Welcome to the GSV Capital second quarter 2012 conference call. During today’s presentation all participants will be in a listen-only mode. Following the presentation, the conference will be open to questions. (Operator Instructions). I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Alex Wellins of Blueshirt Group. Please go ahead.

Thank you and thanks for joining us on today’s call. I’m joined today by Michael Moe, GSV’s Founder and CEO; and Stephen Bard, the company’s Chief Financial Officer. Today’s call and webcast are being recorded. An audio replay of the conference call will be available for seven days. The webcast can be found on our website at www.gsvcap.com. Replay information is included in our press release that was released after the market closed today. Please note that this call is property of GSV Capital. Any unauthorized re-broadcast of this call in any form is strictly prohibited. I also like to call your attention to the customary disclosure on our press release today regarding forward-looking information. The statements made in today’s conference call and webcast may constitute forward-looking statements, which relate to future events or our future performance or financial condition. These statements are not guarantees of our future performance, condition or results and involve a number of risk and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including those described from time-to-time in our filings with the SEC. We do not undertake to update our forward-looking statements unless required to do so by law. To obtain copies of our latest SEC filings, please visit the IR section of our website. With that said, I’ll turn the call over to Michael Moe. Michael.

Thanks Alex and good afternoon, thanks for joining us today and we appreciate your interest. Over the past quarter and last 15 months as gone public, we have executed against the strategy we laid out for investors. We built a diversified portfolio of now 40 of the leading fastest growing top venture backed companies across five focus areas of investment. We believe that many of these game-changing companies is the potential to drive outsourced size growth and significant shareholder value in the years ahead. I’ll start out with a quick summary, a snapshot of the state as of June 30, 2012. First, the total value of GSVs portfolio investments was $171.6 million. The net asset value, NAV of the fund is $13.81 per share and we ended the quarter with $96 million in cash and money market funds. As of today, our five largest positions in the portfolio are as follows: Twitter, where we’ve invested $32.7 million and are representing 12% of the overall portfolio; Palantir which is a position that we’ve expanded significantly in the past quarter and then since the quarter end where we have $20.6 million invested, which is approximate 7.6% of the portfolio; Violin Memory where we have $14.8 million invested, representing 5.6% of the portfolio; Chegg, who have invested $14 million, representing 5.3% of the portfolio; Dropbox, who has invested to-date $12 million, representing $4.9 million of the portfolio. We also made new investments in leading companies such as Solexel, which is a prior Perkins backed solar company which we participated in the financings of the recently completed. We put $10 million into Solexel. Just the quick highlight on the company is it really is potentially extremely disruptive in the alternative energy space, with both high efficacy and lower cost. Basically we think it could…

Thank you Michael. As of June 30 the total value of our investments was $171.6 million. That compares to $75.8 million as of March 31. Net assets as of June 30 were $266.9 million, translating to a net asset value per share of $13.81 and that compares to net assets of $167.3 million or $13.47 per share as of March 31. During the quarter we’ve originated approximately $98.5 million in investments in nine new and eight existing portfolio companies that’s exclusive of transactions costs. Since inception we’ve invested a total of approximately $173.9 million in 34 companies and that’s through June 30. As Michael indicated, subsequent to quarter end we’ve invested in 40 companies representing approximately $216.5 million in investments. Investment income, which is comprised of accrued interest as well as money market dividends was approximately $110,000, which translates to $0.001 per share for the second quarter and that compares with investment income of about $118,000 also $0.001 per share for the first quarter of 2012. Net investment loss for ongoing operating expenses for the second quarter was $2.1 million, which translates to $0.13 per share and that compares to a net investment loss of about $1.1 million or $0.12 per share for the first quarter of 2012. Net realized loss on investments was $1.4 million or $0.08 per share for the quarter and that was related to our investment in PJV, which was the Synthetic Zynga investment that we made and that compares with the realized loss of essentially zero for the first quarter of 2012. The net change in unrealized depreciation, which is comprised of transaction costs such as finders fees, legal expenses, escrow fees associated with acquiring portfolio investments and most importantly any fair value adjustments was approximately $2 million or $0.12 per share for the second quarter and that compares with a $1 million or $0.11 per share unrealized appreciation in the first quarter of 2012. That our results in the net decrease and net assets resulting from operations for the second quarter was about $5.5 million or $0.34 per share. That compares with $83,000 or $0.001 per share for the first quarter. We ended the quarter with about $95.6 million in cash and money market funds. With that said, I’ll now turn the call over to the operator who will start the Q&A session.

