回复 78楼shuiyaa的帖子 这脑路有点新奇。 以为是正常的溢价收购呢。 即便有买家，那价格也基本按快破产价收的， 作为一个前例，以前东部有个银行叫 Wachovia, 2008 年活不下去了， 有2个买家， Citi 出价 $1 一股， Wells Fargo 出了2次价，后面一次好点被接受了， 按照 0.19 股 Wells Fargo 价当时大约6-7刀每股，但是不久 Wells Fargo 自己股价也跌倒 7刀， 想想原 Wachovia 还剩多少 “If you had bought (Wachovia) stock at $38.03 per share (book value) on Dec. 31, 2007, when it was trading at a fraction of estimated value ($61 a share, according to Morningstar), with a huge dividend yield and a low price-to-earnings ratio, you would have ultimately walked away with only 18 to 20 cents on the dollar following the Wells Fargo merger,” Kennon said.
回复 2楼strawberrykiwi的帖子 https://www.ft.com/content/0387e331-61b4-4848-9e50-04775b4c3fa7 California institution that serves start-up scene under scrutiny over investments that have left it with unrealised $15bn loss 賠了150億不報，帳
2008年，bank of America明明是被政府求着收购countrywide，收购价才20多亿美元。但之后却被逼着前后支付了高达500多亿美元的各种相关赔款，简直就是吐血 现在还有大银行敢收购么？不怕被各路人马活活告死？
Namama 发表于 2023-03-11 14:00
bank of America 收购countrywide 绝对是当了冤大头了。 现在 SVB 已无可能继续独立运营，后面命运大约只剩两种： 一种是类似于以前的 Wachovia， 有出价的但不是雪中送炭的，是搞清楚资产负债后出个乘火打劫价的，否则自己的股东也不会同意； 2就是 Washington Mutual 那样的， FDIC 打包极低价卖给另一银行接收。
部分大佬周6呼吁政府出手，也有讽刺地说“你们天天喊自由市场这时候想起来政府和社会主义？” IMO，政府有责任义务保证储户的钱得到兑现，至于股民啥的那管不了了市场说什么价就是什么价。 TECH Investors implore the government to step in after Silicon Valley Bank failure Big names in Silicon Valley and the finance sector are calling publicly for the federal government to push another bank to assume Silicon Valley Bank’s assets and obligations after the financial institution failed on Friday. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) will cover up to $250,000 per depositor and may be able to begin paying those depositors as early as Monday. But the vast majority of SVB’s customers were businesses that had more than that on deposit at the bank. As of December, more than 95% of the bank’s deposits were uninsured, according to regulatory filings. Many of these depositors are startups, and many are concerned that they will not be able to make payroll this month, which in turn could spark a wide wave of failures and layoffs in the tech industry. Venture capitalist and former tech CEO David Sacks called for the federal government to push another bank to buy SVB’s assets, writing on Twitter, “Where is Powell? Where is Yellen? Stop this crisis NOW. Announce that all depositors will be safe. Place SVB with a Top 4 bank. Do this before Monday open or there will be contagion and the crisis will spread.” VC Mark Suster agreed, tweeting, “I suspect this is what they’re working on. I expect statements by Sunday. We’ll see. I sure hope so or Monday will be brutal.” Investor Bill Ackman made a similar argument in a lengthy tweet, writing, “The gov’t has about 48 hours to fix a-soon-to-be-irreversible mistake. By allowing @SVB_Financial to fail without protecting all depositors, the world has woken up to what an uninsured deposit is — an unsecured illiquid claim on a failed bank. Absent @jpmorgan @citi or @BankofAmerica acquiring SVB before the open on Monday, a prospect I believe to be unlikely, or the gov’t guaranteeing all of SVB’s deposits, the giant sucking sound you will hear will be the withdrawal of substantially all uninsured deposits from all but the ‘systemically important banks’ (SIBs).” Benchmark partner Eric Vishria wrote, “If SVB depositors aren’t made whole, then corporate boards will have to insist their companies use two or more of the BIG four banks exclusively. Which will crush smaller banks. AND make the too big to fail problem way worse.” Observers are calling out the irony as some VCs with notoriously libertarian free-market attitudes are are now calling for a bailout. For instance, reactions to Sacks’ tweet included statements like “Excuse me, sir. Suddenly the government is the answer?!?” and “We capitalists want socialism!” Some politicians opposed any bailout, with Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., tweeting, “If there is an effort to use taxpayer money to bail out Silicon Valley Bank, the American people can count on the fact that I will be there leading the fight against it.” But financier and former Trump communications director Anthony Scaramucci argued, “It isn’t a political decision to bailout SVB. Don’t make the Lehman mistake. It isn’t about rich or poor of who benefits, it’s about stopping contagion and protecting the system. Make depositors whole or expect lots of tragic unintended consequences.”
