Good morning my name is Scott and I will be your conference operator today at this time I would like to welcome to the Vistra Energy 2016 webcast and conference call [audio gap] investor call presentation, our 2016 annual report and the related earnings release. Joining me for today’s call are Curt Morgan, President and Chief Executive Officer, Bill Holden, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Jim Burke, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer and a few additional senior executives available to address questions in the second part of today’s call as necessary. Before we began our presentation, I encourage all listeners to review the Safe Harbor Statements included on slide one and two which explain the risk of forward-looking statement in the use of non-GAAP financial measures. Today’s discussion will contain forward-looking statements which are based on assumptions we believe to be true as of today’s date. Slide one highlights certain factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or implied by forward-looking statements. Further, our earnings release, slide presentation and discussions on this call will include certain non-GAAP financial measures. For such measures reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP measures are in the earnings release and in the appendices to Vistra Energy’s various investor presentation. I will now turn the call over to Curt Morgan to lead our discussion.

Thank you, Molly, and good morning to everyone on the call today. We appreciate your interest in Vistra Energy. Before I begin the discussion regarding 2016 performance, I do want to avail timing of this earnings call in our related financial report. We recognize we are reporting our 2016 results later than what is typical for an organization of our size. This time it was driven by recent emergence from bankruptcy and the requirement to implement fresh-start accounting for the emerged entities which some of you may know is very time consuming and detail process. We expect to report results on a more customary cadence in the future. I will try to move you to the appropriate slide as we go through this. However, I do not intend to cover everything on each of the slides and if there’s something that I don’t cover, you can ask us in the Q&A if you’re wondering about it. But I’ll move this along, and right now I’d like to move this page five. Okay. We’ll begin our discussion with 2016. It was a transformational year for us and frankly a good test for our integrated retail and wholesale model. As you may know and I’m sure do Vistra Energy predecessor emerged from bankruptcy on October 3rd of 2016 as a publicly traded entity and we are happy that we have lowest leverage position in the industry finishing 2016 with just under two times net debt to EBITDA and only 2.5 times gross debt to EBITDA. We view these low average level as a tremendous asset to our organization as we continue to evaluate various capital allocation alternatives which I’ll address it in more detail in a bit. In addition, we believe our debt levels are departure from a chronically overleveraged sector that…

Thanks, Curt. And before turning to this financial side, I want to begin with just a brief discussion regarding the presentation of our 2016 GAAP results. As Curt mentioned at the beginning of the call, the company emerged from bankruptcy on October 3rd, 2016, and on that day Vistra Energy became a new energy for financial reporting purposes. Kind of Morgan's investor reported all of the effects of the plant and reorganization and also adopt the press style report, pursuant to which the company revalue all of the assets and liabilities on its balance sheet. As a result, the financial segments of the company for the period on and after October 3rd of last year which we refer to as the successor period are not comparable to the financial segments of the predecessor prior to that date. And given that Vistra's post emergent results are not comparable with the prior period result of the predecessor, today's discussion and our quarterly earnings discussions and releases during 2017 will not include year-over-year or quarter-over-quarter comparisons. However, we do expect to include a comparison of full-year 2017 adjusted EBITDA versus 2016 adjusted EBITDA when we report year-end results on next for '17 next year. Now, turning to slide 11. Vistra Energy delivered adjusted EBITDA in 2016 at 1.6 billion, reducing the year and the top quartile of the 2016 guidance range that we provided in December. An impressive result given the mild Texas weather that we saw in November and December last year. In addition, as we saw on slide 11, we've updated the presentation of our adjusted free cash flow guidance for 2016 to exclude the impacts of margin deposits and working capital which tend to be timing in nature. After adjusting for these timing items, Vistra Energy's 2016 adjusted free cash…

Hi, great. Thank you very much. Good quarter. I know you guys had referred to similar cost cuts and that wasn’t clear about this. You mentioned the IT but is your other areas that you continue to cut costs or is that really the last frontier? Is there anything on the O&M side that we can look at or help us understand that a little bit? Thanks.

