UCBI: How Strong Is The Bank?

Posted in the Blairsville Forum

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of489
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Tom

Cornelia, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

4

3

3

How much does Corsair own? Has anyone looked at that investment deal? Maybe they are unwinding. I think they are the largest single investor.
Idiots

Canton, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Who cares?

Don't have any bearing on my money in there.

IF your dumb enough to buy stocks, I guess you would care.
info

Dawsonville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

3

From Theflyonthewall.com

October 27, 2011
09:49 EDT UCBI
United Community Banks: working with SEC on net deferred tax asset

CEO Jimmy Tallent commented: "United has been working diligently with the SEC to resolve comments regarding our net deferred tax asset made during their review of two resale registration statements and related periodic reports. The SEC has inquired as to the necessity of an additional deferred tax asset valuation allowance. We continue to believe an additional valuation allowance is not required based on our expectation that, more likely than not, we will realize all of our net deferred tax assets many years prior to their expiration. However, considering the SEC's inquiry, it is possible we could be required to record a valuation allowance."
The Dahlonega Stalker

Cornelia, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

info wrote:
From Theflyonthewall.com
October 27, 2011
09:49 EDT UCBI
United Community Banks: working with SEC on net deferred tax asset
CEO Jimmy Tallent commented: "United has been working diligently with the SEC to resolve comments regarding our net deferred tax asset made during their review of two resale registration statements and related periodic reports. The SEC has inquired as to the necessity of an additional deferred tax asset valuation allowance. We continue to believe an additional valuation allowance is not required based on our expectation that, more likely than not, we will realize all of our net deferred tax assets many years prior to their expiration. However, considering the SEC's inquiry, it is possible we could be required to record a valuation allowance."
Why don't you just put the last line into plain english and tell us what that means? I'm a relatively stupid and uneducated person, and don't have any idea what the requirement of recording a valuation will mean. Is it a bad thing or a good thing?

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

5

5

5

The M0untains V0ice wrote:
Again, not a huge loss. But the trend seems to be DOWN even on huge market rally days. The UCBI Car has completely decoupled from the overall stock market train and is seemingly speeding along towards a Ravine with No Bridge.
And here is my guess as to why it is even worse than people think. If things keep heading south (and I see no evidence things are going to turn around)the FDIC might not step up to bail them out because they are low on funds, and lets face it - UCBI did possibly make issues even muddier with all of their "CREATIVE" solutions for getting out of the mess they are in. One perfect example of this is the "Fletcher Deal", which looks to be one of the most misguided scenarios imaginable, Fletcher itself being under investigation from the SEC it seems.(WHERE WAS THE BOARD OVERSIGHT WHEN THAT DEAL WAS BEING CRAFTED?) My guess is that that deal has more substantial write down on it before this is over.
To make it worse, it may end up that no takeover/merger bank will touch UCBI either - because of the possibility criminal or other investigations could open up even new unforseen problems and liabilities. People don't like uncertainty, and they don't like surprises, and with all the other floundering institutions out there available to be picked up on the cheap - I don't see any line forming to take a risk with UCBI at any price.
With all this considered - I think we're getting ready to see something New here.
This is fear-mongering at its worst. To suggest that the FDIC will not support depositors in the the event that UCB fails is simply irresponsible. Yes, the FDIC resolution fund is low, but they replenish it by assessing fees on all banks. If they need more funding, they raise the fees. If you spend any time actually analyzing banks rather than just making stuff up, you'll find that while UCB is having its problems, it is far from failure. There are many banks in line to fail before UCB. Yes, the Fletcher deal smells bad but it won't cause the bank to fail.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

6

4

4

The Dahlonega Stalker wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you just put the last line into plain english and tell us what that means? I'm a relatively stupid and uneducated person, and don't have any idea what the requirement of recording a valuation will mean. Is it a bad thing or a good thing?
The SEC is questioning whether UCB will be able to use all its previous losses to offset taxes on future income. If the bank can't show that it will be profitable enough to use those losses in a timely fashion, it will have to write down the value of the deferred-tax asset. Not a good thing for investors....
observation

