FNB Corp (FNB) 2008 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for standing by. Welcome to today's F.N.B. Corporation third quarter 2008 earnings conference call.

At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Following the presentation, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. Introductions will be provided at that time for you to queue up for questions. As a reminder, today's conference is being recorded.

And now, I'd like to turn the conference over to Mr. Frank Milano, Investor Relations contact for F.N.B. Corporation. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you. Good morning, everyone. This conference call of F.N.B. Corporation and the reports it files with the Securities and Exchange Commission often contain forward-looking statements relating to present or future trends or factors affecting the banking industry and specifically the financial operations, markets and products of F.N.B. Corporation. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties. There are a number of important factors that could cause F.N.B. Corporation's future results to differ materially from historic performance or projected performance.

These factors include but are not limited to a significant increase in competitive pressures among financial institutions, changes in the interest rate environment that may reduce interest margins, changes in pre-paid speeds, loan sale volumes, charge-offs, and loan loss provisions, general economic conditions, legislative or regulatory changes that may adversely affect the businesses in which F.N.B. Corporation is engaged, technological issues which may adversely affect F.N.B. Corporation's financial operations or customers, changes in the securities markets, or risk factors mentioned in the reports and registration statements F.N.B. Corporation files with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

F.N.B. Corporation undertakes no obligation to revise these forward-looking statements or to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this call. It is now my pleasure to turn the call over to Mr. Bob New, President and CEO of F.N.B. Corporation. Bob?

Thank you, Frank and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining our third quarter earnings call. With me today is Brian Lilly, our Chief Financial Officer, as well as other members of our senior leadership team.

I'm pleased to report third quarter net income totaled $23.5 million and that we delivered within our prior guidance with $0.27 per diluted share. It's nice to see our return on tangible equity back up among peer leaders at 25.7%. I'm especially proud of our teams performance during this period of economic uncertainty. They delivered solid revenue growth, excellent expense control, and diligently managed asset quality.

During the third quarter, we continued integration of the Omega franchise and also welcomed the Iron and Glass customers and teammates to the F.N.B. family. You will recall Iron and Glass was a strategic addition to our Pittsburgh market which brings our total number of branches to 71 in that region. Brian and I will cover the drivers of our performance in more detail during the call, with the following key messages regarding our third quarter results.

Earnings for the quarter met our guidance. Loan growth from all sectors met our expectations. Deposit growth was better than expected, especially in our transaction accounts. The margin was healthy and steady during the quarter, but we continue to see pressure on deposit pricing.

Non-interest income was steady. Expenses were under control and down from prior quarters. Our Florida portfolio continues to affect credit quality and the trends there are not improving, however overall asset quality remains manageable and we remain well-capitalized.

Let's take a closer look at these themes. Average loans outstanding grew $172 million sequentially, up 12.2% annualized. Excluding Iron and Glass, our organic growth was a solid 6.6% annualized for the quarter. Our commercial group was successful in winning some very high quality commercial relationships this quarter.

Our Pittsburgh team continue to pick up steam and market share in the third quarter. We also saw steady performances from our Pennsylvania and Ohio offices. As the quarter came to an end, we witness a slowing in our commercial pipeline. Some of that is seasonal and anticipated, and some of it is our customers and prospects exercising more caution about the economy.

During the quarter, we took advantage of a disruption in the auto finance market to increase our indirect loan production and capture approximately $40 million of new balances at very favorable rates and above average FICO scores. All of these loans were underwritten using the same conservative standards as our existing portfolio. Our success in deposit gathering can be attributed to three things; our improving sales culture, a more aggressive and targeted treasury management effort, and a general fight to quality in our markets. Organic deposit growth of $131 million occurred across the product line and especially in our key relationship building categories of business demand and treasury management. As evidenced by our stable net interest margin, we were able to grow our business while maintaining pricing.

Our focus on service quality is also paying off. Last quarter, F.N.B. was recognized by a well known polling organization as " The" top service bank in Pennsylvania. In 2008, we engaged an outside firm to survey our customers quarterly and measure customers' attitudes about our service. The results of the third quarter suggest that we're achieving our goal of constant improvement.

Now let's turn our focus to credit quality. During the quarter, we experienced an increase of $21 million in non-performing assets, bringing the total to $92.2 million or 1.5% of total loans plus OREO. The primary drivers of this change were two loans. One was a $10 million Florida loan which entered bankruptcy due to a partnership dispute. We've already obtained a new appraisal on this property and placed a $950,000 specific reserve against the loan in the third quarter.

