Thanks, Jay, and thanks to everyone for joining us. I will take a few minutes to discuss our current outlook, review our results for the quarter, and update everyone on recent developments with our Company. J. Paul Whitehead, our CFO, is here to discuss our financial results in greater detail and after that we will take questions. Rich House is also with us today to field any questions you may have of him. As with many others in the specialty finance sector, we continue to navigate in an environment with its share of challenges. We have seen dislocation in the securitization markets for over a year now and this continuing dislocation has caused us to focus intensely on getting our managed receivables portfolios to a net cash flow generating position. In this environment, we believe that the best approach for us is a conservative one, one in which we manage the business as a traditional securitization market do not return to their former levels. To that end, we have cut numerous cost and expenses, most notably our marketing cost, which has been at a reduced level since late August of last year. During the coming weeks and months, we will further reduce cost and overhead, given the lack of improvements in the securitization markets. Our current plans call for even a further drop from our very modest marketing levels. As such we expect further reductions in our receivables levels and a diminishment of activity levels in general, which allows us to cut many other areas of cost and overhead. While we always desire to remain in a position to quickly turn back on a growth engine for new accounts and receivables if the capital markets improved, and while we were holding back on some of our cost-cutting measures and till now giving this bias, our view now is that we don’t see the prospects of significantly improved capital markets for the foreseeable future, and we have to react by taking steps to help us deleveraged us business. We continue to have cash available if portfolio acquisition or other opportunities arise, and we ended the quarter with over $210 million in immediately available liquidity. Liquidity that is represented by our unrestricted cash balances plus our immediate draw capacity from our collateral base underlying our existing financing and securitization facilities. As we mentioned in our last quarter’s call, it’s not a lack of capital on hand that constricts our ability to grow but a lack of certainty that we will be able to have financing in the future at today’s levels as our various financing and securitization facilities mature and are extended or replaced or not. We also believe it is prudent to anticipate the effects on our liquidity position of a more market negative shift in the economic landscape that would more significantly affect the ability of our customers to make payments –make their payments to us. As a whole, our June 30th, 2008 delinquencies have fallen significantly, given the passage of the record level of second and third quarter of 2007 lower tier credit card originations through their peak charge off vintages in the first half of this year. We also note that our other credit card portfolios delinquencies are generally in line with where they were last year at this time with some showing modest improvements in delinquencies and others showing some modest weaknesses in delinquencies. Nonetheless, unemployment rates have risen over the past four months, and may trend higher, and we have seen somewhat lower payment rates and somewhat higher late-stage delinquency roll rates within our portfolios, the effects of which could include yield compression, higher charge-offs, reductions in receivables levels, and consequently adverse effects on the cash flows we receive from our portfolios. Notwithstanding our focus on getting our portfolios to a net cash generating position, we are forecasting reductions in our available liquidity and cash balances for the remainder of this year as it would take a few months to realize the full effect of account management actions we have taken in our credit card business, and our new cost-cutting measures, and as we continue to make modest net capital investments in some of our business lines. During the second quarter, we deployed $20.5 million to repurchase $50 million in face amount of our convertible bonds at pricing that we considered particularly attractive. We may use some excess capital to make similar purchases in the future as we like both the yield inherent within these purchases and the efficiency of these purchases as a vehicle for deleveraging our business. As noted earlier in my comments, and as we have said over the past three quarters would happen, the peak charge off vintage effect of our second and third quarter of 2007 lower tier credit card originations had a profound adverse effect on our credit card segments and our overall earnings results this past quarter. We incurred a GAAP net loss of $44.9 million or $0.96 per share this past quarter as compared to the $11 million or $0.23 per share GAAP net loss we incurred in last year’s second quarter. As we expected, the effects of GAAP fair value accounting for our securitizations caused significantly lower GAAP losses, the managed losses in this year’s second quarter. On a managed basis, we have reported a net loss of $101 million, or $2.16 per share as compared to earnings of $12.3 million, or $0.25 per share from last year’s second quarter. With the vintage effect of our record mid-2007 lower tier credit card originations now substantially behind us, we expect our charge-off rates to significantly lower during the second half of the year. Our confidence in the lower gross charge-offs and charge-off rates to come is best illustrated by our delinquent account volumes, which were at a two-year low at the end of the second quarter. 