Cornelia, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

6

4

4

Keith Stone II wrote:
<quoted text>
This is fear-mongering at its worst. To suggest that the FDIC will not support depositors in the the event that UCB fails is simply irresponsible. Yes, the FDIC resolution fund is low, but they replenish it by assessing fees on all banks. If they need more funding, they raise the fees. If you spend any time actually analyzing banks rather than just making stuff up, you'll find that while UCB is having its problems, it is far from failure. There are many banks in line to fail before UCB. Yes, the Fletcher deal smells bad but it won't cause the bank to fail.
MV has a rather good track record regarding the bank. And the FDIC fund balance was only recently running a substantial negative balance and probably only caught back up to zero because of slowed bank closings. The overall system is unquestionably teetering on edge due to Europe issues and Congressional Super Comittee issues. And of course we have the Occupy Movement holding on, even growing, and of course people are leaving banks in droves.

I find it irresponsible to give people false confidence. Because it would not take much for single midsized bank such as UCBI to go insolvent, crash suddenly, and the ONLY way the FDIC is able to refund the depositors involves them going back to Congress for the money. In this political environment - that thought does not give me the warm fuzzies.

And one last thing. Everyone keeps talking about how well capitolized UCBI is - no worries you say. So someone explain to me WHY stock investors are fleeing in droves?? Could it be that the insiders KNOW problems the rest of us don't? For instance - they had to know that Fletcher was a nightmare deal that would only buy short time. How many more short fix scenarios are out there - waiting to blow up?

I find it irresponsible to give people false confidence. Extremely irresponsible. Thats different from calling for panic mind you. But to insinuate that the whole house of cards couldn't legitimately crash to teh ground is not being realistic.
curious

Cornelia, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

2

The M0untains V0ice wrote:
Interesting Decoupling from the Market shows UCBI in trouble.
UCBI is a member of the NASDAQ stocks. It is also a bank stock. Other bank stocks one might look to to get an idea of the sector might include:
Bank of America (BAC); Branch Bank & Trust (BBT); Synovus (SNV); or Suntrust (STI).
We had some huge market swings this week. Wednesday was a down day across the board. Everything listed above was pulled down. But Friday was a huge rebound. Every single stock or index listed above, had big rebounds - Except One!
Let's look at Friday Trading Results:
The NASDAQ ended..... UP 2.04%
BAC ended.......... UP 2.99%
SNV ended.......... UP 2.01%
STI ended.......... UP 2.01%
BBT ended.......... UP 2.25%
UCBI???....... DOWN 0.28%
Again, not a huge loss. But the trend seems to be DOWN even on huge market rally days. The UCBI Car has completely decoupled from the overall stock market train and is seemingly speeding along towards a Ravine with No Bridge.
And here is my guess as to why it is even worse than people think. If things keep heading south (and I see no evidence things are going to turn around)the FDIC might not step up to bail them out because they are low on funds, and lets face it - UCBI did possibly make issues even muddier with all of their "CREATIVE" solutions for getting out of the mess they are in. One perfect example of this is the "Fletcher Deal", which looks to be one of the most misguided scenarios imaginable, Fletcher itself being under investigation from the SEC it seems.(WHERE WAS THE BOARD OVERSIGHT WHEN THAT DEAL WAS BEING CRAFTED?) My guess is that that deal has more substantial write down on it before this is over.
To make it worse, it may end up that no takeover/merger bank will touch UCBI either - because of the possibility criminal or other investigations could open up even new unforseen problems and liabilities. People don't like uncertainty, and they don't like surprises, and with all the other floundering institutions out there available to be picked up on the cheap - I don't see any line forming to take a risk with UCBI at any price.
With all this considered - I think we're getting ready to see something New here.
Then, why has the FDIC directed business to them, from closed banks?
Jack

