Capital City Bank Group - 10-Q quarterly report FY

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20549

FORM 10-Q

 

 

For the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2008

OR

For the transition period from ____________ to ____________

Commission File Number: 0-13358

 

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes x  No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company.  See definitions of "large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer", and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o  No x

At July 31, 2008, 17,123,475 shares of the Registrant's Common Stock, $.01 par value, were outstanding.

CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC.

QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q

FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2008

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

Caution Concerning Forward-Looking Statements

This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.  These forward-looking statements include, among others, statements about our beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, estimates and intentions that are subject to significant risks and uncertainties and are subject to change based on various factors, many of which are beyond our control.  The words "may," "could," "should," "would," "believe," "anticipate," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "plan," "target," "goal," and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements.

All forward-looking statements, by their nature, are subject to risks and uncertainties.  Our actual future results may differ materially from those set forth in our forward-looking statements.

Our ability to achieve our financial objectives could be adversely affected by the factors discussed in detail in Part I, Item 2., “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Part II, Item 1A. “Risk Factors” in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, the following sections of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the “2007 Form 10-K”): (a) “Introductory Note” in Part I, Item 1. “Business”; (b) “Risk Factors” in Part I, Item 1A., as updated in our subsequent quarterly reports filed on Form 10-Q, and (c) “Introduction” in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” in Part II, Item 7. as well as:

 

However, other factors besides those referenced also could adversely affect our results, and you should not consider any such list of factors to be a complete set of all potential risks or uncertainties.  Any forward-looking statements made by us or on our behalf speak only as of the date they are made.  We do not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, except as required by applicable law.

PARTI. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.               CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited)

CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION

AS OF JUNE 30, 2008 AND DECEMBER 31, 2007

The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements.

CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME

FOR THE THREE AND SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30

The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements.

CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN SHAREOWNERS' EQUITY

The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements.

CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30

The accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements.

CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Basis of Presentation

Capital City Bank Group, Inc. (“CCBG” or the “Company”) provides a full range of banking and banking-related services to individual and corporate clients through its subsidiary, Capital City Bank, with banking offices located in Florida, Georgia, and Alabama.  The Company is subject to competition from other financial institutions, is subject to regulation by certain government agencies and undergoes periodic examinations by those regulatory authorities.

The unaudited consolidated financial statements included herein have been prepared by the Company pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, including Regulation S-X.  Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations.  Prior period financial statements have been reformatted and amounts reclassified, as necessary, to conform with the current presentation.  The Company and its subsidiary follow accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) and reporting practices applicable to the banking industry.  The principles that materially affect its financial position, results of operations and cash flows are set forth in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements which are included in the 2007 Form 10-K.

In the opinion of management, the consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments, which are those of a recurring nature, and disclosures necessary to present fairly the financial position of the Company as of June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007, the results of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007, and cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007.

The amortized cost and related market value of investment securities available-for-sale were as follows:

The composition of the Company's loan portfolio was as follows:

Net deferred fees included in loans at June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007 were $1.8 million and $1.6 million, respectively.

Above loan balances include loans in process with outstanding balances of $9.5 million and $7.4 million at June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007, respectively.

NOTE 4 - ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES

An analysis of the changes in the allowance for loan losses for the six month periods ended June 30 was as follows:

Impaired Loans.  On a non-recurring basis, loans are considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due in accordance with the original contractual terms of the loan agreement, including scheduled principal and interest payments.  Selected information pertaining to impaired loans is depicted in the table below:

The Company had net intangible assets of $95.6 million and $98.6 million at June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007, respectively.  Intangible assets were as follows:

Net Core Deposit Intangibles:  As of June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007, the Company had net core deposit intangibles of $9.8 million and $12.6 million, respectively.  Amortization expense for the first six months of 2008 and 2007 was approximately $2.8 million.  Estimated annual amortization expense is $5.5 million.

Goodwill:  As of June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007, the Company had goodwill, net of accumulated amortization, of $84.8 million.  Goodwill is the Company's only intangible asset that is no longer subject to amortization under the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets.”

