This post was part of AOL Money & Finance's Best & Worst of 2007 feature. The voting has now closed and readers have chosen ExxonMobil as the most hated company of the year. Be sure to let us know in the comments if you are pleased with this result.
Trying to discuss the Most Hated Companies is not easy. There are so many to choose from that if we left the subject wide open it would fill a novel. The four companies that made our list are all substantial in size and that alone brings much criticism. These four companies and their stocks are all broadly covered by Wall Street and business journals everywhere. We at BloggingStocks have written dozens of stories about them in just the past year alone. Each time we do, we find that our readers have plenty to vent about, so here we are giving you all one more chance.
Three of the four stocks here have not paid off for shareholders, and that is bound to start the ranting and raving. All of them have created some consumer backlash, and even fury. Some people hate the management. But management hating is not the problem at the worlds largest company, Exxon Mobil, since it is up about 200% in the past five years.
Bank of America (NYSE: BAC), capitalized at about $190 billion, was neck and neck with Citigroup (NYSE: C) as the largest financial institution but, at least for now, it has remained atop the heap while Citi has become a fallen (think questionable loans and billions in write-downs) angel capitalized at $150 billion. Bank of America has grown by mergers and acquisitions over the last decade. It was acquired by or merged with NationsBank Corporation, depending on your perspective, kept the BoA name but moved its headquarters to North Carolina from California. This was followed by the acquisitions of Fleet Boston, MBNA, US Trust, ABN Amro North America, and LaSalle Bank, and most recently an investment in Countrywide Financial (NYSE: CFC).
All of these changes affected millions of customers that had prior business relationships with the predecessor companies. It is only natural that B of A move these new customers to their existing business platforms and change the previously excepted customer patterns. This caused some grief and many complaints. B of A also has had to contend with its own customers that have complained about all the new fees and charges that keep popping up on their monthly statements. While this is true of most banks, B of A is leading the charge, and often takes the brunt of the criticism.
Bank of America has not been untouched by recent debacles in the financial sector related to industry lending practices, questionable mortgages, and the ensuing writedowns, but they have fared better than most. The stock had been up over 50% during the last five years, but has dropped recently. The entire sector has been underperforming the overall market, and looks like that will continue to do so. Some contrarian investors are starting to take a look at this sector, although most have suggested they will stay on the sidelines for now.
Given the stock performance, the size of the company, the increase in fees and altering of business practices, there is much to complain about. However, Bank of America pays a handsom dividend yield of about 6%, has the stability of a wide footprint, and has given no signs that it is through looking for new areas of growth. It is probably one of the safest bets (famous last words, I know) in the financial sector.
Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM) cannot escape the wrath of anyone. Well I guess there are exceptions, that would be shareholders and the Bush Administration. Consumers, on the other hand, hate it with a capital H. Every time gasoline prices go up, the population becomes restless. Every time corporate profits and executive pay are announced, people become disgusted. When these things happen in concert ... well, you can make up your own adjectives, but they're not pretty. Now add issues of hydrocarbon emissions, global warming, foreign intrigue, energy tax breaks, and oil industry subsides, and people can get downright nasty.
All that said, XOM has outperformed most stock investments you could have made over the last five years, gaining about 125%, while paying a dividend and with little downside risk. Because of its giant shadow it remains a Wall Street darling even if this makes most people think of it as having a dark side.
Home Depot (NYSE: HD) has been trying to ride out the center of the storm for a couple of years now. It has had to deal with the housing market implosion, competition from a formidable opponent in Lowe's (NYSE: LOW), complaints about shabby stores, poor customer service, and management has lost most of its credibility. It has also suffered from "Big Box" syndrome like others of its ilk, and all this has led to a stock price that has been going down all year, losing about 30% of its value.
It started the year trading near $40 and is trading in a $27 to $28 range lately, making shareholders none too happy either. But they say things seem darkest right before the dawn, and Home Depot has maintained reasonably strong cash flow though all its difficulties and holds an abundance of powerful assets. Prime among these assets is its real estate accumulated at good prices over the past ten years. Several things are working in Home Depot's favor going forward, although the market will choose to ignore these things for now.