The other one a $9 million loan in Pennsylvania that we've picked up in our purchase of Legacy Bank. The current appraisal on that property more than supports our carrying value and the customer continues to make payments. We also moved an existing Florida non-performing loan into OREO, at a carrying balance of $4.3 million after a $1 million charge off in September. We had immediate success with that property in marketing it and obtaining three sales out of this 10 unit property within the first two weeks of listing.

One note about our non-performing assets. Of the $92 million total, $27.6 million or nearly 30% of the total continues to pay as originally agreed. In our opinion, we have appropriately recognized the loans as having weaknesses consistent with placing them on non- accrual, but the customers are current on their payments.

Now let's talk for a minute about Florida. Our Florida portfolio which I remind you is limited 5% of our total loan portfolio, continues to be the area where we have the most concern. As we've discussed with you in the past, we do an extensive loan by loan review each quarter of the entire loan portfolio in Florida. In addition, our process requires that we meet with all borrowers whose loans are coming due in the next six months. We review with those borrowers their current appraisals -- excuse me just a minute.

We review those borrows and current appraisals we've ordered on their projects and when necessary, confirm with them those actions required to right size the loan, provide additional collateral, or move the loan in total. When renewals are appropriate, we are requiring borrowers to post additional interest reserves through cash payments to support the carrying costs of their projects.

Also each quarter, we initiated communication with our regulators to keep them well-informed of our actions. As part of our risk management process, we obtained new appraisals annually in all non-income producing properties. At present, the weighted average LTV across the portfolio remains within acceptable limits of 70.6%, up over 4% from the last quarter.

Our strategy continues to focus on reducing exposure related to the Florida residential real estate market. During the third quarter, we eliminated approximately $17 million inland and condo-related exposure from the portfolio. These reductions were a result of a number of factors including loan pay downs, pay-offs, and reduction in active lines.

During the quarter, we only made two new loans in Florida. The first being a $7.7 million construction loan to an existing customer for a medical office building with a take out upon completion from a local hospital, and a $4 million loan to a convenience store operator.

At this point, I would like to turn the call over to Brian Lilly, our Chief Financial Officer. Brian?

Thank you, Bob, and good morning, everyone. The earnings release and Bob's comments have covered a third quarter operating results in good detail. In my comments, I will provide an update on the trust preferred securities portfolio and then review our thinking on earnings guidance.

The fair value accounting standards and in particular, the other than temporary impairment standard, is receiving a lot of attention. We have been pleased to see that the appropriate authorities recognize that not all market quotes are created equal. We have monitored these developments with specific applications to our trust preferred securities holdings.

Recall that we own approximately $55 million, with $15 million in individual names and $40 million in pools. Regarding the pool holdings, we have valued these securities using cash flow and sensitivity analysis as well as an analytical review of the underlying companies. Given the economic environment, we did use a premium discount rate to value the cash flows. But some of our analysis resulted in a carrying value of approximately $0.68 on the dollar. This is lower than the discount at June 30 which approximated $0.75 on the dollar.

However, we take some comfort in our shock scenarios. These shocks show that our current deferrals would have to default and then become worthless. Further, these amounts would have to grow by a multiple of two to five times, depending on the pool, before we would experience a loss. Clearly, we have cushion in these assumptions, but there is economic stress in financial institutions and we are monitoring these securities closely.

Next, let me touch on the guidance for the fourth quarter. In terms of the balance sheet, I would summarize Bob's comments as indicating that we expect the strong third quarter growth rates to slow in the fourth quarter. As we shared in our earnings release, the net interest margin benefited three basis points from returning a few loans to accruing status.

Looking forward, the deposit pricing competition has picked up from an already very competitive base. The increased FDIC insurance coverage and the consumer education has lessened the consumer risk of accepting some outlier pricing. Further, we have not seen the recent 50 basis points decrease in the Fed funds rate translate into lower deposit rates at this point. And finally, we are seeing unusual rates in LIBOR, Fed funds, and the wholesale market. All these factors put pressure on the net interest margin and we do expect a slight narrowing in the fourth quarter.