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from the line of John Stockbridge, a private investor.

Yes gentlemen, I’m a private investor is correct. I was one of the ones that talked I believe with TNEG (ph) about stock repurchase, but beyond that, what is the cash to date, not June 30. What is the NAV today, not June 30. I know you can calculate that. I mean I did spend 30 years in Wall Street. Is it possible you could share that with us, because I think the recent public positions have been a disaster and it would be good to get a sense of where we really are.

Sure. I mean Steve, why don’t you give the percentage number on the cash today and again, I think as it relates to the positions that we have, obviously we have gone through the portfolio extensively and we are very confident in terms of the mark that we have provided and again, we think both the fundamentals are what we reflected, but Steve, give the precise cash position please.

Sure. Through today it’s about $40 million balance.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of John Hickman with Ladenburg Thalmann; please go ahead.

Hi guys. Steve would you walk us through the Zynga. Have you written that off? Is that what I heard you say?

No John, we haven’t written it off. The note actually matured on June 27 and we received shares and settlement for that note, so. The interest that we had obtained over the life of them, around $300,000 was capitalized into principal. Again, the note was set out in share. Specifically we received $533,333 shares. The closing price on June 29 was $5.44. So we did realize a loss on the PJB investment of about $1.4 million and we are now holding Zynga shares on the book, so you’ll notice on the schedule of investments you’ll see that.

Okay, so they gave you enough shares to equal the total value of the note and then the stock has declined from that period of time.

Correct.

You have lot of them coming from, okay, excellent. Okay, so could you talk a little bit about your – you have a large position. I mean 29%, 30% of the portfolio is invested in the education and technology space. Could you talk about that? That’s the largest position in the portfolio and you must have a philosophy there. Could you share that with us?

Sure, a couple of things. One is that we do have a strong conviction in terms of growth potential in the education technology space. You’re seeing substantial activity going on in the market looking for education innovation. When you look at what’s going on in the technology economy, you have 8.3% unemployment, you have 30% of high schools students dropping out, you got 50% of college students that can’t get a job in the first 12 months, 45% of law students can’t. We see the opportunity for education technology to have a substantial role to allow people to participate in the future. You start to see education technology models for the first time really have disruptive characteristics, kind of version 1.0, the companies like Kappel (ph) and BlackBoard were effectively creating access. Now your seeing true network effects where your seeing the growth of the network grow exponentially, so you look at our largest positions. Chegg, which is a leader in creating a network in college students. The Trojan Horse was effectively renting college textbooks, providing a compelling value proposition, I don’t know, like a Netflix, but what they were able to do is take that position and basically capture 40% of all college students on the network providing other services that are utilized by that demographic. You have Kno, which has digitized over 225,000 textbooks. As a leader its shift that’s gone on from paper textbooks to smart digital textbooks, where publishers are partnering with Kno and the college universities, as well as the large strategic businesses are partnering with Kno, basically to help them create a smarter, richer, interactive, less costly product. So with Kno we are investors with Marc Andreessen, as well as with Intel and Goldman. Chegg, we are an investor with Kleiner Perkins and Insight…

And then just one more question, if you had the guts right now, is Silver Springs the next – probably in your portfolio the next one to go up.

