I'm sure he knew things were in trouble (seems like they knew there was trouble for probably the past year or so) but I'm equally sure he thought the situation was salvageable probably up until the moment the FDIC walked in the door and maybe even now he thinks it could have been saved if they hadn't intervened.
It was "prearranged" by one month. This honestly just demonstrates how easy it is to game 10B5-1 plans.
I submitted this guy's newsletter separately, but it appears that SVB also lacked a Chief Risk Officer for most of 2022 and failed to explicitly disclose that until March 8 (i.e. two days ago).[1] It all looks pretty shady.
No, it's like saying that it's ok that if you're rich enough you deserve to be first in line for heart transplants in the eventuality that you have a heart attack.
How does that follow? The guy probably cashes out that amount every quarter. So when there is an event like this of course you will find he cashed out what to us little people is a huge amount of money.
It appears as though he sold exactly the number of shares required to cover the cost of exercising options that were about to expire with his after-tax proceeds. This does not seem to me to be a nefarious transaction.
To be clear, he likely has millions of shares of stock in SVB that are now worth exactly $0. He could end up being personally liable for SVB employee’s pay.
In general, I too hate when the “rich people” win despite screwing up. This doesn’t appear to be that sort of situation.
He has been selling blocks of shares since 2018 [1] like any other executive aware that you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket.
According to the most recent SEC insider sale filing, he still owns about 100,000 shares in the bank. If he was that cunny...why won't he have sold them? Doesn't absorb him of carelessness in running the bank, but this is clickbait for the ignorant and perpetually angry.
Dunno about that, I feel like this dichotomy is too often repeated to cover the original malice in the first place. I strongly doubt that those people got to where they were by being that incompetent.
There was a more recent transaction: $3.6M on Feb. 27, "the first time in more than a year that Becker had sold shares in parent company SVB Financial Group." So, update "6 weeks ago" to "11 days ago," does it look different? Maybe.
26 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 63.0 ms ] threadHere are the SEC records which are public records:
https://www.sec.gov/edgar/search/#/ciks=0001259867&entityNam...
I submitted this guy's newsletter separately, but it appears that SVB also lacked a Chief Risk Officer for most of 2022 and failed to explicitly disclose that until March 8 (i.e. two days ago).[1] It all looks pretty shady.
[1]: https://nongaap.substack.com/p/sivb-held-to-mortem-governanc... (submission: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35098617)
Edited to not repeat what you said. :)
If it's a one-off then yea it's suspicious.
In general, I too hate when the “rich people” win despite screwing up. This doesn’t appear to be that sort of situation.
According to the most recent SEC insider sale filing, he still owns about 100,000 shares in the bank. If he was that cunny...why won't he have sold them? Doesn't absorb him of carelessness in running the bank, but this is clickbait for the ignorant and perpetually angry.
1- https://www.sec.gov/edgar/search/#/ciks=0001259867&entityNam...
To make the case for "hey it’s not that" if needed, for example?
I looked it up, and I really doubt you meant that word. Curious what you did mean. Was it "canny"?
(As an ardent Wordle player, I'm always on the lookout for new five-letter words.)
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-10/svb-chief...