4 ms·
> Because the bank was insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the FDIC "absorbed the $47.1 million loss" > Right now, it's unclear how or
by captn3m0 2y ago
> Because the bank was insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the FDIC "absorbed the $47.1 million loss"
> Right now, it's unclear how or when victims will be repaid for losses. Broomes ordered "that restitution be finalized at a separate hearing within the next 90 days," the US Attorney's Office said. Many victims will never fully recoup losses to their life savings and retirement funds
Can someone explain how are these two statements compatible?
- a_dabbler 2y agoI think the losses by people who deposited money in the bank are covered but when the bank collapsed the bank investors lost a further 9m$, the investors are not covered by FDIC insurance
- banksRus 2y agoThe victims are the shareholders who were wiped out when the bank went under. The FDIC made the depositors whole, but not the other parts of the bank's capital structure.
- wheybags 2y agoFdic only covers $250k per person. If you had more than that in your account, you're out of luck.
- winternewt 2y agoBut the text says that the FDIC absorbed the _entire_ loss
- rchaud 2y agoThe deposits were assumed by Dream First Bank of Syracuse, Kansas, according to this article: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/cryptocurrency-pig-butchering-scam-wrecks-kansas-bank-sends-ex-ceo-pri-rcna167642 https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/cryptocurrenc...
- epc 2y agoThere were other victims who were not insured by the FDIC because he stole from their non-bank funds: “After blowing through his own funds seeking promised profits, Hanes stole tens of thousands from a local church, then a local investor club, and finally his daughter's college fund, NBC News reported.”