Stocks

Adriano@10

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
9,631
Likes
2,572
Favorite Player
Oba
10 years of FIF
SVB is definitely the most culpable due to their inability to match long duration assets with short term liabilities - no doubt. But why is every bank in the world carrying giant unrealized losses on their bond portfolios? It's because they're required by regulators to hold these investments in "safer" assets, the value of which has tanked because of all the easy money that was circulating in 2020 and 2021.
Most of these assets are hold to maturity those losses dont matter unless you have a bank run and have to sell....
Blaming regulators is fucken ridiculose......only thing you could blame em for is rolling back some of the dodd frank cause leaving them in place would have avoided all of this...

Also in a raising intrest rates environnemnent banks are gonna carry unrrlized losses no matter what... kind of the nature of bankingm
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

brehme1989

La Grande Inter
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
34,847
Likes
17,814
10 years of FIF
Nostradamus
Most Passionate Member
SVB is definitely the most culpable due to their inability to match long duration assets with short term liabilities - no doubt. But why is every bank in the world carrying giant unrealized losses on their bond portfolios? It's because they're required by regulators to hold these investments in "safer" assets, the value of which has tanked because of all the easy money that was circulating in 2020 and 2021.
If anything, the problem is not enough regulation.
 

brehme1989

La Grande Inter
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
34,847
Likes
17,814
10 years of FIF
Nostradamus
Most Passionate Member
I mean honestly, how can the US/California regulators allow a large bank to go for months without a freaking Risk Officer?

In Mickey Mouse countries that ESMA barely pays attention to, you have the regulators up to your neck if a company of even just 5 people doesn't have a designated Compliance and Risk officer... let alone a large organization.
 

Helenio Herrera

Prima Squadra
Prima Squadra
Joined
Jun 14, 2019
Messages
917
Likes
616
Favorite Player
Cambiasso
It's a well-known fact that almost all of the non-techies in the tech sector are crooks
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

crzdcolombian

La Grande Inter
La Grande Inter
Joined
Aug 2, 2007
Messages
14,593
Likes
2,129
Favorite Player
Cryptozo d King
10 years of FIF
If anything, the problem is not enough regulation.

Haha first thing republicans do is get rid of regulations then banking crisis….

Love that the fed said aren’t bailing them out this time. Fk them!! Stop making stupid bets and thinking the governments going to bail you out when shit hits the fan
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

Dave54

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
May 27, 2022
Messages
5,889
Likes
2,856
Favorite Player
Pele
Best Forum Newcomer
If banks were not bailed out by the Feds in 2008-2009, things would have become really ugly. The bright spot for me back then was to break even with the sale of my house in Forth Worth, TX and to buy a house in Vegas for 50 cents on a dollar in 2010.
 
Last edited:

Adriano@10

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
9,631
Likes
2,572
Favorite Player
Oba
10 years of FIF
God fucken dam bill ackman is a humongous fucken idiot/ass... Dude is still out there crying that the US needs depositor protection for every fucken dollar in a banck. And he s fucken acting like it will help the average american fucker as if the average american had 250k in cash casually laying around..

Ohh also he s stil spreading fear how fucken stupid are these guys.... Sure go ahead and insure all the deposit on us banks with no limits then go watch how the fucken usd goes to shit in a scenario like 08.

Also side note i insist that this whole SVB debacle wont change markets it might have accelerated a recession but it sure as shit aint the trigger especially with everyone made whole....
Also banking stocks going to hades means very little.
It s even more ridiculous when you look at SVBs asset and realize that the customers would not have to take more then a 20% haircut any ways... ANd again thats worst case recovery of 95 to 98% seems more realistic. Which btw shows you how fucken good a job the regulators did once they steped in to stop this clown show. Yet all i hear is Vcs bashing regulators and the fed for bailing them out of their own fucken mess. Good thing is that if some of the banking assets as in the private bank and so on can be sold i would not be to surprised if the state ends up making a small profit on this whole cluster fuck...

Just super pissed that we have so called Genius billionairs out there crying for a new banking system cause they almost had to take a hair cut GTFO.

Also all the banks involved had terrible risk mgm and or hugely concentrated bets on extremely risky sectors (crypto/VCs) pair that with essentialy no risk management and boom this is the outcome. Ofcourse with CS it really is just gross incompetence and greed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

Pimpin

I'm better than Icardi
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
17,102
Likes
1,313
Favorite Player
22IcardiBroHand
Old username
DomesticatedPimp
10 years of FIF
If anything, the problem is not enough regulation.
I agree with adrossi tbh.

