(Being insolvent isn't actually enough to kill a bank as long as the run doesn't start. Of course, here the bank dies when the regulator decides it dies anyway.)
Explain the selling of stock by the executives then.
…but that's not enough to make a bank fail, it's just bad news for shareholders.
And as for assuming good faith that this was a fait accompli already in progress... I'm sorry, but I can't get past "We're doing this on the first business day following the biggest upset to our industry in a decade and a half. But that's just a coincidence!"
Btw I don't think the difference is spin, I think it's the opposite actually—from my perspective (and just to be clear, I'm not privy to the inside discussions) this change is not a reaction to short-term business climate, it's a vision thing. Most people underestimate the power of having just one thing to focus on and knowing exactly what it is. It's a cliché everyone pays lip service to but almost no one really does. It was a huge insight for me that running HN is all about focusing on one thing*—it's a kind of superpower that turns a surprising number of hard calls into easy calls.
* https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
At a minimum, it takes longer than 3 days to make a big change like this. I realize that's not a persuasive argument though, since there is endless supply of explanations one can come up with (what if they knew about SVB beforehand!)