***OFFICIAL*** Bank Failure/Crisis Thread (1 Viewer)

[chet]

I just spoke to our CEO and we are moving our accounts from First Republic to BA.

 

[The Z Machine]

I mean we saw what SBF did with the deposits, gambled and lost on more crypto. SVB gambled and lost on interest rates, what's next?

Well, I'm headed to Vegas for March Madness tomorrow, and I hope to gamble and win on hoops. Likely to gamble and lose on dice tho.

 

[Stoneworker]

What I learned during the 2008 crisis...

Rule #1: In the midst of a crisis, don't panic

Rule #2: If you're going to panic, be the first one

 

[Captain Cranks]

So how much of a hedge is crypto to fiat really if the risk correlation is stronger than anyone thought?

You don't have this problem if you self custody on a decentralized network like Bitcoin. That is the whole point of it all: A decentralized network not at risk of inflationary measures by central banks or centralized custodians with no risk controls like FTX and SVP.

 

[Ridgeback]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

 

[massraider]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

What's this now??

 

[Ridgeback]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

What's this now??

Scum Bag.

 

[Juxtatarot]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

What's this now??

Scum Bag.

Hate the player or hate the game?

 

[Ridgeback]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

What's this now??

Scum Bag.

Hate the player or hate the game?

Both.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Quick thought - please drop the "beavis" insults. This can be a good discussion.

 

[dickey moe]

They've never had to have safeguards in place because people can take out money too fast, but now, with technology, a bank can get run on and collapse in a day, even if it would eventually be able to make people whole. You don't need people crowding at bank tellers.

Now if enough people get little beeps on their phone, they can clean out their account in seconds.

Someone with more financial acumen should chime in on this, but it seems like requirements should probably be raised for fractional reserve banking?

 

[Chemical X]

I think the lesson here for people and small businesses is to try and not have more than $250k in a single bank. It's definitely more difficult for a business to stay under the $250k limit (especially one that moves volume) but they should have their higher dollar accounts in larger banks, imo.

This is the EXACT thinking that is THE problem we are facing right now. (no offense to you @eoMMan there is no fault in it for you to think this way). A flight of cash out of fear from sound banks to consumer unfriendly 'too big to fail' banks that feed the behemoths and put the smaller banks in danger. And this is often as a result of not understanding how FDIC insurance works. It is very easy for a family to have millions in coverage with FDIC coverage. Unless you are a hermit, you can easily protect yourself and not have to bow down to the overlords like Dimon who expect you to bank with them because they are Chase- offering crap and nothing in return. While banks that actually offer value go from being sound to failure because of the drain of deposits.

Meh. People need to take care of themselves and their family/businesses. If lowering their risk means having multiple bank accounts at different banks, so be it. They are just playing by the rules they didn't establish.

Without understanding the rules.

I don't really understand your stance here Chad. Let me ask you a simple question. If I have say a million dollars at a single institution and I choose to change that and distribute that money across several institutions at 250k per institution, am *I* NOT playing by the rules or am I playing by the rules?

It depends. Are you married? Do you have kids?

That has nothing to do with my decision. I get that you're suggesting I open accounts in everyone's name and distribute the money amongst those accounts. That's not what I'm asking. I'm asking if I'm allowed, by the rules, to diversify in another way - by distributing MY money amongst multiple financial institutions. This is a pretty simple question.

insurance is per depositor, per fdic insured bank. why anyone would exceed $250m at any one bank baffles me, but i’ve been doing this for 30 years and most people have no idea about how money or banks operate.

 

[coopersdad]

I think the lesson here for people and small businesses is to try and not have more than $250k in a single bank. It's definitely more difficult for a business to stay under the $250k limit (especially one that moves volume) but they should have their higher dollar accounts in larger banks, imo.

This is the EXACT thinking that is THE problem we are facing right now. (no offense to you @eoMMan there is no fault in it for you to think this way). A flight of cash out of fear from sound banks to consumer unfriendly 'too big to fail' banks that feed the behemoths and put the smaller banks in danger. And this is often as a result of not understanding how FDIC insurance works. It is very easy for a family to have millions in coverage with FDIC coverage. Unless you are a hermit, you can easily protect yourself and not have to bow down to the overlords like Dimon who expect you to bank with them because they are Chase- offering crap and nothing in return. While banks that actually offer value go from being sound to failure because of the drain of deposits.

