The token £1 is just a payment requirement for ownership. The bidding process for insolvent companies is essentially who will take on the most "problems" for the best outcomes for the business.

So one company may bid saying they want to acquire X parts of the company but can not take on the advertising arm or the quality assurance part of the company; which means jobs losses etc. Another company may say we'll acquire all of the company but not the freehold properties the business owns.

The liquidation team then have to decide which bid offers the best likely outcome for the creditors/business. The £1 isn't technically what they're paying for the company, as they're taking on debt, leaseholds, pension funds etc. Their bid is technically tens or hundreds of millions depending on the situation.

£1, plus all deposits, plus all other liabilities (from what I understand).

Maybe the other bidders were not offering that much...

Possibly the other bidders were seen as less robust and able to absorb the liabilities of SVB UK?

Maybe other bidders weren't willing or able to guarantee all deposits?

Usually the "buyer" is being paid to take it off the regulator's hands, so the actual price is negative. The token (positive) amount is to make it easier to deal with in a legal sense.

Thus the bids are for the lowest subsidy instead of the highest price.

Only a few hours ago we were being told that SVB UK was being bought by "The Bank of London", whoever the hell they are, not to be confused with "The Bank, of London" in any case, so I think we can take it that now HSBC are getting it, these dealings haven't exactly been your typical arms length open market kind of affair, but rather something altogether more cozy, presumably orchestrated by the actual The Bank, of London.

I imagine it was "which one of you wants this steaming mess?".

HSBC: [sigh], ok fine why not

The token is just to make the sale contract binding