Making everyone "whole" regardless of losses is not even capitalism anymore, i dont give a fuck let it fucking burn.

The boomers are the largest voting body so everyone panders to their fucking idiotic wishes. Reason why they've accumulated this amount of wealth is that regardless of how much they fuck up you can't have a switch in wealthy stratas.

Like it or not, creative destruction and destruction in general is the great leveler. With everything "safe" we are just kicking the risk further down the road and it's getting incredibly worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

brehme1989

La Grande Inter
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
34,847
Likes
17,814
10 years of FIF
Nostradamus
Most Passionate Member
I agree with adrossi tbh.

Making everyone "whole" regardless of losses is not even capitalism anymore, i dont give a fuck let it fucking burn.

The boomers are the largest voting body so everyone panders to their fucking idiotic wishes. Reason why they've accumulated this amount of wealth is that regardless of how much they fuck up you can't have a switch in wealthy stratas.

Like it or not, creative destruction and destruction in general is the great leveler. With everything "safe" we are just kicking the risk further down the road and it's getting incredibly worse.

I don't necessarily disagree but in practice what happens when these cavalier banking institutions end up in a shithole? We live in a world where the government (anywhere) treats a commercial/retail bank as a branch of its institution and must protect it at all costs. That's fucked up, I'm the first to call it.

But at the same time, you have to protect the schmucks who believe the bankers' fairytales. Since governments and banks are BFE - and to an extent the banking system is their legal mafia branch - they have to come up with rules for themselves, in order to keep playing around by portraying themselves as the guardians of the average civilian.
And since the governments will bail out these banks "for the better good", even worse.

So in this environment, yes, I want more regulation.

If you ask me if I want a revolution where the system is upended to a degree, then I'm all for a wild wild West kind of financial system. But I cannot support it with these players and in this game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

Pimpin

I'm better than Icardi
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
17,102
Likes
1,313
Favorite Player
22IcardiBroHand
Old username
DomesticatedPimp
10 years of FIF
I don't necessarily disagree but in practice what happens when these cavalier banking institutions end up in a shithole? We live in a world where the government (anywhere) treats a commercial/retail bank as a branch of its institution and must protect it at all costs. That's fucked up, I'm the first to call it.

But at the same time, you have to protect the schmucks who believe the bankers' fairytales. Since governments and banks are BFE - and to an extent the banking system is their legal mafia branch - they have to come up with rules for themselves, in order to keep playing around by portraying themselves as the guardians of the average civilian.
And since the governments will bail out these banks "for the better good", even worse.

So in this environment, yes, I want more regulation.

If you ask me if I want a revolution where the system is upended to a degree, then I'm all for a wild wild West kind of financial system. But I cannot support it with these players and in this game.

I am not going all anarcho capitalist, but you can't argue that bailing out businesses regardless of what comes their way will help us long term. Whole west is an aggregation of fucking overlevered zombies protecting old people. Look at everything they do is for these fucking boomers.

this is a good article:



The writer is a former chair of the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and a senior fellow at the Center for Financial Stability

Preventing “systemic risk” was repeatedly used as a rationale for bailing out Wall Street during the 2008 financial crisis. The 2010 Dodd-Frank Act was supposed to have fixed all of that by strengthening regulation and banning government bailouts. Yet, banking regulators have now decided that the failure of two midsized banks, Silicon Valley Bank and Signature, pose systemic risk, requiring the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to pay off their uninsured depositors. At combined assets of $300bn, these two banks represent a minuscule part of the US’s $23tn banking system. Is that system really so fragile that it can’t absorb some small haircut on these banks’ uninsured deposits? If it is as safe and resilient as we’ve been constantly assured by the government, then the regulators’ move sets dangerous expectations for future bailouts. The uninsured depositors of SVB are not a needy group.

They are a “who’s who” of leading venture capitalists and their portfolio companies. Financially sophisticated, they apparently missed those prominent disclosures on the bank’s websites and teller windows that FDIC insurance is capped at $250,000. Some start-ups that banked at SVB argued they needed their uninsured deposits to make payroll. But under the FDIC’s normal procedures, they should have received a sizeable dividend this week to help with their cash flow needs. Signature Bank’s uninsured depositors similarly would have probably achieved significant recoveries. Both banks have good assets for the FDIC to sell. They were victims of rapid deposit withdrawals, not dodgy loans or speculative investments. A systemic risk determination involves supermajority approvals by the FDIC board, Federal Reserve board and the secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the president. It is meant to be used only in extraordinary circumstances. If regulators had evidence that uninsured bank runs would be widespread absent these bailouts, then a “systemic” determination might be justified. But if that is the case, it would make more sense to temporarily backstop all uninsured accounts and charge banks a fee to cover losses.


When I chaired the FDIC during the financial crisis, we instituted such a programme for uninsured transaction accounts used by institutions for payroll and other operating expenses. We did this to protect community banks who were losing uninsured business customers to banking giants such as JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo. The programme was successful in ending runs on community banks. But despite its success, Congress decided to ban this kind of even-handed help to all banks (even while preserving regulators’ ability to do one-off bailouts through systemic risk exceptions). But Congress did provide for a streamlined procedure to approve such a programme, which regulators should now pursue if they truly have reason to fear widespread runs. Otherwise, regulators will have to pick and choose who they want to help. If there are more failures, who are they going to bail out next? Anyone over $100bn? What about community banks? If they create a perception that $100bn is the new “systemic” cut-off, uninsured deposits will surely flee community banks for those in the $100bn club. And to add insult to injury for the smaller banks, by statute they will have to pay special assessments for costs associated with covering uninsured depositors at their larger brethren.

The bigger problem is the Fed’s too rapid unwinding of 14 years of lax monetary policy. When rates rise, the market value of financial assets fall, and banks hold a lot of financial assets. The Fed needs to hit pause on further rate rises to provide time to assess their impact on the financial system. Regulators need to review all banks’ capital capacity to withstand market losses on their securities portfolios if forced to sell them before maturity. Regulators also need to rethink treating government securities as basically risk-free under capital and liquidity rules. When rates rise, they are anything but. The mere fact that regulators designated two midsized banks as systemic implies they think the system is fragile. My instinct tells me that most regional and community banks are basically sound. The main thing we have to fear is fear itself cascading into bank runs that will force otherwise healthy banks to collapse. The government needs to be very careful in its communication, lest its own overreaction causes the very deposit runs it wants to avoid.
 

Conan the Barbarian

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
1,037
Likes
1,009
Favorite Player
L.Matthäus
"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank.
Give a man a bank and he can rob the world."
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

Adriano@10

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
9,631
Likes
2,572
Favorite Player
Oba
10 years of FIF
I agree with adrossi tbh.

Making everyone "whole" regardless of losses is not even capitalism anymore, i dont give a fuck let it fucking burn.

The boomers are the largest voting body so everyone panders to their fucking idiotic wishes. Reason why they've accumulated this amount of wealth is that regardless of how much they fuck up you can't have a switch in wealthy stratas.

Like it or not, creative destruction and destruction in general is the great leveler. With everything "safe" we are just kicking the risk further down the road and it's getting incredibly worse.
Wait thats not what adrossi is is saying though... OR thats not how i understand it... He s blaming regulators for creation of this shit show when it 100% is on mgm and their customer base which arguably again is on mgm you knew you had a huuuge concentration in cash burning STartups......

I m fully with you we should have let em burn as i said before the max haircutt would have been fucken 20% for a bunch of billionairs and millionairs who if they acted sane could have avoided the whole thing....

The fucke problem is that "economists" and VC geniuses and Investors like Billy boy spent all weekend on Social media try to stoke up a bank run in all of the US...
Now if that happens regulators would have been fucked cause no way they could bail out everybody and the system would have suffered a huuuge loss of trust. Regulators had to come out strong and make sure that that shit does not happen.

Also them insisting on tax payers not having to pay for this would suggest that they think they can recoup more than 100% of deposits... ANd honestly i do think thats possible....

Thing that would piss me off is if these fucers now get their way and get the fed to pivot that would be a fucken desaster in the making. Fuck riskmgm cause the Feds will bail you out also lets go back to free money and keep on blowing up that bubble seems fucken insane.