Cornelia, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

4

3

3

curious wrote:
<quoted text>
Then, why has the FDIC directed business to them, from closed banks?
Looks like standard attempt to prop them up. One could argue that it is a desperation move so that they don't have to shut them down. FDIC doesn't want them to close because it would be a really big hit. Besides they have to send the business somewhere. I think you are trying to make a case that doesn't fly. UCBI is in trouble and the only question is how much.
Jack

Cornelia, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

D.T. Ignacio Jayanti’s Corsair Capital LLC is a private equity firm specializing in special situations and distressed investing. They have a very concentrated portfolio. The firm focuses on banks, financial institutions, financial services companies, asset managers, advisory firms, credit cards and consumer finance companies.

Currently the firm has only four stocks in its portfolio. Their largest investment is NewStar Financial (NEWS). They have $100 Million in NEWS at the end of March. The position is unchanged compared to the end of December.
Jack

Cornelia, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

2

1

United Community Banks lands $380M raise
Atlanta Business Chronicle
by Andy Peters , Staff Writer
Date: Friday, March 18, 2011

United Community Banks Inc... has raised $380 million as the lender tries to recover from its soured real estate loan portfolio and position itself to buy failing banks.

The holding company for United Community Bank sold common stock and mandatorily convertible preferred stock to New York-based CORSAIR CAPITOL .. LLC and an unidentified group of institutional investors.

United had been considering all options, including a sale of the entire company, said Nathan Stovall, who follows the bank for SNL Financial in New York.

“They’re doing this because they have to,” Stovall said.“They need to build their capital levels, period.”

The preferred stock will be convertible to common stock immediately upon shareholder approval. That will give CORSAIR CAPITOL about 22.5 percent of United’s pro forma outstanding voting and non-voting common stock. CORSAIR will also appoint one member to United’s board.

Separately, United (Nasdaq: UCBI) sold $293 million of substandard and nonperforming loans in a series of transactions. United also plans to accelerate the disposition of about $142 million of foreclosed properties.

United is operating under a “memorandum of understanding” with state and federal regulators that it improve its levels of capital, as compared to its assets.

NOTES: The $142 million disposition of foreclosed properties looks like it was probably the Fletcher deal. I wonder what the "Catch" to the Corsair deal was.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Jack wrote:
<quoted text>
Looks like standard attempt to prop them up. One could argue that it is a desperation move so that they don't have to shut them down. FDIC doesn't want them to close because it would be a really big hit. Besides they have to send the business somewhere. I think you are trying to make a case that doesn't fly. UCBI is in trouble and the only question is how much.
The FDIC is not in the business of propping up failing banks. Generally, delaying a closing results in a bigger hit got the fund. Any business directed to UCB by the FDIC has been minor and wouldn't come close to keeping a bank that size afloat.
Jack

Cornelia, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

1

Looks like Corsair Capitol has indeed been dumping slowly. Below is a news story from July.

United Community Banks (UCBI)
Corsair Capital has 12,931,625 shares (22.52%), after shareholders approved the conversion of certain preferred shares under Corsair's ownership.

Looking at their holdings today, it shows 10,300,000 shares.

That indicates 2.6 million shares they have unloaded in the 4+/- months since the conversion. Considering they bought the stock at $1.90/share pre-split value - and it currently has a $1.44/share pre-split value, my guess is that they might be tired of owning UCBI. Depending on how bad they want out - this possibly indicates substantial downward price action in future.
Jack

Cornelia, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Keith Stone II wrote:
<quoted text>
The FDIC is not in the business of propping up failing banks. Generally, delaying a closing results in a bigger hit got the fund. Any business directed to UCB by the FDIC has been minor and wouldn't come close to keeping a bank that size afloat.
Which was the reason for my general comment that they have to put the money somewhere when a bank is shut down. Primarily I was addressing the insinuation that somehow the fact that the FDIC was steering money their way (SS Checks etc) as an indicator of soundness was a rather nonsensical argument.