Other:  As of June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007, the Company had a customer relationship intangible, net of accumulated amortization, of $1.1 million and $1.2 million, respectively.  This intangible was recorded as a result of the March 2004 acquisition of trust customer relationships from Synovus Trust Company.  Amortization expense for the first six months of 2008 and 2007 was approximately $96,000.  Estimated annual amortization expense is approximately $191,000 based on use of a 10-year useful life.

NOTE 6 - DEPOSITS

The composition of the Company's interest bearing deposits at June 30, 2008 and December 31, 2007 was as follows:

The Company recognizes the cost of stock-based associate stock compensation in accordance with SFAS No. 123R, "Share-Based Payment” (Revised) under the fair value method.

As of June 30, 2008, the Company had three stock-based compensation plans, consisting of the 2005 Associate Incentive Plan ("AIP"), the 2005 Associate Stock Purchase Plan ("ASPP"), and the 2005 Director Stock Purchase Plan ("DSPP").  Total compensation expense associated with these plans for the six months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007 was approximately $208,000 and $137,000, respectively.  The Company, under the terms and conditions of the AIP, maintained a 2011 Incentive Plan (“2011 Plan”) which was terminated in March 2008 and approximately $577,000 in related expense accrued for this plan was reversed during the first quarter of 2008.

AIP.  The Company's AIP allows the Company's Board of Directors to award key associates various forms of equity-based incentive compensation.  Under the AIP, the Company adopted the Stock-Based Incentive Plan (the "2006 Incentive Plan"), effective January 1, 2006, which was a performance-based equity bonus plan for selected members of management, including all executive officers.  Under the 2006 Incentive Plan, all participants were eligible to earn an equity award, in the form of performance shares, on an annual basis over a term of five years.  Annual awards were tied to an internally established annual earnings target linked to the Company’s 2011 strategic initiative.

The Company terminated the 2006 Incentive Plan in March 2008 in conjunction with the termination of the Company’s 2011 strategic initiative.  Due to the performance targets not being met, no expense was recognized in 2008 or 2007 for the 2006 Incentive Plan.

During the first quarter of 2008, under the terms and conditions of the AIP, the Company adopted a new Stock-Based Incentive Plan (the “2008 Incentive Plan”), substantially similar to the 2006 Incentive Plan.  All participants in this plan are eligible to earn an equity award, in the form of restricted stock.  The award for 2008 is tied to internally established performance goals.  The grant-date fair value of the compensation award for 2008 is approximately $561,000.  In addition, each plan participant is eligible to receive from the Company a tax supplement bonus equal to 31% of the stock award value at the time of issuance.  A total of 21,146 shares are eligible for issuance.

A total of 875,000 shares of common stock have been reserved for issuance under the AIP.  To date, the Company has issued a total of 60,892 shares of common stock under the AIP.

Executive Stock Option Agreement.  For 2003 through 2006, under the provisions of the AIP (and its predecessor), the Company's Board of Directors approved stock option agreements for a key executive officer (William G. Smith, Jr. - Chairman, President and CEO, CCBG).  These agreements granted a non-qualified stock option award upon achieving certain annual earnings per share conditions set by the Board, subject to certain vesting requirements.  The options granted under the agreements have a term of ten years and vested at a rate of one-third on each of the first, second, and third anniversaries of the date of grant.  Under the 2004 and 2003 agreements, 37,246 and 23,138 options, respectively, were issued, none of which have been exercised.  The fair value of a 2004 option was $13.42, and the fair value of a 2003 option was $11.64.  The exercise prices for the 2004 and 2003 options are $32.69 and $32.96, respectively.  Under the 2006 and 2005 agreements, the earnings per share conditions were not met; therefore, no options were granted and no expense was recognized related to these agreements.  In accordance with the provisions of SFAS 123R and SFAS 123, the Company recognized expenses in 2005 through 2007 of approximately $193,000, $205,000, and $125,000, respectively, related to the 2004 and 2003 agreements.  In 2007, the Company replaced its practice of entering into a stock option arrangement by establishing a Performance Share Unit Plan under the provisions of the AIP that allows the executive to earn shares based on the compound annual growth rate in diluted earnings per share over a three-year period.  The details of this program for the executive are outlined in a Form 8-K filing dated January 31, 2007.  No expense related to this plan was recognized for the first six months of 2008 as results fell short of the earnings performance goal.

