SVB was forced to sell a lot of assets to create the cash to pay out deposit outflows on Thursday. As that process happens they were left with fewer and fewer assets that could be sold without a lose (their intention was to hold a lot of these assets to maturity, which is allowed). The bulks of their assets themselves are mostly liquid (not the actual venture debt, etc) but as you sell the assets in the order of their value relative to mark-to-market, their book took on more and more loses. By the end of the day they were insolvent to the tune of nearly negative $1B -- with all shareholder equity wiped out. The point being that the FDIC can sell their remaining assets into the market (it wasn't a liquidity crisis in THOSE markets) and eventually that will net out to some haircut for depositors.

"A lot of" doesn't mean there's enough to cover the deposit outflow. It may be that the remaining assets amount to 85-90% of remaining customer deposits and can be sold fairly soon. Thats not enough to prevent a bank failure but it's an awful lot better than 0% for folks wondering WTH is going to happen to their money. [Note: 85-90% is hypothetical, the FDIC is likely in the process of figuring out what that number really is right now.]

If you have $160B in deposits but only $150B in liquid assets, you're still insolvent. Doesn't mean the assets aren't liquid.