Yes, once filed. It’s certainly probably the most probable. That said, we are aware of several of our companies that are kind of spinning up the process and kind of carefully evaluating whether its time to go out or not and as I made in the formal remarks, I think all these companies are looking at their options and our core holdings and again we have concentrated positions in companies that are greater scale, greater market value and we think all of them can go public if they chose and they obviously strategically value. There’s a consolidation that’s taking place in the technology world, which is going to whether we like it or not, pick off companies that we are invested in, because we are invested in (inaudible).

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

This is Steve Bard, I’m sorry to interrupt. I just want to revisit John Stockbridge’s question with respect to cash on hand. The number I provided earlier, netted out in investments which we’ve committed to make, but haven’t completed yet. The actually cash on hand as of this morning was $51.5 million. Thank you operator

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Ed Woo with Ascendiant Capital. Please go ahead.

I had a clarifying question, is it correct that the bulk of your loss from the quarter net realized or un-realized was due to Zynga, was there anything else involved?

Yes, I’ll let Steve answer the question. But no, there was a handful of adjustments. But go ahead, go through them Steve.

Sure, the net realized loss was exclusively the PJB note, $1.38 million. There were a few marks to the portfolio, so net changes and unrealized depreciation on investments, we marked down Facebook, Facebook, Groupon and Serious. We marked up Dropbox, there were transaction fees such as finder fees and legal expenses involved there, but with respect to the net realized loss, that was exclusively PJB.

Okay, and just another clarifying question, is Silver Springs the only company you are investing that has actually filed and everybody else hasn’t filed yet.

Correct.

Okay and the last question I have is, now that you are up to about 40 companies, do you have an optimal amount of companies that you would like to see GSV invested in.

Yes, that’s a great question. I think that’s evolved as our capitals grow. We still have a strong philosophy of concentrating the capital in core holdings. So we made reference to our five largest holdings earlier. But if you look at our top 20 holdings, in the top 20 investments, we make its 86% of the portfolio and we anticipate and what I’ve said is sort of a framework that we are trying to – as we are constructing our portfolio, we are looking at different investment themes, we are looking at size and stages of companies. But we look to continue to have the bulk of our investments in a relatively 20 to 25 names and then we will sprinkle that with interesting companies and smaller positions as we think its appropriate. But I think what we had created as a model was that we would have 25 to 30 names. That was sort of what our thesis was as we kind of evolved this looking at where we think we can optimize the portfolio, the greatest. We continue to believe its about concentrating and adding to core positions and leading names, but we are complementing that with making smaller investments in companies where we think have an advantage where we think it makes sense, because it would compensate us for in terms of return potential, so that’s how we are thinking about it. So we are not looking at having to expand the number of core positions, but we have added what we think are compelling smaller types of investments on top of the large positions we continue to add to.

Great. Well, definitely good luck.

Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

Thank you. (Operator Instructions). We have a follow up question from the line of John Stockbridge a Private Investor; please go ahead.

Yes sir, I’m sorry, but I did not get. My first question was cash and NAV for as of today not June 30, and you did cash, but did not give me any NAV. If your good enough to do that, that would be perfect.

Well Steve, this is in your realm to discuss. We give a NAV once a quarter and that progress that we go through is pretty rigorous, so we are not just going to throw up NAV, but I think you can do – the portfolio is marked on a current investment basis. You know currently as of June 30, but I don’t think there is anything material that’s changed to the portfolio. Again, we put an appropriate value on and we are confident with the fundamentals. The cash, I think it’s important. In terms of the total cash it is just over $50 million we have in our bank today.

Right, well thank you. But I think a lot of the cash position as you know was from the secondary offering. And listen, don’t get me wrong, I’m just a very discouraged individual investor that would like to see a little bit more from the standpoint of information flow or whatever, and I don’t mean what investments you are look at, but something that allows for the market to penalize what your NAV could substantially account.

