ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Stock and Investment Talk

We had the highest inflation in 40 years, raising rates like normal wasn't a real option.
Yes it was. Peak inflation was over prior to the Fed taken action. Besides, this wasn't normal inflation due to economic activity or demand. It was shutdowns, pandemic, supply chains, gov overspending, workforce dynamics, etc. Lots of logic to say such things are beyond the Fed's control. Most of these rate hikes were unneeded.
 
So it seems like Founders Fund and a widely read tech blog started the bank run.

A Tech Newsletter caught wind of SIVB's finances after their last earning call, tweeted out the 185:1 leverage that SIVB was using, two weeks ago. VC's started paying attention.

Earlier in the week, Peter Theil's Founders Fund, started moving its own cash out of the bank. Then on Wednesday, he asked that their normal capital call deposits be made to other banks instead of SIVB(capital call is a process when limited partner investors send in money to VC fund accounts housed at a bank, for the purposed of the VC fund investing in a portfolio of start ups).

On Thursday $42 Billion was pulled. Game over.





Evan Armstrong 📧
@itsurboyevan


Kinda insane that this entire debacle was potentially caused by
@ByrneHobart's newsletter.

Here's how the butterfly effect happened. 1) Byrne posts this article/Tweet calling out SVB's risk. 2) Pretty much every VC I know reads this newsletter 3) They all start to pay very, very close attention to SVB earnings 4) Absolutely massive earnings miss by SVB 5) Peter Thiel, USV, and Coatue are first to send out messages/mass emails to portfolio co's to pull out funds 6) Tech Twitter catches word of this 7) Bank Run 8) Collapse 9) If FDIC/Buyer doesn't come in, in the next 7 days, potential 20%+ collapse of entire startup industry. All started by one overly prolific dude in Austin. Amazing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote Tweet:
gmf9cyWx_normal.jpg


Byrne Hobart
@ByrneHobart
·
Also in today's newsletter: Silicon Valley Bank was, based on the market value of their assets, technically insolvent last quarter and is now levered 185:1.
Show this thread
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU-05
Yes it was. Peak inflation was over prior to the Fed taken action. Besides, this wasn't normal inflation due to economic activity or demand. It was shutdowns, pandemic, supply chains, gov overspending, workforce dynamics, etc. Lots of logic to say such things are beyond the Fed's control. Most of these rate hikes were unneeded.
Peak inflation may have been over, but it was still 8% in Sept. Heck it's still over 6%.

It had to be reigned in.

It's true that the hikes have exposed a company that was running their business poorly, but that's on the poorly run company, not the fed. IMO at least.
 
Saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make you right. Most financial reporters, pundits, officials, and pols agree with my POV. Not yours. Fed has blood on their hands.
Your POV? LOL. I "think" it's "you" agreeing with "their" POV. Not vice versa. You should diversify your media sources. Repeating the musings of CNBC cartoon characters is problematic. Maybe go Bloomberg. "Fed has blood on their hands." Funny. No mas....
 
Peak inflation may have been over, but it was still 8% in Sept. Heck it's still over 6%.

It had to be reigned in.

It's true that the hikes have exposed a company that was running their business poorly, but that's on the poorly run company, not the fed. IMO at least.
Do you stop taking antibiotics on day 2 of a 5 day prescription because you feel a little better? You're not cured on day 2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU-05
Seriously? You are way more knowledgeable than that.
I don't disregard the long term trend. And on the ground I'm still seeing prices increasing.

I do understand your point regarding short term inflation trends, and I know the mom's were flat, but I think that ignores that the long term trends can still sweep the shorter term trends upward again.
 
Do you stop taking antibiotics on day 2 of a 5 day prescription because you feel a little better? You're not cured on day 2.
Or stop pouring water on a house fire that is "mostly" out?

T2K is right that the fed was late, and that led to then having to raise rates in a drastic way early, but I think they've played it well since.

Siegel calling for a pause last Nov looks bad right now given the recent readings.
 
I don't disregard the long term trend. And on the ground I'm still seeing prices increasing.

I do understand your point regarding short term inflation trends, and I know the mom's were flat, but I think that ignores that the long term trends can still sweep the shorter term trends upward again.
YoY data has no bearing on reality or policy decisions moving forward. It is just a nice historical view of past metrics.

Think QoQ as a good balance, but remember to use real-time housing data, not the gov'ment garbage. Inflation is gone and has been for 5-6 months.
 
How do you think the SVB story will play out? Fed/gov bailout or someone buying it?

