about it exactly the right way. The stuff that got pushed out, we're now assuming happens in 2017. And then we've sort of capped it at last year's actual for the guidance.

Got it. Then wanted to follow-up on the low cost FOG that you're developing, I guess, in January, you had talked about sampling a new low cost FOG, I think clearly not the final low cost FOG, but a low cost FOG in the first quarter. Where do we stand on that?

While we have a new design, which is that we've offered to our customers, that roughly half the price they were paying before, so we're making moves in the cost in the right direction as far as they're concerned. And that would be available for - it is available now for sampling and full production would be in Q2 of this year.

And that roughly 1K, I was - prior ones about $2000 and this would be about half that you're saying?

Directionally, you're correct. It's a little bit more than that, very close to what you're talking about.

And then you mentioned, I think it was one - about 1000 to 1500 as kind of roughly what you expect to ship on those this year. Is that correct?

Yes.

Got it. So why don’t we move into the mini-VSAT in the maritime side of things. So first, what's your expectations for what - the percentage of your new ads that happen on the bundled versus unbundled model?

It's roughly half, I mean, at a high level. So we think that, a, this will increase the numbers from the run rates we were at and from the increased number, half would be and sort of like a VSAT as a service if you will. This will be for commercial customers, for fleet customers, so the leisure market will continue to be by the hardware because that’s more traditional more what they're used to. So about half.

Got it. And then you mentioned bundling in both MobileCast and I think some of your training video - your training stuff as well into some of these packages and I'm just wondering, are you devaluing the products by doing this obviously, you generate a significant revenue stream from say Videotel, you somehow cannibalize that by bundling that into these kind of airtime packagers?

Yeah. Potentially, but think of it this way. If this is incredibly successful and we cannibalize 100% of our Videotel subscribers and they all switch to VSAT, our VSAT, that's another 12,000 vessels. If you look at our average ARPU now, which is $1500 a month, you're talking about 18000 a year times 12000, it’s a gigantic number, it’s $200 million. So that wouldn’t be such a bad thing if that happened. So, but I don't think people will switch, if they’ve already a Videotel customer, I don't think they’ll necessarily switch just to get the free Videotel by buying the VSAT, but what we're trying to do is to make a really compelling bundle that is, as I said, our costs are marginal cost on the software is close to zero. So it's a pretty compelling product offering. And then also be done in tiers. So it’s a little bit of a premium model to this and really great stuff that’s included, but for example vessel tracking is included, but if you want to see one year's vessel track for your fleet, that's a premium and you have to pay for that. So same with the NEWSlink TV is included, but if you want movies, well, you have to pay for movies. Those aren’t included.

Understood. And then I'm not sure, I know it's baked in to your guidance, but can you give us a sense of sort of the year-over-year increase in OpEx we're talking about here if we like baselining it versus ‘16, roughly how much we should think about OpEx increasing in ‘17 in aggregate?

Yeah. I think round numbers, it’s on the order of $10 million year-over-year increase.

And then should we think of that as going back down in ‘18 or how should we think about that longer term?

Yeah. I think that there's an incremental component to this that some of which is one-time, so that if the revenue didn't grow the way we're expecting it to grow, then those numbers would not recur in ‘18, because we are also expecting significant revenue growth, we see those costs, because some of them were people costs and R&D costs will be declining significantly as a percentage of revenue. But in absolute dollars, they probably won't decline if things go according to plan.

And our next question comes from Chris Quilty with Quilty Analytics.

Thanks. Martin, I had a question about the technology deployment here. You mentioned that you're already producing new antennas for the HTS service, but what's happening on the modem side?

We’ll be making product announcements, Chris as we launch the actual products. But you're correct in thinking about modems as a key part of what you need to get the new higher speeds. So the below deck equipment would need a faster modem to get the faster speeds.

Okay. And you're still thinking of keeping the network Ku-band, I mean there's not any global KA available other than?

Right. Yeah. We’re very happy with the Ku-band in terms of the cost, the coverage and the speeds that we're getting and the fact that we have an easy upgrade path for all our customers. So if our installed base wants to upgrade, it will be an easy upgrade for them. And very economical upgrade. So whereas if you switch to Ka-band, as you know, it's a whole new antenna, whole new everything.

