Silicon Valley Bank

[GutterBoy 2,900]

Just now, Strike said:

Nah.  The posts speak for themselves. 

They certainly do.

[Horseman 2,728]

56 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

I'm not in the banking industry, but I would have to assume that they would be competitive with the market to attract customers, and find other ways to increase revenue.  I highly doubt it's the reverse.

In fact I'm fairly certain that true because I've never seen a bank cut their savings account rate based on them losing money. 

What a foking moron.

[Horseman 2,728]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

 

 

 

Another win for big bank. Good job Joe.  

[Dizkneelande 1,136]

4 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Another win for big bank. Good job Joe.  

Yup digital currency and the dollar no longer being the world’s currency here we come. China, Russia and Saudi Arabia are already working on this.

[GutterBoy 2,900]

29 minutes ago, Horseman said:

What a foking moron.

Nice to see you took a break from Oscar talk to post some emojis here, as if we didn't have enough retards.

[Horseman 2,728]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

Nice to see you took a break from Oscar talk to post some emojis here, as if we didn't have enough retards.

A break from a single post today?  Who's the retard.  

[Dizkneelande 1,136]

3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

 

 

 

Stolen from Twitter 

@DavidSacks: "It's not about SVB anymore. It's about the 20 banks and the cascade that comes next. Remember, on Thursday, it was just SVB, Friday, it was Signature; over the weekend, it was three to five more, and now it's 20. Do you know who's smiling right now? Jamie Dimon.

Do you know where all these deposits are going from all these regional banks? They are flooding into the top four banks. They are flooding into JPM Chase, which is too big to fail; thanks to the bailout in 2008, which we all have problems with, he is too big to fail. 

And so, the logical response for everybody is to go to a big four bank. Why would you do anything differently? If the fed is not clear that your deposits are safe if you have any doubt about that, if there is a 1% chance that you might lose your money, why wouldn't you go to a too big to fail bank? This is the problem."

[TimHauck 3,446]

20 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

Stolen from Twitter 

@DavidSacks: "It's not about SVB anymore. It's about the 20 banks and the cascade that comes next. Remember, on Thursday, it was just SVB, Friday, it was Signature; over the weekend, it was three to five more, and now it's 20. Do you know who's smiling right now? Jamie Dimon.

Do you know where all these deposits are going from all these regional banks? They are flooding into the top four banks. They are flooding into JPM Chase, which is too big to fail; thanks to the bailout in 2008, which we all have problems with, he is too big to fail. 

And so, the logical response for everybody is to go to a big four bank. Why would you do anything differently? If the fed is not clear that your deposits are safe if you have any doubt about that, if there is a 1% chance that you might lose your money, why wouldn't you go to a too big to fail bank? This is the problem."

20 banks went under?  What were the 3-5 after Signature?

[Horseman 2,728]

SVB gave 74 million to BLM and "related causes"  

[nobody 2,939]

11 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Sure. I’m going to go get my money out of the bank and put it in another bank! Bank run! 

People would've showed up to the bank on Monday and video themselves not being able to get their money.  They would post it on social media.  The fear would be that would trigger people to go to otherwise healthy banks and withdraw money into cash which would hypothetically require banks to liquidate assets potentially at a loss to cover the withdrawals.  Lines start forming outside banks which also gets posted on social media which triggers more people to make withdrawals, etc.

I mean, shìt, when the covid lockdowns hit people bought up all the toilet paper for no reason just because everyone started buying toilet paper instead of fruits and vegetables and shìt like that.  People are retarded sheep and easily spooked, and if someone is reading this and you ran out and bought 6 months worth of toilet paper during covid, I'm talking about you.

[nobody 2,939]

10 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

I'm not in the banking industry, but I would have to assume that they would be competitive with the market to attract customers, and find other ways to increase revenue.  I highly doubt it's the reverse.

In fact I'm fairly certain that true because I've never seen a bank cut their savings account rate based on them losing money. 

Banks lower interest rates in lock step with the federal funds rate all the time.  Except the big banks that just offer 0.15% no matter what.

[TimHauck 3,446]

10 hours ago, Horseman said:

Another win for big bank. Good job Joe.  

 

 

 

[GutterBoy 2,900]

2 hours ago, nobody said:

Banks lower interest rates in lock step with the federal funds rate all the time.  Except the big banks that just offer 0.15% no matter what.

Exactly.  Thank you.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,062]

4 hours ago, nobody said:

People would've showed up to the bank on Monday and video themselves not being able to get their money.  They would post it on social media.  The fear would be that would trigger people to go to otherwise healthy banks and withdraw money into cash which would hypothetically require banks to liquidate assets potentially at a loss to cover the withdrawals.  Lines start forming outside banks which also gets posted on social media which triggers more people to make withdrawals, etc.

