Please standby, we are about to begin. Good day. And welcome to the Universal Display Corporation Fourth Quarter and 2011 Year End Earnings Call. Today’s conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Joe Hassett.

Thank you, and good afternoon, everyone. With us today are Steve Abramson, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Sid Rosenblatt, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Universal Display Corporation. Let me begin today by reminding you that this call is the property of Universal Display. Any redistribution, retransmission or rebroadcast of this call in any form without the expressed written consent of Universal Display is strictly prohibited. Further, as this call is being webcast live and will be made available for a period of time on Universal Display’s website, this call contains time-sensitive information that is accurate only as of the date of the live webcast of this call, February 28, 2012. All statements in this conference that are not historical are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These include, but are not limited to, statements regarding Universal Display’s beliefs, expectations, hopes or intentions regarding the future. It is important to note that these statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause Universal Display’s actual results to differ from those projected. These risks and uncertainties are discussed in the company’s periodic reports filed with the SEC. Universal Display disclaims any obligation to update any of these statements. Now, I would like to turn the call over to Steve Abramson, President and CEO of Universal Display. Please go ahead, Steve.

Thank you, Joe. And welcome everyone listening on today’s call and webcast. We are profitable, after more than a decade and half of ground breaking research and development, building a worldwide network of business and research partnerships, and refining an innovative business model that leverages both tangible and intangible assets, we are profitable. Our revenues doubled again for the third consecutive year. It’s a great time to be in the OLED industry and a great time to be UDC, based on our pioneer efforts we are participating in the extraordinary growth of this exciting industry. Our business strategy is to sustain our industry leadership through a strong commitment to research and development. This will enable us to continue to provide the industry with new and innovative technology and material, which we believe will help both industry and our company grow, and let there be no mistake the industry is growing rapidly. According to display search, the AMOLED industry grew from $1.2 billion in 2010 to $3.4 billion in 2011, and it is forecasted to grow at $8.2 billion this year and $11.2 billion in 2013. In the near-term, our current results have being driven primarily by the demand for small form factor displays primarily smartphones. These displays are getting larger. Samsung recently introduced the fabulous new product called the Galaxy Notes with features 5.3-inch AMOLED screen with extraordinary functionality. As the acknowledged OLED industry leader Samsung has continued to build out its OLED production capacity. They sold over 20 million Galaxy S2 smartphones in 10 months and accumulated sales of Galaxy smartphone line now exceed $40 million. During the last half of 2011 Samsung even pass Apple as a number one seller of smartphones and there have been reports that about 25% of South Koreans own a Galaxy phone. Smartphone…

Thank you, Steve. And again thank you everyone for joining us on our call today. I’ll be reviewing the financial results, as well as sharing some insights from the quarter and the full year. After that, we will open the call to take your questions. Revenues for the fourth quarter totaled $18.7 million, a 73% increase over revenues of $10.8 million for the fourth quarter of 2010. You will note that we have revised the presentation of revenues in our financial statements that better reflect our current primary sources of revenue. Fourth quarter and full year 2010 revenues have been revised to confirm with our current classification. Material sales now include revenue from the sales of OLED chemicals for evaluation, development and commercial manufacturing, which were previously separated into commercial chemical sales and development chemical sales. Royalty and license sales include revenue recognized from the licensing of our intellectual property and technology, which is unchanged from our prior presentation. Technology development and support revenue includes revenue from technology development activities, government contract work and support provided to third parties for commercialization of their OLED products. On this basis, material sales were $10.8 million for the quarter, an increase of 47% over material sales of $7.4 million for the fourth quarter of 2010. Compared to fourth quarter a year ago, we sold significantly more material under commercial agreement in the fourth quarter of 2011. We had a gross margin on material sales of 90% for the quarter, compared to 97% for the fourth quarter of 2010. For the fourth quarter, host materials represented 12% of our total material sales whereas host materials represented 9% of our total material sales for the fourth quarter of 2010. Royalty and license fee revenue was $5.4 million for the quarter, a 207% increase over royalty…

Thank you. (Operator Instructions) And we’ll take our first question from Darice Liu with Brigantine Advisors. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: Good afternoon, guys. My first question has to deal with the forecast for 2012, $90 million to $110 million, just to clarify for the modeling standpoint, we will not see any Samsung license fees in 1Q and 3Q?

