|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
(
Friday’s Leasing News was not posted due to an internal error,
for those who receive this only by web, please go to:
http://www.leasingnews.org/archives/July2002/7-19-2002.htm) Kit
Menkin's Leasing News Www.leasingnews.org Tuesday, July 23, 2002 Accurate, fair and
unbiased news for the equipment Leasing Industry -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Headlines---- Origins of the Leasing Business--Stan Evans Citigroup Said
to Mold Deal to Help Enron Skirt Rules $3.1 billion
lost since final quarter of 2000 MB Financial
Bank to Acquire LaSalle Systems Leasing Tuesday-Odds
and Ends Pacific
Capital Reports Record 2nd Q Earnings Bank
of Walnut Credit Reports Earnings/Leasing Div MB
Fin. 53% Increase in 2nd Q Net Income News
Briefs---49ers, Will They Surprise You Again This Year Extended Family Unites in Tribute to Ted Williams ### Denotes Press Release ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Origins of the Leasing Business--Stan Evans Your story this morning (Monday) re: B of A being the first
bank lessor reminded me of the origins of the leasing industry in this country. B
of A played a role in that event too, albeit unwittingly. In 1952 a small neighborhood grocery market in San Francisco
needed to replace a food cooler that had given good service since before
the Second World War but now was beyond repair. The owner of the market,
who had both his personal and business accounts with Bank of America,
applied for a loan at his local branch. He asked that the loan be payable in
installments over three years instead of on a demand note, as was customary
in bank lending at the time. He also offered to grant a lien against the food
cooler in favor of the bank. They turned him down. Shortly thereafter he was talking with one of his regular
and best customers and told him about his recent disappointing experience with
B of A. The customer, after talking with his brother and two friends,
all of whom were customers of the market, decided they would buy the food cooler and lease it to the business. An equipment lease was a legal construct
that one of the men (an attorney) recalled reading about earlier in law school. They formed a company to accomplish the lease (United States
Leasing Corporation) and, delicious irony, they then took the lease
document to a B of A branch used by one of the four and discounted the stream
of rents inherent in the lease they owned. Non-recourse! I have always thought that it said a lot about the leasing
industry, its origins in this country, and its phenomenal success since
1952 that one of the four was an engineer, two were attorneys and one was
a used car salesman. This story came to me one day in the early 1970's in a conversation
with the late Henry Schoenfeld, one of the four, who was then Vice
Chairman of United States Leasing International, Inc., the successor to USLC,
and the company generally credited with creating equipment leasing as we
now know it. All the best. Stan Stanley A. Evans, Jr. Executive Solutions for Leasing and Finance, Inc. 631 Baywood Drive - Newport Beach, CA 92660 T - 949.640.5272 F
- 949.640.8272 stanevans@exsolutions.com http//www.wxsolutions.com --- You are right on the money, Stan. More importantly, you are
right on “life.” Your recounting
is not only accurate, but should be a “wake up call” for all of us. The philosophy has been if you are “making money,” anything
goes. This must change. We
need to get back to the “basics.” We
need to care more about our product and our customer, than ourselves. “Greed” has run our profit line. Our CEO’s and all are programs have been “What’s in it for me.” That has become “normal”. We have lost faith in the board of directors and CEO’s who’s main concern
is themselves---not their stockholders, not their customers,
not their employees. We were making a lot of money, and no one wanted to ask why. We need to fire all the “spin doctors.” We shouldn’t need
a spin on anything as if we are legal and doing things right, we don’t
need “the mix.” All of our politicians are now under a microscope. As businessmen, could we we be able to deal with that scrutiny . And we should. Everybody has relaxed his or her integrity. Nobody should
ever do that. Integrity is what business was built on. No more “advance
rental” profits. No more “commitment fees’ just to keep the bucks. We need to be honest. We need to get the “crooks” out of business. This telemarketing, this computer, we have lost touch with
people. We e-mail, we fax, it is fast paced, and has become an inconsiderate
world. We don’t know who our customers are. We don’t know them if we saw them
on the street. We have lost it. The
human touch has gone. And we need to get it back. Thank you very much for your e-mail. You reminded us what “leasing” was about. Editor ) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Citigroup Said to Mold Deal to Help Enron Skirt Rules By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr. and KURT EICHENWALD New York Times Senior credit officers of Citigroup misrepresented the full
