The Chinese government introduced a “green credit” guideline for commercial lenders on Friday to facilitate economic restructuring in a manner that’s environmentally friendly and saves energy.
The China Banking Regulatory Commission, the top banking regulator, ordered lenders to cut loans to industries with high-energy consumption and high levels of pollution or excessive capacity, and to strengthen financial support for green industries and projects.
The CBRC encouraged banks to evaluate, classify and rate the environmental and social risks inherent in their clients’ businesses and take the results as a key reference in their ratings and access to credit.
“Through credit controls, banks can have an influence on businesses’ awareness of energy savings, emissions-reductions and the benefits to the public,” said Yan Yanfei, deputy director-general of the statistics department at the CBRC.
He said that in the next step, the CBRC will set up some key indexes to make the guideline more specific and try to include adherence to the plan in the rating system.
Lenders also need to improve management of any overseas projects that they support, to ensure that the initiators of those projects comply with local environmental, land, healthcare and security legislation, according to the guideline.
Zhang Rong, the programme manager of environment and social standards at the International Finance Corporation of the World Bank Group, said the guideline is welcome, especially given the increased involvement of Chinese enterprises in the global market, and the increasing number of calls urging the overseas projects to take more care of the local environment and to reduce energy use.
“Actually Chinese banks have already made very good attempts at green credit, and they can learn from the mature technology and management systems that their international counterparts have already been using for some time,” Zhang said.
China Development Bank Corp, which makes nearly half of the total loans supporting overseas projects of Chinese enterprises, has just provided credit to a Chinese company that operates an iron ore mine in Africa. The funds will help the company move surface soil to a place of safety to protect the seeds of local plants, according to Lu Hanwen, deputy director-general of CDB’s Project Appraisal Department II.
By the end of 2011, CDB had lent 658 billion yuan ($104 billion) to support environmental protection, energy-saving and emissions-reduction projects, accounting for 12.7 per cent of the bank’s total outstanding loans.
Yang Bin, deputy general manager of Corporate & Investment Banking at Shanghai Pudong Development Bank Co Ltd, said banks have enough motivation to lend green credits because the demand from clients that they undertake green initiatives has been rising constantly.
Such loans have a lower non-performance ratio than other lending because enterprises can usually obtain strong incentives for green projects from the government to repay the loans, he said.
“And the rate of return against cost for green credits is much higher than other lending,” said Yang, adding that evaluating the environmental impact and energy-consumption of their clients will cost the banks little.
“But State-owned enterprises should also be ordered to implement green policies if the government wishes to achieve its energy-saving and emissions-reduction goals,” Yang said.
http://tourism9.com/ http://vkins.com/
2012年2月25日星期六
2012年1月27日星期五
Janus Capital Group Inc. Announces Fourth Quarter and Year-End 2011 Results
DENVER–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Janus Capital Group Inc. (“JCG”) (NYSE: JNS – News) today reported fourth quarter net income of $35.7 million, or $0.19 per diluted share, compared with net income of $27.4 million, or $0.15 per diluted share, in the third quarter 2011 and net income of $65.9 million, or $0.36 per diluted share, in the fourth quarter 2010.
Third quarter 2011 net income included a net charge of $0.06 per share primarily related to mark-to-market losses on investments. Fourth quarter 2010 included a $0.12 per share net benefit from an insurance recovery, the sale of JCG’s structured investment vehicle securities, the reversal of income tax reserves and the cumulative effect of correcting a hedge accounting issue.
For the full-year 2011, net income totaled $142.9 million, or $0.78 per diluted share, compared with net income of $159.9 million, or $0.88 per diluted share for 2010.
The company’s operating margin for the fourth quarter 2011 was 32.7% compared with 31.3% for the third quarter 2011 and 34.7% for the fourth quarter 2010.
Flows and Assets Under Management
Average assets under management during the fourth quarter 2011 were $149.2 billion compared with $155.9 billion during the third quarter 2011 and $167.3 billion during the fourth quarter 2010.
At December 31, 2011, the company’s total assets under management were $148.2 billion compared with $141.0 billion at September 30, 2011 and $169.5 billion at December 31, 2010.
The increase in complex-wide assets during the fourth quarter 2011 primarily reflects net market appreciation of $11.2 billion offset by long-term net outflows of $4.0 billion. Fundamental equity and mathematical equity long-term net outflows totaled $3.2 billion and $2.2 billion, respectively, while fixed income long-term net inflows totaled $1.4 billion. The decrease in year-over-year assets under management was primarily the result of long-term net outflows of $12.2 billion and $9.1 billion of net market depreciation.
Investment Performance
Relative investment performance in key fundamental equity strategies continues to be challenged, with 38%, 38%, and 79% of mutual fund assets ranked in the top half of their Lipper categories on a one-, three- and five-year total return basis, respectively, as of December 31, 2011.1
Fixed income mutual funds continue to generate strong long-term relative investment performance with 80%, 5% and 100% of mutual fund assets ranked in the top half of their Lipper categories on a one-, three- and five-year total return basis, respectively, as of December 31, 2011.2
Mathematical equity relative investment performance continues to improve, with 75%, 43% and 69% of strategies surpassing their respective benchmarks, net of fees, over the one-, three- and five-year periods, respectively, as of December 31, 2011.3
In addition, 56% of complex-wide mutual funds have a 4- or 5-star Overall Morningstar RatingTM at December 31, 2011.4
Financial Discussion
Fourth quarter 2011 revenues of $215.6 million decreased $21.3 million, or 9.0%, from third quarter 2011 primarily due to $13.8 million of negative performance fees incurred on certain mutual funds during the fourth quarter 2011. Fourth quarter 2011 operating expenses decreased $17.7 million, or 10.9%, primarily from lower variable compensation expenses and a continued focus on expense management.
Non-operating items for the third quarter 2011 included $20.6 million of mark-to-market losses on investment securities (net of $2.8 million of mark-to-market losses attributable to noncontrolling interests) and a benefit of $2.5 million for the reversal of income tax reserves following the expiration of statutes of limitations on tax positions taken in previous years.
Capital and Liquidity
At December 31, 2011, JCG had stockholders’ equity of $1.3 billion, cash and investments of $672 million and outstanding debt of $595 million.
On January 24, 2012, JCG’s Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of $0.05 per share. The quarterly dividend will be paid on February 21, 2012, to stockholders of record at the close of business on February 6, 2012.
Fourth Quarter 2011 Earnings Call Information
JCG will discuss its results during a conference call on Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 10 a.m. Eastern Standard Time. The call-in number will be (888) 428-7458. Anyone outside the U.S. or Canada should call (201) 604-5177. The slides used during the presentation will be available in the investor relations section of the Janus Capital Group website (www.janus.com/ir) approximately one hour prior to the call. For those unable to join the conference call at the scheduled time, an audio replay will be available on www.janus.com/ir.
About Janus Capital Group Inc.
Janus Capital Group Inc. (“JCG”) is a global investment firm offering strategies from three individual investment boutiques: Janus Capital Management LLC (“Janus”), INTECH Investment Management LLC (“INTECH”) and Perkins Investment Management LLC (“Perkins”). Each manager employs a research-intensive approach that is distinct within its respective asset class. This multi-boutique approach enables the firm to provide style-specific expertise across an array of strategies, including growth, value and risk-managed equities, fixed income and alternatives through one common distribution platform.
At the end of December 2011, JCG managed $148.2 billion in assets for shareholders, clients and institutions around the globe. Based in Denver, JCG also has offices in France, London, Milan, Munich, Singapore, Hong Kong, Tokyo and Melbourne.
1 References Lipper relative performance on an asset-weighted basis. For the 10-year period ending December 31, 2011, 80% of the 24 fundamental equity mutual funds outperformed the majority of their Lipper peers on an asset-weighted basis. For the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ending December 31, 2011, 32%, 60%, 78% and 75% of the 37, 35, 32 and 24 fundamental equity mutual funds outperformed the majority of their Lipper peers based on total returns.
