Stale terms, scheduled reset: the existing book is priced for a world that has moved on
The model's full reasoning — Q4 2016 call → NOWe need to determine if management describes a meaningful portion of existing business being carried at prices/rates/terms set in the past that are now below current market, and that this existing business is coming up for repricing/renewal/reset on a schedule management can already see, so that economics improve as those older terms roll off, without needing new customers/demand. Look through transcript. Management discusses various segments. Key points: - Acetyls: Pat Quarles talks about pricing in China, raw material cost increases, and how they are able to drive pricing. But that seems to be about passing through cost increases and market dynamics, not about existing contracts resetting from old terms to current market. They mention "we announced about RMB 1,000 of asset price increases throughout the quarter and by the end of the quarter, we'd realized about RMB 700." That is about current pricing actions, not about a backlog of existing contracts resetting. - Filter tow: Mark Rohr discusses pricing down, and mentions "we have in the past taken steps... rationalize" and "we'll just take it through the steps necessary" but no mention of existing contracts resetting to higher prices. Actually tow pricing is down, so not a case of old terms below current. - AEM: Scott Sutton discusses volume growth, new projects, but no mention of existing contracts resetting. - Nilit acquisition: not about existing book. - There is mention of "we have about 1,200 to 1,300 projects currently running" for productivity, but that's cost savings. - No mention of hedges, leases, or contracts that were struck at lower prices and are now resetting to higher market prices. - The only possible thing is in Acetyls: they talk about "we are anticipating an environment in the Western Hemisphere where through a variety of expected maintenance outages, it's going to create some more dynamics that allow us to drive pricing on a real supply/demand basis." That is about future market conditions, not existing book. - Also, they mention "we have about 1,200 to 1,300 projects currently running" for productivity, but that's cost savings. - No mention of "existing book" or "legacy pricing" or "contracts rolling off" etc. Thus, the answer is NO. The transcript does not describe such a situation.
| 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.