Stale terms, scheduled reset: the existing book is priced for a world that has moved on
The model's full reasoning — Q1 2023 call → NOWe need to determine if management describes that a meaningful portion of existing business is still at old, below-market terms that will reset on a known schedule, improving economics without new customers. Let's analyze the transcript. The question is about "existing book" repricing. Management discusses pricing levers: pricing in existing contracts, new customer pricing, surcharges and fees. They mention that they have been implementing pricing actions. They talk about surcharges being sustainable. They mention that they are lapping pricing in second half. They talk about base rates and adjusting. But is there a specific statement about existing contracts coming up for renewal at below-market rates? They mention "CPI that we put in contract renewals at higher pricing" - that suggests renewals are getting higher pricing. But is that a meaningful gap? They also mention that they are seeing inflation, but they have surcharges. The question asks if management describes that a meaningful portion of existing business is still at old terms below current market and will reset on a schedule. The transcript has a lot about pricing actions taken in 2022 and continuing. They say "we continue to leverage both of those pricing levers, which is renewal, and also in the beginning of the year, the CPI that we put in contract renewals at higher pricing and continue to surcharges according to what we see in inflation." That suggests renewals are getting higher pricing. But is that a specific statement about a gap? They also mention that they are "lapping" pricing in second half, meaning they will compare against prior year's increases. That might indicate that the benefit is already in place, not that there is a backlog of repricing. The question is very specific: "existing book" - current leases, contracts, etc. struck under past conditions at levels below what identical business commands today, and management describes the calendar on which that book resets. The transcript does not explicitly say that there is a large portion of contracts that are still at old rates and will reset. They talk about pricing actions already taken. They mention that they are "starting to see" some things. They also mention that they are "looking at" base rates.
| 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.