2 References Lipper relative performance on an asset-weighted basis. For the 10-year period ending December 31, 2011, 100% of the 4 fixed income mutual funds outperformed the majority of their Lipper peers on an asset-weighted basis. For the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ending December 31, 2011, 80%, 25%, 100% and 100% of the 5, 4, 4 and 4 fixed income mutual funds outperformed the majority of their peers based on total returns.
3 For the period ending December 31, 2011, 50%, 50%, 67% and 40% of the mathematical equity mutual funds were beating their benchmarks on a 1-, 3-, 5-year and since-fund inception basis. Funds included in the analysis and their inception dates are: INTECH U.S. Growth Fund – Class S (1/03); INTECH U.S. Core Fund – Class T (2/03); INTECH U.S. Value Fund – Class I (12/05); INTECH International Fund – Class I (5/07); INTECH Global Dividend Fund – Class I (12/11).
4 For the period ending December 31, 2011, 40%, 49% and 57% of complex-wide mutual funds had a 4- or 5-star Morningstar rating for the 3-, 5- and 10-year periods based on risk-adjusted returns for 43, 39 and 28 funds, respectively. 43 funds were included in the analysis for the overall period.
Data presented reflects past performance, which is no guarantee of future results. Due to market volatility, current performance may be higher or lower than the performance shown. Call 877.33JANUS (52687) or visit janus.com/advisor/mutual-funds for performance, rankings and ratings current to the most recent month-end.
Janus Capital Group Inc. (“JCG”) provides investment advisory services through its primary subsidiaries, Janus Capital Management LLC (“Janus”), INTECH Investment Management LLC (“INTECH”) and Perkins Investment Management LLC (“Perkins”).
“Complex-Wide Mutual Funds” means all affiliated mutual funds managed by Janus, INTECH and Perkins. “Fundamental Equity Mutual Funds” means all mutual funds managed by Janus or Perkins that invest in equity securities. “Fixed Income Mutual Funds” means all mutual funds managed by Janus that invest primarily in fixed income securities. “Mathematical Equity Strategies” means all discretionary managed accounts (not mutual funds) that are advised or sub-advised by INTECH.
Mutual fund relative performance analysis shown is for each Fund’s initial share class: Class T, S or I Shares in the Janus retail fund (“JIF”) trust and the Institutional or Service Shares in the Janus Aspen Series (“JAS”). These share classes may not be eligible for purchase by all investors. Other share classes may have higher sales and management fees, which can result in differences in performance.
Investing involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. The value of your investment will fluctuate over time and you may gain or lose money. A fund’s performance may be affected by risks that include those associated with non-diversification, non-investment grade debt securities, high-yield/high-risk securities, undervalued or overlooked companies, investments in specific industries or countries and potential conflicts of interest. Additional risks to funds may include those associated with investing in foreign securities, emerging markets, initial public offerings, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”), derivatives, short sales and companies with relatively small market capitalizations. Each fund has different risks. Please see a Janus prospectus for more information about risk, fund holdings and other details.
Lipper performance on an asset-weighted basis is calculated by taking all funds and assigning the assets under management (“AUM”) in each respective fund to either the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th quartile bucket based on each fund’s respective Lipper relative rankings. The total AUM of each quartile’s bucket is then divided by complex-wide total AUM to arrive at the respective percent of AUM in each bucket. Lipper, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Thomson Reuters, provides independent insight on global collective investments including mutual funds, retirement funds, hedge funds, fund fees and expenses to the asset management and media communities. Lipper ranks the performance of mutual funds within a classification of funds that have similar investment objectives. Funds not ranked by Lipper are not included in the analysis.
The Overall Morningstar RatingTMfor a fund is derived from a weighted- average of the performance figures associated with its three-, five- and ten-year (if applicable) Morningstar RatingTMmetrics. For each fund with at least a three-year history, Morningstar calculates a Morningstar RatingTM based on a Morningstar Risk-Adjusted Return measure that accounts for variation in a fund’s monthly performance (including the effects of sales charges, loads, and redemption fees), placing more emphasis on downward variations and rewarding consistent performance. The top 10% of the funds in each category receive 5 stars, the next 22.5% receive 4 stars, the next 35% receive 3 stars, the next 22.5% receive 2 stars and the bottom 10% receive 1 star. (Each share class is counted as a fraction of one fund within this scale and rated separately, which may cause slight variations in the distribution percentages). The Morningstar RatingTM may differ among share classes of a mutual fund as a result of different sales loads and/or expense structures. It may be based, in part, on the performance of a predecessor fund. Morningstar does not rank funds with less than a 3-year performance history.
Please consider the charges, risks, expenses and investment objectives carefully before investing. For a prospectus containing this and other information, please call JCG at (800) 525-3713 or download the file from www.janus.com/info. Read it carefully before you invest or send money.
Funds distributed by Janus Distributors LLC.
Certain statements in this press release constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Statements preceded by, followed by or that otherwise include the words “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “projects,” “estimates,” “plans,” “may increase,” “may fluctuate,” “forecast” and similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “should,” “would,” “may” and “could” are generally forward-looking in nature and not historical facts. Any statements that refer to expectations or other characterizations of future events, circumstances or results are forward-looking statements. These statements are based on the beliefs and assumptions of Company management based on information currently available to management.
Various risks, uncertainties, assumptions and factors that could cause future results to differ materially from those expressed by the forward-looking statements included in this press release include, but are not limited to, risks specified in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 included under headings such as “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and in other filings and furnishings made by the Company with the SEC from time to time. In light of these risks, uncertainties, assumptions and factors, the forward-looking events discussed in this press release may not occur. Many of these factors are beyond the control of the Company and its management. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date stated, or if no date is stated, as of the date of this press release. Except for the Company’s ongoing obligations to disclose material information under the applicable securities law and stock exchange rules, the Company undertakes no obligation to release publicly any revisions to any forward-looking statements, to report events or to report the occurrence of unanticipated events.
http://tourism9.com/ http://vkins.com/
Third quarter 2011 net income included a net charge of $0.06 per share primarily related to mark-to-market losses on investments. Fourth quarter 2010 included a $0.12 per share net benefit from an insurance recovery, the sale of JCG’s structured investment vehicle securities, the reversal of income tax reserves and the cumulative effect of correcting a hedge accounting issue.
For the full-year 2011, net income totaled $142.9 million, or $0.78 per diluted share, compared with net income of $159.9 million, or $0.88 per diluted share for 2010.
The company’s operating margin for the fourth quarter 2011 was 32.7% compared with 31.3% for the third quarter 2011 and 34.7% for the fourth quarter 2010.
Flows and Assets Under Management
Average assets under management during the fourth quarter 2011 were $149.2 billion compared with $155.9 billion during the third quarter 2011 and $167.3 billion during the fourth quarter 2010.
At December 31, 2011, the company’s total assets under management were $148.2 billion compared with $141.0 billion at September 30, 2011 and $169.5 billion at December 31, 2010.
The increase in complex-wide assets during the fourth quarter 2011 primarily reflects net market appreciation of $11.2 billion offset by long-term net outflows of $4.0 billion. Fundamental equity and mathematical equity long-term net outflows totaled $3.2 billion and $2.2 billion, respectively, while fixed income long-term net inflows totaled $1.4 billion. The decrease in year-over-year assets under management was primarily the result of long-term net outflows of $12.2 billion and $9.1 billion of net market depreciation.
