Dailystocks.com - Ticker-based level links to all the information for the Stocks you own. Portal for Daytrading and Finance and Investing Web Sites
DailyStocks.com
What's New
Site Map
Help
FAQ
Log In
Home Quotes/Data/Chart Warren Buffett Fund Letters Ticker-based Links Education/Tips Insider Buying Index Quotes Forums Finance Site Directory
OTCBB Investors Daily Glossary News/Edtrl Company Overviews PowerRatings China Stocks Buy/Sell Indicators Company Profiles About Us
Nanotech List Videos Magic Formula Value Investing Daytrading/TA Analysis Activist Stocks Wi-fi List FOREX Quote ETF Quotes Commodities
Make DailyStocks Your Home Page AAII Ranked this System #1 Since 1998 Bookmark and Share


Welcome!
Welcome to the investing community at DailyStocks where we believe we have some of the most intelligent investors around. While we have had an online presence since 1997 as a portal, we are just beginning the forums section now. Our moderators are serious investors with MBA and CFAs with practical experience wwell-versed in fundamental, value, or technical investing. We look forward to your contribution to this community.

Recent Topics
Article by DailyStocks_admin    (02-26-13 02:47 AM)

Description

Filed with the SEC from Feb 14 to Feb 20:

BankFinancial (BFIN)
PL Capital disclosed it owns 1,164,241 shares (5.5%) after it bought 529,595 from Dec. 10 through Feb. 6 at prices in a range from $6.96 to $7.25 each. PL also disclosed selling 44,000 on Feb. 6 at $7.25 apiece. In its filing, PL called the shares "undervalued" and said it plans to "where needed…assert PL Capital Group's stockholder rights," though it didn't disclose any specific plans or proposals.
BUSINESS OVERVIEW

BankFinancial Corporation
BankFinancial Corporation, a Maryland corporation headquartered in Burr Ridge, Illinois (the “Company”), became the owner of all of the issued and outstanding capital stock of BankFinancial, F.S.B. (the “Bank”) on June 23, 2005, when we consummated a plan of conversion and reorganization that the Bank and its predecessor holding companies, BankFinancial MHC, Inc. and BankFinancial Corporation, a federal corporation, adopted on August 25, 2004. BankFinancial Corporation, the Maryland corporation, was organized in 2004 to facilitate the mutual-to-stock conversion and to become the holding company for the Bank upon its completion.