All right. And with regard to the modem technology, I mean when you originally launched the mini-VSAT back in 2007, what really stood out was the size of the antenna, relative to competition. Do you still anticipate having those sort of advantages with the new HTS systems?

Yes. So we're going to continue to offer smaller and faster.

Got you. On the FOG business and specific to moving into high volume for autonomous vehicle, I think you had talked in the past about to hit those going from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands to millions, you might look for co-investment with some of your customers or NRE. Is that still a part of the thought process here or is this something that you think will be KVH only investment?

No. I think that's something that we're still discussing and, but we're not depending on it. So, we're not waiting for that to happen and that's why we're bumping up our internal R&D spending on this. Actually, we’ve really started. But, yeah, we would certainly consider partnering with one of our key customers.

Okay. And on the TACNAV product, did you give a backlog for that and could you give us for the quarter sort of the breakdown between TACNAV and FOG sales?

So for the fourth quarter, FOG products were in the neighborhood of $4.5 million, $4.6 million. TACNAV was in the neighborhood of $5.4 million.

And the backlog?

The backlog is in total 5.5 million with 5.1 million expected to ship in 2017.

Okay. And if the large order comes in as expected, would that all drop into the backlog or would you assume that that's going to stretch out past one year and you just take a portion of it into backlog?

It will depend on when it's received, what - obviously, it was received now and the customer wanted delivery this year, then it would go in and out of backlog in 2017. But if the - either the order happens late in the year and/or the customer wants delivery spread out over a longer period than one quarter, then it would obviously be carried as backlog going out of 2017. I’m not sure if I'm answering your question.

Kind of. And I guess for Don, when we think about the bundles, are there any special reserves or accounting we should be aware of or think about in that you are now taking retaining ownership of the hardware in this sort of arrangement or is it done on a capitalized lease basis. I mean how does that flow through on the P&L?

Sure. So these will be revenue generating assets on our balance sheet. It won't be leases. There won’t be long term leases, there will be month to month short term arrangements. So they'll - we will report them along with our other property plant equipment in our balance sheet. From a revenue recognition point of view, it should be fairly straightforward. It's a monthly charge to the customer, a monthly all-in charge, they may not even see the component of it that represents hardware, a single charge based on the contract. We will retain ownership of the hardware and we’ll depreciate that over its useful life. Does that help?

Yeah. It does. But from a customer perspective, let's say, they're transitioning from old plants to new plants, I mean at face value, this is going to increase their monthly service cost or subscription cost and they avoid any capital outlay for the equipment on the front end?

Well. I mean the goal here isn't to make it unattractive. So from a pricing model, the goal is to make it attractive. We're very keen on building our subscription base revenues. Right now, it's about 50%, 60% of our total company revenues. We intend to grow that and be less focused on selling hardware and more focused on subscription. So I think that the, in all of these, it's sort of the trend in IT today is that you outsource your storage to AWS or your CRM system to SalesForce.com. So this path has been pretty well worn in other areas of IT. So I think when we present this to the CIOs and the IT managers of the companies, it's an attractive model where you just give them the service that they want without the hassle of figure out what hardware to buy and how to set it up and configure it and all that other stuff.

Great. And final question, I mean, how do you move forward with this strategy and promote it? I mean it's pretty attractive relative or very differentiated relative to what every other vendor in the industry is doing, right?

And I think it's also something that would be difficult for others to do, because one of the things, because we make the hardware, we can get the hardware back, we can refurbish it, make sure it's perfect and send it out again, it’s difficult if you're an air time service company in a high rise building somewhere to try and do that. So I think it's a unique thing that we have and because we own the content, we can offer these bundles in very attractive ways.

Got you. And how do you promote it?

Oh, sorry. That's going to be key here and it's - we're having a lot of internal discussions about what they call it from a marketing perspective and how to explain it. So we've got to have - we're going to have a marketing launch here shortly. This trade show is coming up where we will be announcing it, but we're going to make a big splash out of this.

And there are no questions at this time.

Okay. Well done and I will be available for follow-up calls and thank you all for your time.