> The bank doesn't exist anymore and its shareholders got nothing. The customers' reward is they can make payroll. What bailout?

Depositors knowingly took a risk by keeping more than $250K in an individual bank account. Rather than allow depositors to face the consequences of that decision, the government will now be making an exception to their own rule and covering depositors' losses. That's a bailout.

If a company would have been unable to make payroll because of this, it would have been a direct result of their failure to adequately assess and mitigate risk.

The word bailout seems to be getting redefined a bit here. The government is stepping in with short term funding to guarantee all uninsured bank deposits. This isn't a matter of another bank buying the failed SVB and the government acting as an arbitrator, the government is setting up the program and footing the bill until they can press the cost on to other banks.

This isn't a shareholder bailout and they say the bill ultimately won't sit on tax payers,but it's a bailout none the less.

edit: to clarify I don't mean it's being redefined by the parent post here, bailout is being redefined for the whole SVB situation to avoid using a term that people respond poorly to.