The market will improve eventually for housing, and this will help immensely. Nothing will restore the company's reputation like an increase in profits and same-store sales. While the industry is suffering, no new competitors will be entering the market, so both Home Depot and Lowe's are well positioned for this. If a recession or anything resembling such a thing does emerge pushing back new home sales, Home Depot will see growth in the remodeling business. Lastly, all the complaints shareholders and consumers have leveled at the company may seem like they have fallen on deaf ears, but I suspect they have not, and current management will have any easier time showing gains over such low expectations.
Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) is the biggest of "Big Boxes" and has suffered mightily for it. It has been making gains overseas, but in the United States it is facing many continuing challenges. Its size hurts it in several respects. When it searches for a site there are fewer choices and often residents do not want to see such massive change to their communities. It offers jobs, but they are low-paying jobs with few benefits, and it is not union friendly either.
When it wants to expand same-store sales, Wal-Mart cannot rely on simply adjusting the product mix or adding a few things, so it has had to enter entirely new businesses, which it has done like the food business and the drug business. It wanted to enter the banking business as well, but this idea has been met with tremendous opposition.
Worst of all for shareholders, in particular long-term shareholders, its stock price is down about 20% over the past five years, and this is very disappointing considering that the market is up substantially. Wal-Mart reported strong sales recently and increased profits, but you wouldn't know it by looking at Wall Street's response.
In my view, one of the critical issues for Wal-Mart to contend with is that growth will be difficult, and unlike other large companies that have the option of spin-offs or break-ups or outright sales of assets, what can they do to become more agile or attain better value for its assets?
It is true that all of these companies have felt the heat at times from investors, the media, local municipalities, and their citizenry. However, they are also victims of their own success, or at least past success. This certainly contributed to hatred of Microsoft Inc. (NASDAQ: MSFT), before and the building animosity against Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) now. The idea of hating a company is too harsh and seems out of place in general. However, if you have suffered the consequences of negative personal experience I suppose you might develop such feelings. What companies are on your short list of infamy?
To find potential opportunities and verify my track record, read Chasing Value or Serious Money.
Sheldon Liber is the CEO of a small private investment company and the principal for design and research at an architecture & planning firm. He does not own any of these securities.
Share the reasons for your pick of the most hated company in the comments, or let us know about any contenders we overlooked. Also be sure to see the rest of AOL Money & Finance's Best & Worst of 2007.
The week in preview: Earnings from Walmart, Macy's, and other retailers
Six top trades for the rest of 2009
Comfort Zone Investing: Buffett buys Burlington
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
11-30-2007 @ 7:33PM
Bernie R. said...
Only Marxist-leaning, snotty, high-maintenance, ignorant, hypocritical liberals HATE these American companies, because they all provide goods and services at very affordable prices (that's correct - $3.00 per gallon for gasoline is affordable, especially for said quite WEALTHY, Marxist-leaning, snotty, high-maintenance, ignorant, hypocrite liberals).
ExxonMobil PRODUCES $400 BILLION (yes, BILLION) dollars worth of petroleum products and the company earns $40 Billion in profits. That is a 10 percent profit margin.
The Federal, state, and local FUEL TAXES are between .30 to .60 cents PER GALLON (10 to 20 percent at $3.00 per gallon) for doing NOTHING to get the oil/gas/fuel to the customer every day at thousands of service stations, airports, and other locations from some of the most remote regions on Earth.
It is the GOVERNMENT who GOUGES Americans with taxes on top of taxes. And Hillary will RAISE YOUR TAXES even MORE!
These companies also provide employment to HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of people. A FEW THOUSAND people showed up for a few jobs at a Walmart in the suburbs ringing Chicago - because the liberal idiots in the local government had banned Walmart from opening stores within the city limits. So the city of Chicago, which as we know, contains many po' folks, but because of do-gooder, wealthy, liberal/democrat politicians, the city of Chicago does not enjoy the SALES TAX from those Walmart stores (I am sure the liberal/democrats get their money in other ways....).
Too bad these companies' profits cut into the booze, drugs, and women that the whiners would rather spend their money on...tsk, tsk...
I believe this Marxist, anti-American business bullsh*t has to be refuted, and I do whenever I see a crap "report" such as this...
If you want to complain about something, complain about Chavez of Venezuela or Castro in Cuba and pray (!) for the people who are unfortunate to be stuck in those current or future hellholes..
Complain about the Communist/Marxists trying to turn this country into a turd world country as we speak in a variety of ways, not just by influencing Americans to "hate" the very companies that provide our world-beating lifestyle.
