Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

$250,000 will be available initially, which is doable for payroll of up to 15 to 25 people for one month, generally if you're a startup.

FDIC website indicates remediation time in the months-to-years. This is the concern.



You ignore the next sentence:

> The FDIC will pay uninsured depositors an advance dividend within the next week.

This will likely be a substantial fraction of the uninsured deposits. Take a look at the FDIC website.

https://closedbanks.fdic.gov/dividends/

Pick a bank, say, "IRWIN UNION BANK & TRUST CO". The first dividend was almost 47% of the uninsured amount, and anoth 25% or so over a decade.

The failure of SVB as reported is not nearly as bad.


Why did YC encourage startups to put their eggs in one basket?


Or not encourage them to have multiple bank accounts so that deposits are fully FDIC insured?

In effect, it encourages concentrating deposits in a single bank. Benefits the bank, does not benefit the depositor.


What's weird is that you can insure an account for more than that, it's just not free.

So if you had "substantially more" than that, you should be financially savvy enough to insure your accounts and pay for the insurance on them as a cost of doing business.

That's why we insure anything - in case something happens.


I found no information on how to do this with a cursory Google search. What comes up are other stratgies, like multiple bank accounts, each at different banks. Or instruments like certificates of deposit, which aren't suitable for payroll.

So if banks offer more insurance for a fee, I can't easily tell how to do this. My business banking account has nothing about such a feature, either online search or looking at the fees schedule.

I'd consider this obscure, even esoteric information. But I'd expect a CFO should know this. And I'd expect a venture capital fund would have an info sheet on avoiding consolidating deposits in a bank, given the 2008 experience. And yet... nothing.


Yep. I find it funny - though I feel bad for the small businesses that may have been oblivious - that a VC CEO is complaining when he effortlessly could have hired a financial consultant for a day to look into the first bank he encouraged his customers to use. A regional bank that had an obvious and alarming reputation of being the only place in town that would make high-risk loans to high-risk ventures. If anyone outside SVB was in the responsible position to avoid this situation, it was this CEO, and I’d suggest - if he truly believes in maintaining innovation and having those responsible suffering the consequences - that he personally go first in making his companies whole, rather than the taxpayer.


This is an example: https://www.difxs.com/DIF/Home.aspx

But I think it's not common because there are other treasury management strategies besides "keep all your eggs in one pure-cash basket".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: