2 ms·
Bear Sterns fell first, at $350 Billion in assets. The issue in 2008 was that the banks were doing a domino effect on each other. We don't see any such signs o
by dragontamer 4y ago
Bear Sterns fell first, at $350 Billion in assets.
The issue in 2008 was that the banks were doing a domino effect on each other. We don't see any such signs of that with Silicon Valley bank, and SIVB is smaller than Bear Sterns (and other banks) from 2007 crisis.
- cm2187 4y agoWell Bear Sterns never went bust, it was bailed out. The issue in 2008 is rather that institutional investors (mostly money market funds) ceased to lend to banks, or only overnight. I am not saying that the banking system is as fragile as in 2008, it is clearly not. But it only takes a panic to cause another post-Lehman contagion across the financial system.
- cameldrv 4y agoThere was a domino effect, but a number of banks had the same root problem -- MBS held on their books at higher than their true value. Bear Stearns just happened to have a whole lot of the worst MBS, so it went down first. In this case, a number of banks are holding a lot of long-term debt as "hold til maturity", so they're not recognizing on their books that it has lost value due to rising interest rates.
- FormerBandmate 4y ago> We don't see any such signs of that with Silicon Valley bank Yet. They were pretty important to the startup ecosystem, and the rise in fear could imperil some of the banks that were sick already
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]