I mean, shìt, when the covid lockdowns hit people bought up all the toilet paper for no reason just because everyone started buying toilet paper instead of fruits and vegetables and shìt like that.  People are retarded sheep and easily spooked, and if someone is reading this and you ran out and bought 6 months worth of toilet paper during covid, I'm talking about you.

Nonsense. 

[GutterBoy 2,900]

38 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Nonsense. 

What Nobody described is exactly what happened.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,062]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

What Nobody described is exactly what happened.

Fear mongering? Yes , that happened. 

[edjr 7,046]

 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,585]

Suisse Bank going down today

Wells Fargo in the crosshairs

[The Real timschochet 7,559]

4 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

Suisse Bank going down today

Wells Fargo in the crosshairs

Has Suisse Bank been too woke? 

[GutterBoy 2,900]

Pretty sure Credit Suisse is too big to fail, and the govt of Switzerland will save it.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,585]

5 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Has Suisse Bank been too woke? 

when have I mentioned woke?

 

[TimHauck 3,446]

man Tucker is really reaching on this stuff.   he had to go back 12 years to 2011 to find some dumb music video that Signature bank made

[Hardcore troubadour 16,062]

7 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

man Tucker is really reaching on this stuff.   he had to go back 12 years to 2011 to find some dumb music video that Signature bank made

Yeah well, he was making the point that the banks were doing that virtue signaling during the occupy Wall Street period. Deflecting. Funny you left that out. Or you just saw a clip. 

[jerryskids 7,201]

18 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

So it was your lack of comprehension that started this.  My quick lesson on bonds to tardcore was to explain that if you hold a bond to maturity then you're fine, you don't lose your initial investment.  It's only if you want to sell before maturity then you only get what the bond is worth at that point.  It wasn't specific to svb. Hope that makes sense to you.

I understand what you are saying but I think you are missing something here.  The reason the current market on those bonds is down is because the perceived future value of those bonds, in terms of REAL value (adjusted for inflation), is down.  In other words, sure at maturity you get what you contracted for, but it was at a much lower interest rate than inflation over that period, so that money is worth less then in real terms, hence the lower present value.

 

[BLS 315]

4 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I understand what you are saying but I think you are missing something here.  The reason the current market on those bonds is down is because the perceived future value of those bonds, in terms of REAL value (adjusted for inflation), is down.  In other words, sure at maturity you get what you contracted for, but it was at a much lower interest rate than inflation over that period, so that money is worth less then in real terms, hence the lower present value.

 

Why would you possibly attempt to have a legit conversation with him?

He's utterly incapable of critical thinking.

 

[Alias Detective 1,475]

7 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I understand what you are saying but I think you are missing something here.  The reason the current market on those bonds is down is because the perceived future value of those bonds, in terms of REAL value (adjusted for inflation), is down.  In other words, sure at maturity you get what you contracted for, but it was at a much lower interest rate than inflation over that period, so that money is worth less then in real terms, hence the lower present value.

 

He will have a snarky remark and or move the goal posts.

Get ready...

3

2

1

 

[GutterBoy 2,900]

13 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I understand what you are saying but I think you are missing something here.  The reason the current market on those bonds is down is because the perceived future value of those bonds, in terms of REAL value (adjusted for inflation), is down.  In other words, sure at maturity you get what you contracted for, but it was at a much lower interest rate than inflation over that period, so that money is worth less then in real terms, hence the lower present value.

 

Not really.  Let's go back to bond lesson 101.

The price of bonds fluctuates inversely to the yield.  When rates go up, the price of bonds goes down.  When rates go down, the price of bonds go up.

This is because the value of the bond is based on the yield that it pays.  Bonds that hold a rate lower than you can buy today aren't very valuable.  So if you want to sell them, you're not gonna get what you paid for it, you sell for a loss.

The current market on the older bonds is down because you can buy new bonds now at a higher yield.

Here is a quick video to explain for you

 

[The Real timschochet 7,559]

From what I’m reading the only things that Suisse and SVB had in common is that neither bank has adjusted well to the raise in interest rates. 

[GutterBoy 2,900]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

From what I’m reading the only things that Suisse and SVB had in common is that neither bank has adjusted well to the raise in interest rates. 

Credit Suisse has had troubles for a long time, years.  I know several people that used to work there, most of them were let go the past few months.  They've been circling the drain for a while.  Actually I almost took a job there a year ago, thankfully I didn't.

