News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on SVB shows that there are few libertarians in a financial foxhole. Parent comment

Re:SVB shows that there are few libertarians in a financial ... by matthewdgreen on Monday March 13, 2023 @05:28PM (#35143036)
They had a customer base that would knife them at the first hint of a liquidity issue, then they had a liquidity issue. Of course a different approach would have reduced their returns, but then they’d still be in business.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SVB shows that there are few libertarians in a financial ... by cm2187 on Monday March 13, 2023 @07:31PM (#35144804)
Deposits from financials are treated as disappearing at the first opportunity from a regulatory point of view. Corporate deposits are considered volatile but less volatile. So the behaviour we have seen isn’t entirely unexpected.

It seems SVB has VC deposits and corporate deposits from startups that were effectively controlled by VC and behaved like financials in term of deposit outflows.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SVB shows that there are few libertarians in a financial ... by pas on Monday March 13, 2023 @09:17PM (#35145981)
what does financials mean in this? can you explain this term, please?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SVB shows that there are few libertarians in a financial ... by cm2187 on Monday March 13, 2023 @11:42PM (#35147169)
Financial institution, so any bank, insurance company or institutional investor.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SVB shows that there are few libertarians in a financial ... by nullc on Thursday March 16, 2023 @07:13PM (#35190282)
"non-suckers"
[ Parent | on HN ]