2 ms·

> Thursday, 9 AM: in one chat with 200+ tech founders (most in the Bay Area), questions about SVB start to show up. > 10 AM: some suggest getting the money ou

> Thursday, 9 AM: in one chat with 200+ tech founders (most in the Bay Area), questions about SVB start to show up. > 10 AM: some suggest getting the money out of SVB for safety. Only upside. No downside. https://twitter.com/torrenegra/status/1634573234187407369 https://twitter.com/torrenegra/status/1634573234187407369 Anecdote to be sure but it's fascinating to read the account of people organising a bank run.

PheonixPharts 4y ago
I've pointed this out a few times in other threads but it's worth repeating. SVB had just recently reported that they had no liquidity issues and did not foresee any need to sell any of their assets at a loss. Then Thursday morning the announced that they had, in fact, liquidated some of their assets at a loss. Your bank is supposed to be zero risk and essentially as good as cash. Any sign that your bank might have liquidity problems significantly raises that risk from 0. In that case it is beyond prudent to try to move out of that bank fast. I love a good conspiracy theory as much as the next, and wouldn't be surprised if there were ill intentions behind some of those meetings. However this bank run was rational and does not need to be explained away by any conspiracy to organize a bank run.