That is correct. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: So, from a margin standpoint because we aren’t going to see those license fees, we should expect a dip down in 1Q and 3Q accordingly?

Yeah. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: Okay. Is there any way in the future you think you could possibly smooth that out or is that something we should be modeling going forward beyond 2012?

Well, I think you can model it that way. We will do our best to give as much information about that in the first quarter conference call as we possibly can without violating any confidential agreement. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: Okay. And then just moving along to the green material, both the host and the dopant? A few months ago you mentioned that you were at least some companies were evaluating your green material. Can you give us an update on where you are with those customers outside of your largest customer of course and if there have been any additional potential customers evaluating your green?

Well, basically, I could say almost all the customers out there are looking at green materials, as well as red materials. And on lighting side, a number of them are looking at light blue materials as well, but as of now the only commercial customer is really the largest customer, but the tests are all going well. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: Is it just a factor of when you will be able to sign those license agreements for them to convert from evaluation to commercial?

Well, it’s really up to them that when they are going to introduce product and then once they introduce product, we’ll have commercial agreements in place, with some of them we have commercial agreements already others will just evolve to commercial agreements as they start introducing products. It really depends on each individual customer at what point in the process they want to move from evaluation agreement to a commercial agreement. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: Okay. Thanks. I’ll get back into the queue.

Thanks, Darice.

Thank you

(Operator Instructions) We’ll go next to John Bright with Avondale Partners. John Bright – Avondale Partners: Thank you. Good afternoon. Steve, Sid, since you’re not providing any profitability guidance for calendar ‘12. I think in the prepared text, Sid, you talked about OpEx will not significantly increase over the next year. Can we take OpEx from the fourth quarter and finally sequentially increase it maybe you think of fourth quarter next year up 10% to 15%, is that an order of magnitude that we should be thinking about?

I think that’s the correct way of looking at it John. John Bright – Avondale Partners: Okay. Second question is breaking down the revenues. As we -- how should we think about the makeup of the revenues in calendar ‘12? You talked about Samsung not being in Q1 and Q3 from a license standpoint, I assume that means materials as well, but correct me if I’m wrong there?

That is, I’m sorry, I don’t mean to interrupt… John Bright – Avondale Partners: It’s okay.

… but the material sales to Samsung are based upon we will record them when we ship them. So I don’t anticipate any change in the trend or material sales. It is only the license fees that will be lumpy on a quarterly basis. John Bright – Avondale Partners: Okay. Maybe you can talk to us in any way that you want to break it down between licensing -- between material sales royalty or maybe talk about what your assumptions are on host revenues for calendar ‘12 or maybe talk about, what devices that you have baked into your thought process between smartphones or maybe how much in tablet and TVs, alluded to those, I think, Steve in the prepared text as well, maybe give some flavor of the makeup of that $90 to $110.

It’s difficult for us to talk about the specific products since we are not in the product manufacturing business. We actually -- the makeup of our guidance is we look at obviously we know what the license fees from Samsung will be and we know what the minimum purchases of material from Samsung will be and we looked at each of our customers that we expect -- that we had and expect to have in 2012. And we do get forecast from each of them and we look at that and we look historically at what, whether or not they meet these forecast and we also look at everything that’s out there about the industry and based upon that, we then put out what we believe is a revenue projection that we’re comfortable with. In order to go product-by-product, I mean there are some products get into the marketplace quicker or some customers accelerate their manufacturing that will have a positive impact on us and to some extent as things get drag out a little bit longer, they will have a negative impact, but we’re comfortable with the guidance that we have given using all of our historical data and using the data that we receive from customers.

And we’ll take our next question from Jim Ricchiuti with Needham & Company. Jim Ricchiuti – Needham & Company: Hi. Good afternoon. I’m wondering if we look at your full year guidance, can you help us understand if within that range that that reflects the minimum level of materials revenue or, I guess, what I’m trying to understand is, perhaps how much visibility do you have into that part of your revenue stream in the event that there is upside to it? Can you maybe also talk about that in terms of what you saw in Q4 without, I understand being specific?

