Prepared remarks
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Old National Bancorp First Quarter Earnings Conference Call. This call is being recorded and has been made accessible to the public in accordance with the SEC's Regulation FD. Corresponding presentation slides can be found on the Investor Relations page at oldnational.com and will be archived there for 12 months. Management would like to remind everyone that certain statements on today's call may be forward-looking in nature and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results or outcomes to differ from those discussed. The company refers you to its forward-looking statement legend in the earnings release and presentation slides. The company's risk factors are fully disclosed and discussed within its SEC filings. In addition, certain slides containing non-GAAP measures, which management believes provide more appropriate comparisons. These non-GAAP measures are intended to assist investors' understanding of performance trends. Reconciliations for these numbers are contained within the appendix of the presentation. I'd now like to turn the call over to Old National's Chairman and CEO, Jim Ryan for opening remarks. Mr. Ryan?
Good morning. Earlier today, Old National reported first quarter 2026 earnings that exceeded our internal expectations and analyst estimates. We carried strong momentum into the year and our performance in the first quarter reinforces our confidence in the full-year plan. This quarter demonstrates disciplined execution as we have reliably delivered quarter after quarter. We delivered robust loan growth, powered by continued strength in our core deposit franchise and disciplined funding management in a highly competitive market. We controlled expenses and generated strong fee income, which helped offset net interest income pressure from typical seasonality and the recent subordinated debt issuance. Credit performance remains solid, supported by healthy liquidity and capital levels. We also acted decisively on capital returns, repurchasing shares during the quarter, including reducing Bremer's trust position in Old National, and we intend to deploy the remaining authorization over the course of the program.
Bottom line, we are executing and we expect to keep building from here. Our priorities remain clear: drive organic growth and return capital to shareholders. Organic growth starts with talent, and we are investing accordingly. We recently announced a strengthened commercial leadership team, promoting proven internal leaders and adding experienced bankers from several super-regional institutions. Our team is focused every day on winning new clients and deepening existing relationships and building the next generation of bankers. Our commercial pipelines are at record levels, and our talent pipeline is as strong as it has ever been. We are also accelerating efficiency and scalability through technology and AI investments supporting positive operating leverage. As a result, we delivered a record adjusted efficiency ratio that remains in the top decile of our industry. On the operating environment, the quarter brought a higher-for-longer rate outlook and continued industry uncertainty.
Old National is built for this backdrop. Our balance sheet remains neutral to the short end of the curve, our granular low-cost deposit base helps contain funding costs and our strong underwriting and straightforward community banking model positions us to perform through volatility. Importantly, nothing we are seeing changes our outlook. Loan pipelines are at record levels. Momentum is building, and we remain confident in our full-year expectations. To close, we're off to a great start in 2026, and we're executing against our commitments. Our focus remains on organic growth and disciplined capital return. This is not a time where we need acquisitions to achieve our objectives. I want to thank our team for delivering a strong quarter and for staying relentlessly focused on our clients. With that, I'll turn the call over to John to walk through the quarter's financial results in more detail.
Thanks. As Jim mentioned and as summarized on Slide 4, we delivered another strong quarter and a solid start to the year, reflecting continued momentum in organic growth, disciplined expense management, stable credit performance and increased capital return with robust capital levels. Beginning on Slide 5, we reported GAAP first-quarter earnings per share of $0.59. Excluding $0.02 of merger-related expenses and a noncash expense associated with the final distribution of a legacy First Midwest pension plan, adjusted earnings per share were $0.61. Results were driven by better-than-expected loan growth and fee income along with well-controlled expenses. Credit remained stable with less than 20 basis points of non-PCD charge-offs. Our profitability profile as measured by return on assets and on tangible common equity remain top decile versus our peers. Capital finished the quarter with CET1 over 11% and we grew tangible book value per share 6% annualized and 11% year-over-year despite absorbing the majority of Bremer one-time charges, better-than-expected balance sheet growth and returning capital to shareholders in dividends and share repurchases.
Specifically, during the first quarter, we returned $151 million to shareholders. On Slide 6, you can see our quarterly balance sheet trends, underscoring strength in our liquidity and capital positions. Our loan-to-deposit ratio remained 89% and the CET1 ratio is comfortably north of 11%. Again, we compounded tangible book value per share year-over-year despite the impact of the Bremer close merger charges over the past year and the increased pace of capital return. We repurchased 3.9 million shares during the current quarter and 6.1 million shares over the last year. With dividends and repurchases, our combined payout ratio was 64% of first-quarter adjusted net income to common. As we've stated in the last several quarters, the best investment we can make today is ourselves. On Slide 7, we show trends in earning assets. Total loans grew 8% annualized from the last quarter, led by 16.9% annualized growth in C&I. Production was diversified across our commercial book and the next few quarters should be supported by record-high pipelines of $5.5 billion, up nearly 14% from year-end levels.