A summary of the status of the Company’s option shares as of June 30, 2008 is presented below:

As of June 30, 2008, there was no unrecognized compensation cost related to the option shares granted under the agreements. 

DSPP.  The Company's DSPP allows the directors to purchase the Company's common stock at a price equal to 90% of the closing price on the date of purchase.  Stock purchases under the DSPP are limited to the amount of the director’s annual cash compensation.  The DSPP has 93,750 shares reserved for issuance.  A total of 39,817 shares have been issued since the inception of the DSPP.  For the first six months of 2008, the Company recognized approximately $21,000 in expense related to this plan.  For the first six months of 2007, the Company recognized approximately $23,000 in expense related to the DSPP.

ASPP.  Under the Company's ASPP, substantially all associates may purchase the Company's common stock through payroll deductions at a price equal to 90% of the lower of the fair market value at the beginning or end of each six-month offering period.  Stock purchases under the ASPP are limited to 10% of an associate's eligible compensation, up to a maximum of $25,000 (fair market value on each enrollment date) in any plan year.  Shares are issued at the beginning of the quarter following each six-month offering period.  The ASPP has 593,750 shares of common stock reserved for issuance.  A total of 69,749 shares have been issued since inception of the ASPP.  For the first six months of 2008, the Company recognized approximately $58,000 in expense related to this plan.  For the first six months of 2007, the Company recognized $51,000 in expense related to the ASPP.

Based on the Black-Scholes option pricing model, the weighted average estimated fair value of each of the purchase rights granted under the ASPP was $5.51 for the first six months of 2008.  For the first six months of 2007, the weighted average fair value purchase right granted was $5.91.  In calculating compensation, the fair value of each stock purchase right was estimated on the date of grant using the following weighted average assumptions:

NOTE 8 - EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLANS

The Company has a defined benefit pension plan covering substantially all full-time and eligible part-time associates and a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (“SERP”) covering its executive officers.

The components of the net periodic benefit costs for the Company's qualified benefit pension plan were as follows:

The components of the net periodic benefit costs for the Company's SERP were as follows:

Lending Commitments.  The Company is a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risks in the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of its clients.  These financial instruments consist of commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit.

The Company’s maximum exposure to credit loss under standby letters of credit and commitments to extend credit is represented by the contractual amount of those instruments.  The Company uses the same credit policies in establishing commitments and issuing letters of credit as it does for on-balance sheet instruments.  As of June 30, 2008, the amounts associated with the Company’s off-balance sheet obligations were as follows:

Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a client so long as there is no violation of any condition established in the contract.  Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require payment of a fee.  Since many of the commitments are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash requirements.

Contingencies.  The Company is a party to lawsuits and claims arising out of the normal course of business.  In management's opinion, there are no known pending claims or litigation, the outcome of which would, individually or in the aggregate, have a material effect on the consolidated results of operations, financial position, or cash flows of the Company.

Indemnification Obligation.  The Company is a member of the Visa U.S.A. network.  Visa U.S.A believes that its member banks are required to indemnify Visa U.S.A. for potential future settlement of certain litigation (the “Covered Litigation”).  The Company recorded a charge in its fourth quarter 2007 financial statements of approximately $1.9 million, or $0.07 per diluted common share, to recognize its proportionate contingent liability related to the costs of the judgments and settlements from the Covered Litigation.

The Company reversed a portion of the Covered Litigation accrual in the amount of approximately $1.1 million to account for the establishment of an escrow account by Visa Inc., the parent company of Visa U.S.A., in conjunction with Visa’s initial public offering during the first quarter of 2008.  This escrow account was established to pay the costs of the judgments and settlements from the Covered Litigation.  Approximately $0.8 million remains accrued for the contingent liability related to remaining Covered Litigation.