Meh. People need to take care of themselves and their family/businesses. If lowering their risk means having multiple bank accounts at different banks, so be it. They are just playing by the rules they didn't establish.

Without understanding the rules.

I don't really understand your stance here Chad. Let me ask you a simple question. If I have say a million dollars at a single institution and I choose to change that and distribute that money across several institutions at 250k per institution, am *I* NOT playing by the rules or am I playing by the rules?

It depends. Are you married? Do you have kids?

That has nothing to do with my decision. I get that you're suggesting I open accounts in everyone's name and distribute the money amongst those accounts. That's not what I'm asking. I'm asking if I'm allowed, by the rules, to diversify in another way - by distributing MY money amongst multiple financial institutions. This is a pretty simple question.

insurance is per depositor, per fdic insured bank. why anyone would exceed $250m at any one bank baffles me, but i’ve been doing this for 30 years and most people have no idea about how money or banks operate.

My ex-wife made sure that we were in compliance of having less than 250K in the bank account................and then even though I'm in finance, I realized that "half" is a big number.

 

[Sullie]

I think the lesson here for people and small businesses is to try and not have more than $250k in a single bank. It's definitely more difficult for a business to stay under the $250k limit (especially one that moves volume) but they should have their higher dollar accounts in larger banks, imo.

This is the EXACT thinking that is THE problem we are facing right now. (no offense to you @eoMMan there is no fault in it for you to think this way). A flight of cash out of fear from sound banks to consumer unfriendly 'too big to fail' banks that feed the behemoths and put the smaller banks in danger. And this is often as a result of not understanding how FDIC insurance works. It is very easy for a family to have millions in coverage with FDIC coverage. Unless you are a hermit, you can easily protect yourself and not have to bow down to the overlords like Dimon who expect you to bank with them because they are Chase- offering crap and nothing in return. While banks that actually offer value go from being sound to failure because of the drain of deposits.

Meh. People need to take care of themselves and their family/businesses. If lowering their risk means having multiple bank accounts at different banks, so be it. They are just playing by the rules they didn't establish.

Without understanding the rules.

I don't really understand your stance here Chad. Let me ask you a simple question. If I have say a million dollars at a single institution and I choose to change that and distribute that money across several institutions at 250k per institution, am *I* NOT playing by the rules or am I playing by the rules?

It depends. Are you married? Do you have kids?

That has nothing to do with my decision. I get that you're suggesting I open accounts in everyone's name and distribute the money amongst those accounts. That's not what I'm asking. I'm asking if I'm allowed, by the rules, to diversify in another way - by distributing MY money amongst multiple financial institutions. This is a pretty simple question.

insurance is per depositor, per fdic insured bank. why anyone would exceed $250m at any one bank baffles me, but i’ve been doing this for 30 years and most people have no idea about how money or banks operate.

I don't know if you made a typo there but It's $250k max not $250m.

 

[Chemical X]

since i’ve been knee deep in this mess since 3/20, i will again state how i continue to believe this mess all began with PPP and the printing of free money by our government, as everyone stuck their hands out during the pandemic. while many industries did suffer, i will argue most did not suffer and were granted the ability to become cash flush. with many businesses in the country being small operators, these funds channeled directly or indirectly to individuals. when everyone has cash and is willing to spend on a widget, said widget will increase in price based on demand. inflation. rate increases. instability. it’s not like svb was reckless in the market, they hedged conservately incorrectly into an increasing rate environment and got caught in an old fashioned bank run, having to liquidate to cover. did we need to print money back in 2020? i hated it then, hated it more during and hate it even more now. if we can do that, then just give everyone $100 every month in perpetuity……sound stupid? well, it is.

 

[Chemical X]

I think the lesson here for people and small businesses is to try and not have more than $250k in a single bank. It's definitely more difficult for a business to stay under the $250k limit (especially one that moves volume) but they should have their higher dollar accounts in larger banks, imo.

This is the EXACT thinking that is THE problem we are facing right now. (no offense to you @eoMMan there is no fault in it for you to think this way). A flight of cash out of fear from sound banks to consumer unfriendly 'too big to fail' banks that feed the behemoths and put the smaller banks in danger. And this is often as a result of not understanding how FDIC insurance works. It is very easy for a family to have millions in coverage with FDIC coverage. Unless you are a hermit, you can easily protect yourself and not have to bow down to the overlords like Dimon who expect you to bank with them because they are Chase- offering crap and nothing in return. While banks that actually offer value go from being sound to failure because of the drain of deposits.

Meh. People need to take care of themselves and their family/businesses. If lowering their risk means having multiple bank accounts at different banks, so be it. They are just playing by the rules they didn't establish.

Without understanding the rules.

I don't really understand your stance here Chad. Let me ask you a simple question. If I have say a million dollars at a single institution and I choose to change that and distribute that money across several institutions at 250k per institution, am *I* NOT playing by the rules or am I playing by the rules?

It depends. Are you married? Do you have kids?

That has nothing to do with my decision. I get that you're suggesting I open accounts in everyone's name and distribute the money amongst those accounts. That's not what I'm asking. I'm asking if I'm allowed, by the rules, to diversify in another way - by distributing MY money amongst multiple financial institutions. This is a pretty simple question.

insurance is per depositor, per fdic insured bank. why anyone would exceed $250m at any one bank baffles me, but i’ve been doing this for 30 years and most people have no idea about how money or banks operate.

I don't know if you made a typo there but It's $250k max not $250m.

i’m a banker. we use m for 000s, mm for 000,000 fyi. no k here.

 

[Desert_Power]

They've never had to have safeguards in place because people can take out money too fast, but now, with technology, a bank can get run on and collapse in a day, even if it would eventually be able to make people whole. You don't need people crowding at bank tellers.

Now if enough people get little beeps on their phone, they can clean out their account in seconds.

Someone with more financial acumen should chime in on this, but it seems like requirements should probably be raised for fractional reserve banking?

That wouldn't really do anything in this situation beyond further depleting liquidity. I don't think reserve requirements really make sense with the post-2008 structure of the industry/Fed as banks started to hold far more than the required amount in cash.

 

[TripItUp]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

This needs to be addressed.

 

[Chadstroma]

I think the lesson here for people and small businesses is to try and not have more than $250k in a single bank. It's definitely more difficult for a business to stay under the $250k limit (especially one that moves volume) but they should have their higher dollar accounts in larger banks, imo.

This is the EXACT thinking that is THE problem we are facing right now. (no offense to you @eoMMan there is no fault in it for you to think this way). A flight of cash out of fear from sound banks to consumer unfriendly 'too big to fail' banks that feed the behemoths and put the smaller banks in danger. And this is often as a result of not understanding how FDIC insurance works. It is very easy for a family to have millions in coverage with FDIC coverage. Unless you are a hermit, you can easily protect yourself and not have to bow down to the overlords like Dimon who expect you to bank with them because they are Chase- offering crap and nothing in return. While banks that actually offer value go from being sound to failure because of the drain of deposits.

Meh. People need to take care of themselves and their family/businesses. If lowering their risk means having multiple bank accounts at different banks, so be it. They are just playing by the rules they didn't establish.

Without understanding the rules.

I don't really understand your stance here Chad. Let me ask you a simple question. If I have say a million dollars at a single institution and I choose to change that and distribute that money across several institutions at 250k per institution, am *I* NOT playing by the rules or am I playing by the rules?

It depends. Are you married? Do you have kids?

That has nothing to do with my decision. I get that you're suggesting I open accounts in everyone's name and distribute the money amongst those accounts. That's not what I'm asking. I'm asking if I'm allowed, by the rules, to diversify in another way - by distributing MY money amongst multiple financial institutions. This is a pretty simple question.

insurance is per depositor, per fdic insured bank. why anyone would exceed $250m at any one bank baffles me, but i’ve been doing this for 30 years and most people have no idea about how money or banks operate.

Per depositor per bank per ownership category.

 

[worrierking]

I went to my stockbroker to get her advice on a purchase of some property I am considering. I asked if I should just use the 60,000 in my savings account. She laughed and told me it might start a bank run! I like my stockbroker for her sense of humor. Not sure how good her advice is.