The investment portfolio was essentially unchanged from the prior quarter with portfolio purchases offset by changes in fair values. We expect approximately $2.4 billion in cash flow over the next 12 months. Today, new money yields are running about 83 basis points above back-book yields on securities. Strong loan growth, ongoing repricing across both loans and securities and continued deposit pricing discipline supports stable to improving net interest income and net interest margin over the course of 2026. I would point out that the first quarter was impacted by two fewer days, our subordinated debt issuance in late January and the spread dynamics inherent in this quarter's loan production, which was skewed decidedly toward near investment-grade floating-rate C&I. Moving to Slide 8, we show trends in deposits. Total deposits increased 4.2% annualized, primarily driven by commercial and retail growth and partially offset by seasonally lower public funds balances.
As a reminder, first quarter is the low point for our public funds deposits with those balances typically rebuilding over the second and third quarters. Noninterest-bearing deposits declined slightly to 23% of total deposits from 24% in the prior quarter, partly reflecting the seasonal factors I just mentioned. Despite remaining on offense with respect to client acquisition in a competitive deposit environment, we were able to decrease total deposit costs by 8 basis points and lowered interest-bearing deposit costs even better by 14 basis points linked quarter. We achieved an approximate 93% beta in our exception-priced book in conjunction with the Fed cuts in the fourth quarter. These actions resulted in a spot rate of 170 basis points on total deposits at March 31. Overall, our deposit strategy performed as we expected, and we successfully achieved the down-rate beta that we had targeted for this rate cycle.
Slide 9 shows our quarterly income statement trends. As I mentioned earlier, adjusted earnings per share were $0.61 for the quarter, and our profitability remains peer-leading. Moving on to Slide 10, we present details of our net interest income and margin, both of which reflect my prior comments around day count, the nature of this quarter's loan production and the impact of our subordinated debt issuance. You'll note that we remain neutral to short-term interest rates, and we have a total of nearly $8 billion in fixed-rate loans and securities expected to reprice over the next 12 months. Slide 11 shows trends in adjusted noninterest income, which was $122 million for the quarter, exceeding our guidance. While most of our fee businesses performed in line with our expectations, we again saw better-than-expected performance within mortgage despite typical seasonal patterns in that business and within capital markets.
In both cases, this was driven by the mid-quarter dip in rates. Continuing to Slide 12, adjusted noninterest expense was $354 million for the quarter. Run-rate expenses remained well controlled, and we generated positive operating leverage, both quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year. We reported a record-low 46% adjusted efficiency ratio, and we have now realized 100% of the $111 million of annual run-rate cost saves that were anticipated with Bremer. On Slide 13, we present our credit trends. Total net charge-offs were 26 basis points or 19 basis points, excluding charge-offs on PCD loans. Criticized and classified loans increased $113 million this quarter as Bremer loans transitioned to Old National's asset quality framework consistent with our due diligence expectations. Legacy Old National upgrades partly offset this increase. Nonaccrual loans to total loans decreased modestly, the fourth consecutive quarter of improving performance trends due to active portfolio management.
The first-quarter allowance for credit losses to total loans, including the reserve for unfunded commitments, was 122 basis points, down 2 basis points from the prior quarter, primarily driven by charge-offs on PCD loans and loan growth in lower-risk portfolios. Consistent with the fourth quarter, our qualitative reserves incorporate a 100% weighting on the Moody's S2 scenario with additional qualitative factors to capture global economic uncertainty. Lastly, given the continued focus on loans to nondepository financial institutions, we'd again like to emphasize that our exposure is de minimis. All said, MDFIs are approximately 1% of total loans, all are performing and, like other businesses that we bank, most are long-standing client relationships. Slide 14 presents key credit metrics relative to peers. As discussed in past calls, we've historically experienced a lower conversion rate of NPLs to NCOs as compared to our peers, driven by our approach to credit and client selection.
