I am saying that in the financial crisis the limit for protection was upped considerably and depositors are senior in a bank failure. You're taking a risk above 250K,so don't take it. But there is a good chance even above two fifty you'll emerge whole.
That's true of course, but the speed with which bank resolution often occurs is amazing. In some cases it is from close on Friday to opening on Monday morning, as if nothing happened. The the U.S. banking system is the model for the rest of the world.
Who's next? Study finds 186 banks vulnerable to Silicon Valley Bank-like collapse https://www.fox7austin.com/news/will-more-banks-collapse-silicon-valley A new study says that, depending on certain market conditions, nearly 200 U.S. banks could be vulnerable to the same fate as Silicon Valley Bank (SVB). A recent Social Science Research Network study suggests that 186 American banks could fail if half of their depositors suddenly withdrew their funds. The researchers formulated a speculative scenario in which each bank experienced a run, and concluded that the FDIC would run out of money. The study was published shortly after the collapse of SVB, the worst American financial institution failure since 2008. "Our calculations suggest these banks are certainly at a potential risk of a run, absent other government intervention or recapitalization," the economists wrote. "Even if only half of uninsured depositors decide to withdraw, almost 190 banks are at a potential risk of impairment to insured depositors, with potentially $300 billion of insured deposits at risk," the study's abstract reads. "If uninsured deposit withdrawals cause even small fire sales, substantially more banks are at risk." The issue lies in the fact that the studied banks' assets are in government bonds and mortgage backed securities, which were negatively affected by the Federal Reserve's recent interest rate hikes. Many of SVB's assets were long-term government bonds. Despite being a sound long-term investment, they were not worth as much as when SVB originally bought them. SVB invested too heavily in longer-term mortgage securities with more than 10 years to maturity. SVB sold those bonds at a staggering $1.8 billion loss to meet customer withdrawals. When SVB disclosed that loss, depositors panicked and withdrew their money. "Overall, these calculations suggest that recent declines in bank asset values very significantly increased the fragility of the US banking system to uninsured depositor runs." the study's abstract concludes. FOX Business has reached out to FDIC for comment, but has not received a statement.
%% Good points, but they did lot of stupid stuff. Like ''donate more than $73 million to groups related to BLM '' So they proved ''woke=broke'' And they proved ESG = ''asinine '' ,as Warren Buffet noted . No wonder SVB had a big % of tech money; one businesswoman said SVB loaned her money on her new co with no profit With wasting more than $73 million to BLM related, wonder what SVB waste we dont know about??[Edit that's unusual for FDIC bank to loan money to new business, especially with no profit]
The sad truth here in the SF Bay Area, if you aren't outwardly woke you will be banished eventually so it is just the price for doing business in a clueless electorate here who vote for people who spend years trying to change the name of "racist" elementary school names. Oh and don't forget these idiots also want to give every black person (but not Native American) here $5 million. These people here cannot be helped, they are on a death spiral here just like Portland, Seattle, etc.
In Seattle currently. It is healing quite well. Slow motion grow patterns. There is still a hint of speculation in a certain market though. Akuma