At this time I would like to welcome everyone to the World Fuel Services fourth quarter 2007 earnings call. (Operator Instructions) I would now like to introduce Mr. Frank Shea, Executive Vice President and Chief Risk and Administrative Officer.

Good evening, everyone. And welcome to the World Fuel Services fourth quarter conference call. I am Frank Shea, Executive Vice President and Chief Risk and Administrative Officer, and as evident, I am doing the introductions on this evening’s call. Today’s call is also available via webcast. To access this webcast or future webcasts, please visit our website and click on the webcast icon. With us on the call today are, Paul Stebbins, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; Michael Kasbar, President and Chief Operating Officer; Ira Birns, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; and Paul Nobel, Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer. By now, you should have all received a copy of our earnings release. If not, you can access our release on our website. Before we get started, I would like to review World Fuel’s Safe Harbor statement. Some of the comments to be made on this evening’s call may include forward-looking statements under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or facts to differ materially from such statements. Detailed information about these risks is contained in the company’s SEC filings, which are available on the company’s website or from the SEC. We will begin with several minutes of prepared remarks which will then be followed by a question-and-answer period. At this time, I would like to introduce our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Paul Stebbins.

Thank you, Frank. Good afternoon and thank you all for joining us. Today we announced earnings of $18.1 million or $0.63 per diluted share for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007. These numbers include a $1.7 million after-tax impairment charge related to the write-down of capitalized software costs from a business we acquired in 1998. Overall, we delivered solid earnings performance in Q4, and our return on equity, excluding the software write-down, was 16.8% [inaudible – break in audio] an extremely volatile operating environment. We continued to deliver robust underlying growth across all segments. In our Aviation segment, we were pleased to announce the acquisition of AVCARD, which offers a private label charge card and sells aviation fuel and related services to the general aviation industry. AVCARD’s robust offering has been an excellent strategic complement to our core business. They came with great management depth, and we have already begun to leverage their expertise within our existing organization. This acquisition has generated considerable interest in the aviation market, and we have embarked on a number of successful joint sales initiatives with the AVCARD team. We could not be happier with the AVCARD acquisition and its positive impact on our business. We are also pleased to report that the overall aviation industry continues to prosper. Boeing set a record for plane orders in 2007 with over 1,400 commercial jet orders and deliveries of over 440 aircraft. Airbus had over 1,200 orders and delivered over 400 planes. Our own core aviation business remains strong in the quarter, with gross profit up sharply on a sequential and year-over-year basis. Furthermore, our self-supply model continued to drive value as we benefited from increasing prices throughout Q4. Looking forward, IATA expects airline industry profits in 2008 to be around $5.5 billion, down from their previous…

Thank you, Paul and good evening everyone. Revenues for the fourth quarter was $4.1 billion, up 15% sequentially and up 58% compared to the fourth quarter of last year. Our Marine segment revenues were $2.3 billion up 17% sequentially and 63% year-over-year. The Aviation segment generated revenues of $1.6 billion, up 12% sequentially and up 52% from last year’s fourth quarter. And finally, our Land segment grew to $181 million, up 18% sequentially and 60% from last year’s fourth quarter. These increases in revenue were significantly impacted by the sharp increase in fuel prices over the course of 2007, with the most pronounced impact occurring during the fourth quarter. Before I review our results by segment, I would like to point out that our Aviation results include AVCARD’s results of operations from December 1 through year-end. Our Aviation segment sold 601 million gallons of fuel during the fourth quarter of 2007, down 2% sequentially, but up 14% compared to the fourth quarter of last year. Our Marine segment’s total business activity was 7.1 million metric tons, up 3% sequentially and year-over-year. Fuel reselling activities constituted 75% of total Marine business activity in the quarter, consistent with the third quarter. Our Land segment continues to grow, selling 74 million gallons during the fourth quarter, up 6% sequentially and up over 24% compared to the fourth quarter of last year. Gross profit for the fourth quarter was $73.8 million, an increase of $11.6 million or 19% sequentially and $16.1 million or 28% compared to the same quarter a year ago. Our Aviation segment contributed a record $39.1 million in gross profit, an increase of $5.8 million or 18% sequentially, and $10.5 million or 37% over the fourth quarter of 2006. Similar to the second quarter of 2007, the sharp rise in jet…

Thank you, Ira. Marcelo, if you’d be kind enough, we’d like to open it up for Q&A. Thanks.