My opinion is that the Treasury and Fed will need to coordinate and figure out if this is an isolated situation to SVB or just to regional and specialized banks or pervasive throughout the entire system. If pervasive then something would need to be done. If isolated to these regional banks (possibly due to recent deregulation) then no need to bail out the banking system. The fact that Yellen came out saying "no bailout" tells me that this is probably just a few banks. For the larger issue at hands, inflation absolutely needs to come down. Inflation at these levels will be a lot more harmful to the economy. With recent increase in inflation and jobs report that continues to be hot, I would think that the Fed will continue to be hawkish.
 
Bank
Ticker
City
AOCI ($mil)
Total equity capital ($mil)
AOCI/ TEC – AOCI
Total assets ($mil)
Customers Bancorp Inc.West Reading, Pa.
-$163​
$1,403​
-10.4%​
$20,896​
First Republic BankSan Francisco
-$331​
$17,446​
-1.9%​
$213,358​
Sandy Spring Bancorp Inc.Olney, Md.
-$132​
$1,484​
-8.2%​
$13,833​
New York Community Bancorp Inc.Hicksville, N.Y.
-$620​
$8,824​
-6.6%​
$90,616​
First Foundation Inc.Dallas
-$12​
$1,134​
-1.0%​
$13,014​
Ally Financial Inc.Detroit
-$4,059​
$12,859​
-24.0%​
$191,826​
Dime Community Bancshares Inc.Hauppauge, N.Y.
-$94​
$1,170​
-7.5%​
$13,228​
Pacific Premier Bancorp Inc.Irvine, Calif.
-$265​
$2,798​
-8.7%​
$21,729​
Prosperity Bancshare Inc.Houston
-$3​
$6,699​
-0.1%​
$37,751​
Columbia Financial, Inc.Fair Lawn, N.J.
-$179​
$1,054​
-14.5%​
$10,408​
SVB Financial GroupSanta Clara, Calif.
Bank
Ticker
City
AOCI ($mil)
Total equity capital ($mil)
AOCI/ (TEC – AOCI)
Total assets ($mil)
Comerica Inc.Dallas
-$3,742​
$5,181​
-41.9%​
$85,406​
Zions Bancorporation N.A.Salt Lake City
-$3,112​
$4,893​
-38.9%​
$89,545​
Popular Inc.San Juan, Puerto Rico
-$2,525​
$4,093​
-38.2%​
$67,638​
KeyCorpCleveland
-$6,295​
$13,454​
-31.9%​
$189,813​
Community Bank System Inc.DeWitt, N.Y.
-$686​
$1,555​
-30.6%​
$15,911​
Commerce Bancshares Inc.Kansas City, Mo.
-$1,087​
$2,482​
-30.5%​
$31,876​
Cullen/Frost Bankers Inc.San Antonio
-$1,348​
$3,137​
-30.1%​
$52,892​
First Financial Bankshares Inc.Abilene, Texas
-$535​
$1,266​
-29.7%​
$12,974​
Eastern Bankshares Inc.Boston
-$923​
$2,472​
-27.2%​
$22,686​
Heartland Financial USA Inc.Denver
-$620​
$1,735​
-26.3%​
$20,244​
First BancorpSouthern Pines, N.C.
-$342​
$1,032​
-24.9%​
$10,644​
Silvergate Capital Corp. Class ALa Jolla, Calif.
-$199​
$603​
-24.8%​
$11,356​
Bank of Hawaii CorpHonolulu
-$435​
$1,317​
-24.8%​
$23,607​
Synovus Financial Corp.Columbus, Ga.
-$1,442​
$4,476​
-24.4%​
$59,911​
Ally Financial IncDetroit
-$4,059​
$12,859​
-24.0%​
$191,826​
WSFS Financial Corp.Wilmington, Del.
-$676​
$2,202​
-23.5%​
$19,915​
Fifth Third BancorpCincinnati
-$5,110​
$17,327​
-22.8%​
$207,452​
First Hawaiian Inc.Honolulu
-$639​
$2,269​
-22.0%​
$24,666​
UMB Financial Corp.Kansas City, Mo.
-$703​
$2,667​
-20.9%​
$38,854​
Signature BankNew York
-$1,997​
$8,013​
-20.0%​
$110,635​
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU-05
YoY data has no bearing on reality or policy decisions moving forward. It is just a nice historical view of past metrics.

Think QoQ as a good balance, but remember to use real-time housing data, not the gov'ment garbage. Inflation is gone and has been for 5-6 months.
I think the long term, mid term, and short term should all be considered. And I don't think just taking an average of them gives you an accurate picture. It's nuanced, and I do think that even though the short term metrics indicating inflation is done, the longer term trends indicate that it's not, or at least the potential for further flare ups are still there.
 
