Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

BB&T Corporation Message Board

jim56442 558 posts  |  Last Activity: Mar 29, 2016 9:02 PM Member since: Oct 16, 2003
  • Reply to

    Justify Executive Stock Options ?

    by jim56442 Mar 25, 2016 12:41 AM
    jim56442 jim56442 Mar 29, 2016 9:02 PM Flag

    In most cases options are given at current price at issue and are good for a 10 year period. Will BBT not have any gain in the share price for the next 10 years? I think the majority of companies will have some kind of increase in a full 10 years period regardless. However, the options given were given for past performance is my understanding.

  • Is there anyone out there that can explain what could possibly justify the millions of stock options given to Kelly King and the executives of BBT? If I read the proxy correctly Kelly King was given millions of stock options for the following results. BB&T missed the last four quarters of earnings estimates according to Yahoo. Yes, that is correct BBT missed every quarter's earnings estimates in 2015. The per share stock price was $38.89 on December 31,2014 and ended at $37.81 on December 31,2015. I just don't understand how anyone could believe that this type of management deserves big rewards.

  • Reply to

    Stock Price per Share

    by jim56442 Feb 6, 2016 11:47 PM
    jim56442 jim56442 Feb 9, 2016 11:35 PM Flag

    My point was and still is the fact that the top executives and Board of Directors were well paid for the increase in the per share stock price when it was increasing and even during your April 1997 until my figure from December 1998. Now that the price per share has not increased above the 1998 price and is actually about 20% below the 1998 price not including any increase for the decrease in the value of a dollar. Just how much have the shareholders paid the executives and BOD for their efforts which have not done much for the shareholders (owners) of BBT? It appears to me that these people have not shouldered their fair share of the pain especially with these results.

  • on 12/31/1998 the price for a share of BBT was $40.31 each. The closing price on 2/5/2016 for a share of BBT stock was $32.06. The dividend per quarter end of 1998 was 17.5 cents per share and the current dividend is 27 cents a share.
    In 1998 the Board of Directors and the top executives were getting paid for a growth company and the share price was increasing greatly. What is the current Board of Directors and top Executives getting paid to do?
    Just wondering if anyone has current compensation figures verus those in 1998?

  • Just wonder how much the BOD will give the senior executive team and Kelly KIng for 2015. It might pay the stockholders to pay close attention to the above. This is a team that has missed estimated earnings for all four quarters of 2015. Just how much is that worth to the shareholders (owners) of this company?

  • Reply to

    BBT

    by c6at1952 Nov 29, 2015 5:21 PM
    jim56442 jim56442 Dec 4, 2015 10:44 PM Flag

    Yes, John Allison was indeed competent especially at improving his total income from BBT. Just what did the shareholders get from the bank increasing in size?

  • Reply to

    Yeah!!! Back to Q4 1998 levels!!!

    by toosmartforecu Aug 4, 2015 9:39 AM
    jim56442 jim56442 Aug 11, 2015 11:23 AM Flag

    This is true, but you just need to really appreciate all the money and benefits that Allison, King, the top executives and BOD have received since then.

  • Big article in the local paper about the following.BBT is buying Susquehanna Bancshares and now it comes out that the top five executives of BBT including King are in line to receive $2.6 milliion in extra bonuses in addition to their other pay and benefits.The bonus is for "merger completion" payouts. So they get paid to do the deal and then get extra bonuses for doing their jobs and integrating the company onto BBT network. My understanding is this is not normal and highly unusual way of doing business. What next does BBT's Board of Directors give an additional bonus for the executives that show up for work on time. The merger integration would normally be considered a part of the executives normal job function.

  • Reply to

    Is this a lousy return policy or ?

    by jim56442 Apr 29, 2015 9:41 PM
    jim56442 jim56442 Jun 17, 2015 8:42 PM Flag

    I now have a replacement mat that cost a little more than half of what the original mat cost. This is what Office Max gave me as a replacement. I bought what the salesman told me I needed for the carpet I had. He also represented it as a lifetime warranty and did not state that I would have to deal with the manufacturer on the warranty. Most reliable companies do tell the their customers when and how the warranties work and make a point of informing the customer if the warranty is not taken care of in house. My point is just tell me what to expect and not mislead me or any customer.