 

[FairWarning]

This has the potential to get very political.

Will likely be a talking point in the next election.

I wonder if this opens up the student loan bailout talk again.

 

[facook]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

This needs to be addressed.

Couldn't that be considered insider trading? I feel dumb asking, but...

 

[Chadstroma]

I went to my stockbroker to get her advice on a purchase of some property I am considering. I asked if I should just use the 60,000 in my savings account. She laughed and told me it might start a bank run! I like my stockbroker for her sense of humor. Not sure how good her advice is.

I can help you work through the options on that versus the mortgage loan since I am a mortgage broker. I have a good sense of humor as well but then also have the expertise to give you a little better advice than that


If you want, reach out with a DM. Most likely I am not licensed in your state but can refer you to someone good if you do need to move forward.

 

[GroveDiesel]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

This needs to be addressed.

Well, the link only refers to the CEO selling. It seems like he sold probably just a small amount of his overall stock. And it was scheduled for sale at the end of January for sale a month later. Certainly could have been done seeing the ship sinking, but also could have just been part of an annual rebalancing of his overall portfolio as well. Not sure the info in the article matched what was being claimed here.

 

[TripItUp]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

This needs to be addressed.

Well, the link only refers to the CEO selling. It seems like he sold probably just a small amount of his overall stock. And it was scheduled for sale at the end of January for sale a month later. Certainly could have been done seeing the ship sinking, but also could have just been part of an annual rebalancing of his overall portfolio as well. Not sure the info in the article matched what was being claimed here.

if the execs only sold a small percentage, I agree...and that's pretty standard and acceptable

 

[Psychopav]

It’s truly amazing how mismatched their asset-liability duration was. I can’t even fathom how they thought that made sense. It’s incredibly basic.

I know nothing about all of this except when I hear about a bank failing I assume either 1. somebody stole something or 2. they are idiots at managing money. I thought after 2008 we put stuff in place to keep and eye on the banks to kind of guard against stuff like this, no? I mean my company is privately held by a public company in England but we get audited every year and have to answer a lot of painful questions when we do stupid ****. Is that not the case for a company that manages billions of dollars?

They put all their eggs in long term US Treasuries at 1.5% rates.....they got steamrolled these last 10 months as the FED put the pedal to metal on hikes. Those bond prices cratered......major clients made a run on their deposits.....and here we are.

This is capitalism. It’s not full proof. The BOD of this bank were negligent.

FDIC is covering eligible deposits.

But everyone needs to know......you have 250K per depositor per ownership form per bank. Read up on FDIC to make sure you are fully covered. I have plenty of clients who have deposits at multiple banks to make sure it is all under the FDIC umbrella.

This is a sad case of a bank being mis managed. And this does happen every year. But when a regional bank or higher fails....you hear about it like wildfire. Local banks? There are local small bank failures yearly......you never hear about them of course.

In any case.....the risk management at SVB was incompetent. They invested like interest rates would stay at zero for 10 more years......it’s all on them.

 

[Zigg]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

This needs to be addressed.

We all know congress does not tolerate insider trading.

 

[Chadstroma]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

This needs to be addressed.

We all know congress does not tolerate insider trading when they can't profit from it themselves.

Fixed for the cheap seats.

 

[Sand]

I expect First Republic Bank to fail next, if there is a failure, even with injection of funds from the Fed and Chase. Stock price is a good indicator of faith in a bank and FRC is down 70% right now. Keep an eye on Western Alliance Bank as well. Down 62% rigth now. Both improved from opening but this indicates a complete lack of confidence in the bank. Deposits should be fleeing in droves from them.

Just saw this: https://twitter.com/FedGuy12/status/1635263272705470467

We are addressing the symptoms and not the core issue.
If CPI comes in continued with a down trend in inflation (which I am confident it will) then a 25 bps point cut would go a long way to stabilize everything.

IMO they raise a quarter point if nothing else than to show that these small matters won't affect them. Unlike big stuff, like the word transitory.

