Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. And welcome to the World Fuel Services fourth quarter and full year 2013 earnings conference call. My name is Scott, and I will be coordinating this call this evening. (Operator instructions) As a reminder, this conference is being recorded, and I would now like to turn the conference over to Glenn Klevitz, World Fuels’ Assistant Treasurer. Mr. Klevitz, you may begin your conference.

Thank you, Scott, and good evening everyone. And welcome to the World Fuel Services Fourth quarter and Full Year 2013 Earnings Conference Call. I’m Glenn Klevitz, World Fuels’ Assistant Treasurer, and I’ll be doing the introductions on this evening’s call, alongside our live slide presentation. This call is also available via webcast. To access the webcast or future webcast, please visit our website at www.wfscorp.com and click on the webcast icon. With us on the call today are Michael Kasbar, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Ira Birns, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. By now you should’ve all received the copy of our earnings release. If not, you can access the release on our website. Before we get started, I would like to review World Fuel Safe Harbor statement. Certain statements made today including comments about World Fuel’s expectations regarding future plans, performance and pending acquisitions are forward-looking statements that are subject to a range of uncertainties and risks that could cause World Fuel’s actual results to materially differ from the forward-looking information. A description of the risk factors that could cause results to materially differ from these projections can be found in World Fuels’ Form 10-K and other reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. World Fuel assumes no obligation to revise or publicly release the results of any revisions to these forward-looking statements in light of new information or future events. This presentation also includes certain non-GAAP financial measures as defined in regulation G. A reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP financial measures is included in World Fuels’ press release and can be found on its website. 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 President and Chief Executive Officer, Michael Kasbar.

Thank you, Glenn, and good afternoon everyone. Today we announced full year earnings of $203 million or $2.83 per diluted share, eclipsing the $200 million net income level for the first time in company history. So the fourth quarter, our earnings were [ph] the highest of the year at $51.9 million or $0.73 per diluted share. In our aviation segment the team once again, delivered strong results, setting a new volume record of just under 5 billion gallons as well as records in gross profit and operating income for 2013. New years’ day of this year marked 100 years since the birth of the commercial aviation industry, celebrating the first paying passengers’ flight from Saint Petersburg to Tampa in 1914. It took 23 minutes and cost $400. Obviously the commercial aviation industry has come a long way since then, and the long-term outlook remains bright for the industry as a whole. The latest reports are calling for total passengers to go grow to 3.3 billion in 2014, up from 3.1 billion in 2013. This 5% increase in demand aligns with the compounded annual growth rate over the last 30 years and it shows that despite economic challenges over the years, aviation enabled connectivity has been an important driver for society. In addition, about 50 million tons of cargo are transported by air each year, which equates to over $6 trillion or 35% of the value of goods traded internationally. With the global airline industry turnover expected to be $743 billion supporting over 57 million jobs, we continue to have an opportunity to capitalize on a market that presents a multitude of opportunities for our company. While the financial performance of our marine segment was below our expectations for the year, primarily due to the lack of volatility but also continuing…

I will do that. Thanks, Mike, and good afternoon everybody. As I review our results, I will talk about our performance for the fourth quarter as well as highlight many of our full year achievements for 2013. Consolidating revenue for the fourth quarter was $10.4 billion which is down 1% sequentially but up 5% compared to the fourth quarter of 2012. The year-over-year improvement in revenue was due to the increase in overall volume across our businesses offset by the impact of lower fuel prices. Our aviation segment generated revenues of $4.2 billion, up 1% sequentially and 8% year-over-year. The entire year-over-year increase was a result of higher volume offset by lower average jet fuel prices. Our marine segment revenues were $3.5 billion, down 1% sequentially but up 2% year-over-year. The entire year-over-year increase was a result of higher volume offset by lower average fuel prices during the fourth quarter. And finally, the land segment generated revenues of $2.6 billion, down 4% sequentially but up 3% year-over-year. The entire year-over-year increase was a result of higher volume which was also offset by lower average fuel prices during the fourth quarter. Consolidated revenue for the full year was $41.6 billion, up 7% compared to 2012. The year-over-year improvement in revenue was due to the increase in overall volume across our businesses, offset once again, by the impact of lower fuel prices. Our aviation segment sold 1.3 billion gallons of fuel during the fourth quarter, up 25 million gallons or 2% sequentially and 175 million gallons or 15% year-over-year. For the full year, our aviation segment sold 4.94 billion gallons of fuel, up 585 million gallons or 13% year-over-year. Volume in our marine segment for the fourth quarter was 6.3 million metric tons, relatively flat compared to last quarter or the third…

Thank you. (Operator instructions) And our first question comes from the line of Ken Hoexter, please proceed. Ken Hoexter – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Great, good afternoon. Michael, Ira, can you just talk a little bit about maybe the impact of the draw down on the air freight side if we’re going to start seeing troupes withdrawn through the year on a measured basis from Afghanistan. What does do to the air freight side? You mentioned to expect some decrease in government activity. Can you set the scale of what we should expect to see impact there?

