Homework:
Quantify the liquidity issue experienced by Signature Bank before the NY Regulators swooped in and confiscated all assets and operations.
You are counting too?
Honestly, just seeking an answer. Not-so-cleverly disguised as if I knew the answer already. So sue me.
Every finance rag is reporting Signature's capture as a mere tiny blurb on their spectacle around SVB. But exactly none of them are bothering to say that Signature was illiquid (let alone insolvent).
Makes my spidey-senses tingle, seeing as Signature was banko numero uno for the crypto* space. Almost like they are redirecting attention from an unmerited takedown of the space's biggest on- and off-ramp. I mean, the back end institutional on- and off-ramp. The one that allows the on- and off-ramps that peeps actually interface with to be the conduit for the actual off-ening and on-ening. Shut down the channels. Starve the crypto transactions. Make using them painful. Incentivize an alternative (stick, not carrot). One giant leap for CBDC-kind.
*(shaddap, JJG - this includes your daddy)
So did Signature halt withdrawals? If they actually did, you'd think they'd report on it. And if not, what is the justification? None in a free society. nadazipzilch
Perhaps just another notch in a coordinated takedown of crypto writ large. Again, to herd all into an upcoming CBDC?
And... umm ... Barney Frank! You 'member him, right? Frank-Dodd and all that!? Well, he was a board member at Signature. And not like I trust his words anyhow (never did when he was in the legislature either...), but he said Signature was 'in no way insolvent', and that the takeover was unwarranted. Well, we know insolvent and illiquid are two different things, plus Frank is an unreliable source. But you'd think that some reporting somewhere would speak of the reason for the confiscation.