 

[Andrew74]

I can’t see the Fed cutting rates next week. You had a couple of Fed members address financial stability back in the fall. Basically said they had tools to address it and rates to address inflation. They addressed the liquidity issues with the loan facility. I could see them pausing next week, citing “data dependency”, but I think they raise a quarter. Inflation is trending down, particularly on energy declines, but the Fed cares about core. They’ve also been very vocal recently about core services ex-housing, which isn’t budging. Unless there are signs the system is collapsing, I can’t see a rate cut.

They reversed course in 98 after LTCM and we see how that turned out.

 

[Ridgeback]

The CEO and execs sold all their stock within the last two weeks. What soulless criminals.

This needs to be addressed.

Well, the link only refers to the CEO selling. It seems like he sold probably just a small amount of his overall stock. And it was scheduled for sale at the end of January for sale a month later. Certainly could have been done seeing the ship sinking, but also could have just been part of an annual rebalancing of his overall portfolio as well. Not sure the info in the article matched what was being claimed here.

The link here shows the CFO and CMO also sold shares.

 

[Orange&Blue]

I think the lesson here for people and small businesses is to try and not have more than $250k in a single bank. It's definitely more difficult for a business to stay under the $250k limit (especially one that moves volume) but they should have their higher dollar accounts in larger banks, imo.

they need to raise the limit.

 

[The Z Machine]

I can’t see the Fed cutting rates next week. You had a couple of Fed members address financial stability back in the fall. Basically said they had tools to address it and rates to address inflation. They addressed the liquidity issues with the loan facility. I could see them pausing next week, citing “data dependency”, but I think they raise a quarter. Inflation is trending down, particularly on energy declines, but the Fed cares about core. They’ve also been very vocal recently about core services ex-housing, which isn’t budging. Unless there are signs the system is collapsing, I can’t see a rate cut.

They reversed course in 98 after LTCM and we see how that turned out.

100% agree. Even if they have to backstop banks or a bunch go under after bank runs, they will not stop their assault on inflation.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

I’m not sure if this has been posted yet—but Coffeezilla really does a nice job simplifying and explaining some of what happened with SVB on youtube. It’s an easy, short and entertaining watch.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

 

[Orange&Blue]

I'm not knowledgeable at all about this, but from what I've read the SVB investments weren't bad. Those will still pay out eventually, correct?

I guess i don't understand the fear of this spreading. Even if other banks were also inept, it's not like these investments are going belly up.

 

[jvdesigns2002]

I'm not knowledgeable at all about this, but from what I've read the SVB investments weren't bad. Those will still pay out eventually, correct?

I guess i don't understand the fear of this spreading. Even if other banks were also inept, it's not like these investments are going belly up.

You should watch the short video I linked in the post just above yours. The banks purchased medium to long term government bonds back before interest rates went up. When a flood of people want to withdraw funds from the banks—the banks are forced to sell their bonds at a loss because the interest rates they are commanding are not desirable compared to what is available on the market currently. So effectively—the initial issue with the bank is a liquidity issue-that transforms into an insolvency issue because of all of the losses they are forced to take by selling their undesirable bonds at a loss.

 

[Redwes25]

Fed is not going to cut rates. I would expect another 25 bps raise.

I think that the thing that is getting lost in the discussion is how bad the fixed income market was last year as treasuries had their worst year ever - https://fortune.com/2022/12/31/trea...-loss-2022-worst-year-ever-2023-forecast/amp/

That type of year is going to cause a lot of pain and that is playing out now and 10 year yields were bumping against their worst levels last year about a week ago so pain was still there. Yields on the 10 year have improved by 50 bps since then and imagine that is relief for some.

 

[fatness]

It’s truly amazing how mismatched their asset-liability duration was. I can’t even fathom how they thought that made sense. It’s incredibly basic.

I know nothing about all of this except when I hear about a bank failing I assume either 1. somebody stole something or 2. they are idiots at managing money. I thought after 2008 we put stuff in place to keep and eye on the banks to kind of guard against stuff like this, no? I mean my company is privately held by a public company in England but we get audited every year and have to answer a lot of painful questions when we do stupid ****. Is that not the case for a company that manages billions of dollars?