Turning to expenses, the fourth quarter expense levels should be consistent with the third quarter, as a full quarter of Iron and Glass's operating expenses offsets the one-time merger costs incurred in the third quarter. We did realize the cost savings from both Omega and Iron and Glass mergers. The third quarter efficiency ratio was a very good 56% and we expect the fourth quarter to be slightly better.

With regard to credit cost, we expect to see an increase in non-performing assets, primarily from our Florida portfolio. The net charge-offs for both the bank and Regency have been stable the last few quarters at a combined 30 basis points. This could move a few basis points higher in the coming quarter due to some seasonality in consumer charge-offs.

Also impacting the fourth quarter could be net charge-offs related to the resolution of larger credits that were specifically reserved for in a prior period. In terms of providing for credit losses in the fourth quarter, we feel comfortable with the performance in our Pennsylvania and Ohio footprint including Regency, our consumer finance company. However, we do expect continued weakness in Florida and this will impact our provisioning going forward.

Summing up, based on the third quarter run rate and our view of the fourth quarter expectations, we would guide to the current consensus estimate; however it is appropriate for us to add caution in these historic times as credit costs will continue to impact our financial results. One last point, I have seen that many in the investment community are beginning to include a pre-tax, pre-credit analysis in their evaluations. We also consider this metric internally to provide insight into the progress that we are making. On a year-over-year third quarter basis, after considering the plan dilution from Omega and Iron and Glass mergers we have grown 4%. This growth, coupled with our top quartile peer performance and profitability tells us that we're on the right path for our shareholders. With that, let me turn the call back to Bob.

Thank you, Brian. In summary, we're very pleased with the high levels of profitability delivered in the third quarter. We feel we benefited from being a strong competitor in a more stable part of the country, but we also understand there are challenges ahead in the economy. At the same time, we have confidence that our proven risk management practices will continue to serve us well. I like the position we're in and the markets we serve and we look forward to your questions. At this time, I'll turn the call over to the operator to open the call for questions.

Thank you, Mr. New. (OPERATOR INSTRUCTIONS). We'll take our first question from Damon Delmonte of KBW.

Hi, good ,guys. How are you?

Good morning, Damon.

I was wondering if you could give us a little bit more color on the Florida portfolio, what the balances are in the three categories that you generally lend in.

Yes, good morning, Damon. This is Gary Guerrieri.

Hi, Gary.

Our Florida portfolio at the end of the quarter breaks down this way. We have 41% of the portfolio or about $129 million related to land. We've got an income producing portfolio that has increased from 16% at the end of the year to 32% of the portfolio at this point, a total of about $100 million. In addition, the condo portfolio which earlier in the year was in the $40 million range or 16% of the portfolio, is down to 8% and we're continuing to work that down. The land development portfolio is also coming down and is in the range of about 12% right now or $36 million.

Great, thank you. And what's the total reserve you have against the Florida specific loans?

David, we haven't broken that out and shared that in the past and probably won't do that as we go forward. It certainly is a significant amount, but it's blended in with a number of our other factors as it weighs into our commercial real estate and other pieces, so it's a difficult number to break out specifically.

Okay, and then a technical question. With the Iron and Glass deal coming on board this quarter, you mentioned in the release a $1.6 million charge. Is that purely a merger-related charge or does that include some of the operating expenses from that bank?

The intention in the release was that it was $1.6 million related to Ironing Glass; about $900,000 of that was related to merger costs for Iron and Glass and also carryover from Omega, and about $700,000 was related to half a quarters operating expense impact from Iron and Glass.

Okay, great. Thank you. And again, Brian, could you just go over again your expectations for charge-offs again? I think I might have missed some of your details, for the fourth quarter.

I think the components that we gave you was that we continue to feel pretty good about our Ohio and Pennsylvania markets; and that the 30 basis points we recorded in the last couple quarters reflect that, as well as our consumer finance company. Second component is that we typically have a little bit of seasonal increase, particularly in consumer finance company, related to charge-offs in the fourth quarter so that could move just small basis points. As we look forward to the fourth quarter though, we've had specific reserve we placed against Florida credits in the past and as those work their way through, there will be a time when we actually will realize a charge off on those. That's the other factor that could influence charge-offs, but those have been specifically reserved for and would just be rolling through the charge off ratio, potentially the fourth quarter, first quarter, second quarter. But that's out there now that we have larger specific reserves.

And when those charge-offs work themselves through, do you foresee yourselves going back to a 122 or 120 loan loss reserve ratio?