That continues to be the case, and we remain comfortable around the credit outlook. On Slide 15, you can see our capital position at the end of the quarter. Regulatory ratios and TCE were stable linked quarter as strong retained earnings were offset by the robust quarterly loan growth, share repurchases and merger-related charges. Still, tangible book value per share was up 6% linked-quarter annualized and 11% year-over-year. Our peer-leading profitability profile continues to generate significant capital, which opened the door for capital return late last year. As previously mentioned, we repurchased 3.9 million shares of common stock during the first quarter and have $383 million remaining under our program. Lastly, of note, while not yet finalized, we would clearly expect a capital benefit under the proposed capital rule changes. This would mainly come from reductions in RWA treatment within our mortgage book and changes to the treatment of unfunded commitments over one year.
Obviously, these changes, if finalized, could present meaningful capital optionality. In any case, we feel confident in our plans to continue to execute on our buyback plan, which runs through the end of February. Slide 16 includes our outlook for the full year 2026, which is unchanged from our prior guidance. We believe our current pipeline supports full-year loan growth of 4% to 6% and based on the results of the first quarter, we suspect we may trend to the higher end of this range. We anticipate continued success in the execution of our deposit strategy and expect to meet or exceed industry growth in 2026, generally in line with our asset growth. Our NII guidance remains unchanged, and our balance sheet remains neutrally positioned to short-term interest rates. Obviously, the exact path of NIM and NII in 2026 will depend on growth dynamics, the shape of the yield curve, the absolute level of rates in the belly of the curve and the competitive landscape, but our base-case outlook assumes the Fed is done for the balance of this year and that the 5-year, which has been volatile year-to-date, stabilizes at about current levels.
We expect our fee businesses to perform well, supported by a robust loan pipeline that is driving capital markets activity, along with continued momentum in our wealth management and brokerage businesses. To that end, we believe we would trend towards the higher end of our full-year fee income guidance. Expense guidance is unchanged despite a lower-than-expected outcome in the first quarter, but this is due to a robust talent pipeline and our expectation of continued investment in operational excellence. As a reminder, second quarter includes normal seasonal factors such as merit increases. Our expectations for credit and income tax rates are unchanged. In aggregate, you'll note that we expect full-year results that yield 15% plus growth in earnings per share and again feature positive operating leverage with peer-leading profitability, good growth in fees, controlled expenses and normalized credit.
To close, the first quarter sets the tone for the rest of 2026, and we are on the front foot. We intend to stay there. Organic loan growth was strong and pipelines are healthy. We maintain a granular low-cost deposit franchise and our credit book remains stable. That gives us the flexibility to invest in ourselves in talent and in capabilities while continuing to return capital to shareholders. As Jim said at the top of the call, Old National enters the balance of 2026 with good momentum and added conviction in our ability to execute. With those comments, I'd like to open the call for your questions.
Questions and answers
The conference call will now be open for questions. Our first question comes from the line of Scott Siefers with Piper Sandler.
John, I was hoping you could please walk through sort of the major drivers of NII momentum going forward. I know you touched on the seasonality in the first quarter and the impact of the subordinated debt issuance, but just that because I think the year started a little weaker than at least the market had expected those idiosyncratic factors notwithstanding. But you kept the guide, I think the quarterly NII will need to average about 5% higher through the remainder of the year to get to the midpoint. So just sort of what gives you confidence in the guide and what are the major puts and takes you see.
Yes. So obviously, I think, first and foremost, we've got a more cooperative yield curve today than what we had on average for the first quarter. So that will be a helper. And then we've got $5.5 billion sitting in the pipeline, up 14% year-over-year, and we feel really good about the growth outlook. What's driving that is a little bit more balanced in terms of CRE versus C&I than what we saw in the first quarter. So I think the spread implications of that are favorable to us as we look forward into second and third quarter.
Okay. Perfect. And then, so that sort of touches on the second one, which was the margin specifically. Presumably that beneficial mix shift in the loan portfolio should be helpful. But when we think about the launching point of the 3.55% margin, are there any other factors that would cause it to jump up from here? I think in your prepared remarks you suggested stable to improving trends for both NII and the margin.
Yes. I think stable to improving is the right way to think about it. Recall, we will get 4 basis points back on day count and so that will kind of be the launch point there. And yes, I think stable to improve is the name of the game for this year.
Our next question comes from the line of Ben Gerlinger with Citi.
I just want to double check to run through the numbers a little quick. You said loans high end of the range; you're building out a bigger team and hiring. You guys say the higher end of the range on expenses? Or is it still within that despite the lower core in first quarter?
I'm just going to walk back on one thing that you said. So we said loans high end of range, NII guidance is unchanged, fees high end of range and expenses is unchanged despite a better-than-expected outcome in the first quarter. And that piece of the guide, Ben, on the operating expense side is really not the talent pipeline that Tim and Jim are building. I think we're having more conversations today than at any other time that I can remember since I've been at Old National, and we're really excited about that pipeline.
Yes, I apologize. It was on the higher side, but you're still good. I just wanted to push you a little bit here. Things are looking good, you're hiring and you're setting up; the hires today are obviously not impacting much for growth in 2026, call it more of a 2027 and 2028 story. Both look good. Why not be more aggressive on the shareholder buyback or return?
Well, I think we feel really good about where capital is. We fully intend to use the $383 million remaining on the existing authorization through its expiration in February. A combined payout ratio that's close to two-thirds of what we generated in the first quarter while still being able to support loan growth, I think, is a pretty good place to be. So we feel comfortable with where we are. And obviously, if those capital rules become final, we'll have additional optionality and will consider what to do with that.
Incremental to everything we're doing today.
Exactly.
Our next question comes from the line of Brendan Nosal with Hovde Group.
Starting off on loan growth here. I know you've been kind of working towards these numbers for years and years in terms of the bank's growth capacity, but it really feels like something clicked this quarter and will continue to click for you through the balance of the year. Has anything changed environmentally in your favor? Or is this just kind of the culmination of a lot of effort?
Thanks for the question. We're leaning into go-to-market strategies. We're really focusing on sales excellence and just being tighter in who we're targeting, how we're targeting and leveraging the full plethora of products and our platform that we have to offer. We've seen that really come together nicely this quarter, and we like the trends that we see in the record pipelines that we have. We think that will continue to come to fruition. And as we add more bankers and more talent, we like the opportunity to continue to drive that growth going forward.
Okay. Great. Maybe pivoting to capital. I heard the commentary on the proposed capital rules and the benefits that would drive for you and others, and I think you mentioned that opens up the option set down the road. I mean can you walk through that? I think at the near-term buyback commentary and lack of interest in M&A at present. But longer term, if you and others are sitting with more capital, what does that allow you to do longer term?
For us, I think you'd see a reduction in risk-weighted assets roughly in line with what others estimated for midsized banks. On our balance sheet, the two biggest drivers of that are the LTVs in our one- to four-family book and the treatment of line utilization over one year. There were some banks that shortened commitments to under one year historically; Old National never did that. So the capital treatment on that piece of our book will be favorable. I think in total, it could be up to 100 basis points, give or take, on CET1, and that is not a level that we're going to run the bank at. Foremost, it would support continued organic growth and, secondly, return of capital. I think it's also just getting comfortable with where the industry settles at: what is the right CET1 ratio, what are the right TCE ratios to run the organization long term. The industry is still trying to find that target level. Clearly, we believe we have a lower-risk model and should be at the peer average or lower, but there's a lot of work to kind of get there to define what those normalized levels should be.
Our next question comes from the line of Chris McGratty with KBW.
On the Basel discussion, the 100 basis points that John referenced, ballpark. We've heard a lot of banks in follow-up calls talk about the importance of balancing CET1 and TCE. One going as far as saying 8% might be the right number for TCE. How do you view the interplay between the two?
I think those are the two metrics, and we have long been sensitive to both. We feel really good about where we are in TCE as evidenced by the fact that we're returning a pretty significant chunk of capital in the quarter and a 64% combined payout ratio on the quarter's core net income, while still supporting organic growth. As Jim said, we still have to figure out what the right long-term numbers are as an industry and then what's appropriate for Old National Bank, but we feel really good about where we are.
The challenge becomes from a stress-testing perspective: we feel really good about our capital levels and we could push it harder. But there becomes a point in time when under periods of stress, banks with higher capital levels may feel less pain. So we're trying to figure out what's the right long-term view and not get caught up in any short-term window. And we need to balance all stakeholders as Chris suggested.
As you stay at these levels on deposit pricing, if the forward curve is right and there are no more cuts, or reading that 170 basis points spot, are you basically flatlined until the Fed moves again?
I think we still have some opportunity in the back book. We've definitely got some opportunity with brokered deposits, but I think the material decreases in spot rate are probably behind us if the Fed is done for the year, which is our base-case expectation. Deposit competition is intense but rational. The environment around specials has stayed a bit frothy longer than we would have hoped for as an industry.