I disagree with your first sentence though. The FDIC often goes to great pains to crash land financial institutions. To think that a bank the size of UCBI going under isn't going to cause a lot of collateral damage is beyond believable. I watched them drag out the closing of Gilmer County Bank for quite some time. Once a bank is determined that it is time to go there is only one primary deciding factor. Who does the FDIC get to take it over?
MV is a loser

Dawsonville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

More pure speculation from a person who doesn't even own a home, tries to be involved in the real estate business, but isn't a licensed realtor, and doesn't even have a job. Consider the source.
Idiots

Canton, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

3

MV is a loser wrote:
More pure speculation from a person who doesn't even own a home, tries to be involved in the real estate business, but isn't a licensed Realtor, and doesn't even have a job. Consider the source.
Well you know it is hard to pass the Realtor test! LOL

His mission in life is to win a law suit, what happened to his lawsuit where he was suing everyone on here, Topix and the INTERNET itself?

Did he figure out he had a fool for a client? DUH

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Jack wrote:
<quoted text>
Which was the reason for my general comment that they have to put the money somewhere when a bank is shut down. Primarily I was addressing the insinuation that somehow the fact that the FDIC was steering money their way (SS Checks etc) as an indicator of soundness was a rather nonsensical argument.
I disagree with your first sentence though. The FDIC often goes to great pains to crash land financial institutions. To think that a bank the size of UCBI going under isn't going to cause a lot of collateral damage is beyond believable. I watched them drag out the closing of Gilmer County Bank for quite some time. Once a bank is determined that it is time to go there is only one primary deciding factor. Who does the FDIC get to take it over?
David... I mean Jack, Applachian/Gilmer had wiped out its capital. UCB has been recapitalized. The federal minimum regulatory capital standards for banks are 6% tier 1 capital, 10% total capital, and 5% leverage. As of 9/30 UCB had ratios of 13.8%, 15.1% and 8.8%. Those ratios are pretty strong for industry, considering that there are banks currently operating with negative ratios. I don't think the FDIC is terribly worried about UCB right now. If they can lose a fair amount of money before the FDIC starts thinking about closing them.
MV is a loser

Dawsonville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Nov 12, 2011
 

Judged:

5

4

3

Yeah, but The Mountain told Jack, uh, uh, David, to take down UCBI. And you know, The Mountain is THE Authority.
My two senses

Maysville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Nov 13, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Jack wrote:
United had been considering all options, including a sale of the entire company, said Nathan Stovall, who follows the bank for SNL Financial in New York.
My belief is that it's more attractive to the ruling class in a bank to sell the bank than to use it as a sandbox. When companies agree to sell, many times the executives of that company get gobs of money from the acquiring company in reward for approving the sale and for encouraging the board and shareholders to approve. With all the scrutiny on banks, many banks can't as easily be used a slush funds for those that started the banks or for those that are excutives of the banks.

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Nov 13, 2011
 

Judged:

5

4

4

When you have this much denial and it is so extreme then it would in most cases mean that the initial statement might have truth.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of489
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

47 Users are viewing the Blairsville Forum right now

Search the Blairsville Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
GA Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Georgia i... (Oct '10) 24 min rename 47,410
Disabled parking enforcement ! 36 min Timmy_ 17
need "good" heating and air conditioning service (Sep '09) 7 hr YOUNG HARRIS 25
Sick of Hub Reece 8 hr PEACE Please 37
Serious Question for Someone with Knowledge of ... 11 hr PTM 20
Patrick Malone 11 hr Interesting 5
NormC answers Dark Male questions 12 hr Pat 69
•••
•••

Blairsville News Video

•••
•••

Blairsville Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Blairsville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Blairsville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Blairsville
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••