Uccmal Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Wonder why the 8.5%....deposit stability? Anyone know why? Surpassed that Citigroup needs a bigger capital buffer. Dazel. I was wondering that myself. I can understand JPM and DB due to their derivatives trade. I dont know Citi well enough. Keeping in mind that this is going to be subject to annual reviews, and requirements could be changed from year to year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcollon Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 One analysts opinion... ISI Bank Research: BAC's G-SIB buffer drops to 1.5%, potentially unlocking $7.5bn in capital The FSB updated its list of G-SIB Banks The Financial Stability Board (by authority of the Group of Twenty) has the role of coordinating, at the international level, the work of national financial authorities and international standard setting bodies in developing and promoting the implementation of effective regulatory, supervisory and other financial sector policies in the interest of global financial stability. Last Night, the FSB updated its list of Globally Systemically Important Banks (G-SIBs). Similar to last year, 6 U.S. banks appear on the list: JPM, C, BAC, GS, MS, and WFC. However, this year each G-SIB has been allocated to a bucket corresponding to its required level of additional loss absorbency (i.e. its eventually required Basel 3 capital ratio buffer above the 7% standard). As expected, J.P. Morgan and Citi were allocated to the 2.5% bucket, implying that they will eventually be required to operate with at least a 9.5% Basel 3 Tier 1 common equity ratio (7% + the 2.5% buffer). GS and MS were allocated to the 1.5% bucket, implying that they will eventually be required to operate with at least an 8.5% Basel 3 Tier 1 common equity ratio (7% + a 1.5% buffer), and WFC was allocated to the 1.0% bucket, implying only an 8.0% minimum B3 capital ratio. However, the big surprise is that BAC was allocated to the 1.5% bucket, which is lower than the 2.0% bucket that most investors were expecting (and some were expecting 2.5%). Thus, it appears reasonable to conclude that BAC may be allowed to ultimately operate with a B3 common equity ratio that is up to 100bps lower than those of JPM and C (a clear advantage). Also, investors will likely view this very positively for BAC because it could unlock about $7.5bn of capital for BAC that could be returned to shareholders as soon as 2013-14 (depending on BAC's performance in the 2013 CCAR). The $7.5bn figure equals 50bps (lower requirement) on BAC's current B3 risk weighted assets of $1.5tr. Furthermore, BAC is already operating at a 9.0% B3 Tier 1 common equity ratio (see the table below). Thus, it may prove true that the vast majority of the capital that it generates, going forward, could be returned to shareholders (post the 2013 CCAR) in the form of dividends and stock buybacks. Overall, given that BAC is trading at only about 70% of TBV, we regard this as very positive for the stock, and we expect BAC shares to be up significantly today. Note that $7.5bn of unlocked capital equals about 7.5% of BAC's current market cap, which implies additional buyback capacity of about 7.5% of BAC's stock (at current prices) over the long-term. Finally, we would note that all of this extra capital is unlikely to be returned in 2013. It is still unclear 1) how much capital BAC will seek to return and be approved by the Fed to return in the 2013 CCAR and 2) if the Fed will hold BAC to a materially higher than 8.5% B3 Tier 1 common minimum given that BAC is extremely Domestically important (D-SIB) even if it is less Globally important (G-SIB) than previously expected. Nevertheless, we still expect BAC shares to be up considerably today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkp007 Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 If it's like March we could see 11 very quickly. That would be nice although that deprives those of us that would like to buy in the low 9's. Yeah, like there haven't been any opportunities to buy cheap... like all year long already and the second half of last year... LOL. Come on, you know the gig. Man I wish I could buy at =LastPrice*.9 , I guess it's not a value anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardboard Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 The "A" warrants are still trading like the stock is at around $8. Final chance is approaching although. I think that the train is leaving the station. Cardboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uccmal Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 The "A" warrants are still trading like the stock is at around $8. Final chance is approaching although. I think that the train is leaving the station. Cardboard I agree. We have been harping on the value here for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obtuse_investor Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Yeah, I would agree with that. I think they are very, very likely to increase the dividend to 5-7 cents a quarter, plus $6-8B buyback authorization at the very least. Cheers! While the stock is selling below Book, I really hope that they focus heavily on buybacks and not the dividend. Buybacks below book are a great capital allocation decision, while dividends are precisely not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCO Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Yeah, I would agree with that. I think they are very, very likely to increase the dividend to 5-7 cents a quarter, plus $6-8B buyback authorization at the very least. Cheers! While the stock is selling below Book, I really hope that they focus heavily on buybacks and not the dividend. Buybacks below book are a great capital allocation decision, while dividends are precisely not. What