They put all their eggs in long term US Treasuries at 1.5% rates.....they got steamrolled these last 10 months as the FED put the pedal to metal on hikes. Those bond prices cratered......major clients made a run on their deposits.....and here we are.

This is capitalism. It’s not full proof. The BOD of this bank were negligent.

FDIC is covering eligible deposits.

Succinct explanation.

 

[Redwes25]

After that CPI print, a rate hike is set in stone.

 

[Todem]

After that CPI print, a rate hike is set in stone.

.50 more coming. Whether that is one shot or two .25 raises.

Then the long pause will happen so all theses raises work their way through the entire economy.

I seriously (barring any black swans) don’t see rates being cut till late 2024 at the earliest. That is of course the Fed does not cave to political pressure like they did in late 2018.

 

[fruity pebbles]

I’m still trying to figure out how the CPI showed used car prices falling and the Manheim used car index had them rising substantially last month.

 

[Andrew74]

3mo core inflation rate is going up over the last 3 releases. Core Services ex-housing isn’t moving down at all.

 

[The Z Machine]

I seriously (barring any black swans) don’t see rates being cut till late 2024 at the earliest. That is of course the Fed does not cave to political pressure like they did in late 2018.

Not great for us that are looking at a new mortgage in the next 2 years. I don't want to give up my 2.75% for a 6.5+%

 

[The Z Machine]

I’m still trying to figure out how the CPI showed used car prices falling and the Manheim used car index had them rising substantially last month.

lag?

 

[fruity pebbles]

I’m still trying to figure out how the CPI showed used car prices falling and the Manheim used car index had them rising substantially last month.

lag?

Aren’t they both measuring the same month?

 

[Chadstroma]

I'm not knowledgeable at all about this, but from what I've read the SVB investments weren't bad. Those will still pay out eventually, correct?

I guess i don't understand the fear of this spreading. Even if other banks were also inept, it's not like these investments are going belly up.

Not 'bad' but you can simplify it by saying that they took all the eggs in a basket that they couldn't reach into until well after Easter. When all the kids wanted to get to their eggs they had none to give and they had to sell all their candy to pay for more eggs to give them.... which made everyone freak out that there was no candy and even more people demanded their eggs until they were out of business.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I'm not knowledgeable at all about this, but from what I've read the SVB investments weren't bad. Those will still pay out eventually, correct?

I guess i don't understand the fear of this spreading. Even if other banks were also inept, it's not like these investments are going belly up.

The issue as I see it, is for the last 5 years or more we have had historically low interest rates. So the yields on all of the mortgage backed securities purchased recently have low returns (safe, but low). If the banks need liquidity, they have to sell their interests in these securities, because the low yields aren't giving them a lot of cash.

The market for the low rate mortgages is CRAP right now, because with rates moving up at historically FAST rates (percentage increase wise) new mortgage securities are MUCH more valuable than what the banks currently hold. So when banks are having to pay out high rates on accounts now and folks are pulling out their money for various reasons, the banks are selling the securities at a loss -- creating solvency issues.

SVB saw this coming and they were trying to raise capital because their values were going down, but this spooked folks which exacerbated withdrawals and it snowballed and here we are. Panic is bad.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

don't know if you made a typo there but It's $250k max not $250m.

In the financial world $250m = $250k and $250mm = 250 million

 

[Don't Toews Me]

Moody's cuts outlook on U.S. banking system to negative, citing 'rapidly deteriorating operating environment'

The firm, part of the big three rating services, said it was making the move in light of key bank failures.

www.cnbc.com

In a harsh blow to an already-reeling sector, Moody’s Investors Service on Monday cut its view on the entire banking system to negative from stable.

The firm, part of the big three rating services, said it was making the move in light of three key failures that prompted regulators to step in Sunday with a dramatic rescue plan for depositors and other institutions impacted by the crisis.


“We have changed to negative from stable our outlook on the US banking system to reflect the rapid deterioration in the operating environment following deposit runs at Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), Silvergate Bank, and Signature Bank (SNY) and the failures of SVB and SNY,” Moody’s said in a report.

 

[HellToupee]

don't know if you made a typo there but It's $250k max not $250m.

In the financial world $250m = $250k and $250mm = 250 million

Well that seems downright silly from a non financial world perspective