  • Reply to

    Is this a lousy return policy or ?

    by jim56442 Apr 29, 2015 9:41 PM
    jim56442 jim56442 Jun 16, 2015 10:14 PM Flag

    Had the mat and had the receipt when and where I purschased the mat and that is what I took back to Office Max.. Most first class companies guarantee what they sell when it is represented as guranteed and not specified that it is not their warranty. When it was purschased there was a lot of conversation about the life time warranty, but nothing was said about having to deal with the manufacturer. In my past dealings when it was not the store's warranty the salesperson noted that it was a manufacturer warranty and not the store's. This is the reason for my original comments and they are still true.

  • Reply to

    Is this a lousy return policy or ?

    by jim56442 Apr 29, 2015 9:41 PM
    jim56442 jim56442 May 16, 2015 9:09 PM Flag

    Sorry, but I don't have clue as to who the actual manufacturer would be. They did offer a phone number, but no proof that this was the actual manufacturer of the chair mat other than the person's word at Office Max I spoke with.That would leave me calling a manufacturer stating that I have one of their chair mats purschased at Office Max and knowing that Office Max does not carry their merchandise anymore. Not a good solution in my opinion. This is what was presented to me and I still is a poor warranty policy.

  • Reply to

    Is this a lousy return policy or ?

    by jim56442 Apr 29, 2015 9:41 PM
    jim56442 jim56442 May 2, 2015 12:13 PM Flag

    Yes, I did buy a chair mat. I now have a replacement mat that cost a little more than half of what the original mat cost. This is what Office Max gave me as a replacement. In answer to your question as to what is my problem I just want what was represented when I purschased the mat. What was represented was that the mat was lifetime quaranteed and there was no mention of having to deal with the manufacturer if there was a problem. In response to calling the manufacturer Office Max now has the higher priced mat and what I have is a cheaper mat from a different manufacturer so it would be a wasted phone call.

  • Reply to

    Is this a lousy return policy or ?

    by jim56442 Apr 29, 2015 9:41 PM
    jim56442 jim56442 May 1, 2015 12:18 PM Flag

    When I bought the mat it was represented as life time quarantee and the salesman did not mention anything about having to deal with the manufacturer. I believe the salesperson clearly misrepresented the warranty and its conditions. I know there are lots of different warranties etc., but most places are clear on the specifics of the warranties. I think part of the problem here is that they do not carry this brand now. There are also lots of stores that do their own in house replacements for defects. This is bad policy in my opinion they should make sure the customer understands if there is a problem they will have to deal with a third party.

  • I bought a desk chair mat from Office Max a little over a year ago and the reason I bought this particular mat was that it was highly recommended by their staff. It was suppose to have a life time guarantee and was the supposed better quality. It was almost twice the price of the less expensive ones at that time. In the last week it began to crack in several places. When I returned it to the store today their response after much debate was that they did not carry this brand anymore and their only offer was to furnish the phone number to the manufacturer or they finally replaced it with a much lower quality and price mat. Now I have a mat of lesser quality which costs less than 2/3 the price I paid originally and it comes with a one year warranty. Is this GREAT customer service or what?

  • Just why is the Board Of Directors paying Kelly King and his executives so much and giving them so many other benefits? Today's miss on estimated earnings is just the lastest. This is now 3 missed earning estimates out of the last 5 according to Yahoo. It might be time for the shareholders to hold King, his executives staff and the Board of Directors to at least a somewhat little higher performance standard. Take a look at the pay of the above group for what I would say is at the least a sub-standard performance.

