- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 23,870
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
Because that worked so well in 1929.
aaaaaand, let's use that to justify everything
Because that worked so well in 1929.
Because that worked so well in 1929.
That's why I brought up 1929. I was talking about his proposal to "let the market decide."The FDIC didn't exist in 1929.
None was mandated, as far as I know. It was an example of the "let the market decide" philosophy.Exercise for the student - what deposit insurance existed in 1929?
In the other hand, we've had 500+ bank failures since 2008 (https://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/bank/) and I don't think that any of those depositors were covered above $250k.
We won't know because the govt stepped in.
Today's selloff is said to be driven by concerns about a Swiss bank that has apparently been known to be shaky for a while now.The market crunch continues. This is likely to not end pretty.
As for SVB, a depositor group has formed with the intent to force bankruptcy so assets can he liquidated.
Today's selloff is said to be driven by concerns about a Swiss bank that has apparently been known to be shaky for a while now.
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/15/fin...sse-becomes-latest-crisis-for-the-sector.html
That’s child’s play. The bigger concern should be around US Treasuries and German bunds, which is where everyone is trying to get into.
So much so that it’s overwhelming the system and slowing trades significantly.
Earlier in the thread there was a comment about regulation could have prevented this.
Actually the CEO of SVB was among many who advocated for the change in 2018 which raised the application of Dodd-Frank requirements from 50B to 250B.
Under Dodd-Franck the asset mix and multiple other aspects of SVB would have been flagged and prevented.
Tim
Ironically, Barney Frank has sat on Signature’s board since 2015 and also championed for the change.
He commented that change had nothing to do with Signature’s failure.
From what I understand, Barney Frank is correct. …
Tim
Wait, I'm a crypto noob but people legit took loans out to finance their crypto?? That's insane!
He is. The irony is how quickly his position changed between being in office to then being invited to the board of Signature. Then how quickly he’s attacked banking regulators for shuttering Signature.
Neither bank was a run of mill retail bank and FDIC is geared to oversee run of the mill retail banks; 2008-09 should have taught us bank examiners need to be as competent in a bank’s business as the bank is. What we should be learning is that examining niche banks needs to evolve as well.
Oof.
Top executives of First Republic Bank sold millions of dollars of company stock in the two months before the bank’s shares plummeted during the panic over the health of regional lenders. The bank’s chief risk officer sold on March 6, according to government documents. Two days later, Silicon Valley Bank shocked the market and sent other banks into freefall. First Republic was among the worst hit.
Probably paywall:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/first-...lion-in-stock-in-months-before-crash-ca6ce79e
Ha! I don't wonder about the health of non-bank SoftBank. I know they're garbage . Nothing else to wonder about! With their dumba** move of converting WeWork debt to equity (WHY?!?) just to keep that company going, I can say that softbank never disappoints in making the worst decision at every juncture.Looks like one or more of the Big 4 will try to help shore up First Republic now, too. The ECB announced another rate hike today, so expect more volatility. People are starting to wonder about the health of the non-bank SoftBank.
I thought I had read that the same executive had sold a similar amount of shares at the same time the year prior, so it may just be an annual planned transaction. However, it certainly has poor optics either way.
SVB executives sold stock too, and DoJ is investigating, but I'm not sure that they will find an insider-trading violation, because they were part of a preplanned schedule of regular sales.Oof.
Top executives of First Republic Bank sold millions of dollars of company stock in the two months before the bank’s shares plummeted during the panic over the health of regional lenders. The bank’s chief risk officer sold on March 6, according to government documents. Two days later, Silicon Valley Bank shocked the market and sent other banks into freefall. First Republic was among the worst hit.
Probably paywall:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/first-...lion-in-stock-in-months-before-crash-ca6ce79e
Wall Street seems to be happy today, so far.Looks like one or more of the Big 4 will try to help shore up First Republic now, too. The ECB announced another rate hike today, so expect more volatility. People are starting to wonder about the health of the non-bank SoftBank.
Wall Street seems to be happy today, so far.
UBS is going to purchase them outright, underwritten by the Swiss taxpayer $$s.
Wow, This is going to be a ride, planet wide.
How certain are you? I need to go poach me some staff… smart people still work thereWell, First Republic is pretty much gone.
I wonder if the fed/treasury/fdic plan to guarantee the $30b in deposits that the majors just showered FRC with?
Using math and mental gymnastics that only the government is capable of, $5b+ per depositor might somehow clock in below $250k FDIC limit and remain insured...
If it were me, I'd poach away!How certain are you? I need to go poach me some staff… smart people still work there
To be fair, Credit Swiss has been a slow moving car crash for about a decade. It would still be a very slow moving crash now if investors did not suddenly get nervous after SVB and Signature.
On the flip side, investors should have been more nervous about Credit Swiss, and really should have been concerned about it a few years ago at a minimum.
Tim