What happened? Not too familiar with the details of shorting.
Some stocks get too much short interest so if you go to short a stock you are faced with with either a:
-hard to borrow fee when shorting (extra margin %)
-not shortable because there are too many shorts (think meme stocks)
 
So it seems like Founders Fund and a widely read tech blog started the bank run.

A Tech Newsletter caught wind of SIVB's finances after their last earning call, tweeted out the 185:1 leverage that SIVB was using, two weeks ago. VC's started paying attention.

Earlier in the week, Peter Theil's Founders Fund, started moving its own cash out of the bank. Then on Wednesday, he asked that their normal capital call deposits be made to other banks instead of SIVB(capital call is a process when limited partner investors send in money to VC fund accounts housed at a bank, for the purposed of the VC fund investing in a portfolio of start ups).

On Thursday $42 Billion was pulled. Game over.





Evan Armstrong 📧
@itsurboyevan


Kinda insane that this entire debacle was potentially caused by
@ByrneHobart's newsletter.

Here's how the butterfly effect happened. 1) Byrne posts this article/Tweet calling out SVB's risk. 2) Pretty much every VC I know reads this newsletter 3) They all start to pay very, very close attention to SVB earnings 4) Absolutely massive earnings miss by SVB 5) Peter Thiel, USV, and Coatue are first to send out messages/mass emails to portfolio co's to pull out funds 6) Tech Twitter catches word of this 7) Bank Run 8) Collapse 9) If FDIC/Buyer doesn't come in, in the next 7 days, potential 20%+ collapse of entire startup industry. All started by one overly prolific dude in Austin. Amazing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote Tweet:
gmf9cyWx_normal.jpg


Byrne Hobart
@ByrneHobart
·
Also in today's newsletter: Silicon Valley Bank was, based on the market value of their assets, technically insolvent last quarter and is now levered 185:1.
Show this thread
But it’s the Fed’s fault.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Morrischiano
It is still possible that no deal is reached, the report said.

A total or partial acquisition by another bank is one of the options regulators are exploring this weekend. Many investors on Wall Street and Silicon Valley expect an announcement at some point on Sunday to detail the next steps in the SVB crisis.

 

SVB CEO Greg Becker lobbied the government to relax some Dodd-Frank provisions on regional lenders in 2015. Trump did in 2018.

Looks like another trainwreck.
this has zero to do with relaxing regulations as the only one that matters is glass steagal. try as the left might, this isn't on Trump. This is soley, 100% on management
 
I wonder if SVB ever tapped the Fed window to help with liquidity issues and if it would've helped enough.
no they did not which is not odd considering the hubris and lack of financial credibility it's management had. they should have
 
they didn’t have access because they needed to raise capital to meet banking regulatory ratios. If they had healthy ratio, the Fed would’ve provided the liquidity.
no, the FED window is open for any and all liquidity issues and if coverage ratios are below limits (this is not a tier 1 bank so they have different limits and responsibilities that Citi, BAC etc don't have) then the Fed would still take manage but not in receivership
 
  • Like
Reactions: rutgersguy1
I would've thought they could have tapped it with treasuries etc..as collateral even if MTM the value was down. IIRC the Fed accepted much worse collateral during the crisis but that was a much more systemically stressful period.
they'd of had to pledge htm securities which they could have however, this bank was so mismanaged that they didn't have enough of pledgable securities other than what state commission required.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rutgersguy1
no, the FED window is open for any and all liquidity issues and if coverage ratios are below limits (this is not a tier 1 bank so they have different limits and responsibilities that Citi, BAC etc don't have) then the Fed would still take manage but not in receivership
Thanks, I didn’t know rules with regards to accessing the discount window.
 
no they did not which is not odd considering the hubris and lack of financial credibility it's management had. they should have
I'm not an expert on it but but they may not have been creditworthy enough to use the primary discount window.

The secondary window is the Repo market. That I'm familiar with. Every morning at 7:30 and at 2:30 pm an automated dutch auction occurs for an overnight loan. You bid and you see who is taking out the repo. Im pretty sure that almost everyone on Wednesday and Thursday morning would say "no f'in way" to a repo to SIVB.
 
Interesting thread circulating among cognoscenti .
SVB was very generous towards clients -good terms, helping them buy homes etc (lots of clients from China - maybe 1/3)





I like people (Dowd and some other) who do long-term perspectives
50 years of charts is not much in land of tectonic economics
Western economies are historically unique for their acceleration over 100s of years.
The "Industrial Revolution" was 800 years in the making.
Credit was a key to acceleration and it needs to keep expanding more or less
With global debt described as over 300 trillion, there isn't much room left for viable debt (hence US buying own debt)

In US, M2 growth has gone below zero only fives times since 1868.
1958 was the only mild sub-zero tank - deflation usually followed pronounced spikes (had different causes)
Greatest increase of M2 in history was during lockdown.
Post peak the piper will need paying and there isn't much the Fed or anyone else can do.
Dollar will be biggest midget for now.