Well, I mean in Q4 the -- if you look at the old method, I mean our commercial materials in Q4 were about $9 million of the $10.8 million and then developmental material were about $1.6 million and it’s difficult for us to really answer your question unfortunately. I mean we do base it upon whatever information we have, but I really don’t have specific data that I can point you towards. Jim Ricchiuti – Needham & Company: Okay. And, Sid, is there any color you can give on that third piece of the revenue stream in terms of how we should think about this new technology development and support revenue component? Do you have some visibility to that, is there anything that you can?

I think it will be -- it’s not a significant number and in terms of that that is something that goes customer-by-customers. I don’t expect much change for the foreseeable future in that number. Jim Ricchiuti – Needham & Company: Okay. Thank you.

Thanks, Jim.

And we’ll take our next question from Jed Dorsheimer with Canaccord Genuity. Jed Dorsheimer – Canaccord Genuity: Hi. Thanks, guys and congratulations for getting into the back here. First question, maybe just a follow-up. Sid, on Jim’s question, I guess if you end up at $90 million for the year so, what has happened to get you there? And then what has happened if you end up at the $110 million? What are that $20 million swing? What is baked into your expectation? Is that a function of TVs not materializing in ‘12 or is it a function of smartphones not sort of getting there or is it a function of the host materials going away, maybe if you could just help us try gain a little bit more clarify around what the thought process in under and over there? That might be helpful. Then I have a follow-up.

Well, as I said, I mean we look customer-by-customer based upon what we know in terms of the license fees and the guarantee minimums and what we think will increase. We looked at when we expect customers to come online. I think what you’re hearing about TVs today is information that was probably not out there a couple of months ago when we actually gave the original guidance. If the market accelerates then faster than we thought, we will be at the top end, if it doesn’t, we’ll be at what we think the conservative approach is, right.. I really can’t give you specifics to say if TVs takeoff from one customer to another that’s where that $20 million swing is. I mean, because we have not given guidance in the past, we really wanted to try to make sure that we gave a range that we were comfortable with based upon all the information that we have in-house. Jed Dorsheimer – Canaccord Genuity: Got you. I was just trying to get into, I’m not trying to put words in your mouth in terms of TVs. I was just trying to sort of get in your mind in terms of what the logic was. It sounds as if it’s a bit more, if a couple of customers don’t turn on that could have a much bigger impact than from an application perspective?

If customers don’t turn on that we expected to turn on or that the market expects to turn on, it will have an impact on us. I mean, if the OLED industry does not grow as fast as expectations it will impact our revenue. Jed Dorsheimer – Canaccord Genuity: Okay. Just as a follow-up. I didn’t see any extension associated with LG. I mean, I know you can’t discuss sort of where you are in terms of that negotiation, but it looks as if they’ve got some commercial products in the market. So, I assume that’s covered under the old development agreement but in the case of Samsung, I know we saw six-month and three months extensions for the two years that it took to get that inked up into the longer agreement. With LG, is that -- is the lack of extension just a function of the difference in negotiations or should we see some type of -- how should we read into that?

I’m not sure you can read anything, we’re selling them under our development agreement and under our development agreement customers can actually do small quantities of product, sample product. So I mean we are negotiating with them as we have said and other customers at this time and I don’t think you can read one thing into it or another by us not seeing an extension of the commercial terms. Jed Dorsheimer – Canaccord Genuity: Okay. Last question, I’ll jump in the queue. Any seasonality in the business, at least to Samsung or is it just because the ramp is so strong that there is no seasonality in terms of the end products at this point, specifically going into Q1?

We have not -- when we gave guidance for the fourth quarter, we thought there was some, the fourth quarter was pretty strong. I don’t really see a lot of seasonality but as I’ve said, one of the issues that we have is this is a new industry, in the first quarter we always have Chinese New Year or Lunar New Year, which impacts all the manufacturers. So there could be a little bit but it’s not anything that we have enough history out to really say will or it won’t to be honest.