Investment Performance
Relative investment performance in key fundamental equity strategies continues to be challenged, with 38%, 38%, and 79% of mutual fund assets ranked in the top half of their Lipper categories on a one-, three- and five-year total return basis, respectively, as of December 31, 2011.1
Fixed income mutual funds continue to generate strong long-term relative investment performance with 80%, 5% and 100% of mutual fund assets ranked in the top half of their Lipper categories on a one-, three- and five-year total return basis, respectively, as of December 31, 2011.2
Mathematical equity relative investment performance continues to improve, with 75%, 43% and 69% of strategies surpassing their respective benchmarks, net of fees, over the one-, three- and five-year periods, respectively, as of December 31, 2011.3
In addition, 56% of complex-wide mutual funds have a 4- or 5-star Overall Morningstar RatingTM at December 31, 2011.4
Financial Discussion
| Financial Highlights | ||||||||||||||||||||
| (dollars in millions, except per share data or as noted) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Year Ended | |||||||||||||||||||
| December 31, | September 30, | December 31, | December 31, | |||||||||||||||||
| 2011 | 2011 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||
| Average Assets (in billions) | $ | 149.2 | $ | 155.9 | $ | 162.3 | $ | 160.7 | ||||||||||||
| Ending AUM (in billions) | $ | 148.2 | $ | 141.0 | $ | 148.2 | $ | 169.5 | ||||||||||||
| Revenues | $ | 215.6 | $ | 236.9 | $ | 981.9 | $ | 1,015.7 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Expenses | $ | 145.0 | $ | 162.7 | $ | 670.1 | $ | 734.1 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Income | $ | 70.6 | $ | 74.2 | $ | 311.8 | $ | 281.6 | ||||||||||||
| Operating Margin | 32.7% | 31.3% | 31.8% | 27.7% | ||||||||||||||||
| Net Income | $ | 35.7 | $ | 27.4 | $ | 142.9 | $ | 159.9 | ||||||||||||
| Diluted Earnings per Share | $ | 0.19 | $ | 0.15 | $ | 0.78 | $ | 0.88 | ||||||||||||
Fourth quarter 2011 revenues of $215.6 million decreased $21.3 million, or 9.0%, from third quarter 2011 primarily due to $13.8 million of negative performance fees incurred on certain mutual funds during the fourth quarter 2011. Fourth quarter 2011 operating expenses decreased $17.7 million, or 10.9%, primarily from lower variable compensation expenses and a continued focus on expense management.
Non-operating items for the third quarter 2011 included $20.6 million of mark-to-market losses on investment securities (net of $2.8 million of mark-to-market losses attributable to noncontrolling interests) and a benefit of $2.5 million for the reversal of income tax reserves following the expiration of statutes of limitations on tax positions taken in previous years.
Capital and Liquidity
At December 31, 2011, JCG had stockholders’ equity of $1.3 billion, cash and investments of $672 million and outstanding debt of $595 million.
On January 24, 2012, JCG’s Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly cash dividend of $0.05 per share. The quarterly dividend will be paid on February 21, 2012, to stockholders of record at the close of business on February 6, 2012.
Fourth Quarter 2011 Earnings Call Information
JCG will discuss its results during a conference call on Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 10 a.m. Eastern Standard Time. The call-in number will be (888) 428-7458. Anyone outside the U.S. or Canada should call (201) 604-5177. The slides used during the presentation will be available in the investor relations section of the Janus Capital Group website (www.janus.com/ir) approximately one hour prior to the call. For those unable to join the conference call at the scheduled time, an audio replay will be available on www.janus.com/ir.
About Janus Capital Group Inc.
Janus Capital Group Inc. (“JCG”) is a global investment firm offering strategies from three individual investment boutiques: Janus Capital Management LLC (“Janus”), INTECH Investment Management LLC (“INTECH”) and Perkins Investment Management LLC (“Perkins”). Each manager employs a research-intensive approach that is distinct within its respective asset class. This multi-boutique approach enables the firm to provide style-specific expertise across an array of strategies, including growth, value and risk-managed equities, fixed income and alternatives through one common distribution platform.
At the end of December 2011, JCG managed $148.2 billion in assets for shareholders, clients and institutions around the globe. Based in Denver, JCG also has offices in France, London, Milan, Munich, Singapore, Hong Kong, Tokyo and Melbourne.
1 References Lipper relative performance on an asset-weighted basis. For the 10-year period ending December 31, 2011, 80% of the 24 fundamental equity mutual funds outperformed the majority of their Lipper peers on an asset-weighted basis. For the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ending December 31, 2011, 32%, 60%, 78% and 75% of the 37, 35, 32 and 24 fundamental equity mutual funds outperformed the majority of their Lipper peers based on total returns.
2 References Lipper relative performance on an asset-weighted basis. For the 10-year period ending December 31, 2011, 100% of the 4 fixed income mutual funds outperformed the majority of their Lipper peers on an asset-weighted basis. For the 1-, 3-, 5- and 10-year periods ending December 31, 2011, 80%, 25%, 100% and 100% of the 5, 4, 4 and 4 fixed income mutual funds outperformed the majority of their peers based on total returns.
3 For the period ending December 31, 2011, 50%, 50%, 67% and 40% of the mathematical equity mutual funds were beating their benchmarks on a 1-, 3-, 5-year and since-fund inception basis. Funds included in the analysis and their inception dates are: INTECH U.S. Growth Fund – Class S (1/03); INTECH U.S. Core Fund – Class T (2/03); INTECH U.S. Value Fund – Class I (12/05); INTECH International Fund – Class I (5/07); INTECH Global Dividend Fund – Class I (12/11).
4 For the period ending December 31, 2011, 40%, 49% and 57% of complex-wide mutual funds had a 4- or 5-star Morningstar rating for the 3-, 5- and 10-year periods based on risk-adjusted returns for 43, 39 and 28 funds, respectively. 43 funds were included in the analysis for the overall period.
| JANUS CAPITAL GROUP INC. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (dollars in millions, except per share data) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Year Ended | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| December 31, | September 30, | December 31, | December 31, | December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2011 | 2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenues: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment management fees | $ | 190.9 | $ | 202.2 | $ | 218.7 | $ | 844.3 | $ | 834.6 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Performance fees | (9.2 | ) | (3.1 | ) | 18.5 | (11.7 | ) | 32.6 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Shareowner servicing fees and other | 33.9 | 37.8 | 38.5 | 149.3 | 148.5 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | 215.6 | 236.9 | 275.7 | 981.9 | 1,015.7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Operating expenses: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Employee compensation and benefits | 62.1 | 71.2 | 79.2 | 294.9 | 314.5 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Long-term incentive compensation | 10.7 | 16.4 | 23.3 | 63.0 | 83.1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Marketing and advertising | 7.5 | 6.2 | 7.8 | 28.0 | 35.8 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Distribution | 30.5 | 35.5 | 36.9 | 141.7 | 140.1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Depreciation and amortization | 7.8 | 8.1 | 9.5 | 33.3 | 39.1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| General, administrative and occupancy | 26.4 | 25.3 | 23.2 | 109.2 | 121.5 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | 145.0 | 162.7 | 179.9 | 670.1 | 734.1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Operating income | 70.6 | 74.2 | 95.8 | 311.8 | 281.6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest expense | (11.7 | ) | (13.0 | ) | (15.9 | ) | (51.0 | ) | (63.2 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Investment gains (losses), net | 1.2 | (23.4 | ) | 19.9 | (21.9 | ) | 24.7 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other income, net | 2.0 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 3.8 | 1.9 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loss on early extinguishment of debt | - | - | - | (9.9 | ) | - | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Income tax provision | (22.4 | ) | (11.9 | ) | (31.9 | ) | (79.4 | ) | (76.4 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net income | 39.7 | 27.3 | 68.4 | 153.4 | 168.6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Noncontrolling interests | (4.0 | ) | 0.1 | (2.5 | ) | (10.5 | ) | (8.7 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Net income attributable to JCG | $ | 35.7 | $ | 27.4 | $ | 65.9 | $ | 142.9 | $ | 159.9 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Diluted weighted-average shares outstanding (in millions) | 184.0 | 184.0 | 183.1 | 184.2 | 182.1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Diluted earnings per share | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| attributable to JCG common shareholders: | $ | 0.19 | $ | 0.15 | $ | 0.36 | $ | 0.78 | $ | 0.88 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Average Assets Under Management (in billions) | $ | 149.2 | $ | 155.9 | $ | 167.3 | $ | 162.3 | $ | 160.7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| JANUS CAPITAL GROUP INC. | |||||||||||||||
| UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS | |||||||||||||||
| (dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||
| December 31, | December 31, | ||||||||||||||
| 2011 | 2010 | ||||||||||||||
| Assets | |||||||||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 360.0 | $ | 373.2 | |||||||||||
| Investment securities | 312.0 | 296.1 | |||||||||||||
| Other assets | 185.0 | 251.6 | |||||||||||||
| Property and equipment, net | 36.9 | 44.1 | |||||||||||||
| Intangibles and goodwill, net | 1,750.0 | 1,761.8 | |||||||||||||
| Total Assets | $ | 2,643.9 | $ | 2,726.8 | |||||||||||
| Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity | |||||||||||||||
| Debt | $ | 595.2 | $ | 799.8 | |||||||||||
| Other liabilities | 281.1 | 333.5 | |||||||||||||
| Deferred income taxes | 421.7 | 410.3 | |||||||||||||
| Stockholders’ equity | 1,345.9 | 1,183.2 | |||||||||||||
| Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity | $ | 2,643.9 | $ | 2,726.8 | |||||||||||
| UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| CASH FLOW INFORMATION | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Year Ended | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| December 31, | September 30, | December 31, | December 31, | December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cash provided by (used in) | 2011 | 2011 | 2010 | 2011 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Operating activities | $ | 74.3 | $ | 47.8 | $ | 101.4 | $ | 224.6 | $ | 246.6 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Investing activities | (33.1 | ) | 116.0 | (18.0 | ) | 21.7 | (148.0 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Financing activities | (10.6 | ) | (103.9 | ) | 1.8 | (259.5 | ) | (50.1 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Net change during period | $ | 30.6 | $ | 59.9 | $ | 85.2 | $ | (13.2 | ) | $ | 48.5 | |||||||||||||||||||
| JANUS CAPITAL GROUP INC. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ASSETS & FLOWS BY INVESTMENT DISCIPLINE | |||||||||||||||||||||
| (dollars in billions) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Year Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2011 | September 30, 2011 | December 31, 2010 | December 31, 2011 | December 31, 2010 | |||||||||||||||||
| Growth/Core (1) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Beginning of period assets | $ | 47.3 | $ | 58.5 | $ | 58.3 | $ | 60.9 | $ | 60.9 | |||||||||||
| Sales | 1.6 | 2.9 | 3.3 | 10.7 | 12.4 | ||||||||||||||||
| Redemptions | 3.4 | 4.7 | 6.0 | 18.7 | 18.6 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net redemptions | (1.8 | ) | (1.8 | ) | (2.7 | ) | (8.0 | ) | (6.2 | ) | |||||||||||
| Market / fund performance | 4.2 | (9.4 | ) | 5.3 | (3.2 | ) | 6.2 | ||||||||||||||
| End of period assets | $ | 49.7 | $ | 47.3 | $ | 60.9 | $ | 49.7 | $ | 60.9 | |||||||||||
| Global/International | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Beginning of period assets | $ | 18.6 | $ | 26.1 | $ | 26.2 | $ | 27.9 | $ | 23.8 | |||||||||||
| Sales | 0.9 | 0.8 | 1.9 | 4.8 | 6.0 | ||||||||||||||||
| Redemptions | 1.6 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 7.7 | 6.3 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net redemptions | (0.7 | ) | (1.4 | ) | (0.2 | ) | (2.9 | ) | (0.3 | ) | |||||||||||
| Market / fund performance | 0.5 | (6.1 | ) | 1.9 | (6.6 | ) | 4.4 | ||||||||||||||
| End of period assets | $ | 18.4 | $ | 18.6 | $ | 27.9 | $ | 18.4 | $ | 27.9 | |||||||||||
| Mathematical Equity (2) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Beginning of period assets | $ | 38.0 | $ | 45.5 | $ | 42.4 | $ | 44.1 | $ | 48.0 | |||||||||||
| Sales | 0.7 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 4.5 | 4.4 | ||||||||||||||||
| Redemptions | 2.9 | 1.7 | 3.6 | 9.5 | 14.9 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net redemptions | (2.2 | ) | (0.7 | ) | (2.6 | ) | (5.0 | ) | (10.5 | ) | |||||||||||
| Market / fund performance | 4.1 | (6.8 | ) | 4.3 | 0.8 | 6.6 | |||||||||||||||
| End of period assets | $ | 39.9 | $ | 38.0 | $ | 44.1 | $ | 39.9 | $ | 44.1 | |||||||||||
| Fixed Income (1) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Beginning of period assets | $ | 18.6 | $ | 17.2 | $ | 14.5 | $ | 15.3 | $ | 10.3 | |||||||||||
| Sales | 2.9 | 3.8 | 2.1 | 10.7 | 8.5 | ||||||||||||||||
| Redemptions | 1.5 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 5.8 | 4.5 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net sales | 1.4 | 2.1 | 0.6 | 4.9 | 4.0 | ||||||||||||||||
| Market / fund performance | 0.6 | (0.7 | ) | 0.2 | 0.4 | 1.0 | |||||||||||||||
| End of period assets | $ | 20.6 | $ | 18.6 | $ | 15.3 | $ | 20.6 | $ | 15.3 | |||||||||||
| Value (3) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Beginning of period assets | $ | 17.0 | $ | 21.0 | $ | 17.8 | $ | 19.8 | $ | 15.0 | |||||||||||
| Sales | 0.9 | 1.2 | 1.7 | 5.3 | 7.7 | ||||||||||||||||
| Redemptions | 1.6 | 1.8 | 1.5 | 6.5 | 5.5 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net sales (redemptions) | (0.7 | ) | (0.6 | ) | 0.2 | (1.2 | ) | 2.2 | |||||||||||||
| Market / fund performance | 1.8 | (3.4 | ) | 1.8 | (0.5 | ) | 2.6 | ||||||||||||||
| End of period assets | $ | 18.1 | $ | 17.0 | $ | 19.8 | $ | 18.1 | $ | 19.8 | |||||||||||
| Money Market | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Beginning of period assets | $ | 1.5 | $ | 1.5 | $ | 1.6 | $ | 1.5 | $ | 1.7 | |||||||||||
| Sales | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 0.8 | ||||||||||||||||
| Redemptions | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net redemptions | - | - | (0.1 | ) | - | (0.2 | ) | ||||||||||||||
| Market / fund performance | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||||||
| End of period assets | $ | 1.5 | $ | 1.5 | $ | 1.5 | $ | 1.5 | $ | 1.5 | |||||||||||
| Total Company | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Beginning of period assets | $ | 141.0 | $ | 169.8 | $ | 160.8 | $ | 169.5 | $ | 159.7 | |||||||||||
| Sales | 7.2 | 10.0 | 10.2 | 37.0 | 39.8 | ||||||||||||||||
| Redemptions | 11.2 | 12.3 | 15.0 | 49.2 | 50.8 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net redemptions | (4.0 | ) | (2.3 | ) | (4.8 | ) | (12.2 | ) | (11.0 | ) | |||||||||||
| Market / fund performance | 11.2 | (26.5 | ) | 13.5 | (9.1 | ) | 20.8 | ||||||||||||||
| End of period assets | $ | 148.2 | $ | 141.0 | $ | 169.5 | $ | 148.2 | $ | 169.5 | |||||||||||
| Total Excluding Money Market | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Beginning of period assets | $ | 139.5 | $ | 168.3 | $ | 159.2 | $ | 168.0 | $ | 158.0 | |||||||||||
| Sales | 7.0 | 9.7 | 10.0 | 36.0 | 39.0 | ||||||||||||||||
| Redemptions | 11.0 | 12.1 | 14.7 | 48.2 | 49.8 | ||||||||||||||||
| Net redemptions | (4.0 | ) | (2.4 | ) | (4.7 | ) | (12.2 | ) | (10.8 | ) | |||||||||||
| Market / fund performance | 11.2 | (26.4 | ) | 13.5 | (9.1 | ) | 20.8 | ||||||||||||||
| End of period assets | $ | 146.7 | $ | 139.5 | $ | 168.0 | $ | 146.7 | $ | 168.0 | |||||||||||
| Each line has been rounded on the schedule individually to increase the accuracy of the amounts presented. Therefore totals and subtotals may not foot. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Notes: | ||
| (1) | Growth/core and fixed income assets reflect a 50%/50% split of the Janus Balanced Fund between the two categories. | |
| (2) | Represents all assets managed by INTECH Investment Management LLC. Year-to-date 2011 gross sales and redemptions exclude the transfer of $1.1 billion within mathematical equity strategies in the first quarter 2011. | |
| (3) | Represents all assets managed by Perkins Investment Management LLC. | |
Data presented reflects past performance, which is no guarantee of future results. Due to market volatility, current performance may be higher or lower than the performance shown. Call 877.33JANUS (52687) or visit janus.com/advisor/mutual-funds for performance, rankings and ratings current to the most recent month-end.