60 plus day delinquent receivable were 12.6% of our portfolio at June 30, 2008, down from 16.5% at the end of this year’s first quarter and down from their peak of 18.4% at the end of 2007. We also expect higher net interest margins and other income ratios during the second half of the year, now that our mid-2007 lower tier originations have passed through their peak delinquency and charge-off phase. Higher charge-off levels that came with the passage of these accounts through peak charge-off status served to depresses these ratios in the first half of this year as did the effects of our not billing interest or fees on many of these accounts that were more than 90 delinquent in the months leading up to their charge-off. Our approach has been fairly straightforward over the last several months. Our number one priority has been to protect the value within the company, moving forward rather than a focus on current growth or profitability. We try and look at 18 months to 24 months on cash uses and needs and we believe that we are currently in pretty good shape on protecting value within the Company while also having some cash available for strategic opportunities that might present themselves. We believe we have a business that can purchase portfolios and on very attractive rates of return. We also believe we have business that can earn attractive rates of return on originated credit card assets. Win and only win, there is some available funding for those assets. We targeted the end of the second quarter to make decisions that (inaudible) an impact on our business moving forward. As that day has now passed, we have already put in place several initiatives that will improve cash flow while preserving our ability to start back marketing at greater volumes once the funding markets improve. As I mentioned earlier, the first thing we did a year or so ago in response to the credit crisis was reduce our marketing dollars fairly dramatically. And now we are reducing them even further. We have substantially shut down our new business initiatives as we don’t want to be investing in these activities during times when capital is precious. We have reduced overhead, staff in other areas as well to ensure that we are operating at a level commensurate with our current forecasted size rather than a platform designed for a much larger receivable base. We have subleased some office space and are looking at other ways to eliminate or reduce overhead cost. While these decisions cause some pain, they are decisions that were reasonably easy to make in as much as they are consistent with the key objectives that I mentioned a moment ago. We think these actions are the most prudent thing to do in today’s challenging environment. Let me point out that we do not believe that some of the things that we are currently doing will maximize the value of our portfolio. In fact, we know that with revolving credit, the way to maximize the value of a portfolio sometimes means increasing available credit to those borrowers who are performing well. Instead, we are now taking actions to reduce exposure while trying to maximize cash flow such that we don’t increase liabilities that may be difficult to fund in the future. So, we are trying to maximize the value of our business within the current environment rather than hoping for good things to happen in the future. We do believe that our business model is one that will attract alternatives in the future. We believe funding sources can feed the relative strength of our book of business but are hesitant to step in until they believe the economy is close to the bottom of the cycle. Our portfolios (inaudible) perform better on a relative basis during the economic downturns than those of prime portfolios. So we think the funding will return to our sector quicker than to some other sectors. We also have pricing flexibility that most prime issuers do not have. I like to briefly address the regulatory issues that we're currently facing. As you know we have been working with the FTC and FDIC for a couple of years on some issues that they had raised regarding some of our prior marketing programs. We expected to have favorably resolved the FDIC and FTC matters within a few short weeks after our last earnings conference call in May. We entered into an agreement in principle with the FDIC and FTC to resolve their investigations. The argument contemplated formal settlement agreements with both the FDIC and FTC and was conditioned on the FDIC entering into settlement agreements with three of our FDIC regulated issuing banks. Under the agreement in principle and under the contemplated settlement agreements, we would have issued approximately $80 million in credits the cash cost and pretax earnings effect of which would have approximated $7.5 million an amount we had accrued as a reserve on our March 31st balance sheet. Even though we reached agreement with both the FDIC and FTC on the terms of our settlement agreements, two of our three FDIC regulated issuing bank partners were unable to reach agreement with the FDIC which had the effect of aligning our agreement with both regulators. The two regulators announced that they were moving forward with enforcement actions against our company as well as some of our banking partners. As we said in our press release at that time we believe that their allegations are unsupportable. It is incredulous that they can institute litigation against us when on numerous occasions during the period in question, the FDIC personnel in charge of oversight for consumer protection reviewed the materials and found that they complied with all applicable laws and regulations. That said we were prepared to resolve the dispute in order to get a costly legal situation behind us, but the agencies weren't able to reach agreements with our two bank partners leaving us little option but to contest their claims. These claims are unfounded and without merit and we will vigorously contest them. These legal issues have damaged us from a profitability perspective. Some of our account management actions to improve yield have taken much longer to implement. In a slow economic environment we have to manage the revolving credit very closely to ensure that we are able to get the returns necessary in our business. We have worked through some of these issues but still have some challenges ahead. In addition, based merely on allegations made by the FTC Encore capital with whom Jefferson Capital has a long-term forward flow arrangement reached its agreement in early July refused to honor its obligation to purchase our credit card charge-offs from Jefferson Capital as well as its obligations to provide flows to Jefferson Capital under Jefferson Capital's balance transfer and Chapter 13 bankruptcy programs. Although we are in the process of arbitrating these matters with Encore, these disputes contributed to Jefferson Capital's earnings climate in the second quarter of this year and are likely to cause Jefferson Capital to experience significantly lower earnings until this matter is resolved in our favor. There are three primary reasons why Encore’s actions so significantly affect Jefferson Capital's results. First, the fixed price that Encore is obligated to pay Jefferson Capital for our credit card charge-offs was negotiated in 2005 and was based on the going rates for such charge-offs in 2005. Through either collecting our credit card charge-offs itself or selling our credit card charge-offs to other potential purchasers, Jefferson capital will not be able to obtain the same level of returns that Encore is obligated to provide