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

631–640 of 864 posts

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#631

Post by [deleted] »

garry wrote: post #144
axlee wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

110% agree. At some point, risk HAS to be treated as what it is, risk, rather than just "another way to do things". We have so many banks treating risk as what it is, and pricing for it, well these people decided to go to another bank to get funding, well deal with it. It's not like the average citizen has this luxury.

The equity holders and management of SVB are likely to be wiped. In the petition we specifically call this out: we are not asking for their risks to be "socialized." Depositors have a reasonable expectation that when they choose a bank (especially a publicly traded bank that is regulated) that their deposits are safe. If this is not true, then most people will only bank with the largest banks. That's not a good situa…

[deleted]

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#632

Post by muzz »

olliej wrote: post #572

Don't ycombinator and the various VCs always complain about government regulation? Don't they always complain about taxes? The other day I saw the old quote "there's no atheists in a foxhole" extended with "and no libertarians in a bank run". If there's a tax payer bail out (and I don't believe there needs to be - this seems more a liquidity problem than total funding) then all of that money is just tax payers giving…

Yes and this describes precisely their hypocrisy

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#633

Post by koheripbal »

bentlegen wrote: post #214
garry wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Garry I have a question (and this is not intended to be snarky). Why should a company, perhaps a slower and more risk-averse company who intentionally chose a different, safer banking institution to do business with, do they not get to benefit from their discretion in choosing that banking partner? One could argue that choice put them at a disadvantage against their fast-moving competitors, who chose fast-moving “cor…

Large bank failures are rare enough, that I suspect very few, if any, had intentionality to select a more traditional bank.

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#634

Post by JohnFen »

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?

If you deposit more than $250k, you absolutely should take actions to limit your risk to an acceptable level. There are myriad ways to do this.

> I should just accept the impact of the bank shutting down due to events unrelated to my actions and choices?

You should hedge against potential losses, yes, absolutely. You're knowingly taking a risk. Just like every other risk in business, you determine if you can take the hit if things fail, and if you can't you arrange a mechanism that will reduce the damage to a level where you can.

It's just basic business management.

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#635

Post by hahahhahahahaaa »

garry wrote: post #358
prepend wrote: post #133

What would I gain as a taxpayer in return for this bailout? Would the taxpayer receive 10% equity in YC? It seems like YC could have insured these funds, but didn’t. They saved money and accepted the risk. This risk is now realized. Seems bizarre that YC would be made whole. Certainly it saves jobs, but it benefits YC more than anyone else.

These are deposits at a bank. We're advocating for protection of 37,000 small business accounts, a small number of which are YC. We discovered about 30% of YC companies would not be able to make payroll even after the $250,000 insured amount if they were to wait months for their payments. That is detailed on the FDIC website currently as the process for remediation. This petition represents the lived experience of th…

[flagged]

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#636

Post by WirelessGigabit »

garry wrote: post #358
prepend wrote: post #133

What would I gain as a taxpayer in return for this bailout? Would the taxpayer receive 10% equity in YC? It seems like YC could have insured these funds, but didn’t. They saved money and accepted the risk. This risk is now realized. Seems bizarre that YC would be made whole. Certainly it saves jobs, but it benefits YC more than anyone else.

These are deposits at a bank. We're advocating for protection of 37,000 small business accounts, a small number of which are YC. We discovered about 30% of YC companies would not be able to make payroll even after the $250,000 insured amount if they were to wait months for their payments. That is detailed on the FDIC website currently as the process for remediation. This petition represents the lived experience of th…

These are not small business accounts. These are businesses who took a risk, and put all their eggs in 1 basket.

A small business is the donut shop down the street, owned by a woman and employs 3 kids.

NONE of the SVB clients come even close to that. Startups are not small businesses. Startups take on an intrinsically large financial risk, whether funded by the founder, with his/her own money, or via VC.

This is on them for not having identified this risk and/or not hedged against it.

I looked at the list of signers of your petition. All CEOs.

How about ya'll put in 1,000,000 of your bonus into this. Then we'll talk.

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#637

Post by JohnFen »

skwirl wrote: post #123
slondr wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? Yes, because that is how risk works. > And that my deposit should vanish into thin air? No, you should insulate yourself from that risk, either by spreading o…

>No, you should insulate yourself from that risk, either by spreading out your cash between multiple institutions, or obtaining deposit insurance beyond the government's, or (most likely) both. Why would I do that when I can bank with a too-big-to-fail bank like JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, Wells Fargo, or Bank of America?

You're taking a risk with those banks if you exceed the insurance limits, too.

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#638

Post by friend_and_foe »

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?

Or, you should purchase private additional insurance, yes. It's not like it didn't say "covered up to $250,000" on the package, it's not like theyre the only bank in town, it's not like the FDIC was the only option.

Re: Urgent: Sign the petition now

#640

Post by JohnFen »

dehrmann wrote: post #390
leipert wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know that 250k cash is not a lot for a company with a few folks on payroll. But why wouldn’t you distribute cash across multiple banks as a business? It hasn’t to be this situation, but if your accounts are flagged for fraud or someone hacks an account, aren’t you safer by distributing cash in multiple banks?

This workaround seems rather silly when it mostly applies to medium-sized businesses trying to get safe, stable bank accounts. FDIC coverage is too low for businesses.

There are a number of mechanisms besides the FDIC that are commonly used for depositors of this scale. You can even buy your own insurance, if nothing else.
Post reply on HN