NOTE 10 - COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

SFAS No. 130, "Reporting Comprehensive Income," requires that certain transactions and other economic events that bypass the income statement be displayed as other comprehensive income.  Comprehensive income totaled $3.7 million and $12.0 million, respectively, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2008, and $7.3 million and $14.6 million, respectively, for the comparable periods in 2007.  The Company’s comprehensive income consists of net income and changes in unrealized gains and losses on securities available-for-sale (net of income taxes) and changes in the pension liability (net of taxes).  The after-tax reduction in net unrealized gains on securities totaled approximately ($1,065,000) and ($79,000), respectively, for the three and six months ended June, 2008.  The after-tax increase in net unrealized losses on securities totaled approximately $585,000 and $270,000, respectively, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2007.  Reclassification adjustments consist only of realized gains and losses on sales of investment securities and were not material for the three and six months ended June 30, 2008 and 2007.

NOTE 11 – FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

Effective January 1, 2008, the Company adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 157, "Fair Value Measurements," for financial assets and financial liabilities.  In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Staff Position No. 157-2, "Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157," the Company will delay application of SFAS 157 for non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, until January 1, 2009.  SFAS 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles and expands disclosures about fair value measurements.

SFAS 157 defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants. A fair value measurement assumes that the transaction to sell the asset or transfer the liability occurs in the principal market for the asset or liability or, in the absence of a principal market, the most advantageous market for the asset or liability.  The price in the principal (or most advantageous) market used to measure the fair value of the asset or liability shall not be adjusted for transaction costs.  An orderly transaction is a transaction that assumes exposure to the market for a period prior to the measurement date to allow for marketing activities that are usual and customary for transactions involving such assets and liabilities; it is not a forced transaction.  Market participants are buyers and sellers in the principal market that are (i) independent, (ii) knowledgeable, (iii) able to transact and (iv) willing to transact.

SFAS 157 requires the use of valuation techniques that are consistent with the market approach, the income approach and/or the cost approach.  The market approach uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets and liabilities.  The income approach uses valuation techniques to convert future amounts, such as cash flows or earnings, to a single present amount on a discounted basis.  The cost approach is based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of an asset (replacement cost). Valuation techniques should be consistently applied.  Inputs to valuation techniques refer to the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability.  Inputs may be observable, meaning those that reflect the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability developed based on market data obtained from independent sources, or unobservable, meaning those that reflect the reporting entity's own assumptions about the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability developed based on the best information available in the circumstances.  In that regard, SFAS 157 establishes a fair value hierarchy for valuation inputs that gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs.  The fair value hierarchy is as follows:

Level 1 Inputs -Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the reporting entity has the ability to access at the measurement date.

Level 2 Inputs - Inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. These might include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability (such as interest rates, volatilities, prepayment speeds, credit risks, etc.) or inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by market data by correlation or other means.

Level 3 Inputs -Unobservable inputs for determining the fair values of assets or liabilities that reflect an entity's own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the assets or liabilities.

A description of the valuation methodologies used for instruments measured at fair value, as well as the general classification of such instruments pursuant to the valuation hierarchy, is set forth below. These valuation methodologies were applied to all of the Company’s financial assets and financial liabilities carried at fair value effective January 1, 2008.

In general, fair value is based upon quoted market prices, where available.  If such quoted market prices are not available, fair value is based upon models that primarily use, as inputs, observable market-based parameters.  Valuation adjustments may be made to ensure that financial instruments are recorded at fair value.  These adjustments may include amounts to reflect counterparty credit quality, the Company’s creditworthiness, among other things, as well as unobservable parameters.  Any such valuation adjustments are applied consistently over time.  The Company’s valuation methodologies may produce a fair value calculation that may not be indicative of net realizable value or reflective of future fair values. While management believes the Company’s valuation methodologies are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date.

Securities Available for Sale.  Securities classified as available for sale are reported at fair value on a recurring basis utilizing Level 1, 2, or 3 inputs.  For these securities, the Company obtains fair value measurements from an independent pricing service or a model that uses, as inputs, observable market based parameters.  The fair value measurements consider observable data that may include quoted prices in active markets, or other inputs, including dealer quotes, market spreads, cash flows, the U.S. Treasury yield curve, live trading levels, trade execution data, market consensus prepayment speeds, and credit information and the bond's terms and conditions.