nature of a 1999 transaction with Enron in the records of the deal so
that the energy company could ignore accounting requirements and hide
its true financial condition, according to internal bank documents and
government investigators. The records and interviews with investigators demonstrate
for the first time that bankers intentionally manipulated the written
record of their dealings with Enron to allow the company to improperly
avoid the requirements of accounting rules and the law, thus keeping $125
million in debt off its books. In the 1999 deal, the records show, the bankers knew that
a secret oral agreement they had reached with Enron required that the accounting
for the transaction be changed. Instead, investigators said, Citigroup
left that side deal out of the written record and allowed Enron to account
for the transaction in a way that the bankers knew was improper. In other
words, the full terms of the deal were left out of the paperwork, with
the result being that anyone reviewing it would have no idea that the
accounting treatment being used by Enron was not proper. The relationship between Enron and its bankers has been a
focus of investigative efforts since the company collapsed amid an accounting
scandal last December. For months, both Citigroup and J. P. Morgan Chase
have been repeatedly criticized by investigators and shareholders' lawyers
for structuring billions of dollars of transactions for Enron involving
entities with names like Mahonia, Yosemite, Delta and Stoneville Aegean. The banks have responded that those transactions — which
critics say allowed Enron to disguise loans as trading liabilities — properly
followed accounting rules, and were the workaday product of a widely used
business known as structured finance. But the latest transaction — a previously undisclosed deal
called Roosevelt — is far different. In this case, the determination of
the proper way to account for the deal is not coming from outside critics
but from internal Citigroup e- mail messages among bankers expressing
deep concern about revealing the oral agreement with Enron in the written
record of the transaction. "The paperwork cannot reflect their agreement,"
according to one e-mail message written by James F. Reilly, a senior Citigroup
loan executive in Houston, "as it would unfavorably alter the accounting." A spokesman for Citigroup declined to comment, but he stressed
that the bank believed that its dealings with Enron were "entirely
appropriate." A lawyer for Enron, Robert S. Bennett, said tonight that
he was unfamiliar with the Roosevelt transaction, but he said that he
was "unaware that those financial institutions did anything wrong." The Roosevelt transaction and other deals between Enron and
the banks are expected to be examined today at a hearing before the Senate
Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Already, some members of the
committee have concluded that the Roosevelt transaction violated accounting
rules. "Citibank was a participant in this accounting deception,"
said Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan and the panel's chairman. The subcommittee's ranking Republican, Susan M. Collins of
Maine, said the investigation had found that Citigroup was willing to
risk its reputation "to keep Enron, an important client, happy." Such transactions between the banks and Enron — including
Roosevelt, Mahonia and Delta — were structured to have all the appearance
of commodity trades, but ultimately served the same purpose as a loan.
Money flows from the bank to the company, cash is paid back months later
along with the equivalent of interest, and actual commodities rarely change
hands. Technically, experts have said, such transactions — known as prepays
— follow the requirements of the accounting rules, even if ultimately
they can disguise the total debt held by a corporation. But, for such transactions to be treated as prepays, one
agreement must stay in force: the company must maintain its commitment
to deliver a commodity — like natural gas — at some point in the future.
If, instead, the company commits itself simply to return the cash, the
transaction has been transformed from a prepay into a loan, pure and simple. That is what happened in the Roosevelt transaction, documents
and interviews show. In that deal, Citigroup agreed in late 1998 to transfer
to Enron $500 million for six months as part of a prepay, with the company
committing itself to deliver natural gas and oil at a future date. Terms
of the deal called for portions of the debt to be sold off by May 1999
in chunks to other banks, to help spread Citigroup's risk — unless the
commodity was delivered or the money advanced was repaid. As that date approached, Enron asked Citigroup to extend
the time in which it was allowed to make good on its side of the transaction,
according to e-mail messages between senior Citigroup loan executives.
Under the company's proposal, it would repay Citigroup $310 million —
roughly the amount owed under the natural gas portion of the transaction.
