- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: SVB failure isn't something that's just affecting a few thousand tech bros in SF
Posted on 3/11/23 at 9:23 pm to Street Hawk
Posted on 3/11/23 at 9:23 pm to Street Hawk
quote:
what would happen if SVB is allowed to fail fully and if depositors aren't made whole
I mean is there a cap on insured deposit amounts or isn’t there?
0
Posted on 3/11/23 at 9:28 pm to HailToTheChiz
I believe I read that there were about 20K business that banked with SVB. 98% of their clients are businesses and only 2 percent were individuals.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say ALL of those banks had many if not all of their available cash there. Only 250K is insured. Not a smart business move to do that. That doesn't deserve taxpayers money for a SAVING.
I do agree that there will be A LOT of business shutting doors because of this. It sux that there will be people that work at these businesses that get affected especially because they weren't the ones deciding where monies are invested, stored, and the like.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say ALL of those banks had many if not all of their available cash there. Only 250K is insured. Not a smart business move to do that. That doesn't deserve taxpayers money for a SAVING.
I do agree that there will be A LOT of business shutting doors because of this. It sux that there will be people that work at these businesses that get affected especially because they weren't the ones deciding where monies are invested, stored, and the like.
This post was edited on 3/12/23 at 12:10 am
Posted on 3/11/23 at 9:34 pm to HailToTheChiz
quote:
Why do I keep seeing this word
It's a pretty common term in the wake of financial/economic negative events.
I know the poliboard thinks this is some kind of concerted effort amongst the media to use this word but it's long been a staple whenever something like this happens lol. It was used a TON during the brief evergrande story a year or two ago.
This post was edited on 3/11/23 at 9:36 pm
Posted on 3/11/23 at 10:13 pm to Street Hawk
Are there people running real businesses out there that don't understand the FDIC limit?
Posted on 3/11/23 at 11:00 pm to Big Jim Slade
quote:
It was probably vogue in the Silicon Valley tech circles. Plus the banks in Ohio likely don’t virtue signal enough for the Silicon Valley crowd so you probably got some industry cred using their hip, PC bank.
My understanding is they had a much more pro start up lending team.
Most big banks will laugh at startups until they no longer need their capital, I think SVB had a rep for taking chances.
Posted on 3/11/23 at 11:03 pm to Street Hawk
I mean I believe all depositors should be made whole, and they will be eventually. And while she makes some good points about everything overall, she really presents herself as way different than she is in reality.
She lives in my area, and her and her husband were both consultants and McKinsey, before moving on to senior leadership roles at Worthington Industries, a multiple billion dollar company, and Ohio Health, a multi billion dollar healthcare system.
They’re both Duke MBAs, and they live in an $800k house in Bexley, which is a wealthy inner suburb. And they bought this house around the time they are single-income family, after she was able to take $10k and work a year and a half for no pay.
She says her husband works in Manufacturing, which is true, but he is obviously not doing any manual labor. He’s just a senior leader in a Fortune-1000 company.
None of this refutes her overall point, but after liking her tweet (especially since she’s local), I was a little annoyed when I found she did not paint an accurate picture as a non-elite middle class family.
She lives in my area, and her and her husband were both consultants and McKinsey, before moving on to senior leadership roles at Worthington Industries, a multiple billion dollar company, and Ohio Health, a multi billion dollar healthcare system.
They’re both Duke MBAs, and they live in an $800k house in Bexley, which is a wealthy inner suburb. And they bought this house around the time they are single-income family, after she was able to take $10k and work a year and a half for no pay.
She says her husband works in Manufacturing, which is true, but he is obviously not doing any manual labor. He’s just a senior leader in a Fortune-1000 company.
None of this refutes her overall point, but after liking her tweet (especially since she’s local), I was a little annoyed when I found she did not paint an accurate picture as a non-elite middle class family.
This post was edited on 3/11/23 at 11:13 pm
Posted on 3/12/23 at 12:25 am to Auburn80
quote:
Why does an Ohio mom have her entire operation tied up in a Silicon Valley Bank? Plenty of banks in Ohio.
VC fund probably required it
Posted on 3/12/23 at 12:30 am to SloaneRanger
quote:
Are there people running real businesses out there that don't understand the FDIC limit?
