SVB failure

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fee should follow up with a significant increase in the amount of insured deposits for commercial accounts.

...which would require larger fees paid by the banks to FDIC. Do you really think they will agree to that?

Do they have a choice? I doubt the FDIC is going to go all King John on them. But maybe they will require banks to insure a higher amount for deposit accounts owned by unsophisticated investors (consumers and small businesses)

They should charge a higher fee for sophisticated investors. They're the ones that caused this and they're who we're placating. Credit flight risk is much more impactful and common with them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have most of our cash savings with Wealthfront. It's guaranteed up to $2mln because they spread it across a few different banks to deal with the $250k/account limit:
https://www.wealthfront.com/blog/cash-account-2m-fdic-insurance

That’s pretty cool. How do you like them? I have Boomer parents who have way too much cash and are super spooked right now.

Why do they not have a treasury direct account? I have held hundreds of thousands there, know that its safe and liquid and also significantly protected from simple fraud since it does not have cash checking or such access

DP. Treasuries are risky these days obviously as SVB just found out. So, if you want a deposit equivalent you would need to buy 1 months bills. Does treasuries direct offer to roll them from month to month or you need to buy a new batch every month?

No they aren't. Sorry but that was just ignorant.

You can reinvest treasuries.

Wat? Which part is ignorant bro? If you bought long term treasuries a year ago you are a loser, HTM or no HTM

They only lose money if you sell. They are extremely safe.

Depends what you mean by losing money. Compared to keeping them under the mattress yes, compared to what bank savings accounts pay today, you are losing money tied up in a low yielding security every day

No you are not. You are just making less money. It's a really freaking important distinction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have most of our cash savings with Wealthfront. It's guaranteed up to $2mln because they spread it across a few different banks to deal with the $250k/account limit:
https://www.wealthfront.com/blog/cash-account-2m-fdic-insurance

That’s pretty cool. How do you like them? I have Boomer parents who have way too much cash and are super spooked right now.

Why do they not have a treasury direct account? I have held hundreds of thousands there, know that its safe and liquid and also significantly protected from simple fraud since it does not have cash checking or such access

DP. Treasuries are risky these days obviously as SVB just found out. So, if you want a deposit equivalent you would need to buy 1 months bills. Does treasuries direct offer to roll them from month to month or you need to buy a new batch every month?

No they aren't. Sorry but that was just ignorant.

You can reinvest treasuries.

Wat? Which part is ignorant bro? If you bought long term treasuries a year ago you are a loser, HTM or no HTM

They only lose money if you sell. They are extremely safe.

Depends what you mean by losing money. Compared to keeping them under the mattress yes, compared to what bank savings accounts pay today, you are losing money tied up in a low yielding security every day

No you are not. You are just making less money. It's a really freaking important distinction.

if you are not earning 4-5% on your savings you are not keeping up with inflation so you are losing money in real terms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Joint statement of Treasury, FDIC and Federal Reserve saying that a systemic risk exception is being made to make all depositors of SVB and Signature Bank whole.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20230312b.htm

"No losses associated with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank will be borne by the taxpayer ... senior management has been removed."

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20230312a.htm
"banking system to safeguard deposits and ensure the ongoing provision of money and credit to the economy.

The Federal Reserve is prepared to address any liquidity pressures that may arise.

The additional funding will be made available through the creation of a new Bank Term Funding Program (BTFP), offering loans of up to one year in length to banks, savings associations, credit unions, and other eligible depository institutions pledging U.S. Treasuries, agency debt and mortgage-backed securities, and other qualifying assets as collateral. "

And this making good for depositors and providing money and credit resulted in positives for the crypto industry. Euphoric is a word used by Luna.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/13/bitcoin-btc-crypto-prices-surge-as-svb-depositors-protected.html

Signature Bank-heavy in crypto-gets the same deal.

[Anonymous]

SVB UK has been acquired by HSBC, reportedly for one pound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SVB UK has been acquired by HSBC, reportedly for one pound.