Janus Capital Group Inc. (“JCG”) provides investment advisory services through its primary subsidiaries, Janus Capital Management LLC (“Janus”), INTECH Investment Management LLC (“INTECH”) and Perkins Investment Management LLC (“Perkins”).
“Complex-Wide Mutual Funds” means all affiliated mutual funds managed by Janus, INTECH and Perkins. “Fundamental Equity Mutual Funds” means all mutual funds managed by Janus or Perkins that invest in equity securities. “Fixed Income Mutual Funds” means all mutual funds managed by Janus that invest primarily in fixed income securities. “Mathematical Equity Strategies” means all discretionary managed accounts (not mutual funds) that are advised or sub-advised by INTECH.
Mutual fund relative performance analysis shown is for each Fund’s initial share class: Class T, S or I Shares in the Janus retail fund (“JIF”) trust and the Institutional or Service Shares in the Janus Aspen Series (“JAS”). These share classes may not be eligible for purchase by all investors. Other share classes may have higher sales and management fees, which can result in differences in performance.
Investing involves risk, including the possible loss of principal. The value of your investment will fluctuate over time and you may gain or lose money. A fund’s performance may be affected by risks that include those associated with non-diversification, non-investment grade debt securities, high-yield/high-risk securities, undervalued or overlooked companies, investments in specific industries or countries and potential conflicts of interest. Additional risks to funds may include those associated with investing in foreign securities, emerging markets, initial public offerings, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”), derivatives, short sales and companies with relatively small market capitalizations. Each fund has different risks. Please see a Janus prospectus for more information about risk, fund holdings and other details.
Lipper performance on an asset-weighted basis is calculated by taking all funds and assigning the assets under management (“AUM”) in each respective fund to either the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th quartile bucket based on each fund’s respective Lipper relative rankings. The total AUM of each quartile’s bucket is then divided by complex-wide total AUM to arrive at the respective percent of AUM in each bucket. Lipper, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Thomson Reuters, provides independent insight on global collective investments including mutual funds, retirement funds, hedge funds, fund fees and expenses to the asset management and media communities. Lipper ranks the performance of mutual funds within a classification of funds that have similar investment objectives. Funds not ranked by Lipper are not included in the analysis.
The Overall Morningstar RatingTMfor a fund is derived from a weighted- average of the performance figures associated with its three-, five- and ten-year (if applicable) Morningstar RatingTMmetrics. For each fund with at least a three-year history, Morningstar calculates a Morningstar RatingTM based on a Morningstar Risk-Adjusted Return measure that accounts for variation in a fund’s monthly performance (including the effects of sales charges, loads, and redemption fees), placing more emphasis on downward variations and rewarding consistent performance. The top 10% of the funds in each category receive 5 stars, the next 22.5% receive 4 stars, the next 35% receive 3 stars, the next 22.5% receive 2 stars and the bottom 10% receive 1 star. (Each share class is counted as a fraction of one fund within this scale and rated separately, which may cause slight variations in the distribution percentages). The Morningstar RatingTM may differ among share classes of a mutual fund as a result of different sales loads and/or expense structures. It may be based, in part, on the performance of a predecessor fund. Morningstar does not rank funds with less than a 3-year performance history.
Please consider the charges, risks, expenses and investment objectives carefully before investing. For a prospectus containing this and other information, please call JCG at (800) 525-3713 or download the file from www.janus.com/info. Read it carefully before you invest or send money.
Funds distributed by Janus Distributors LLC.
Certain statements in this press release constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, assumptions and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Statements preceded by, followed by or that otherwise include the words “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “projects,” “estimates,” “plans,” “may increase,” “may fluctuate,” “forecast” and similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “should,” “would,” “may” and “could” are generally forward-looking in nature and not historical facts. Any statements that refer to expectations or other characterizations of future events, circumstances or results are forward-looking statements. These statements are based on the beliefs and assumptions of Company management based on information currently available to management.
Various risks, uncertainties, assumptions and factors that could cause future results to differ materially from those expressed by the forward-looking statements included in this press release include, but are not limited to, risks specified in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 included under headings such as “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and in other filings and furnishings made by the Company with the SEC from time to time. In light of these risks, uncertainties, assumptions and factors, the forward-looking events discussed in this press release may not occur. Many of these factors are beyond the control of the Company and its management. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date stated, or if no date is stated, as of the date of this press release. Except for the Company’s ongoing obligations to disclose material information under the applicable securities law and stock exchange rules, the Company undertakes no obligation to release publicly any revisions to any forward-looking statements, to report events or to report the occurrence of unanticipated events.
http://tourism9.com/ http://vkins.com/
2012年1月9日星期一
Banking on Market Share
Sterling Financial Corp.
Parent of Sterling Savings Bank.• FOUNDING: 1983.
• HEADQUARTERS: Spokane.
• ASSETS (as of 9/30/11): $9.18 billion.
• EARNINGS, 3RD QUARTER 2011: $11.3 million.
• BRANCHES: 177 in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana and California; one each in Clark and Skamania counties.
• EMPLOYEES: 2,500.
• INFORMATION:Sterling Financial Corporation.
First Independent Financial Group
Parent of First Independent Bank.• FOUNDING: 1910 (as Ridgefield State Bank) .
• HEADQUARTERS: Vancouver.
• ASSETS (as of 9/30/11): $792 million.
• EARNINGS, 3RD QUARTER 2011: $2.2 million.
• BRANCHES: 14 in Clark and Skamania counties; two offices in Oregon.
• EMPLOYEES: 245.
• INFORMATION: First Independent.
The bank had been propped up by a $303 million infusion of federal bailout money in December 2008, but government regulators demanded that it raise another $725 million from private investors.
“They were on the verge of destruction,” said Tom Hayes, a principal in investment banking firm D.A. Davidson & Co. based in Great Falls, Mont.
Less than 18 months later, Sterling’s deal to purchase the banking assets of Vancouver-based First Independent Bank signaled its return as an aggressive player in the banking industry’s fight for market share. The deal, announced in November and expected to close before April 1, will put an end to one of the nation’s last family-owned banks. It will make Sterling, which now has a small local presence with just one Clark County branch, into one of Southwest Washington’s largest banks and signal its larger role in the Portland metropolitan area market.
The Firstenburg family, owners of 101-year-old First Independent and major philanthropists for community charities, will not disappear from the local scene. First Independent President Jeanne Firstenburg will become Sterling’s Southwest Washington market president. The Firstenburg family will hold on to some of their bank’s assets, through a private company managing a portfolio of loans not included in the deal, as well as the First Independent headquarters building in downtown Vancouver. Sterling says it will keep all of First Independent’s branches and move forward on First Independent’s project of opening a downtown Portland branch.
Hayes, who keeps tabs on Northwest banks for financial services firm D.A. Davidson, admitted to some surprise that Sterling moved into expansion mode so soon after its close brush with disaster. “Not only did they come back, but now they are able to go on the offensive,” Hayes says. “I don’t think anybody thought they would be able to do this so quickly.”