[WhiskeyCash 65]

It’s hilarious seeing the obvious leftist nut jobs on this board CONSTANTLY scrambling to find SOME way to defend the atrocities the democrats have created. Complete control of house, senate, and presidency. Yet they still try to blame things like this on Trump  and the retards here will keep on defending them. From one disaster to the next, they’ll defend their overlords with their dying breath. Can’t wait to see the next disaster that comes and see how you retards are going to blame it on trump. Never mind the fact that the idiot women that were the investors invested poorly and got the entire bank shut down. Never mind the train derailment happened over something NOT involved with Trump. You retarded cultists are gonna blame him. We expect it. The truth always proves you wrong. You literally haven’t been right about a SINGLE thing 

[jerryskids 7,201]

22 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Not really.  Let's go back to bond lesson 101.

The price of bonds fluctuates inversely to the yield.  When rates go up, the price of bonds goes down.  When rates go down, the price of bonds go up.

This is because the value of the bond is based on the yield that it pays.  Bonds that hold a rate lower than you can buy today aren't very valuable.  So if you want to sell them, you're not gonna get what you paid for it, you sell for a loss.

The current market on the older bonds is down because you can buy new bonds now at a higher yield.

Here is a quick video to explain for you

 

Sigh...  If you watch your own video, at 2:45 they explain interest rate risk.  I made the mistake of explaining to you the underlying reason for that interest rate risk, which is apparently too advanced for you.  

That being said I should have included the reduced real value of the interest payments as a standalone item, but you are already confused so I'm glad I didn't.

Basically, they were NOT fine if they just could have held on to maturity.  At current interest rates they would lose money at that time.  At higher interest rates they'd lose more; lower they would lose less (or be OK/make money if they go low enough).  And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.  All we can do is value investments based on our perception of the future value.  That's basically how investment works.  HTH

[RLLD 4,283]

31 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I understand what you are saying but I think you are missing something here.  The reason the current market on those bonds is down is because the perceived future value of those bonds, in terms of REAL value (adjusted for inflation), is down.  In other words, sure at maturity you get what you contracted for, but it was at a much lower interest rate than inflation over that period, so that money is worth less then in real terms, hence the lower present value.

 

This is on point.

Consider this.  To anyone with even a modest understanding of economics it was evident in 2021 that the Biden policies would foment inflation, and that is what happened.  The writing was on the wall and clear for most people to understand.  To include, and especially, the banks.....

We need not look back very far to observe such situations from the past where banks, more pointedly wall st, reacted NEXT DAY and reacted emphatically from the simple mention of inflation or rate manipulations..... so then why did this bank sit on it hands for so long? I think these people should be compelled to explain their actions and inactions.....they should be put on display for the failure of leadership.

You are never completely useless if you can at least serve as a warning to others....

[The Real timschochet 7,559]

10 minutes ago, WhiskeyCash said:

It’s hilarious seeing the obvious leftist nut jobs on this board CONSTANTLY scrambling to find SOME way to defend the atrocities the democrats have created. Complete control of house, senate, and presidency. Yet they still try to blame things like this on Trump  and the retards here will keep on defending them. From one disaster to the next, they’ll defend their overlords with their dying breath. Can’t wait to see the next disaster that comes and see how you retards are going to blame it on trump. Never mind the fact that the idiot women that were the investors invested poorly and got the entire bank shut down. Never mind the train derailment happened over something NOT involved with Trump. You retarded cultists are gonna blame him. We expect it. The truth always proves you wrong. You literally haven’t been right about a SINGLE thing 

Hmm. 
 

The complaint that some liberals have made is that the Trump era included deregulation of banking that helped this along (just as the deregulation of safety procedures contributed to East Palestine.) I have no idea how reasonable that complaint is. But at least they are offering a specific cause. 
 

You on the other hand are claiming that Democrats are at fault because during the last two years they were nominally in charge. Putting aside the fact that Republicans in the Senate, together with Joe Manchin, had a large enough block to shut down almost everything the Democrats tried to do, my question is what exactly did the Dems or Biden do to cause this? Please be more specific than “it was done under their watch”, as that’s a rather silly argument. 

[WhiskeyCash 65]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

Hmm. 
 

The complaint that some liberals have made is that the Trump era included deregulation of banking that helped this along (just as the deregulation of safety procedures contributed to East Palestine.) I have no idea how reasonable that complaint is. But at least they are offering a specific cause. 
 