诶，一批人分不清blackeock 和black stone
其实之前start up确实很热，但是不至于到过热的地步。某些领域可能是吧，但是大多数还是挺好的。 最主要的是有才华的年轻人愿意加入start up，甚至found start up，这是push科技和发展的原动力
这脑路有点新奇。 以为是正常的溢价收购呢。 即便有买家，那价格也基本按快破产价收的， 作为一个前例，以前东部有个银行叫 Wachovia, 2008 年活不下去了， 有2个买家， Citi 出价 $1 一股， Wells Fargo 出了2次价，后面一次好点被接受了， 按照 0.19 股 Wells Fargo 价当时大约6-7刀每股，但是不久 Wells Fargo 自己股价也跌倒 7刀， 想想原 Wachovia 还剩多少
“If you had bought (Wachovia) stock at $38.03 per share (book value) on Dec. 31, 2007, when it was trading at a fraction of estimated value ($61 a share, according to Morningstar), with a huge dividend yield and a low price-to-earnings ratio, you would have ultimately walked away with only 18 to 20 cents on the dollar following the Wells Fargo merger,” Kennon said.
别担太多心。每一次危机后就是膨胀的机会。 2007年后iphone诞生开启mobile internet时代，极大促进大家效率。你现在回头看看拿着老手机的样子多老，干事有多慢，事情有多不方便。 2023年后人工智能会开启另一个时代，你的小孩生活的时代有多炫你都想象不到。 不要低估时间的力量。16年可以沧海变桑田。
一个是一手优质资产，缺流动性，一个是资不抵债，一首坏账。 这都看不出区别，就别脑回路了
LOL 你都不知道你在说什么。
银行手里拿的是抵押贷款的抵押物，不是什么债券。此处的抵押物就是各start up的非流通股。
另外，你说的债券不存在上市完全是文盲说法。债券当然也有 listed vs not listed，这你都不知道，就敢来评论金融？
脑筋急转弯能力真让人佩服，这二回事也能扯上关系
没错！👍 就是这样！问题是川普脑子不清楚（谁知道他是不是故意的）有些民众脑子也跟着不清楚！
醒醒吧，天天打压挤怼人家，还希望人家买帐? 做梦吧，还以为是人傻钱多的08年啊
fed升息其实就是和地方抢钱，地方债到期成本太高没法renew，town或者city就要破产了
打包被其他银行吃掉，换个牌子继续工作。倒闭的银行的员工，少数人需要找工作。人数应该不多。
话虽如此，但中国也没办法，中美已然绑在一起了！究竟中国有那么多人要生存。
这🆔每天靠骂川普才能活下去，基本上只要社会上有个问题必须是川普的错，都看腻了，一点新意都没有
不是我天天骂川普，这局面明明就是川普造成的，为什么有些人就是非要选择视而不见，然后胡乱去找其他原因？我为什么骂川普？因为他又要回来了！
鸡蛋涨价跟贸易战有啥关系？
你是不是整天只看大妓院？
什么抵押贷款的抵押物，SVB不就是贷款发不出去才买了一堆MBS么？
还扯啥上市不上市，扯啥不上市所以抛售对市场没影响，真是无力吐槽
真的，这都哪来的金融白痴
中国早就把钱花到其它地区了，中东东南亚非洲和南美，中国都有货币互换，这次没必要急吼吼的冲进来救场
和美国二战一样，等世界一片废墟，再进来摘桃子，来一波中国版的马歇尔计划不要太容易
金融市场崩溃的直接表现就是美元信用破产，这对人民币是利好，看不出中国为什么要重复08年的救场
哈哈😄😂😂 谁说鸡蛋涨价和川普有关了？鸡蛋涨价和禽流感有关，你这是把驴头硬要接到马脖子上啊！
老老实实找到的上班的厂，也是别人创业做出来的啊。
还好我前晚上把买voo的单撤了
这已经很多了好不好
恢复？股票不是清零的吗？
已经放弃股权融资了，说明没有大佬愿意救火。
2008年，bank of America明明是被政府求着收购countrywide，收购价才20多亿美元。但之后却被逼着前后支付了高达500多亿美元的各种相关赔款，简直就是吐血
现在还有大银行敢收购么？不怕被各路人马活活告死？
https://www.ft.com/content/0387e331-61b4-4848-9e50-04775b4c3fa7 California institution that serves start-up scene under scrutiny over investments that have left it with unrealised $15bn loss 賠了150億不報，帳
美联储极速大幅加息，峰值过高，会对经济造成巨大伤害。
bank of America 收购countrywide 绝对是当了冤大头了。
现在 SVB 已无可能继续独立运营，后面命运大约只剩两种： 一种是类似于以前的 Wachovia， 有出价的但不是雪中送炭的，是搞清楚资产负债后出个乘火打劫价的，否则自己的股东也不会同意； 2就是 Washington Mutual 那样的， FDIC 打包极低价卖给另一银行接收。
+1
现在sp 500还比疫情前最高点还高20%
“这局面”？美帝现在情况非常好。正常的经济环境新陈代谢而已。有人冒险失败，有人抄底赚翻。 谁做总统都有公司挣钱，有公司倒闭。
天天发生。你从来不网购，才觉得奇怪。
自从有了互联网我就开始网购了，回到零六年，先是是从当当网购书，美国网站购军品，服装，谁说我不网购了？还真没有遇到过放进购物车被人家给掏出去的。
为什么这么有先见之明？
内部有消息的 澳洲很多公司都提前转出来了
什么叫有才华？现在start up好多其实和圈钱没什么区别，不爆就不知道而已。 ftx算是成功的start up吗？
TECH Investors implore the government to step in after Silicon Valley Bank failure
Big names in Silicon Valley and the finance sector are calling publicly for the federal government to push another bank to assume Silicon Valley Bank’s assets and obligations after the financial institution failed on Friday.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) will cover up to $250,000 per depositor and may be able to begin paying those depositors as early as Monday.