(Operator Instructions) Our first question is from the line of Alexander Brand – Stephens Inc.

Good evening. Congratulations on a nice quarter.

Thanks, Alex. Alexander Brand – Stephens Inc.: Paul, I’d first like to just get your comments on the environment. It sounds like you had some working capital that was drained but I assume that’s just rising fuel; looks like your terms were stable. Are you getting any kind of push to pay sooner; is it affecting credit terms? And if not for you, what are you seeing with other suppliers in the market?

Certainly a good question. I would say that, no, we haven’t seen so much of that on our front, but again, we enjoy the benefit of a huge competitive differentiator, which is our balance sheet and our liquidity. I think if anything I would say that from a supply perspective we represent sort of Safe Haven and Safe Harbor. That balance sheet’s very important to our suppliers. They look at it and it becomes the competitive differentiator for us and it gives us some significant competitive advantage. Certainly, for smaller, privately held companies that are less well capitalized, this is not an easy market to be doing business in. There’s lot of volatility, prices have been high. And we’ve seen some evidence that it’s certainly put some pressure on some of the competitive landscape. So from our point of view, I think that we’ve said all along that we knew that prices could remain high, and if nothing else, they would be certainly up and down. And we wanted to keep our powder dry and able to play in the space, and I think we’ve done that very well. As Ira said, the uses of cash sequentially were the acquisition of AVCARD, so it’s nice to be able to pony up the cash and buy an acquisition and not have to worry about our balance sheet or our ability to protect our core, and we also put $51 million into the business, and that was an over 20% jump in prices. From that perspective, prices could jump again and we would be in a position to play. Now that’s not something that everybody else in the market can say. So I think we’re in a good position, and we’re going to stay focused on that mission. Alexander Brand – Stephens Inc.: Now you mentioned how it might be affecting the smaller players. Are you seeing any bankruptcies yet?

No. But I don’t think that’s typically what would happen first out of the box, Alex. What you’re going to see with some of the smaller resellers and stuff in the space, it just means that their credit lines get squeezed. The oil companies are more sensitive to this. We certainly have had conversation with large global oil companies whose financial departments are concerned more than they have been in the past about some of the more fragmented smaller intermediaries that they historically had relationships with. And they are looking to rationalize their relationships and consolidate them with larger players. Certainly, we feature very prominently in their calculus as it relates to what kind of counter-parties they want to do business with. So again we enjoy very good dialogue with these people at the top of their financial organizations. But it hasn’t manifested itself so much in bankruptcies as it is that we know some of these smaller players are being squeezed. And it’s difficult for them to do the volumes. So we think it benefits us. Alexander Brand – Stephens Inc.: Does it manifest itself, though, in smaller players being more willing to sell at reasonable prices? Is it good for your acquisition opportunities?

There’s no question. I think that when you look at what’s happened in this last year, the complete disappearance of the private equity machine and lot more sensitivity on the availability of credit. And kudos to Ira, who understood that by changing that bank facility it opened up a world of opportunities for us in terms of being able to view the landscape in a way that others just don’t have access to the resources to do. So yes, we think it presents opportunities. And again, we’ve kept our powder dry. We think it’s a competitive differentiator. And as Ira points to the 8-K, we’ve got a lot of flexibility under our bank covenants, and we’ve got a very supportive group of banks. So we have a lot of latitude in terms what we can do in this market. Alexander Brand – Stephens Inc.: Okay. And I’ll list a housekeeping and then let someone else have it. The software write-off in the quarter, can you just confirm what that was? Is that all that needs to be written off?