to Jefferson Capital at 2005 pricing levels. Second, because Jefferson Capital uses a cost recovery method of accounting it must fully recover its aggregate purchase price for each static pool of its monthly purchases of our credit card charge-offs and must expense all internal and third party collection costs before it can realize any revenues associated with these transactions. This upfront expensing of costs and delay in revenue recognition can be contrast with the Encore arrangement under which Jefferson Capital purchased our charge-offs and sold them almost simultaneously to Encore at a significant profit without incurring any significant collection costs. Lastly, Encore's failure to provide Jefferson Capital with chapter 13 bankruptcy and balance transfer program flows will slow Jefferson Capital's growth and profitability in these areas as well. Our Jefferson Capital business is at least temporarily investing more cash than in the recent past to purchase portfolios of charge-off paper. Without Encore's sales proceeds as an offset to Jefferson Capital necessary cash requirement to purchase our credit card charge-offs Jefferson capitol has been converted from a net provider of capital to a net user of capital. Assuming that Jefferson Capital holds and collects the portfolios of charge-off paper that Encore is obligated to purchase from it which is probably the most likely scenario, we project that Jefferson Capital will need capital to meet its purchasing obligations through the end of this year. Our forecast show that Jefferson Capital will resume providing cash flows to us in January, 2009, as collections on its newly held charge-off paper portfolios start to exceed the cash required to meet its monthly obligations in buying our credit card charge-offs. Moving on to our retail Micro-Loans segment, our store fronts generated $2.8 million in pretax GAAP earnings from continuing operations in the second quarter. At the end of the April, we executed a sale of our 81 Texas locations. We also have another 103 locations in six states that are held for sale and classified as discontinued operations through a series of stage closings with a single buyer, the first of which was completed on Thursday of last week. We expect to fully complete the sale of operations in Florida, Louisiana, and Arizona in the third quarter of 2008 and we hope to be able to sell the remaining 3 states’ operations in Oklahoma, Colorado, and Michigan by the end of this year. Upon our completion of sales or store closures as planned, we will have 325 retail store fronts in 8 states in the U.K. As we have discussed in the past, our plan when entering the retail Micro-Loan business was to use our expertise in a multiple product set to reduce the cost of credit to the traditional Micro-Loan customer and build this business as a consumer friendly provider of various products and services. Unfortunately, many in the public policy arena, shifted from desiring more financial options for consumers to actually opposing additional financial products and services. Thus our focus is now on doing business only in states where the monoline products still makes sense for us. Ohio, where we currently have 91 locations has been and we hope will continue to be one of these states. However, in response to unfavorable retail Micro-Loan legislation enacted in the second quarter of this year, we along with others in the industry currently are seeking regulatory approval to market and service alternative products in Ohio. Should we obtain the necessary approvals, as the first industry player to seek such approvals has done, we believe these alternative products will meet our customers’ needs, state requirements, and our profitability thresholds. While a comparison of our current quarter with our retail Micro-Loans segment's $6.7 million pretax second quarter 2007 earnings from continued operations show a significant decline in income, much of this drop is based on our cessation in 2007 of a unique category of profitable loans arranged by three different U.S. credit service organizations. The reduction also reflects our belief which is shared by other retail Micro-Loan providers that tax stimulus payments received by consumers in the second quarter of this year have temporarily diminished consumer demand for retail Micro-Loans. Lastly, our conservative second quarter 2008 approach to loan generation in Ohio while we await approval of regulatory filings, also contributed to reduced second quarter earnings relative to the 2007 results. In our Auto Finance segment, we posted a pre-tax GAAP loss of $762,000 in the second quarter, a loss that is much lower than in both the first quarter this year and the same quarter of last year. Our efforts within this segment are focused on achieving the scale necessary to achieve profitability. We are pleased with the progress we are making in this area, and we continue to allocate capital to this segment, particularly given the pricing power we now have which pulled back many other lenders out of the market. However, continued liquidity market challenges will serve to lengthen the time necessary for us to achieve our desired scale and have caused us to focus successfully in recent quarters on cost reductions to better align costs with the size of our receivables. We also continue to be very pleased with our MEM UK Internet operations that now comprise our other segment. While small at only $72,000 pretax, MEM posted its first profitable quarter this past quarter. Since our acquisition of this business last year it has experienced very strong marginal internal rates of return and we continue to slowly expand these operations. Fortunately, given the profile of this business with small loans and quick customer repayments it is possible to expand this business at modest growth rates without huge amounts of capital. This is an obvious attraction of this business in the current liquidity environment. In closing, I note that like any other investor in our company and as the majority shareholders of our company, we on the management team at CompuCredit are not at all comfortable with our recent stock performance. However, our focusing remains on preservation of what we have built and long-term value creation, which we hope will result in attractive prices for our stock over the long run. We have seen many cycles since founding the company in the mid 1990s, and we will continue to manage through this challenging cycle with a view towards increasing the long-term strength and value of the company. Thanks again for joining us this afternoon and for your interest in CompuCredit. I will now turn the call over to J. Paul for further details on our financial performance.