Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The Mainboard' started by Menelaus, Mar 10, 2023.
8.87 now. Nice trade
this has paid off very handsomely
You took advantage of panicked pre market traders
No, sorry, it's because they were woke.
people in silicon valley really dont get how much the rest of the country despises them
There’s been a lot of crying from them about people laughing at them, they see themselves as heroes not overpaid hacks for creating a “DoorDash for dogs” or some shit and getting way overfunded in a zero interest rate environment just so VCs can show paper gains to their LPs and thus pay themselves handsomely for it.
I've hated everyone out there for a while but never more when they were IPOing tens of companies a year whose entire ethos was to spend $2 to make $1 and by the time anyone was like wow that doesn't work all of the money people would be cashed out.
Well I’m shocked
99% of that industry is entirely made up bullshit. Let it burn. I can't believe we're going to have to abort our inflation plan (raising rates) to cater to these dumb fucks.
Whilst this has thrown a spanner in the works, I find it hard to believe that they won’t go at the previously indicated level. You can’t go from suggesting a double rise to none in a week.
did something happen?
what's the 1%?
Nobody went to jail in 2008 - ain’t nobody going now either (even though the only way this will ever come close to stopping is putting people in jail).
With that said, these are executives should be bankrupted as a result of forfeiting assets to cover legal costs and depositor losses, and they should never be able to work in any regulated financial industry again.
If 5-10 people at a random mid size bank can imperil the US financial system within 48 hours, their actions should be subject to criminal liability.
Market disagrees pretty strongly with you on that.
So as a complete layperson, am I correct in understanding that at this moment, all of this chaos is purely driven by finance bros' untreated anxiety?
Peter Thiel, specifically
Everyone who watches this for a living disagrees with you. we will see soon
yes yes we know the fucking answer
i mean this bank isn't getting bailed out. they're all going to be unemployed and all of their stock/equity is worthless.
Raising rates until something breaks seems like it was always the plan.
i don't think they should raise or lower rates this month tbh. seems like the plan was to raise .25 in december and .25 in january and then chill for awhile. just do that.
Not helpful to call guaranteeing depositors their money a bailout. Cheapens (and confuses the public) the shittiness of bailouts when they actually happen.
Yeah tbh I agree with everything that’s happening. Guaranteeing deposits and wiping out equity seems to be the right move to me. I would like to see the executives and board members personally liable but doubt that ever happens. Until these fucks can be sent to prison or have all of their assets seized then nothing will happen. Have a feeling a lot of lawyers going to get rich off this though so that’s something we can all agree is good
The only thing I wish would happen is just stop pretending that there's any amount that won't be FDIC insured in the event of bank failure. Rewrite the policy to make it unlimited for FDIC insured banks.
edit: whoops. turns out the FDIC limit has already outpaced ordinary inflation adjustment.
it really doesn't work for big companies though. like should roku get fucked because their payroll is massive?
I vote for a 2% rate drop. Let's do that asap.
To the moon!!! As someone buying a home in the next year, that would be a welcome adjustment
I saw GS said that but JPM disagreed? That was at the outset of the day though.
I do think it’s wild that policy could shift on something so (apparently) focused on a couple of institutions.
Im no expert.
My "I'm not saying 12 white men would have avoided this mess" WSJ Op-Ed has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my WSJ Op-Ed.
If they’re not properly managing risk in accordance with legislation and regulations yes. But I think we all know that 250k isn’t a hard cap
Don’t know why he’s so worried he’s got overloaded IRAs with stocks that costed a fraction of a penny.
they should manage risk how exactly? their money was in a checking account.
Roku had 25% or so with SVB. Themselves and other large corporates are bad examples. It’s the smaller ones without a treasury function that is the issue.
The startup from 500k to ~20M top line does not have a CFO and can’t afford one. Likely outsourcing accounting with an AR/AP person. Probably a controller towards the higher end of that range
No excuse for Roku really
If Roku wants to pay me a CFO salary I’ll look into answering this
pretty much what i thought.
WSJ now just saying the quiet parts out loud my god
“Go woke, go broke” - WSJ
I wonder if the guy who wrote that column thought the women's menstrual cycles cause hormonal issues that make them bad with money.
You thought what? That I’m unqualified to manage Roku’s risks and financial decisions but that I also would not care if the company lost money due to poor risk management
It’s poor risk management to have money in a checking account?
If you’re a CFO of a major corporation there is a risk assessment involved in where you decide to store your capital, whether it be at a credit union or bank, or in a checking account or sweep acct. There are ways to manage this and if Roku disappeared because of this I would not care at all
Roku needs to die solely based on the fascist news programming they stream for free on their devices/app