Also i just dont see how people can blame regulators wtf should the fed have done simply not raise rates when inflation was at 10% cause fuck the small guy we have to protect VCs and shit COs?
Truly mind blowing also i lost the last shred of respect i had for all these fucken VCs all financially illiterate all assholes all me first and very obviously all only libertarian when the state does not help em.
How much i would love it if there was a penalty for fucken trying to start a bankrun
 

Pimpin

I'm better than Icardi
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
17,102
Likes
1,313
Favorite Player
22IcardiBroHand
Old username
DomesticatedPimp
10 years of FIF
Thing that would piss me off is if these fucers now get their way and get the fed to pivot that would be a fucken desaster in the making. Fuck riskmgm cause the Feds will bail you out also lets go back to free money and keep on blowing up that bubble seems fucken insane.

yes this so much this. Also I agreed with ADrossi in that more regulation is not the answer.. but yes im quite anxious to see how many banks are sitting on unrealised lossess.

Credit suisse seems to be in full meltdown mode.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

Adriano@10

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
9,631
Likes
2,572
Favorite Player
Oba
10 years of FIF
yes this so much this. Also I agreed with ADrossi in that more regulation is not the answer.. but yes im quite anxious to see how many banks are sitting on unrealised lossess.

Credit suisse seems to be in full meltdown mode.
Well they all are sitting on unrealized losses hard not too... But again that is not an issue in the absence of a bank run...

Cs man the poster child for what happens when a bank says risk mgm? MEh fuck it....
I do not understand why the Fuck the saudis came out today and said what they said... like we all knew they were limited by regulations to increase their ownership why the fuck come out and state it publicly?

Anyways I m still not worried by CS and i fucken bank with them, worst case SNB stepps in and saves em.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

Pimpin

I'm better than Icardi
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
17,102
Likes
1,313
Favorite Player
22IcardiBroHand
Old username
DomesticatedPimp
10 years of FIF
Well they all are sitting on unrealized losses hard not too... But again that is not an issue in the absence of a bank run...

Cs man the poster child for what happens when a bank says risk mgm? MEh fuck it....
I do not understand why the Fuck the saudis came out today and said what they said... like we all knew they were limited by regulations to increase their ownership why the fuck come out and state it publicly?

Anyways I m still not worried by CS and i fucken bank with them, worst case SNB stepps in and saves em.
SNB ruled out bailing them.

Also the Saudi chairman was asked and said we won't provide more because of x y z reasons oone of them being regulatory. Idk why ud be mad at that lol

i have 20 % of the portfolio in US treasuries now
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

brehme1989

La Grande Inter
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
34,847
Likes
17,814
10 years of FIF
Nostradamus
Most Passionate Member
This Credit Suisse thing is driving me nuts
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

Adriano@10

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
9,631
Likes
2,572
Favorite Player
Oba
10 years of FIF
SNB ruled out bailing them.

Also the Saudi chairman was asked and said we won't provide more because of x y z reasons oone of them being regulatory. Idk why ud be mad at that lol

i have 20 % of the portfolio in US treasuries now
Not mad but we all knew they could not provide any additional funding by buying equity why go out of your way to state it again...
SNB aint gonna rescue their IB and their WM outside of Switzerland... THE SNB and the swiss state are very much gonna bail out CS cause they are TBTF for Switzerland. There is no way they let the swiss retail part of CS fail matter of fact swiss banking regulations are designed so that the international non retail part of the bank can fail without affecting Retail, ofcourse this would be the first time that this is actually put to the test.

My point here being that the people who are talking the loudest about these things seem to be mainly interested in stoking fear.... Again this is nothing like 07/08 yes bank share are falling hard but who the fuck cares? In 07 the fucken entire system came to a grinding halt cause everybody was holding the same toxic BS on their balance sheet. Not remotely similar to what is happening now. All i see is fear porn when it coms to banks ATM.
Like how come i m more relaxed about this situation than some talking head on CNBC?

Like i m very tempted to buy UBS for example...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: MVD

Adriano@10

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
9,631
Likes
2,572
Favorite Player
Oba
10 years of FIF
LOL Axel lehman is in Saudi throwing shade at SVB and US regulations you cannot make this shit up. Maybe not the fucken time to do this Axel....
He s theoretically right that what happened to SVB cannot happen to credit suisse as they are regulatory not allowed to do the shit that SVB did...
Does not mean they cannot go but do to non existent risk mgm...
Still found this very funny and axel usually is a rather quiet guy....
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVD
Top