But the vast majority of SVB’s customers were businesses that had more than that on deposit at the bank. As of December, more than 95% of the bank’s deposits were uninsured, according to regulatory filings. Many of these depositors are startups, and many are concerned that they will not be able to make payroll this month, which in turn could spark a wide wave of failures and layoffs in the tech industry.
Venture capitalist and former tech CEO David Sacks called for the federal government to push another bank to buy SVB’s assets, writing on Twitter, “Where is Powell? Where is Yellen? Stop this crisis NOW. Announce that all depositors will be safe. Place SVB with a Top 4 bank. Do this before Monday open or there will be contagion and the crisis will spread.”
VC Mark Suster agreed, tweeting, “I suspect this is what they’re working on. I expect statements by Sunday. We’ll see. I sure hope so or Monday will be brutal.”
Investor Bill Ackman made a similar argument in a lengthy tweet, writing, “The gov’t has about 48 hours to fix a-soon-to-be-irreversible mistake. By allowing @SVB_Financial to fail without protecting all depositors, the world has woken up to what an uninsured deposit is — an unsecured illiquid claim on a failed bank. Absent @jpmorgan @citi or @BankofAmerica acquiring SVB before the open on Monday, a prospect I believe to be unlikely, or the gov’t guaranteeing all of SVB’s deposits, the giant sucking sound you will hear will be the withdrawal of substantially all uninsured deposits from all but the ‘systemically important banks’ (SIBs).”
Benchmark partner Eric Vishria wrote, “If SVB depositors aren’t made whole, then corporate boards will have to insist their companies use two or more of the BIG four banks exclusively. Which will crush smaller banks. AND make the too big to fail problem way worse.”
Observers are calling out the irony as some VCs with notoriously libertarian free-market attitudes are are now calling for a bailout. For instance, reactions to Sacks’ tweet included statements like “Excuse me, sir. Suddenly the government is the answer?!?” and “We capitalists want socialism!”
Some politicians opposed any bailout, with Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., tweeting, “If there is an effort to use taxpayer money to bail out Silicon Valley Bank, the American people can count on the fact that I will be there leading the fight against it.”
But financier and former Trump communications director Anthony Scaramucci argued, “It isn’t a political decision to bailout SVB. Don’t make the Lehman mistake. It isn’t about rich or poor of who benefits, it’s about stopping contagion and protecting the system. Make depositors whole or expect lots of tragic unintended consequences.”
你看看，鲍威尔巴不得多死几个公司，失业率赶紧上去，他好交差呢……
的确是阴谋论……就虚拟币里那点钱够干嘛用的，整个市值还不到一万亿，还都是往大了吹的，实际上根本不值这些钱。
把中国当最大的敌人看待，还指望中国帮忙，脑子病得不轻，中国这个时候不落井下石就不错了
或许是没货了？
这银行感情是中方控股的，肉眼可见坑的都是美国人。
谢谢
年内开始减息就是饮鸩止渴，现在就是在为之前这么干付出代价，继续这样以后总有一次超大的危机
即便这样通胀也不会下来。这波操作是供应链问题，俄罗斯乌克兰战争，中美脱钩。不是经济过热
不会，房贷会被打包卖掉。
这不公平啊，人家的存款不给人家了，欠款还照追？如果在破产前把贷款卖给其他银行，这应该就是破产前兆。