億萬富翁自我辯護(hù)：我還有5,000萬美元滯留在硅谷銀行
Tristan Bove
2023-03-20
彼得·蒂爾就創(chuàng)始人基金在硅谷銀行擠兌事件中扮演的角色為自己辯護(hù)。圖片來源：JOHN LAMPARSKI/GETTY IMAGES
彼得·蒂爾的創(chuàng)始人基金（Founders Fund）是兩周前最早采取行動(dòng)、并敦促客戶迅速從硅谷銀行（Silicon Valley Bank）撤出資金的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)投資公司之一。據(jù)報(bào)道，截至3月9日上午，該公司已經(jīng)從硅谷銀行撤出所有資金，就在此時(shí)，社交媒體上開始出現(xiàn)恐慌情緒（人們擔(dān)憂該銀行陷入償付能力危機(jī)），并由此演變?yōu)?月10日發(fā)生的420億美元的歷史性銀行擠兌，導(dǎo)致硅谷銀行破產(chǎn)。蒂爾和他的公司因?yàn)樵陔S后發(fā)生的銀行擠兌事件中扮演的角色而在網(wǎng)上遭到抨擊，但這位億萬富翁投資者和PayPal的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人否認(rèn)他希望硅谷銀行破產(chǎn)。蒂爾說，畢竟他還把自己的個(gè)人財(cái)富存在硅谷銀行。
蒂爾在3月16日發(fā)表的一篇文章中對(duì)《金融時(shí)報(bào)》（Financial Times）的專欄作家吉蓮·邰帝表示：“我有5,000萬美元滯留在硅谷銀行。”由于蒂爾將個(gè)人資金存在硅谷銀行，這讓他看起來有點(diǎn)像個(gè)異類，因?yàn)楣韫茹y行主要為初創(chuàng)公司和風(fēng)投公司提供相關(guān)服務(wù)。據(jù)美國的聯(lián)邦監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)稱，3月10日被查封時(shí)，該銀行的存款總額為1,754億美元。如果蒂爾認(rèn)為硅谷銀行會(huì)倒閉，他肯定也會(huì)撤出自己的5,000萬美元？
兩周前，當(dāng)硅谷銀行公開披露其部分財(cái)務(wù)問題時(shí)，許多客戶都感到迷茫和慌亂，蒂爾就是其中之一，這可能有助于解釋兩周前的銀行擠兌心態(tài)。據(jù)Axios報(bào)道，創(chuàng)始人基金在3月9日上午之前就撤出了在硅谷銀行的所有資金，并打算在恐慌消退后再把資金存入該銀行。據(jù)報(bào)道，蒂爾沒有參與創(chuàng)始人基金從硅谷銀行撤資決定的討論。
隨著3月9日一分一秒的過去，該公司更加擔(dān)憂硅谷銀行會(huì)破產(chǎn)，最終開始建議其投資組合公司將基金從硅谷銀行撤出，稱這樣做的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和弊端很少。這些公司在2022年的總投資額約為110億美元。
創(chuàng)始人基金遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不是唯一一家放大恐慌（硅谷銀行破產(chǎn)）的風(fēng)投公司，這導(dǎo)致硅谷銀行股價(jià)3月9日暴跌60%，盤后又下跌20%，然后在3月10日的盤前交易中進(jìn)一步暴跌。硅谷銀行破產(chǎn)被認(rèn)為是第一起由社交媒體引發(fā)的重大銀行擠兌事件，投資者和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)投資家兩周前在推特（Twitter）和即時(shí)通訊應(yīng)用程序等平臺(tái)上傳播消息，使得人們對(duì)該銀行的財(cái)務(wù)狀況感到恐慌。硅谷銀行的首席執(zhí)行官格雷格·貝克爾在3月9日的投資者電話會(huì)議上對(duì)這種現(xiàn)象提出了警告，稱只有在“所有人都在傳硅谷銀行陷入困境”的情況下，該銀行才會(huì)陷入危機(jī)。
投資者和創(chuàng)始人后來言辭激烈地指責(zé)對(duì)方在引發(fā)危機(jī)中扮演的角色。Loomia的首席執(zhí)行官及創(chuàng)始人麥迪遜·馬克西在3月10日告訴《商業(yè)內(nèi)幕》（Business Insider）網(wǎng)站：“投資者陷入瘋狂的境地，并策劃了銀行擠兌，這對(duì)緊急情況來說于事無補(bǔ)?！?/p>
許多風(fēng)投公司，包括位于美國舊金山的Pear VC和英國倫敦的Hoxton ventures，都建議投資組合公司從硅谷銀行撤出資金，但蒂爾的創(chuàng)始人基金仍然首當(dāng)其沖，因?yàn)樗袆?dòng)迅速，而且其投資組合規(guī)模龐大。
創(chuàng)始人基金的首席財(cái)務(wù)官尼爾·魯思文在給Axios的一份聲明中說：“3月9日上午，很明顯我們正處于銀行擠兌之中，我們根據(jù)受托責(zé)任采取了相應(yīng)行動(dòng)?！?/p>
蒂爾告訴英國的《金融時(shí)報(bào)》，就像創(chuàng)始人基金的經(jīng)理們建議客戶暫時(shí)撤資一樣，他也不相信硅谷銀行最終會(huì)倒閉。
就像硅谷銀行所有存款超過25萬美元保險(xiǎn)限額的賬戶持有人一樣，在美國政府于兩周前采取非常措施確保所有儲(chǔ)戶都可以得到全額補(bǔ)償后，他將能夠取回所有存款。雖然蒂爾肯定會(huì)對(duì)此感到高興，但周末無法支取資金不太可能對(duì)他80億美元的財(cái)富造成太大的影響。
創(chuàng)始人基金和彼得·蒂爾沒有立即回復(fù)《財(cái)富》雜志的置評(píng)請(qǐng)求。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）
譯者：中慧言-王芳
彼得·蒂爾的創(chuàng)始人基金（Founders Fund）是兩周前最早采取行動(dòng)、并敦促客戶迅速從硅谷銀行（Silicon Valley Bank）撤出資金的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)投資公司之一。據(jù)報(bào)道，截至3月9日上午，該公司已經(jīng)從硅谷銀行撤出所有資金，就在此時(shí)，社交媒體上開始出現(xiàn)恐慌情緒（人們擔(dān)憂該銀行陷入償付能力危機(jī)），并由此演變?yōu)?月10日發(fā)生的420億美元的歷史性銀行擠兌，導(dǎo)致硅谷銀行破產(chǎn)。蒂爾和他的公司因?yàn)樵陔S后發(fā)生的銀行擠兌事件中扮演的角色而在網(wǎng)上遭到抨擊，但這位億萬富翁投資者和PayPal的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人否認(rèn)他希望硅谷銀行破產(chǎn)。蒂爾說，畢竟他還把自己的個(gè)人財(cái)富存在硅谷銀行。
