Blue Hill Advisors to Territorial Shareholders: No Risk to Territorial if Board Engages with Us

Hope Cannot Walk Away if Board Allows Investors to Perform Due Diligence

Hope Can Only Walk Away if Board Changes Recommendation or Breaches Merger Agreement

Calls on Board to Exercise Risk-Free Option to Explore Potentially Superior Offer

Encourages Territorial Shareholders to Force Another Postponement by Voting AGAINST Hope Sale Again at the Adjourned Special Meeting of Stockholders on November 6, 2024

Responds to Illogical Board Excuses for not Engaging with Investors

HONOLULU, Oct. 29, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Blue Hill Advisors today issued the following open letter to shareholders of Territorial Bancorp Inc. ("Territorial" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: TBNK).

Dear Fellow Territorial Shareholders,

Territorial's Board of Directors has flooded you with materials urging you to support the Company's proposed sale to Hope Bancorp, Inc. ("Hope") (NASDAQ: HOPE) and dismiss our proposal. Most of their arguments are based on a false premise: that they cannot engage with us for fear of losing the Hope deal. This is simply not true.

Under the Hope merger agreement, Territorial is entitled to explore a competing offer that is "reasonably likely to lead to a Superior Proposal." We believe we have always cleared that bar. And since sending more information about our offer in an addendum to the Board last week, we have no doubt.

We will keep our message simple because it really is:

  1. Seven investors, including Blue Hill Advisors, have made a $12.50 per share cash offer for up to 100% of Territorial shares – that's a 25% premium to the current value of the Hope consideration. Our proposal also allows up to 49% of existing holders to stay on as shareholders if they choose to participate in Territorial's considerable upside. Territorial has bizarrely attacked the proposal both for being too liquid (citing taxes on imaginary gains under the cash option) and too illiquid (for shareholders who choose not to tender and instead participate with us in the potential upside). The point is that our proposal lets you, the shareholder, decide—isn't whatever you choose going to be superior?

  2. We have contacted Territorial's Board, management team or outside advisers on at least 9 occasions since August, seeking to engage constructively. The Board has declined every request and repeatedly attacked our offer instead. Last Wednesday we offered to share information with the Board under a limited scope NDA and were told that Territorial would respond the following Monday, five days later. We waited two days and sent them the information anyway on Friday without an NDA.

  3. Territorial's merger agreement with Hope explicitly permits the Board to sign an NDA and proceed to due diligence if the Board determines that another offer is "reasonably likely to lead to a Superior Proposal." Our offer is financially superior, superior in optionality and the result of extensive analysis by each of the investors individually. There are no conditions attached, other than for the Board to stop manufacturing concerns and engage with us constructively in the manner the merger agreement expressly contemplates. The Board claims to have a lot of unanswered questions about our proposal. There is a very simple way for them to get those answers: sign an NDA and ask us.

  4. Allowing us to perform due diligence has no impact on the Hope deal. Hope cannot walk away unless Territorial changes its recommendation or breaches the merger agreement. Logically, the Board will only change its recommendation after they're fully satisfied with our offer and any lingering concerns or uncertainties have been put to rest.

  5. The entire point of signing an NDA (and the "reasonably likely" provision of the merger agreement) is to enable due diligence and determine if a preliminary offer can advance to a definitive agreement. Nobody is asking Territorial to sign a definitive agreement with us today. As with any transaction, diligence is a two-way process. We will be happy to address the Board's questions if they will just engage with us.

  6. The Board is asking shareholders to approve the Hope deal on November 6 without having engaged on a deal that values the Company at a 25% premium. Is the Board breaching its fiduciary duty by not pursuing a better offer?

  7. The merger agreement calls for two postponements if Territorial cannot get enough votes. Shareholders should force another postponement so that the Board can sign an NDA with us immediately and let us work toward a definitive offer. This does not force Territorial to do a deal with us and Hope cannot walk away.

  8. Territorial is playing "chicken" with shareholders: Approve the Hope deal or else. How bad is or else? The Hope deal is one of the worst we've ever seen and the banking environment has improved since it was struck. Are there really no better options? 

  9. The Hope deal is not a sure thing by any stretch – Hope's last attempt to buy a bank in 2017 failed to obtain regulatory approval and its application for this deal still has not been accepted by the FDIC.

  10. Territorial shareholders should once again oppose the Hope merger so that this superior offer can be pursued.