Our next question comes from the line of Sun Young (Janet) Lee with TD Cowen.
When I look at Slide 10 on the impact to net interest margin, that 19 basis point negative impact from rate and volume mix, relative to 5.88% total loan yields for the quarter, should we expect that loan yields to increase in the second quarter as the rate impact is decreasing or basically gone? The first quarter had an overly high concentration of higher-quality C&I loans, which carry lower spreads. I just want to get a sense of what a good loan yield is to start off as we head into the second quarter.
I think you've got the moving parts right. On margin overall, 10 basis points of that was day count for us. The balance was sort of spread down and most of that was offset by funding costs. And then there was a de minimis amount just on churn in the book, call it 4 or 5 basis points on loan yields. Going forward, much like margin, it's kind of stable to improving and will depend a little bit on the business mix of production.
When I look in the pipeline, a couple factors on the loan side: a greater portion of our pipeline is being driven in community markets, where we see a little less competition, and in segments of our strong community markets where we have great market share and good brand, those are picking up. Secondly, a larger part of our pipeline for the second quarter is in core middle market, third- and fourth-generation companies where you can tend to get a little more spread on that as well. You also can get good core operating deposits with those loans. So as we look at the mix, second quarter compared to first quarter, timing-wise, the first quarter had some of the higher-quality loans with slightly lower interest rates. In the second quarter, we see that mix shifting.
Got it. That's very helpful. And I would also love to hear a little bit more about what you're doing on the AI front that you mentioned earlier that's helping on efficiency and across the enterprise?
So like others, we are investing in AI. We've got an AI center of excellence stood up within our technology and data teams. I would describe our progress to date as a lot of singles and doubles. A real example we shared is we had some old Power BI legacy code that we lifted and shifted into a new data environment. It was clunky. We used AI to clean it up and what would have taken some of our best programmers months to clean up was done in a week. That's a single example. We have several interesting use cases we are evaluating. Probably the first one we're going to dive deeper into is in risk management. If you think about everything that needs to be built to embed risk into the first line, many of those jobs are checkers of checkers. That's a perfect AI use case and something that, frankly, large banks have staffed heavily. The cost of that work is a fraction of what it would have been even three years ago because of advancements in AI. So we're excited about it. There's a lot at the bank that we think will help drive efficiencies and free up dollars for us to invest in revenue-facing talent and capabilities.
Our next question comes from the line of Brian Foran with Truist Securities.
So the loan growth momentum: if it continues to be at the high end or above the guide, do you think earning assets will be growing at the same level? Or is there some point where if loan growth starts to be 7% or 8% you should moderate securities and cash a little bit?
I think it's fair to think about everything sort of growing about lockstep. So as loan growth goes, the liquidity book would grow with it.
Got it. And then on the Basel discussion, I know it's very early and the proposals could change, but you referenced how some specific areas get much better treatment. Do you think this is big enough where from a strategic standpoint you might do more hiring or focus in certain types of lending or deemphasize others? Is this a big enough move that you'll remix the business a bit to optimize around it?
It's probably a little early to say for sure, but one area to watch is the one- to four-family treatment. It seems clear regulators are trying to encourage banks to be back in that business in a somewhat more meaningful way. There are interesting implications to that which we would think through if it became permanent.
Our next question comes from the line of Brandon Rudd with Stephens.
My first question, if I could drill in on loan yields a bit. I know it's primarily rate mark related now, but do you have the purchase accounting accretion for the quarter?
Not handy. It was roughly unchanged, though. I think the net of purchase accounting accretion and interest collected on nonaccrual was a wash — no impact on overall margin.
Got you. And then for the other side of the balance sheet, I heard your earlier comments about deposit-cost competition. A superregional bank last week said the Midwest is a bit more competitive than other regions. Since your footprint stretches across the Midwest, are there markets in particular where you're seeing more competition than others?
In the Midwest, no, not really. Our most competitive market is probably Nashville. We don't really have a large back book in Nashville compared to other markets. Most of our markets are competitive but rational.
Some of the large national players are hanging pretty steamy rates out there. That's primarily competing with our wealth and private-client businesses, which can be a little bit challenging at times.
Our next question comes from the line of David Chiaverini with Jefferies.
On expenses, can you talk about areas of investment and how we should think about positive operating leverage, the extent to which it should come through based on the guide? We're modeling pretty decent operating leverage. Can you talk about those things?
