Stale terms, scheduled reset: the existing book is priced for a world that has moved on
The model's full reasoning — Q4 2023 call → NOWe need to determine if management describes that a meaningful portion of existing business is still 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. Look for statements about existing book, renewals, rate increases earning in, etc. Marc Grandisson's opening: "Our ability to deploy capital early in the hard market cycle is paying dividends as we own the renewals... When markets turn hard, you should aggressively write business early in the cycle. This puts your underwriters in a strong position to fully capitalize on the market opportunity. By making decisive early moves, you won become an [Technical Difficulty] we then want to do more business with you. In some ways, the growth becomes self-sustaining..." This is about new business written early, not about existing book repricing. Later: "we continue to earn in premium from our deliberate growth during the early years of this hard market." That suggests that premium written earlier is now earning in, but that's about new business written earlier, not about existing book being repriced. Also: "we are seeing with our clients and that's really what's happening." That's about market conditions. François Morin: "we have more property premium that is more short tail and should have a lower loss ratio ex cat than not... So obviously profitability embedded in the business should be strong." That's about current book. Question asks: does management describe that existing business is still carried at old terms below current market, and that it will reset on a schedule? The transcript doesn't seem to explicitly say that. They talk about rate increases in casualty, but that's about new business. They talk about "owning the renewals" meaning they wrote business early in hard market, so they have good relationships, but not about existing policies repricing. They mention "we continue to earn in premium from our deliberate growth during the early years of this hard market." That means they wrote business at good rates, and as it earns in, they see the benefit. That is about new business written earlier, not about existing book being repriced upward.
| 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.