Actually, Leon Wilson graduated from UNC-Chapel Hill. However, he can be considered ENCM, because he has lived in Wilson and run the operations center there for a long time. If JA is around for ten more years, I see Leon taking over the COO title, whenever Henry leaves. I think Henry has groomed him for the position. Leon really seems to be a deep analytical thinker. He certainly is a rising star of the "younger" generation of management. Everyone is correct in their assessment of a possible 5/3 merger, just a little wishful thinking on my part. I don't think they'll do any big deals in the near future. IMHO
BBTFAN you said it well. A large portion of my portfolio is in BBT stock and has been since 1980. The track record says it all. Each time I get the urge to sell some of BBT I resist and six months later I am glad I did not.
There would have to be a big swing in our economy and the way we all use banks for me to sell. GO GO BBT!!!!!!!
My money's in BB&T because over the last quarter century, they've proven to be trustworthy in public statements and published reports. Meeting the people through several administrations helps reach a certain comfort level. I never said they're perfect or that I agree with every thing they do, but I'm paying them to make management decisions and the track record is top tier. The best way to second guess is to sell.
Anyone who puts his money in a company he 's willing to call a liar has quit investing and become a gambler and not a very smart one.
But "it's only money" as a poster says. Have fun!!
The FTU board is being energized once again. Remember Fast Eddie's pool boy......... "Peacelovencharity"? He came back on the air last week as Ken Thompson's yard boy, after an absence from the board of at least two years.
Lex makes some excellent points. I've picked on Fan as being a shill before, which he disagrees with strongly, but it is clear he does know the corporate spiel down pat, which is helpful information - true or not.
Seems to me that the point of these boards (or at least one of the points) is to have open discussion of, hpoefully, cogent issues concearning these public companies that many of us are owners of. That said, I agree that the discussion in question is on purpose (assuming you buy my purpose as stated above) and of interest. Folks have different opinions and that's OK - makes it a horse race as they say. I thinks Fan's points are as valid as his detractors and are worthy of posting here, as long as the posts don't degrade into doscussing the parentage of the other posters!
There was a time when FTU's board offered comic relief, what with Ed's ferrets, etc., but that probably was needed given the black news being shared there. A laugh was required of us shareholders to keep from crying! But I digress, again.
Keep on disagreeing - that's what makes this all interesting and remember - it's only money! And for those of you with most of your net worth's tied up in BBT, what's the matter with you? If you haven't figured out what's wrong with that picture (and you can insert pretty much any stock instead of BBT if you wish), then you probably shouldn't be posting here. Just MHO, of course.
Regards and peace........
I know I rarely post such thought -provoking content, and often I tend to pay less attention to the downside issues, however, I find X's post excruciatingly accurate, including the last. Ive been critized often for telling too much of the truth, but if you do not examine the truth, then you continue on making assumptions in the realm,and follow a path not based there-upon. I would have to say that the conversation between X and MOE is in itself, both sides viewed, a breath of fresh air. I do believe the differences encountered are due to viewpoints, which, when examined, tell much more than what has been seen so far.
It is obvious that if those viewpoints are examined, there is a deficit between the two, and that deficit is where BBT's greatest weaknesses lie. Such is not necessarily MHO, but more the fact, all common denominators having been removed.
I've been mostly passing on this management discussion since I realized that it pretty much requires you to name names. I'm not going to sit here in anonymity and say So-and-So is a moron or Such-and-Such is a suck-butt. My hypocrisy does know a few bounds.
However, this last post from ccb almost made me puke, and I think I've had enough management worshipping for the time being.
I have worked with everyone--EVERY ONE--of the people named in these posts. With the exception of JA, not a single one of them can be even charitably described as a deep analytical thinker.
This is not to say those named don't do their jobs well. As I alluded before, some of the jobs aren't rocket science and require salesmanship more than anything else. And the succession to the COO post may play out exactly as ccb says.
But none of these guys has serious brainpower. Sorry.
I have worked with all as well, but I'm not sure you have. This is my first visit to this board in some time, but I am amazed at the amount of BS being passed on as fact regarding management. In truth, unless you are a part of the team you have no way of knowing the capability of the members, except for keeping up with the results. IMHO, BB&T has played the trump card of being underestimated very successfully over the past six years, and results reflect this. While JA is definately leading this, it would not have been possible without strong executional management by many others. Furthermore, if JA is as good as you think he is, would he be so shortsighted as to not provide for future leadership? In my time with both SNB and BB&T, I did not always agree with decisions or direction, but I felt that there was a logical process being followed that the entire executive team was participating in. Much of the discussion here seems to be motivated by personal agendas, likes and dislikes, etc. Results are what matter, and I don't see much arguement in this regard. I'm reminded of the fable of the tortoise and the hare and who won in the end. Staying under the radar screen may not generate headlines and magazine profles, but may in fact be a winning strategy for future success. Let's not throw stones at management until evidence supports that position.
This ain't quantum physics. If banking were that complicated someone would have hired Stephen Hawkings long ago. He thinks about things that don't exist yet.
Evidently management has enough brainpower to help BBT outperform most of its competitors, especially the stock price. That's all that matters, IMHO.
We don't know ANY of the individuals whose names are being bantered about in recent posts. But we have a tendency to agree with XBBTER. The posts by CCB76us make us puke, too. We don't understand why CCB76us doesn't go ahead and tell the BBT executive managers his real name so he can get "credit" for all his sucking up. CCB76us obviously wants something from them, other than friendship.
We suppose all of you know that the OCC and other regulators require that there be a succession plan in place in case a bank's CEO should get run over by the truck, so to speak. We feel sure that the Secretary to the BBT Board of Directors has a sealed envelope containing a letter from JA to the Board, in which he makes a recommendation to the Board as to who should be named CEO in the event of JA's untimely demise.
Now, there must be a subject of more interest to the readers than this one. CCB76us has prolonged the posts on this subject for too long. Excuse us, please.......we have to go puke.......again.