As part of the mutual-to-stock conversion, BankFinancial Corporation, the Maryland corporation, sold 24,466,250 shares of common stock in a subscription offering for $10.00 per share. The separate corporate existences of BankFinancial MHC and BankFinancial Corporation, the federal corporation, ceased upon the completion of the mutual-to-stock conversion. For a further discussion of the mutual-to-stock conversion, see our Prospectus as filed on April 29, 2005 with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3) of the Rules and Regulations of the Securities Act of 1933 (File Number 333-119217).
We manage our operations as one unit, and thus do not have separate operating segments. Our chief operating decision-makers use consolidated results to make operating and strategic decisions.
BankFinancial, F.S.B.
The Bank is a full-service, community-oriented federal savings bank principally engaged in the business of commercial, family and personal banking, and offers our customers a broad range of loan, deposit, and other financial products and services through 20 full-service banking offices located in Cook, DuPage, Lake and Will Counties, Illinois, and through our Internet Branch, www.bankfinancial.com.
The Bank’s primary business is making loans and accepting deposits. The Bank also offers our customers a variety of financial products and services that are related or ancillary to loans and deposits, including cash management, funds transfers, bill payment and other online banking transactions, automated teller machines, safe deposit boxes, wealth management, and general insurance agency services.
The Bank’s primary lending area consists of the counties where our branch offices are located, and contiguous counties in the State of Illinois. We derive the most significant portion of our revenues from these geographic areas. Through our Wholesale Commercial Lending and National Commercial Leasing Departments, we also engage in multi-family lending activities in selected metropolitan areas outside our primary lending area and in commercial leasing activities on a nationwide basis.
We originate deposits predominantly from the areas where our branch offices are located. We rely on our favorable locations, customer service, competitive pricing, our Internet Branch and related deposit services such as cash management to attract and retain these deposits. While we accept certificates of deposit in excess of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) deposit insurance limits, we generally do not solicit such deposits because they are more difficult to retain than core deposits and at times are more costly than wholesale deposits.
Lending Activities
Our loan portfolio consists primarily of investment and business loans (multi-family, nonresidential real estate, commercial, construction and land loans, and commercial leases), which represented 78.2% of our total loan portfolio of $1.227 billion at December 31, 2011. At December 31, 2011, $423.6 million, or 33.7%, of our total loan portfolio consisted of multi-family mortgage loans; $311.6 million, or 24.8%, of our total loan portfolio consisted of nonresidential real estate loans; $93.9 million, or 7.5%, of our total loan portfolio consisted of commercial loans; $135.0 million, or 10.7%, of our total loan portfolio consisted of commercial leases; and $19.9 million, or 1.6%, of our total loan portfolio consisted of construction and land loans. $272.0 million, or 21.6%, of our total loan portfolio consisted of one-to-four family residential mortgage loans (of which $80.6 million, or 6.4%, were loans to investors in non-owner occupied single-family homes), including home equity loans and lines of credit.
Deposit Activities
Our deposit accounts consist principally of savings accounts, NOW accounts, checking accounts, money market accounts, certificates of deposit, and IRAs and other qualified plan accounts. We provide commercial checking accounts and related services such as cash management. We also provide low-cost checking account services. We rely on our favorable locations, customer service, competitive pricing, our Internet Branch and related deposit services such as cash management to attract and retain deposit accounts.
At December 31, 2011, our deposits totaled $1.333 billion. Interest-bearing deposits totaled $1.190 billion and noninterest-bearing demand deposits totaled $142.1 million, which included $6.7 million in internal checking accounts such as bank cashier’s checks and money orders. Savings, money market and NOW account deposits totaled $826.1 million, and certificates of deposit totaled $364.4 million, of which $264.8 million had maturities of one year or less.
Related Products and Services
The Bank’s Wealth Management Group provides investment, financial planning and other wealth management services to our customers through arrangements with a third-party broker-dealer. The Bank’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Financial Assurance Services, Inc. (“Financial Assurance”), sells life insurance, property and casualty insurance and other insurance products on an agency basis. During the year ended December 31, 2011, Financial Assurance reported net income of $75,000. At December 31, 2011, Financial Assurance had four full-time employees. The Bank’s other wholly-owned subsidiary, BF Asset Recovery Corporation, is in the business of holding title to and selling certain Bank-owned real estate acquired through formal collection action, and reported a loss of $5.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.
Website and Stockholder Information
The website for the Company and the Bank is www.bankfinancial.com. Information on this website does not constitute part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
The Company makes available, free of charge, its Annual Report on Form 10-K, its Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, its Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to such reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”), as soon as reasonably practicable after such forms are filed with or furnished to the SEC. Copies of these documents are available to stockholders at BankFinancial’s web site, www.bankfinancial.com , under Stockholder Information, and at the SEC’s web site, www.sec.gov.
Competition
We face significant competition in both originating loans and attracting deposits. The Chicago metropolitan area and some other areas in which we operate have a high concentration of financial institutions, many of which are significantly larger institutions that have greater financial resources than we have, and many of which are our competitors to varying degrees. Our competition for loans and leases comes principally from commercial banks, savings banks, mortgage banking companies, the U.S. Government, credit unions, leasing companies, insurance companies, real estate conduits and other companies that provide financial services to businesses and individuals. Our most direct competition for deposits has historically come from commercial banks, savings banks and credit unions. We face additional competition for deposits from online financial institutions and non-depository competitors such as the mutual fund industry, securities and brokerage firms and insurance companies.
We seek to meet this competition by emphasizing personalized service and efficient decision-making tailored to individual needs. In addition, we reward long-standing relationships with preferred rates and terms on deposit products based on existing and prospective lending business. We do not rely on any individual, group or entity for a material portion of our loans or our deposits.
Employees
At December 31, 2011, we had 338 full-time employees and 30 part-time employees. The employees are not represented by a collective bargaining unit and we consider our working relationship with our employees to be good.
Supervision and Regulation
General
As a federally chartered savings bank, the Bank is regulated and supervised primarily by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”). The Bank is also subject to regulation by the FDIC in more limited circumstances because the Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC. This regulatory and supervisory structure establishes a comprehensive framework of activities in which a financial institution may engage, and is intended primarily for the protection of the FDIC’s deposit insurance funds, depositors and the banking system. Under this system of federal regulation, financial institutions are periodically examined to ensure that they satisfy applicable standards with respect to their capital adequacy, assets, management, earnings, liquidity and sensitivity to market interest rates. After completing an examination, the OCC critiques the financial institution’s operations in a report of examination and assigns it a rating (known as an institution’s CAMELS rating). Under federal law and regulations, an institution may not disclose the contents of its safety and soundness examination report or its CAMELS rating to the public.
The Bank is a member of, and owns stock in, the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago (“FHLBC”), which is one of the 12 regional banks in the Federal Home Loan Bank System. The Bank also is regulated to a lesser extent by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“FRB”) with regard to reserves it must maintain against deposits and other matters. The OCC examines the Bank and prepares reports for the consideration of its Board of Directors on any identified operating deficiencies. The Bank’s relationship with its depositors and borrowers also is regulated in some respects by both federal and state laws, especially in matters concerning the ownership of deposit accounts, and the form and content of the Bank’s consumer loan documents.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”), which was signed by the President on July 21, 2010, provided for the transfer of the authority for regulating and supervising federal savings banks from the Office of Thrift Supervision (“OTS”), the Bank’s previous regulator, to the OCC. The Dodd-Frank Act also provided for the transfer of authority for regulating and supervising savings and loan holding companies and their non-depository subsidiaries from the OTS to the FRB. The transfers occurred on July 21, 2011. The Dodd-Frank Act also created a new federal agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), as an independent bureau of the FRB, to conduct rule-making, supervision, and enforcement of federal consumer financial protection and fair lending laws and regulations. The CFPB has examination and primary enforcement authority in connection with these laws and regulations for depository institutions with total assets of more than $10 billion. Depository institutions with $10 billion or less in total assets, such as the Bank, continue to be examined for compliance with these laws and regulations by their primary federal regulators, and remain subject to their enforcement authority.
The Dodd-Frank Act also broadened the base for FDIC assessments for deposit insurance, permanently increased the maximum amount of deposit insurance to $250,000 per depositor and provided non-interest bearing transaction accounts with unlimited deposit insurance through December 31, 2012. The Dodd-Frank Act increased shareholder influence over boards of directors by requiring companies to give shareholders a non-binding vote on executive compensation and so-called “golden parachute” payments. The legislation directed the FRB to promulgate rules prohibiting excessive compensation paid to company executives, regardless of whether or not the company is publicly traded. The Dodd-Frank Act also provided for originators of certain securitized loans to retain a percentage of the risk for transferred credits, directed the FRB to regulate pricing of certain debit card interchange fees, repealed restrictions on paying interest on checking accounts and contained a number of reforms related to mortgage origination.
There can be no assurance that laws, rules and regulations, and regulatory policies will not change in the future, which could make compliance more difficult or expensive or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects. Any change in these laws or regulations, or in regulatory policy, whether by the OCC, the FDIC, the FRB, the CFPB or Congress, could have a material adverse impact on the Company, the Bank and their respective operations. The following summary of laws and regulations applicable to the Bank and Company is not intended to be exhaustive and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the actual laws and regulations involved.
Federal Banking Regulation
Business Activities. As a federal savings bank, the Bank derives its lending and investment powers from the Home Owners’ Loan Act, as amended, and the regulations, pronouncements or guidance of the OCC. Under these laws and regulations, the Bank may invest in mortgage loans secured by residential and nonresidential real estate, commercial business and consumer loans, certain types of securities and certain other loans and assets. Specifically, the Bank may originate, invest in, sell, or purchase unlimited loans on the security of residential real estate, while loans on nonresidential real property generally may not, on a combined basis, exceed 400% of the Bank’s total capital. In addition, secured and unsecured commercial loans and certain types of commercial personal property leases may not exceed 20% of the Bank’s assets; however, amounts in excess of 10% of assets may only be used for small business loans. Further, the Bank may generally invest up to 35% of its assets in consumer loans, corporate debt securities and commercial paper on a combined basis, and up to the greater of its capital or 5% of its assets in unsecured construction loans. The Bank may invest up to 10% of its assets in tangible personal property, for rental or sale. Certain leases on tangible personal property are not aggregated with commercial or consumer loans for the purposes of determining compliance with the limitations set forth for those investment categories. The Bank also may establish subsidiaries that may engage in activities not otherwise permissible for the Bank directly, including real estate investment and insurance agency activities. A violation of the lending and investment limitations may be subject to the same enforcement mechanisms of the primary federal regulator as other violations of a law or regulation.
Capital Requirements. Federal regulations require federal savings banks to meet three minimum capital standards: a ratio of tangible capital to adjusted total assets of 1.5%; a ratio of Tier 1 (core) capital to adjusted total assets of 4.0% (3% for institutions receiving the highest rating on the CAMELS rating system); and a ratio of total capital to total risk-adjusted assets of 8.0%. The prompt corrective action standards discussed below, in effect, establish a minimum 2% tangible capital standard. The OCC is also authorized to establish individual minimum capital requirements for federal savings banks in excess of the above minimum capital standards.
The risk-based capital standard for federal savings banks requires the maintenance of Tier 1, or core capital, and total capital (which is defined as core capital and supplementary capital) to risk-weighted assets of at least 4% and 8%, respectively. In determining the amount of risk-weighted assets, all assets, including certain off-balance sheet assets, are multiplied by a risk-weight factor of 0% to 100%, assigned by the capital regulations based on the risks inherent in the type of asset. Core capital is defined as common stockholders’ equity (including retained earnings), certain noncumulative perpetual preferred stock and related surplus and minority interests in equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries, less intangibles other than certain mortgage servicing rights and credit card relationships. The components of supplementary capital currently include cumulative perpetual preferred stock, long-term preferred stock, mandatory convertible securities, subordinated debt and intermediate-term preferred stock, allowance for loan and lease losses up to a maximum of 1.25% of risk-weighted assets and up to 45% of net unrealized gains on available-for-sale equity securities with readily determinable fair market values. Overall, the amount of supplementary capital included as part of total capital cannot exceed 100% of core capital.
At December 31, 2011, the Bank’s capital exceeded all applicable regulatory requirements and was well capitalized.
Loans-to-One-Borrower. A federal savings bank generally may not make a loan or extend credit to a single or related group of borrowers in excess of 15% of unimpaired capital and surplus. An additional amount may be loaned, equal to 10% of unimpaired capital and surplus, if the loan is secured by readily marketable collateral, which generally does not include real estate. As of December 31, 2011, the Bank was in compliance with the loans-to-one-borrower limitations.
Qualified Thrift Lender Test. As a federal savings bank, the Bank is subject to a qualified thrift lender (“QTL”) test. Under the QTL test, the Bank must maintain at least 65% of its “portfolio assets” in “qualified thrift investments” in at least nine months of the most recent 12-month period. “Portfolio assets” generally means the total assets of a savings institution, less the sum of specified liquid assets up to 20% of total assets, goodwill and other intangible assets, and the value of property used in the conduct of the federal savings bank’s business.
“Qualified thrift investments” include various types of loans made for residential and housing purposes, investments related to those purposes, including certain mortgage-backed and related securities, and loans for personal, family, household and certain other purposes up to a limit of 20% of portfolio assets. “Qualified thrift investments” also include 100% of an institution’s credit card loans, education loans and small business loans. The Bank also may satisfy the QTL test by qualifying as a “domestic building and loan association” as defined in the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. At December 31, 2011, the Bank maintained approximately 79.57% of its portfolio assets in qualified thrift investments, and as of that date, satisfied the QTL test. A federal savings bank that fails the QTL test must operate under specified restrictions, including limits on growth, branching, new investment and dividends. As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, noncompliance with the QTL test is subject to regulatory enforcement action as a violation of law.