Good luck, HSBC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fee should follow up with a significant increase in the amount of insured deposits for commercial accounts.

...which would require larger fees paid by the banks to FDIC. Do you really think they will agree to that?

Do they have a choice? I doubt the FDIC is going to go all King John on them. But maybe they will require banks to insure a higher amount for deposit accounts owned by unsophisticated investors (consumers and small businesses)

They should charge a higher fee for sophisticated investors. They're the ones that caused this and they're who we're placating. Credit flight risk is much more impactful and common with them.

No, they can let sophisticated investors decide for themselves if they want an insured account for a higher cost. And they shouldn’t make them whole if something happens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have most of our cash savings with Wealthfront. It's guaranteed up to $2mln because they spread it across a few different banks to deal with the $250k/account limit:
https://www.wealthfront.com/blog/cash-account-2m-fdic-insurance

That’s pretty cool. How do you like them? I have Boomer parents who have way too much cash and are super spooked right now.

Why do they not have a treasury direct account? I have held hundreds of thousands there, know that its safe and liquid and also significantly protected from simple fraud since it does not have cash checking or such access

DP. Treasuries are risky these days obviously as SVB just found out. So, if you want a deposit equivalent you would need to buy 1 months bills. Does treasuries direct offer to roll them from month to month or you need to buy a new batch every month?

No they aren't. Sorry but that was just ignorant.

You can reinvest treasuries.

Wat? Which part is ignorant bro? If you bought long term treasuries a year ago you are a loser, HTM or no HTM

They only lose money if you sell. They are extremely safe.

Depends what you mean by losing money. Compared to keeping them under the mattress yes, compared to what bank savings accounts pay today, you are losing money tied up in a low yielding security every day

No you are not. You are just making less money. It's a really freaking important distinction.

if you are not earning 4-5% on your savings you are not keeping up with inflation so you are losing money in real terms.

2% is more than holding cash for a bank. It's not meant to be actively traded. It's meant to be secure. We don't want banks adding risk in a chase for yield as part of their capitalized reserves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have most of our cash savings with Wealthfront. It's guaranteed up to $2mln because they spread it across a few different banks to deal with the $250k/account limit:
https://www.wealthfront.com/blog/cash-account-2m-fdic-insurance

That’s pretty cool. How do you like them? I have Boomer parents who have way too much cash and are super spooked right now.

Why do they not have a treasury direct account? I have held hundreds of thousands there, know that its safe and liquid and also significantly protected from simple fraud since it does not have cash checking or such access

DP. Treasuries are risky these days obviously as SVB just found out. So, if you want a deposit equivalent you would need to buy 1 months bills. Does treasuries direct offer to roll them from month to month or you need to buy a new batch every month?

No they aren't. Sorry but that was just ignorant.

You can reinvest treasuries.

Wat? Which part is ignorant bro? If you bought long term treasuries a year ago you are a loser, HTM or no HTM

They only lose money if you sell. They are extremely safe.

Depends what you mean by losing money. Compared to keeping them under the mattress yes, compared to what bank savings accounts pay today, you are losing money tied up in a low yielding security every day

No you are not. You are just making less money. It's a really freaking important distinction.

Better stated than "you are just making less money" is: You are just losing less money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have most of our cash savings with Wealthfront. It's guaranteed up to $2mln because they spread it across a few different banks to deal with the $250k/account limit:
https://www.wealthfront.com/blog/cash-account-2m-fdic-insurance

That’s pretty cool. How do you like them? I have Boomer parents who have way too much cash and are super spooked right now.

Why do they not have a treasury direct account? I have held hundreds of thousands there, know that its safe and liquid and also significantly protected from simple fraud since it does not have cash checking or such access

DP. Treasuries are risky these days obviously as SVB just found out. So, if you want a deposit equivalent you would need to buy 1 months bills. Does treasuries direct offer to roll them from month to month or you need to buy a new batch every month?

No they aren't. Sorry but that was just ignorant.

You can reinvest treasuries.

Wat? Which part is ignorant bro? If you bought long term treasuries a year ago you are a loser, HTM or no HTM

They only lose money if you sell. They are extremely safe.

Depends what you mean by losing money. Compared to keeping them under the mattress yes, compared to what bank savings accounts pay today, you are losing money tied up in a low yielding security every day

No you are not. You are just making less money. It's a really freaking important distinction.

Better stated than "you are just making less money" is: You are just losing less money.

Dude, a lower rate of return is ALWAYS preferable to losing your principal/corpus. Get real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have most of our cash savings with Wealthfront. It's guaranteed up to $2mln because they spread it across a few different banks to deal with the $250k/account limit:
https://www.wealthfront.com/blog/cash-account-2m-fdic-insurance

That’s pretty cool. How do you like them? I have Boomer parents who have way too much cash and are super spooked right now.

Why do they not have a treasury direct account? I have held hundreds of thousands there, know that its safe and liquid and also significantly protected from simple fraud since it does not have cash checking or such access

DP. Treasuries are risky these days obviously as SVB just found out. So, if you want a deposit equivalent you would need to buy 1 months bills. Does treasuries direct offer to roll them from month to month or you need to buy a new batch every month?

No they aren't. Sorry but that was just ignorant.

You can reinvest treasuries.

Wat? Which part is ignorant bro? If you bought long term treasuries a year ago you are a loser, HTM or no HTM

They only lose money if you sell. They are extremely safe.

Depends what you mean by losing money. Compared to keeping them under the mattress yes, compared to what bank savings accounts pay today, you are losing money tied up in a low yielding security every day

No you are not. You are just making less money. It's a really freaking important distinction.

Better stated than "you are just making less money" is: You are just losing less money.

No. Not at all. You're trying to make a consumer focused analogy to purchasing power that doesn't apply while also conflating realtive and absolute gains.

[Anonymous]

This article is my take as well:

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-03-12/with-demands-for-a-bank-bailout-silicon-valley-shows-its-small-government-mantra-was-just-a-scam

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This article is my take as well:

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-03-12/with-demands-for-a-bank-bailout-silicon-valley-shows-its-small-government-mantra-was-just-a-scam

They will have short memories but hopefully regulators and lawmakers will not. Beyond the financial aspect, tech and social media companies absolutely need to be regulated. They are nicotine for the latest generations. And I want them out of schools too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Ashley Tyrner, CEO of Boston wellness firm FarmboxRx, said she had at least $10m deposited with SVB and has been frantically calling her banker. She called it 'the worst 18 hours of my life.'

Honest question -- should we care about that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We have most of our cash savings with Wealthfront. It's guaranteed up to $2mln because they spread it across a few different banks to deal with the $250k/account limit:
https://www.wealthfront.com/blog/cash-account-2m-fdic-insurance

That’s pretty cool. How do you like them? I have Boomer parents who have way too much cash and are super spooked right now.

Why do they not have a treasury direct account? I have held hundreds of thousands there, know that its safe and liquid and also significantly protected from simple fraud since it does not have cash checking or such access

DP. Treasuries are risky these days obviously as SVB just found out. So, if you want a deposit equivalent you would need to buy 1 months bills. Does treasuries direct offer to roll them from month to month or you need to buy a new batch every month?

No they aren't. Sorry but that was just ignorant.

You can reinvest treasuries.

Wat? Which part is ignorant bro? If you bought long term treasuries a year ago you are a loser, HTM or no HTM

They only lose money if you sell. They are extremely safe.

Depends what you mean by losing money. Compared to keeping them under the mattress yes, compared to what bank savings accounts pay today, you are losing money tied up in a low yielding security every day

No you are not. You are just making less money. It's a really freaking important distinction.

if you are not earning 4-5% on your savings you are not keeping up with inflation so you are losing money in real terms.

2% is more than holding cash for a bank. It's not meant to be actively traded. It's meant to be secure. We don't want banks adding risk in a chase for yield as part of their capitalized reserves.

This comment completely misses the point on how risky ann investment in long term treasuries can be in light of SVB collapse.