The remaining amount of roughly $190 million — which corresponded with
the value of the crude oil prepay — would be paid back by Enron sometime
in the fall. "Enron characterizes this as a `favor' — they do not
wish to repay Roosevelt without full corresponding refinancing,"
according to an April 19, 1999, e-mail message from Mr. Reilly. In other
words, Enron did not want to repay the $500 million until it could find
another way to get similar financing. But, according to the e-mail message,
Enron had failed to do so. Officials in the loan department of Citigroup were "very
negative" on the proposal, the internal records show. Rather than
extending the time and allowing Enron to pay in the future, they suggested
several alternatives under which Enron would pay the $310 million, while
the rest of the debt would be sold off to other banks. Within days, the records show, a new deal was reached, sidestepping
the concerns of the loan department. Under its terms, Enron would pay
$310 million in early May. At the same time, oil deliveries required to
be made each month from May to September would be pushed back to begin
on Oct. 1. But, under the secret oral agreement, Enron committed itself
to prepay the full amount by Sept. 30 — a commitment that bankers knew
transformed the potential oil deliveries into a fiction, thus changing
the deal from a structured financing into a loan. Enron has "agreed to prepay by 9/30," Mr. Reilly,
the Houston banker, wrote in an April 27 e-mail message. "The papers
cannot stipulate that as it would require recategorizing the prepaid as
simple debt." Ultimately, Enron paid $375 million in May, leaving $125
million of the oil transaction still outstanding. The loan approval documents
for the revisions, submitted to senior banking officials, disclosed that
Enron had "verbally agreed to repay the remaining $125 million by
Sept. 30, 1999." However, according to people who have reviewed the
paperwork for the transaction itself, there is no mention of that oral
commitment. Mr. Bennett, the Enron lawyer, said the current criticisms
by Congress were a result of political pressure to crack down on the appearance
of corporate wrongdoing. "What we have here is an incredible amount
of revisionist history, which is motivated by the upcoming election,"
he said. "Most of the problems — not all of them — are things that
have been legal and have been acceptable." _______________________________________________________________ $3.1 billion lost since final quarter of 2000 By Thomas Kupper SAN DIEGO UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER It has been a brutal recession for many of San Diego's largest
companies, and the suffering may not be over. Altogether, the 25 largest publicly traded companies in San
Diego County have lost $3.1 billion since their fortunes turned downward
in the final quarter of 2000. Sales are down, and companies have written
off hundreds of millions of dollars for acquisitions and bad investments.
The weak results mirror the nationwide trend, as the rapid
growth of the late 1990s came to an abrupt end. But while many companies
elsewhere have merely seen profits shrink, 12 of the 25 biggest companies
in San Diego lost money last year. Nonoperating costs, such as acquisitions and one-time write-offs,
made up a significant part of the losses – but not all of them. Operating
profits, reflecting companies' ongoing businesses, fell in 2001 by 72
percent. "Many of the (San Diego) tech companies have really
suffered severely," said Sung Won Sohn, chief economist at Wells
Fargo. "The suppliers to those companies have suffered as well."
The performance of many San Diego companies has improved
along with the nationwide economy, but it's unclear whether the storm
has passed. Gateway, one of the first local companies to report results
for the quarter through June, said last week that it lost $61.2 million.
Several more major local companies, including Sempra and Qualcomm, are
expected to report results this week. The key question: Are weak results at the region's biggest
companies an ominous sign for the direction of the San Diego economy?
So far, the answer appears to be no. The region has held
up better against the recession than most other regions of the country
have, with a June unemployment rate for San Diego County of 4.1 percent,
compared with 6 percent for the nation as a whole. Altogether, nonagricultural businesses in San Diego County
employed 21,000 more workers in June than they did a year earlier. But several of the region's biggest companies have let workers
go to cut costs. Gateway has dismissed 12,000 employees, though most of
them worked outside San Diego. HNC Software let 75 workers go in October,
and Peregrine Systems said last month that it would lay off 1,400 employees,
including 340 at its San Diego headquarters. "What this shows is the fact that San Diego's economy
is not dominated by the big, publicly traded companies," said Alan
Gin, a business professor at the University of San Diego. "Most of
the companies in the region tend to be smaller, and I think those companies
are better able to adapt to difficult economic situations." Across the country, pretax corporate profits fell 16 percent
last year after rising 9 percent in 2000, according to Federal Reserve
data. But despite the drop, companies made $713.7 billion in profits last
year. In part, the weaker performance among San Diego companies
reflects that many of the region's biggest employers operate in industries
that have been hit particularly hard in the recession, such as telecommunications
and computers. But the trend also shows that San Diego's companies remain
smaller and less well-established than such Silicon Valley companies as
Intel and Hewlett-Packard that have remained profitable, if less so than
they were in the late-'90s boom. Many of San Diego's biotech companies lose money, for example,
because they are focused on research and haven't brought products to market.
Likewise, Leap Wireless International lost $483.2 million last year as
it sought to build up its business. Added together, the 25 biggest publicly traded companies
in San Diego reported $29 billion in revenue for 2001, which would rank
57th on the Fortune 500. By comparison, Dell Computer and United Parcel
Service each had about the same revenue as the 25 biggest local companies
combined. Still, many of the San Diego companies have reported profits
in the past. The 25 biggest companies reported net income of $795.7 million
among them in the 2000 calendar year, and all but three reported operating
profits. The numbers for 2001 represented a significant weakening.
Revenue fell at 10 of the 25 biggest companies, and nine reported operating
losses. Altogether, the 25 companies lost $2.4 billion in the 2001 calendar
year. Wells Fargo's Sohn said those companies may be suffering
from some of the same factors that have hit businesses across the nation:
increased globalization, falling prices for technology gear and generally
tough competition. "Basically, companies have suffered because they don't
have any pricing power," Sohn said. "The margins have really
suffered." Among the biggest money losers last year were Gateway, which
lost $1 billion as sales fell 37 percent, and Peregrine Systems, which
reported a loss of $1.3 billion but has since said the true figure probably
is higher. Qualcomm saw a profit in 2000 turn to a loss in 2001, in part
because of write-offs related to investments and acquisitions. There were a few exceptions to the trend. Sempra Energy said
net income rose 20 percent to $547 million, while Idec Pharmaceuticals
said net income more than doubled to $101.7 million. It is unclear how quickly results will improve for the region's
biggest companies. Results from this year's first quarter suggest a recovery,
but many companies are still hurting. Altogether, the region's 25 biggest
companies reported $110.4 million in losses for the quarter, compared
with losses of $929.8 million at the same companies a year earlier. "Operationally, we're hard-pressed to see any real recovery,"
said Bud Leedom, an analyst who follows San Diego companies for Wells
Fargo Securities. "(But) companies have lowered their operating costs
dramatically, so there's no way we can see the same magnitude of loss
in 2002 (as in 2001)." --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ############# ###################################### MB Financial Bank Agrees to Acquire LaSalle Systems Leasing
and LaSalle Equipment Partnership CHICAGO Transaction Will Result in Expansion of Lease Banking Business; Charles Gately to Continue as President of New Bank Subsidiary MB Financial Bank, N.A., a $3.3 billion subsidiary of MB
Financial, Inc., (Nasdaq:MBFI), has agreed to acquire LaSalle Systems
Leasing, Inc. and its affiliated company LaSalle Equipment Limited Partnership.
("LaSalle Systems Leasing") for $39.7 million, it was jointly
announced today. Five million dollars of the purchase price will be paid
in the form of MB Financial, Inc. common stock, while the balance will
be paid in the form of cash. The transaction involving the Chicago-based
MB Financial Bank and LaSalle Systems Leasing, based in Northbrook, Illinois,
is expected to be completed in the third quarter, pending regulatory approval.
LaSalle Systems Leasing will operate as a subsidiary of MB Financial Bank. Mitchell Feiger, President and CEO of MB Financial, Inc.,
and Charles Gately, President of LaSalle Systems Leasing, jointly made
the announcement. Gately will continue as President of LaSalle Systems
Leasing. "We view the LaSalle Systems Leasing transaction as
a natural extension of our current lease banking business and consistent
with our growth objectives in this area," said Feiger. "This
transaction will enable us to increase the growth rate of our lease investment
income and lease loan volume, and provide us with key talent in the leasing
business." LaSalle Systems Leasing is a 22 year-old organization that
offers a wide range of financial solutions to companies needing to manage
high technology equipment. The company's principal focus is on providing
lease financing for computer enterprise servers, LAN/WAN networks and
telecommunications equipment. The company also provides leasing solutions
for industrial use capital equipment. LaSalle Systems Leasing originated $37 million of leases
in 2001 and currently has a portfolio with an original cost exceeding
$180 million. LaSalle Systems Leasing has been a customer of MB Financial
Bank since its inception, working closely with MB Financial Bank's President,
Burton Field. The purchase price of $39.7 million, which includes a $4
million deferred payment tied to LaSalle Systems Leasing results, is expected
to initially generate approximately $3 million in goodwill. The transaction
is expected to yield an internal rate of return of 21.5%, and the first
year fully diluted earnings per share accretion impact to MB Financial,
Inc.'s shareholders is expected to range from $0.08 to $0.10 per share. "We have had a long term relationship with MB Financial
Bank and its professionals. They have been like a partner to us. There
should be no learning curve for any of us and it should be business as
usual for our customers. We both share the same vision of profitable growth
and dedicated customer service," added Gately. Feiger, Field and Jill York, MB Financial, Inc.'s Chief Financial
Officer, will join the LaSalle Systems Leasing board of directors. MB Financial Bank is experienced in meeting the commercial
banking needs of companies in many specialized areas. The MB Financial
Bank Lease Banking Division has helped small and medium-sized equipment
leasing companies with a broad range of services for more than 30 years. In 2001, the MB Financial Bank generated a record $295.2
million in loans to independent leasing companies, up more than 20% from
the previous year. The loans included financing for the debt portion of
leveraged leases, working capital lines of credit, bridge loans and warehouse
lines of credit. The LaSalle Systems Leasing transaction will be the second
acquisition completed this year by MB Financial, Inc. In April 2002, MB
Financial, Inc. acquired the First National Bank of Lincolnwood, a $228
million assets-sized institution that was merged into MB Financial Bank.