The following table summarizes financial assets and financial liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of June 30, 2008, segregated by the level of the valuation inputs within the fair value hierarchy utilized to measure fair value:

The change in the fair value of Level 3 securities from March 31, 2008 to June 30, 2008 relates to the change in an unrealized gain of approximately $54,000 for one security.

Certain financial assets and financial liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis; that is, the instruments are not measured at fair value on an ongoing basis but are subject to fair value adjustments in certain circumstances (for example, when there is evidence of impairment).  Financial assets and financial liabilities measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis were not significant at June 30, 2008.

Impaired Loans.  On a non-recurring basis, certain impaired loans are reported at the fair value of the underlying collateral if repayment is expected solely from the collateral.  Collateral values are estimated using Level 3 inputs based on customized discounting criteria.  Impaired loans had a carrying value of $62.5 million, with a valuation allowance of $7.4 million, resulting in an additional provision for loan losses of $2.7 million for the six months ended June 30, 2008.

Loans Held for Sale.  Loans held for sale, which are carried at the lower of cost or fair value, are adjusted to fair value on a non-recurring basis.  Fair value is based on observable markets rates for comparable loan products which is considered a level 2 fair value measurement.

Effective January 1, 2008, the Company adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 159, "The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities - Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115." SFAS 159 permits the Company to choose to measure eligible items at fair value at specified election dates.  Changes in fair value on items for which the fair value measurement option has been elected are reported in earnings at each subsequent reporting date.  The fair value option (i) is applied instrument by instrument, with certain exceptions, thus the Company may record identical financial assets and liabilities at fair value or by another measurement basis permitted under generally accepted accounting principals, (ii) is irrevocable (unless a new election date occurs) and (iii) is applied only to entire instruments and not to portions of instruments.  Adoption of SFAS 159 on January 1, 2008 did not have a significant impact on the Company’s financial statements because the Company did not elect fair value measurement under SFAS 159.

NOTE 12 – SUBSEQUENT EVENT

On July 31, 2008, Capital City Bank Group, Inc. and its subsidiary, Capital City Bank entered into a marketing alliance with Elavon Inc., formerly NOVA Information Systems, a wholly owned subsidiary of U.S. Bancorp.  Under this alliance, Elavon purchased substantially all of Capital City Bank’s merchant services business for $6.25 million.  Elavon will provide merchant bankcard processing to Capital City Bank clients going forward.

QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED)

 

Management’s discussion and analysis ("MD&A") provides supplemental information, which sets forth the major factors that have affected our financial condition and results of operations and should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes.  The MD&A is divided into subsections entitled "Business Overview," "Financial Overview," "Results of Operations," "Financial Condition," "Liquidity and Capital Resources," "Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements," and "Accounting Policies."  The following information should provide a better understanding of the major factors and trends that affect our earnings performance and financial condition, and how our performance during 2008 compares with prior years.  Throughout this section, Capital City Bank Group, Inc., and subsidiaries, collectively, are referred to as "CCBG," "Company," "we," "us," or "our."

In this MD&A, we present an operating efficiency ratio and an operating net noninterest expense as a percent of average assets ratio, both of which are not calculated based on accounting principles generally accepted in the United States ("GAAP"), but that we believe provide important information regarding our results of operations.  Our calculation of the operating efficiency ratio is computed by dividing noninterest expense less intangible amortization and merger expenses, by the sum of tax equivalent net interest income and noninterest income.  We calculate our operating net noninterest expense as a percent of average assets by subtracting noninterest expense excluding intangible amortization and merger expenses from noninterest income.  Management uses these non-GAAP measures as part of its assessment of its performance in managing noninterest expenses.  We believe that excluding intangible amortization and merger expenses in our calculations better reflect our periodic expenses and is more reflective of normalized operations.

Although we believe the above-mentioned non-GAAP financial measures enhance investors’ understanding of our business and performance, these non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered an alternative to GAAP.  In addition, there are material limitations associated with the use of these non-GAAP financial measures such as the risks that readers of our financial statements may disagree as to the appropriateness of items included or excluded in these measures and that our measures may not be directly comparable to other companies that calculate these measures differently.  Our management compensates for these limitations by providing detailed reconciliations between GAAP information and the non-GAAP financial measure as detailed below.

