4 ms·
To be honest, the analysis of recent days show that the public information was there from Q3 on. So Thiel could just have hired financials with a tad more profe
by wjnc 4y ago
To be honest, the analysis of recent days show that the public information was there from Q3 on. So Thiel could just have hired financials with a tad more professionalism than SVB. Even the plain reported story is plausible. Don’t use a bank ever again if they do not make their SLA. Pretty simple reasoning and risk management can save you a lot of hassle.
- hd95489 4y agoWhat was there in Q3 that could have tipped folks off?
- mannerheim 4y agohttps://twitter.com/itsurboyevan/status/1634603869752766471 https://twitter.com/itsurboyevan/status/1634603869752766471 This thread was in January: https://twitter.com/RagingVentures/status/1615826088038473733 https://twitter.com/RagingVentures/status/161582608803847373...
- hd95489 4y agoThanks followed both of be those. Looks like #FRB might be next
- kkielhofner 4y agoThere were also short positions on SVB taken out after some of those financials. Startup founders/teams should not be spending their time reading their 40 year old bank's quarterly financials, analyzing various short positions, or hiring resources to do so. Then there's (as always) the absurdity of making significant financial decisions for your startup based on a more-or-less random fund/personality twitter account that may have an undisclosed short position spreading FUD (or just be flat-out wrong). Hindsight is 20/20 and even the most sophisticated actors taking short positions have failed spectacularly. For cases as dramatic as this ($200b bank failure) it's the stuff they make movies of ("The Big Short"). The fact remains that other than a few hawks this came out of nowhere last Thursday, and as the article and other sources describe not even Thiel and other sophisticated insiders were that far ahead but as we all know when it comes to a bank run those hours are precious.