With that addition, MB Financial, Inc. has grown to more than $3.7 billion
in assets and has 34 branches throughout the Chicago area. MB Financial, Inc., the parent company of MB Financial Bank,
N.A. (Illinois), Union Bank, N.A. (Oklahoma), and Abrams Centre National
Bank (Texas), is a Chicago-based financial holding company quoted under
the symbol "MBFI." MB Financial has been delivering competitive,
personalized service for more than 90 years to privately owned, middle-market
companies as well as to individuals who live and work in the Chicago metropolitan
area. The website may be found at www.mbfinancial.com. CONTACT: MB Financial Karen Perlman, 773/292-6292 kperlman@mbfinancial.com or Minkus & Dunne Communications Raymond Minkus/Stephanie Hamernik, 312/541-8787 rdm@minkus-dunne.com ############# ################################### Tuesday—Odds and Ends Ginny Young <GinnyYoung@bravacapital.com> I agree with you 100% Bob Rodi. The way local politicians build and renovate stadiums with tax payer dollars is despicable.
The fact that federal politicians may not continue to help Amtrak while
at the same time subsidizing US Airways is ludicrous. The loss of US Airways as a passenger air carrier no way compares to the loss of Amtrak as a passenger
railway. The economical impact, especially to the east coast, is frightening
if Amtrak were to cease operating. I'm sure the delays have already cost a bundle. The most amazing thing is that you and I agree on something.
Yes, you risked sounding like a liberal, and indeed you did. I am proud of you! Welcome to my world, if only for a minute........ I must go and make an entry in my journal. Ginny ---- The train on the return trip from Chicago was only 6 minutes
late to Mt. Pleasant Iowa. My daughter paid a $44 student fare for a three
and a half hour 220 mile trip. She is beginning to share my ardor for
rail travel. She will be studying in Japan next school year and hopes
the trains are "as nice" there but the service is better. I
told her if all I've heard is true, she could bet on it. J.P. (Jake) Kemps Jake Kemps jkemps@valleyapp.com ---
Len Sperl I am looking for
Rich Eudicone from the old NECC--does anyone know how to contact him? If so email me with numb we have info _____ Equipment Leasing Association Membership breakdown on 436. It is as follows: 98 Bank/Bank Subsidiary 11 Broker/Packager 54 Captive 1 Consultant 1 Equip Manager 3 Equip Remarketer 81 Financial Services 165 Independent Leasing Company 6 Investment Banker 2 Management Services 13 Other We have 26 International Members 13 Business Unit Members 37 Arranger Members 254 Associate Members Best, Michael Michael Henderson Director, Membership & Marketing Equipment Leasing Association 4301 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 550 Arlington, VA 22203 703.516.8383; Fax: 703.527.2649 (Leasing News is asking all leasing association for their
membership breakdown, to further show the diverseness. Here you have an excellent breakdown, and again, showing that this organization is the leader among all the
equipment leasing associations. years looking into not only how they can serve their members
better, but our industry. If you have not been to a ELA conference, you are
qualified to attend as “ a member”, as per their policy. San Francisco will be dynamite, and what a great City and area ( Napa, Monterey, but the
restaurants here are the best, rival New York and New Orleans. Editor ) --- BancPartners has had a fantastic last quarter, great last
month. Sales have been up, and they have signed up more community banks, introducing
leasing to the bank’s customers.
Leasing News will soon have a story on the success of this
company. ---- Chuck Brazier is back in Miami, but not for long. He will
be attending the United Association of Equipment Leasing Funding Retreat
on the 26th in Philadelphia, Pa. You can see him there. Go to: www.uael.org to make your reservation. It is never too late. ---- WorldCom controls 65% of Internet Traffic. This is more serious than many people realize. Carl Moberg, Streak Technology -----------------------------------------------------------------------------\\ Great Financial Statement—Menzel will approve a lease to
SBB&T FYI ************************************************* Paul J. Menzel, CLP Senior Vice President / General Manager Leasing Division SANTA BARBARA BANK & TRUST P.O. Box 60607 Santa Barbara, CA 93160-0607 1 South Los Carneros Road Goleta, CA 93117 Dir Ph# (805)560-1650 Email PaulM@sbbt.com Pacific Capital Bancorp Reports Record Second Quarter Earnings SANTA BARBARA, Calif.----Pacific Capital Bancorp (Nasdaq:SABB): Highlights: -- $0.43 earnings
per share compared to $0.32 in prior year -- Year-to-date earnings
per share increase by 26% over 2001 -- Improving net
interest margin and expense management -- Better-than-expected
loan growth and asset quality Pacific Capital Bancorp (Nasdaq:SABB), a community bank holding
company with $4.1 billion in assets, today announced the highest second
quarter net income in the company's history. For the second quarter ended
June 30, 2002, net income was $15.2 million, or $0.43 per diluted share,
compared with net income of $11.5 million, or $0.32 per diluted share,
in the second quarter of 2001. For the first six months of 2002, Pacific Capital Bancorp's
net income increased 24% to $42.7 million, or $1.22 per diluted share,
from $34.6 million, or $0.97 per diluted share. Pacific Capital Bancorp's return on average equity (ROE)
and return on average assets (ROA) for the second quarter of 2002 were
18.17% and 1.53%, respectively, compared to 14.43% and 1.22%, respectively,
for the second quarter of 2001. "Our financial performance in the second quarter exceeded
our expectations, and we continued to deliver strong year-over-year growth,"
said William S. Thomas Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of Pacific
Capital Bancorp. "We achieved a significant increase in net interest
income which was driven by solid loan growth in the residential real estate
segment of our portfolio and an increasing net interest margin. "We are seeing signs of stabilizing economic conditions
in our markets, resulting in a balanced flow of credits into and out of
problem loan categories. This enabled our provision for loan losses in
the second quarter to be less than our expectations. In addition, our
entire network of community banks has also done an excellent job in tightly
controlling expenses. These factors were the key drivers of our better-than-anticipated
financial performance in the second quarter," said Thomas. Financial Highlights During the second quarter, total interest income was $64.2
million, compared with $68.5 million in the same period last year. This
decrease occurred as the lower rates earned on loans offset the positive
impact of higher loan balances. Total interest expense for the second quarter of 2002 was
$15.7 million, compared with $25.5 million for the second quarter of 2001.
Although deposit volume increased year-over-year, total interest expense
decreased due to reductions in the average cost of funds, driven by decreases
in prevailing interest rates. Exclusive of RALs, net interest margin for the second quarter
of 2002 was 5.17%. This represents a 14 basis point improvement over the
net interest margin of 5.03% in the first quarter of 2002 as the Company
benefited from stable interest rates and the continued repricing of deposits.
This also compares with a net interest margin of 5.18% in the second quarter
of 2001. Total loans were $2.88 billion at June 30, 2002. This compares
to $2.83 billion, exclusive of RALs, at March 31, 2002. Total loans increased
8.9% from $2.64 billion at June 30, 2001. "Loan demand was slightly better in the second quarter
than we expected, and the growing pipeline of opportunities indicates
a more positive outlook on the part of our customers," said Thomas.
"However, we continue to remain cautious in our approval process,
particularly with commercial loans, given the uncertain pace of economic
recovery." Total deposits were $3.22 billion at June 30, 2002, compared
to $3.24 billion at March 31, 2002, and $3.12 billion at June 30, 2001.