Sorry, libs, but I have been to Europe 12 times, and the USA is much better place to live. When the Eurowimps are exterminated in the next 50 years by Islamists who are living among and out- breeding the vacationing, retired, aging Euros, even you white liberals won't be visiting London, Rome, or Cannes anymore.
If people were not be told to "hate" our own companies from the liberal, psuedo-Marxist media, maybe their share prices would be up, because the people would INVEST in these companies, and get much more back over their lifetime of investment from the companies then the small fees, $3.00 gas, and whatever else the whiners complain about.
If you want to complain about a REAL RIPOFF, go to MY website and read how the scam of Social Security allows the government to steal potentially a MILLION dollars or more over a worker's lifetime from American workers.
www.socialsecurityisascam.com
11-30-2007 @ 9:49PM
LJ said...
Bernie, above....I AGREE with you!! Well said! No one ever said life was a guaranteed picnic, sometimes things get a little rough economically. That's life folks! I can't think of any other country that would be better to live in than the US, and yes, I have traveled too. The companies mentioned are large and stable ( we will have to see how much more the sub-prime loan mess will impact the bankers stupid enough to make the loans in the first place). The US is the most stable government in the world. The smart money investes here, not in Europe where taxes are sky high. What is the cost of gas in Europe...about $6 a gallon, right? Our prices are a bargain by comparison. The stock market is cyclical, thats a fact. Everyone calm down.
11-30-2007 @ 11:19PM
Casey said...
Bernie and LJ ought to run for some sort of political office...really. Government could use some people who seem to understand the harm nay-sayers, pass new taxes type politicians, and uninformed liberals do to the economy and the "fabric" of America...
12-01-2007 @ 2:33AM
Flatbroke said...
I welcome this comentary. Period. that is my priviledge of being an american. It is also your obligation to respect, not necessarily agree, or even entertain the subject. I can't believe that your advising to 'calm down' like if we are all a bunch of sheepish subjects of the king who have no need or even reason to criticize the way some companies run their businesses in spite of the trust the investors put on them. Frankly, I believe that all those companies should have the obligation to 'guarantee' profit and do way better. This is the 21st century and if they have not learned by now how to be sucessful in business they simply don't belong there. The problem is not that we cry and bitch, though that is true we do. The real problem is because of the greedy bastards who run good business to the ground and as long as they get a bite of the carcass, they will stop at nothing and move on to next victim. Does a CEO ever said: "ok, we are going through some tough times and we must tighten our belt a bit and for a short period of, say, 3 months we will not spend on ...bla and we will cut wages by 4% to invest in improvements. After that period, we will return the cut in true dividends to everyone who has been part of it. That 4% should be enough to make necessary improvements and then some. But the cut should be all accross the board not just the little guy who makes 6 bucks an hour b-cause such high tax on wages and the high cost of living which is eating every low wage earner and now we are all forced to live on credit cards they can't afford it. No wonder why people gets po'd. after they find themselves in a huge pile of bills and kids crying or creditors barking at their doors. We all wage earners support the economy one way or another. The problem is the low wage earner cannot ongoingly continue to support this costly overrunning war and highly paid CEO's while everybody goes to McD's for a handout of a cheap meal which by the way ain't that cheap anymore. People should look at their statements every month end to see where you been spending you hard earned credit card dollars. You'll surprise yourselves. Between high taxes, high fuel cost, stagnant wages and high cost of living only the very few and wealthy can say this is a democracy and 'let's not complain' type of attitude. Only the wealthy. It's funny that when they want more money to run the company they come to the employee with the so called 'stock plan' and then become like the child or the drug addict who comes back for a fix every so often but never does good with the fix they got. So it goes, untill is time for surgery because the ill is cancerous and it must be cut to the root. Home Depot did one of those surgeries recently by selling the Supply company, and lost money in the process. The question is: was that surgery enough to cut the cancer? many do not believe so, and with good reason. I for once believe that as well, the cancer did not start with the housing market problem we hear so much about. This blimp has been loosing helium for quite some time now. Can we continue the war? Can we survive the loss of so much in the process. Maybe, but at what cost.
12-06-2007 @ 1:19PM
frank said...
I agree with Bernie and LJ.
For Flatbroke :
So long as there is greed among humans there are always going to be those that will try to take advantage of the situation wheter it is business or politically.
I believe that what happens at the high levels of the presidents of the world powers is so partial to their own selves that the people of the world would be shocked to learn that such manipulations can be done by our own governments.
