3 ms·
> SVB would be a much more attractive player with better DDA functionality They would be an even more attractive partner if they didn't always throw a wrench i
by ci5er 11y ago
> SVB would be a much more attractive player with better DDA functionality
They would be an even more attractive partner if they didn't always throw a wrench in the works when you are trying to do an orderly liquidation of your company. It's pretty horrible when you realize that Chase had been a (much!) better banking partner. They talk a good game, though.
- pbreit 11y agoI'm not sure I would optimize for liquidations.
- ci5er 11y agoSure. I was just making the point that as a business partner, they have a lot of things beyond a DDA offering that they need to fix. When you are trying to get 100% of the investor's money back after a hard run that didn't make, it makes one feel a bit raw to have sand thrown in your gears in process. And the cool thing about getting investors whole is that they'll show up to your next party. If I had remained a fan of SVB, the investors would not have allowed them back at the table after some of the things that occured. If all that SVB is is money, I can that from GE Capital. I start to question what value they are bringing to the table. I know-- anecdote is not data and all that. None of this is meant as commentary against what's going on in the head-line story. I could see this being a solid win for both parties. Yay. I like happy middle-ings.