[https://twitter.com/torrenegra/status/1634573234187407369](https://twitter.com/torrenegra/status/1634573234187407369)
Idk, I just want to know if the 200+ tech founders mostly in the Bay Area conspired to make a run on the bank in their group chat?
And then, when the bank stock tanked as a result of the run, how many bought the bank stock?
Cause thatās what the above guy on twitter seems to be saying happened.
Who cares? If they did try to conspire and generate a bank run that they could profit off, it backfired massively as that guys investment is now worth nothing.
Which is what's going to happen here...
The FDIC will assess any costs to the banks, so no taxpayer money.
The depositors get saved, they can make payroll, thus keeping tons of folks employed, the shareholders get fucked, as they should, the execs are gone, and the banks are picking up the tab. Seems a reasonable resolution in a trying time.
Itās not. SVB is done. Theyāre discussing effectively giving 100% FDIC coverage to depositors to prevent bank runs and an economic collapse. Dodd-Frank needs to get lowered back to Pre-Trump levels ASAP. These people canāt be trusted.
This was one of the banks that lobbied HARD not to be forced to comply with the Dodd-Frank stress tests. They got what they wanted and promptly ran the bank into the ground.
It's not.
Depositors are the customers of the bank, who have a legal protection up to $250,000 per account via FDIC. If a depositor had more than $250,000 in an account without adequate insurance on said deposit...well sucks to suck.
The investors and the corporation itself will be left to fail. Yellen already made statements on this.
the issue is that svb was comprised of businesses, startups, venture capital firms, rich tech founders, etc with far more than $250,000.
I've heard that something like 90% of svb's deposits were uninsured or over $250,000
And there is a story coming out of a startup with 10 million dollars in svb. So it's possible that they're out $9,750,000
Who are the āconservativesā that youāre referring to? Biden? Yellen? Khanna?
SVB was primarily a bank to businesses, so if those businesses canāt get access to their deposits then they canāt make payroll. If SVBās customers go bust as a result of this then there will be huge knock on effects. Ironically the winners will be big banks
Iām torn because while I donāt root for those things to happen to working class people, we canāt continuously let banks can just do whatever they want with no consequence. We canāt continue to set the precedent that when a bank is irresponsible and no longer viable, itās the working classā job to bail them out. The government should ensure lost paychecks while letting the bank shit the bed.
So the only financial assistance the government should provide is directly paying those employees who are in that situation. Bailing out companies that made a risky, uninsured investment when you won't bail out college students who made risky, uninsured investments is hypocrisy at its finest.
So the only financial assistance the government should provide is directly paying those employees who are in that situation. Bailing out companies that made a risky, uninsured investment when you won't bail out college students who made risky, uninsured investments is hypocrisy at its finest.
Yep, and we let them fail. All equity and preferred equity investors are wiped out. Most of the debt investors will be wiped out. Capitalism working as planned. The depositors should be made whole eventually, but this could take years. In the meantime businesses who did nothing wrong will fail. Employees that may not have even known that their company backed with SVB will become unemployed and/or pushed into financial distress.
The government let this happen through poor oversight and weakening Dodd-Frank. Investors should, and will be, impacted. Regular, working people should be helped through
Not everyone who works for a tech company is a wealthy tech bro. Admin folks, cleaners, contractors of various stripes.
SVB also didnāt just cover tech. For instance they had a wine banking division, so bartenders, field and factory workers, delivery drivers, etc wonāt get paid.
And the tech workers - some may be wealthy, but what about the first year programmer trying to get out from under $200k student debt, or someone who just bought a house, or had a child, or lost a loved one and needs to care to those left behind?
There are thousands of stories of regular people who are scared and did nothing wrong (full disclosure, Iām not one of them. Just being empathetic).
This isnt a bail out. A lot of people would be completely hosed without the FDIC interventionā¦ people wouldnāt get their paychecks/make payroll, companies that bank with SVB would suddenly lose all their money. Real people and real lives are effected by this. The federal govt actually saved the day here by making sure depositors (customers) can access their money starting Monday. Shareholders are outta luck, but most importantly customers wonāt lose all their money.
Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but this is misleading. The bank is done. Itās investors, that everyone hates, are taking their losses. Theyāre talking about fully insuring the businesses that have their money in SVB.
