Jump to content

Brew

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3384
  • Joined

Everything posted by Brew

  1. Our client base has seen no deposit loss as a result. I think people are fleeing the regionals (to your point) to move up to the mega banks, but the smaller sub $1B community banks seem fine.
  2. I’m keeping the ice maker i ordered even if we don’t do anything with the kitchen. Our stand alone is getting old and needs to be replaced so we ordered a sonic ice version to replace it with. The stand alone ice maker comes in extremely handy.
  3. What model/size is the Sub Zero? Have to go back and check, ordered them 18+ months ago. Pretty sure the fridge is the cl4850sd/s and the range is one of the 48” or 60” dual fuels with a Wolf hood.
  4. I have a wolf range and a sub zero fridge/freezer sitting in a warehouse I’ll cut you a deal on. Delays set back kitchen renovations and I’m just not that interested in starting it now, but I have the appliances already. Renovations and additions have been shitty for the last 18 months and I’ve lost interest in another 3 month project that turns into 6.
  5. Sounds like they would make excellent social media users.
  6. Just to be clear, I’m not arguing to take the limits off either. I just think the risk to taking the limits off is more related to depositor side problems it creates not bank side. It’s basically the guy on the depositors shoulder making them pay attention to things and spread their individual risk. Without it, you could see mass consolidation in the banking world because deposit side risk goes away. Inevitably that probably creates the risk you bring up as well. I just think the bank is always going to be limited by the risk to the bank. Ultimately, the system functions now with very limited depositor risk albeit not zero. Most of this will quiet down if the feds return money to investors showing they did not come out of pocket on anything.
  7. They are free to chase the yields now within the constraints of regulations, which have zero to do with FDIC insurance limits per deposit. Again, the motivation to protect the money comes from not killing the golden goose (the bank) not depositor risk of loss in a bank failure in my opinion. They work to protect the bank and maximize the bank’s return, taking off the FDIC limit doesn’t change that equation. I grew up in the bank side of our firm and still deal with banks/bankers regularly as we still work with 60-80 banks. We deal primarily with non publicly traded banks just for the record, so I view banks more from the community bank size (up to $1B) more than the publicly traded side for perspective.
  8. The bank deposits were, but the depositors were not. They were still subject to bank risk and the interest rate float if you scan the app and response. If you read further through the Fed’s response, they had a number of issues with the structure. I may be completely off base here. It wouldn’t be the first time, but with the overlayed regulations in place the guardrails are there already otherwise you would see depositor loss on bank failures.
  9. In a very quick look at it, the Federal Reserve was concerned with a number of issues with the structure that TNB was applying for while also not being an FDIC insured bank. Those deposits would not have been insured at the depositor level.
  10. Walk me through what the bank does differently if deposits are 100% guaranteed? You keep saying it, but what does it look like in practice? Bank A has deposits of $500M, makes loans using those deposits, holds treasuries and other ST investments to make some money on funds not loaned, etc. If that $500M becomes fully guaranteed what is the bank doing differently with those deposits? Riskier loans, riskier investments than treasuries, what? The bank is still exposed to risk of loss, regulatory requirements on capital, funds being moved ant any given time, etc. Do you think they all start rolling the dice and increasing the risk of default to the bank? I don’t see it. I can see where it pushes interest rates higher potentially (which could lead to more risk in the loan portfolio by extension) and causes bank consolidation which may not be positives, but this wholesale shift that covered deposits would creat doesn’t make sense. Deposits are effectively covered now as has been stated numerous times. The timing of access has not been.
  11. Can you walk into a bank where you are and buy insurance products without having to go through their wealth management / private banking people? You can’t where I am. There is a bank side (deposits/loans) and a wealth management side (products/investments) and with larger banks a private client side that bridges the gap.
  12. Edited to say 4 failed bank clients in the last 11 years. Turning into my parents where everything seems like it happened yesterday. There were a few others in the front/middle of the 2008/2009 collapse.