should they buy back first? A-warrants or stock? A mix of both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRH Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Buybacks below book are a great capital allocation decision, while dividends are precisely not. Maybe it is just due to the type of businesses I prefer - ones with substantial capital structure management opportunities - but I really wish so many boards would stop feeling beholden to their current shareholder base's expectations at the expense of longer-term per-share value creation. When buybacks make sense, they probably make sense for all remaining excess capital (market liquidity constrained, that is). Having a 50/50 policy or even being hesitant to cut the dividend when higher-return opportunities present themselves really irk me. I understand the justification for, particularly, steady dividend income, but this is just my personal rant. ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomcapital Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 What should they buy back first? A-warrants or stock? A mix of both? An increasing worry of mine is that BofA will try and buy back the warrants. Can they force me to tender my shares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
claphands22 Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 An increasing worry of mine is that BofA will try and buy back the warrants. Can they force me to tender my shares? No. Unless you have the impossible event of someone buying out BAC in cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobp Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 On the warrants - "Charles Munger called the use of a Black-Scholes calculator for valuing long-term options “a standardized solution (invented by accountants) that does not require them to think too hard.” From Forbes - http://www.forbes.com/sites/ycharts/2012/10/23/the-value-of-warren-buffetts-bank-of-america-warrants-depending-on-your-calculator/ BAC common was trading around this price in March. The A wts were about a dollar higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I would also prefer if they just kept their capital level at 9%, and not release any of that estimated $7.5B cushion. Just because they tell you that you are ok at 8.5%, doesn't mean you have to listen to them and stay there. Better safe than sorry if they want to change this company for the long-term. The culture should be that we are no longer the weakest bank, but the strongest, and we are here to serve our customers. Simple! Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CONeal Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I would also prefer if they just kept their capital level at 9%, and not release any of that estimated $7.5B cushion. Just because they tell you that you are ok at 8.5%, doesn't mean you have to listen to them and stay there. Better safe than sorry if they want to change this company for the long-term. The culture should be that we are no longer the weakest bank, but the strongest, and we are here to serve our customers. Simple! Cheers! With the check being done every year, I would be suprised if they released any excess. Once they hit 9.5% then open up the dam and allow the excess to flow down to the shareholders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txlaw Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I would also prefer if they just kept their capital level at 9%, and not release any of that estimated $7.5B cushion. Just because they tell you that you are ok at 8.5%, doesn't mean you have to listen to them and stay there. Better safe than sorry if they want to change this company for the long-term. The culture should be that we are no longer the weakest bank, but the strongest, and we are here to serve our customers. Simple! Cheers! I prefer owning fortress BAC, so I would also like to see them act as though they have the 2.5% SIFI charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I would also prefer if they just kept their capital level at 9%, and not release any of that estimated $7.5B cushion. Just because they tell you that you are ok at 8.5%, doesn't mean you have to listen to them and stay there. Better safe than sorry if they want to change this company for the long-term. The culture should be that we are no longer the weakest bank, but the strongest, and we are here to serve our customers. Simple! Cheers! With the check being done every year, I would be suprised if they released any excess. Once they hit 9.5% then open up the dam and allow the excess to flow down to the shareholders. Yes, I agree. I think they'll be at or above that by the end of the 4th quarter, and definitely by the end of 1st quarter 2013. They can then distribute the bulk of their cash flow into dividends and share buybacks. Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Bank of America sells off PCL for $1.4B! Tier 1 Common Equity continues to go up. :o Cheers! http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/11/02/boa-sells-pcl-after-2-year-courtship/?source=yahoo_quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xazp Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 One year ago, the dominant market conversation was "raise more capital" with the occasional "bankruptcy" (or"government takeover"). Today it's "what are we going to do with all this capital?!" Though this does make me even angrier over the transfer of shareholder money to Buffett, which was expensive and unnecessary. Bank of America sells off PCL for $1.4B! Tier 1 Common Equity continues to go up. :o Cheers! http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/11/02/boa-sells-pcl-after-2-year-courtship/?source=yahoo_quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 One year ago, the dominant market conversation was "raise more capital" with the occasional "bankruptcy" (or"government takeover"). Today it's "what are we going to do with all this capital?!" Though this does make me even angrier over the transfer of shareholder money to Buffett, which was expensive and unnecessary. Bank of America sells off PCL for $1.4B! Tier 1 Common Equity continues to go up. :o Cheers! http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/11/02/boa-sells-pcl-after-2-year-courtship/?source=yahoo_quote Yeah, it was expensive, but it quieted down the shorts too. So how much was that worth? The $2-3B Buffett makes at the expense of other shareholders...probably was worth it. Remember, we crept just under $5 at one point and the stock had fallen off a cliff. It would not have taken long for it to drift into no-man's land and at that point BAC would have to find someone else to bail them out at probably a far more expensive pricetag. Buffett's investment said "the buck stops here...we've given capital, and we've got a hell of alot more to give if necessary!" Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xazp Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 BAC crept under $5 AFTER Buffett was given his sweetheart deal. And that was because some interpreted it as BAC needing capital so badly they'd pay through the nose for it. It's going to cost more than $2-3Bn to shareholders. When it's all said and done, I think Buffett will have collected more than $5Bn in cap gains + dividend/interest payments. His warrants strike at about $8, so a $5Bn cap gain means in another 9 years BAC trades at $16. Yeah, it was expensive, but it quieted down the shorts too. So how much was that worth? The $2-3B Buffett makes at the expense of other shareholders...probably was worth it. Remember, we crept just under $5 at one point and the stock had fallen off a cliff. It would not have taken long for it to drift into no-man's land and at that point BAC would have to find someone else to bail them out at probably a far more expensive pricetag. Buffett's investment said "the buck stops here...we've given capital, and we've got a hell of alot more to give if necessary!" Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grenville Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Warren's Warrant exercise at 7.142857/share and they have the same adjustment feature as the A Tarp warrants and expire in 2021. (I didn't know about the adjustment feature until another person/post tipped me off) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfp Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I've read the adjustment sections of both the class A TARP warrants and Berkshire's warrant/preferred purchase agreement, and I am familiar with the dual-adjustment of the class A warrants. But I haven't been able to find the language in Berkshire's purchase agreement that gives his warrants similar adjustments in both strike price and shares per warrant. Can anybody quote or point me to the language that gives Berkshire's warrants these same features? Also, if it IS true that Berkshire's warrants adjust in this way, have they already adjusted a few times with just the .01/q dividend or do they have a similar threshold before adjustment? If they do have the same features, the capital gain for Berkshire will likely be in the neighborhood of 10Billion or above on these securities over their lifetime. Thanks BAC class A supplement - http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000119312510044940/d424b7.htm BRK - BAC deal - http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000119312511232422/dex11.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrB Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I've read the adjustment sections of both the class A TARP warrants and Berkshire's warrant/preferred purchase agreement, and I am familiar with the dual-adjustment of the class A warrants. But I haven't been able to find the language in Berkshire's purchase agreement that gives his warrants similar adjustments in both strike price and shares per warrant. Can anybody quote or point me to the language that gives Berkshire's warrants these same features? Also, if it IS true that Berkshire's warrants adjust in this way, have they already adjusted a few times with just the .01/q dividend or do they have a similar threshold before adjustment? If they do have the same features, the capital gain for Berkshire will likely be in the neighborhood of 10Billion or above on these securities over their lifetime. Thanks BAC class A supplement - http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000119312510044940/d424b7.htm BRK - BAC deal - http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/70858/000119312511232422/dex11.htm Buffett being Buffett: What do you think are the odds he did not negotiate the adjustments? What you should hope for is that the dilution from the A and B warrants do not lead to even more warrant shares for Buffett. As an aside: Buffett has only one warrant, not warrants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valueinvesting101 Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 13. Adjustments and Other Rights, starts on page 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ERICOPOLY Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 New slide deck from today: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9MTYwMjM4fENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1 Also, 10-Q is out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfp Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 13. Adjustments and Other Rights, starts on page 7. So where in that section does it say Warren's warrant adjusts it's strike price and number of warrant shares when BAC pays cash dividends? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now