Yes, thanks for the question, Ken. It’s Ira. I would say that we’ve continued to expect declines every quarter and then we’ve been positively surprised with the fact that the level of activities remains somewhat stable. As we get closer to the currently anticipated troupe withdrawal base, it becomes increasingly likely that we will see the declines. I would say for the first quarter that we will likely see a decline in profitability of a few million dollars, $3 million to $5 million or so. It’s tough to say what the results will be beyond that at this point. I will probably give another update on next quarter’s call. There may be some continuing activity that continues on indefinitely, but that’s really yet to be determined at this point in time. Ken Hoexter – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: Can you set the size of that within the aviation business? Is that a measured portion of that aviation business or –?

Yes. I think we’ve stated before that it’s, in percentage terms of gross profit in aviation, it’s in the teen somewhere and it will probably drop into single digits as we progress through 2014. Ken Hoexter – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: That’s very helpful. And then you mentioned that in cases of low volatility, marine cost – I guess there’s a decrease in marine activity, do they end up going straight to the source to buy or is that just a decrease in profit potential because they’re not buying added services?

Yes, Ken, it’s a combination of things. I think we put a chart up on the screen and you saw the dramatic difference in volatility between 2011, 2012 and 2013. So certainly our services are offering greater value if we’re helping to navigate difficult markets. And our ability to add derivative products, we’re quite confident at being able to do that. So that’s part of the mix. And we thought that it certainly gives a real picture to be able to see that. And it’s a combination. Certainly there is the dimension you’d talked about in terms of not feeling the need to utilize our services. I think it’s more of a case on our inability to take off contracts and to be able to add value and pick up some additional margins by virtue of that. When you look at the marine side, you’ve got your three segments that are driven by macro global economic drivers, containers driven by retail, tankers driven by oil, demand bulk is driven by industrial activity, a combination of slow steaming, oversupplied ships [ph]. It’s really not a great picture. You’ve seen some of the reports that we have. A lot of folks feel that the worst is behind us and you’ll start to see some recovery. But it’s certainly not a pretty picture by any stretch. Ken Hoexter – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: I want to close my two question, I guess if I can then follow up them on the crude business, you mentioned a lot about crude movements but I guess my question is just any update on the Lac-Megantic exposure or process in the courts cases, anything that I guess, that’s stalled business for a little bit and now it’s back. Any comment on that, Ira?

Yes. All we could say is there really haven’t been any material developments in relation to that particular incident beyond the information that we provided on the third quarter call. What we provided on the third quarter call remains completely accurate. Ken Hoexter – Bank of America Merrill Lynch: All right, I appreciate the time, thank you.

And our next question comes from the line of Jack Atkins, please proceed. Jack Atkins – Stephens Inc.: Great. Thanks for the time, guys. Mike, I guess first off, if we could talk a little bit more about the loss in transaction. I guess I’d love to hear you maybe talk for a moment about World Fuel’s expansion into the land base fuel business in Europe. It seems like Watson is sort of the first foothold in that market. And maybe can you talk about the long-term strategy and how do you find to tackle it. Is it a combination of organic and M&A or given the cultural differences between certain regions within Europe, is it more of an M&A strategy there?

Thanks, Jack. Now, listen, it’s a combination of we are continuing to refine our strategy. Each market is different, in the same way that [indiscernible] market and aviation market has similarities but differences. So the land business has been growing. We really didn’t start to get serious about this business until 2008, so it picked up quite strongly over a very short period of time. It’s a combination of organic and acquisition. We’ve been in that market in the U.K. for quite some time. And the idea now as you look at our business from a macro perspective, we’re a diversified distribution platform. If you look at the organized oil community, we’re bringing that downstream expertise, bringing that customer handling side of the equation. You’re seeing diesel and light ends coming into play with the marine side. So you see that we bought U.S. Energy not too long ago, the natural gas mix. So we’ll continue to march throughout the world as you see we’ve got operations in about 35 countries with offices. We’re doing business in almost every country in the world. There is diesel or gasoline or ethanol or lubricants or biodiesel in all of these locations, so it’s really a perfect expansion for us into the marketplace. There are similarities in synergies between our land business and our aviation business, our land business and our marine business. So we’re playing that role of partnering up with the oil community and being entrusted distributor and marketer, dealing with the underwriting, creating those technology platforms. So we like it. We think it fits. We’ve got a lot of cross segment synergies there. The U.K. is a great place for us. It’s a great market. We established the de novo [ph] operation. We started to buy some smaller companies. Watson…