Yes and believe me, I understand your frustration, and I mean we are all frustrated in terms of where the share price is. We are frustrated and disappointed with how our three public companies have done, and I will tell you that we have been around this for quite some time and been involved in emerging growth companies and we are going to be wrong from time to time, but we are focused on the barring average, we are focused on fundamentals, because we know that over time fundamentals will drive the stock price. And so we are working extremely hard at GSV, is to focus on identifying the best of the best growth company in the world and be diligent and be transparent and honest with ourselves about what’s going on and we work really hard of doing that. I will say that we try to be communicative with our investors, its our obligation, its our duty and we feel very strongly about that and if there’s suggestions or things that we can do on an ongoing basis that will provide better information, better insight to what we are doing, I think that’s important and we think that’s to everybody’s benefit. So we will focus on how we, how we can deliver against that and I think that’s completely fair and again, your frustration is fair as well. What we are focused on is making smart decisions and doing everything we can to be involved with the right companies, because if we do that, everything will take care of itself and that I assure you. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes of the line of Tony Polak with Maxim Group. Please go ahead.

Could you comment a little about your valuation on Twitter. I see if I’m right its about $17 and could you comment on where it is trading now. I assume it is trading somewhat higher than that.

Yes, so the reality with Twitter is, I’ll tell you, I don’t think there is a real, it’s not the kind of market that we’ve seen in the past. Even the fact that Twitter as you might know or recall from previous calls is a company that is very systematic, has a process about who’s approved to buy the shares and so forth and we are an approved buyer. But nonetheless you’ve seen a pretty active market and with marks that give you some pretty good sense of how investors are valuing it. Before Facebook, Twitter shares were certainly north of $20 a share. I think $21, $22 you saw pretty good institutional market. Since Facebook and the disappointment, it was our expectation that we were going to see Twitter shares be much lower than where you are seeing our market today and its not like I said before, its not a great market, but I think we are seeing twitter – we think we are reflecting the value of Twitter today well in terms of what we stated in our statement. You are playing about $17 and change. We think it’s an appropriate level. They will be going through, they are going through a tender process as we speak. So I think we’ll have a pretty good sense of what the current price is, but its not my expectation that you’ll see it materially above where we have it marked. But we do love what’s going on with Twitter. We are very close to that situation, as just was with a very, very senior person on Twitter last night and we are very excited about what’s going on there from a value creation standpoint. I’ll also make the point which I probably could have referenced in the earlier formal…

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Danilo Kawasaki with Gerber Kawasaki Wealth Management; please go ahead.

Yes, in light of what happened to Facebook IPO would you guys be willing to consider taking some profits for the next two companies that go public.

Well, we are always looking at what’s the right decision and generally speaking, it’s our philosophy once we become liquid, once we are permitted to sell, we’ll be looking for an opportunity to sell. So with the companies that we invested, we have a lockup period of six months. In some cases underwrites will allow you to sell before that lockup period is done, but we haven’t had that opportunity. Whether we would have, that’s different, but generally speaking you can expect that we are going to hold the position for at lease six months and will then look for the appropriate time and the place to exit.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line Donald Elliot, a Private Investor. Please go ahead.

Hi, I have a coupe of questions, particularly about some of these companies, i.e., Dropbox. Do you really think that they can compete in the space with such names as Google, Apple, Microsoft and if I’m not mistaken they are cloud computing. So if I’m not mistaken, Google has Google Drive, Apple has iCloud, I think Microsoft has SkyDrive, something like that. You really think Dropbox can compete and another question regarding Twitter, do you feel -- I mean how do you feel about Twitter. Do you feel like it’s going to flop like Facebook or what..

