[betteryet]

They did let the bank fail. The bankers lost any wealth that was tied to ownership of the bank. Of course, a bunch of them sold shares as they saw the end near, but that's something the SEC should prosecute as insider trading.

They're saving customers to a large extent, who could have done more diligence when choosing a bank, you could argue. But they still feel pain going through this process. And not saving them would have worse consequences for the entire system.

[unmole]

> Of course, a bunch of them sold shares as they saw the end near

Insiders file 10b5-1 plans with their brokers well in advance to automate the sale of their stock. It's very unlikely that the sales had anything to do with recent events.

[cypherpunks01]

In this case, 30 days in advance. So it's much more like a transaction delayed by a few weeks, rather than one planned months/years in advance with no knowledge of how stock price will perform in the future.

[542458]

There are lots and lots of ways to use 10b5-1 plans and still trade on insider information, I.e., selective cancellation or trading on longer-term insider info.

[unmole]

In this particular instance, the CEO had ~26 million dollars worth of shares wiped out.

[wiz21c]

> They're saving customers

No, they use taxpayer's money to save taxpayers.

I'm fine with that as soon as we save taxpayer's money and punish those who triggered the accident and replace them by people who are paid by taxpayers money, under direct control of the state.

[astrange]

All banks are under control of the state via bank regulators. And those bank execs just lost their jobs when the banks stopped existing, so you got that.

There is no sensible reason to want the state to own every bank; that means you're accepting a silly amount of risk and not diversifying your investments. What you want is a social wealth fund, not owning a random industry you don't like.

[ndespres]

>> And those bank execs just lost their jobs when the banks stopped existing, so you got that.

SVB’s CFO was previously the CFO at Lehman, so whether he still has his job today seems to have no impact on whether the revolving door will continue to open for him or anyone else there.

[astrange]

Eh, this is just that story about the engineer who makes a big expensive mistake and his boss who refuses to fire him because he just got expensively trained to not do it again.

Although in this case he did do it again.

[jalapenos]

Pain is important. It teaches you to be more careful.

[Lionga]

Oh sweet summer child.

The bankers sold most of the shares before it happened, because they knew it was coming.

[unmole]

Do you know what a Rule 10b5-1 plan is?

[Lionga]

I do, thank you very much!

Just shows that they knew even early SVB was fucked. I meant it was clear SVB was fucked since JPOW raised rates and SVB had dog shit assets on their HTM.

But instead of doing something they kept it afloat until they sold their shares which took about month to let it fail after they cashed out.

[unmole]

> Just shows that they knew even early SVB was fucked.

Right, that is the only reason why an insider would ever sell stock.

Here's the CEO's latest Form 4: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/719739/0001562180230...

He exercised stock options to keep his ownership roughly the same at about 26 Million USD. Wonder why he didn't cash that out.

> But instead of doing something they kept it afloat until they sold their shares which took about month to let it fail after they cashed

What should they have done? How did they manage to keep aflot? Why did they stop?