NOTE A — BASIS OF PRESENTATION

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U. S. generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U. S. generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2012, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2012 or any other period. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of these condensed consolidated financial statements required the use of certain estimates by management in determining the Company’s assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Specific areas, among others, requiring the application of management’s estimates include determination of the allowance for loan losses, the valuation of investment securities available for sale, fair value of impaired loans, contingent liabilities, other real estate owned, and the valuation of deferred tax valuation allowance. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

NOTE B — RECENT ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

Future Application of Accounting Pronouncements

In July 2012, FASB issued ASU 2012-02 Intangibles – Goodwill and Other; amending ASC Topic 350 to simplify how an entity tests indefinite-lived intangible assets other than goodwill for impairment and to improve consistency in impairment testing guidance among long-lived asset categories. The amendment permits an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that an indefinite-lived intangible asset other than goodwill is impaired as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the quantitative impairment test. The amendment is effective for annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012. Early adoption is permitted, including for annual and interim impairment tests performed as of a date before July 27, 2012. The adoption of the amendments will not have a material impact on company’s financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, “Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities.” This project began as an attempt to converge the offsetting requirements under U.S. GAAP and IFRS. However, as the Boards were not able to reach a converged solution with regards to offsetting requirements, the Boards developed convergent disclosure requirements to assist in reconciling differences in the offsetting requirements under U.S. GAAP and IFRS. The new disclosure requirements mandate that entities disclose both gross and net information about instruments and transactions eligible for offset in the statement of financial position as well as instruments and transactions subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement. ASU No. 2011-11 also requires disclosure of collateral received and posted in connection with master netting agreements or similar arrangements. ASU No. 2011-11 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. As the provisions of ASU No. 2011-11 only impact the disclosure requirements related to the offsetting of assets and liabilities, the adoption will have no impact on the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

NOTE C — BASIC AND DILUTED EARNINGS (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE

Equivalent shares of 527,000 and 1,125,000 related to stock options, stock settled appreciation rights and warrants for each of the periods ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, were excluded from the computation of diluted EPS because they would have been anti-dilutive.

NOTE D — FAIR VALUE INSTRUMENTS MEASURED AT FAIR VALUE

In certain circumstances, fair value enables the Company to more accurately align its financial performance with the market value of actively traded or hedged assets and liabilities. Fair values enable a company to mitigate the non-economic earnings volatility caused from financial assets and financial liabilities being carried at different bases of accounting, as well as, to more accurately portray the active and dynamic management of a company’s balance sheet. FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 820 provides additional guidance for estimating fair value when the volume and level of activity for an asset or liability has significantly decreased. ASC 820 also includes guidance on identifying circumstances that indicate a transaction is not orderly. Under ASC 820, fair value measurements for items measured at fair value at September 30, 2012 and 2011 included:

When appraisals are used to determine fair value and the appraisals are based on a market approach, the related loan’s fair value is classified as Level 2 input. The fair value of loans based on appraisals which require significant adjustments to market-based valuation inputs or apply an income approach based on unobservable cash flows, is classified as Level 3 inputs.

Transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy are recognized on the actual date of the event or circumstances that caused the transfer, which generally coincides with the Company’s monthly and/or quarter valuation process.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 there were no transfers between level 1 and level 2 assets carried at fair value.

For loans classified as level 3, transfers in totaled $19.6 million for the first nine months of 2012. For 2012, transfers out consisted of charge-offs of $4.6 million, foreclosures migrating to other real estate owned (“OREO”) and other reductions of $2.1 million and a single loan transfer of $10.3 million to loans held for sale. No sales were recorded.

Charge-offs recognized upon loan foreclosures are generally offset by general or specific allocations of the allowance for loan losses and generally do not, and did not during the reporting periods, significantly impact the Company’s provision for loan losses.

For OREO classified as level 3 during the first nine months of 2012, transfers out totaled $16.8 million, consisting of valuation write-downs of $2.4 million and sales of $14.4 million, and transfers in consisted of foreclosed loans totaling $3.5 million.

The following table shows the carrying value and fair value of the Company’s financial assets and financial liabilities as of September 30, 2012 and 2011:

The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each class of financial instrument for which it is practicable to estimate that value at September 30, 2012 and 2011:

Cash and cash equivalents: The carrying amount was used as a reasonable estimate of fair value.

Securities: U.S. Treasury securities are reported at fair value utilizing level 1 inputs. Other securities classified as available for sale are reported at fair value utilizing level 2 inputs. For these securities, the Company obtains fair value measurements from an independent pricing service. The fair value measurements consider observable data that may include dealer quotes, market spreads, cash flows, the U.S. Treasury yield curve, live trading levels, trade execution data, market consensus prepayment speeds, credit information, and a bond’s terms and conditions, among other things.