Reconciliation of operating efficiency ratio to efficiency ratio:

Reconciliation of operating net noninterest expense ratio:

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the condensed consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

CAUTION CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including this MD&A section, contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.  These forward-looking statements include, among others, statements about our beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, estimates and intentions that are subject to significant risks and uncertainties and are subject to change based on various factors, many of which are beyond our control. The words "may," "could," "should," "would," "believe," "anticipate," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "plan," "target," "goal," and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements.

All forward-looking statements, by their nature, are subject to risks and uncertainties.  Our actual future results may differ materially from those set forth in our forward-looking statements.  Please see the Introductory Note and Item 1A. Risk Factors of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, as updated in our subsequent quarterly reports filed on Form 10-Q, and in our other filings made from time to time with the SEC after the date of this report.

However, other factors besides those listed in our Quarterly Report or in our Annual Report also could adversely affect our results, and you should not consider any such list of factors to be a complete set of all potential risks or uncertainties.  Any forward-looking statements made by us or on our behalf speak only as of the date they are made.  We do not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, except as required by applicable law.

BUSINESS OVERVIEW

We are a financial holding company headquartered in Tallahassee, Florida, and we are the parent of our wholly-owned subsidiary, Capital City Bank (the "Bank" or "CCB").  The Bank offers a broad array of products and services through a total of 69 full-service offices and one mortgage lending office located in Florida, Georgia, and Alabama.  The Bank offers commercial and retail banking services, as well as trust and asset management, merchant services, retail securities brokerage and data processing services.

Our profitability, like most financial institutions, is dependent to a large extent upon net interest income, which is the difference between the interest received on earning assets, such as loans and securities, and the interest paid on interest-bearing liabilities, principally deposits and borrowings.  Results of operations are also affected by the provision for loan losses, operating expenses such as salaries and employee benefits, occupancy and other operating expenses including income taxes, and noninterest income such as service charges on deposit accounts, asset management and trust fees, retail securities brokerage fees, mortgage banking revenues, merchant service fees, and data processing revenues.

Our philosophy is to grow and prosper, building long-term relationships based on quality service, high ethical standards, and safe and sound banking practices.  We maintain a locally oriented, community-based focus, which is augmented by experienced, centralized support in select specialized areas.  Our local market orientation is reflected in our network of banking office locations, experienced community executives with a dedicated president for each market, and community boards which support our focus on responding to local banking needs.  We strive to offer a broad array of sophisticated products and to provide quality service by empowering associates to make decisions in their local markets.

Our long-term vision is to continue our expansion, emphasizing a combination of growth in existing markets and acquisitions.  Acquisitions will continue to be focused on a three state area including Florida, Georgia, and Alabama with a particular focus on financial institutions, which are $100 million to $400 million in asset size and generally located on the outskirts of major metropolitan areas.  Six markets have been identified, five in Florida and one in Georgia, in which management will proactively pursue expansion opportunities.  These markets include Alachua, Marion, Hernando, and Pasco Counties in Florida, the western panhandle in Florida, and Bibb and surrounding counties in central Georgia.  We continue to evaluate de novo expansion opportunities in attractive new markets in the event that acquisition opportunities are not feasible.  Expansion opportunities that will be evaluated include asset management and mortgage banking.

FINANCIAL OVERVIEW

A summary overview of our financial performance for 2008 versus 2007 is provided below.

Financial Performance Highlights –

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Net Income

Net income for the second quarter of 2008 totaled $4.8 million ($0.28 per diluted share) compared to $7.3 million ($0.42 per diluted share) in the first quarter of 2008 and $7.9 million ($0.43 per diluted share) for the second quarter of 2007.  Earnings for the second quarter of 2008 include a loan loss provision of $5.4 million ($.20 per diluted share) versus $4.1 million ($.15 per diluted share) in the first quarter of 2008 and $1.7 million ($.06 per diluted share) in the second quarter of 2007.

A condensed earnings summary is presented below: