I find it rather amusing that some posters here believe that bbt is a good bank with bad management.
15 years ago bbt was a small regional run by John Allison and Kelly King. Through a combination of acquisitions and organic growth, bbt has grown its pretax profit before provisioning by a factor of 12 and has become a major regional bank.
With the exception of Darryl Bible, the current management team has been with bbt for 20 to 40 years. How could bad management transform bbt into a good bank?
The great recession has given me an opportunity to pick up a bunch of bbt shares at what I believe is a bargain price. Of course if I were a shareholder prior to Lehman crisis, I would have lost about 1/3 of my share value due to the market events.
In a twisted way, that is exactly why the bank WILL NOT be sold. The executives believe they are so smart and the Street is so wrong that right now, their assets are really worth $50/share, and the only reason the stock is not at that level is because everyone else is stupid and/or an evil Wall Street insider. This company will never be sold nor change direction...ever. Not until the Board gets some stones and brings in new leadership. And I am not talking about he CEO, you need a cultural change.
Norman: I would be amused too if I were not a shareholder. I have stated on this message board that BB&T is a good bank with bad management and I still think that is the case; however, sooner or later the Company will be transformed by current management. I don't think it has happened yet, but it will if changes are not made.
You are correct that current management is experienced and for the most part career BB&T employees. Something that I have learned over the years is that tenure is not always indicative of competency. Some people do have 20 or 30 years of experience but others have one year of experience 20 or 30 times. I have been a BB&T shareholder for many years and this team is actually quite different than the group that ran BB&T successfully for many years. The long-time CEO (Allison), COO (Williamson), CFO (Reed), Chief Credit Officer (Chalk), have all retired over the past several years and, with the exception of the current CFO (Bible), were all replaced by career BB&T people. While this speaks well for management succession planning, it is also a sign of The Peter Principal which is among the worse things that can befall a company.
I am aware that Imam Norm has placed me on on ignore and issued a Fatwa to other investors that they should do the same; however, I decided to post this instead of reading through the latest Federal Reserve statistics.
Strong growth in stock price 4th quarter 1990 through 1st quarter 1999.
NO growth 2nd quarter 1999 until market started crashing around 3rd quarter 2007; price "vibrated" around $40 share.
KK et al did not take control until well past 3rd quarter 2007, a time when market forces controlled.
Folks you praise in nostalgic memory were in charge during the ennui of the first 7 years of last decade.
Were they in charge during the 1990s when things were going gangbusters?
You can't have a good team and a bad coaching staff.
1. Antiquated products. They follow, never lead, and take their time doing it.
2. Lack of talent. Most Regional Presidents are former Commercial Lenders, who don't understand the bank's heart is the branches, not the other way around.
3. Revenue sources will continue to dwindle. Service charges will be flat, loan income will decline as a result of stricter lending guidelines.