1. You know the holes in W2K. XP ( Home and Professional ) is still under discovery.
2. Longhorn is getting pushed out farther every day and deliverables sliced off faster than the marketeers can announce new features.
3. Micro$oft whining to the contrary, Linux is cheaper to install and maintain. It just isn't quite there for the desktop. And, Red Hat is just down the road a piece. They'd love to have a signature corporate account like BB&T. Servers soon, desktops later anyone?
Many corporations are still using Win 2000, and it's still a stable OS. What is your point about not using XP? System upgrades would have cost in the past also. How long has XP been around now? Maybe they should just hold out for Longhorn.
BBT Fan, you are correct that at the end of the day, nobody really cares why a stock goes up. Except for one thing. If a stock price goes up creating an expensive stock in terms of p/e, people will ask, why would I pay more for this stock than for a cheaper one. BB&T has always paid a strong dividend, and in the past, their earnings grew faster than peers. But thatr was exactly the same case as Wachovia before they made the VA acquisitions. And although I never worked for Medlin, he is clearly a legend, and Baker let credit standards drop (although only in the US Corporate division, the rest of the bank was clean). My take on JAA is he would acquire a fire hydrant if the price was low. JAA has purchased a number of 2nd and 3rd rate banks and those employees are now BB&T'ers. They do not have the same talent as those in the originial NC/SC footprint. The 1st VA merger has NOT gone well and anybody on the inside will tell you the BB&T has lost a lot of their customers. This sounds a lot like Wachovia after the CFB/Jefferson merger.
I am not saying BB&T is for sale, I am saying their vulnerability is increasing and I do not think earnings growth will sustain the current stock price. And if the price drops to a normal P/E, the sharks will begin to circle.
I have heard too many times that the company is not for sale. We all know that the goal of any company is to maximize shareholder value, so why doesn't JA do that? The fact remains that the company uses antiquated systems, and they have too much overhead. Why? Don't know, but an acquirer could sure work that out for us. They don't even use Windows XP! We can bet that systems upgrades will surely suck up more cash in the future. I guess JA will pay for that by having 1% or less salary growth for the next 10 years. LOL!
Of course anything is POSSIBLE. A $55+ offer (2.8X 9/30/04 book value) would have to go to the board (most of whom have sold once). But the intent of JAA and the Board is that the bank is not for sale (at a normal multiple) parentheses are mine. Therefore, barring a ridiculous offer, it is IMPROBABLE the bank will be sold on JJA's watch. As the stock price goes up whether on earnings momemtum or perceived merger speculation the bank becomes harder to buy.
Don't put much stock in Bud's quote. He let Wachovia's pristine credit quality go to hell in a hand basket which led to the buyout. Archie Davis, John Watlington and John Medlin were in a class apart.
Also, don't sell short "consolidating and improving acquisitions" as a legitimate, achievable strategy which I've watch work over 35 years as a s/h and customer under four CEO's.
By the way, I've never figured out why we as shareholders or JAA as CEO should care whether the stock price should go up due to earnings momentum or market speculation.
Up is good, down is bad if it can't be fixed.
As I originally said "BB&T is Stil not for sale.