8 ms·

> If there was a bank run, First Republic probably would not be able to meet all depositors. If everyone knows this, why keep your money there? Tech exposure h

> If there was a bank run, First Republic probably would not be able to meet all depositors. If everyone knows this, why keep your money there? Tech exposure has nothing to do with it. "In a bank run, he who runs first, runs best".

metacritic12 4y ago
Exactly, they're basically changing the subject to distract from the elephant in the room.
dannyw 4y ago
Tech businesses tend to have more direct access to information (e.g. Twitter, emails), and listen to VCs and investors. Regular people and businesses don't hear about these things. Today, only 1 other person in my friend group of 6 heard about SVB.
- ketzo 4y ago
  I have to imagine that if you have enough money in First Republic for your withdrawal to actually be a problem for them… you at least have a dim awareness of, say, the WSJ front page.
- vkou 4y ago
  That's not why there's a tech bank run. The reason there's a tech bank run is because VCs, and the companies they own are like geese. They fly in a triangle. Thiel tells his startups to bank-run SVB, and they bank-run SVB, and all the other VC start telling their firms to follow suit. It's all herd mentality among an undiversified group of customers (startups all of which are hit hard by raising interest rates), which is perfect for a bank run.
- gnicholas 4y ago
  > Today, only 1 other person in my friend group of 6 heard about SVB. Really? My mom knew about it, and she's a retired teacher who doesn't live in the Bay Area.
- gault8121 4y ago
  There are three articles about this on the front page of the New York Times right now. It’s going to be widespread knowledge very soon.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- TechBro8615 4y ago
  It's currently the top article on CNN, Fox News, NYT, WSJ, and Twitter Trending. Your friends must live under a rock.
digitaltrees 4y ago
Not really the money can and will be clawed back if a bank is placed into bankruptcy or receivership. The legal system disincentivizes runs on the bank by enforcing a 90 day look back period where withdrawals have to be repaid so that funds can be distributed more broadly and fairly.
- loopdoend 4y ago
  Which legal system has a claw back period on withdrawals? Can you imagine rolling back wire payments 90 days old!
  - mediaman 4y ago
    It’s not always 90 days, but the American federal bankruptcy system does allow for clawbacks on payments made immediately leading up to a filing. Meaning, the bankruptcy administrator will absolutely file and get a judgment on your assets, which will be forcibly collected, if you received a payment from a bankrupt entity within the window established by the court.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      This is mainly but not limited to trying to prevent a bankrupt entity from “getting rid” of all its assets. I don’t know if it would apply to a bank wire transfer of “your own money” unless it was a literal fraud situation (pyramid scheme).
      - WWLink 4y ago
        I can't imagine that going well. "No we're taking your $50k life savings back so we can give it all to a client that had $5mil and deserves your $50k life savings more than you do"
        bombcar 4y ago
        Well up to $250k wouldn’t be touched, but yeah, doing a clawback for a bank could cause a run on all banks.
beefield 4y ago
>If everyone knows this, why keep your money there? Because that applies to literally every single operative bank, and given FDIC insurance and other refulation, the risk of deposit losses for average joe is so small that they do not need to care.

metacritic12 4y ago

Exactly, they're basically changing the subject to distract from the elephant in the room.

dannyw 4y ago

Tech businesses tend to have more direct access to information (e.g. Twitter, emails), and listen to VCs and investors. Regular people and businesses don't hear about these things. Today, only 1 other person in my friend group of 6 heard about SVB.

ketzo 4y ago
I have to imagine that if you have enough money in First Republic for your withdrawal to actually be a problem for them… you at least have a dim awareness of, say, the WSJ front page.
vkou 4y ago
That's not why there's a tech bank run. The reason there's a tech bank run is because VCs, and the companies they own are like geese. They fly in a triangle. Thiel tells his startups to bank-run SVB, and they bank-run SVB, and all the other VC start telling their firms to follow suit. It's all herd mentality among an undiversified group of customers (startups all of which are hit hard by raising interest rates), which is perfect for a bank run.
gnicholas 4y ago
> Today, only 1 other person in my friend group of 6 heard about SVB. Really? My mom knew about it, and she's a retired teacher who doesn't live in the Bay Area.
gault8121 4y ago
There are three articles about this on the front page of the New York Times right now. It’s going to be widespread knowledge very soon.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
TechBro8615 4y ago
It's currently the top article on CNN, Fox News, NYT, WSJ, and Twitter Trending. Your friends must live under a rock.

digitaltrees 4y ago

Not really the money can and will be clawed back if a bank is placed into bankruptcy or receivership. The legal system disincentivizes runs on the bank by enforcing a 90 day look back period where withdrawals have to be repaid so that funds can be distributed more broadly and fairly.

loopdoend 4y ago
Which legal system has a claw back period on withdrawals? Can you imagine rolling back wire payments 90 days old!
- mediaman 4y ago
  It’s not always 90 days, but the American federal bankruptcy system does allow for clawbacks on payments made immediately leading up to a filing. Meaning, the bankruptcy administrator will absolutely file and get a judgment on your assets, which will be forcibly collected, if you received a payment from a bankrupt entity within the window established by the court.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    This is mainly but not limited to trying to prevent a bankrupt entity from “getting rid” of all its assets. I don’t know if it would apply to a bank wire transfer of “your own money” unless it was a literal fraud situation (pyramid scheme).
    - WWLink 4y ago
      I can't imagine that going well. "No we're taking your $50k life savings back so we can give it all to a client that had $5mil and deserves your $50k life savings more than you do"
      - bombcar 4y ago
        Well up to $250k wouldn’t be touched, but yeah, doing a clawback for a bank could cause a run on all banks.

beefield 4y ago

>If everyone knows this, why keep your money there? Because that applies to literally every single operative bank, and given FDIC insurance and other refulation, the risk of deposit losses for average joe is so small that they do not need to care.