I think that's difficult to say because as you know, the math within our allowance incorporates every landing category in the history of those particular portfolios. Let me add something there. The reserve for loan allowance is basically flat quarter to quarter. What we had in the quarter is -- we did have some specific allowance to Florida credit, but we also had a good, steady performance in our consumer portfolios.

The other factor that gets lost in this is that when you do merger accounting, as we've had with Omega and Iron and Glass, there's a fair value standard out there called [Statement Position 3-3]. That statement requires you to identify problem credits, impaired credits and to net the allowance against the credit, and to mark that credit further to fair value and carry it at fair value. There is a piece of loans in our portfolio from prior acquisitions in Omega and Iron and Glass that are being carried with zero reserve. I make that point because it had an impact of about 2 basis points from the second to third quarter comparison. In total, it's about 6 basis points currently on the balance sheet that the reserve would be higher if it wasn't for those fair value marks.

Okay, great. Thanks for the color.

We'll take our next question from Mac Hodgson of SunTrust Robinson Humphrey. Please go ahead.

Good morning.

Hi, Mac.

I had a question on the increase in the NPAs. I think you gave some color there. One was a $10 million Florida credit. It was a dispute over partners in bankruptcy. Could you give any more color on -- is it a land development deal? Is it a construction deal, that sort of stuff. Also on the $9 million Pennsylvania credit, could you give any more color on that one?

Sure, Mac. The credit in Florida is a hotel. It's an operating property. It does have cash flow. This is a partner dispute that drove this into bankruptcy and we're working to move it out of bankruptcy as they resolve their dispute.

The loan in Pennsylvania is a private school. That loan continues to pay as agreed. The reason we put it on non-accrual is a good portion of the eventual repayment of this is subject to fundraising so you can't prove up the cash flow, so we took a conservative approach and moved it to non-performing.

Okay. And then Brian, I think your comment on maybe expected resolution of some of the larger credits that have previously been put on non-accrual, could you give any more insight on the method of disposition there? Are these some that -- where you have investors lined up -- divide of properties or that color would be helpful.

Mac, could you be more specific with your question? I'm not sure I really understood what you're asking for.

Yes. I think Brian mentioned that in discussing charge-offs in the fourth quarter, you made a comment about the potential charge-offs related to some credits that were placed on non-accrual previously, maybe affecting the charge off level in the fourth quarter. If I understood it correctly, I was asking basically how you expected to resolve some of those credits, if it was through investor purchasing the asset, stuff moving into OREO, any detail there?

Let me answer that and, Brian, just plug in here if I miss something. As we move all of these credits through the process, their are a number of things that could happen. You could take it to OREO or you could writedown the loan or have a -- or buy it from you, but at this point we're not looking to package or sell any of these to investors at this time. I think that's really your question.

Okay. Thanks. One question about -- Brian, about the $1.1 million related to investments in bank stocks, just want to be sure I understood that. That was a gain this quarter, is that right?

No. It wasn't a gain this quarter. In the reconciling of the non-interest income change from quarter to quarter, we had -- think of it this way, a decrease last quarter versus a slight pick up this quarter. The item that you're talking about specifically, the limited partnership that quite frankly, we terminated a $3 million and we see the proceeds here in October. But it had a loss, a cumulative loss and that's a mark-to-market asset that goes through other income in the fee income categories and that was a negative $700,000 in the second quarter. When the bank stocks turned and on September 30, those stocks were actually higher, and happy to leave that investment at a higher level of bank stock prices. It was $ 400,000 pick up during the quarter and so the net charge for the quarter-to-quarter comparison was $1.1 million.

Got you. That makes sense. nd then maybe just finally if you could all comment on some of the treasuries programs and if F.N.B. is considering any of them.

Mac, we're studying them. We haven't made a decision as yet, but it's on our radar.

Okay, great. Thanks.

We'll take our next question from David Darst of FTN Midwest. Please go ahead.

Good morning.

Hi, David.

Could you give us a little bit more details on the $129 million land portfolio? What the LTV is there and then what the recent appraisal trends have been?

Sure. I'm going to ask Gary Guerrieri who is our Chief Credit Officer to answer that question for you.