And we’ll take our next question from Rob Stone with Cowen And Company. And Mr. Stone, we’re unable to hear you at this time. I’m sorry, we’re still not hearing you. We’ll move on to Brian Lee with Goldman Sachs. Brian Lee – Goldman Sachs: Hey, guys. Thanks for taking the question. Actually I had a few mostly related on how to think about the set up for this year. First, it seems like the lumpy nature of the Samsung payments are going to turn some investors off. So do you think you can provide at least pro forma revenue on the Samsung licensing in 1Q and 3Q when you aren’t getting the actual cash?

We are going to do our best to give pro forma, give information. It is a, once you know what one quarter is you will know what it is in each quarter. It is annual amount that is payable in equal installments, one in June and one in December. So once -- one quarter is disclosed, you will know what all the other quarters are. Brian Lee – Goldman Sachs: Sure. Exactly. So you will give us some amount of detail to help us smooth things out.

Next quarter. Brian Lee – Goldman Sachs: Okay. Okay. Fair enough. Second question I had was, what do you think the percentage split of your revenue from Samsung will be between licensing materials, is it 50-50 in 2012 or something materially different from that?

I really can’t answer that without talking about how much the license fees would be. So it isn’t anything that I can answer your question of right now. Brian Lee – Goldman Sachs: Okay. Fair enough. On 2011 you guys did about, looks like $30 million in revenue outside of Samsung. What’s your expectation for that non-Samsung revenue bucket to grow year-over-year in ‘12?

We do expect it to grow and I don’t have data that is in our projection that says this is how much is Samsung versus this is how much of outside of it, I mean what we did it, we obviously did it, but I don’t have that information available right now, while... Brian Lee – Goldman Sachs: Any reason that you think it would be materially different from just overall industry growth?

No. I really expect it to grow with the industry growth.

We’ll go next to Rob Stone with Cowen And Company.

Rob, I think you have to get Cowen bring for a new phone.

And I apologize we’re still unable to hear you at this time. We’ll move on to Hendi Susanto with Gabelli & Company. Hendi Susanto – Gabelli & Company: Steve and Sid, good evening, and thank you for taking my questions. My first questions, could you indicate how much your green emitter material revenue was in Q4 in 2011 and what are their corresponding end products? One item that I want to clarify is whether Sony PSP Vita’s OLED display has your green emitter and host material as well?

Well, our green emitters that we sold, we sold approximately in the fourth quarter about $3 million worth of green commercial emitter material. We also sold some under the old category of developmental materials. We sold about $10 million of green emitters of which $6 million of it was on developmental side under the old categories and about $3.9 million of it was on the commercial side. And in terms of which products is in, I mean we really, there has been rumors about some products at a time, but we really can’t answer that question, I mean that’s really is a question for Samsung. Hendi Susanto – Gabelli & Company: Okay. And second question is how should we think of the corporate income tax in 2012?

Well, 2012, our NOL should carry us for everything. However, we feel we’ll have the withholding tax, which is 16.5% of the license fee that we will receive from Samsung. So we still will have some income taxes, but they are the withholding taxes that, but beyond that I don’t expect to see any additional provision for income taxes.

And we’ll go next to Andrew Abrams with Avian Securities. Andrew Abrams – Avian Securities: Hi. Just a couple of quick questions on host material. Was all the host material that was sold in 2011 green host material?

Pretty much. I mean that is the material that we have sold. We really have not worked on red host materials and we do actually work on some blue host materials also, but I would say the bulk of our host materials that were sold relate green phosphorescent. Andrew Abrams – Avian Securities: And of your emitter sales in 2011 and maybe looking out 2012, other than red and green, would you expect to sell any other color emitter materials in 2012 and did you in 2011?

We’ve actually sold some light blue emitter materials and some yellow materials in 2011. Andrew Abrams – Avian Securities: And were the yellow materials used for as far as you know for white stack or is that for a separate item?

There is – as you are well aware, there is a number of ways to make white, one is using yellow and blue and another is using RGB. So I probably can assume that these were used for white.