You run a company to make a profit and sometimes you have to make hard decisions to keep it alive.
The U.S.A government runs this country and they also are put to test and they therefore have to make harsh decisions in order to keep this country free.
12-01-2007 @ 8:34AM
wcsmith said...
If Wal Mart is so bad for employees why do they have so many people apply for work when they open a new store? Could your real reason for the smear article was the comment about not being union friendly? And you forgot to mention the amount of money Wal Mart saves the averaage family each year 2500.00 dollars.
12-01-2007 @ 9:41AM
Jerry said...
Waaaahhhh.Pure,simple,transparent jealousy is the only reason people "hate" these companies.They are huge,& they are successful.So,all the little dogs can do is whine about it.It was ever thus.
12-05-2007 @ 12:31PM
David H R Hall said...
Jerry, your comment does not cover everybody's dislike for companies, my dislike for Exxon is the way they balked on cleanup onthe oil spill. That is complete irresponsibility. No matter what was the cause of the accident, they are responsible for their employees and equipment. Thusly, the spill was their responsibility immediately not later. I contend that oil ships need to be down sized to help on the potential of accidents and its environmental impact. comments welcome.
12-05-2007 @ 2:03PM
Jeannesammy said...
No the reason I hate exxon is not out of jealousy. I hate exxon because they have not paid punitive damages to the residents are commercial fisherman in Alaska for the Exxon Valdez oil spill. People lost their livelihoods and a beautiful, pristine part of our country is still damaged by oil almost 19 years later. I hate Exxon because they are irresponsible pricks.
12-01-2007 @ 9:57AM
Jim said...
Long term investors, especially those who reinvest their dividends, will make money with all four of these stocks. Liberals hate Exxon because it's "big oil" and hate Wal-Mart because they have resisted unionization and have not yet duplicated the welfare state that liberals want all corporations to adopt. For the individual long term investor, you can do a lot worse than invest in these four. I agree wholeheartedly with the poster who remarked that jealousy is what gives these corporations their "hated" label. The question an intelligent investor should ask is, "hated by whom?"
12-02-2007 @ 2:06AM
Dave said...
Where's Microsoft on the list??? Number 2 behind Wal-Mart I hope!
12-02-2007 @ 3:31AM
WHIH03 said...
This article reminds me of some old morning television show (mabe Jerry Springer) over even more like the gambler who bets on NFL games. The better dosen't realy care about the teams they bet on, just did the cover. If they don't cover they blame the team, not themselves for mis quessing the outcome of the game. The same for analysts' estimates on earnings. If the company's earnings are a bit under estimate, blame the company not the analyst that quessed wrong. But the issue with this article is really who is doing the hating, investers (i.e., betters, analysts. etc.) or the general public. If it's the stock market betters (of which I'm one), I understand Sheldon's point of view. However, if it's the general public, I think the general public would vote for a company like Goldman Sachs. Unlike the companies in Sheldon's article, Goldman Sachs contributes very little to society in general. For instance, BAC and C participate in the funding of loans for people to live in decent housing and take risks on the portion of the population at the lower end of the economic rungs as well. While I have my concerns about Wal-Mart they also contribute to society both as an employer of and a provider of goods to people along a broad range of the economic landscape. I ask, why did Goldman Sach's not get hit with the fallout of this way overblown reaction to some losses by the credit markets? Because they are not a real participant in society. No doubt GS is successful at what they do, largely rich folks doing financial deals for largely rich folks. [Now I have absolutely no objection to rich folks. Some are and everyone else would like to be.] But I am sure that just about any deal they completed in 2007 could have been done and would have been done, by a competitor had GS not been there. However, I am equally sure that without the likes of BAC and C and their fellow financial institutions life would be very different for quite a few members of society.
12-02-2007 @ 8:37PM
Sheldon L said...
Some interesting sentiment here, let me add a few points.
1) These four companies were selected by the editors based on the comments we have received from an abundance of readers.
2) There are supporters, and they are frequently the shareholders; the disgruntled are more frequently customers.
3) Hate is a strong word and I might have chosen something else, perhaps resent or upset, both more in line with some of the comments here, but I do not think jealously is correct.
4) The liberal or marxist references are slanderous and untrue, and anyone who chooses to undermine someones elses ideas or criticisms based on this should reflect on what it means to try and extinguish disent.