Yes. That’s the end of it. This has to do with an acquisition that goes back to 1998, when we did the aviation acquisition of Baysoft, which was a service group, along with that came some flight planning software. And every year, as you know, we spend a lot of energy going through a major systems review this year and at the end of the year it’s a just a routine review of impairment charges. But we don’t have anything else like this in the system. This was unique and had a very specialized application and we continue to use it. But it was the right thing to do relative to the overview that we did (inaudible). Alexander Brand – Stephens Inc.: Okay. Good color. Thanks a lot.

Our next question is from the line of Jonathan Chappell - JPMorgan.

Paul, I found on your comments about Maersk and some of the container lines using these floating fuel surcharges pretty interesting, and it’s just because I’m a shipping guy. But, you mentioned it would help your price risk management business. But could you give little bit more detail as to how this may benefit World Fuel, from first of all your core fuel basis, but also some of the other value added products that you offer to your customers.

Sure. I think these large global fleets have realized that they’re under enormous pressure because the shipping companies themselves have had a very hard time managing this volatility. This has become a really big nut and represents a huge part of their operating costs. And it’s moving all over the place, so it’s hard to quote these freight rates with any reliability. So there’s been a move to say, look, this is just getting so big that we’ve got to break it out. And unless the big guys were willing to begin to do this, it becomes difficult for everybody; no one’s going to follow suit. But it’s just become too important an item. And I would say that there are a couple of things that interest us. Number one, it highlights the fact that this has basically garnered attention at the highest levels of these companies in a way that I would say is unprecedented. They realize how important fuel is. So there is a sense of, we have got to pay attention to this. The “not invented here” resistance to getting outside help has certainly changed and it opens up opportunities, given our very large global platform, our very diversified base, our large ability to aggregate volume and our expertise in using derivative instruments to help manage the forward curve. All of this becomes, again, a place for these companies to turn as they look to manage these things. Remember, fuel historically is not their core competence. Their focus is on the movement of goods. So to the extent that this represents a considerable challenge for them to manage internally, we’ve got the expertise and we represent a clean one-stop shop for them to achieve some visibility on a very difficult part of their costing. So we’re watching the trends with interest. We are seeing that our access to very high levels in these companies continues to expand. I think we are viewed with considerable differentiation by these large global fleets as being able to add value at scale. It’s not only on the financial side but it’s also on being able to manage visibility in these complex markets but it’s also the value add of being able to add very sophisticated and very acute solutions on the operations side, because at these very high rates, time is money. So these ships are very exposed to not only just the price of the fuel, but all the operational support. Again, on all of these fronts we think these changes are good for us.

It sounds like a lot of people are starting to look at the Middle East and the Far East from a supply basis. I would think because a lot of new refineries are pegged to be ramping up in those areas over the next couple years. We saw that Vitol is entering that market and Chemoil plans some expansions there. How does this impact you from a competitive standpoint? Is it more competition as others take more product in that area? Or is it more opportunity for you, as you could partner with these companies to help take the supply and actually get it to the right people?

I would say it’s the latter, Jonathan. Again, we represent a very important platform for these companies. If you look at a company like a Vitol historically that’s operated in really the trading market, the retail distribution and managing retail credit and being able to manage retail relationships and all the complexity of fuel quality control, follow-up operations – this is not their core competence. So I think they view us as very important parts of the supply chain because they can rationalize huge amounts of offtake in a very, very clean way through us. I think these kinds of trading groups have made it clear that their core competence is moving on the bulk side. It’s difficult for them to retail to scale. So again with our balance sheet and our global platform and our distribution network and our multiple offices and our deep customer domain expertise, this represents a very natural complement to them. Again, these guys are primarily cargo traders, but it allows them to distribute opportunistically into the retail side in a very, very easy way. So again, I think all this change is good for us, as we’ve talked, at a macro level. As the major international companies have moved upstream and have focused on return on capital it’s opened up all sorts of creative opportunities further down in the supply chain. And again this is good for us. I think all this change simply validates our model and continues to create opportunities for us to expand our value proposition.

Good. One last one for you just on the acquisition front. Obviously AVCARD seems to be pretty successful, and also if I could just ask Ira briefly before I get to the main part of this question, if there is any way to quantify the impact of AVCARD on the Aviation gross profit in 4Q?

It had a pretty minor impact because we only had one month of activity in the quarter. So it didn’t have material impact on the overall results. I could try to give you that number after the call.

Okay, great. And then the main point of the question though is, as you look at other acquisition opportunities, do you see more core business whether it’s people, whether it’s new regions, geographies, whatever? Or are you also looking at maybe secondary or tertiary parts of the business that may be value add; that may provide maybe a not so apparent complementary part to your core business?

I think, Jonathan, in terms of the acquisition opportunities, there is certainly a broad range of opportunities to us. And we evaluate these more broadly every day, so adjacencies and extensions, as long as they are a good solid strategic fit, we’d certainly consider. Obviously our core acquisition, similar to the AVCARD acquisition we did recently, are certainly our sweet spots and they’re a no-brainer as long as it’s the right people and the right price.

Okay.

A quick follow-up. The AVCARD impact on our GP in the fourth quarter was about $1 million.

Thanks, Ira, and thanks Paul and Michael.

Our next question is from the line of Al Kaschalk - Wedbush Morgan.

Just a follow-up a little bit on the Marine and pardon if this is an elementary question, but revenues and dollars were up substantially, so we view that more just on the pricing aspect or were there new customer wins in the quarter? Because it certainly performed a little bit better in the top line relative to where I was expecting.

You’ve had some volume growth which we’re happy about so quarter-over-quarter we were up about 2.5% both sequentially and year-over-year on a quarterly basis. On a year-over-year basis, we were almost 9% increase in volume. Certainly, prices increased significantly so a big chunk of that is coming from price. But I think the more important thing that we’re pretty happy about is that we managed to gain market share.

Is the share up in tier one level?

Yes. It’s tier one. We didn’t go bottom fishing.

Okay. I want to focus on the balance sheet in particular. The inventory level I caught from Ira in regards to Aviation, it looks like inventories are up a little bit. I know they’re down sequentially, but a little bit higher than I had thought we would be at. Could you comment on what comprises the balance of the inventory other than the aviation self-supply?

The largest other chunk is there is some inventory on the Marine side. Aside from that, the rest of the numbers would be relatively small. So, most of the change related to the change in Aviation. You thought that number would come down more, but as I mentioned as an example on self-supply, even though we were down from 40 million gallons to 33 million gallons, because of price, the dollar value of that inventory was basically the same. So, clearly the price impact had a material impact on the changes that you are looking at in inventory dollars.

Okay. The sales were up 15% sequentially if I did my math right, but AR was up 26%. Is that more a timing issue end of the quarter or what’s going on there? It seems relative to the number that you calculate it out on the quick math, it seems a little bit higher than percentage-wise. I know the DSO details you gave us.

At the end of the day you have the impact of rising prices and DSO was up one day and that translated to the AR position that we went up with at the end of the period. That’s probably the explanation.

I’ll follow up after. Finally, on the receivables, derivatives were up about 50%. Is that a little bit more aggressive bad timing, what’s happening there?

Al, can you clarify that? I don’t know what you mean by derivatives were up 50%.

If you look at the balance sheet, according to what was released, the receivables related to derivative contracts were $86.5 million at the end of December. They were $37 million last year, and they were $47 million and change or so at the end of Q3. So as we we’re trying to get down to a little bit more analytics on the numbers, I’m wondering how much of that translates in the operating profit, but I thought I would start there as an initial question.