"The greatest deflationary cycle ever I believe lies ahead. Tim Wood & I discuss Stocks, Dollar, 30 yr Bond (prices) & most importantly M2 the money supply. This is the 5th time since 1868 that M2 growth has gone negative on a yearly basis. Interview link below."

IIe9Bqi.jpg


 
  • Like
Reactions: Rutgers Chris
Interesting thread circulating among cognoscenti .
SVB was very generous towards clients -good terms, helping them buy homes etc (lots of clients from China - maybe 1/3)





I like people (Dowd and some other) who do long-term perspectives
50 years of charts is not much in land of tectonic economics
Western economies are historically unique for their acceleration over 100s of years.
The "Industrial Revolution" was 800 years in the making.
Credit was a key to acceleration and it needs to keep expanding more or less
With global debt described as over 300 trillion, there isn't much room left for viable debt (hence US buying own debt)

In US, M2 growth has gone below zero only fives times since 1868.
1958 was the only mild sub-zero tank - deflation usually followed pronounced spikes (had different causes)
Greatest increase of M2 in history was during lockdown.
Post peak the piper will need paying and there isn't much the Fed or anyone else can do.
Dollar will be biggest midget for now.

"The greatest deflationary cycle ever I believe lies ahead. Tim Wood & I discuss Stocks, Dollar, 30 yr Bond (prices) & most importantly M2 the money supply. This is the 5th time since 1868 that M2 growth has gone negative on a yearly basis. Interview link below."

IIe9Bqi.jpg


This is what the FED is supposed to do. This will bolster the dollar, which is disinflationary.

When I see graphs like this, it seems less likely that there will be a "soft landing".
 
  • Like
Reactions: ashokan
Saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make you right. Most financial reporters, pundits, officials, and pols agree with my POV. Not yours. Fed has blood on their hands.
you're wrong and most of these stupid pundits you refer too reallyhaven't a clue on liquidity management or FI.

the reality is that the FED had telegraphed well in advance and nothing was done to alleviate the interest rate risk by svb and many other institutions. Risk off was the frame of management thinking for too long despite obvious changes in the market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUDead
We had the highest inflation in 40 years, raising rates like normal wasn't a real option.
telegraphed, should not be a surprise to anyone. the rate of increases from zero was fine, the management of the interest rate risk was not. I know what my bank has done throughout
 
no, the FED window is open for any and all liquidity issues and if coverage ratios are below limits (this is not a tier 1 bank so they have different limits and responsibilities that Citi, BAC etc don't have) then the Fed would still take manage but not in receivership
Do you think this is solely a liquidity issue? They were under capitalized after they realized the losses. Treasuries are super liquid. Going to the Fed wouldn’t get them more than selling in the open market.
 
My opinion is that the Treasury and Fed will need to coordinate and figure out if this is an isolated situation to SVB or just to regional and specialized banks or pervasive throughout the entire system. If pervasive then something would need to be done. If isolated to these regional banks (possibly due to recent deregulation) then no need to bail out the banking system. The fact that Yellen came out saying "no bailout" tells me that this is probably just a few banks. For the larger issue at hands, inflation absolutely needs to come down. Inflation at these levels will be a lot more harmful to the economy. With recent increase in inflation and jobs report that continues to be hot, I would think that the Fed will continue to be hawkish.
agree and on top of this, this will be deflationary as I said earlier as this will impact lending

no bailouts, let them suffer. You can't have taxpayers bailing out Oprah and rich VCs who mismanaged their money.
 
Do you think this is solely a liquidity issue? They were under capitalized after they realized the losses. Treasuries are super liquid. Going to the Fed wouldn’t get them more than selling in the open market.
no i've said it's a interest rate mismanagement issue that led to a liquidity issue once the balance sheet was examined.

I have to say, anyone arguing the Fed raised rates too fast is ignorant to risk management principles. The Fed telegraphed and was very transparent. Anyone worth even a low 6 figure salary could manage the yield curve knowing in advance what the Fed is going to do. Hubris, woke agendas, mismanagement, ignorance or willful abandonment of basic risk management principles, and outright intellectual bigotry caused this. If more regional die, then they die. This is good
 
0-5% reserve requirement on fractional lending is an absolute mind blowing game of hide the pea under the cup. That is one thing I would absolutely change
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT