OnPoint saw profit cut in half in 2010
Our quarterly look at the financials of OnPoint Community Credit Union, designed to give us a picture of the state of the Portland-area economy, reveals a tough year in 2010 but a stable fourth quarter.
OnPoint's net income for 2010 was $13,871,613, down 51.19% from $28,419,382 in 2009. Operating expenses jumped from $56,459,380 in 2009 to $75,317,579 in 2010 -- a 33.4% increase. This included a 77.13% increase ($2,743,397) in premiums and expenses relating to the nationwide insurance system that backs up credit unions, including rescuing weak ones. Another part of OnPoint's decreased profit was the $22,514,914 in loans it wrote off in 2010, compared with $19,378,445 in 2009 -- a 16.19% increase.
Here are the balance sheet numbers, as recently filed with the National Credit Union Administration:
| Item | 12/31/09 | 9/30/10 | 12/31/10 | Quarterly increase (decrease) | 12-month increase (decrease) |
| Total investments | $432,665,342 | $625,128,631 | $625,611,273 | 0.08% | 44.59% |
| Federal agency securities | $285,152,450 | $505,421,759 | $517,311,741 | 2.35% | 81.42% |
| Total reportable delinquency - total delinquent loans | $22,551,519 | $29,353,063 | $28,623,943 | (2.48%) | 26.93% |
| Total reportable delinquency - indirect lending | $4,449,517 | $3,055,264 | $2,522,542 | (17.44%) | (43.31%) |
| Total outstanding loan balances subject to bankruptcies | $29,565,449 | $25,828,172 | $18,544,050 | (28.2%) | (37.28%) |
| Ratio of delinquent loans to total loans (percent) | 1.06 | 1.46 | 1.45 | ||
| Ratio of total delinquent loans to net worth (percent) | 8.73 | 11.04 | 10.52 |
Delinquent loans are those delinquent for two months or more.
In the fourth quarter of 2010, deposits decreased from $2,488,675,931 to $2,473,555,611 -- a 0.61% decrease and a second consecutive down quarter. Deposits at the end of 2009 were $2,381,752,154, and thus for the year 2010, deposits were up 3.85%.
That brings us to our comparison of some of OnPoint's financial data with that of three other Oregon-based credit unions: Unitus here in Portland, First Tech in Beaverton, and Oregon Community down in Eugene.
One number that we've been tracking for the group has been the ratio of delinquent loans (two months or more) to total loans -- the higher the number, the worse the portfolio from a delinquency standpoint. Here are the percentages for all four credit unions in that department at three recent reporting dates:
| Credit union | 12/31/09 | 9/30/10 | 12/31/10 |
| First Tech | 1.09 | 1.25 | 1.06 |
| OnPoint | 1.06 | 1.46 | 1.45 |
| Oregon Community | 1.51 | 0.66 | 0.73 |
| Unitus | 1.33 | 0.89 | 0.76 |
Another ratio that we've been watching is delinquent loans to net worth. Here are the percentages for the group on that score:
| Credit Union | 12/31/09 | 9/30/10 | 12/31/10 |
| First Tech | 6.63 | 7.38 | 6.92 |
| OnPoint | 8.73 | 11.04 | 10.52 |
| Oregon Community | 16.91 | 7.44 | 8.09 |
| Unitus | 9.41 | 5.81 | 4.95 |
Finally, here are the 2010 net income (loss) figures for the group, worth noting for the trends. All four credit unions took insurance charges in 2010, which are reflected in these numbers:
| Credit Union | 2009 | 2010 |
| First Tech | $23,354,779 | $7,501,420 |
| OnPoint | $28,419,382 | $13,871,613 |
| Oregon Community | ($78,980) | $6,454,062 |
| Unitus | ($4,074,553) | $3,325,564 |
It's interesting that First Tech had a saggy year, just as its proposed merger into Addison Avenue Credit Union in Palo Alto was being approved. It will be interesting to see how the combined companies perform going forward, although it will doubtlessly be difficult to make a meaningful comparison to past performance for a while. Meanwhile, little Oregon Community and Unitus bounced back strongly from bad 2009's, whereas OnPoint declined.
| Posted at 10:41 AM | Permalink |
|
Comments (4)
Jack, looking at your back-up spreadsheet, the OnPoint #s illustrate what’s been going on at many financial institutions. Deposits grew last year by $92 million, but loans decreased by $153 million, with the difference being soaked up by the significant growth in Federal Agency Securities (which I assume means Fannie/Freddie).
