IBJNews

Conseco shares fall on weak profit forecast

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Conseco Inc. hopes that an amendment to its bank loans announced today helps it fetch a higher price in an upcoming public offering of stock.

But the company’s 2010 profit forecast, also announced today, is sending its shares in the opposite direction.

The Carmel-based life and health insurer expects profit next year in a range of $145 million to $170 million, or 55 cents to 65 cents per diluted share.

Those totals, which exclude investment gains or losses, are far lower than the 86 cents per share expected by Wall Street analysts, according to a survey by Thomson Financial Network.

The news sent shares of Conseco tumbling Tuesday morning as much as 7 percent to as low as $4.80 apiece.

Conseco plans to sell at least $200 million in new shares by mid-January.

Since Conseco’s investment assets plunged in value a year ago, investors have been concerned that the company is operating with slim margins on the terms of its bank loans.

To alleviate those concerns, the company is now negotiating for looser restrictions on its bank loans, which total $817.8 million.

For example, Conseco’s current loan agreement requires it to have at least $1.27 billion by June 30 in reserves at its insurance company units, something called statutory capital and surplus. But Conseco wants its lenders to step up those requirements gradually, from $1.1 billion now to $1.2 billion in 2011 and $1.3 billion in 2012.

Conseco is asking for similar breathing room on the amount of total capital it must have beyond the levels required by insurance regulators, as well as the amount of its earnings compared with the size of its interest payments.

In exchange, Conseco has agreed to pay $150 million of the proceeds of its stock offering toward its bank loans. If Conseco sells more than $200 million in stock, it will pay its lenders 50 cents of every dollar above $200 million.

Those payments would excuse Conseco from making its normally scheduled principal payments in 2010. But Conseco also would begin paying about $8 million a year in interest that it had been deferring until the end of the life of its loans.

In order to make these changes, Conseco would incur $2.3 million in fees.

It is the second time this year that Conseco has amended its bank loans. In March, when the company was facing a cash crisis, it agreed to make higher interest payments in exchange for looser requirements for its capital reserves.

The new agreement, if approved, would maintain those higher interest payments, which are costing the company $45 million a year.

But since March, Conseco has received a $78 million investment by a New York hedge fund, Paulson & Co., and has refinanced some of its bonds, making its capital position much more secure.

Tom Barta, Conseco’s senior vice president of financial planning and analysis, said Conseco does not mind paying down its debt and said the looser loan restrictions—also called covenants—should reassure investors.

“The market has always kind of undervalued our stock because of how tight everybody thought we were with our covenants,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Good ole' Obamacare. Thanks liberals and those who didn't bother to vote.

  2. Yes. Blame those who were too lazy to go vote Obama out and those who voted him in again. That's my take on it. I know folks won't get it on the left. OK. Start berating me now!

  3. Serioulsy, people are AGINST this project? Most communities would be salivating over a project like this. You'd rather have an empty eye-sore gas station and shacks posing as apartments? This project is exactly what BR needs. BUILD IT MR MAYOR. And yes, I am a BR resident, and have been for 20 years.

  4. As a St. Vincent employee of over 20 years, I am saddened and disheartened by this announcement. Unfortunately, as the healthcare "industry" continues on this political and corporate path, all that St. Vincent Hospital has stood for spiritually for its employees and this community is being sucked dry. I know it truly has no choice. It is not just Obamacare or just competition or just any single thing. This trend started long before I was even born when the government became involved in healthcare and it became an "industry." I grieve for those who will lose their jobs, one of whom may be me, but I also grieve for this hospital which I have served for over 20 years. May God give us and it the grace to withstand the future of healthcare.

  5. Why do people constantly harp on this issue and act ignorant about what a city population measures? A city's population is the city's population. There is no argument or debate about it. If you want to measure the density of a city--measure it. If you want to measure the size of a metropolitan area, then measure the metropolitan population. City boundaries cover different sized areas--and they always have (though the disparity has probably increased since about 1900 or so when more cities began annexing their surrounding communities). For example, San Francisco only covers 49 square miles while Houston cover nearly 600 square miles. No one argues about the population rankings of either city even though they clearly cover extremely different sized areas. Indianapolis is the 13 largest city by population in the U.S. That is a fact. While the population of a metropolitan area may give you a better sense of how large a community is, as noted, even metro areas can vary widely in the size of geographic area they cover--so that is not a perfect comparison either.

ADVERTISEMENT