You on the other hand are claiming that Democrats are at fault because during the last two years they were nominally in charge. Putting aside the fact that Republicans in the Senate, together with Joe Manchin, had a large enough block to shut down almost everything the Democrats tried to do, my question is what exactly did the Dems or Biden do to cause this? Please be more specific than “it was done under their watch”, as that’s a rather silly argument. 

Too long. Didn’t read. Nor do I care. I’ve already witnessed the stupidity you bring to the table and now I’m onboard with the rest of the guys on this board:

I don’t believe you. I don’t trust you. Everything you say is nothing but you doing your best to defend the left. You’ve lost all credibility with everyone here. You lost it with me and I haven’t even been here that long.
 

FIX YOUR SH1T. Get your Sh1t together and stop being a man child. Swear you liberals won’t ever admit you’re wrong or that your side is evil and has committed acts of treason against the American people 

[BLS 315]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Hmm. 
 

The complaint that some liberals have made is that the Trump era included deregulation of banking that helped this along (just as the deregulation of safety procedures contributed to East Palestine.) I have no idea how reasonable that complaint is. But at least they are offering a specific cause. 
 

You on the other hand are claiming that Democrats are at fault because during the last two years they were nominally in charge. Putting aside the fact that Republicans in the Senate, together with Joe Manchin, had a large enough block to shut down almost everything the Democrats tried to do, my question is what exactly did the Dems or Biden do to cause this? Please be more specific than “it was done under their watch”, as that’s a rather silly argument. 

I don't think the current state of affairs is the "Dems" fault per se.  Biden's administration is doing the same thing essentially as Trump's.  Same as Obama's, same as Bush's, etc.

Our entire banking system is just a microcosm of the overall problem.  We printed money to get out of the housing collapse; which was caused by printing too much money and easy liquidity.  Gambling ensues and Wall Street has a great time.  Your 401k goes up nicely for a long time, until it pops.  Every pop gets bigger, which requires more money, which brings more inflation.

We're only getting this party started.  What you're going to see soon will make today's current environment look like a child's game.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,062]

Life lesson: politicians don’t tell the banks what to do. Banks tell the politicians what to do. 

[WhiskeyCash 65]

They spent over $73 million on donations to BLM & related organizations. That wasn’t personal funds. That was with bank funds. If a person claims to be a leftist then they shouldn’t be in charge of anything money related. They give it away too much 

[GutterBoy 2,900]

53 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Sigh...  If you watch your own video, at 2:45 they explain interest rate risk.  I made the mistake of explaining to you the underlying reason for that interest rate risk, which is apparently too advanced for you.  

That being said I should have included the reduced real value of the interest payments as a standalone item, but you are already confused so I'm glad I didn't.

Basically, they were NOT fine if they just could have held on to maturity.  At current interest rates they would lose money at that time.  At higher interest rates they'd lose more; lower they would lose less (or be OK/make money if they go low enough).  And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.  All we can do is value investments based on our perception of the future value.  That's basically how investment works.  HTH

It's not too advanced for me Jerry, it's just a different topic.  The real reason the prices of bonds fluctuates is due to the yield of the bond vs the market.

Again, I've explained this several times now, when I said "fine" I was simply referring to the fact that they don't have to take a loss on the sale of the bond if they were able to hold them to maturity.

[Horseman 2,728]

48 minutes ago, WhiskeyCash said:

Too long. Didn’t read. Nor do I care. I’ve already witnessed the stupidity you bring to the table and now I’m onboard with the rest of the guys on this board:

I don’t believe you. I don’t trust you. Everything you say is nothing but you doing your best to defend the left. You’ve lost all credibility with everyone here. You lost it with me and I haven’t even been here that long.
 

FIX YOUR SH1T. Get your Sh1t together and stop being a man child. Swear you liberals won’t ever admit you’re wrong or that your side is evil and has committed acts of treason against the American people 

[TimHauck 3,446]

1 hour ago, WhiskeyCash said:

It’s hilarious seeing the obvious leftist nut jobs on this board CONSTANTLY scrambling to find SOME way to defend the atrocities the democrats have created. Complete control of house, senate, and presidency. Yet they still try to blame things like this on Trump  and the retards here will keep on defending them. From one disaster to the next, they’ll defend their overlords with their dying breath. Can’t wait to see the next disaster that comes and see how you retards are going to blame it on trump. Never mind the fact that the idiot women that were the investors invested poorly and got the entire bank shut down. Never mind the train derailment happened over something NOT involved with Trump. You retarded cultists are gonna blame him. We expect it. The truth always proves you wrong. You literally haven’t been right about a SINGLE thing 

No one in this thread blamed Trump.  That's slightly more dumb than blaming Biden.