And we’ll take our next question Jagadish Iyer with Piper Jaffray. Jagadish Iyer – Piper Jaffray: Yeah. Thanks for taking my question. Two questions, Sid. First one. Can you tell us how many customers other than Samsung are having acceptable yields on their OLED whether it’s be it for smartphones or tablets or for TVs? Can you give us some color on that besides Samsung who else and I have a quick follow-up?

We -- to be honest, yield questions really have to go through the manufacturers. It is not information that we can answer for them. So you’d have to talk to the other manufacturers. Jagadish Iyer – Piper Jaffray: No. Maybe I can phrase it this way. How many of them in your opinion have production capability that will come on line in 2012 other than Samsung, volume production?

AUO and LG have both announced that they will have volume production in 2012. Jagadish Iyer – Piper Jaffray: But in your opinion do you think it’s that realistic?

We honestly can’t make an opinion about a manufacturers’ ability to manufacture or not. We’re a technology and material supplier to them. Jagadish Iyer – Piper Jaffray: Fair enough. The second question is, I wanted to find out, Sid, you had talked about the last time that you would be re-filing your patents on osmium. Can you give us an update where you are with regard to that filing and any more -- can you give us any more color on what are the upcoming? Is there any other pending litigation stuff that investors ought to be aware of? Thank you.

The continuation application is simply being filed in due course. I don’t know the specific status of it -- of that right now. On the oppositions, as I have mentioned, there was one new opposition filed in Europe, one with our fundamental PHOLED patents, but there has been no other significant activity on the opposition front.

And we’ll take our next question from Carter Shoop with KeyBanc. Carter Shoop – KeyBanc: Good evening. Thanks for taking questions. First question is on the greenhouse, obviously, we had a little bit of pre-buy in the third quarter and then that dropped down in the fourth quarter. But if we look at the annualized split between host and emitter sales in the second half of 2011, is that a good reason to think about for chemical sales in 2012?

Well, as we have said in the past, the host material business is one that is just starting to get started. There was a significant amount in the third quarter that was sold. We’re going to need a couple more quarters for us to determine specifically what the mix maybe going forward. We did sell host materials in the fourth quarter, as we said approximately $1.3 million worth of them or about 12% of our material sales. And the second -- the third quarter was significantly higher percentage wise. So I’m not so sure you can do that, just take those two quarters. I’m not trying to avoid your question. We just don’t have an answer for that, to be honest, Carter. Carter Shoop – KeyBanc: Okay. That’s fine. My second question is the level of confidence that you have about UDC’s phosphorescent materials being used in LG and Samsung’s OLED TV that are coming out later this year, assuming they come out this year?

We think they’re going to be used. Carter Shoop – KeyBanc: And last question. It’s been four months since you have provided your original guidance and maybe you can talk about a few items that have gone better than originally planned four months ago and maybe some items that have gone a little bit worse?

Well, in terms of our guidance there hasn’t been just because when we did it we spent a lot of time working on it, announcements of things that occur short-term really don’t affect how we look at 2012 because it really is, it’s a long year and we’re still comfortable and we re-looked at it. There has been a number of announcements recently to talk about some introduction of TVs, which may have not have been talked about a few months ago. However, there’s a lot of people announce a lot of things and whether or not there is any volume that will move our needle or not is something that we’re going to have to wait for it.

And we’ll take a follow up question from Darice Liu with Brigantine Advisors. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: Guys, can you give us an update on what’s going on with lighting? There seems to be an increased amount of development activity and your license agreements had increased nicely in that segment. And just on the side question, can you comment whether or not you are including lighting in your 2012 revenue forecast?

We are seeing an uptick in the number of companies that are involved in lighting as indicated by some license agreements and other agreements that we’ve signed with companies. There is some lighting revenue included in our forecast, but frankly it pales in comparison to the display revenue. We think over the next year or two, you see a number of companies involved in developing products and manufacturing processes for lighting and then it’d be likely that one or more of them will step out of the gate into a production facility. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: Okay. When you mentioned that it’ll pale in comparison to display, are we talking about less than 10% or 15% of your forecast distributed to lighting?

