21–30 of 102 posts
So gradually it's all opening up. The scams at those levels are most impacting one to people. I only see more fallouts in future.
It's amazing how post 2008 nothing was learned by US and pretty much no major bank but top 10 is expected to have more than 5/10% of cash-like collateral of deposits. In Europe, no single bank is allowed to have less than 100% collateral of deposits, not one, and yet they manage to make good money and profits nonetheless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's amazing how post 2008 nothing was learned by US and pretty much no major bank but top 10 is expected to have more than 5/10% of cash-like collateral of deposits. In Europe, no single bank is allowed to have less than 100% collateral of deposits, not one, and yet they manage to make good money and profits nonetheless.
EU only has 4 of the top 50 banks by market cap. the us has 10. I'm not saying the us system is necessarily better, but for two economies that are comparable in gdp, that's a big gap. https://companiesmarketcap.com/banks/largest-banks-by-market...
Supposedly, many countries in Europe require banks to have at least 100% collateral of deposits, this should mean resolution in the case of failure be much easier + bank runs less likely to happen, as people can feel safer that their funds actually exists in the bank is liquidity. Unless the bank is operating fraudulently that is.
I want to have sympathy for the depositors, but it is hard to knowing that they chose to keep their funds in an bank that was actively lobbying to weaken risk regulations. There multiple products that would help in this situation, such as insurances and virtual accounts that split between multiple FDIC accounts/banks. Bailing out these depositors would send the wrong message and encourage moral hazard, i.e., the beli…
> Bailing out these depositors would send the wrong message and encourage moral hazard This seems to be the way the financial system has operated in the last 20 years. So I’d expect a bailout. Also, SVB depositors weren’t just random individuals, they are some of the wealthiest people and organizations in the country or even the world. They are going to leverage their power and influence to recover as much as they ca…
Not anymore!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
EU only has 4 of the top 50 banks by market cap. the us has 10. I'm not saying the us system is necessarily better, but for two economies that are comparable in gdp, that's a big gap. https://companiesmarketcap.com/banks/largest-banks-by-market...
Having a hard time finding any numbers about it, but how many banks fail in the US compared to Europe? And once they fail, how long time does it take to give people the money they are guaranteed via the insurances? Supposedly, many countries in Europe require banks to have at least 100% collateral of deposits, this should mean resolution in the case of failure be much easier + bank runs less likely to happen, as peop…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's amazing how post 2008 nothing was learned by US and pretty much no major bank but top 10 is expected to have more than 5/10% of cash-like collateral of deposits. In Europe, no single bank is allowed to have less than 100% collateral of deposits, not one, and yet they manage to make good money and profits nonetheless.
EU only has 4 of the top 50 banks by market cap. the us has 10. I'm not saying the us system is necessarily better, but for two economies that are comparable in gdp, that's a big gap. https://companiesmarketcap.com/banks/largest-banks-by-market...
the exact opposite is true. excessive concentration means an oligopolistic or oligopsonistic sector that is holding everybody hostage: clients, employees and the political / regulatory system at large
adulation of "bigness", if not with ulterior motives, is naive
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's amazing how post 2008 nothing was learned by US and pretty much no major bank but top 10 is expected to have more than 5/10% of cash-like collateral of deposits. In Europe, no single bank is allowed to have less than 100% collateral of deposits, not one, and yet they manage to make good money and profits nonetheless.
EU only has 4 of the top 50 banks by market cap. the us has 10. I'm not saying the us system is necessarily better, but for two economies that are comparable in gdp, that's a big gap. https://companiesmarketcap.com/banks/largest-banks-by-market...
US is also the investment capital of the world, so it's quite unsurprising.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you aware of all the lobbying your current bank does? Seems an unreasonable expectation.
I´m not, but I do expect sophisticated companies such as Roku to do better risk management than me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's amazing how post 2008 nothing was learned by US and pretty much no major bank but top 10 is expected to have more than 5/10% of cash-like collateral of deposits. In Europe, no single bank is allowed to have less than 100% collateral of deposits, not one, and yet they manage to make good money and profits nonetheless.
[flagged]
Yes, the European Union is the biggest financial supporter of Ukraine and that excludes single European countries contributions.
US tops the military aid, that's most certainly true and it greatly benefits US defense contractors and their workers.
edit: seems like people having problems at reading, as I've said US indeed tops military help which is what the following comment(s) include.
What seems people don't understand is that this kind of (military) help, albeit absolutely critical to Ukraine, is money that stays in US. Every himars rocket fired by Ukraine it's 170k $ being paid to Lockheed Martin.
Long ago I and colleagues opened accounts at SVB for two different outfits with VC money. It was simply the thing to do when getting started converting that money into software that would then produce lots more money.
It was simply the thing to do. We didn't have CFOs. We knew darn well our deposits would exceed the household-banking FDIC insurance limit. It would have seemed a brutal waste of very precious time to do an independent background check on our banks.
Look, friends, the rule of law is what makes it possible to do business. If we lowly startup entrepreneurs can't trust institutions like banks reliably to provide their services, and we can't trust the government to do their part in maintaining that reliability, who can we trust? Are the next YC classes going to get their financing in Krugerrand gold coins? Are they going to need to look for safes on EBay along with the other gear they need to make the magic happen?
Lowly? Yeah. Compared to banks, governments, infosec certification people, even landlords and vendors? Yeah. Lowly. We have to be able to trust our environment at least a little bit to succeed.
This regulatory capture is freakin' ridiculous and has to come to an end.
I want to have sympathy for the depositors, but it is hard to knowing that they chose to keep their funds in an bank that was actively lobbying to weaken risk regulations. There multiple products that would help in this situation, such as insurances and virtual accounts that split between multiple FDIC accounts/banks. Bailing out these depositors would send the wrong message and encourage moral hazard, i.e., the beli…
And SVB didn't have products that would help you maximize FDIC insurance.
It wasn't exactly predatory, but they set everything up to leave everyone very exposed to SVB issues. I think on purpose, just to maintain power in the ecosystem.