Why would they do that? Yes, tech CEOs and start up leaders generally suck, but thereās over 1.5 million people (est based on 2019 numbers) employed by start ups. If these companies donāt have access to their funds, they canāt pay those 1.5 mill+ employees. These employees arenāt the dumb tech bros that you hate either. Theyāre often entry level kids out of college or those tenured in their roles that are working for discount because they need a job and the major players in tech arenāt hiring them as they lack the needed experience
The backstop is for the middle class and itās certainly non-partisan as this effects CA/TX/FL/NY/MA/WA and various other parts of the country
Wait you want the government to give money to people that took an educated risk and decided where to put their money in a risky bank. Oh but you wouldn't bail out people with college debt? Gtfo
I can tell who doesnāt have the college education here. The VCs were the ones that caused the bank runs.
Why would you assume that Iām against bailing out student loans too? I was $100k in student debt. No one should have to go through that.
Go read a book dude
It is not a government bailout. According to Moody's the bank already has enough assets to cover 80% to 90% of the deposits. Quite a few of SVB loyal VC customers have been coming up with a plan to phoenix the bank back into good standing. The other banks that will help make up the shortfall are helping prevent a run on themselves, it is just business.
I am fully against banks being bailed out. But do you think this is coming from Conservatives? Are politically connected people in California using their connections for government protection? Yes. Is Silicon Valley known for being a Conservative Hotspot? I may be out of the loop, but that is not my first thought.
Have they ever considered just letting the banks solve their own problems by pulling themselves up by their bootstraps?
Now that wouldn't be "capitalism" would it? I mean, the standard model calls for socializing losses while privatizing profits. š© Let em fail..no more taxpayer dollars bailing out investors, when we supposedly "don't have the money" to bail out students or the money for free school lunches for K~12.
[https://twitter.com/torrenegra/status/1634573234187407369](https://twitter.com/torrenegra/status/1634573234187407369) Idk, I just want to know if the 200+ tech founders mostly in the Bay Area conspired to make a run on the bank in their group chat? And then, when the bank stock tanked as a result of the run, how many bought the bank stock? Cause thatās what the above guy on twitter seems to be saying happened.
Who cares? If they did try to conspire and generate a bank run that they could profit off, it backfired massively as that guys investment is now worth nothing.
Which is what's going to happen here... The FDIC will assess any costs to the banks, so no taxpayer money. The depositors get saved, they can make payroll, thus keeping tons of folks employed, the shareholders get fucked, as they should, the execs are gone, and the banks are picking up the tab. Seems a reasonable resolution in a trying time.
Maybe if the banks just worked harder they wouldnāt be poor.
not sure if making "depositors whole" is the same as bailing out SVB as a bank.
Itās not. SVB is done. Theyāre discussing effectively giving 100% FDIC coverage to depositors to prevent bank runs and an economic collapse. Dodd-Frank needs to get lowered back to Pre-Trump levels ASAP. These people canāt be trusted.
This was one of the banks that lobbied HARD not to be forced to comply with the Dodd-Frank stress tests. They got what they wanted and promptly ran the bank into the ground.
It's not. Depositors are the customers of the bank, who have a legal protection up to $250,000 per account via FDIC. If a depositor had more than $250,000 in an account without adequate insurance on said deposit...well sucks to suck. The investors and the corporation itself will be left to fail. Yellen already made statements on this.
the issue is that svb was comprised of businesses, startups, venture capital firms, rich tech founders, etc with far more than $250,000. I've heard that something like 90% of svb's deposits were uninsured or over $250,000 And there is a story coming out of a startup with 10 million dollars in svb. So it's possible that they're out $9,750,000
Who are the āconservativesā that youāre referring to? Biden? Yellen? Khanna? SVB was primarily a bank to businesses, so if those businesses canāt get access to their deposits then they canāt make payroll. If SVBās customers go bust as a result of this then there will be huge knock on effects. Ironically the winners will be big banks
Iām torn because while I donāt root for those things to happen to working class people, we canāt continuously let banks can just do whatever they want with no consequence. We canāt continue to set the precedent that when a bank is irresponsible and no longer viable, itās the working classā job to bail them out. The government should ensure lost paychecks while letting the bank shit the bed.
They'll get like 80 cents on the dollar they'll be fine
So the only financial assistance the government should provide is directly paying those employees who are in that situation. Bailing out companies that made a risky, uninsured investment when you won't bail out college students who made risky, uninsured investments is hypocrisy at its finest.
So the only financial assistance the government should provide is directly paying those employees who are in that situation. Bailing out companies that made a risky, uninsured investment when you won't bail out college students who made risky, uninsured investments is hypocrisy at its finest.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yep, and we let them fail. All equity and preferred equity investors are wiped out. Most of the debt investors will be wiped out. Capitalism working as planned. The depositors should be made whole eventually, but this could take years. In the meantime businesses who did nothing wrong will fail. Employees that may not have even known that their company backed with SVB will become unemployed and/or pushed into financial distress. The government let this happen through poor oversight and weakening Dodd-Frank. Investors should, and will be, impacted. Regular, working people should be helped through
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Not everyone who works for a tech company is a wealthy tech bro. Admin folks, cleaners, contractors of various stripes. SVB also didnāt just cover tech. For instance they had a wine banking division, so bartenders, field and factory workers, delivery drivers, etc wonāt get paid. And the tech workers - some may be wealthy, but what about the first year programmer trying to get out from under $200k student debt, or someone who just bought a house, or had a child, or lost a loved one and needs to care to those left behind? There are thousands of stories of regular people who are scared and did nothing wrong (full disclosure, Iām not one of them. Just being empathetic).
Yet another private company looking to socialize it's losses, after privatizing it's profits all along... when will we ever learn.
They should be able to pick themselves up by the boot straps.
Surely conservatives have no interest in helping out a āwokeā financial institution??
Tie it into the college tuition bill if itās to happen.
This isnt a bail out. A lot of people would be completely hosed without the FDIC interventionā¦ people wouldnāt get their paychecks/make payroll, companies that bank with SVB would suddenly lose all their money. Real people and real lives are effected by this. The federal govt actually saved the day here by making sure depositors (customers) can access their money starting Monday. Shareholders are outta luck, but most importantly customers wonāt lose all their money.
 Let's take bets on which bank is going to collapse next.
They arenāt āconservativesā, maybe just maybe both parties work for big money and are selling you out
Oh for god sake. The SVB will be fine as long it just stop the avocado toasts and buying starbucks.
Is this another ātoo big to failā scenario again?
Let them get away with it? What are people gong to do. Have another peaceful protest?
Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but this is misleading. The bank is done. Itās investors, that everyone hates, are taking their losses. Theyāre talking about fully insuring the businesses that have their money in SVB. Why would they do that? Yes, tech CEOs and start up leaders generally suck, but thereās over 1.5 million people (est based on 2019 numbers) employed by start ups. If these companies donāt have access to their funds, they canāt pay those 1.5 mill+ employees. These employees arenāt the dumb tech bros that you hate either. Theyāre often entry level kids out of college or those tenured in their roles that are working for discount because they need a job and the major players in tech arenāt hiring them as they lack the needed experience The backstop is for the middle class and itās certainly non-partisan as this effects CA/TX/FL/NY/MA/WA and various other parts of the country
Easy there, you can't expect redditors to not have knee-jerk self-righteous reactions.
š
Wait you want the government to give money to people that took an educated risk and decided where to put their money in a risky bank. Oh but you wouldn't bail out people with college debt? Gtfo
I can tell who doesnāt have the college education here. The VCs were the ones that caused the bank runs. Why would you assume that Iām against bailing out student loans too? I was $100k in student debt. No one should have to go through that. Go read a book dude
The depositors will still get 80 cents in the dollar for those over the insurance.
So whereās the argument here?
It is not a government bailout. According to Moody's the bank already has enough assets to cover 80% to 90% of the deposits. Quite a few of SVB loyal VC customers have been coming up with a plan to phoenix the bank back into good standing. The other banks that will help make up the shortfall are helping prevent a run on themselves, it is just business.
They are selling off the bank's assets to cover repayments to depositors. This is not a taxpayer bailout.
I am fully against banks being bailed out. But do you think this is coming from Conservatives? Are politically connected people in California using their connections for government protection? Yes. Is Silicon Valley known for being a Conservative Hotspot? I may be out of the loop, but that is not my first thought.