[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::dcu

Title:DCU
Notice:1996 BoD Election results in 1004
Moderator:CPEEDY::BRADLEY
Created:Sat Feb 07 1987
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:1041
Total number of notes:18759

428.0. "DCU wipes off another 27.4% of equity" by SMAUG::GARROD (An Englishman's mind works best when it is almost too late) Wed Jan 22 1992 18:56

    Regarding the latest statement of conditions recently posted as note
    272.36.
    
    Interesting. Notice the $3.6M in "INVESTMENT IN CUSO" going down to $0
    this month. That 'INVESTMENT' was where they carried the remainder of
    the bad real estate loans on the books. They've now written off that
    $3.6M. You'll notice that "OTHER REAL ESTATE OWNED" went up by
    $0.5M. That may have been caused by some of this bad loan investment
    being backed by a poultry $0.5M. The effect of all this is very clearly
    shown in the change in equity line. Note that owners (that's OUR)
    equity decreased by $3.8M ie a whopping 27.4% from $13.8M to $10.0M.
    Note also that this decrease in equity was even larger than the
    writeoff from the CUSO (I wonder if DCU is now making an operating loss
    in addition to the special chargeoff losses?).
    
    An interesting figure to now calculate is Chuck Cockburn's
    EQUITY/ASSET ratio. It is now $10M/$360M = 2.78%. I'm sure this will
    be causing the NCUA to be getting more interested in DCU. One more
    major faux par and there goes all the equity. A far cry from those
    fabricated 'example' credit union balance sheets Chuck was parading at
    his meet the owners sessions. Chuck has put it on record as saying that
    he'd like to see an equity to asset ratio of about 8%. Well folks to
    reach that kind of ratio the credit union needs another $18.8M of
    equity on top of the $10M it is now left with. Guess what that money
    will indirectly be coming out of our pockets through higher spreads
    between loans and savings interest rates. And also no doubt more fees.
    Now hopefully people can see why DCU tried to surupticiously introduce
    new fees under the guise of 'more choices'. They know damn well that
    a load of the assets they were carrying were worthless (now written
    off) and that once written off it would kill the equity and hence
    the equity/asset ratio. Pity the board didn't ensure that DCU
    management were straighter with us. But that's what I've come to expect
    from the current board. It is now even more abundantly clear to me that
    we need a complete new board that TRULY REPRESENTS the average
    shareholder. Not a bunch of finance majors who think they're running
    their own private bank.
    
    My message to everyone is get out and vote. I and several other people
    are working hard to ensure that there will be a good choice of
    candidates petitioned by the membership to vote for.
    
    Dave
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
428.1More on disappearing equitySMAUG::GARRODAn Englishman's mind works best when it is almost too lateWed Jan 22 1992 19:2126
    A few more comments on equity.
    
    I just looked back at previous statements of condition. It looks like
    owner equity reached a high of $18.6M in November of 1990 (that's if
    you ignore the spike up to $19.9M in August 1991 which is when the
    $6M bond received against MANGONE hit the books but before a lot of the
    writeoffs were done. Well now we're down to $10M equity. Let's just
    consider for a moment that we'd now be at $4M equity if there hadn't of
    been a $6M bond. $4M is basically peanuts for an asset base of $360M.
    The DCU would be a hair from being insolvent. This is how close the
    current incompetent board allowed the DCU to come to insolvency.
    Where were the checks and balances? Why wasn't ANYONE on the board
    awake? How come the treasurer (Susan Shapiro who is running again)
    interpreted an 87% drop in net income for 1990 as "DCU's financial
    performance improved with Net Income for 1990 on target at .8% or
    $.3 million"? Even somebody who knows basic arithmetic will know that
    a vast drop in money earned is not an improvement.
    No wonder 5 of the board have decided not to run again. Too
    embarassed no doubt. One wonders how things would be now if a few
    concerned shareholders hadn't taken a hard look at what was going on at
    the DCU and pushed for the special meeting.
    
    It's time for a change at the top. Let's have some people who represent
    the average shareholder.
    
    Dave