蒂爾在3月16日發(fā)表的一篇文章中對(duì)《金融時(shí)報(bào)》（Financial Times）的專欄作家吉蓮·邰帝表示：“我有5,000萬美元滯留在硅谷銀行?！庇捎诘贍枌€(gè)人資金存在硅谷銀行，這讓他看起來有點(diǎn)像個(gè)異類，因?yàn)楣韫茹y行主要為初創(chuàng)公司和風(fēng)投公司提供相關(guān)服務(wù)。據(jù)美國的聯(lián)邦監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)稱，3月10日被查封時(shí)，該銀行的存款總額為1,754億美元。如果蒂爾認(rèn)為硅谷銀行會(huì)倒閉，他肯定也會(huì)撤出自己的5,000萬美元？
兩周前，當(dāng)硅谷銀行公開披露其部分財(cái)務(wù)問題時(shí)，許多客戶都感到迷茫和慌亂，蒂爾就是其中之一，這可能有助于解釋兩周前的銀行擠兌心態(tài)。據(jù)Axios報(bào)道，創(chuàng)始人基金在3月9日上午之前就撤出了在硅谷銀行的所有資金，并打算在恐慌消退后再把資金存入該銀行。據(jù)報(bào)道，蒂爾沒有參與創(chuàng)始人基金從硅谷銀行撤資決定的討論。
隨著3月9日一分一秒的過去，該公司更加擔(dān)憂硅谷銀行會(huì)破產(chǎn)，最終開始建議其投資組合公司將基金從硅谷銀行撤出，稱這樣做的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和弊端很少。這些公司在2022年的總投資額約為110億美元。
創(chuàng)始人基金遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不是唯一一家放大恐慌（硅谷銀行破產(chǎn)）的風(fēng)投公司，這導(dǎo)致硅谷銀行股價(jià)3月9日暴跌60%，盤后又下跌20%，然后在3月10日的盤前交易中進(jìn)一步暴跌。硅谷銀行破產(chǎn)被認(rèn)為是第一起由社交媒體引發(fā)的重大銀行擠兌事件，投資者和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)投資家兩周前在推特（Twitter）和即時(shí)通訊應(yīng)用程序等平臺(tái)上傳播消息，使得人們對(duì)該銀行的財(cái)務(wù)狀況感到恐慌。硅谷銀行的首席執(zhí)行官格雷格·貝克爾在3月9日的投資者電話會(huì)議上對(duì)這種現(xiàn)象提出了警告，稱只有在“所有人都在傳硅谷銀行陷入困境”的情況下，該銀行才會(huì)陷入危機(jī)。
投資者和創(chuàng)始人后來言辭激烈地指責(zé)對(duì)方在引發(fā)危機(jī)中扮演的角色。Loomia的首席執(zhí)行官及創(chuàng)始人麥迪遜·馬克西在3月10日告訴《商業(yè)內(nèi)幕》（Business Insider）網(wǎng)站：“投資者陷入瘋狂的境地，并策劃了銀行擠兌，這對(duì)緊急情況來說于事無補(bǔ)?！?/p>
許多風(fēng)投公司，包括位于美國舊金山的Pear VC和英國倫敦的Hoxton ventures，都建議投資組合公司從硅谷銀行撤出資金，但蒂爾的創(chuàng)始人基金仍然首當(dāng)其沖，因?yàn)樗袆?dòng)迅速，而且其投資組合規(guī)模龐大。
創(chuàng)始人基金的首席財(cái)務(wù)官尼爾·魯思文在給Axios的一份聲明中說：“3月9日上午，很明顯我們正處于銀行擠兌之中，我們根據(jù)受托責(zé)任采取了相應(yīng)行動(dòng)?！?/p>
蒂爾告訴英國的《金融時(shí)報(bào)》，就像創(chuàng)始人基金的經(jīng)理們建議客戶暫時(shí)撤資一樣，他也不相信硅谷銀行最終會(huì)倒閉。
就像硅谷銀行所有存款超過25萬美元保險(xiǎn)限額的賬戶持有人一樣，在美國政府于兩周前采取非常措施確保所有儲(chǔ)戶都可以得到全額補(bǔ)償后，他將能夠取回所有存款。雖然蒂爾肯定會(huì)對(duì)此感到高興，但周末無法支取資金不太可能對(duì)他80億美元的財(cái)富造成太大的影響。
創(chuàng)始人基金和彼得·蒂爾沒有立即回復(fù)《財(cái)富》雜志的置評(píng)請(qǐng)求。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）
譯者：中慧言-王芳
Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund was one of the first venture capital firms to take action and urge clients to quickly withdraw funds from Silicon Valley Bank two weeks ago. The firm had reportedly removed all of its own holdings in SVB by March 9 morning, just as panic over the bank’s solvency began to set in on social media, from which it devolved into a historic $42 billion bank run on March 10 that collapsed SVB. Thiel and his firm have come under fire online for the role they played in the bank run that followed, but the billionaire investor and PayPal cofounder himself is denying he wanted it to fail. After all, Thiel says, he kept his own money invested there.
“I had $50 [million] of my own money stuck in SVB,” Thiel told Financial Times columnist Gillian Tett in an article published Thursday. As he held his own money at the bank, Thiel was a bit of an outlier as SVB mainly catered to startups and venture capital firms. The bank held $175.4 billion in total deposits when it was seized Friday, according to federal regulators. Surely Thiel would also have pulled his own $50 million if he thought SVB was going to fail?