David, the land portfolio in total today -- the LTV on that is right at 71%. Inside of that portfolio, there's four transactions that make up approximately 60% of that portfolio. Those four transactions, naturally being 60% of the portfolio, are customers that we work with very closely as we do every one of our Florida clients. Three of those accounts continue to be past credits, based on the income streams and our collateral positions so we feel very comfortable with those. One of those accounts -- we do have closely monitoring, we're closely monitoring that credit. It's something that we work with that client on going forward. But that particular credit, we are watching very closely.

Okay, and how about the appraisal trends?

The appraisal trends -- we're seeing appraisals continue to come down and they're ranging, depending upon location and specific property, in the range of 15% to 35%. The commercial properties are holding a little stronger than the residential pieces.

Okay. Are these four commercial or residential?

These four are primarily -- two of them are commercial pieces. The third one is a commercial piece and one is a residential piece.

Okay. But it sounds like the developers equity is eroding pretty quickly.

There's no doubt that with the deterioration in the market that the developers equity is deteriorating. Again, we're working with these clients. A number of these clients continue to have strong liquidity positions. The one that we mentioned that we are concerned with, his liquidity position has been diminished.

And David, this is Bob. Let me just remind you too. When we underwrote these, many of the LTVs on our land portfolio where some were in the 50%, 52% range. And unlike other lenders, we had our borrowers put up cash reserves on these. I know we've been saying this now for two quarters, this will be the third quarter that I've said this; the longer this activity -- the longer this recession in Florida continues. the more risk there is on the portfolio. Because exactly what you said that the equity begins to erode and the borrowers begin to get stressed. Again, we believe that the process we have in place is the right process.

It gets us out in front of these credits before there's action that's required. We are seeing borrowers come to the table and put up cash reserves. But again, the longer this thing goes and doesn't turnaround, the more risk you have in the portfolio.

But it sounds like you're committed to the market and you just want to refocus the loan mix down there.

The answer is we've got a really great team down there, and I'm not willing to abandon the team. I think the market -- the things we're looking at down there today are all projects of cash flow. We have good equities in them. We're doing very selective underwriting. It's our intent to keep them there and be active in the market, but the market is not offering us much right now.

Okay. Could you comment on the Iron and Glass portfolio? What segments that contributes to? Looks like the indirect portfolio had pretty good growth. I was wondering.

The indirect portfolio didn't have anything to do with Iron and Glass. Iron and Glass was primarily a commercial portfolio. The growth in the indirect was at our initiative. We saw an opportunity and took advantage of it.

We've historically run that portfolio around 9%, 9.5% of our total loan portfolio. Today it stands even with this addition of about 8.5%, maybe 8.6% so that was production. That wasn't something we bought from Iron and Glass.

Okay, thanks.

Sure.

Our next question will be from Charlie Smith from Fort Pitt Capital. Please go ahead.

Good morning, gentlemen. Was wondering if you guys have a floor for your allowance for loan losses as a percentage of non-performers.

Gosh, first thing, I can't answer that. Charlie as you know, the deep math that we've all had to go thought in the last four years on the allowance applies factors and historical factors and then adjusts for the current environment by product category. There isn't a floor and there isn't a ceiling as it relates to that. But certainly, there's logic and a rationale and after 30 years in banking, you have a gut feel of where it should be. But I can't tell you that there's a floor or a ceiling.

Okay. Now you said because of acquisition accounting, your allowance during the quarter as a percentage actually went down but if you X out that accounting change or the accounting convention, it wouldn't have declined sequentially?

It was two basis points that was caused by the 3-3.

Okay, so you get to a129 versus 128 last quarter?

There's rounding. The 128 and 127 are so close. It's rounding. It's really a few basis points.

You also have Omega's piece of that too, as well.

Just as a round number, it looks like the non-performers in Florida about 12% of the total portfolio there?

That's about it, pretty close.

Thanks a lot.

Our next question is from Frank Schiraldi of Sandler O'Neill. Please go ahead.

Good morning.

Good morning, Frank.

Just a came of broader picture questions here. Given talks about deposit competition heating up again, and we've seen it across-the-board. Are there any thoughts to maybe slowing deposit growth by design or just to preserve the margin? Or are there thoughts that this competition has just gotten haywire here? What's your general thinking on that?

Yes. Frank, good question. Let me begin by putting a context, too, on how we position ourself in the market. We currently sit with about a 95% loan to deposit ratio.