  • The DOJ late last year subpoenaed information relating to a HUD review over BB&T's (NYSE:BBT) FHA-insured loan origination process. BB&T says it's cooperating, the range of fines could be between $25M and $105M, and it's taking an $85M charge.

  • Does anyone else wonder if the stock is being driven down deliberately? I believe it is getting closer to the time that stock options are given out. Did a study a few years ago not recently and it was amazing how the stock price was low around stock option time. In any event sure seems to be a lot of options and grants given out for the performance of a share price since the EOY of 1998 price.

  • jim56442 by jim56442 Dec 18, 2014 11:31 PM Flag

    I'd bet money that we won't get any decent action like the following information from this CEO or Board of Directors. This company stock is still below the End Of Year 1998 price. Sixteen years of no share price gain and just look at what the BOD and executives officers have received in stock options in addition to their salary, stock grants, bonuses and other things. Shame on them and their greed.

    (((((.The lumber industry has been cut down over the past two years, and execs are feeling the pain. Executive bonuses often get ridiculous.

    In light of that, Plum Creek Timber Co. CEO Rick Holley just did something quite admirable.

    He gave back 44,445 restricted-stock units, worth nearly $2 million.

    According to a regulatory filing, "Mr. Holley elected to return the restricted stock units because he does not believe that he should receive such an award unless Plum Creek's stockholders see an increase in their investment return." ))))

    What a unique idea that stockholders should actually see an increase in their investment return..

  • jim56442 by jim56442 Nov 22, 2014 1:57 PM Flag

    I'm just wondering if BBT will ever reach the same level and hold it as it was end of year 1998. Yahoo states that a share of BBT was at $40.31 end of year 1998 and it closed Friday aty $37.51. Just for information the dividend was 17.5 cent per quarter in 1998. So the shareholders have lost $2.80 a share and the dividend has increased by 6.5 cents a quarter in about 16 years.

    Does anyone possibly think or state that this is even an average performance?

    How does the Board of Directors, Kelly King and the executives of this company actually take their pay with a straight face?

  • jim56442 by jim56442 Nov 12, 2014 3:15 PM Flag

    South Carolina judge orders BB&T to pay $17 mln to misled investor
    By Suzanne Barlyn

    Tue Nov 11, 2014 4:30pm EST
    inShare1Share this
    Email
    Print

    Analysis & OpinionBlame trial lawyers for GM ignition switch disaster – law prof
    N.Y. judge to Wylys: You can’t keep SEC away by declaring bankruptcy
    Related TopicsStocks »
    Regulatory News »
    Markets »
    Financials »
    Nov 11 (Reuters) - A South Carolina judge has ordered BB&T Corp to pay $17 million to a former financial adviser for mismanaging the man's retirement nestegg, a ruling that more than doubles a jury's June award, according to court documents.

    Judge Edward Miller in Greenville, rejected a demand by BB&T Corp to overrule a jury's verdict totalling $8.1 million in favor of Francis Maybank, who filed the case against BB&T and two units in 2011, according to an opinion filed late Monday the Court of Common Pleas for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit.

    A BB&T spokeswoman could not be immediately reached for comment.

    "We are gratified that justice prevailed and a wrong was righted," said Mitchell Willoughby, one of Maybank's lawyers.

    Maybank, of Charleston County, South Carolina, founded a trust and asset management company that BB&T acquired in 2001. BB&T bought Maybank's firm, which managed $700 million in client assets, with 246,000 shares of BB&T company stock, according to the complaint. Maybank hired BB&T's wealth management division in 2006, when nearing age 74, to advise him on investing his retirement portfolio.

    BB&T recommended a complex investment strategy involving a type of derivative, a security whose value was linked to the performance of underlying BB&T stock, which BB&T advisers said would help him to reduce his concentration in the company's shares while raising cash to invest in a diversified portfolio, Maybank alleged.

    They did not disclose to Maybank that the strategy would force him into an expensive cycle of rolling over one derivatives transactions into another, which meant more fees

BBT
36.45+0.91(+2.56%)9:59 AMEDT