Liquidity. A federal savings bank is required to maintain a sufficient amount of liquid assets to ensure its safe and sound operation.
Community Reinvestment Act and Fair Lending Laws. All federal savings banks have a responsibility under the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) and related federal regulations to help meet the credit needs of their communities, including low- and moderate- income neighborhoods. In connection with its examination of a federal savings bank, the OCC is required to evaluate and rate the federal savings bank’s record of compliance with the CRA. In addition, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act prohibit lenders from discriminating in their lending practices based on the characteristics specified in those statutes. A federal savings bank’s failure to comply with the provisions of the CRA could, at a minimum, result in regulatory restrictions on its activities. The failure to comply with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act could result in enforcement actions by the OCC, as well as other federal regulatory agencies and the Department of Justice. The Bank’s CRA performance was rated as “Outstanding,” the highest possible rating, in the CRA Performance Evaluations of the Bank since 1999.
Privacy Standards. Financial institutions are subject to regulations implementing the privacy protection provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. These regulations require the Bank to disclose its privacy policy, including identifying with whom it shares “nonpublic personal information” to customers at the time of establishing the customer relationship and annually thereafter. In addition, the Bank is required to provide its customers with the ability to “opt-out” of or consent to having the Bank share their nonpublic personal information with unaffiliated third parties before it can disclose such information, subject to certain exceptions. The implementation of these regulations did not have a material adverse effect on the Bank. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act also allows each state to enact legislation that is more protective of consumers’ personal information.
The OCC and other federal banking agencies have adopted guidelines establishing standards for safeguarding customer information to implement certain provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The guidelines describe the agencies’ expectations for the creation, implementation and maintenance of an information security program, which would include administrative, technical and physical safeguards appropriate to the size and complexity of a financial institution and the nature and scope of its activities. The standards set forth in the guidelines are intended to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer records and information, to protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such records, and to protect against unauthorized access to or use of such records or other information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer. The Bank has implemented these guidelines, and such implementation has not had a material adverse effect on our operations.

CEO BACKGROUND

Cassandra J. Francis. Age 46. Ms. Francis currently provides management, real estate and construction related strategic planning, program and project advisory services to public, private and non-profit organizations and professional associations. Ms. Francis previously served as Executive Director and Vice President of Clayco, Inc., a national design-build construction firm, and as the Director of Olympic Village Development for Chicago’s bid to host the 2016 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games. Prior to serving as the Director of Olympic Village Development, she held various management positions, including Senior Vice President with U.S. Equities Development, L.L.C. from 1995 to 2008. Ms. Francis is an accredited member of the American Institute of Certified Planners, is an LEED accredited professional, and is licensed as a Real Estate Managing Broker in the State of Illinois and as a Real Estate Principal Broker in the State of Indiana. She is also a member of the Board of Governors of Lambda Alpha International, an honorary land economics society, the Chicago Advisory Board of the Urban Land Institute, and the Chicago Loop Alliance, a business organization that supports economic development, programming and improvements to Chicago’s central business district’s built environment. Ms. Francis has been a director of the Company and the Bank since 2006, and is a member of the Asset Liability Management Committee of the Bank.
Ms. Francis brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, substantial experience in urban planning and commercial real estate development and operations, with particular emphasis in retail development and leasing. She also has extensive experience with commercial real estate finance and valuations, particularly in Midwestern markets.
Thomas F. O’Neill. Age 65. Mr. O’Neill is a Principal of Ranieri Partners. He joined Ranieri Partners in 2010 as the Chairman of Ranieri Partners Financial Services Group, a company formed to acquire and manage financial services companies, including money management and investment management firms. Mr. O’Neill also works with Ranieri Partners’ investment funds and operating companies. In 2010, Mr. O’Neill retired from Sandler O’Neill & Partners, an investment banking firm he co-founded in 1988 that advises banks, thrifts and other domestic and international financial services firms on a broad range of strategic and transactional matters, including mergers and acquisitions and other strategic transactions, capital formation and financings, asset – liability management and asset purchases and dispositions. Prior to co-founding Sandler O’Neill, Mr. O’Neill was a Managing Director at Bear Stearns and was the Co-Manager of Bear Stearns’ Financial Services Group. Mr. O’Neill began his career at L.F. Rothschild & Co. in 1972, where he served as the Managing Director of the Bank Service Group. Mr. O’Neill currently serves on the Boards of Directors of the NASDAQ, the Archer Daniels Midland Company and Misonix, Inc. He is a member of the Audit Committee and the Finance Committee for both the NASDAQ and the Archer Daniels Midland Company.
Mr. O’Neill brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, substantial experience and expertise in a broad range of matters that affect publicly-traded bank and thrift holding companies, including corporate governance, asset – liability management, investment management, mergers and acquisitions, asset purchases and dispositions and corporate finance.
Terry R. Wells. Age 53. Mr. Wells has served as the Mayor of the Village of Phoenix, Illinois since 1993. Mr. Wells has also taught history and social studies since 1981 at the elementary and high school levels, and presently teaches U.S. History at Thornton Township High School in Harvey, Illinois. He is also a member of the Board of Directors of Pace, a Division of the Regional Transportation Authority (Illinois), and the Board of Trustees of South Suburban College. Mr. Wells served as President of the South Suburban Mayors and Managers Association from 2009 through 2010. Mr. Wells has been a director of the Company since its formation in 2004, and of the Bank since 1994. He was a director of the Company’s predecessors, BankFinancial MHC and BankFinancial Corporation, a federal corporation, from 1999 to 2005. Mr. Wells is a member of the Audit Committees of the Company and Bank.
Mr. Wells brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, substantial experience in municipal government and finance, community and economic development and serving the needs of low- and moderate-income borrowers and communities. His experience as an educator has also provided him with significant expertise in secondary and post-secondary vocational training applicable to the Bank’s customer service and support personnel.
The Board of Directors recommends a vote “FOR” the above nominees.
Continuing Directors
The business experience for at least the past five years of each continuing member of the Board of Directors and each individual’s qualifications to serve as a director are set forth below, in each case as of May 17, 2012.
F. Morgan Gasior. Age 48. Mr. Gasior has served as Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company since its formation in 2004, and of the Bank since 1989, and as a director of the Bank since 1983. He held the same positions with the Company’s predecessors, BankFinancial MHC and BankFinancial Corporation, a federal corporation, from 1999 to 2005. Mr. Gasior has been employed by the Bank in a variety of positions since 1984, and became a full-time employee in 1988 when he was appointed as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Gasior serves as the Chairman of the Executive Committees of the Company and the Bank and is a member of the Asset Quality Committee of the Bank. He was also a director and officer of Financial Assurance Services from 1989 through 2003. Mr. Gasior is licensed as an attorney in the States of Illinois and Michigan, but he does not actively practice law.
Mr. Gasior brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, a comprehensive understanding of the Bank’s strategies, operations and customers based on his more than 28 years of service as an employee and officer of the Bank. He has led the development and implementation of the Bank’s financial, lending, operational, technology and expansion strategies, and this experience has uniquely positioned him to adjust the Company’s business strategies to respond to changing economic, regulatory and competitive conditions, and to discern and coordinate operational changes to match these strategies. His position on the Board also provides a direct channel of communication from senior management to the Board.
John M. Hausmann, C.P.A. Age 57. Mr. Hausmann has been a self-employed certified public accountant since 1980. Prior to that time, he was an accountant with Arthur Andersen. Mr. Hausmann is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the Illinois Certified Public Accountant Society. He has been a director of the Company since its formation in 2004, and of the Bank since 1990. He was a director of the Company’s predecessors, BankFinancial MHC and BankFinancial Corporation, a federal corporation, from 1999 to 2005. Mr. Hausmann is the Chairman of the Audit Committees of the Company and the Bank, is a member of the Executive Committees of the Company and the Bank, and since the Company’s 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, has been a member of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Human Resources Committee of the Company.
Mr. Hausmann brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, a comprehensive understanding of accounting, auditing and taxation principles based on his many years of experience as a certified public accountant. His experience as a member of the Audit Committee has provided him with a thorough knowledge of the Company’s internal controls and internal and external audit procedures. His tax and accounting practice and longtime residency in the Bank’s southernmost market territory have also provided him with a unique familiarity with the needs of the Bank’s small business and municipal customers and communities.
Joseph A. Schudt. Age 74. Mr. Schudt served as the Principal Partner and President of Joseph A. Schudt & Associates, a professional engineering firm based in Frankfort, Illinois, specializing in engineering design, environmental analyses and land surveying, from 1972 to 2004. Mr. Schudt currently serves as a Vice President of Joseph A. Schudt & Associates. Mr. Schudt is licensed as a professional engineer in seven states, including Illinois. He has been a director of the Company since its formation in 2004, and of the Bank since 1992.