Yeah. Good question asked and if I would know that relatively [ph] we are using lot of words here, but two things. One, I think on the – what I call support cost side of thing, which is SG&A and then we have some support O&M and is really largely the support for the generation business. We are pretty much where we need to be on that, but I do want to stress again and this is just in my nature and I think our company’s nature that we are going to continually look for ways. Technology is advancing so quickly and frankly we cut really quickly, within a month of when we emerged from bankruptcy, we cut very quickly and so we are now just following up with our underlying process improvements that go along with restructuring the organization. We might find [ph] through process improvements, but it’s not going to be large reduction. There could be some incremental improvement. With regard to the plans we are working on an what we call an operational performance improvement initiative and we are coming to conclusion on that on Oak Grove and Sandow and we also are doing some work around some of the other plants in the fleet. We do expect to have cost savings around that, but also what I would call sort of revenue net deal [ph] enhancements around improvement and plant performance, and so stay tuned on that. We are not ready to detail that yet, but we in terms of the size of that, but you should expect us to come out with some incremental improvements later in 2017.

Okay, thanks. And then just following up also on the comment about your legacy coal facilities – can you maybe walk us through how you think about whether do you want to keep some of them open, whether you close some, what would be kind of the metrics you reduced to side, and then also what would be the timeline to do something like that.

Yeah. Another [ph] question. So, first and foremost I want to stress that any analysis we do is on the plant by plant basis and it is solely focused on the profitability on an individual plant basis and what we look at is obviously EBITDA contribution and we also look at basically cash flow from those facility. ERCOT being in energy only market with $9,000 per megawatt hour price gas sort of the – you can be lured into the idea that we will just wait around within one summer will make a bunch of money on a lot of capacity by having some plants around. And so, our analysis really is around where we think the frequency of that might be, but more important is we look at our excess link in ERCOT that is only in the money and largely in the summer months. We look at those as options. And then what we look is can we get the strike price of those options effectively the fixed costs of those plants down to a level where we feel comfortable, keeping them in the portfolio during the trough [ph] and that we can then get disproportionate returns in the energy only market during the tightening in the marketplace. And so, when we take that into accounts just what are current year now cash flows and EBITDA contribution combined with how low can we get the cost structure down to get the strike price if you will of the ongoing fixed cost nature of that to the lowest it can be. Does it have a reasonable chance given what we think that probability that we would see tightening in the market that we have a reasonable chance of making money, and I will just tell you that I think in this market right now that’s a very difficult proposition for some of our coal plants, but we are in the middle we are trying to get that strike price down as low as we can before we make that final decision, and we will probably be wrapped up on that in the middle – probably more toward the end of the summer and you should expect that we will have some decisions around our legacy coal plants that we will communicate with the market in 2017.

Okay. Thanks. And then just one final question and I’ll let someone else hop on. When you think about – I know reaffirm 2017 guidance where you hedges locked in. As you look into 2018 I guess you probably have significant proportion locked up now on the hedging side, is there a time when you’ll give us 2018 outlook or is that really going to wait until sort of the end of 2017 to maybe get a revision in while you had in your previous presentation index. Thanks.

Yeah. It will be later in the year and there is a number of reasons for that. We would like to see how the markets shake out. We would like to see how the summer comes in, because that’s going to affect. One thing that happens in ERCOT is depending on what the summer does and if you do get fortunate to see scarcity pricing it will show up in the forwards for the following summer and so we just want to – before we come out we want to see a little bit more how 2017 coming out and its impact on 2018. We also think that as we just discussed there maybe some other market activity that might change just what 2018 looks like. So, you should expect as more I would guess in the fourth quarter timeframe to come out with definitive guidance for 2018. I will just say this that if we – there is some stuff out there probably available and if we thought we were materially off on that, one way or the other we would probably feel compel [ph] especially if it was lower until compel to say something and we are not compelled to say something. So, I think we’d just leave it at that and you’ll hear more from us on 2018 as we roll through 2017.

