Silicon Valley Bank

[TimHauck 1,801]

4 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

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.

How much of a loss does one take when they sell bonds early?   They probably could have still survived even if they sold some of them without the rush of deposits right?

[Horseman 1,514]

It's pretty simple folks.  SVB had a deposit to lend ratio of 42%.  They had too much extra cash, got greedy and tied it up at a relatively low interest rate. BidenFlation happened and they couldn't pay the deposits back when people came asking for their money.  Nothing else matters and nothing else could have stopped it.

[GutterBoy 2,281]

6 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

How much of a loss does one take when they sell bonds early?   They probably could have still survived even if they sold some of them without the rush of deposits right?

I don't know exactly what they held, but many long term bond funds were down 20-30% the past year, so assume in that area.  They probably could have survived without the run, but their earnings were bad, so they were mismanaged and in trouble either way.

[jerryskids 5,206]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

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.

I think we are arguing over the same thing, and we agree that if they had not had to liquidate them they would not have gone under (near term; they were still losing a lot of money on them, just over time).  My initial comment was based on a difference of opinion of getting their investment back, so I said something like "I think you are missing" to clarify, but then others jumped in, you got butt hurt, and gave me the "bond 101" video.

Anyway, I'm out.   

[GutterBoy 2,281]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I think we are arguing over the same thing, and we agree that if they had not had to liquidate them they would not have gone under (near term; they were still losing a lot of money on them, just over time).  My initial comment was based on a difference of opinion of getting their investment back, so I said something like "I think you are missing" to clarify, but then others jumped in, you got butt hurt, and gave me the "bond 101" video.

Anyway, I'm out.   

I didn't get butthurt, I just saw that you were blaming the falling bond price on inflation, which was incorrect (well partially incorrect in a round about way since inflation caused the fed to raise rates and the increased rates are what directly causes the price to go down), and I was just trying to help.  But you already know everything, so enjoy!

[The Real timschochet 2,939]

1 hour ago, Horseman said:

It's pretty simple folks.  SVB had a deposit to lend ratio of 42%.  They had too much extra cash, got greedy and tied it up at a relatively low interest rate. BidenFlation happened and they couldn't pay the deposits back when people came asking for their money.  Nothing else matters and nothing else could have stopped it.

I don’t usually agree with anything you write but I believe that you may be largely correct here. My only objection would, of course, be your use of the term “BidenFlation”, which indicates you place the blame for inflation on his policies. Obviously I don’t. 

[Baker Boy 1,485]

12 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

I didn't get butthurt, I just saw that you were blaming the falling bond price on inflation, which was incorrect (well partially incorrect in a round about way since inflation caused the fed to raise rates and the increased rates are what directly causes the price to go down), and I was just trying to help.  But you already know everything, so enjoy!

Let’s take one more step, inflation was caused by massive government spending.

[GutterBoy 2,281]

12 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t usually agree with anything you write but I believe that you may be largely correct here. My only objection would, of course, be your use of the term “BidenFlation”, which indicates you place the blame for inflation on his policies. Obviously I don’t. 

Meh, I usually ignore what he writes because he's usually wrong, but I think I owe it to you to point out where he is wrong, for your sake.

They weren't greedy, at all, they were stupid.  If anything they didn't take on enough risk, since they parked an excess of cash in treasuries and mortgage backed securities which are ultrasafe, however subject to rising rates.

[GutterBoy 2,281]

4 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

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

Quote

 

Swiss authorities and Credit Suisse Group AG are discussing ways to stabilize the bank, according to people familiar with the matter, after comments by its biggest shareholder on Wednesday helped trigger a plunge in the stock.

The firm’s leaders and government officials have talked about options that range from a public statement of support to a potential liquidity backstop, said the people, who asked not to be identified describing private discussions. Also among the ideas floated include a separation of the Swiss unit and a long-shot orchestrated tie-up with larger Swiss rival UBS Group AG, said the people, cautioning that it’s unclear which, if any, of these steps will actually be executed.

 

 

[TimHauck 1,801]

46 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Meh, I usually ignore what he writes because he's usually wrong, but I think I owe it to you to point out where he is wrong, for your sake.

They weren't greedy, at all, they were stupid.  If anything they didn't take on enough risk, since they parked an excess of cash in treasuries and mortgage backed securities which are ultrasafe, however subject to rising rates.