He was a director of the Company’s predecessors, BankFinancial MHC and BankFinancial Corporation, a federal corporation, from 1999 to 2005. Mr. Schudt is the Chairman of the Asset Quality Committee of the Bank, is a member of the Executive Committees of the Company and the Bank, and since the Company’s 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, has been a member and the Chairman of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Human Resources Committee of the Company.
Mr. Schudt brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, substantial experience in commercial real estate construction and development, and federal, state and local requirements relating to project development, land use and environmental remediation. His experience as a member and the Chairman of the Bank’s Asset Quality Committee has provided him with a thorough knowledge of the Bank’s loan portfolio and portfolio management practices, as well as applicable financial, consumer and social compliance regulations.
Glen R. Wherfel, C.P.A. Age 62. Mr. Wherfel has been a principal in the accounting firm of Wherfel & Associates since 1984. Mr. Wherfel was a director of Success National Bank from 1993 to 2001, and of Success Bancshares from 1998 to 2001. He was the Chairman of Success National Bank’s Loan Committee and a member of its Asset Liability Management Committee. Mr. Wherfel has been a director of the Company since 2006, and of the Bank since 2001. Mr. Wherfel is a member of the Asset Quality Committee of the Bank, and since the Company’s 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, has been a member of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Human Resources Committee of the Company.
Mr. Wherfel brings to the Board, among other skills and qualifications, substantial experience in entrepreneurial finance and operations. His tax and accounting practice, longtime residency in the Bank’s northern market territory and service as a director of Success National Bank have also provided him a unique familiarity with the needs of the Bank’s small business and municipal customers and communities.

MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION FROM LATEST 10K

Overview
Loans. Our loan portfolio consists primarily of investment and business loans (multi-family, nonresidential real estate, commercial, construction and land loans, and commercial leases), which together make up 78.2% of gross loans at December 31, 2011. Net loans receivable increased $176.6 million, or 16.8%, to $1.227 billion at December 31, 2011, from $1.051 billion at December 31, 2010, due in substantial part to an acquisition of a portfolio of $152.1 million of performing Chicago area multi-family loans on March 11, 2011 and the $118.1 million in loans that were acquired from Downers Grove National Bank. At the closing of the acquisition in March of 2011, Downers Grove National Bank’s loans consisted of $49.4 million one-to-four family residential mortgage loans, $2.2 million of multi-family mortgage loans, $40.5 million nonresidential real estate loans, $14.9 million construction and land loans, $9.9 million commercial loans, and $1.1 million consumer loans. Multi-family mortgage loans increased by $126.7 million, or 42.7%. Commercial loans increased by $29.3 million, or 45.2%. Nonresidential real estate loans increased $29.7 million, or 10.5%. Construction and land loans increased $1.5 million, or 7.9%. One-to-four family residential mortgage loans increased $15.7 million, or 6.1%. Commercial leases decreased by $16.1 million, or 10.7%, as scheduled lease payments outpaced originations. Future loan growth could be adversely affected by our unwillingness to compete for loans by relaxing our historical underwriting standards.
Securities. Securities decreased $27.9 million, or 23.1%, to $92.8 million at December 31, 2011, from $120.7 million at December 31, 2010, due primarily to the receipt of principal repayments of $30.7 million in our residential mortgage-backed and collateralized mortgage obligation portfolio. During 2011 and 2010, we also invested in FDIC insured certificates of deposit issued by other insured depository institutions.
Stock in Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago. We owned $16.3 million of common stock of the FHLBC at December 31, 2011, compared to $15.6 million at December 31, 2010. The increase was due to $748,000 in FHLBC stock that we acquired in our acquisition of Downers Grove National Bank.
Deposits. Deposits increased $97.2 million, or 7.9%, to $1.333 billion at December 31, 2011, from $1.235 billion at December 31, 2010. The increase in deposits was primarily due to the deposits acquired in our acquisition of Downers Grove National Bank. At the closing of the acquisition in March of 2011, Downers Grove National Bank had $36.1 million in noninterest–bearing demand deposit accounts, $39.3 million in savings accounts, $17.3 million in money market accounts, $31.7 million in interest–bearing NOW accounts, and $86.6 million of certificates of deposits. We increased our core deposits (savings, money market, noninterest-bearing demand and NOW accounts) by $112.8 million and reduced our balances of wholesale deposits by $5.8 million during the year. Core deposits increased as a percentage of total deposits, representing 72.7% of total deposits at December 31, 2011, compared to 69.2% of total deposits at December 31, 2010.
Borrowings. Borrowings decreased $14.4 million, or 60.7%, to $9.3 million at December 31, 2011, from $23.7 million at December 31, 2010, due to our repayments of maturing FHLBC advances.
Stockholders’ Equity. Total stockholders’ equity was $199.9 million at December 31, 2011, compared to $253.3 million at December 31, 2010. The decrease in total stockholders’ equity was primarily due to the combined impact of our $48.7 million net loss, our declaration and payment of cash dividends totaling $4.6 million, and a $689,000 decrease in accumulated other comprehensive income during the year ended December 31, 2011. The unallocated shares of common stock that our ESOP owns were reflected as a $13.2 million reduction to stockholders’ equity at December 31, 2011, compared to a $14.2 million reduction to stockholders’ equity at December 31, 2010.

Net Loss. We recorded a net loss of $48.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to net losses of $4.3 million and $738,000 for 2010 and 2009, respectively. The net loss for 2011 was primarily due to the recording of a goodwill impairment expense of $23.9 million, a $22.6 million valuation allowance for deferred tax assets, a $22.7 million provision for loan losses and $10.8 million of expense for nonperforming asset management and operations of other real estate owned. The net loss in 2010 was due in substantial part to our recording a $12.1 million provision for loan losses, $7.3 million for nonperforming asset management expense and operations of other real estate owned combined with a $1.8 million decrease in net interest income. The net loss in 2009 was due primarily to the recording of an $8.8 million provision for loan losses, a $2.1 million increase in FDIC expense and $1.4 million in combined pre-tax losses that we recorded for the impairment and subsequent sale of our Freddie Mac preferred stocks. Our basic loss per common share was $2.46, $0.22 and $0.04 for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Net Interest Income. We recorded net interest income of $62.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to $51.8 million for 2010 and $53.6 million for 2009. The increase in net interest income for 2011 reflected a $4.8 million increase in interest income, combined with a $6.3 million decrease in interest expense. Our net interest rate spread was 4.09% for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to 3.36% for 2010. The Company’s net interest spread and net interest margin increased in 2011 principally due to a $9.5 million increase in net interest–earning assets and approximately $2.4 million in purchase price discount accretion for performing and impaired loans acquired in the Downers Grove National Bank merger.
Provision for Loan Losses. We recorded a provision for loan losses of $22.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to $12.1 million for 2010 and $8.8 million for 2009. The provision for loan losses that we recorded in 2011 reflects the combined impact of a $5.5 million increase in the portion of the specific allowance for loan losses that we allocate to impaired loans, $13.2 million in net charge-offs and a $4.0 million increase in the general component of the allowance for loan losses.
Noninterest Income. Noninterest income for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $7.3 million, compared to $7.1 million for 2010 and $7.2 million for 2009. Our noninterest income for 2011 included service charges and fees of $2.7 million, compared to $3.0 million for 2010 and $3.4 million for 2009. Earnings on bank-owned life insurance were $626,000 for the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to earnings of $430,000 for 2010 and a $20,000 loss for 2009. Our noninterest income for 2009 included a $988,000 loss on the sale of our Freddie Mac preferred stocks and a $1.3 million gain on the sale of our merchant processing operations.
Noninterest Expense. Noninterest expense for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $83.7 million, compared to $53.8 million for 2010 and $52.7 million for 2009. Noninterest expense for 2011 included a $23.9 million goodwill impairment expense. Noninterest expense for 2011 also included $4.4 million in nonperforming asset management expenses, compared to $3.3 million for 2010 and $770,000 in 2009. Operations of other real estate owned, including asset write-downs and gains and losses on disposition, totaled $6.3 million in 2011, compared to $3.6 million for 2010 and $2.8 million in 2009. Noninterest expense for 2011 also included acquisition costs of $1.8 million relating to our purchase of a pool of performing Chicago area multi-family loans from Citibank and our acquisition of Downers Grove National Bank. Noninterest expense for 2009 included a $401,000 pre-tax impairment loss on our holdings of Freddie Mac preferred stocks.
Income Taxes. We recorded an income tax expense of $12.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, and an income tax benefit of $2.7 million and $13,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The recognition of the $12.4 million income tax expense for 2011 resulted from a non-cash charge of $22.6 million for the establishment of a full valuation allowance for our deferred tax assets. A full valuation on deferred tax assets was recorded in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The effective tax rates were 38.94%, and 1.73% for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The effective tax rate for the year ended December 31, 2011 is not meaningful due to the size of our operating loss relative to the income expense resulting from the valuation allowance. For 2009, the difference between accounting for equity-based compensation granted in prior years in accordance with GAAP basis (fair market value at the date of grant) and the tax basis (fair market value at the date of vesting) reduced our income tax benefit.

Quarterly Cash Dividends. Our Board of Directors declared four quarterly cash dividends totaling of $0.22 per share during 2011. Cash dividends totaling $4.6 million were paid in 2011. As a result of the regulatory restructuring occasioned by the Dodd-Frank Act, the Company became subject to Federal Reserve Board Supervisory Letter SR 09-4 on July 21, 2011, which provides that a holding company should, among other things, inform the Federal Reserve Bank prior to declaring a dividend if its net income for the current quarter is not sufficient to fully fund the dividend, and inform the Federal Reserve Bank and consider eliminating, deferring or significantly reducing its dividends if its net income for the current quarter is not sufficient to fully fund the dividends, or if its net income for the past four quarters, net of dividends previously paid during that period, is not sufficient to fully fund the dividends. The Company does not have sufficient net income for the fourth quarter of 2011 or sufficient net income for the past four quarters net of dividends previously paid to declare a dividend for the fourth quarter of 2011 without first consulting with the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
As a consequence, the Company is currently in discussions with the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago with respect to whether a dividend should be declared for the quarter ended December 31, 2011 and, if declared, at what level. There can be no assurance that a dividend will be declared or, if it is declared, at what level.
Stock Repurchase Program. Our Board of Directors has authorized the repurchase of up to 5,047,423 shares of our common stock. The authorization permits shares to be repurchased in open market or negotiated transactions, and pursuant to any trading plan that may be adopted in accordance with Rule 10b5-1 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The authorization may be utilized at management’s discretion, subject to the limitations set forth in Rule 10b-18 of the Securities and Exchange Commission and other applicable legal requirements, and to price and other internal limitations established by the Board of Directors. The repurchase authorization will expire on May 15, 2012, unless extended by the Board of Directors. As of December 31, 2011, the Company had repurchased 4,239,134 shares of its common stock pursuant to the repurchase authorization. Federal Reserve Board Supervisory Letter SR 09-4 provides that holding companies experiencing financial weaknesses such as operating losses should consult with the appropriate Federal Reserve supervisory staff before redeeming or repurchasing common stock. The Company has not initiated discussions with the Federal Reserve supervisory staff with respect to common stock repurchases, and has no plans to initiate such discussions in the immediate future. Due to the Company’s operating loss in 2011, the Company will not undertake any further share repurchases without engaging in discussions with the Federal Reserve supervisory staff.
Economic and Competitive Conditions
During 2011, the national and local economies showed limited signs of recovery. The principal challenges in the local economy, the Chicago metropolitan area, continue to be persistent unemployment and declining real estate values, with certain geographic sub-markets considerably more adversely affected than others.
Pricing and underwriting for multi-family and commercial real estate loans came under increasing pressure towards the end of 2011. Competition and pricing for commercial and industrial loans and commercial leases also increased steadily throughout the year. Given recent Federal Reserve Board projections of modest U.S. economic growth, weak employment growth and expected market interest rate levels for the next several years, we believe that pricing and underwriting competition on multifamily, commercial real estate and commercial loans and commercial leases will continue to intensify in 2012. We also expect that the combination of current market interest rate levels and government participation in residential lending markets will continue to result in higher prepayments on our adjustable-rate residential loan portfolio due to borrower refinance activity into 30-year fixed rate mortgage loans sold into the secondary market.
Although there are some signs of stabilization in market rents, occupancies and real estate valuations, local governmental and judicial policies concerning foreclosure processing currently prevent the normal type of “market clearing” transactions that reduce the supply of available inventory and, consequently, contribute towards a stabilization of valuations. To the extent that this “shadow inventory” clears more rapidly in 2012 than in 2011, improved results in terms of borrower defaults and losses given defaults can be expected.

Overview of 2011
Core Operating Earnings and Franchise Growth
For 2011, a key priority was to deploy the Company’s excess liquidity and continue its franchise growth in a meaningful manner to improve the Company’s core operating earnings and long-term market position. We evaluated many different opportunities, including the conduct of due diligence on loan portfolios for sale and on several local depository institutions. We were able to successfully negotiate and close the acquisition of a $152 million performing multifamily loan portfolio and to close the Downers Grove National Bank acquisition at the end of first quarter, 2011. The data conversions and customer retention / transition plans for these transactions were successfully concluded by the end of third quarter, 2011. In an overall environment of stagnant to negative loan growth and declining market yields, our net interest income (before loan loss provision) grew 21% compared to 2010. In addition, the two Downers Grove National Bank locations were an important enhancement to our geographic footprint due to their strong base of high value core deposit relationships. The Downers Grove National Bank Trust Department also enhanced our existing wealth management operations and provided opportunities to enhance future non-interest income.
Consistent with our practices in previous years, we actively managed our loan portfolio to exit certain multifamily, commercial real estate and commercial loan relationships based on our overall assessment of the borrowers, the industries in which they operate and future collateral valuations. Given the growth we experienced in our multifamily and commercial real estate loan portfolios from the acquisitions that we conducted early in the year, we did not emphasize the aggressive origination of multifamily and commercial real estate loans in 2011. Our growth in commercial loan balances resulted from higher credit utilization by Illinois health care borrowers and growth in credit utilization from loans originated in 2009 and 2010. Lack of demand for adjustable rate residential mortgage loans, coupled with accelerating fixed-rate refinance activity in the last third of 2011, resulted in a decline in our residential mortgage loan portfolio. Our commercial lease origination volumes were 17% higher in 2011 than in 2010 but scheduled lease amortizations resulted in a net decrease in the commercial lease portfolio.
We managed our deposit portfolio, including the deposits acquired in the Downers Grove National Bank transaction, to retain the highest value core deposit relationships and reduce our cost of funds to the lowest practicable levels. We ended 2011 with our highest-ever core deposit ratio at 72.7% of total deposits and our lowest-ever cost of funds at 0.55%.
Our non-interest income increased in 2011 as the revenues from the new Trust Department and from bank-owned life insurance more than offset declines in deposit-related fee income resulting from the Dodd-Frank legislation that became effective during 2011.
Our core non-interest expense remained well-contained in 2011, even with the addition of the Downers Grove National Bank operating expenses. We continue to implement new processes and technologies to reduce staffing needs where feasible while still investing in business development, customer service and marketing resources to foster future growth with existing and new customers.
Asset Quality & Credit-Related Expenses
We consider the total balances of non-performing loans and repossessed assets to be an important asset quality metric. Our credit-related expenses include any required provisions for loan losses, write-downs of repossessed assets to current market value, and expenses related to the collection, management and sale of non-performing loans and repossessed assets. Although we track the non-performing loans and repossessed assets we acquired from Downers Grove National Bank separately for management and certain accounting purposes, these non-performing assets are included in our total balances for financial reporting and OCC regulatory purposes. At December 31, 2011, non-performing assets related to Downers Grove National Bank were 21% of our total non-performing assets, and represented 54% of the increase in non-performing assets since December 31, 2010.
Our asset quality and credit-related costs began a gradual improvement trend in the first two quarters of 2011. As further detailed on pages 39-41, in third quarter, 2011, we encountered unexpected issues with several borrowers, including our second-largest credit exposure. Given the uncertainties presented by these borrowers, we assigned classified risk ratings to the loans, placed them on non-accrual status and established specific loan loss reserves where appropriate until the various situations could be fully resolved, including in situations where the borrowers remained current on their loan payments. In fourth quarter, 2011, we took a similar approach with a borrower that was conducting an orderly liquidation of its assets, and will maintain this approach until such time as the liquidation is fully completed. As further detailed on pages 39-41, we expect that some (but not all) of these pending cases may be resolved acceptably during 2012, either through improvements warranting a return of the loan to accrual status or by a mutually-satisfactory resolution. The year 2011 ended with a materially reduced level of past due loans compared to 2010, and with a resumption of the gradual improvement in asset quality trends resulting from our continuing resolutions of non-performing assets on an orderly basis.
Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the OCC succeeded the OTS as our primary federal bank regulator on July 21, 2011. The OCC maintains a number of operating policies and practices that are different from the OTS, including in the areas of loan classification and the timing of charge-offs of previously-established loan loss reserves. To accelerate our transition to the OCC regulatory environment, we engaged an independent firm staffed by former OCC examiners to conduct an independent external loan risk rating review during fourth quarter, 2011. The review supplemented an independent external loan review that was performed by another firm earlier in the year, and covered $227 million of our multi-family, commercial real estate, commercial and commercial lease portfolio. The results of the review included a net increase of approximately $13 million in “performing classified” loans as of the end of fourth quarter, 2011 (of which 60% of the balances related to loans acquired in the Downers Grove National Bank transaction).
We believe we have revised our classification of assets policies and practices as needed to complete our transition to the OCC’s loan risk rating practices. The OCC’s practices will make it more difficult to renew “performing classified” loans in situations in which the borrowers are unable or unwilling to take the steps necessary to eliminate the basis of classification. In some situations, this could translate into a higher level of non-performing assets than would otherwise have been the case in previous years; at December 31, 2011, approximately $3.5 million of our non-accrual loan balances reflected our decision to liquidate or not renew “performing classified” loans.
Consistent with previous years, we obtained updated collateral valuations on non-performing assets and OREO during the fourth quarter, 2011. Accordingly, we obtained new collateral valuations on over 40% of our total non-performing asset balances (including purchased impaired assets acquired in the Downers Grove National Bank transaction) such that the weighted average age of our collateral valuations was approximately six months at December 31, 2011. We recorded additional specific loan loss reserves and write-downs of repossessed assets at December 31, 2011 to reflect the decline in market valuations, which in some cases were in excess of 30% of the valuations obtained within the previous twelve to eighteen months. As was the case in the third quarter, 2011 appraisal data, we noted that a key difference in current appraisal data was the impact of distressed asset disposition activity (such as short sales, judicial sales or bulk-asset sales) on comparable sales data. Given this trend in the basis of valuations, we believe that acceleration of non-performing asset disposition is an even greater priority in 2012 than in 2011 to eliminate the future risk that a continued decline in valuations could present.
Significant Accounting Matters
We disclosed in prior Annual Reports the risk that our balance of deferred tax assets could be subject to a valuation allowance in the future. We conducted the valuation allowance testing at December 31, 2011 and determined that a full valuation allowance on the year-end deferred tax asset balance was necessary. The valuation allowance has a minimal impact on our regulatory capital as of December 31, 2011. We expect to begin a recovery of the deferred tax asset into both earnings and tangible stockholders’ equity contingent on the impact of accelerated non-performing asset dispositions upon our core operating earnings.
We also disclosed in prior Annual Reports the risk that our intangible goodwill asset could be subject to impairment in the future. We conducted goodwill impairment testing at December 31, 2011 and determined that a full impairment on the year-end goodwill asset was necessary. Factors that impacted the impairment included the decline in bank share prices generally during 2011, including the Company’s, as well as the small number of unassisted bank merger and acquisition transactions that could be considered comparable sales. The impairment has no effect on regulatory capital or tangible equity; however, there is no possibility of a recovery of the impairment in the future.
Conclusion
We began 2011 with cautious optimism for a more robust economic environment and that our actions to improve our core operating earnings and franchise position would result in a successful year in terms of our earnings and overall Company posture. We are severely disappointed in the unexpected adverse events in the loan portfolio, but believe we have addressed the situations comprehensively from both a financial and regulatory perspective, and are prepared to facilitate rapid resolutions if borrowers are inclined to cooperate in the resolution. Based on available information, we also believe that we have responded on a thorough and timely basis to the changes in our regulatory environment due to the OCC/OTS transition. Finally, we believe that our actions with respect to the valuations of non-performing assets, deferred tax assets and the intangible goodwill asset were correct given current and potential future market conditions, and that the Company is now poised for positive developments in the future.
Objectives for 2012
Preservation and Expansion of Core Operating Earnings
Given the persistence of the current economic conditions, including weak economic growth, historically low market interest rates and yields and ever-increasing competitive forces in the Chicago metropolitan area, we believe that some compression of our net interest margin is inevitable in 2012 as the interest rates on maturing loans, or loans not subject to a prepayment penalty, change to current market interest rates. We anticipate we may be able to offset some of the effects of yield compression with further loan portfolio diversification, some modest growth in non-interest income and, if necessary, further reductions of core operating expenses. As we expect the present economic environment to continue for a considerable period of time in the Chicago metropolitan area, we will endeavor to accelerate the evolution of our loan portfolio towards a configuration that permits better growth rates in multiple, independent segments with comparable risk-adjusted yields. Through these actions, we hope to preserve our core operating earnings in 2012 to the extent feasible and to continue developing the capabilities to expand core operating earnings in future periods.
Restore Asset Quality Metrics to Historical Levels
We do not anticipate a rapid improvement in the local economic conditions and real estate market valuations in the Chicago metropolitan area in 2012. As distressed asset sales in the Chicago metropolitan area continue to dominate valuation assessments, and there appears to be a considerable excess inventory of potential dispositions remaining in the market, a key priority for 2012 is to accelerate our disposition of non-performing assets and OREO on a targeted and selective basis. Asset dispositions will likely take multiple forms; although we continue to prefer orderly liquidations to maximize our proceeds and minimize the impact on future market valuations, we will evaluate and execute more aggressive asset disposition techniques – including “bulk” liquidations – in cases in which it appears that the long-term benefits outweigh the short-term costs.
We also believe that achieving a material reduction in non-performing assets would provide greater predictability to our earnings, which in turn would provide a number of benefits related to improved stockholder dividends, an eventual recovery of our deferred tax asset valuation allowance and the ability to contemplate additional share repurchases at some point in the future.
Conclusion
The challenges of 2012 converge on a single point: our ability to maintain positive net income while also establishing a definitive trend towards a restoration of our asset quality metrics to historical levels. Absent any other influences or factors, we expect to balance our business plan execution towards an achievement of both objectives in each reporting period; however, to the extent necessary, we expect to favor a more rapid return to our historical asset quality metrics as we believe these actions will present the greatest benefit for future periods.

MANAGEMENT DISCUSSION FOR LATEST QUARTER

Overview
During the third quarter of 2012, national economic activity decelerated and local economic conditions in our primary Chicago metropolitan market area reflected at best minimal growth. The principal challenges in the local economy continue to be persistent unemployment and uneven economic growth, both of which continue to impact real estate values. Competitive factors also had an increasing impact during the quarter, as pricing and underwriting competition for multi-family and commercial real estate loans and commercial leases remained intense.
Loan portfolio balances declined in all categories except consumer loans; however, loan pipelines for multifamily, commercial real estate, commercial health care and commercial leasing are at their highest levels in the past four quarters. Residential loan balances declined due to scheduled loan amortizations and prepayments of our fixed-rate loan portfolio. Multi-family loan balances declined due to intensified pricing and underwriting competition, including the entry of new competitors into the sector. In approximately 50% of the cases in which we received a payoff on a multi-family loan, we elected not to match the competitor's offer based on the particular merits of the credit exposure, which involved unmonitored cash-out refinance transactions. Commercial real estate loan balances declined due to slightly lower loan origination volumes and certain targeted portfolio reductions. We expect to see continued targeted portfolio reductions within the commercial real estate portfolio through the first quarter of 2013, potentially fully offset by improved loan origination volumes. Commercial and industrial loan balances declined primarily for cyclical reasons due to state government health care payables practices and due to quarter-end activity on commercial lease bridge lines of credit; we expect these balances to return gradually to their customary balances over the next three to six months. Commercial lease origination volumes improved during the quarter; we expect this portfolio to return to positive growth in the fourth quarter of 2012. Our focus for the remainder of 2012 will be to maintain current overall loan portfolio levels and to more aggressively increase originations in certain selected loan categories such as residential loans, multifamily loans, commercial loans and commercial leases consistent with market opportunities.
We engaged in the accelerated disposition of certain OREO assets during the third quarter of 2012. Our evaluation methodology involves an assessment of the disposition strategy that provides the highest cash proceeds within a defined period of time. During the third quarter of 2012, we changed our disposition strategy on certain income-producing OREO assets from an ordinary-liquidation pricing model to an aggressive pricing model designed to stimulate market demand. For the third quarter of 2012, we closed $2.4 million in total OREO sales and had accepted offers on an additional $4.3 million in OREO balances; the total activity represented 38.6% of our June 30, 2012 OREO balances. Our third quarter of 2012 results reflect the write-downs and expenses related to OREO transfers and sales.
Management is evaluating, but not yet finalized or presented to the Board for approval, a more comprehensive plan to reduce nonperforming assets through accelerated dispositions during the fourth quarter of 2012. In this regard, we continued evaluations of certain non-performing loans and OREO for which a targeted disposition strategy aimed at long-term equity investors may be the most appropriate strategy. If approved by the Board, the objectives of such a plan would be to achieve a meaningful reduction of non-performing loans and OREO by the end of 2012 such that the future potential impacts to earnings in 2013 and future years from credit-related costs are materially diminished.
Our general loan loss reserve requirement remained stable in the third quarter of 2012 due principally to a reduction of loan portfolio balances offset by increased reserves for residential and home-equity loans pursuant to new regulatory standards. Pursuant to newly-applicable OCC guidance, we charged off $10.8 million of our specific valuation allowances during the quarter and recorded $3.8 million in additional charge-offs related to updated appraisals received on non-performing loans.
Given our excess liquidity position, we continued to reduce our competitive posture with respect to pricing on single-service certificate of deposit accounts, which has been successful in producing a decline in these account balances. Pricing conditions for local deposits, whether low-balance core deposits, certificates of deposit or high-balance, high-yield transaction accounts, remained generally favorable due to very low market yields and continued weak industry-wide loan demand.
Our net interest spread and net interest margin declined due to declines in loan yields and the decline in loan balances. We anticipate that current market conditions on new loans and leases and lower effective yields resulting from scheduled loan repayments and loan renewals will likely cause some additional compression of our net interest margin and net interest spread; however, we believe that the preponderance of portfolio yield reductions have already occurred and we may be able to offset some of the impact of lower market yields with loan growth in the coming quarters. Given the quantity and volatility of the variables affecting our net interest margin and net interest spread, we are unable to confidently predict what the Company's net interest margin and net interest spread will be for the remainder of 2012 and 2013.

Comparison of Financial Condition at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011
Total assets decreased $63.7 million, or 4.1%, to $1.500 billion at September 30, 2012, from $1.564 billion at December 31, 2011. Cash and cash equivalents increased $116.0 million, or 96.1%, to $236.7 million at September 30, 2012, from $120.7 million at December 31, 2011, as a result of the decreases in investment securities and loans. Securities decreased by $11.1 million, or 11.9%, to $81.7 million at September 30, 2012, from $92.8 million at December 31, 2011, primarily due to cash flows in our residential mortgage-backed and collateralized mortgage obligation portfolio. Net loans receivable decreased $146.9 million, or 12.0%, to $1.080 billion at September 30, 2012, from $1.227 billion at December 31, 2011, due in part to loan payoffs, and intense pricing and underwriting competition for multi-family and commercial real estate loans and commercial and industrial loans.
Total liabilities decreased by $61.8 million, or 4.5%, to $1.302 billion at September 30, 2012, from $1.364 billion at December 31, 2011. Total deposits decreased $54.4 million, or 4.1%, to $1.278 billion at September 30, 2012, from $1.333 billion at December 31, 2011, primarily due to our decision to reduce our competitive posture with respect to pricing on single-service certificate of deposit accounts. Certificates of deposit decreased $51.3 million, or 14.1%, to $313.1 million at September 30, 2012, from $364.4 million at December 31, 2011. Core deposits increased to 75.5% of total deposits at September 30, 2012, from 72.6% of total deposits at December 31, 2011. Noninterest-bearing demand deposits decreased $7.6 million, or 5.4%, to $134.5 million at September 30, 2012, from $142.1 million at December 31, 2011. Savings accounts decreased $1.3 million, or 0.9%, to $143.2 million at September 30, 2012, from $144.5 million at December 31, 2011. Money market and interest-bearing NOW accounts increased $5.9 million, or 0.9%, to $687.4 million at September 30, 2012, from $681.5 million at December 31, 2011.
Total stockholders' equity decreased $1.9 million to $198.0 million at September 30, 2012, compared to $199.9 million at December 31, 2011. The decrease was primarily due to the net loss of $2.1 million. The unallocated shares of common stock that our ESOP owns were reflected as a $12.5 million reduction to stockholders' equity at September 30, 2012.
Operating Results for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 and 2011
Net Loss. We had a net loss of $5.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012, compared to a net loss of $1.9 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Our loss per share of common stock was $0.26 per basic and fully diluted share, respectively, for the three months ended September 30, 2012 compared to $0.10 per basic and fully diluted share for the three-month period ended September 30, 2011.
Net Interest Income . Net interest income was $13.4 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012, a decrease of $2.9 million, or 17.9% from $16.4 million for the same period in 2011. The decrease reflected a $3.5 million decrease in interest income and a $593,000 decrease in interest expense.
The decrease in net interest income was primarily attributable to a lower level of average interest-earning assets. Total average interest-earning assets decreased $94.0 million, or 6.2%, to $1.420 billion for the three months ended September 30, 2012, from $1.514 billion for the same period in 2011. Our net interest rate spread decreased by 50 basis points to 3.69% for the three months ended September 30, 2012, from 4.19% for the same period in 2011. Our net interest margin decreased by 53 basis points to 3.76% for the three months ended September 30, 2012, from 4.29% for the same period in 2011. The decrease in the net interest spread and margin was a result of lower yields on interest earning assets, which was partially offset by a lower cost of funds. The yield on interest earning assets decreased 66 basis points to 4.05% for the three months ended September 30, 2012, from 4.71% for the same period in 2011, and the cost of interest bearing liabilities decreased 16 basis points to 0.36% for the three months ended September 30, 2012, from 0.52% for the same period in 2011.

Provision for Loan Losses. We establish provisions for loan losses, which are charged to operations to maintain the allowance for loan losses at a level we consider necessary to absorb probable incurred credit losses in the loan portfolio. In determining the level of the allowance for loan losses, we consider past and current loss experience, evaluations of real estate collateral, current economic conditions, volume and type of lending, adverse situations that may affect a borrower’s ability to repay a loan and the levels of nonaccrual and other classified loans. The amount of the allowance is based on estimates and the ultimate losses may vary from such estimates as more information becomes available or later events change. We assess the allowance for loan losses on a quarterly basis and make provisions for loan losses in order to maintain the allowance.
Based on our evaluation of the above factors, we recorded a $408,000 provision to the general portion of the allowance for loan losses. In Call Report preparation guidance issued in connection with the transition of federal savings banks from OTS to OCC supervision, the OCC announced that the specific valuation allowances that the OTS' accounting guidance historically permitted federal savings banks to maintain for collateral dependent loans should be eliminated. We adopted this methodology in the third quarter 2012 and charged off $10.8 million of specific valuation allowances. This one time charge did not impact earnings or the provision for loan losses for the quarter ended September 30, 2012; however, the $10.8 million of specific valuation allowance charge-offs were included in total charge-offs for the quarter ended September 30, 2012 and reduced our recorded balances for loans, the allowance for loan losses, nonaccrual loans and impaired loans.
A loan balance is classified as a loss and charged-off when it is confirmed that there is no readily apparent source of repayment for the amount of the loan that is classified as loss. Confirmation can occur upon the receipt of updated third-party appraisal valuation information indicating that there is a low probability of repayment upon sale of the collateral, the final disposition of collateral where the net proceeds are insufficient to pay the loan balance in full, our failure to obtain possession of certain consumer-loan collateral within certain time limits specified by applicable federal regulations, the conclusion of legal proceedings where the borrower’s obligation to repay is legally discharged (such as a Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding), or when it appears that further formal collection procedures are not likely to result in net proceeds in excess of the costs to collect.

Nonperforming Loans and Assets
We review loans on a regular basis, and generally place loans on nonaccrual status when either principal or interest is 90 days or more past due. In addition, the Company places loans on nonaccrual status when we do not expect to receive full payment of interest or principal. Interest accrued and unpaid at the time a loan is placed on nonaccrual status is reversed from interest income. Interest payments received on nonaccrual loans are recognized in accordance with our significant accounting policies. Once a loan is placed on nonaccrual status, the borrower must generally demonstrate at least six months of payment performance before the loan is eligible to return to accrual status. We may have loans classified as 90 days or more delinquent and still accruing. Generally, we do not utilize this category of loan classification unless: (1) the loan is repaid in full shortly after the period end date; (2) the loan is well secured and there are no asserted or pending legal barriers to its collection; or (3) the borrower has remitted all scheduled payments and is otherwise in substantial compliance with the terms of the loan, but the processing of loan payments actually received or the renewal of the loan has not occurred for administrative reasons. At September 30, 2012, we had one loan totaling $248,000 in this category and we had three loans totaling $350,000 in this category at December 31, 2011.
We typically obtain new third–party appraisals or collateral valuations when we place a loan on nonaccrual status, conduct impairment testing or conduct a TDR unless the existing valuation information for the collateral is sufficiently current to comply with the requirements of our Appraisal and Collateral Valuation Policy (“ACV Policy”). We also obtain new third–party appraisals or collateral valuations when the judicial foreclosure process concludes with respect to real estate collateral, and when we otherwise acquire actual or constructive title to real estate collateral. In addition to third–party appraisals, we use updated valuation information based on Multiple Listing Service data, broker opinions of value, actual sales prices of similar assets sold by us and approved sales prices in response to offers to purchase similar assets owned by us to provide interim valuation information for consolidated financial statement and management purposes. Our ACV Policy establishes the maximum useful life of a real estate appraisal at 18 months. Because appraisals and updated valuations utilize historical or “ask–side” data in reaching valuation conclusions, the appraised or updated valuation may or may not reflect the actual sales price that we will receive at the time of sale.
Real estate appraisals may include up to three approaches to value: the sales comparison approach, the income approach (for income-producing property) and the cost approach. Not all appraisals utilize all three approaches. Depending on the nature of the collateral and market conditions, we may emphasize one approach over another in determining the fair value of real estate collateral. Appraisals may also contain different estimates of value based on the level of occupancy or planned future improvements. “As-is” valuations represent an estimate of value based on current market conditions with no changes to the use or condition of the real estate collateral. “As-stabilized” or “as-completed” valuations assume the real estate collateral will be improved to a stated standard or achieve its highest and best use in terms of occupancy. “As-stabilized” or “as-completed” valuations may be subject to a present value adjus tment for market conditions or the schedule of improvements.
As part of the asset classification process, we develop an exit strategy for real estate collateral or OREO by assessing overall market conditions, the current use and condition of the asset, and its highest and best use. ASC 820-10 provides guidance for measuring the fair value of OREO property. A lthough the fair value of the property normally will be based on an appraisal (or other evaluation), the valuation should be consistent with the price that a market participant will pay to purchase the property at the measurement date. Circumstances may exist that indicate that the appraised value is not an accurate measurement of the property's current fair value. As of September 30, 2012, all of our impaired real estate loan collateral and OREO were valued on an “as–is basis.”
Estimates of the net realizable value of real estate collateral also include a deduction for the expected costs to sell the collateral or such other deductions from the cash flows resulting from the operation and liquidation of the asset as are appropriate. For most real estate collateral subject to the judicial foreclosure process, we apply a 10.0% deduction to the value of the asset to determine the expected costs to sell the asset. This estimate includes one year of real estate taxes, sales commissions and miscellaneous repair and closing costs. If we receive a purchase offer that requires unbudgeted repairs, or if the expected resolution period for the asset exceeds one year, we then include, on a case-by-case basis, the costs of the additional real estate taxes and repairs and any other material holding costs in the expected costs to sell the collateral. For OREO, we apply a 7.0% deduction to determine the expected costs to sell, as expenses for real estate taxes and repairs are expensed when incurred.

CONF CALL

F. Morgan Gasior - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Good morning, welcome everyone. At this time I'd like to introduce, Assistant Corporate Secretary Valerie Ostapa-Kontos who will read our forward-looking statement.

Valerie Ostapa-Kontos - Assistant Corporate Secretary
This conference call may contain forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, concerning BankFinancial Corporation's future operations and financial results. Such statements are based on management's views and expectations as of today, based on information presently available to management. These statements are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties as described in our annual report, on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008, and other filings with the Securities & Exchange Commission. And as a consequence, actual results may differ materially from those anticipated by the forward-looking statements. BankFinancial undertakes no duties to update forward-looking statements.

F. Morgan Gasior - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Thank you, Valerie. All filings are complete, but we do have one announcement concerning an upcoming Investor Conference. So I'd like to introduce Senior Vice President, Elizabeth Doolan with that information.

Elizabeth A. Zoolan - Senior Vice President, Controller
We will be attending the Sandler O'Neill West Coast Investor Conference on March 2nd and 3rd. For further information please contact our Investor Relations department.

F. Morgan Gasior - Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Thank you Elizabeth. All filings are complete and we have nothing new to add. So we'll be happy to open it up for questions at this time.

SHARE THIS PAGE:  Add to Delicious Delicious  Share    Bookmark and Share



 
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
You can comment on this topic
Print Topic

Email Topic

2074 Views