Hacker News Reader

Comment by crisdux | Hacker News Reader

I'm spitballing here but it could be an opportunity for another bank to expand into a new market and acquire new customers. SVB has a unique position in the market, as they specialize in catering to the financial needs of industries such as technology, life science, healthcare, private equity, and venture capital.

View on HN

Spot on, a ton of Directors / MDs are rushing to push this in front of their leadership (whoever 'leads' the acquisition will no doubt burnish their personal brand / career path /s).

That said, if I'm an SVB customer...do I want to stick with the bank that's had this issue? Even so, would I want to bank with the acquirer?

Seems like much of the SVB customer base doesn't have a/much choice with who will provide banking for them at the early stage.

Seems like the reason for acquiring this risking market would be to transition your the clients who succeed into the parent bank for their future banking needs. Sure you will get a bunch of small/medium sized clients for a mega bank, but they are just fishing for a couple giant paydays and want the next Apple or Amazon to start banking with them.

these specialist banks are not worth much, there is no retail banking advantage to having tech companies as clients. the individual people who run the companies are most likely already wealth management clients of the same banks that might acquire SVB.

I believe the customers they would be going after are commercial entities, not retail.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com