How is a major company supposed to do business with 300 banks with 240K in each?
Posted on 3/12/23 at 2:47 am to LSUFanHouston
Sounds like they took a risk.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 3:21 am to HailToTheChiz
quote:
Why do I keep seeing this word
The tech folks are driving that narrative to protect the money they have in the bank.
As far as the Ohio lady, she has a Duke MBA, quit her job at a massive corporation, and got millions in vc money.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 6:19 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
How is a major company supposed to do business with 300 banks with 240K in each?
They don’t. They use the IntraFi network.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 6:57 am to Street Hawk
quote:
The All-in podcast was fire this week. Here they cover the 2nd and 3rd order effects of what would happen if SVB is allowed to fail fully and if depositors aren't made whole at the 43:58 mark
I love All-In, but they are extremely heavily biased in this regard. All four of them have some relation to that bank financially whether it’s direct or through some of their investments or through friends or close business partners with money tied in there. Likely friends or business partners with people working at that bank as well
Posted on 3/12/23 at 8:21 am to Upperdecker
I agree but I also think that they know the ripples in SV this will create in the best scenario. The worst case scenario is incredibly bad. That bias (like knowing companies who are about to fail to make payroll or who lost their burn) is legit but it doesn't fully discredit their concerns.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 8:27 am to buckeye_vol
quote:
None of this refutes her overall point, but after liking her tweet (especially since she’s local), I was a little annoyed when I found she did not paint an accurate picture as a non-elite middle class family.
That is pretty scummy of her and she knows what she's doing. "OH, I'm just a blue collar joe family from Ohio, not the coastal elite type you all hate."
I feel bad, but there's no reason her company, which is some obscure personal to-do list app company, should be bailed out. This isn't a healthcare system, or a company devoted to important research. It's a company developing something non-essential.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 8:39 am to tiggerthetooth
quote:
but there's no reason her company, which is some obscure personal to-do list app company, should be bailed out. This isn't a healthcare system, or a company devoted to important research. It's a company developing something non-essential.
What does the product and your opinion of it matter?
Either depositors get protected or they don't. It's a binary decision based on policies and economics that have nothing to do with the underlying companies. It's all or nothing.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 8:42 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
How is a major company supposed to do business with 300 banks with 240K in each?
Exactly. But to add to that, most of those businesses likely banked with SVB because they either got very favorable banking rates OR because of the woke principles.
This bank should be allowed to fail so that it creates a permanent impact on the issues that caused it to fail. That’s the chief principle of capitalism.
If you have more than $250k you should strongly consider keeping it somewhere with low risk. SVB was anything but.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 8:46 am to baldona
quote:
But to add to that, most of those businesses likely banked with SVB because they either got very favorable banking rates OR because of the woke principles.
You missed the most obvious and realistic scenario: it had a long relationship with the VCs who are funding these ventures.
quote:
This bank should be allowed to fail so that it creates a permanent impact on the issues that caused it to fail.
The issue isn't really the bank failing. It's what to do with depositors. The bank is dead, but its assets aren't $0.00.
quote:
If you have more than $250k you should strongly consider keeping it somewhere with low risk. SVB was anything but.
Why was SVB not low risk?
Posted on 3/12/23 at 8:47 am to Auburn80
quote:
Why does an Ohio mom have her entire operation tied up in a Silicon Valley Bank? Plenty of banks in Ohio.
I think because VC steered startups to SVB. The story here will be the relationship between Venture/SVB/ Government.
A quick bailout/acquisition keeps all these relationships hidden. It’s in everyone’s interest ( except for taxpayers) to make this go away.
Posted on 3/12/23 at 8:56 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Why was SVB not low risk?
I’m not sure if you are being sarcastic? I’m guessing those that bank with SVB know they are into venture capital heavy which is always a risk?
Posted on 3/12/23 at 9:01 am to baldona
quote:
I’m guessing those that bank with SVB know they are into venture capital heavy which is always a risk?
Do you know why SVB failed?
They had so much capital sitting around they put it in the saftest investment vehicle on earth (US treasuries)
In hindsight, putting all that money into illiquid, long-term bonds was stupid, but it didn't put the underlying assets at risk.
Venture is risky, but that risk didn't make SVB fail.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News