Wayne Foo - President and CEO Ken Pinsky - Chief Financial Officer Dave Taylor - EVP, Exploration and Business Development

David Dudlyke - Dundee Capital Markets Ian Macqueen - Paradigm Capital

Good morning. And thank you all for joining us this morning.

With me today is Ken Pinsky, our Chief Financial Officer; Dave Taylor, our Executive VP of Exploration and Business Development; and Mike Kruchten, our VP of Corporate Planning and Investor Relations. I’d like to thank Mike for making the change to having operator read those statements and ease that.

The format for today’s conference call will be a question-and-answer session with our audience. And we’ll open the line to questions right away.

Operator, over to you.

First question would be on the tax restructuring, maybe the first of several questions on this matter. And I’m no tax export.

But I look to your statements and you talk about a gained increased tax basis; and the use of loss carry-forwards in the newly consolidated entity. And then you talk about the go forward current tax rate being less 10% of your Colombian segmented cash flows.

And I think from memory that compares with something in the mid-teens. But correct me if I’m wrong.

You also say that the benefit is expected to reduce over time. So, I guess I’m trying to understand, is this some sort of tax loss carry-forward creation that basically will just work its way through the system, or have you done something much more nifty and structural and long lasting in nature?

Hi, David; it’s Ken. Basically, there is nothing nifty around it, it is pretty straight forward.

We’re matching revenues with capital expenditures and some of our non-capital loss carry-forwards, so that instead of having revenue in one bucket and capital expenditures in another bucket, you combine the buckets and get the benefit of the tax basis. As you know, we do have a fair amount of exploration and drillings continually, plus other projects.

So, you just want to match your revenue with your expenditures. If you look at year-to-date, you’ve got about $6 of barrel in tax expense.

By the end of the year, you won’t -- we’ve said, we’d have some minor tax booking, because there is always true-ups on tax calculations, because your tax in Colombia is based upon what we call units of production for your tax completion, plus there is trivial expense that you may or may not encounter, and both those are pretty tough to forecast. So, there may be some noise in the fourth quarter in a minor amounts which we’ve said.

But I think you will see our tax per barrel go to 450 [ph] year-to-date for the full 2015. And then next year for 2016, we’re saying it’s going to be in a $1 to $1.50 per barrel range, which brings into both $10 to $15 million cash for current tax expense.

I think going forward in subsequent years, as to me, tax is going to depend upon a number of things including exploration success, and where commodity prices go. But that’s why see that the benefit of this will last for more than one year but start to use estimations of what you are going to do in 2017, ‘18 becomes a very difficult.

But that just gives you a bit of an outline of what we did and why we did that thing.

But if we set that that’s flat to 50, am I being way too simply -- you’ve incurred a cash charge of $24 million in this third quarter, by my reckoning, the benefit seems to throw off -- a payback for that upfront charge seems to be in the two-year frame -- two to three year frame, assuming nothing changes or is it much shorter than that?

Yes, it’s much shorter than that. If you look at what people were thinking our tax might be for 2016, it was $50 million, instead of running 10 to 15; paybacks in matter of months.

Well, thank you for correcting me that. And my second question would just be on the exploration commitment wells.

You make reference to some 10 wells next year and that plays again, so I eight exploration commitments that you’ve planned to drill this year. I guess is there any long period -- I believe this year you saw the ANH allow you to swap [ph] a commitment on one block with the Chachalaca exploration well on Block 34.

Are you likely to be able to mix and match commitments between blocks next year or do you see that this realization we’ve got a one-off?

If we can swap a well or two, we would try to. It becomes pretty complex, when you don’t have the same working interest in blocks.

So, it’s easier to switch a block from a 100% working interest to another 100% working interest block, but it’s more difficult when you have partnerships involved. So we don’t see that as something we’ll do a lot of but there might be an opportunity to defer a well or two to another block.

We’re also applying for quarter two and to quarter three [ph] to defer the timing of some of the commitments. But at the end of the day, these are commitments that are going to have to be drilled we’ve got some schedule in for 2016.

We had a couple deferred from 2015 based on those quarters. [Ph] So, most of those will be firm as we’ve talked about.

Hi guys, just a follow-up on David’s question. You’ve giving us a gross exploration well number for 2016.

I’m sure you’ll eventually give us more detail on what locations those are. But can you just briefly give a net drilling location for 2016?

Yes. It’s pretty much, they’re all gross except for one well.

Okay.

So, some of them are earnings -- they’re earning wells and some of trued up.

Okay. But they will all be exploration wells?

Yes.

Okay. Well, I’d like to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in Parex Resources and your continued support of the Company.

For further information, we invite you to visit our website or call us. Thank you again and have a good day.

Operator?