The company's AI-based platform has seen increased interest during the COVID pandemicRead more...
Why enterpreneurs (and investors) should care
The FDIC extended the protection of non-interest bearing accounts beyond the $250,000 limit for another six months (now ending June 2010 instead of January 1). However, with new fees (from 50% to 150% higher depending on the riskiness of the bank taking the insurance for its customer deposits), banks were given until early last month to "opt-out" of the extended protection. Many of the largest banks such as Citibank (NYSE symbol: C), JPMorgan Chase (NYSE symbol: JPM), Bank of America (NYSE symbol: BK) and Wells Fargo (NYSE symbol: WFC) opted out.
Why should entrepreneurs and investors care about this? To get a perspective, I've copied one response I wrote to investor concerns about the security of their cash in banks of companies they considered investing in. Other friends closing deals during the same time period were dealing with the same types of concerns from sophisticated investors. Given the financial collapse, and the inability of many to get cash out of so-called "cash equivalents" that same year, the concern was not entirely without merit.
My friend, and client, Mark Freedle of NetMore America raised around $9.5 million in equity for his mortgage bank right after the mortgage industry started collapsing. He was ultimately able to turn that $9.5 million into over $1 billion in leverage, which he used to buy and resale government backed securities at a profit. However, when Lehman, Merrill Lynch, Wachovia and others started shaking, so did prospective investors. Some of the questions they were asking last year this time don't even come up in discussions anymore. One of those questions was "What Happens To My Cash If The Bank You Put It In Fails?" I haven't heard that question in any deals lately.
This, along with FDIC insurance increases, may explain why many banks are pulling out of the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program's "Transaction Account Gaurantee" or TAG, which basically offered unlimited protection to non-interest bearing accounts.
Here's a summary of my response to one of those investors (from last year), used with Mark's permission of course. Incidentally, 100% of what I suggested did in fact take place.
Responses to macroeconomic concerns, from January 2009.
We believe the essence of the remaining macroeconomic concerns you've expressed can be reduced to a single question: "How do we know our cash is safe if a bank fails?"
The simple answer is that the cash will be held in a manner that insures 100% coverage by the FDIC.
Non-interest bearing Business Demand Deposit Accounts (DDA) are currently 100% insured (through December of 2009 without limit to dollar amount. Details on how this protection and a number of alternatives address your question of cash risk follow beginning on the second page of this response. Points are in outline format and many items are hyperlinked to source documents from issuing or otherwise authoritative entities.
Hypothetical Wells Fargo insolvencyPOTHETICAL WELLS FARGO INSOLVENCY:
1. Non-interest bearing Business Demand Deposit Accounts (DDA) are currently 100% insured (through December of 2009) up to essentially an unlimited amount through the FDIC
2. If, after 2009...
a. The transaction program is not extended and b. There remains concern for solvency of the very largest banks c. Or, the investors believe that unused cash should be earning some kind of return:
1. There's a setup cost plus some maintenance fees, obviously offset by interest yield. So banks will often eat the setup costs since they are getting large timed deposits
3. Impact of unemployment on bank solvency
a. Loan losses would be more sensitive to the Unemployment Insurance exhaustion rate than they would be to a net increase in the unemployment rate
b. Unemployment benefits were already extended by 50% as part of the Iraq spending bill (from 26 weeks to 39, so 3/4th of a year)
I. The same congress that passed that legislation is quick to use it (benefit extension) as a shield for social reasons
II. More importantly, most economists agree that the proportion of long-term employed currently gives extension of benefits a greater economic impact (1.64X or so in GDP for every $1 in additional benefits)
Bank common trading prices as cessation trigger:
4. As noted above, your cash in DDAs is 100% insured by the FDIC (it was not 12 months ago, unless you were using Cedars with a regional)
5. That's better assurance than some kind of stock based trigger (full faith and credit assurance versus failing bank admin assurance and simultaneous collapse of investment vehicle)
6. Downgrade of their debt is also not trigger
a. Inability to insure the funds up to the maximum amount held, should be a trigger to transfer to a Cedar account or otherwise change trust names on accounts in an effort to regain 100% FDIC insurance coverage
b. Insurance risk is not an issue until December of 2009
7. That (unlimited insurance on cash deposits, + guarantees on mortgages) makes this the best time in history to do this type of deal
a. Your cash is insured at max cost to the investee of 0.10 basis points
b. If it was in cash DDA, you would have a negative return
c. With the coupon, you are getting the best of both worlds
Opinions expressed herein by Lorenzo Carver, do not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of Liquid Scenarios (bpCentral, Inc.) https://www.liquidscenarios.com/
Image Source: The Dark Knight - Legendary Pictures, Syncopy Films, DC Comics, Warner Bros. Pictures
Read more from our "Trends and news" series
The company was founded by Braintree's Bryan JohnsonRead more...
The company saw engagement with its platform grow 139 percent in the first half of 2020Read more...
Related Companies, Investors, and Entrepreneurs
Joined Vator on
Since founding bpCentral, our focus has been on increasing each user's competitive advantage each and every time they interact with one of our applications. Naturally, this involves more than simply enabling complex calculations to be performed accurately. In fact, during the first 12 months of developing our new technologies and applications, we put an inordinate amount of resources into discovering how to transform the relationships between idiosyncratic decision-makers and financial information. Our premise was that if that human to data relationship could be elevated to a new standard, then the relationships of those professionals with the entities and individuals they interact with could be more efficient and therefore more valuable.
In response, we developed CIMPA, the Carver Import Algorithm, a system that allows any electronic financial information, data or reports to be interpreted by a receiving system without the need for XML, XBRL, tagging approaches or extensive manual data entry. As a result of this technology, the Company's systems for private equity and venture capital professionals are able to import data in a matter of seconds, instead of a matter of hours.
Similarly, the Company noted that when users attempted to calculate the outcomes of complex liquidation preferences, anti-dilution provisions and other complex terms that are common to VC/PE transactions, any output was virtually impossible to verify without a costly audit of the formulas. Since the formulas were generally based in excel, this meant that few if any partners or other key investment professionals could afford to expend the effort to verify how amounts were arrived at. Upon further consideration, the Company realized that, to a certain extent, this was true of all financial reports. For traditional financial statements, this point is evidenced in the fact that notes to financial statements typically occupy several times more pages than the actual financial reports do. This realization inspired the Company to develop a system it calls OferX, which presents all financial information in a manner that allows any user to audit and see how amounts were calculated (in an easy to understand, quantifiable manner) without the need for extensive textual descriptions.
Together these unique tools form the foundation for the Company's offerings, which are backed by over 29 patent pending technologies.
Joined Vator on
Barclays Capital provides large corporate, government and institutional clients with a full spectrum of solutions to their strategic advisory, financing and risk management needs. These solutions include the following products and services:
Barclays Capital has offices around the world, employs 20,000 people and has the global reach, advisory services and distribution power to meet the needs of issuers and investors worldwide.
Joined Vator on
Brainspray promises to increase any streaming media publisher's ad revenue overnight. By taking advantage of our innovative, proprietary technology, Brainspray clients reduce ad clutter and increase user interaction.