Back from the abyss
By the end of 2010, Sterling had pulled itself back from the abyss by drawing in big-name private equity investors and aggressively whacking away at a mountain of bad real estate loans. But its survival came at a cost to taxpayers who had pitched in the $303 million through the Troubled Assets Relief Program, or TARP. It found major investors willing to buy stock at 20 cents a share, then orchestrated what is calleda reverse stock split to drive up its per-share price so its stock could remain listed on the New York stock exchange.
When the dust settled, the U.S. Treasury, which owns about 10 percent of the bank’s stock, was among the investors suffering large losses. The government-owned stock is valued at around $90 million, said Greg Seibly, Sterling Financial Corp. president and chief financial officer. Seibly doesn’t know when the Treasury will cash out its shares, but acknowledged that the government is unlikely to get a full return on its investment in Sterling.
“The goal of (Sterling’s) management and board was to salvage the organization,” said Seibly, noting that he was not involved in the bank’s decision to seek government funding. “Had Sterling failed, the cost would have been far greater.”
Sterling’s survival strategy stands in contrast to First Independent’s playbook during the financial crisis. First Independent reported nearly $32 million in losses in 2009. The bleeding would have continued had not the Firstenburg family purchased some loans to manage through a family-owned company, reducing ongoing losses and allowing the bank to shrink the size of its troubled loan portfolio. The family also contributed some $28 million in cash and real estate to get their bank through the crisis. First Independent took no TARP funding.
Under the deal, still subject to state and federal regulatory approval, Sterling will initially pay $8 million. It will make an additional $17 million payment after eight months, based on the bank’s financial performance and its ability to retain customers. The Firstenburg family keeps $49 million of existing loans and $34 million of real estate and other assets.
Sterling’s acquisition of First Independent also gives it the legal authority in Washington to administer trust accounts, a service that will help it attract customers with high net worth. First Independent has $450 million in assets under management in its trust and wealth management business.
Sterling officials say they’re on track to meet with First Independent employees this month about their professional futures. Seibly said last week that no decisions have been made about staffing needs once Sterling takes control, although executive and back-office employees are likely to be most affected by the change in ownership. Staff reductions will create vacancies in the Firstenburg-owned First Independent Plaza at a time when downtown Vancouver’s office market is glutted with empty space.
Not a big surprise
The November announcement that Sterling would purchase the core pieces of First Independent wasn’t entirely a surprise to business community leaders or observers of the Firstenburg family. Although Scott and Jeff Firstenburg, grandsons of the bank’s founder, worked for First Independent, there were no signs that they were being groomed to run the bank. Jeanne Firstenburg, daughter-in-law of bank founder E.W. “Ed” Firstenburg and stepmother to Scott and Jeff, had been tossing broad public hints that a sale was one of the options being considered by the family. A business broker had been putting out feelers to other banks about their possible interest in First Independent.Those close to the family say the sale would have been unimaginable during E.W. Firstenburg’s lifetime. He purchased the Ridgefield State Bank in 1936 and turned in into First Independent, and didn’t finally retire until 69 years later, in 2005. His died in 2010 at age 97.
First Independent’s sale raises questions about its purchaser’s philanthropic role. Sterling enjoys a strong reputation in Spokane for public involvement and civic contributions, and Clark County’s charities are hoping the bank will continue the strong traditions of First Independent and the Firstenburg family.
“We’re obviously in kind of wait-and-see mode,” said Richard Melching, president of the Community Foundation of Southwest Washington, an organization that the late E.W. Firstenburg, the family scion, helped launch in 1984. “Any time you change the status quo, it’s bound to raise some questions. All the right things have been said.”
Certainly, Sterling’s decision to retain Jeanne Firstenburg in a top position was in part a recognition of the strong bonds between the family and Clark County’s civic leadership.
Bank officials say the job description is still under discussion, but Sterling took a similar approach when it purchased Sonoma Bank in Northern California in 2007 and hired its president to serve as a market president for that region. Said Seibly: “We will be very active and engaged in Vancouver.”
Both Seibly and Jeanne Firstenburg say that the two banks share a community-oriented focus that should appeal to First Independent customers. But Sterling is vastly larger, with $9.18 billion in assets and 177 depository branches in five states, to First Independent’s $792 million in assets and 14 branches in Oregon and Washington. In Clark County, where First Independent is second in deposits only to JP Morgan Chase, Sterling will move immediately to a dominant market position — if it holds onto most of its customers.
Riverview Community Bank, the county’s last locally owned bank, is marketing aggressively for First Independent customers, as are newly resurgent credit unions feeding off anti-Wall Street sentiment.
Kim Capeloto, Riverview’s executive vice president for marketing and operations, said Riverview welcomes the competition from Sterling.
“Having said that, we are headquartered and located in Vancouver, Washington, and as a result, money deposited by our clients stays local,” he said. “Your money stays local, helping your neighbors.”
Seibly defines “local” more broadly. “Vancouver and Spokane are located in the same state,” he said. “This isn’t as if an institution from New York is coming in.
“What Vancouver needs is strong financial institutions. Washington needs strong financial institutions.”
Just a few years back, “strong” was not a word many would have associated with Sterling. Seibly, who joined Sterling in 2007, became CEO of Sterling Financial Corporation during an October 2009 management shake-up. Sterling had accepted the government’s TARP money in December 2008, but it was still bleeding cash. It’s losses for 2009 reached $855 million, with most of that coming in the year’s last two quarters.
The bank missed a December 2009 deadline set by federal and state regulators to raise $300 million in new capital. But then the pieces started falling into place. By the following August, Sterling had secured the required $725 million in private financing, including $171 million each from the Thomas H. Lee Partners and Warburg Pincus Private Equity X investment firms. Those investments took the form of stock purchased at 20 cents per share, well below the sale price at that time. With those stock investments, each firm secured 22.6 percent ownership in the bank.
Before long, Sterling faced another critical deadline. If its stock didn’t climb to more than $1 per share by Dec. 7, 2010, it would be de-listed on Wall Street. For investors, the 1-for-66 reverse stock split Nov. 18, 2010, drove up the value of a single share while drastically reducing the number of shares an investor owned. Sterling’s shares have climbed steadily since the split. The two equity firms each now own 24.9 percent of stock, the maximum allowed without additional regulatory hurdles.
Hayes, of D.A. Davidson, said Sterling is positioning itself well for competing against both regional and national banks once the economy finally improves.
“When the market turns, there are going to be a lot of people competing for the same acquisitions and same customers, he said. “They’ll tell you they’re competing against the big banks, but as they get larger they’ll be competing against each other as well.”
Ashley Swanson provided research for this story.
Rate this
You must be logged in to rate this.Current Rating : Nobody has rated this article yet.
PLUS to issue RM30.6b sukuk
Proceeds from the sukuk issuance will go to part-finance the purchase of assets, liabilities, businesses, undertakings and rights of the five toll concessions
Projek Lebuhraya Usahasama Bhd (PLUS) is set to issue RM30.6 billion sukuk – the world’s largest and Malaysia’s single largest bond issuance to date.
Scheduled for January 12, the issuance follows the privatisation
and restructuring of toll concessions under PLUS Expressways Bhd, including the Penang Bridge.
The concession agreements of these highways will be novated
to PLUS, a wholly-owned unit of PLUS Malaysia Sdn Bhd.
The latter is the investment vehicle of UEM Group Bhd and
the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) board on a 51:49 basis.
Proceeds from the sukuk issuance will go to part-finance the purchase of assets, liabilities, businesses, undertakings and rights of the five toll concessions – Projek Lebuhraya Utara-
Selatan Bhd, Expressway Lingkaran Tengah Sdn Kulim Sdn Bhd, Linkedua (Malaysia) Bhd and Penang Bridge Sdn Bhd.