Okay, fantastic. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from the line of Julien Dumoulin-Smith with UBS. Your line is open.

Hey good morning.

Hey, Julien! How are you doing?

Good. Thank you very much. Congratulation! I supposed first quick question on balance sheet deployment. I heard a lot of your comments about practice and also higher markets and investing in Brownfield versus Greenfield. How are you thinking now about future capital balance sheet deployment and specifically back in the wholesale power space rather than investing in say midstream or renewable or some other asset class entirely?

Yeah, I think we have a slight preference where we see the markets today to invest in our sweet spot and that means in the power sector, whether that would be wholesale assets or retail. Julien, we talked before on this and I talk to many folks on this before when we were going through a period of time and kind of assessing and we still continue to think about either energy infrastructure as if relates to supports our current business, but I think if you are thinking about any kind of transformational transaction or something like that or significant move somewhere outside ERCOT, I think we would probably be leading more from power sector standpoint than we would in some other type of infrastructure. So, I think that’s kind of where our head and that’s just because where evaluations in the sector have gone, both for assets and for companies and we are just going to take a look at that and be opportunistic. I will reiterate and we said this over and over again and words are cheap, but we are going to have to find what we think are very compelling opportunities with significant value to proposition for us to really expose our balance sheet and this is tough sector, especially if you step outside our comfort zone of ERCOT. I have been in these other markets and that is good thing and also though a little bit of an overhang for us, because I have a pretty good memory of what it takes and you guys know this. I mean, just think about what’s going in these other markets with [Indiscernible]. A lot of people have their fingers in the pie in this particular sector. So, it’s a tough one. So, if you are going to win in it you got to be able to buy something that you think is a compelling value proposition and feel confident [ph]. You have control over how you get that value proposition and so that’s where we are kind of where we are thinking about things as we speak.

And what about retail – you kind of alluded to it there. I mean, what about retail outside of your core physical footprint as it stands. Does that something that would be [Indiscernible]? I know you guys have been historically very focused on that Texas market with TXU Energy brand, but you branch out with new brands into the northeast for instance?

Yeah. I think it is unlikely to see us – I should say any kind of transformational deal as we can get anything and we talk about it a lot, but we would want it to be in integrated fashion. We want two things. One, existing retail and two, we want to know that we could use it as a platform to expand our integrated model. It is highly unlikely that we are going to go buy a couple of generation assets to standalone and then look to build organically a retail business outside our ERCOT or buy a retail business. It’s also equally unlikely that we are going to go out and buy a lead with the retail business and fill again [ph] with generation. Those are just unlikely things when you think about how we see the world. We still think that we could actually add to our business here and we know that well, we’ve got scale economies in our retail business and certainly a very good approach to the market. We just don’t know that this is the right time to do that, but we were constantly in this market. I would tell you that the deal flow that goes on in ERCOT we are just front and centre [ph] on this. Everybody knows what our balance sheet looks like. Everybody knows kind of what we are interested in, so there is very little going on in ERCOT that we don’t get a look at and so I would say, we are going to do retail right now on the standalone only basis. You could put pretty much bet on it would be in ERCOT deal.

Excellent! Thank you gentlemen!

Hey, thanks John.

There are no further questions at this time. I will turn the call back over to the presenters.

Okay. Well, thank you everybody for your interest in our company and we look forward to many future calls going forward. As I said at the beginning of the call, we do appreciate your interest in Vistra and we look forward to talking to you in the weeks and months ahead and we are going to stay tune for what we call non-deal road show coming up and our listing on the New York Stock Exchange. We are excited about it and as always if you have any further questions, you know how to get hold of Molly. So, thank you.

This concludes today’s conference call. You may now disconnect.