ML retweetledi
ML
215 posts

ML
@mayliao_
My personal opinions, not legal advice.
San Francisco Bay Area Katılım Ocak 2022
126 Takip Edilen25 Takipçiler
ML retweetledi

1. The lawyers from prestigious firm Cooper & Kirk, which has argued numerous cases before multiple Circuit Courts and the United States Supreme Court have issued a white paper describing how federal banking regulators including the @FDICgov have illegally...
English
ML retweetledi

“Signet and SEN were essential,” said Nic Carter, a general partner at crypto-focused Castle Island Ventures. “Now we can expect more stablecoin depegs [and] more choppiness and volatility on exchanges on the weekends.” fortune.com/crypto/2023/03…
English

The Fed is considering easing the terms of banks’ access to its discount window, giving firms a way to turn assets that have lost value into cash without the kind of losses that toppled SVB Financial bloomberg.com/news/articles/… via @markets
English
ML retweetledi
ML retweetledi

Federal Reserve Board - Joint Statement by Treasury, Federal Reserve, and FDIC federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pre…
English
ML retweetledi
ML retweetledi
ML retweetledi
ML retweetledi

Great update from Jeremy. Some tldr (as I see it) and some thoughts (as I think them)
all opinions are mine, Wintermute has exposure to USDC and this is ongoing volatile situation that will continue until banks are open on Monday (and potentially beyond)
Jeremy Allaire - jerallaire.arc@jerallaire
Sharing an Update on USDC and Silicon Valley Bank. circle.com/blog/an-update…
English
ML retweetledi
ML retweetledi

Many people seem to (implicitly) think SVB must have been doing some kind of atypical tech gambling.
But most other banks *also* have unrealized losses. Because, like SVB, they trusted the Fed’s guidance and bought what is marketed as the safest thing you can buy: US Treasurys. And then the Fed devalued those assets with ultrafast rate hikes.
Moreover, this isn’t a small issue — as of Dec 2022 it’s $620B in Fed-caused unrealized losses across multiple banks. The accounting isn’t mark-to-market…but a bank run forces realization of the losses and determines if each bank is actually solvent.
Needless to say, if the take home lesson is don’t trust the Fed, don’t buy Treasuries if you can avoid it, and don’t trust US regulators to protect consumers or stress test banks…well, then, I’d unfortunately have to agree.
But I don’t think that was the intended lesson.




English
ML retweetledi

From a source I trust: @SVB_Financial depositors will get ~50% on Mon/Tues and the balance based on realized value over the next 3-6 months. If this proves true, I expect there will be bank runs beginning Monday am at a large number of non-SIB banks. No company will take even a tiny chance of losing a dollar of deposits as there is no reward for this risk. Absent a systemwide @FDICgov deposit guarantee, more bank runs begin Monday am.
English
ML retweetledi

Hearing rumors that the FDIC is blocking GSIBs from buying SVB on the grounds that it would create too much concentration with our largest banks. If true, they really need to understand that not finding a suitable buyer over the weekend will result in much greater concentration in GSIBs than letting one buy it, and this will happen across industries as businesses and people move balances out of smaller banks in fear the same thing will happen to them. Do the right thing. Protect deposit holders while you still can!
English
ML retweetledi

When you read doom & gloom news, take note of who's talking & their incentive.
If you're a VC w/ money stuck at SVB along w/ your portfolio companies, you have everything to gain and nothing to lose by making loud apocalyptic claims, and leveraging public fear to pressure government into giving bailout.
Reality is SVB is a mid-size bank w/ a $200 bn balance sheet which is just 0.8% of US banking sector.
Irony is by claiming SVB a bigger problem than it actually is, some people are drumming up public panic which will make the issue worse than what it could have been.
English