In all periods, the deposit totals provided are exclusive of deposits
related to the RAL program. Noninterest revenue was $12.7 million, compared with $14.2
million in the second quarter of 2001. Income from other service charges,
commissions and fees for the quarter ended June 30, 2002, decreased $1.2
million, or 18%, over the same quarter of 2001. Fees generated by the
Trust & Investment Services division increased 5.8% to $3.4 million,
compared with $3.2 million in the second quarter of 2001. Service charges
on deposit accounts increased during the second quarter of 2002 to $3.5
million, up 5.2% over the second quarter of last year. Exclusive of the impact of the RAL and RT programs, the Company's
operating efficiency ratio for the second quarter of 2002 was 53.92% compared
with 60.99% for the same period last year. "Through the diligent efforts of our employees, we have
been successful in generating increased net income this year without having
to increase our expense levels," said Thomas. 2002 RAL and RT Programs During the second quarter, the Company successfully completed
its 2002 Refund Anticipation Loan (RAL) and Refund Transfer (RT) income
tax programs. These programs generated approximately $33.7 million in
pre-tax income, 86% of which was earned during the first quarter. This
compares with pre-tax income of $26.1 million generated by the RAL/RT
business in 2001. The Company experienced a lower level of charge-offs
related to the 2002 RAL program than expected, which had a positive impact
on second quarter net income. Asset Quality and Capital Ratios During the second quarter, the Company recorded provision
for non-RAL credit losses of $5.9 million. For the quarter ended June 30, 2002, the non-RAL related
allowance for credit losses increased to $59.1 million, or 2.05% of total
loans, compared to $54.8 million, or 1.93% of total loans, at March 31,
2002. This compares with the industry average of 1.79% of total loans
for the Company's peer group, based on data provided as of March 31, 2002. Total nonperforming loans increased $10.8 million in the
second quarter to $31.5 million at June 30, 2002, representing 1.09% of
total loans. This compares with the industry average of 1.11% of total
loans for the Company's peer group, based on data provided as of March
31, 2002. Approximately 80% of the second quarter increase in nonperforming
loans is attributable to five credits in the hospitality, agriculture
and technology sectors. Total nonperforming assets at the end of the second quarter
of 2002 represented 0.78% of total assets, an increase from 0.51% of total
assets at the end of the prior quarter. This compares with the Company's
peer group average of 0.77% of total assets, based on data provided as
of March 31, 2002. Net charge-offs (exclusive of RALs) for the three months
ended June 30, 2002, were $1.6 million, compared with $3.5 million for
the three months ended March 31, 2002. Annualized net charge-offs to total average loans (both exclusive
of RALs) were 0.23% for the three months ended June 30, 2002, compared
with 0.51% for the three months ended March 31, 2002. This compares with
the Company's peer group average of 0.91%, based on data provided as of
March 31, 2002. The Company's capital ratios continue to be above the well-capitalized
guidelines established by bank regulatory agencies. Share Purchase Program Update On June 6, 2002, Pacific Capital Bancorp announced that its
board of directors had authorized the repurchase of up to $20 million
of its common stock. Through June 30, 2002, the Company had purchased
160,433 shares of its common stock at an average per share price of $24.06,
for a total price of $3.9 million. Outlook Based on the strong second quarter financial results, Pacific
Capital Bancorp now believes its full-year 2002 earnings per share will
range between $1.89 and $1.92. "We fully expect to continue our strong growth for the
remainder of 2002," said Thomas. "We believe our second-half
results will be driven by further loan growth, a lower level of provision
for loan losses than in the first half of the year, and continued success
in expense management." Pacific Capital Bancorp is the parent company of Pacific
Capital Bank, N.A., a nationally chartered bank with four divisions: Santa
Barbara Bank & Trust, First National Bank of Central California, South
Valley National Bank and San Benito Bank. Pacific Capital Bank, N.A. is
a 41-branch community bank network serving customers in six Central Coast
counties, from Morgan Hill in the north to Westlake Village/Thousand Oaks
in the south. CONTACT: Pacific Capital Bancorp, Santa Barbara Deborah Lewis, 805/884-6680 (Investor Relations) SOURCE: Pacific Capital Bancorp ################################ #################### ================================================= "Knowlton, Paul" <knowlton@bowc.com> FYI, the leasing division has had our 2 most profitable quarters.
BWC FINANCIAL CORP.
