We're experiencing the logical conclusion of a culture of failing upward.

Eventually nobody at the top knows what the fuck they are doing.

….so?

The problem though is that their portfolio seems to only have been long term T bills. They didnt have adequate amounts of short term And medium term T bills to protect against a run

That's still being greedy. Long term T bills have a higher return than short and medium term bills. Had they not had a run, they'd have been fine.

>The California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation

Laugh? Cry?

For detecting, not committing. Sheesh.

the first decade of training is just cooking rice. You have to rinse it, put it into the big rice machine, and press the "on" button. But theres so much more to it than that.

What do you expect from a Fox News source? This is their bread and butter, deceptive reporting.

Look at the source, it's fox. Not even worth a click. The whole thread should just be deleted

...and people are missing the connotations of a bank going under just after their previous incumbent of the role left their position.

It’s because she is an idiot hired to be there

Is this the poophole loophole I’ve heard about?

The job listing existing is less interesting than posting it just before closing, IMHO. The latter implies the previous person filling that job was no longer willing and/or able to do it, which begs the question "why not?".

If they found a better job (leaving the sinking ship?) or left for unrelated reasons then whatever, fair enough.
If they felt their employer wasn't taking financial crimes seriously enough despite their best efforts, on the other hand...

agreed, he epitomizes everything he hates about reddit. And he seems to want to respond to every comment, usually in a prett dickish way.

The problem is bonds are used as a hedge when the other markets turn to shit. They're a lot less valuable when inflation is high.

They have low interest rates but since governments, especially the US government (as long as the debt ceiling fuckery gets resolved), are very reliable debtors so there's almost no risk in getting paid back. Because the interest is a set amount over time; if you want to liquidate them quickly you'd need to sell them lower than whatever the remaining interest is. Profit margins are razor thin at the best of times.

Right now high inflation means the bond markets are crappy in general. So the SVB bonds were sold at a steep loss.

not just ITT but throughout reddit and beyond

also not just financial services, but everything to do with money

lolno, they gambled everything on interest rates staying low (despite everyone and their dog talking about the obvious inflation trend) instead of doing the actually risk averse thing and hedging

ridiculous take bro, banks don't go bust because they're risk averse. smh at your ironic edgy take at the end too

Does a US bank even need to be issuing credit cards to need to do that these days? Regulations in other western countries for SVB's business clients and transfers of the size they regularly see would require a sizeable fraud department.

[deleted]

> Problem with SVB was that they were too cautious.

absolutely wild take lol can I have some of what you're having?

from Patrick Boyle's video on SVB:

> [...] they basically had no hedges in place at all. To be really clear, this is not just extremely unusual, it is unheard of. All large banks hedge their interest rate risk. They do it because if you don't, you can be wiped out (as we've just seen).

and that's just part of how negligent SVB was

I think you might be right. The old guy hobbling back to his wheelchair gives it away. But perhaps it's just Florida.

And?

I love how sanctimonious and all knowing you are, on reddit.

Its as if you don't realize at all that you're doing exactly what you're condescending all the other redditors about. There's a word for that you know.

This is an idiotic "article". Essentially all financial firms are going to have financial crimes staff in order to comply with their legal obligations around anti-money laundering, fraud prevention, and sanctions compliance. An EDD manager like the one that the article talks about is needed because banks are literally legally mandated to have due diligence processes to comply with anti-money laundering laws.

It would be a huge issue if SVB didn't have financial crimes staff.

Not to mention that at least as of now, we don't have reason to believe that SVB's collapse was in any way criminal. Poor portfolio risk management could be negligent, but there's a legal threshold to cross before it would be considered criminally negligent. Regardless, a financial crimes team has nothing to do with financial risk management of the sort that brought down SVB; that would be the financial risk management team.

I give this 3-1 odds of being a Sacha Baron Cohen-type thing.

Sure, for things like vehicular manslaughter... not when a bank fails because of a run after their bonds lost value...