Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Urgent: Sign the petition now

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 864 posts

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#81

Post by PaulHoule »

nocoiner wrote: post #8

LOL, nope. Not interested in taking another spin on the “privatize gain, socialize loss” merry-go-round. The banks had to be saved in 2008 because they were, like, the financial system. I don’t see why private companies and funds that are much less integral to the functioning of the economy as a whole should be saved by the public fisc. Sorry about your disruption.

If this is handled by the ordinary procedures used to handle bank bailouts and if the story is what we've been told (problems w/ bonds going bad because of an interest rate increase) there could be some haircut for depositors but it will not be apocalyptic.

If the real problem is the quality of the loan book, however, it calls the startup and VC economy into question.

We'll learn a lot more about this in the next few weeks.

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#82

Post by JumpinJack_Cash »

Can I ask why everybody banked with SVB?

Are Wells Fargo or Bank of America not hip enough?

A bank should be like a gas station, you go to the nearest one given that the pruduct being sold is essentially all the same.

I think that what happened is that founders weren't the one opening the accounts, the VC industry took it upon themselves to streamline the process in order to free the founders of the 'burden' of having to provide the documents etc. So it was the legal office of VCs doing the opening and they were opening with SVB because VC funds are incestous and they have zero geographic and ideologic diversification in their non-portfolio business relationships. So they all end up using the same law firms, banks, consultants etc. Same reason why they all sits on each other's boards.

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#83

Post by muyuu »

notmindthegap wrote: post #6

Genuinely asking: for startups who were not banking with SVB, is the recent event a good thing from a competitive standpoint?

provided their main customer base is not from the area or the sector then it's pretty fantastic for them, especially if they had significant competition in their business model and many of those competitors are now insolvent

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#85

Post by mberning »

nocoiner wrote: post #8

LOL, nope. Not interested in taking another spin on the “privatize gain, socialize loss” merry-go-round. The banks had to be saved in 2008 because they were, like, the financial system. I don’t see why private companies and funds that are much less integral to the functioning of the economy as a whole should be saved by the public fisc. Sorry about your disruption.

100% agree. These titans of industry can surely help themselves.

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#86

Post by KerrAvon »

jarym wrote: post #32
nocoiner wrote: post #8

LOL, nope. Not interested in taking another spin on the “privatize gain, socialize loss” merry-go-round. The banks had to be saved in 2008 because they were, like, the financial system. I don’t see why private companies and funds that are much less integral to the functioning of the economy as a whole should be saved by the public fisc. Sorry about your disruption.

Are you saying if I deposit more than $250k (which is NOT a lot for a business) into a reputable and regulated US bank at negligible rates of interest I should just accept the impact of the bank shutting down due to events unrelated to my actions and choices? And that my deposit should vanish into thin air?

I think you should be made whole, but only if you submit a public statement supporting welfare for individuals as well as corporations in trouble. If you want a socialist handout from the government, fine, but you can’t be a hypocrite about it.

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#87

Post by thuridas »

Kyragem wrote: post #35

Trump & republicans cut banking regulations and increased capital thresholds from 50 to 250 billion for banks to comply with an FDIC stress test as mandated by Dodd-Frank (which was enacted after the mortgage crisis). SVB would have not gone bankrupt had they been required to pass this stresstest. This change was widely supported by tech companies and banks and here we are again with a bank engaging in risky behavior…

I was just asking myself what was the us bank regulator doing. But this explains a lot.

Small government has its consequences

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#89

Post by crummy »

nocoiner wrote: post #8

LOL, nope. Not interested in taking another spin on the “privatize gain, socialize loss” merry-go-round. The banks had to be saved in 2008 because they were, like, the financial system. I don’t see why private companies and funds that are much less integral to the functioning of the economy as a whole should be saved by the public fisc. Sorry about your disruption.

Didn't the public get paid back, plus extra, after bailing out the banks?

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#90

Post by garry »

nocoiner wrote: post #8

LOL, nope. Not interested in taking another spin on the “privatize gain, socialize loss” merry-go-round. The banks had to be saved in 2008 because they were, like, the financial system. I don’t see why private companies and funds that are much less integral to the functioning of the economy as a whole should be saved by the public fisc. Sorry about your disruption.

These are depositors of a bank. Most startups only have one bank.

Startups should live or die because they create good products and solve real problems in real markets, not because they made an arbitrary choice like which bank they started using.

There's also a real risk of bank contagion if it is only safe to deposit in the largest banks.

Post reply on HN