A majority of our competitors are looking at ratios that are in excess of 100%. As this whole issue of liquidity and funding became more prominent, I think we saw some increased pricing in our markets from those banks and also from banks that were systemically losing deposits because of their health. When you take a look at the deposit growth that we had this quarter, a good percentage of it -- as it was last quarter, was based in these transaction accounts which is really where we've been focusing.

We have really done a great job. My teammates that have run our treasury management business and our commercial bankers have really done a great job selling our treasury management services. We're winning in bringing in customers that we would traditionally not have been able to compete for in the past. I think to respond to your question, our focus is really not on the higher price deposits. Our focus has been on the transaction deposits. Where we end up paying up is to keep deposits and keep relationships, not necessarily to go out and recruit new deposits.

Frank, if I could add on that. I think you'll see from our net interest margin management over the last, maybe two years now, we're flat to increasing in that. Rates have gone all over the place in that period of time. We've been pretty good managers of matching what we can get on the yield versus the rate pay. Some of the caution though that I included in my comments-- were really unprecedented times as we experienced in the last 30 days.

Maybe I'm hedging a little bit to say if it doesn't return to normalcy here in this quarter, that there might be an impact on our net interest margin, but we have been pretty tight. I hope that -- I expect that we'll be pretty tight even in this quarter. To Bob's point, we don't have the large buckets of higher cost. We don't have brokerage CDs. We don't need the wholesale funding. We've got to focus on self-funding here and the transaction accounts have been successful in the third quarter. I'll take all the transaction accounts; don't want to turn any of those spickets off, just keep bringing them in.

Okay. All right. Thanks. And then just one other question here. Clearly, people don't really talk about it here anymore. What about M&A? Are there distressed banks in your area -- beaten down banks that you're taking a look at that you think could make sense or is it more of an internal focus here?

Frank, we said in the past that we really had an interest in two areas as related to M&A. If you take a look at our history over the past -- particular four years, we've been executing the same strategy and we haven't changed it. That is to look for markets that are contiguous to our footprint that provide greater growth opportunities. The second is to look for fill-in strategies and Omega would have been a great example of the first strategy and Iron and Glass was a great example of the second strategy. We haven't changed our mind. That still makes good sense for us.

When you throw in the additional factor of institutions that may be looking for partners because of their weakness, we see those opportunities. We're plugged into those, and we'll take a look at them. The key is what kind of real franchise value do they offer you so our intent is up. We're just not pursuing anything at this moment.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. We have time for one last question. We'll hear from Damon Delmonte of KBW. Please go ahead.

Hi. I had one follow-up question. Could you guys give your thoughts on the TARP program? I don't think that was covered on this call. I was just wondering what your thoughts were as far as accessing the governments plan and how you could use that capital.

Damon, we actually did get the question earlier and my response was that we're studying it. We haven't made a decision yet, but it's definitely something that we're going to study and take seriously.

Okay, I apologize for the repetitive question. I was hopping from one conference call to the next.

Not a problem, Damon.

Andy Stapp of B. Riley & Company. Please go ahead, sir.

Good morning.

Hi, Andy.

Just wondering if you could give a breakdown on the tranches on your holdings of Trump CDOs?

The Trump CDOs as I mentioned was $40 million in size and they were all the A-tranch.

All A? Okay.

Yes.

And did you mention that you have some single issued trust preferreds?

Yes. We have $14 million or $15 million in -- I think it's 14 in single. I'm sorry, it's 41 in pools, 14 in single issuer. That's spread across I think seven names on the single issuer.

Those are all good quality A-rated or better names?

Yes. There is one. There is one -- that's First Horizon would be the weakest of that group. Otherwise, you're talking about the B of A's and those types. It's a fun list because you see Fleet, Bank of Boston and some of those that have been picked up by acquisitions over the year, so we've held them a long time. We've held them a long time. But First Horizon would be the weakest of the ratings on that, but still in pretty good shape as we monitor them very closely.

Okay, great. Thank you.

At this time, there are no further questions.

Thank you once again for joining us. Just as a reminder, a replay of this call is a available from 11 a.m. Eastern Daylight time today until midnight on Friday , October 31. The replay can be accessed by dialing 888-203-1112, confirmation number is 5054046. The transcript of the call will be posted to the shareholder and Investor Relations section of the F.N.B. Corporations website at www.FNBCorporation.com. Thank you once again. This concludes our call.

This concludes today's F.N.B. Corporation conference call. Thank you for joining us and have a wonderful day.