We are likewise modeling pretty decent positive operating leverage on the year, David. When we stack it up against our executive peers, we were either number one or number two on that metric for this year. Our expectation is that we'll continue to drive quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year positive operating leverage, and we walk into every single budget cycle with that as a guiding principle. It's an important metric and something we're focused on, and I think it will deliver in 2026 for sure.
Great. And then shifting over to your comment about pipelines on the loan side being up 14% — great to hear. Any particular industries that are driving that?
They're pretty balanced, no real industry concentration. We've seen a nice pickup in CRE pipelines. Across the board, C&I remains strong. CRE is building and we've seen markets like Minnesota where momentum is building and pipelines are higher than they've been in the last 18 months. It's a good mix of CRE and C&I with no industry concentration.
Our next question comes from the line of Jonathan Rau on for Jared Shaw with Barclays.
Just looking at some of the components of deposit pricing, it seems like the exception book has been driving most of the downward pressure on deposit costs and the non-exception book might be even going up a little bit in terms of average cost. Can you talk about the dynamics there? And is there any emphasis being placed on moving to more weighting towards exception pricing?
The exception book is where we saw all of our up-rate beta, and that's how we've always managed deposit costs at Old National. It's where we've experienced the down-rate beta as well. We're pleased with how that's performed. If you're looking at quarterly puts and takes on deposits, remember there are seasonal factors in the first quarter. Our public funds balances are at a low point in Q1 and those rebuild in Q2 and Q3, and there's some seasonality in our noninterest-bearing balances on both the commercial and public side in the first quarter. That may explain the quarter's deposit-cost dynamics.
Okay. Great. That's good color. And maybe just a little more on the leadership changes in commercial banking bringing in Chris. Is there any specific expertise in terms of lending verticals or anywhere else that he brings that would alter the pace or areas that you're hiring in?
Chris's background is diverse, and we're very excited about what he can bring. Primarily on the C&I side when you think about asset-based lending and core C&I middle-market banking — the old-school banking we're known for — I think Chris will help drive that growth. At the same time, John Thurston on the corporate banking side, as our leader and President of that area, brings depth with a 30-plus year career across business banking, commercial banking and corporate banking. We're excited about the depth they bring to grow our business.
Our next question comes from the line of Jon Arfstrom with RBC Capital Markets.
We were just in Minneapolis yesterday. I didn't see you in the Skyway.
No, I had a seatbelt on my office chair. Can't leave my desk. A few follow-ups. John, you said the yield curve maybe is a little bit more cooperative now. What changed, what makes it more cooperative and what's more ideal for you guys?
Well, the 5-year came back to around 3.90%, which is definitely helpful and there's a bit more steepness finally. A little bit better belly is certainly helpful for us.
Okay. And then just following up on the positive operating leverage question. You flagged a record adjusted efficiency ratio this quarter of 45.7%, which is great. Are you saying that could go lower, John? Is that the message?
I think we're going to try to keep it where it is or maybe grind it lower.
The tension for me is that we don't want that metric to inhibit investing in our future, in talent. We inherently know that if we're able to successfully convert this talent pipeline, the breakeven timeline is roughly 18 months, and top-decile talent comes at higher cost. I don't want the 45% efficiency number to be a blocker to investing. If we have to raise the expense guide because we successfully recruit great talent, I wouldn't be upset about that and would happily come back and explain it.
Fair. And then the last one on the buyback: you flagged that you bought a piece of the buyback from Bremer's trust. How much is left there? Were those negotiated transactions? What's the plan and how much did you get from the trust?
We actually flagged that transaction when we did it. It was around $50 million of stock. We filed on it. They see long-term value in ownership and we expect them to remain long-term owners. We're sensitive to the concentration they bring. The lockup expires soon, but based on our conversations I don't see them doing anything different in the near future. We have the right of first refusal, so to the extent they want to come to market, we'll be there to support that. But I don't anticipate that based on our most recent conversations.
There are no further questions at this time. I'd like to turn the call back to Jim Ryan for closing remarks.
We appreciate everybody's support. As usual, we'll be here all day to answer any follow-up questions. Thanks so much.
This concludes Old National's call. Once again, a replay, along with the presentation slides, will be available for 12 months on the Investor Relations page of Old National's website, oldnational.com. A replay of the call will also be available by dialing (800) 770-2030 access code 9394540 and this replay will be available through May 6. If anyone has additional questions, please contact Lynell Durkol at (812) 464-1366. Thank you for your participation in today's conference call, and you may now disconnect.