  13. I’m all ears on an explanation of how your first point works, because so far no one else that has made that claim can support it with any sort of explanation. The FDIC limit provides confidence to retail customers which in turn curbs bank runs on bad information. Bank runs are probably one of the lowest volume reasons that banks fail. I can name 4 bank clients that have failed in the last 5 years, runs on deposits weren’t the issues with any of them. I can’t come up with anything a bank does at a higher risk level with depositors balances covered because they still put the bank at risk in any scenario you throw out. What it does is artificially deflate interest rates on bank accounts and probably artificially prop up the sheer number of chartered banks there are. Those both may be positives in reality. I’m also not arguing to perpetually cover deposits, but again in almost every scenario depositors end up whole. The timing is the anomaly here, not the fact depositors get their money back. On your second point, item number one on their list then should be caps of no more than FDIC covered deposits. How many bankers do you know that operate that way? Also, where do you live that bankers require licensing? If they aren’t selling investment products or in mortgage lending, I don’t know of any licensing needed.
  14. Do you think bankers currently operate under the moral incentive to guard depositor’s money? How many bankers will gladly take your deposits in excess of $250k? One of the local banks here is advertising 4.75% on up to $10M in deposits. Isn’t that by definition not operating with the incentive to guard your deposit risk? They should cap you at $250k and send you elsewhere. Again, I can’t get my head around it. This was an investment risk failure plain and simple. The bank held large deposits with no offsetting loans for front end capitalized entities and made longer terms bets to generate income on assets classes they shouldn’t have. They should have told the depositors to lock the money up elsewhere until it was going to be needed based on their cash burn rates, but why turn away good money even if we cannot lend it. Banks have to have deposits to make loans to make money. This one had the deposits, but not the loans and decided to play stupid games and won stupid prizes.
  15. It’s been a long weekend so I could be completely missing the obvious here, but why would fully insured deposits impact loan underwriting standards? I can’t think of anything they do that would be dictated by the FDIC coverage outside of it giving them more leverage for deposit concentrations. Right now the average person with excess cash knows to spread it around in banks. That goes away with guaranteed deposit coverage which may actually drive interest rates on deposits up as it would be more competitive and it is artificially held down with the FDIC coverag. I guess that could lead to lowering underwriting standards as they have to take on riskier loans at higher rates to make the spread.
  16. I’m having a hard time coming up with a scenario where it doesn’t make sense for depositors to be made whole. I also can’t think of a scenario where they weren’t eventually made whole although I’m sure they exist. The catch here is the timing and guarantee and the class of assets that have to be dealt with. Generally the FDIC has a buyer in place quickly so timing isn’t usually an issue although I can think of a couple of local banks the regulators operated for quite a while after taking over.
  17. Is it a bailout if there is no real bailout? Again, at the moment we’re talking about timing differences on access to money unless the disposition of the bank assets goes terribly wrong. Idiots are going to call it whatever they want, because they are idiots and looking for clicks on social media. I hate social media, everyone’s inherent need to share their opinions and spew garbage slowly (or maybe not so slowly any more) pushes us closer and closer to the cliff’s edge.
  18. Did that come out of the letters to the editor section?
  19. We do a lot of work in the banking sector and have had bank clients go under. I don’t know that I have seen any where depositors lose money although I’m sure it happens. This isn’t some big anomaly. Banks typically have the asset coverage, it just takes time to convert it to cash. They are covering the timing shortfall by allowing access today, but this is a big bank with a lot of assets to work through the liquidation process on.
  20. Based on your pictures from stopping by the grocery store, the list of things you can’t get your hands on has to be short. Anything out there you know you are interested in? I might be willing to part with my handle of Buffalo Trace I haven’t opened yet.
  21. Are you really this stupid? They give you examples in what you linked if you would just read them. You don’t get $250k per account type. You don’t get multiple CD’s. It is per depositor, per insured bank, for each account ownership category not type. All of the accounts you listed are added together up to $250k per depositor, not $250k per bank account type.
  22. That in no way, shape, or form matches up with what you typed above.
  23. In your example who is the asshole, the bank or the depositors or are they all assholes?
  24. This is not how FDIC insurance works. Maybe you should read up on FDIC insurance.
  25. Looks like we’re sitting on about $100k in ACH’s hung up in this mess. It’s interesting reading through the barrage of emails coming from our processor and making sure to point out it’s not their fault. Dumbasses kept processing into Friday night/Saturday morning instead of immediately blanket shutting the ACH option down when the shit hit the fan. Also, have talked to several clients with $250k CD’s with them.
×
×
  • Create New...