Stale terms, scheduled reset: the existing book is priced for a world that has moved on
The model's full reasoning — Q1 2022 call → NO1. The user asks to determine if management describes a meaningful portion of the company's existing business being carried at prices/rates/terms set in the past that are now below current market conditions, and that this existing business is coming up for repricing/renewal/reset on a schedule management can already see, so the company's economics improve as those older terms roll off, without needing new customers. 2. I need to scan the transcript for any discussion of repricing, renewals, resets, hedges rolling off, expiring contracts, etc., that apply to the existing book of business. 3. Let's look for keywords: "repricing", "renewal", "reset", "hedge", "roll off", "expiring", "contracts", "rates", "terms", "pricing", "price". 4. In the transcript, Dan Brennan discusses the debt refinancing: "we completed an opportunistic transaction, refinancing approximately $3.3 billion of US bonds funded through an offering of 3 billion euro-denominated bonds." This is a debt refinancing, not a repricing of the company's existing business (products/services). It's about the company's own debt, not its customer contracts. 5. Dan Brennan discusses the FX hedging program: "the cost to manage our VC portfolio and execute our hedging program." and "FX, I think the team has done a great job with the hedging program. Obviously, we've seen the changes in FX rates and what that's done to the top-line. We do have $0.01 for the year." This is about hedging currency, not about repricing existing customer contracts. It's about managing FX exposure, not about resetting prices on existing business. 6. Mike Mahoney discusses pricing: "we still have negative price, but that negative price impact has actually improved each year, because of the weighing of the portfolio." and "Where it's appropriate, where we have unique value and economics to support it, we do our best to have appropriate price increases." This is about taking price increases on new sales or where possible, not about a specific book of existing contracts resetting on a schedule. It's a general statement about pricing power, not a specific embedded reset. 7. The question asks specifically about a "meaningful portion of the company's existing business" being carried at prices below current market, and that this existing business is coming up for repricing on a schedule management can already see.
| Ticker | Company | Call | Date | Call grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SNV | Synovus Financial Corp. | Q1 2024 | 2024-04-18 | B |
| FISI | Financial Institutions, Inc. | Q4 2023 | 2024-01-26 | B |
| UMBF | UMB Financial Corporation | Q3 2022 | 2022-10-26 | C+ |
| CRK | Comstock Resources, Inc. | Q2 2022 | 2022-08-02 | B+ |
| ADSK | Autodesk, Inc. | Q3 2019 | 2018-11-20 | A |
| T | AT&T Inc. | Q3 2018 | 2018-10-24 | C+ |
| DBX | Dropbox, Inc. | Q2 2018 | 2018-08-09 | B |
| ESS | Essex Property Trust, Inc. | Q2 2018 | 2018-08-03 | B+ |
| PTC | PTC Inc. | Q3 2017 | 2017-07-19 | C+ |
| BDN | Brandywine Realty Trust | Q1 2017 | 2017-04-21 | C+ |
FISI · Q4 2023 → YESThe question is about whether management describes a meaningful portion of the existing business being carried at below-current-market terms, and that it's coming up for repricing on a visible schedul...YES The transcript shows management describing exactly this situation for the company's existing loan and securities portfolios (yields rolling off) and for a meaningful portion of its deposit book (the money-market campaign with 12-month guarantees that reset in July 2024). Jack Plants explicitly ties the expected margin expansion to these scheduled repric ings and redeployments of existing cash flows, stating that the improvement is already embedded in the company's current commitments and does not require new customers or demand. This matches the criteria for a "meaningful portion" of the existing business coming up for repricing on a visible schedule. The answer is therefore YES.
PTC · Q3 2017 → YESThe question is about whether management describes a meaningful portion of the existing business being carried at below-current-market prices/terms that are coming up for repricing on a visible schedu...YES Management describes a meaningful portion of the existing business (large enterprise customers on volume purchase agreements / perpetual licenses with discounted maintenance) being carried at below-current off-the-shelf rates. These older terms are expiring on a visible schedule (many in Q4 2017), creating a compelling event where customers must either convert 50%+ ACV uplift to subscription or renew maintenance at 25% higher rates. This repricing is already embedded in the existing book and will improve economics without new customers or demand, as confirmed by the large pipeline of such opportunities and the fact that most large deals are already moving to subscription.
UMBF · Q3 2022 → YESThe question is about whether management describes a meaningful portion of the existing business being carried at below-current-market terms that will reprice/reset on a known schedule, improving econ...YES The transcript shows management describing a meaningful portion of the existing loan book carried at past terms that are now below current market levels, with repricing already scheduled: 61% of loans (~$12.1 billion) are variable-rate, 60% repricing in the next quarter and 71% within 12 months, tied to short-end indices. Loan yields rose 74 bp quarter-over-quarter to 4.46% (cycle-to-date beta 37%), and the securities portfolio is rolling off at ~1.83% yield while cash flows fund higher-yielding loans.