You see Al, we’ve got it on both sides of the balance sheet, in receivables and liabilities side. I think the increase is principally related to volume and price. Once again, price is up significantly in the quarter. So on mark-to-market basis it impacted both the asset side and liability side of that equation.

Okay. Very good. Thank you.

(Operator Instructions) Our next question is from the line of Jim Larkins - Wasatch.

Good afternoon. A couple of detailed questions, I missed a few of the second numbers. I wondered if you could repeat those for me. Did you give the operating income for the three segments or did I miss that on the press release? I didn’t catch it.

Aviation was at $18.1 million; Marine was $14.6 million and Land had an operating loss of just under $100,000.

Okay, great. And could you give the gallons on Aviation again?

33 million gallons in jet fuel inventory at the end of the period.

I am sorry the gallons sold.

I am sorry, total volume? That was 601 million gallons.

And as I look at the gross profit numbers this quarter on Marine, can you give a little bit of color on what drove those margins up? Was there more contractual versus spot business this quarter?

On the Marine side good amount of reselling activity; inventory we had some robust opportunities there and good amount of volatility in the beginning of the quarter.

I know you’ve talked a little bit about customers being hesitant with bunkers at record prices of engaging in forward transactions. Did that change at all during the quarter?

In fact, one of the things that we were pleased about and that in spite of the fact that the derivative activity did not go up significantly for exactly the same reasons. If you look at what was going on within Q4 we saw the same reluctance in a fast spiking market. But I would say that the underlying ability to just garner margin out of a highly volatile market paid dividends in the quarter. But again, we saw the same reluctance. Of course this is the funny thing when we’re out there talking to customers, we’re always arguing that managing the forward curve is discipline. It’s like getting in shape. You don’t just do it once and forget it. And of course, there’s always still a reluctance, that people feel like they’re chasing the market up and yet it goes again and there they are, trying to figure out when’s a good time. So, we’re making better inroads, we’re beginning to get people to realize that it is part of just good procurement strategy to have dialing in derivative coverage as part of your program. It doesn’t matter so much whether it’s high or low, you should just be doing it as a matter of discipline. So, it’s getting better, but I would say again, we saw fairly dormant activity on that front because of the fast rising prices. But we did very well on the underlying, just absolute margin on the barrels.

And so when you talk about inventory opportunities there, these are still covered transactions. You saw a certain supply opportunity, you matched it up with a demand opportunity and that’s not a speculative-type position, is that correct?

That is correct.

Okay. One other detailed question I missed was the unallocated corporate overhead for the quarter ?

It was $8.1 million I believe in the quarter.

And then, on the systems side, you mentioned this quarter maybe a little bit of implementation costs or setup – I don’t know how you’d describe that, but still a little bit more cost this quarter. Can you talk about, aside from freeing up your people from having to work on the implementation, what are the benefits that we might see going forward from those systems?

I think one of the main things, Jim, is work that would take us weeks and months to produce in terms of enhancements and changes, those changes are now taking us hours. So we have one global system around the world; one software, one source of data coming out of our systems. A lot of our financial analysts who’ve been working very hard over the years to just extract information and be able to interpret it, we’re going to have that at our fingertips. So, it’s going to be tremendous power. We’ve got a significant volume of activity in our two main business segments. So allowing our sales guys and our customer-facing guys to be able to get to the answer quicker is going to be a huge pickup. And our Land business, that business relies very much on automation. We haven’t had the systems to be able to execute that business activity. So there’s going to be big front office pickups and big back office pickups. So we’re very excited. You can’t be successful on these types of projects unless you have a first class team. We’re very happy with the group that we brought in not so long ago, and that’s certainly going to help us. And for the type of business we are, that is a significant asset for us.

Great. I had one other question, but I’ll go ahead and get back in line.

Our next question is from the line of Edward Hemmelgarn - Shaker Investments.

