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

Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 889 posts

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#861

Post by zamnos »

twelve40 wrote: post #843
zamnos wrote: post #836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm guessing your corp didn't have a 1 million dollar check to deposit, with expectations that most of that would get sent out to employees and AWS/GCP over the next few years, and that you would be receiving another 10 million dollars shortly thereafter. Bragging about getting a car loan when (I assume) you have good history and credit? Unless it was a $1.5m Mclaren P1 supercar or something, that's not remotely in t…

the person i was replying to said no way a brand new corp can get an account or credit cards, they didn't say anything about millions. That directly contradicted my experience, and despite being "anecdotal", I'm sure i was subject to the same rules and equations as everyone else. If you want another anecdote - this one has millions in it - my last startup banked with Wells Fargo from pre-seed right up to series A wit…

This is the Wells Fargo that got in trouble for creating 2.1 million fake accounts for customers who never asked for them, got caught by the CFPB, paid $185 million in fines, and has been desperate for customers ever since? Yeah, actually, you did get lucky with them, they really do want your business.

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#862

Post by astrange »

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #544
astrange wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Employees will take risky stuff like equity as payment, but the IRS won't take it for their payroll taxes.

The number of employees who take equity as a significant portion (>50%) of their comp rounds to zero.

I take 10% of my salary in an equity IOU (ESPP) and I'd do more if they'd let me. But they only let execs into the deferred compensation plan.

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#863

Post by brutusborn »

sanderjd wrote: post #827
brutusborn wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that banning debt wouldn't cause starvation. Apologies for the terminology, the other commenter is right that I was using the original meaning. I don't think the rate of interest is relevant since the mechanisms that make debt dangerous still exist at 7% or 70%. Lending to a "No Income No Asset" person who has 0 chance of paying off the debt is immoral at any interest rate. I'm interested why you think th…

Lending money is like the grease in the gears of a liberal economy. In countries with such economies, the ability to purchase food is downstream of the economy operating smoothly. If you entirely remove the grease from the gears and the economy siezes up, you do put the ability for people to get food at risk. Agricultural business rely on lending, businesses that transport goods rely on lending, businesses that sell…

I agree with everything besides “business X relies on lending.”

Businesses _in the west_ rely on lending. Islamic businesses _cannot_ morally or legally rely on lending, so they must have alternatives. And if you look at the alternatives you will realise that debt is not essential.

Sure, if all western governments banned lending tomorrow there would be crisis, but because any major change shocks an economy, not because economies _need_ debt.

Haha I knew you’d come around about the GFC, it’s definitely not a good example of the superiority of Western Financial system LOL

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#864

Post by brutusborn »

sanderjd wrote: post #828
brutusborn wrote: post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely misspoke there: I meant that they have no debt and no mass starvation. I’m aware there’s a lot of poverty in the Islamic world, but it’s not because Usury is illegal.

It isn't not because of that either.

I’d need to see some statistics to be convinced either way.

When I think of poverty, I think of sub Saharan Africa. I believe debt is legal in most of those countries, so the odds are that banning debt is a small part of the poverty picture.

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#865

Post by willmadden »

toss1 wrote: post #384
willmadden wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to spread FUD, but a friend of mine shared this with me some time ago. It's a good article. I suggest reading it. https://fintechbusinessweekly.substack.com/p/evolves-problem...

Looks like the key info is that Evolve is partnered with MANY other services, including some in crypto land and they are having issues, so some VCs were advising people to move money off of Evolve and onto Mercury's other partner, and a bit of that happened. Here's the quote: >>"Multiple VCs, including Sequoia and Craft Ventures, have advised their startups to move funds away from Evolve-backed platforms, resulting i…

Don't get me wrong, I like Mercury. They have a sweep program that allows you to 4x the FDIC insurance up to 1mm and moves it across multiple banks including JPM. I think the writeup about Evolve was more compliance than issues with its assets and liabilities.

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#866

Post by [deleted] »

tito wrote: post #357

SVB is our bank, I got in touch with a member of the senior team there and got the following message to share. (My own interpretation is I'm comfortable and I'm not planning to pursue it further at the moment): As you know, we are limited in what we can share until the transaction formally closes next week but in the meantime I’m attaching concise information on the strength of our business, based on our recent mid-q…

[deleted]

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#867

Post by smsm42 »

MengerSponge wrote: post #683
gadders wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't call defeating communism and winning the Cold War "societal harm".

"Defeating communism" like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AfPFlWnww8

It is funny that all the Experts (TM) have been talking for years how the USSR was an unbeatable giant with colossal strength that can not be defeated and Americans need to seek friendship with them and learn to live alongside them and learn to respect the choice of people in all the communist countries. In fact, the Democrats went the further along this road, actually requesting help from Andropov to fight Reagan (yes, that happened, look it up). Until Reagan came and... the mighty USSR is no more. The Eastern Europe is free. Then The Experts shrugged and proclaimed that it collapsed by itself, through forces of nature that any learned man would easily predict and that they can easily explain, and nothing Reagan did has anything to do with it. Of course.

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#868

Post by grensley »

arockwell wrote: post #414
grensley wrote: post #390

I don't really understand why anyone would keep more than the FDIC insured amount in a bank. Also, I'm constantly fascinated by how many smart people fundamentally don't understand the economics of banking and how these (often private) institutions create and destroy money.

SVB has billions of dollars in client funds. Once you start having cash in the millions it isn’t practical to have all of it FDIC insured.

Maybe it's just because I haven't managed that kind of money on behalf of an organization, but it seems like you would get super paranoid about that aspect of things: spread your money between multiple banks, hold low risk assets with capital you don't immediately need, possibly even hold some in a straight up vault.

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#869

Post by RC_ITR »

nradov wrote: post #857
RC_ITR wrote: post #799

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, the point is the only thing to say is theres no problem There’s no deeper point.

No, that's not what a competent leader would say. You obviously don't understand how this stuff works in the banking industry.

Im just explaining the quote that you asked for clarification on.

Re: Bank run on Silicon Valley Bank

#870

Post by raspberry1337 »

simonh wrote: post #816
raspberry1337 wrote: post #694

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"The conservative and republican parties are mocking parodies of their former selves. Back in the 80s there were serious, major economic and social problems that desperately needed fixing and economic liberalism had the answers. Nowadays that's just not even vaguely controversial, instead the focus of the right has shifted towards damaging reactionary dog whistle issues like culture wars and blind nationalism. " The…

Where we differ is I just don’t see any of the problems you list as actual problems. I’m in favour of immigration, it does us a lot of good which is why conservative policies actually encourage it, and illegal immigration is a tiny fraction of it overall. Crime rates are down significantly from the 80s. Even in the EU we had all the sovereignty we could ever need, and negotiated opt outs of huge swathes of regulation…

If you can't see that immigration is having a negative impact, which so many voters perceive, then yes you have a minority perspective. Crime in the UK is so bad in some areas that Ukrainian refugees were shocked.
Post reply on HN