The best – not a great answer. It’s Ira, Jack, but the best we can tell you is that in matters such as this with all different parties involved and complications, the expectation is this will clearly not be months but years before formal resolution, easily a year or two, but very difficult to pinpoint accurately. Jack Atkins – Stephens Inc.: Okay, that makes sense. And then Ira just one last question here on the housekeeping side. I think I may have missed this, but in the past you’ve broken out the gross profit contribution from Multi Service. Did you give that in your prepared comments, if I just missed out, I’m just curious, or what that was in the quarter?

I believe that I did, but in the quarter, the related gross profit was about $13 million. Jack Atkins – Stephens Inc.: Okay, great. Thanks again, guys.

Thanks, Jack.

(Operator Instructions) And our next question comes from the line of Jon Chappell, please proceed. Jon Chappell – Evercore Partners: Thanks, good afternoon, guys.

Hi, Jon. Jon Chappell – Evercore Partners: Mike or maybe Ira, I just want to ask a question about the land side, it’s obviously grown pretty significantly as Mike mentioned the answer to previous question, but the margins have also been ramping up even stronger than the volume side. Obviously Multi Service has something to do with that. I would assume Watson maybe as well. Is there any way to talk about – and I know it’s difficult to break down organic versus inorganic because you’ve been such an inquisitive company, but how the acquisition strategy particularly as you’ve built on land has impacted the ramp in the margins there? And when you look at Watson, should we expect to see another cross-selling opportunity or margins to potentially improve even greater than the volume potential?

I’ll start and Mike could chime in. But I would say a lot of it is a mix of business. For point of clarification, Jon, Watson obviously has no impact so far because we haven’t closed yet. Jon Chappell – Evercore Partners: Right.

So in terms of the results you’re looking at, those are Watson free so to speak. I’ll get back to that in a moment. I would say over last several quarters, it’s clearly been more mixed than anything else. This quarter margins are up sequentially driven a bit by crude that have margins slightly higher. We had a better quarter in crude. But also a mix of some of our international activity in the UK, the pre-Watson activity, that was a bit stronger this quarter. So that’s principally when you seem so far, Watson will indeed have a positive impact going forward adding hundreds and millions of gallons at an average margin which is certainly higher than the land average gross margin today. And as you mentioned, I know I’m going back and forth, if you’re looking at total GP over a volume which includes multiservice, to Jack’s last question, that obviously had an impact as well, although, she’ll probably strip that out when you’re looking at fuel related margins anyway.

Just to add a little bit of color on to that, our margins in our core business activity is relatively stable. It doesn’t really change that much. We are in distribution businesses. A lot of this is contractual. There is some spot business activity. But it is fairly stable. When you look at our company, we are a broad base, diversified downstream distribution company that add a lot of solutions, have transaction processing and fuel cards and we brought other products like natural gas. And we’ve selectively entered the supply chain to create value. So from time to time, you’re going to see an uptick. Obviously, we preferred mountains rather than valleys. We know that everyone’s looking for ever increasing predictable returns. But you are going to see with that crude spread – I don’t want to see we don’t say we don’t care what the crude spread is. We’re offering the market an efficient distribution channel and marketing channel and dealing with the underwriting. So from time to time, those spreads are going to have an impact on margin, but the underlying business is reasonably stable from a margin perspective. Jon Chappell – Evercore Partners: All right. That’s very helpful, Mike, thanks, and Ira. My second question has to do with the marine business. Mike, you said you think the worse is in the rearview mirror. I would tend to agree with that. You also said, a transitional year. I agree to that as well. It’s simply not going to bounce back to probably even mid cycle levels within the next 12 months. How are you thinking about layering back on risk in that business as we kind of lift off the bottom, but probably still in a period of a pretty significant volatility?