Well, I mean this is the first on Dropbox and obviously we’d be naïve to say that we don’t pay attention or don’t carefully watch the developments of very powerful, tremendous companies such as Google doing Google Drive and with iCloud with Apple or Microsoft, I mean these are great companies, lot of resources and so forth. What our experience is with emerging growth companies, is that you come across, again often those companies, the buy guys kill the little guys and you’ve seen that many times more than the little guys win it right. But you come across these very special companies every so often that have the special sauce, the special leadership, special product and potential and culture and I’m telling you things can change, but Dropbox is a company that we are huge ably resent… iCloud, with me obviously Apple tried to buy Dropbox three years ago for a $1 billion and Drew Houston said he wasn’t going to do it. And then he just got their head down and you walk into that company and they are relentless, they have a product that’s basically magic and it’s so much. I think basically 100 million people’s view right now that this is a product that is superior, vastly superior to anything in the market. They’ve commoditized the operating system, they have commoditized device and they made a seamless remarkable product that when you have real network effects going, meaning you got the network that everybody sharing on, it doesn’t matter how big your competitors might be. You have built in network effect type of advantage. So look, Dropbox, as I said we would be foolish to ignore it. They are serious compotators, but we think Dropbox is a special company and they are doing unbelievably well and…

Thank you and our last question comes from the line of William Corley, a Private Investor.

Yes, I’m actually William Corley with 22nd Century. Hi Mike, how are you?

I’m doing great. How are you?

I got a few quick couple of questions for you. First of all, and I’d like to thank you for your weekly writing that you put out. I met you in San Francisco in your office a number of years ago. I also run 1st Discount Brokerage, but the writings that you put out each week are very helpful.

Thank you.

I think that you have done an excellent job of telegraphing your views and even with the debacle on Facebook I think that you addressed it to the readers readily and I want you to know first hand I appreciate it and believe in the way that you approach your investing and these things are tricky. That being said, I have been a professional money manger for quite a long time and these private equity deals are sometimes moving forward and I know your are such a valuation, and trying to place asset to what they will be valued in the market place over a period of time. What do you expect the multiplying effect to be in the closed in space of private equity. You got other private equity investment that have been out there for a number of years that have been the leading discounts to NAVs in the group and so its interesting that this particular stock is, GSV is now somewhat getting painted with that same brush. So I want to kind of get your view as you move forward on how we can separate ourselves from that that stigma and then secondly, to understand if the market, you can’t close that 30%, 40% discount to NAV moving forward. And then secondly, because of your writings going back in March, you introduced a number of companies, one course era and I just finished taking their sociology course online from Princeton University because you introduced that to me, and I took the time to take that course, just so that I can be informed to be able to let investors and the community know, whether this was real or whether this was just a hot spot and thanks to your initiation, its very real and its phenomenal. They expected to be 5000 students in my class and by the mid-term there were 40,000 and the professor did a brilliant job and what I as a student took away from the class was knowledge at a very high institution i.e., Princeton. So my question to you is, as you are investing, the GSV funds into the knowledge space, how are those investors going to play out when now you have MIT, Harvard courses bringing in high level education to the public at no cost.

Yes, you said a lot of different things, but first let me one, thank you very much for your kind comments about the news letter we put out and anybody on the line, we make this available, we put our kind of weekly thoughts out and we do try to communicate and provide information on how we are thinking of what we are doing and so one, I very much appreciated those kind of comments and it is, and we should have probably done before, just to make sure that people are aware that we do that, and that’s something that we hope people find useful and it adds to that point about communicating well with our shareholders. Secondly as it relates to kind of the state of our discount to NAV versus what can happen over time and how do we avoid being in sort of a perpetual discount to NAV and there is a couple or three things that how we look at that. One is, we understand. I mean we understand what happened to our stock and we think again as stock goes ahead of NAV we have got 4% of the fund in Facebook, we got undue credit for Facebook in the fund and if one of the things went the other way, we certainly got punished along with. But I think the gap between NAV, the portfolio and what we got, you know I think some investors think that everything in the portfolio is – and obviously its discount like this with the case. We bought at one price, but they are significantly below what we bought. I mean that’s – we have NAV and we go through a third party evaluation firm. Our auditors go through it, so there is no routine matter with…

Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude the GSV Capital second quarter 2012 conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.