Stale terms, scheduled reset: the existing book is priced for a world that has moved on
The model's full reasoning — Q3 2022 call → NOWe need to determine if management describes that a meaningful portion of existing business is still at prices below current market, and that this existing business will reset to current terms on a schedule already determined, improving economics without needing new customers. Look for mentions of existing contracts, hedges, pricing structures, etc., that are below current market and will roll off. In the transcript, Scott Drake discusses price increases, surcharges, and hedging. He mentions that the price hike implemented in November was needed to offset higher inflation, and that more recent price increases have positioned them well. He also mentions that the Direct ship business operates under a cost plus model, so pricing pressures flow to customers, but there is a lag: "the inflationary challenges we faced from September through March in our Direct ship business, won’t be fully realized until the next quarter as our pricing engine captures these increases and passes them along to our customers." That suggests that existing business (Direct ship) will see price increases as the cost plus model adjusts, but that's about passing through cost increases, not about repricing below market. Also, they mention hedging: "our hedging strategy is working and helping mitigate those increases" but they expect inflationary investment in coffee inventory. Hedges are about costs, not about repricing existing customer contracts. The question asks about existing business being carried at prices below current market and resetting. The transcript mentions price increases implemented in November and April, but those are for the company's own pricing to customers. Are they saying that existing customer contracts are below market and will reset? They talk about "price increases and delivery surcharges implemented across our DSD network in the previous quarter, and flowing through our results in Q3" - that's about new price increases taking effect. But is that about existing business? Yes, they are raising prices on existing customers.
| 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.