It will also be used to fund capital expenditure, working capital and other general funding requirements. It is noteworthy that PLUS had raised the long-term financing via the establishment of up to RM34.35 billion nominal value Islamic
Medium Term Notes Programmes within a short time despite the size of the issuance.
The sukuk is due to be repaid between five and 27 years and the weighted average yield is around 5.0 per cent.M alaysian Rating Corp Bhd accorded the highest long-term rating of AAA to the
sukuk, reflecting the strong credit strength of PLUS and
its importance to the government.
UEM Group managing director and chief executive officer Datuk Izzaddin Idris and EPF deputy chief executive officer (Investment) Datuk Shahril Ridza Ridzuan sealed the deal
here on Friday.
CIMB Investment Bank Bhd was appointed the financial adviser, sole principal adviser, sole lead arranger and joint lead manager.
The other joint lead managers were AmInvestment Bank Bhd chief executive officer Kok Tuck Cheong, Maybank Group president and chief executive officer Datuk Seri Abdul Wahid Omar and RHB Investment Bank officer-in-charge Mike Chan.
“The successful issuance indicates investors’ confidence in PLUS’ operations and assets,” Izzaddin said.
Shahril said, “We are confident our investment in PLUS will provide a long-term and stable source of income that fits EPF’s risk-return criteria. This investment is part of our overall strategic allocation of assets into low volatility sectors.”
Meanwhile, CIMB Investment Bank group CEO Datuk Seri Nazir Razak said at RM23 billion, PLUS Expressways delisting was the largest privatisation exercise in 2011 and the second largest ever in Malaysia
http://tourism9.com/
Projek Lebuhraya Usahasama Bhd (PLUS) is set to issue RM30.6 billion sukuk – the world’s largest and Malaysia’s single largest bond issuance to date.
Scheduled for January 12, the issuance follows the privatisation
and restructuring of toll concessions under PLUS Expressways Bhd, including the Penang Bridge.
The concession agreements of these highways will be novated
to PLUS, a wholly-owned unit of PLUS Malaysia Sdn Bhd.
The latter is the investment vehicle of UEM Group Bhd and
the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) board on a 51:49 basis.
Proceeds from the sukuk issuance will go to part-finance the purchase of assets, liabilities, businesses, undertakings and rights of the five toll concessions – Projek Lebuhraya Utara-
Selatan Bhd, Expressway Lingkaran Tengah Sdn Kulim Sdn Bhd, Linkedua (Malaysia) Bhd and Penang Bridge Sdn Bhd.
It will also be used to fund capital expenditure, working capital and other general funding requirements. It is noteworthy that PLUS had raised the long-term financing via the establishment of up to RM34.35 billion nominal value Islamic
Medium Term Notes Programmes within a short time despite the size of the issuance.
The sukuk is due to be repaid between five and 27 years and the weighted average yield is around 5.0 per cent.M alaysian Rating Corp Bhd accorded the highest long-term rating of AAA to the
sukuk, reflecting the strong credit strength of PLUS and
its importance to the government.
UEM Group managing director and chief executive officer Datuk Izzaddin Idris and EPF deputy chief executive officer (Investment) Datuk Shahril Ridza Ridzuan sealed the deal
here on Friday.
CIMB Investment Bank Bhd was appointed the financial adviser, sole principal adviser, sole lead arranger and joint lead manager.
The other joint lead managers were AmInvestment Bank Bhd chief executive officer Kok Tuck Cheong, Maybank Group president and chief executive officer Datuk Seri Abdul Wahid Omar and RHB Investment Bank officer-in-charge Mike Chan.
“The successful issuance indicates investors’ confidence in PLUS’ operations and assets,” Izzaddin said.
Shahril said, “We are confident our investment in PLUS will provide a long-term and stable source of income that fits EPF’s risk-return criteria. This investment is part of our overall strategic allocation of assets into low volatility sectors.”
Meanwhile, CIMB Investment Bank group CEO Datuk Seri Nazir Razak said at RM23 billion, PLUS Expressways delisting was the largest privatisation exercise in 2011 and the second largest ever in Malaysia
http://tourism9.com/
2012年1月2日星期一
Phillippine external debts on the rise
Manila (Philippine Daily Inquirer/ANN) – The Philippines’ outstanding debts to foreign creditors rose as of the end of September as both the government and corporate entities continued to tap the external markets for financing.
Data from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP or Central Bank of the Philippines) showed that the country’s outstanding external debt amounted to US$62.4 billion by the end of the third quarter, up by 4.4 percent from $59.7 billion as of the same period in 2010.
The BSP said in a report that the increase was due to the fact that fresh loans tapped offshore exceeded the liabilities that were paid.
On a quarter-on-quarter basis, the latest amount of external debt was up by 1.6 percent from $61.4 billion.
Despite the increase in the absolute amount of liabilities, the BSP said the Philippines was able to improve on its capability to meet its obligations.
This is because the country’s resources grew faster than its liabilities.
For instance, the BSP said, the country’s external debt-to-GDP (gross domestic product) ratio improved to 28.4 percent by the end of September from 31.3 percent in the same period in 2010.
Moreover, the proportion of the external debt to the country’s export revenues and remittances likewise fell to 8.3 percent from 8.8 percent over the same period.
“Major external debt indicators remained at comfortable levels,” BSP Governor Amando Tetangco Jr. said in a statement.
He said the improving debt ratios of the Philippines should send a positive signal about the country’s improving credit-worthiness.
The Philippines, which is rated one to two notches below investment grade by major ratings agencies, is hoping for another rating upgrade in 2012.
Early this year, the Philippines enjoyed an upgrade of its credit rating by Moody’s from three to two notches below investment grade. Fitch raised the country’s rating from two to one notch below investment grade.
The BSP also cited the country’s growing reserves of foreign exchange, which it said further indicated its ability to service its obligations to foreign creditors.
The gross international reserves stood at $75.2 billion by end-September, which was 7.3 times the country’s foreign debts maturing within the short term.
The BSP said the country’s foreign exchange reserves have been more comfortable than the minimum indicated by international benchmark. According to this benchmark, reserves are comfortable if these are equal to its debts maturing within the short term.
Data from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP or Central Bank of the Philippines) showed that the country’s outstanding external debt amounted to US$62.4 billion by the end of the third quarter, up by 4.4 percent from $59.7 billion as of the same period in 2010.
The BSP said in a report that the increase was due to the fact that fresh loans tapped offshore exceeded the liabilities that were paid.
On a quarter-on-quarter basis, the latest amount of external debt was up by 1.6 percent from $61.4 billion.
Despite the increase in the absolute amount of liabilities, the BSP said the Philippines was able to improve on its capability to meet its obligations.
This is because the country’s resources grew faster than its liabilities.
For instance, the BSP said, the country’s external debt-to-GDP (gross domestic product) ratio improved to 28.4 percent by the end of September from 31.3 percent in the same period in 2010.
Moreover, the proportion of the external debt to the country’s export revenues and remittances likewise fell to 8.3 percent from 8.8 percent over the same period.
“Major external debt indicators remained at comfortable levels,” BSP Governor Amando Tetangco Jr. said in a statement.
He said the improving debt ratios of the Philippines should send a positive signal about the country’s improving credit-worthiness.
The Philippines, which is rated one to two notches below investment grade by major ratings agencies, is hoping for another rating upgrade in 2012.
Early this year, the Philippines enjoyed an upgrade of its credit rating by Moody’s from three to two notches below investment grade. Fitch raised the country’s rating from two to one notch below investment grade.
The BSP also cited the country’s growing reserves of foreign exchange, which it said further indicated its ability to service its obligations to foreign creditors.
The gross international reserves stood at $75.2 billion by end-September, which was 7.3 times the country’s foreign debts maturing within the short term.
The BSP said the country’s foreign exchange reserves have been more comfortable than the minimum indicated by international benchmark. According to this benchmark, reserves are comfortable if these are equal to its debts maturing within the short term.
14 years on, Indonesia back on its feet
Indonesia finally regained an investment grade credit rating from Fitch Ratings, 14 years after losing the status following the country’s worst-ever financial crisis in 1997.