Loan balances haven’t been growing or have been growing slowly in the productive economy. Instead of leveraging consumers and business there’s been a carry trade from depositors (getting zero or close to zero nominal returns) into the mortgage backed security market (Fannie/Freddie, with yields up to 4 percent) with financial intermediaries pocketing the difference. That’s helped bank/financial institution earnings, and helped stabilize housing markets by keeping mortgage interest rates low, but has done so at the expense of depositors who are getting negative real returns on their savings. Such is the impact of accommodative monetary policy.
Posted by Newleaf | February 15, 2011 7:32 AM
Meanwhile, over in the Too Big to Prosecute (TBTP) segment of the financial community, JPM's Jamie Dimon is burdened by too much cash:
"'I’m worried about how much capital is going to build up in the system in the U.S.,' Dimon said. 'In 12 months we’re looking at a lot of capital we can’t use. That may make people do stupid things.'"
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/jp-morgans-dimon-worried-about-too-much-capital-2011-02-15?siteid=yhoof
Writing in the 6Nov09 Seattle Times, Kristi Heim mentioned one of the "stupid things" -- in Mr Dimon's estimation -- in the Seattle area:
"In the current jobless recovery, people are running out of unemployment benefits before they find job openings. Some may look to starting a small business of their own, but who would loan them money without a track record? Certainly not banks.
For such local entrepreneurs, the answer has been non-profits like Community Capital Development. CCD has provided $26 million to more than 1,000 previously "unbankable" local businesses, including Plum Bistro, Bedrock Industries and Utilikilts.
Another blow was losing Washington Mutual, which was one of CCD's top lenders. The new owner, JPMorgan Chase, does not lend to CCD."
Newleaf has described one reason JPM's Dimon has too much capital. There are others.
For example, Mr Dimon apologized today for JPM's illegal mortgage charges and foreclosures against veterans. No promise not to do it again. And no indication that AG Eric Holder, a Wall St instrument prior to his appointment, will bring criminal charges against anyone at JPM.
Posted by Gardiner Menefree | February 15, 2011 8:34 PM
Yes, new business and small business are job generators, but CCD's loan criteria are as follows:
What is your Loan Criteria?
We make our investment decisions based on the following "5 C's of Financing."
Character - The owner's business character as reflected on a personal credit report.
Capacity - The owner's ability to be successful with the business. Proven by a pristine business plan, thought-out business model, experience in the industry, and solid financial statements.
Capital - The owner's contribution of at least 20% of the requested financing amount.
Collateral - Acceptable collateral to back the loan in case of default.
Cash Flow - The businesses ability to pay its owner, employees, service the debt, while leaving sufficient operating cash.
I would guess that not one in a thousand individuals could satisfy the criteria when at the tail end of the unemployment benefit stream.
The answers to spurring small business growth and creating demand for productive capital lie in removing regulatory barriers and eliminating government mandates.
Posted by Newleaf | February 16, 2011 7:43 AM
Newleaf, could you be more specific about the "regulatory barriers" you would like removed and the "government mandates" you think should be eliminated "to [spur] small business growth and [create] demand for productive capital?"
Just yesterday, as reported in the NYTimes:
"Republican lawmakers implored financial regulators on Wednesday to exempt airlines, manufacturers and thousands of other nonfinancial companies from new rules governing derivatives trading, warning that jobs and corporate profits were at risk."
Some find such calls for deregulation dangerous and hypocritical; for example, again from the NYT:
"Representative Stephen Lynch, Democrat of Massachusetts, warned: 'You think regulation is costly? How about the $7 trillion we just lost from not regulating the derivatives markets?'"
Posted by Gardiner Menefree | February 16, 2011 2:22 PM