ANNOUNCES SECOND QUARTER & FIRST HALF EARNINGS James L. Ryan,
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of BWC Financial Corp.
and its subsidiaries Bank of Walnut Creek and BWC Mortgage Services, announced
net income for the period ending June 30, 2002. Ryan reported
net income of $2,142,000 or $0.59 diluted earnings per share for the six
months ended June 30, 2002, compared to income of $2,597,000 or $0.68
diluted earnings per share for the same period in 2001. Earnings for first half 2002 represent 1.07% return on average
assets (ROA) and 10.97% return on average equity (ROE), compared to 1.45%
return on average assets (ROA) and 14.67% return on average equity for
first half 2001. For second
quarter 2002, net income was $1,061,000 or $0.29 diluted earnings per
share, compared to net income of $1,114,000 or $0.29 diluted earnings
per share for the same period in 2001. Return on average assets for second
quarter 2002 was 1.06% and return on average equity was 11.14% compared
to second quarter 2001 return on average assets of 1.23% and return on
average equity of 12.48%. Total assets
of the Corporation at June 30, 2002 were $409,032, 000, compared to total
assets of $370,666,000 at June 30, 2001. Additional
details may be found in the Summary of Consolidated Financial Results
for second quarter and first half 2002: BWC Financial Corp.
The Board
of Directors of BWC Financial Corp. recently declared a 10% stock dividend
to shareholders of record as of July 15, 2002. Founded in 1980, Bank of
Walnut Creek headquarters and main office are at 1400 Civic Drive, Walnut
Creek. Additional branch offices are in Orinda, San Ramon, Danville, Pleasanton,
and Livermore with regional business centers in Fremont and San Jose.
BWC Mortgage Services, with headquarters in San Ramon, has mortgage consultants
in each of the Bank's branch offices. ##### Nasdaq: BWCF ########### ######################################### MB Financial, Inc. Reports 53% Increase in Second Quarter
Net Income CHICAGO-- --MB Financial, Inc. (Nasdaq:MBFI) (the "Company"),
the holding company for MB Financial Bank, N.A., Union Bank, N.A. and
Abrams Centre National Bank (collectively, the "Banks") announced
today second quarter 2002 net income of $11.5 million compared to $7.5
million for the second quarter of 2001, an increase of 53.1%. Fully diluted
earnings per share for the second quarter of 2002 increased 52.4% to $0.64
compared to $0.42 for the second quarter of 2001. Of this increase, approximately
$644 thousand or $0.04 basic and fully diluted earnings per share, resulted
from the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 142
on January 1, 2002, which eliminated the requirement to amortize goodwill. Mitchell Feiger, President and Chief Executive Officer of
MBFI, said "This was another strong quarter for our Company and we
are very pleased with our operating results through the first six months
of the year. During the second quarter the Company completed the acquisition
of First Lincolnwood Corporation and its subsidiary, First National Bank
of Lincolnwood ("Lincolnwood"), which totaled approximately
$227.5 million in assets as of the April 5, 2002 closing date. We have
made significant progress towards integrating operations and plan to finish
the integration, including the systems conversion in the third quarter." Also today, the Company announced the signing of a definitive
agreement to acquire LaSalle Systems Leasing and its affiliated company
LaSalle Equipment Limited Partnership ("LaSalle Systems Leasing")
for $39.7 million. Five million dollars of the purchase price will be
paid in the form of MB Financial, Inc. common stock, while the balance
will be paid in the form of cash. The purchase price, which includes a
$4.0 million deferred payment tied to LaSalle Systems Leasing's future
results, is expected to initially generate approximately $3.0 million
in goodwill. The acquisition is pending final regulatory approval and
is expected to close in the third quarter. The LaSalle Systems Leasing will operate as a subsidiary
of MB Financial Bank. The Company's lease residuals will increase by approximately
$12.0 million as a result of the acquisition. The acquisition is expected
to be accretive to the Company's fully diluted earnings per share by approximately
$0.08 to $0.10 on an annual basis. "We view the LaSalle Systems Leasing
transaction as a natural extension of our current leasing business,"
said Feiger. "This transaction will enable us to increase the growth
rate of our lease investment income and lease loan volume and provide
us with key talent in the leasing business." RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Second Quarter Results The Company had net income of $11.5 million for the second quarter of 2002 compared to $7.5 million for the second quarter of 2001, an increase of $4.0 million or 53.1%. Net interest income, the largest component of net income, was $33.9 million for the three months ended June 30, 2002, an increase of $6.5 million from $27.4 million for the second quarter of 2001. Net interest income grew due to a fifty-nine basis point increase in the net interest margin expres |