Fitch raised Indonesia’s sovereign rating for long-term foreign and local currency debts to BBB- from BB+, with a stable outlook.
“The upgrades reflect the country’s strong and resilient economic growth, low and declining public debt ratios, strengthened external liquidity and a prudent overall macro policy framework,” said Philip McNicholas, director of Fitch’s Asia-Pacific Sovereign Ratings group.
The BBB- rating is considered an investment grade indicating the country’s low risk for investment. The government is expecting other international rating agencies to follow suit.
Moody’s Investors Service upgraded Indonesia’s rating in January to Ba1, while in April, Standard & Poor’s raised the country’s rating to BB+, with a positive outlook. Both ratings are one level below investment grade.
Indonesia lost the investment grade rating in December 1997, during the Asian financial crisis, which severely hit the country’s financial sector.
Fitch projects GDP growth to average more than 6 per cent per annum over the forecast period (until 2013), despite a less conducive global economic backdrop. Indonesia’s domestically oriented economy and success in delivering relatively strong economic growth without the creation of external imbalances, or a reliance on short-term external financing suggests economic growth prospects should prove resilient to external shocks, as was the case in 2008. Low public debt and positive real interest rates give the authorities policy flexibility to respond to any slowdown.
BI deputy governor Hartadi Sarwono said the upgrade would ensure better economic prospects for Southeast Asia’s largest economy as it minimized investment risks and reduced borrowing costs to support Indonesia’s economic financing.
“An upgrade amid the worsening global economy shows lowering risks for investment, making [Indonesia] more attractive for capital inflows,” Hartadi said in a mobile phone text message.
Rahmat Waluyanto, the director general of the Finance Ministry’s debt management office, said with surging capital inflows, including foreign direct investment (FDI), financing for infrastructure development would be more plentiful.
“Economic growth will accelerate further,” he said.
Finance Minister Agus Martowardojo said the rating upgrade confirmed the market’s positive perception of Indonesia’s debts. He said that without the new rating, Indonesia’s government bond market had been treated as an investment grade-rated nation with lower yields or interest rates compared to investment grade nations.
Fauzi Ichsan, a senior economist at Standard Chartered Bank Indonesia, said the “rating agencies caught up with the bond market”, which had priced sub-investment grade Indonesian and Philippine bonds higher than Italian and Spanish bonds, for example.
The Indonesian government last month collected US$1 billion for seven-year US dollar-denominated Islamic bonds (sukuk) with a yield of 4 per cent, beating out investment grade-rated Italy’s five-year bonds at 6.29 per cent.
Fitch said long-standing structural weaknesses that needed to be resolved were poor physical infrastructure and corruption, which affected the business climate, as well as the low average income of S$3,600 versus the $9,800 average for investment grade nations.
Anggun C. Sasmi says she is “ecstatic” to represent France in the 2012 Eurovision Song Contest.
“The show will be broadcast to millions of people across Europe,” the Indonesian-born singer said.”It’s a great honor.”
Although a French citizen since 2000, she still feels she has a foot in both nations, telling French newspaper Le Parisien that, “I eat as much rice as I do cheese”.
“I miss Indonesia a lot,” Anggun, 37, told The Jakarta Post on Thursday. “The optimism, the generosity, the real sense of the word “family”. I miss the kindness, real kindness. Of course, life is not easy in any part of the world, but in Indonesia you don’t have to fight the wrong fight with the wrong people to obtain something you don’t even want.”
The birth of daughter Kirana, 4, with her French husband Cyril Montana and her role as a UN Goodwill Ambassador in the campaign to end hunger have given her new roles.
“Music gives me balance and identity, but my commitment to the world makes me happy.”
After 17 years abroad, she is considering a return to live in Asia one day. “Now that Kirana goes to school I tend
to get a bit worried about all the bad influences that she can get,” she said.
“I believe life in Asia is much easier because of the amount of kind people around. So, I’ll see about us relocating to Asia, probably Bali.”
http://tourism9.com/
Fitch raised Indonesia’s sovereign rating for long-term foreign and local currency debts to BBB- from BB+, with a stable outlook.
“The upgrades reflect the country’s strong and resilient economic growth, low and declining public debt ratios, strengthened external liquidity and a prudent overall macro policy framework,” said Philip McNicholas, director of Fitch’s Asia-Pacific Sovereign Ratings group.
The BBB- rating is considered an investment grade indicating the country’s low risk for investment. The government is expecting other international rating agencies to follow suit.
Moody’s Investors Service upgraded Indonesia’s rating in January to Ba1, while in April, Standard & Poor’s raised the country’s rating to BB+, with a positive outlook. Both ratings are one level below investment grade.
Indonesia lost the investment grade rating in December 1997, during the Asian financial crisis, which severely hit the country’s financial sector.
Fitch projects GDP growth to average more than 6 per cent per annum over the forecast period (until 2013), despite a less conducive global economic backdrop. Indonesia’s domestically oriented economy and success in delivering relatively strong economic growth without the creation of external imbalances, or a reliance on short-term external financing suggests economic growth prospects should prove resilient to external shocks, as was the case in 2008. Low public debt and positive real interest rates give the authorities policy flexibility to respond to any slowdown.
BI deputy governor Hartadi Sarwono said the upgrade would ensure better economic prospects for Southeast Asia’s largest economy as it minimized investment risks and reduced borrowing costs to support Indonesia’s economic financing.
“An upgrade amid the worsening global economy shows lowering risks for investment, making [Indonesia] more attractive for capital inflows,” Hartadi said in a mobile phone text message.
Rahmat Waluyanto, the director general of the Finance Ministry’s debt management office, said with surging capital inflows, including foreign direct investment (FDI), financing for infrastructure development would be more plentiful.
“Economic growth will accelerate further,” he said.
Finance Minister Agus Martowardojo said the rating upgrade confirmed the market’s positive perception of Indonesia’s debts. He said that without the new rating, Indonesia’s government bond market had been treated as an investment grade-rated nation with lower yields or interest rates compared to investment grade nations.
Fauzi Ichsan, a senior economist at Standard Chartered Bank Indonesia, said the “rating agencies caught up with the bond market”, which had priced sub-investment grade Indonesian and Philippine bonds higher than Italian and Spanish bonds, for example.
The Indonesian government last month collected US$1 billion for seven-year US dollar-denominated Islamic bonds (sukuk) with a yield of 4 per cent, beating out investment grade-rated Italy’s five-year bonds at 6.29 per cent.
Fitch said long-standing structural weaknesses that needed to be resolved were poor physical infrastructure and corruption, which affected the business climate, as well as the low average income of S$3,600 versus the $9,800 average for investment grade nations.
Anggun C. Sasmi says she is “ecstatic” to represent France in the 2012 Eurovision Song Contest.
“The show will be broadcast to millions of people across Europe,” the Indonesian-born singer said.”It’s a great honor.”
Although a French citizen since 2000, she still feels she has a foot in both nations, telling French newspaper Le Parisien that, “I eat as much rice as I do cheese”.
“I miss Indonesia a lot,” Anggun, 37, told The Jakarta Post on Thursday. “The optimism, the generosity, the real sense of the word “family”. I miss the kindness, real kindness. Of course, life is not easy in any part of the world, but in Indonesia you don’t have to fight the wrong fight with the wrong people to obtain something you don’t even want.”
The birth of daughter Kirana, 4, with her French husband Cyril Montana and her role as a UN Goodwill Ambassador in the campaign to end hunger have given her new roles.
“Music gives me balance and identity, but my commitment to the world makes me happy.”
After 17 years abroad, she is considering a return to live in Asia one day. “Now that Kirana goes to school I tend
to get a bit worried about all the bad influences that she can get,” she said.
“I believe life in Asia is much easier because of the amount of kind people around. So, I’ll see about us relocating to Asia, probably Bali.”
http://tourism9.com/
订阅：
博文 (Atom)