Yeah, some think that substantial fraction will be 100%. We'll see!
I don't want to give Circle one cent of bailout money, though. And their post is saying that they are owed a full bailout because they participated in the bank run on the day of the bank run, and also begging for a full bailout. Pretty pathetic.
>And their post is saying that they are owed a full bailout because they participated in the bank run on the day of the bank run, and also begging for a full bailout.
> $3.3bn of USDC’s cash reserves remain with SVB. As of Thursday, we had initiated transfers of these funds to other banking partners. Though these transfers had not yet been settled as of close of business Friday, we remain confident in the FDIC’s management of the SVB situation and stand ready to receive these funds.
The part where they said that because they participated in the bank run that they should keep it all, presumably even if others who didn't participate in the bank run lose some of theirs:
> We have reason to believe that under applicable FDIC policy, transfers initiated prior to a bank entering receivership would have otherwise been processed normally. In other words, the FDIC should allow transactions to settle in the ordinary course through the end of a bank’s standard daily processing cycle until the FDIC takes control of the failed institution.
"transfers initiated prior to a bank entering receivership" is doing a lot of work here.
I don't want to give Circle one cent of bailout money, though. And their post is saying that they are owed a full bailout because they participated in the bank run on the day of the bank run, and also begging for a full bailout. Pretty pathetic.