Resolves YES. https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1337 "Depositors will have access to all of their money starting Monday, March 13." and reporting from today says that they are indeed processing withdrawals.

"Janet Yellen confirms help for SVB depositors but dismisses bailout" https://www.ft.com/content/6a77d81b-7376-4ccf-80a2-3336af04d04b?shareType=nongift

The evidence we have is that they went from healthy to insolvent incredibly fast.

The status quo hypothesis is that an established, sophisticated bank made an elementary risk management mistake, then got unlucky with rate hikes and a run.

The competing hypotheses is that there’s something weirder. I have no idea what it would be, but I don’t think the status quo is all of 89% likely (maybe 75%?). And from there, I’m assuming that the “weird scenario“ would take more than a month to unwind.

So basically if you don't keep your account constantly below $250K you run the risk of being treated as an "uninsured depositor"?? Notably, I recently got an email from my bank Mercury that said our accounts were FDIC insured up to $1mm because they spread deposits out across so many different banks. This seems like the type of thing a sophisticated company like SVB would do also, don't you think??

@BTE

basically if you don't keep your account constantly below $250K you run the risk of being treated as an "uninsured depositor"??

Basically yes - FDIC insurance covers 250k per depositor per ownership type per bank.

Mercury ... spread deposits out across so many different banks

Mercury isn't a bank, it's a financial institution that puts your deposits at banks, so it can do that, yes. Banks themselves don't do that to my knowledge.

@jack I see. So mercury is just allocation of funds. That's smart. Banks should custody money in different accounts internally, capping accounts at $250k. I suppose they don't because they leave it up to customers?