Posted on 03/12/2023 10:40:08 AM PDT by marcusmaximus
This is one of those very rare occasions where the lefties have a unique insight that we don’t, they have a popular pejorative, “corporations privatize profits and socialize losses”.
Popcorn time.
At the end of last year, SVB had more than $175 billion in deposits — and $209 billion in total assets. Unless that filing was a fraud, the bank is illiquid but not insolvent. Assuming competence on the part of federal banking authorities, It is quite possible that no one but the bank stock owners will lose any money. I am predicting that all depositors will recover over 90% of their money.
So, it’ll be the old “we’ll take your bank funds to make up for the idiocy of other folks?
You’ve gotta love liberals (when they are being led to the guillotine).
I hear it was a favorite bank by liberals...
I know this info has been posted on other threads, but just to keep the numbers handy,
Before the collapse, SVB executives sold shares.
Gregory Becker, CEO, sold 11% on Feb 27, 2023.
Michael Zucker, Counsel, 19% on Feb 5.
Daniel Beck, CFO, 32% on Feb 27.
Michelle Draper, CMO, 25% on Feb 1.
>>Indians, Chinese, and Koreans dominate at the Ivy League thanks to the “meritocracy” that so many on this site worship.
Meriotocracy worshipper here. Maybe the present percentages will inspire Americans to force schools from grammar school to colleges to participate in the social pressure for students to study rather than drug themselves into not caring about studying. Only when American students put serious studying on the same pedestal that those countries do, will American students regain their intellectual reputations and America have any kind of a future.
I don’t think anyone is an expert at fixing this.
Might as well be a person without arms and legs along with an IQ of 30 trying to dig out of a 1,000 ft hole. Some “stuff” will be thrown on the wall, still going to be future hurt with the amounts required to salvage/correct the situation.
I just hope whoever works in risk and investment management sectors at SVB never be allowed in those fields again.
I’ve heard conflicting things.
I heard one report saying that this bank had a strong balance sheet, but the problem is that it was insolvent, couldn’t sell off enough bond holdings to get cash for the depositors who were withdrawing money.
If that’s true, and the assets are in balance with the liabilities/deposits, then everyone eventually would get made whole. Even those with account balances over the $250K FDIC insurance limit.
They wouldn’t get made whole immediately, but eventually, they would get their money.
Which in that case, is very different from everyone assuming that all account balances over $250K are just gone and will never be recovered.
Of course, it’s too early to know yet, if anything illegal was going on in that bank , which led to their problems.
This is kicking the can down the road - and it'll make things worse soon. Serious returns on buying Democrats? No one can beat out Ukraine - we might all die for the millions Joe and his whore monger son's graft machine made.
What in the insurance industry is known as moral hazard. The principals, including large depositors, need to take a haircut. The executives should not receive a nickel above minimum wage for any time spent working with regulators to do a thorough audit.
Could the treasury, on it’s own....offer a dollar-for-a-dollar rate? Or would this require House/Senate consent?
I would agree...some deal like that, and a quick sale of the bank...might lessen total market disturbances. Biden though...isn’t the guy to really clear up the mess and give confidence.
A lot of this is attached to SVB strategy for stock-holders. I’m wondering what other banks went down this bond path and bought the same investment strategy. Are there more like them?
South Asians seem great at running motels and convenience stores; what goes wrong when it comes to banks?
Is Jay a he, she or other?
Otherwise known as quantitative easing.
Thanks and you seem to be a bit ahead of understanding this, but as I understood it the stock/earnings for the bank (as a company) was taking a nose dive because they were in negative (but safe) instruments that would lock them into below market return.
I am trying to understand this, but shouldn’t the bank have bonds for the amounts deposited even if they cannot honor the promised return or did the executives (who paid themselves bonuses) sell too much at a loss to shore up the stock? I had read that they took a 1.something billion bath on treasuries BUT the bank had over 125 billion in deposits.
I know this is complex, but unless they did some SBF type shenanigans it would seem like the money would be there and the total losses would be the “stock value” more than an actual loss of deposits even if the woke techies lose money on their investments.
Rather than have my kids and grandkids pay for this maybe those who deposited more than 250k should simply take the loss because they invested poorly? Bailing out banks is evil and frankly it should be illegal. I never expected a bailout when I made a poor investment.
THAT is a very interesting list.
I did not go to the source to look but is there a way to look at a bank that is not listed here?
Why would so many depositors that are not corporations have so much unemployed money?
What is the maturity dating for all these bonds held by SVB along with the amount purchased? If they are long then they are screwed because depositors what their money out now. They had to sell over $2 billion Available-for-sale securities. Once that happened investors and depositors ran to the hills.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.