That Thiel was one of many clients who were left disoriented and scrambling two weeks ago when SVB publicly disclosed some of its financial troubles may help explain the mentality of two weeks ago bank run. Founders Fund withdrew all its deposits with SVB by March 9 morning, according to Axios, with the intention of returning it once the panic subsided. Thiel was reportedly not a part of that conversation.
As March 9 wore on, the firm began getting more nervous, eventually starting to advise its portfolio companies, which last year collectively accounted for around $11 billion of investment, to withdraw their own funds, saying that there were few risks and downsides to doing so.
Founders Fund was far from the only VC firm to amplify the panic around SVB, causing its shares to plummet 60% on March 9, before dropping another 20% after-market and then a further plummet in March 10 pre-market trading. SVB’s failure has been designated the first major social-media-fueled bank run, as investors and venture capitalists took to platforms like Twitter and instant messaging apps two weeks ago to spread news and panic over the bank’s financial status. SVB CEO Greg Becker warned against exactly this phenomenon during an investor call on March 9, saying the bank would only be in crisis if “everyone is telling each other SVB is in trouble.”
Investors and founders later criticized each other bitterly for their role in causing the crisis. “This emergency was not helped by investors going into a frenzy and orchestrating a bank run,” Madison Maxey, CEO and founder at Loomia, told?Insider on March 10.
Many VC firms, including Pear VC in San Francisco and Hoxton ventures in London, advised portfolio companies to withdraw their funds from SVB, but Thiel’s Founders Fund still got most of the heat given its speed to act and the large size of its portfolio.
In a statement to Axios, Founders Fund CFO Neil Ruthven said: “March 9 morning it was clear we were in the middle of a bank run, and we reacted in line with our fiduciary duties.”
Like the managers at Founders Fund who advised clients to temporarily withdraw their funds, Thiel didn’t believe SVB would eventually fail, he told the FT.
Thiel, like all account holders at SVB with deposits exceeding the $250,000 insurable limit, will be able to get all of his money back after the government stepped in over the weekend with extraordinary measures to ensure all depositors would be made whole. While Thiel will surely be happy to see his money returned to him, the inaccessible funds over the weekend are unlikely to have made a big dent in his $8 billion fortune.
Founders Fund and Peter Thiel did not immediately reply to Fortune’s requests for comment.
財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)所刊載內(nèi)容之知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)為財(cái)富媒體知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)有限公司及/或相關(guān)權(quán)利人專屬所有或持有。未經(jīng)許可，禁止進(jìn)行轉(zhuǎn)載、摘編、復(fù)制及建立鏡像等任何使用。
