What ever you say or want to think.
Just for conversation though of my previous 4 posts before your post #10691 my thinking is that either the date 12/31/1998 or six plus years were referrenced in at least three of them.
You are correct in the fact that when I first referred to 12/31/1998 as the buy date that it was for a shorter time frame, but not much has changed since that time except it is now six plus years rather than five.
Actually I think you were. Your post over the past months are always looking at five-year returns (always from that high point back in 1998, but five years none-the-less. You also made the point that not everyone is a long-term investor and that people also need to make money in the shorter term. Do I have the wrong guy? I'll go back and check.
Thanks for your reply, it makes common sense which is unusual this day and time.
I agree that good money could and has been made by some on this stock during the period in question, but not by the buy and hold people during this time frame. The point is that most people who respond are the above type. They forget the fact that they could have sold this stock several years ago and put that money to work somewhere else or bought and sold this stock on the dips and increases and made money.
In answer to your questions. Would you rather own a bank with a 4.0% dividend and estimated earnings of $4.06 this year and $4.44 next year and the analyst increasing forward earnings at $44.73 a share or one which has a 3.7% dividend with earnings estimates of $3.02 this year and $3.30 next year and the analyst are decreasing their forward earnings estimates at $38.08 a share? Oh, the first bank has a better history or making their earnings estimates too. I think the choice is obvious.
My personal opinion is that a sale would benefit the shareholders much better and a lot sooner. No more mergers or them buying someone out as they seem to be having major problems operating and making earnings growth in what they currently have.
CD's are for some people if that is what they are comfortable with doing, but is not my thing.
Before I retired as a manager, I always told my people that everyone did not have to work at our place. If you could find a better place to work, lots of luck. Just make sure where you are going is better than working here. I had very few people leave in 30 years. It is not a requirement that you need to work at BBT.
Gee Jim, why didn't you just put your money in the WS darling 5/3? You'd have made a killing in that high-performer!
I just can't pass the JA 15% increase,
I am considered a "high Performer", however
only receiving a 2% increase, because I am "too close to midpoint". I am now on my
third interview with another Bank, starting
salary 17% over "high range" in my job
range...Guess what JA...see ya! Offer pending.
I have mixed feelings about your comments re: John Allison's compensation.
On the one hand, it is tough to swallow his "justice" dogma when he rakes it in while limiting employees to 1-3% raises, only giving employees $35/month for cellphone usage (when the employees are required to have the phone by BB&T), etc.
On the other hand, I have clients that are making similar cash in the private sector, who aren't running a 20,000+ organization (with the related headaches and time commitments).
Keep fighting the fight...
I agree with your points, but I would rather hear Jim all day long than the other folks who "defend" the board from anything negative.
It is better to candidly discuss the company's performance, problems, future, etc. than to pretend there are no problems and attack all those with neutral/negative comments. For example: Stil's predictable response to any employee that complains about company policies, problems, etc. "Don't let the door hit you in the ass, you aren't a high performer, and there are lines of people waiting for your job." Too funny (and pathetic).
Despite the problems, I agree with the poster before you. BB&T appears to be a "buy" here. The numbers (EPS, Div Yield, etc.) will drive it higher over the next few years if the bank remains independent. If not, we will get an even better return (at least in the short-term).
Great post, but one thing you forgot to mention is that the market was paying a premium
for BBT's profit growth in those years.
I think if you'll check you will find that their P/E was higher than most other banks and part of the reason was the growth in earnings.
Check the last few years and you will find a different situation and that may very well be reflected in the current share price.
Another thing you might want to check is the percentage of the earnings that the dividend now consumes. The last few years the dividend has been increasing yearly without the same increase in earnings.
What would make you think that the company is now going to be pushing earnings upward? What is different from the last three years or so?