Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

A HERETIC I AM

(24,829 posts)
56. You've said this a few times now and it's not quite accurate;
Sun Mar 12, 2023, 06:10 PM
Mar 2023
"they need to be able to find a buyer for the bonds."


1st, the market for US Treasuries is wide, extremely deep, VERY liquid and worldwide. We are talking literally TRILLIONS of dollars worth. The idea that this bank has to "find a buyer" is somewhat misleading, as one single pass across a bond desk at any brokerage in the world would find a willing buyer for virtually any amount of any series in a matter of seconds.

2nd, you have insinuated a few times that these bonds are somewhat less than completely liquid, and that is simply not the case, for the reason I stated above. US Treasuries settle Same Day, as opposed to the traditional "Trade Plus 3" settlement of most other securities. If you put up the $200 million figure (a drop in the bucket compared to the overall size of the market) you have used numerous times for sale in the morning, by the middle of the afternoon your account would be credited with the cash. It isn't as if you would have to wait days and days or even a full 24 hour period. A number of the articles that have been linked on this subject indicate the bank sold some $21Bn of their bond portfolio, a large sum to be sure, but again, not much compared to the overall market for this paper.

Your assertion that they have sold these bonds at a loss is correct, but since these bonds are sold "Over The Counter" and on a Bid/Ask basis, that market takes into account the time to maturity, coupon, current yield trends on similar bonds sold and the direction the bond market is heading (a rally or a selloff), so a bond with a 2% coupon as an example selling into a 2.5% market would absolutely sell at a discount to par.

