stock market was up today...

[MurphyVol]

Bailing out over $250K?

The decision by Treasury to backstop all of SVB’s deposits — not just those up to $250,000 that are automatically insured under federal law — will likely ignite a political firestorm over the decision to protect the assets of tech firms, venture capitalists, and other rich people in California.

There you go rubes..the 16th biggest bank ie too Big To Fail..

Poor FDIC

It is unlikely to create a "firestorm" because they will likely find a buyer soon. The typical process is that the FDIC places the bank into receivership and then actively looks for a buyer to assume all deposits.

The only time the $250k limit comes into play is if a bank fails and the FDIC can't secure a buyer for that bank. This almost never happens. PNC was supposedly showing some interest but passed. Someone will likely assume ownership soon.

 

[NorthDallas40]

WAPO actually spilled the beans.

Janet Yellen is lying through her fat f@cking face…

They are going to use a $100B fund (backstopped by the US Treasury cough, cough) to make depositors whole.

They just lied. Go figure.

So I told you exactly what the answer was as called out in that article. Fairly favorable collateralized loans for one year. That gives all the qualifying banks access to liquidity.

SVB and Signature are gone. Their shareholders are wiped out. The context seems to be liquidity to whomever buys their assets. Bids close at midnight tonight for banks interested in buying the assets.

 

[Orangeburst]

So I told you exactly what the answer was as called out in that article. Fairly favorable collateralized loans for one year. That gives all the qualifying banks access to liquidity.

SVB and Signature are gone. Their shareholders are wiped out. The context seems to be liquidity to whomever buys their assets. Bids close at midnight tonight for banks interested in buying the assets.

Then why are the ****ing Feds involved in saying making them whole?

Damn

 

[NorthDallas40]

Then why are the ****ing Feds involved?

I’ve answered exactly why the “Feds” are involved.

The Federal Reserve is the lender to banks. Always has been.

 

[Orangeburst]

I’ve answered exactly why the “Feds” are involved.

The Federal Reserve is the lender to banks. Always has been.

What does that even mean?

A bank failed and the Feds said they would make investors "whole"?

**** man

 

[NorthDallas40]

What does that even mean?

A bank failed and the Feds said they would make investors "whole"?

**** man

I answered exactly what it means.

And NO they said they would make depositors whole. The stock is trash. SIVD was pulled from the S&P on Friday

 

[85SugarVol]

So I told you exactly what the answer was as called out in that article. Fairly favorable collateralized loans for one year. That gives all the qualifying banks access to liquidity.

SVB and Signature are gone. Their shareholders are wiped out. The context seems to be liquidity to whomever buys their assets. Bids close at midnight tonight for banks interested in buying the assets.

Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen stressed in a statement that taxpayers would bear none of the burden of protecting the depositors. Their funds will be backstopped by a pool of money that is regularly paid into by U.S. banks, which has more than $100 billion in it.

The assertions that the decisions do not amount to a “bailout,” however, are likely to be challenged by critics of the move. While the fund going to the depositors is paid into by U.S. banks, it is ultimately backstopped by the Treasury Department — and therefore U.S. taxpayers.

 

[Orangeburst]

I answered exactly what it means.

Whatever..we disagree Bigly

 

[NorthDallas40]

Whatever..we disagree Bigly

You bet we do. You’re flat out wrong on who is being protected here. The depositors are being given a line. The shareholders are toast in both banks.

 

[MurphyVol]

What does that even mean?

A bank failed and the Feds said they would make investors "whole"?

**** man

Perhaps they should have said "depositors" poorly worded. I can assure you the stocks of these banks are worth exactly zero.

 

[Orangeburst]

You bet we do. You’re flat out wrong on who is being protected here. The depositors are being given a line. The shareholders are toast in both banks.

Not according to the Fed.

 

[Orangeburst]

Perhaps they should have said "depositors" poorly worded. I can assure you the stocks of these banks are worth exactly zero.

Then they are fools as I thought in another way

 

[Orangeburst]

You bet we do. You’re flat out wrong on who is being protected here. The depositors are being given a line. The shareholders are toast in both banks.

The despositors is "whole"

Who said anything about shareholders?

 

[NorthDallas40]

Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen stressed in a statement that taxpayers would bear none of the burden of protecting the depositors. Their funds will be backstopped by a pool of money that is regularly paid into by U.S. banks, which has more than $100 billion in it.

The assertions that the decisions do not amount to a “bailout,” however, are likely to be challenged by critics of the move. While the fund going to the depositors is paid into by U.S. banks, it is ultimately backstopped by the Treasury Department — and therefore U.S. taxpayers.

Collateralized loans with very favorable terms are being made. If they write those off down the road then you’ve possibly got a point. Right now interest bearing loans are being set up.

You guys are just going to have to find a more willing partner to go jump off a cliff in despair with. I’m still more worried about my ATT fiber instal than I am these two banks at the moment.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Not according to the Fed.

Yes according to the Fed.

 

[Orangeburst]

Yes according to the Fed.

Is the "whole" beyond the 250K FDIC or not?

Othwersise I gotta say..it is inexcusable

 

[NorthDallas40]

The despositors is "whole"

Who said anything about shareholders?

You guys were yelling at clouds over “another bailout” you tell me. The investors are wiped out.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Is the "whole" beyond" the 250K FDIC or not?

Othwersise I gotta say..it is inexcusable

You’re wrong in your assertions OB. No other way I can say it sorry.

 

[Orangeburst]

WaPo Headline:

U.S. says ‘all’ deposits at failed bank will be available Monday

The USG is guaranteeing all deposits. IOW waiting for investors to buy. Brilliant

 

[Orangeburst]

What is going to happen tomorrow with those people that have over $250K..Withdraw city

SAF

 

[Orangeburst]

Note"all"

 

[NorthDallas40]

WaPo Headline:

U.S. says ‘all’ deposits at failed bank will be available Monday

The USG is guaranteeing all deposits. IOW waiting for investors to buy. Brilliant

Is a bank depositor an investor? Yes or no? Do you own any stock in whatever bank you do business with merely due to depositing money there?

 

[85SugarVol]

Collateralized loans with very favorable terms are being made. If they write those off down the road then you’ve possibly got a point. Right now interest bearing loans are being set up.

You guys are just going to have to find a more willing partner to go jump off a cliff in despair with. I’m still more worried about my ATT fiber instal than I am these two banks at the moment.

Not worried about SVB. Just aggravated by what is clearly just more subterfuge.

 

[Orangeburst]

Is a bank depositor an investor? Yes or no? Do you own any stock in whatever bank you do business with merely due to depositing money there?

Yes to the extent of not losing over 250K

No to the USG guaranteeing "all"investments. Like was posted

 

[MurphyVol]

WaPo Headline:

U.S. says ‘all’ deposits at failed bank will be available Monday

The USG is guaranteeing all deposits. IOW waiting for investors to buy. Brilliant

Smart move to soothe fears and the buying bank will assume all deposits anyway.

This is akin to announcing that the post office will deliver mail tomorrow.