Mortgage backed securities are ultrasafe?  Aren't they basically what caused the 2008 crisis?

[GutterBoy 2,281]

9 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Mortgage backed securities are ultrasafe?  Aren't they basically what caused the 2008 crisis?

Safe, not ultrasafe, and yes subprime mortgages played a role in the 2008 crisis.  Since then there have been many changes to make them generally low risk.

[Alias Detective 1,179]

Gutter had a rough day in this thread.  Wow!

[GutterBoy 2,281]

7 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

Gutter had a rough day in this thread.  Wow!

Anytime you wanna challenge me on anything, go for it.  Otherwise, shut your face.  Your commentary trying to get a baseless dig in is tiresome.

[nobody 2,043]

2 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

Anytime you wanna challenge me on anything, go for it.  Otherwise, shut your face.  Your commentary trying to get a baseless dig in is tiresome.

I'd kick your ass in two areas.

1. Height
2. Being ugly as fock

Come at me bro.

[TimHauck 1,801]

On 3/14/2023 at 7:41 AM, Dizkneelande said:

Money to Candidates BECKER, GREG
MENLO PARK, CA 94025 SVB CEO 08-26-2020 $2,800 Joe Biden (D)

 

On 3/14/2023 at 7:44 AM, Dizkneelande said:

Money to Candidates BECKER, GREG
MENLO PARK, CA 94025 SILICON VALLEY BANK CEO 08-13-2015 $1,500 Ro Khanna (D) Federal

 

On 3/14/2023 at 7:49 AM, Dizkneelande said:

Money to Candidates BECKER, GREG
MENLO PARK, CA 94025 SILICON VALLEY BANK 06-17-2021 $2,900 Charles E Schumer (D) Federal

Just throwing them off the scent again?

 

Considering the bank was headquartered California, I don’t think it’s surprising that they donated more to Dems

[GutterBoy 2,281]

59 minutes ago, nobody said:

I'd kick your ass in two areas.

1. Height
2. Being ugly as fock

Come at me bro.

I concede on height, but I'm pretty ugly myself, would put up a good fight.

[dogcows 1,029]

If they had diversified: their investments and their clientele, this wouldn’t have happened.

They should have known interest rates wouldn’t stay low forever. The Fed had already started a path of raising rates before the pandemic. They reversed course temporarily, but everybody knew they would go back up. And it’s not like inflation surprised anybody. And the Fed was a bit slow to act, meaning the bank had plenty of time to move assets. So there’s really no excuse for the bank on this one.

As for clientele, the Silicon Valley tech bros are an inbred group. All it takes is a few to panic, and suddenly many depositors with huge accounts acted very quickly.

All the bank execs should be banned from the industry for life. And IMO, the FDIC should not have paid out anything over the $250K per depositor.

[Strike 3,979]

https://www.ft.com/content/090e081f-35b3-484b-8095-c42a3c5e4259

[RLLD 3,455]

I think we are accentuating the negative here and overlooking the positive.

With this bank you had a glimmering example of "woke" and "diversity".  They prioritized diversity and being woke over merit, and we should all applaud them for it. Right up to the moment that their lack of focus on merit destroyed them, they were showing us all about diversity 

[GutterBoy 2,281]

Just now, RLLD said:

I think we are accentuating the negative here and overlooking the positive.

With this bank you had a glimmering example of "woke" and "diversity".  They prioritized diversity and being woke over merit, and we should all applaud them for it. Right up to the moment that their lack of focus on merit destroyed them, they were showing us all about diversity 

How did they prioritize diversity and being woke over merit?

[RLLD 3,455]

1 minute ago, GutterBoy said:

How did they prioritize diversity and being woke over merit?

https://www.svb.com/globalassets/library/uploadedfiles/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-at-svb_january-2023.pdf

Well, that is what I read from them. 

[seafoam1 1,879]

6 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

How did they prioritize diversity and being woke over merit?

You should pay attention to what is happening in the country.

[GutterBoy 2,281]

3 minutes ago, RLLD said:

https://www.svb.com/globalassets/library/uploadedfiles/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-at-svb_january-2023.pdf

Well, that is what I read from them. 

What page do they talk about prioritizing diversity and being woke over merit?

[RLLD 3,455]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

What page do they talk about prioritizing diversity and being woke over merit?

I get where you are going, just so you know , but I do want to play with you a bit more.....

 

We continue to evaluate our process to advance gender parity in SVB leadership roles and ensure fair pay. We publish a Gender Pay Gap Report for our UK office annually.

on slide 8 they admit it a bit more

But lets look at it another way, let's play the game properly. You will use the same liberal deflection as the New York Times to pretend it away.   The key defense for any liberal will always be "you cant prove it".  And if someone is hiding their intentions and actions well enough there is some merit to this. Will we ever have that "Perry Mason" moment, perhaps not....though it can happen; as it did with Reiner and Maher......poor wob.....he tried to play that game and got shot down as well.

So do your thing, two step as much as you want. Its all good fun   

[GutterBoy 2,281]

2 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I get where you are going, just so you know , but I do want to play with you a bit more.....

 

We continue to evaluate our process to advance gender parity in SVB leadership roles and ensure fair pay. We publish a Gender Pay Gap Report for our UK office annually.

on slide 8 they admit it a bit more

But lets look at it another way, let's play the game properly. You will use the same liberal deflection as the New York Times to pretend it away.   The key defense for any liberal will always be "you cant prove it".  And if someone is hiding their intentions and actions well enough there is some merit to this. Will we ever have that "Perry Mason" moment, perhaps not....though it can happen; as it did with Reiner and Maher......poor wob.....he tried to play that game and got shot down as well.

So do your thing, two step as much as you want. Its all good fun   

Well at least you're smart enough to see that I called you out for your BS baseless statement and you have backpedaled accordingly.  I'm done here.

[RLLD 3,455]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

Well at least you're smart enough to see that I called you out for your BS baseless statement and you have backpedaled accordingly.  I'm done here.

Absolutely!  I mean c'mon...you are the prototypical wayward webbie, extolling your virtuous position, but deep down you are a coward, and people get that.  It's probably not entirely your fault, but it is what it is....and you are not without merit. We can use your viewpoints to assess how stupid something is based on your level of support.  So post away sport, you are at least entertaining. 

[TimHauck 1,801]

GO WOKE GO BROKE

Nevermind that this person is in IT

 

 

 

[Crestwood 2 128]

7 hours ago, TimHauck said:

GO WOKE GO BROKE

Nevermind that this person is in IT

 

 

 

He looks too old for you to shower with, Tim

[jerryskids 5,206]

7 hours ago, TimHauck said:

GO WOKE GO BROKE

Nevermind that this person is in IT

 

 

 

Head of Global Markets is an IT position?

 

[TimHauck 1,801]

14 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Head of Global Markets is an IT position?

 

“Head of Global Markets Core Engineering Integration Components” (via their LinkedIn)

Schachtel’s tweet was fake news

[jerryskids 5,206]

17 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

“Head of Global Markets Core Engineering Integration Components” (via their LinkedIn)

Schachtel’s tweet was fake news

Got it, thanks

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,584]

They should get a refund from BLM

[Mike Hunt 154]

On 3/15/2023 at 8:09 PM, dogcows said:

If they had diversified: their investments and their clientele, this wouldn’t have happened.

They should have known interest rates wouldn’t stay low forever. The Fed had already started a path of raising rates before the pandemic. They reversed course temporarily, but everybody knew they would go back up. And it’s not like inflation surprised anybody. And the Fed was a bit slow to act, meaning the bank had plenty of time to move assets. So there’s really no excuse for the bank on this one.

As for clientele, the Silicon Valley tech bros are an inbred group. All it takes is a few to panic, and suddenly many depositors with huge accounts acted very quickly.

All the bank execs should be banned from the industry for life. And IMO, the FDIC should not have paid out anything over the $250K per depositor.

I heard yesterday they have not had a risk assessment manager for almost a year.  Probably the single most important position at a bank.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,653]

9 minutes ago, Mike Hunt said:

I heard yesterday they have not had a risk assessment manager for almost a year.  Probably the single most important position at a bank.

They didn’t. And when they finally got around to hiring one we were told she was a POC and queer, not much about her capabilities.  Because that was what was most important.  

[Strike 3,979]

Fed knew about the problems at SVB a year ago:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-17/fed-alarms-at-svb-began-more-than-year-ago-as-examiners-changed?leadSource=uverify wall

[The Real timschochet 2,939]

6 minutes ago, Strike said:

Fed knew about the problems at SVB a year ago:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-17/fed-alarms-at-svb-began-more-than-year-ago-as-examiners-changed?leadSource=uverify wall

Isn’t this always the case? No matter what crisis occurs we later find out that somebody knew it was coming. 

[Strike 3,979]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Isn’t this always the case? No matter what crisis occurs we later find out that somebody knew it was coming. 

Yes.  And it's why you so often see so many of us push back against more government oversight.  For every crisis people like you say "we need more laws and government"  And we say "Maybe they should enforce the laws already on the books."   And you say "NOOOOO.  We need MORE laws for them not to enforce."  Gun control is the perfect example.  Whether it's a shooting that was done with a handgun and you want to more restrictions on  "assault weapons" even though you can't even define what one is, or some other additional gun control law that will only impact lawful gun owners, you call for more gun control with every shooting.  But then you'll have an epiphany like above, but it won't last.  You'll be back calling for more laws the next time anything bad happens.  You NEED the government to look out for you.  I'd rather they stay the fock out of the way.

[GutterBoy 2,281]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

Yes.  And it's why you so often see so many of us push back against more government oversight.  For every crisis people like you say "we need more laws and government"  And we say "Maybe they should enforce the laws already on the books."   And you say "NOOOOO.  We need MORE laws for them not to enforce."  Gun control is the perfect example.  Whether it's a shooting that was done with a handgun and you want to more restrictions on  "assault weapons" even though you can't even define what one is, or some other additional gun control law that will only impact lawful gun owners, you call for more gun control with every shooting.  But then you'll have an epiphany like above, but it won't last.  You'll be back calling for more laws the next time anything bad happens.  You NEED the government to look out for you.  I'd rather they stay the fock out of the way.

So you're saying more banking deregulation would have prevented this?

[The Real timschochet 2,939]

Just now, Strike said:

Yes.  And it's why you so often see so many of us push back against more government oversight.  For every crisis people like you say "we need more laws and government"  And we say "Maybe they should enforce the laws already on the books."   And you say "NOOOOO.  We need MORE laws for them not to enforce."  Gun control is the perfect example.  Whether it's a shooting that was done with a handgun and you want to more restrictions on  "assault weapons" even though you can't even define what one is, or some other additional gun control law that will only impact lawful gun owners, you call for more gun control with every shooting.  But then you'll have an epiphany like above, but it won't last.  You'll be back calling for more laws the next time anything bad happens.  You NEED the government to look out for you.  I'd rather they stay the fock out of the way.

I get your philosophy. In some ways I share it. Your example of assault rifles is a good one. I used to be in favor of an assault rifles ban until I realized that it would be useless. Now I oppose it. I still favor other kinds of gun control, like universal background checks, which I believe really will make a difference. 
 

But I find your overall argument to be flawed. You’re very much like the radical who, after finding things the police did wrong, argue that we need to defund the police. That would be a mistake, obviously. We don’t need to defund government; we need government to be better and smarter. 

[Strike 3,979]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I get your philosophy. In some ways I share it. Your example of assault rifles is a good one. I used to be in favor of an assault rifles ban until I realized that it would be useless. Now I oppose it. I still favor other kinds of gun control, like universal background checks, which I believe really will make a difference. 
 

But I find your overall argument to be flawed. You’re very much like the radical who, after finding things the police did wrong, argue that we need to defund the police. That would be a mistake, obviously. We don’t need to defund government; we need government to be better and smarter. 

You misunderstand my argument, but that's not unexpected.  You are very simplistic in your thought processes, and everything is this or that to you.  I've never said we need to defund the government, at least not completely.  But there's no doubt they're god awful wasteful.  You don't care about that as evidenced by our discussion of accountability and waste in our giving to Ukraine, but I do.  And in many cases, such as this, they're woefully incompetent and often don't do their jobs.  We absolutely need government.  But it should be as little as possible to perform their jobs, their should be accountability, and they should actually do their jobs.  Why people like you are willing to tolerate the levels of incompetence and waste that is well documented in government is beyond me.  It would never fly in the private sector.