3 ms·
I dont see the connection here. SVB failed because they dumped most of their liquidity into 10 year bonds before the Fed started hiking rates, essentially lock
by croutonwagon 4y ago
I dont see the connection here.
SVB failed because they dumped most of their liquidity into 10 year bonds before the Fed started hiking rates, essentially locking in those assets for 10 years. No company would buy a bond for next to no interest when a new bond can be had at 5% now.
They failed to diversify and that seems a top level decision that has nothing to do with WFH.
Additionally a lot of their depositors were companies with accounts well over the FDIC insurance. Arguably the werent a consumer bank and the repeal of Glass-Steagall allowed them to act like they were when it suited them, and act like an investment bank when it simiarly suited them.
Arguably this would be an example of why repealing GS was bad, from my very limited understanding.
And the whole WFH seems a red herring at best to try and avoid any actual accountability for the real decisions that led to its run and collapse.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y agoAnything to push a narrative. I personally added Axios to the same pile as Fortune in terms of corporate propaganda.
- wyclif 4y agoThis seems like a propaganda move to "get people back in the office" by management types. There doesn't appear to be any connection at all between remote work and the kind of malfeasance that created the conditions for SVB's failure.
- croutonwagon 4y agoAgree. I have my own opinions on WFH, especially for certain sectors and types of workers, but that is regardless of this article and totally irrelevant.