5) In general the unhappiness comes not from the companies profits, but policies. It also comes when a company try's to enforce it's will against a community. Certainly people should have a say in being "Big Box" free if they want too. By the way, the big box store is a communist idea -- but without the selection of quality or quantity.
6) Most large successful companies would not be such if they did not offer value to their customers, however, they have a responsiblity to offer leadership and act as the most repsonsibile of corporate citizens in the same way that we as individuals must be grateful for the advantages we have in living in this great land.
Peace, Sheldon
12-03-2007 @ 1:45AM
kalhock said...
I guess Sheldon has had a Che Guevera siting in our midst instead of Elvis. Try living on the wages Walmart pays. What do the big corporations do if things get tight or their suspect business practices come back to haunt them to protect the bottom line? They fire tens of thousands of employees-the average Joes!!
How quickly we forget about social responsibility. Remember Enron, etc.?
P.S.-We also have the same aging population & low birth rate situation that Europe is experiencing.
I guess we should have a nation full of Rush Limbaughs & bring back the Reaganomics debacle.
12-03-2007 @ 9:40AM
Bernie R. said...
2) There are supporters, and they are frequently the shareholders; the disgruntled are more frequently customers.
My reply:
======
Who is stopping the "customers" from becoming "shareholders???
Why of course, Sheldon, it is those Democrats and Liberals who tell the "po' folks" that the Stock Market is "TOO RISKY" to put their hard-earned money into, but to rely on the GOVERNMENT run SCAM of Social Security instead...
The po' folks would get a refund MANY TIMES OVER offsetting the "high" gas prices by INVESTING in ExxonMobil.
================================
4) The liberal or marxist references are slanderous and untrue, and anyone who chooses to undermine someones elses ideas or criticisms based on this should reflect on what it means to try and extinguish disent.
My reply:
======
Shel, you mean like any Conservative who "dissents" against liberals is immidiately labled a "McCathyite" to extinguish debate?
(Even though the way things have turned out since the 1950s, my hero, Senator Joe McCarthy was CORRECT. Read the "Venona Papers"...)
================================
Shel Said:
"Certainly people should have a say in being "Big Box" free if they want too."
My reply:
======
People do have a choice. They either shop at the "big box" store, or they don't. What we don't want is government idiots (like in Chicago as I stated previously) imposing THEIR will on behalf of some "offended" minority of people who don't like Walmart, Home Depot, or any other business.
The people have spoken, and the businesses that sell the people what they want at a fair price will succeed, those that do not - fail (see Sears and K-Mart...).
12-05-2007 @ 7:24AM
dr said...
Why hate success,times change and if you dont all you can do is hate the success of others. Lets support our businesses even though we think we can do it better
12-05-2007 @ 7:23AM
Per said...
Normally Walmart has good deals , but they don't respect their employes nor pay them very much, and they change prizes, in the middle of a sale I have seen this several times, that is illegal by the way.What I mean to say as a consumer you should not have to see this kind of cheating, if you have posted a prize you must sell it for that prize.I have seen Kohls do that, maybe change the prize if it was a mistake.Walmart has generally lousy customer service.If they paid the emplyoes better , and trained them better...it would be a plus
sincerly
Per
12-05-2007 @ 8:04AM
tevis j said...
Walmart adds no value to america what so ever,makes jobs that have minimum wage.As littlte benefits as they can possibly offer and put other buisness's out of buisness and buy everything they can overseas.They somehow need to be made the bad guy instead of thier ads showing how much good they do that is all bogus
12-05-2007 @ 8:40AM
David H R Hall said...
Jerry, all dislikes are not the same. My dislike for Exxon is not financial or political, but rather a practical thing. Responsibility, the hesitancy of Exxon to jump in and start cleaning up the mess on their oil spill was ridiculous. Having to be made to help in the cleanup should have been time to bring a suit to keep them from operating til they did clean up to the satisfaction of the People. Their people and equipment caused the oil spill, it was not anyones responsibility to start the cleanup but them and immediately. All companies transporting oil or any other hazardous material on the seas must be required to have cleanup equipment ready to make the environment not suffer. comments welcome.
12-05-2007 @ 8:59AM
Dave said...
The thing I dislike about Wal mart is ther low quality merchandise. I am tired of getting things there that are so cheaply made that thay do not do the job or they do not last. I think that before long more people will stop shopping Wal Mart because of that. I know I did.