The Company reviews the prices supplied by the independent pricing service, as well as their underlying pricing methodologies, for reasonableness and to ensure such prices are aligned with traditional pricing matrices. In general, the Company does not purchase investment portfolio securities that are hard to value or that have complicated structures. The Company’s entire portfolio consists of traditional investments, nearly all of which are U.S. Treasury obligations, federal agency bullet or mortgage pass-through securities, or general obligation or revenue based municipal bonds. Pricing for such instruments is fairly generic and is easily obtained. From time to time, the Company will validate, on a sample basis, prices supplied by the independent pricing service by comparison to prices obtained from third party sources or derived using internal models and observed prices from purchases and sales.

Loans: Fair values are estimated for portfolios of loans with similar financial characteristics. Loans are segregated by type such as commercial, mortgage, etc. Each loan category is further segmented into fixed and adjustable rate interest terms and by performing and nonperforming categories. The fair value of loans, except residential mortgages, is calculated by discounting scheduled cash flows through the estimated maturity using estimated market discount rates that reflect the credit and interest rate risks inherent in the loan. For residential mortgage loans, fair value is estimated by discounting contractual cash flows adjusting for prepayment assumptions using discount rates based on secondary market sources. The estimated fair value is not an exit price fair value under ASC 820 when this valuation technique is used.

Loans held for sale: Fair values are based upon estimated values to be received from independent third party purchasers.

Deposit Liabilities: The fair value of demand deposits, savings accounts and money market deposits is the amount payable at the reporting date. The fair value of fixed maturity certificates of deposit is estimated using the rates currently offered for funding of similar remaining maturities.

Borrowings: The fair value of floating rate borrowings is the amount payable on demand at the reporting date. The fair value of fixed rate borrowings is estimated using the rates currently offered for borrowings of similar remaining maturities.

Subordinated debt: The fair value of the floating rate subordinated debt is estimated using discounted cash flow analysis and the Company’s current incremental borrowing rate for similar instruments.

NOTE E — IMPAIRED LOANS AND VALUATION ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES

During the nine months ending September 30, 2012, the total of newly identified troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”) was $9.6 million, of which $0.1 million were accruing construction and land development loans, $4.2 million were accruing residential real estate mortgages, $0.8 million were accruing commercial real estate loans, and $0.1 million were accruing consumer loans. Loans modified but where full collection under the modified terms is doubtful are classified as nonaccrual loans from the date of modification and are therefore excluded from the tables below.

The Company’s TDR concessions granted generally do not include forgiveness of principal balances. Loan modifications are not reported in calendar years after modification if the loans were modified at an interest rate equal to the yields of new loan originations with comparable risk and the loans are performing based on the terms of the restructuring agreements.

When a loan is modified as a TDR, there is not a direct, material impact on the loans within the consolidated Balance Sheet, as principal balances are generally not forgiven. All loans prior to modification were classified as an impaired loan and the allowance for loan losses is determined in accordance with Company policy.

The following table presents loans that were modified within the nine months ended September 30, 2012:

Accruing loans that were restructured within the twelve months preceding September 30, 2012 and defaulted during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 is presented in the table below. The Company considers a loan to have defaulted when it becomes 60 days or more delinquent under the modified terms, has been transferred to nonaccrual status, or has been transferred to other real estate owned. A defaulted TDR is generally placed on nonaccrual and specific allowance for loan loss is assigned in accordance with the Company’s policy.

As of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company’s recorded investments in impaired loans and the related valuation allowances were as follows:

For the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, the Company’s average recorded investments in impaired loans and related interest income were as follows:

Impaired loans also include loans that have been modified in TDRs. At September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, impaired loans include accruing TDRs totaling $44.2 million and $71.6 million, respectively.

Interest payments received on impaired loans are recorded as interest income unless collection of the remaining recorded investment is doubtful at which time payments received are recorded as reductions to principal. For the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, the Company recorded $2,400,000 and $2,548,000, respectively, in interest income on impaired loans.

Transactions in the allowance for loan losses for the three and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2012 are summarized as follows:

Transactions in the allowance for loan losses for the three and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2011 are summarized as follows:

The allowance for loan losses is composed of specific allowances for certain impaired loans and general allowances grouped into loan pools based on similar characteristics. The Company’s loan portfolio and related allowance as of September 30, 2012 and 2011 is shown in the following tables: