Ancora Issues Open Letter to Middlefield Banc Corp. Shareholders
Ancora Holdings Group, the largest shareholder of Middlefield Banc Corp. (NASDAQ: MBCN), expressed concerns regarding the Board's governance, succession planning, and operational performance. Ancora argues that MBCN has underperformed compared to industry peers and advocates for a strategic sale of the Bank, estimating a potential value of $36-$38 per share. The letter criticizes the Board's decisions, including hiring an older CEO and failing to explore merger opportunities with more dynamic management teams. Ancora emphasizes that such strategic actions are crucial for enhancing shareholder value.
- Estimated MBCN could value at $36-$38 per share based on peer transaction multiples.
- Board's poor succession planning and questionable decisions.
- Recent performance has lagged compared to peers and the broader market.
- Concerns about sustainability of earnings due to reliance on non-recurring events.
Highlights the Board's Poor Succession Planning, Abysmal Corporate Governance and
Urges the Board to Initiate a Credible Sale Process and Promptly Engage with Potential Suitors
***
Fellow Shareholders,
We estimate MBCN could be worth
In light of the Company’s response to our shareholder proposal in the 2022 proxy statement, we felt compelled to clarify several statements made by the Company.
Ancora Is a Long-Term Shareholder of MBCN
In the Company’s response to our shareholder proposal, MBCN stated, “the board of directors believes the proposal is only for the near-term benefit of the shareholder and is not in the best long-term interest of all of the Company’s shareholders.” We believe this comment typifies the narrow mindedness of incumbent Board members. Ancora has been a shareholder of MBCN for more than five years, while also currently being the Company’s largest shareholder. Our ownership position is significantly larger than the entire Board’s combined level of ownership, despite a majority of the current Board members having director tenures of at least 14 years. We question why numerous long-term directors have such low levels of ownership and have failed to make meaningful open market purchases of MBCN stock if the standalone prospects of the Company are so compelling? Below you will find a table illustrating the current directors' tenure along with the dates of their most recent open market purchases.
Board Members | ||||||||
Title | Years on Board | Years | Shares Held |
% Own |
Last Purchase |
|||
Voinovich, Michael C. | Independent Director | 2020-Present | 2 |
31,200 |
|
|
||
Heslop II, James R. | President, CEO & Director | 2001-Present | 21 |
31,499 |
|
|
||
Mast, Darryl E. | Independent Director | 2013-Present | 9 |
36,882 |
|
|
||
Skidmore, William J. | Independent Chairman of the Board | 2007-Present | 15 |
20,357 |
|
|
||
Jones, Kenneth E. | Independent Director | 2008-Present | 14 |
9,748 |
|
|
||
McCaskey, James J. | Independent Vice Chairman | 2004-Present | 18 |
9,932 |
|
|
||
Turk CPA, CPA, Carolyn J. | Independent Director | 2004-Present | 18 |
30,429 |
|
|
||
Bevan, Thomas W. | Independent Director | 2017-Present | 5 |
50,957 |
|
- |
||
DiGeronimo, Kevin A. | Director | 2021-Present | 1 |
990 |
|
- |
||
Moeller, Jennifer L. | Director | 2021-Present | 1 |
- |
|
- |
||
Board Total | 221,994 |
|
||||||
Source: |
We continue to be disappointed by the performance of MBCN’s stock price over our investment period. Despite claims that MBCN has fared well compared to the SPDR S&P Regional Bank ETF (ticker: KRE) over the last five years, the Company has underperformed since we filed our 13D on
MBCN highlights the financial services sector as being disproportionately impacted by the 2021 Russell rebalancing and cites this as a main reason for the Company’s stock price underperformance. Its response points out that 80 financial institutions were removed from the Russell 3000 Index in 2021 and suggests the current stock price is not a true reflection of the Bank's recent operating results. However, when evaluating banks with assets between
Failed Succession Planning
We viewed the succession planning process as the perfect opportunity for the Board to pursue a dual path in MBCN’s go-forward strategy. We informed the Board on multiple occasions that running a process to test the market value of the Company, while also evaluating what the Company’s standalone prospects looked like as the Board developed its three-year strategic plan was important. In our view, our advice was not followed.
The Company highlighted that we applauded the
The Company championed this initiative as taking favorable governance actions by addressing CEO succession, which ultimately led to
Peer Group Criticism
The Company indicated that the peer group we selected to compare MBCN’s performance against was not appropriate. We find this criticism disingenuous at best considering MBCN has not publicly disclosed a compensation or performance peer group in either of its last two proxy statements (or even in its current response to our proposal). We believe comparing MBCN against similar-sized Midwest banking peers is the most appropriate method to gauge how the Bank is performing given the absence of Company-defined peers. After evaluating the criticism of our peer group further, we found that the peer group which MBCN used for compensation purposes in its 2020 proxy statement included 19 banks, 16 of which had larger asset bases than MBCN, with six of those banks having asset bases twice as large as MBCN. This dynamic is quite interesting given this peer group is used in evaluating compensation for MBCN’s executives and directors. We believe the use of larger banks in this peer group is purely self-serving considering larger organizations generally have higher levels of compensation (including for their boards). Furthermore, we noticed several MBCN banking peers from the Company’s peer group have been acquired over the past four years. The average and median multiple from these transactions were 1.72x and 1.65x TBV, which would imply a
Unsustainable Earnings
MBCN is quick to highlight the strong operating results generated by the Bank during fiscal year 2021. While we acknowledge on the surface that the operating results were solid, we question the sustainability of those results for a variety of reasons. The 2021 results were anchored by prior years' benefits from PPP funding, an extremely low loan loss provision taken in 2021 and the Company’s entry into the marijuana servicing business. This confluence of events resulted in 2021 EPS of
The Company’s response touted its ROTCE versus our use of ROAE. Just to be clear from a return standpoint, we believe ROAE presents a more accurate picture of true return as it actually accounts (in the denominator) for acquisitions the Company has made to generate the earnings used in the calculation. As such, MBCN generating less than
In conclusion, we firmly believe the best way to maximize shareholder value is through a sale of the bank to a larger, more liquid partner at a significant premium to today’s stock price. We are confident there are a number of buyers willing to purchase MBCN and estimate fair value to be in the
Sincerely, |
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
Chief Executive Officer and Executive Chairman |
President |
||
|
|
***
About Ancora
Founded in 2003,
__________________________ |
1 Our transaction comps include acquired banks that were part of the Company’s previously disclosed peer group, namely banks in the peer group that were acquired over the past five years with assets between |
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220418005224/en/
gmarose@longacresquare.com / bkirpalani@longacresquare.com
Source: Ancora Holdings Group, LLC Board MembersNameTitleYears on BoardYearsShares Held% OwnLast Purchase Voinovich, Michael C.Independent Director2020-Present231,
FAQ
What is Ancora Holdings Group's position on Middlefield Banc Corp. (MBCN)?
What potential value does Ancora estimate for MBCN shares?
Why does Ancora criticize MBCN's Board of Directors?
How has MBCN's stock performance compared to its peers?