Darice, to be honest, we haven’t given any breakdowns of what’s in the forecast and so I really can’t answer your question, to be honest. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: Okay. I tried.

I can tell you lighting was -- for this year our lighting was about 1% to 1.5% of our total material sales. Darice Liu – Brigantine Advisors: Okay. They’re very insignificant. Okay. Thank you, guys.

Thank you.

And we’ll go next to Brian Lee with Goldman Sachs. Brian Lee – Goldman Sachs: Hey, guys. I just had a follow-up question on the host business. It looks like a little over $1 million in sales in Q4. How many customers did that represent and how are you seeing the trend in that material segment to start 2012?

I -- we’ve sold it to a number of our customers. You were correct the number is about $1.3 million for the fourth quarter and we have a number of customers that are sampling our material. I really can’t answer any questions about the Q1 at this time. Brian Lee – Goldman Sachs: Okay. How about, one last question for me and I’ll jump back in, on Q4, was Samsung subject to any minimum volume requirements on the material side and did they buy that minimum or more than the minimum?

Well, they were subject to because there were minimums in each of the years from 2011 through 2017 and they met their minimums. Brian Lee – Goldman Sachs: They exceeded it or they just met them?

They exceeded their minimum. Brian Lee – Goldman Sachs: Okay. Thanks.

And we’ll take our last question from Jed Dorsheimer with Canaccord Genuity. Jed Dorsheimer – Canaccord Genuity: Hi. Thanks. Two follow-ups. I guess, one on the host, Sid, and I know the details are limited, but it seems as if, my understanding is that you got involved really in the host business to try and help your customers solve a problem that they were having. I’m wondering if, should we look at that host business as a function of the customer design? In other words, it’s more applicable to a patent stack of RGB versus a non-patent issue and then also, your comments, I think at a recent conference seems to suggest that you weren’t sure if because that business is a commodity and I think you used the analogy of chocolate and milk with the host being the milk that that’s a business that you’re going to be in longer term. So, I’m just wondering if there is any update on that as we look forward? Then I do have one follow-up.

The hosts are all applicable to all the different designs whether it will be patent or not. So I guess I’ll answer that part of the question. Sid?

I mean, it was developed for our green emitter to get the best possible performance from our green emitter. And as I’ve said, the host business historically is a commodity business and if in the long run we have to compete on a commodity basis, it’s not a business that we are setup to be in. We do think that the host business though if we can continue to develop higher performing materials, it is a business that we want to be in because we can have higher margins with higher performance. Jed Dorsheimer – Canaccord Genuity: Okay. And then one follow-up. Sorry to beat the horse here but in terms of the guidance, I know you’re in a difficult position in terms of what you can say and what you can’t say. But if, just if, we can stay within sort of orders of magnitude, if we look at Samsung this year, it was like roughly $30 million, $35 million, if we look at their capacity increases and sort of take the license out, is it fair to say that a significant portion of that $90 to $110 is really based on non-Samsung customers coming into the market?

I think we probably beat the horse well enough, Jed. Jed Dorsheimer – Canaccord Genuity: Okay. Thank you.

And we’ll take our final question from Jagadish Iyer with Piper Jaffray. Jagadish Iyer – Piper Jaffray: Thanks. Just a quick follow-up. I wanted to find out on ‘012, how should we think in terms of your chemical sales, the split between the host and the emitter of ‘012…

Yeah. I… Jagadish Iyer – Piper Jaffray: … roughly percentage wise if that should be helpful in our modeling?

I really can’t answer that question mainly because we haven’t given guidance specific to each separate material and as we said, I mean, the host business is one that is one that is very lumpy because it is new. So, honestly, I can’t answer your question. Jagadish Iyer – Piper Jaffray: Okay. That’s fair enough. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

There are no further questions at this time. I’d like to turn the conference back to our speakers for any closing remarks.

We’d like to thank you all very much for being on the call. As you are well aware, if you have any specific follow-up questions, I’d be happy to answer them. You can either call me or send me an email and I’d be happy to answer them and thank you again for your time.

Thank you, everyone, that does conclude today’s conference. We thank you for your participation.