It’s a very good question. I think we certainly see what you see. We certainly read what you write. And there are packets of opportunities. So we feel that we’ve got great decision within the marketplace, primarily at spot market as you know. So our risk profile I don’t think is going to change dramatically. Our underwriting is a reflection of the marketplace. So as things become safer, we’ll let out more rope. I don’t think we’re going to change our fundamental discipline in terms of risk. So you can argue that perhaps we’ve been a bit conservative, but that’s the way we run the company. I don’t think we’re planning on changing that. So as the market does commander its doldrums which have been significant, we should have greater opportunities to bring more business into the house.

And potentially do more business with existing customers as Mike said, laying out more rope where we may limits today that we could increase in the improving market, more stable – more stability amongst certain customers. Jon Chappell – Evercore Partners: And then just for my follow up along those same lines, I think I asked this probably 12 months ago, a little bit more relevant today as we’re less than 12 months away from it, but the emission control areas with the US and Europe and kind of a change in the structure of the fuel that goes into ships. You mentioned the opportunity a couple of time. Is that a pretty significant opportunity for you guys given your global presence and scale? Or like your customers, is it going to be a pretty significant challenge for you given the pretty vast change in a way that ships are fueled starting in ten-and-a-half months.

Well, we thrive on change. And you can call that another form of market volatility. So anytime there is a change in regulations, it’s certainly an additional challenge, but for us it’s a tremendous opportunity to provide service because we are focused on those changes. We anticipate those changes. We have the staff to be able to sort out and prepare to provide solutions to our clientele. Our land business puts us in a good position. And the ubiquitous coverage that we have with our global teams to be able to source from different providers and the relationships that we have cutting across aviation, marine and land puts as in an excellent position. So while those regulations may not be happy news to ship owners, it’s an opportunity for us to add value and provide solutions. Jon Chappell – Evercore Partners: Okay. Great. Thanks for your time, Mike. Thanks, Ira.

Thanks, Jon.

And our next question comes from the line of Greg Lewis. Please proceed. Gregory Lewis – Credit Suisse: Thank you and good afternoon guys.

Hi.

Hi, Greg. Gregory Lewis – Credit Suisse: Hi, Ira. I just have a couple of quick questions. One was, did the provision for bad debt expense impact the tax rate in the fourth quarter?

Not in a meaningful way. No. Gregory Lewis – Credit Suisse: Okay, and then –

And there’s no tight correlation between the increase in the provision for bad debt and the lower tax rate. Gregory Lewis – Credit Suisse: Okay, so it wasn’t an impact. Okay. And then just so as I think about 2014 and 2015, it looks like return on capital for the company is kind of been in the 11% range. As we think about marine, the marine business is probably not going to really be a major contributor to an increase in return on capital. Aviation seems like it’s kind of also kind of static. I mean should we be thinking that if there is going – to get return on capital back into that 12%, 13%, 14% range, should we be thinking that primarily if that is to happen, it’s primarily going to be driven by the land segment and I guess the combination of multiservice?

I’m not sure I would completely agree with that. I think across all three of our businesses that we have today including multiservice within land, there are opportunities for improvement that are both growth related and certainly when they argue that land may have more growth opportunities in the short term, that doesn’t mean that marine doesn’t have those opportunities going forward. But also various efficiencies that we could drive in terms of the working capital requirement to support an individual business even if it’s not growing materially. So we look at that on a very regular basis. And while when you have a $41 billion enterprise moving that needle from 11% to 12% is a lot more difficult than when the enterprise was half the size. But there’s certainly opportunities there, but just more heavy lifting. Now one thing that’s worth noting is the fact that while our ROC or return on capital has been in the 11%, 12% range and had been higher, our cost of capital is down dramatically as well. And I know everyone calculates that in different ways. So we often look at the spread between the two and ironically, today the spread between the two is higher than it’s been in a while because of the fact that our cost to capital has dropped more than our return on capital the last couple of years. So that’s the equation that effectively drives shareholder value. So we try to look at those two in tandem, how do we get to the most efficient cost to capital or how do we drive the best possible outcome from return on capital standpoint. But even in marine, once again, even if they’re bouncing around the bottom for a while longer, we spend a lot of time focusing on how we at least improve returns in a market that may not be growing rapidly. And of course, in aviation and land, we’ve got both dynamics in play that give us greater opportunity in the short term. Gregory Lewis – Credit Suisse: Okay, perfect answer. All right. Thank you for the time.

Welcome.

And Mr. Kasbar, there are no further questions at this time. I will now turn the call back to you for closing remarks.

Well, thanks very much for joining us. We feel great about where we are in terms of our long-term positioning. We feel excellent about what our team is focused on. We thank you for your support and look forward to talking to you next quarter.