It’s regarding your outlook and how you’ve increased your operating expenses quite a little bit. At the low end would be about the same as you increased it last year but at the high end it would be about 26%. Can you talk about how we would expect to see the improvements in gross profit? Should we see it in terms of you doing a lot more volume? Or should we see it in terms of margin expansion?

Thanks, Edward, I appreciate the call. I think it probably merits a little bit of background. As you know, and I’m not sure how long you’ve followed us, but 2007 was a very important transitional year for us. We were pretty open with the investing community about the fact that we felt that to really transition to the next level of business expansion, we needed to make significant investments in people processing systems. That we had grown like a weed. We were a classic entrepreneurial company that accelerated very rapidly, but we were commercially out over our skis in terms of being able to support the whole structure and begin to maintain our efficiency at scale. So we were both investing as a maturing organization both the need to put in a global platform on systems. We also had to invest in people and we also had to invest in better business processes. So I think all of those things were going on and that’s why you saw the increase in expenses. We feel very confident that that investment is going to give us a very good return. How it actually directly translates into specific gross profits, I would say that you saw very robust gross profit growth throughout this year. Granted, it was eaten up quite a bit by the investment and we’re not happy about that. But we knew that the investment had to be made. But we certainly have confidence that platform is going to add efficiency, that we’ll be able to increase volume and we’ll also be able to improve margin through that efficiency. So, we’re quite confident that the investments will pay off, and that’s part of being good stewards of the franchise over the long term. You got to make those investments or you can’t expect to scale the platform.

Okay.

And you have a follow-up question from the line of Jim Larkins - Wasatch.

I wonder if you can talk little bit more about AVCARD and what they’re going to bring to your customers? Should we view this as a credit product? Should we view it as a consolidated billing service or a platform for additional services? Can you go into more detail as to what it’s going to offer that you did not previously have on the Aviation side?

AVCARD is a number of different things. First of all, we get a great organization that’s been run by a superb management team. By and large that’s our major consideration whenever we look at a company. But you’ve got, in addition to the basic business activity of selling fuel in very similar manner to the way we sell fuel to the business aviation or corporate aviation market, you’ve got three value adds. One is to the FBO in terms of processing the transaction to business aviation right there on the fueling side of that FBO. Second is convenience to that pilot to be able to swipe that card and present that card at any of a thousand locations around the United States and internationally. And then third, management reports in control for those corporations that are running a fleet of aircraft. So that convenience of having that web interface. So, those are the three pickups in terms of convenience and the value add. And it was a lot more intelligent for us to go ahead and invite them to be part of our organization, as opposed to spending the time and money to specialize in that particular area. Now by virtue of our ERP, we’ve got greater capabilities, so we’re pretty happy about the union. In addition, we get some operations in the U.K. that are showing us that they have some management depth.

So with this acquisition, can we think of it in terms of you’ve picked up additional FBOs that are now willing to pick up World Fuel as a fuel provider?

Yes. Certainly, they have broad relationships. They’re in different areas. They’re doing government business. You’ve got a company that the unique thing that they’re bringing that is unique is their processing and their charge card processing system. They have different relationships and certainly we picked that up both on suppliers, vendors and customers. And now we jointly, as I think Paul commented in his introductory remarks, have got joint initiatives to go after some of those larger business aviation clients and put that package together to be a more robust offering.

We’re delighted to have their processing capability and they’re delighted to have our very strong access to fuel.

Right. Can I pretty much go to any FBO with this card as a pilot right now or will there still be select FBOs that will accept this card?

In the United States, it’s pretty broadly accepted. I may not want to say any FBO, but thousands of FBOs in the U.S.

The 80/20 rule would apply…

Yes, that’s right. There you go.

All right, thanks for the color.

(Operator Instructions).

Marcelo, sounds like we have no other questions.

Yes, sir. There are no further questions. Do you have closing comments?