It is also important to keep in mind that the Yield is typically only realized if the bond is held to maturity and then redeemed by the Treasury (there are various yield calculations, of course; Running Yield, Nominal Yield, Yield to Maturity (YTM), Tax-Equivalent Yield (TEY), Yield to Call (YTC), Yield to Worst (YTW) etc.) . If you buy a 2% coupon at a discount on Jan 1, hold it until you receive one of the bi-annual interest payments and then sell, the yield quoted on the day of purchase will not necessarily be what you actually realize on the day you sell.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Thank you! ggma Mar 2023 #1
That is a nice summary lapfog_1 Mar 2023 #2
Correction: Fiendish Thingy Mar 2023 #3
Correction Johnny2X2X Mar 2023 #8
I choose to focus on the entire collection of legislators who passed this law Fiendish Thingy Mar 2023 #12
I'll choose to focus on those who tried to stop it Johnny2X2X Mar 2023 #14
Lemme guess: Banks must have paid high-priced LOBBYISTS to promise campaign donations Justice matters. Mar 2023 #16
Thank you for some critical thinking instead of falling for consertive Stargazer99 Mar 2023 #68
Isn't it amazing how it only works one way too? Johnny2X2X Mar 2023 #73
Well, I would encourage you to downplay it maxrandb Mar 2023 #23
I've always wondered about you. DoBotherMe Mar 2023 #30
Have you? Fiendish Thingy Mar 2023 #45
Same here. wnylib Mar 2023 #70
"entire collection" krkaufman Mar 2023 #78
*cough cough* W_HAMILTON Mar 2023 #43
You can assume my contempt for the anti-worker, fascist republicans as a given. Fiendish Thingy Mar 2023 #46
You find it healthier for you to criticize Democrats over Republicans? W_HAMILTON Mar 2023 #55
If it's good enough for Reuben Gallego, it's good enough for me. Fiendish Thingy Mar 2023 #60
Is he slamming """Democrats""" for Sinema's actions? W_HAMILTON Mar 2023 #61
Well, if your mind is made up, I need say no more Fiendish Thingy Mar 2023 #62
HA! Good one. betsuni Mar 2023 #69
+1 progressoid Mar 2023 #66
Does anyone have a list of the 17 Ds who voted for it? nt in2herbs Mar 2023 #4
No Johnny2X2X Mar 2023 #17
A-fucking-men. W_HAMILTON Mar 2023 #44
sure. progressoid Mar 2023 #67
Thank you n/t Delphinus Mar 2023 #71
Is the fed trying to tank the economy and Biden? usonian Mar 2023 #5
I don't know about the FED, but I think Thiel would definitely try to harm Biden politically. Lonestarblue Mar 2023 #9
I agree about powell.. sprinkleeninow Mar 2023 #63
Yep...you got it...when Fed began to raise rates...the bank got squeezed as the bonds lost market values... ashredux Mar 2023 #6
Dumb on the part of the bank, not the Fed. Fiendish Thingy Mar 2023 #13
+1 dalton99a Mar 2023 #20
Pardon if that was not clear.....THE STUPID BANK MANAGEMENT ashredux Mar 2023 #24
+1, but the bank ... KNEW ... the feds were going to increase rates and held that dumb position uponit7771 Mar 2023 #52
This is a good analysis but it over looks one thing. flashman13 Mar 2023 #7
Powell shares blame for waiting too long to begin hikes Fiendish Thingy Mar 2023 #15
Nope.... It was not the federal reserves fault. The bank management did not do their job. ashredux Mar 2023 #26
I think you are missing the big picture. While a single bank can suffer from bad decisions, flashman13 Mar 2023 #48
"because the balance sheets of many other institutions look the same as SVB." SVB held on to bonds uponit7771 Mar 2023 #53
That's the story I've heard paleotn Mar 2023 #10
ABSOLUTELY spot on point! flashman13 Mar 2023 #49
Mine's simpler Warpy Mar 2023 #11
What happened w/this? Do all these partners have exposure to this collapse at the Wall Street Backseat Driver Mar 2023 #18
Researching stuff too, I also came across this Goldman-Sak "Marcus" easy to start high-yield Backseat Driver Mar 2023 #31
Thanks for this great information. Knowledge is good, even if you have no $$$. n/t Paper Roses Mar 2023 #19
Two additional points... brooklynite Mar 2023 #21
Good points. n/t LuckyCharms Mar 2023 #22
Again spot on! It is just unforgiving mathmatics. flashman13 Mar 2023 #50
So SVB did nothing wrong. Just too conservative with investments mainer Mar 2023 #25
They did everything wrong. They failed banking 101. ashredux Mar 2023 #27
So incompetence but not corruption? mainer Mar 2023 #34
This point, not enough data to make that determination. But crypto might be in the mix. ashredux Mar 2023 #38
They played fast and loose in regard to risk management. LuckyCharms Mar 2023 #33
Disagree, SVB should've known their bonds were going to lose at minimum short term value and ... uponit7771 Mar 2023 #54
Hedging is prudent investment strategy. jaxexpat Mar 2023 #28
Thanks for the clear summary and discussion jmbar2 Mar 2023 #29
Cripto is the 2022's Tulip Bulb folly ashredux Mar 2023 #41
In some ways, like the Orange County bankruptcy in 1994 peppertree Mar 2023 #32
Very nice synopsis of it tornado34jh Mar 2023 #35
Well, I recall 2008, and some awfully big, big boys failed.... You had to keep certain regulations in ashredux Mar 2023 #39
Indeed tornado34jh Mar 2023 #42
Yep...that appears correct... ashredux Mar 2023 #47
Where is the depositors' money? mainer Mar 2023 #36
If they are far over weighted in long term bonds, LuckyCharms Mar 2023 #37
You've said this a few times now and it's not quite accurate; A HERETIC I AM Mar 2023 #56
Agree. LuckyCharms Mar 2023 #58
Afraid not.... long-term bonds they held are selling at a discount... ashredux Mar 2023 #40
YEP!! "SBV over-weighted the amount of depositor's funds that were used to buy [FED BONDs]" uponit7771 Mar 2023 #51
Can anyone knowledgeable comment on this Twitter thread? mainer Mar 2023 #57
Banks should not "just need time" to get you your money. LuckyCharms Mar 2023 #59
Hard to sell bonds when the Federal Reserve is constricting M1 money supply. roamer65 Mar 2023 #64
I am wondering if they were also involved in the Bitcoin debacle..... William Gustafson Mar 2023 #65
All banks are insolvent by definition lonely bird Mar 2023 #72
I understand this is a blow to new tech development orangecrush Mar 2023 #74
Can I leave this here? DJ Porkchop Mar 2023 #75
the imbecile republican way - they are stupid and drag the rest of us down samsingh Mar 2023 #76
Doesn't this mean that the government can simply return the bonds ecstatic Mar 2023 #77
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»As I understand it, here'...»Reply #56