亿万富翁自我辩护：我还有5,000万美元滞留在硅谷银行
彼得·蒂尔的创始人基金（Founders Fund）是两周前最早采取行动、并敦促客户迅速从硅谷银行（Silicon Valley Bank）撤出资金的风险投资公司之一。据报道，截至3月9日上午，该公司已经从硅谷银行撤出所有资金，就在此时，社交媒体上开始出现恐慌情绪（人们担忧该银行陷入偿付能力危机），并由此演变为3月10日发生的420亿美元的历史性银行挤兑，导致硅谷银行破产。蒂尔和他的公司因为在随后发生的银行挤兑事件中扮演的角色而在网上遭到抨击，但这位亿万富翁投资者和PayPal的联合创始人否认他希望硅谷银行破产。蒂尔说，毕竟他还把自己的个人财富存在硅谷银行。
蒂尔在3月16日发表的一篇文章中对《金融时报》（Financial Times）的专栏作家吉莲·邰帝表示：“我有5,000万美元滞留在硅谷银行。”由于蒂尔将个人资金存在硅谷银行，这让他看起来有点像个异类，因为硅谷银行主要为初创公司和风投公司提供相关服务。据美国的联邦监管机构称，3月10日被查封时，该银行的存款总额为1,754亿美元。如果蒂尔认为硅谷银行会倒闭，他肯定也会撤出自己的5,000万美元？
两周前，当硅谷银行公开披露其部分财务问题时，许多客户都感到迷茫和慌乱，蒂尔就是其中之一，这可能有助于解释两周前的银行挤兑心态。据Axios报道，创始人基金在3月9日上午之前就撤出了在硅谷银行的所有资金，并打算在恐慌消退后再把资金存入该银行。据报道，蒂尔没有参与创始人基金从硅谷银行撤资决定的讨论。
随着3月9日一分一秒的过去，该公司更加担忧硅谷银行会破产，最终开始建议其投资组合公司将基金从硅谷银行撤出，称这样做的风险和弊端很少。这些公司在2022年的总投资额约为110亿美元。
创始人基金远远不是唯一一家放大恐慌（硅谷银行破产）的风投公司，这导致硅谷银行股价3月9日暴跌60%，盘后又下跌20%，然后在3月10日的盘前交易中进一步暴跌。硅谷银行破产被认为是第一起由社交媒体引发的重大银行挤兑事件，投资者和风险投资家两周前在推特（Twitter）和即时通讯应用程序等平台上传播消息，使得人们对该银行的财务状况感到恐慌。硅谷银行的首席执行官格雷格·贝克尔在3月9日的投资者电话会议上对这种现象提出了警告，称只有在“所有人都在传硅谷银行陷入困境”的情况下，该银行才会陷入危机。
投资者和创始人后来言辞激烈地指责对方在引发危机中扮演的角色。Loomia的首席执行官及创始人麦迪逊·马克西在3月10日告诉《商业内幕》（Business Insider）网站：“投资者陷入疯狂的境地，并策划了银行挤兑，这对紧急情况来说于事无补。”
许多风投公司，包括位于美国旧金山的Pear VC和英国伦敦的Hoxton ventures，都建议投资组合公司从硅谷银行撤出资金，但蒂尔的创始人基金仍然首当其冲，因为它行动迅速，而且其投资组合规模庞大。
创始人基金的首席财务官尼尔·鲁思文在给Axios的一份声明中说：“3月9日上午，很明显我们正处于银行挤兑之中，我们根据受托责任采取了相应行动。”
蒂尔告诉英国的《金融时报》，就像创始人基金的经理们建议客户暂时撤资一样，他也不相信硅谷银行最终会倒闭。
就像硅谷银行所有存款超过25万美元保险限额的账户持有人一样，在美国政府于两周前采取非常措施确保所有储户都可以得到全额补偿后，他将能够取回所有存款。虽然蒂尔肯定会对此感到高兴，但周末无法支取资金不太可能对他80亿美元的财富造成太大的影响。
创始人基金和彼得·蒂尔没有立即回复《财富》杂志的置评请求。（财富中文网）
译者：中慧言-王芳
彼得·蒂尔的创始人基金（Founders Fund）是两周前最早采取行动、并敦促客户迅速从硅谷银行（Silicon Valley Bank）撤出资金的风险投资公司之一。据报道，截至3月9日上午，该公司已经从硅谷银行撤出所有资金，就在此时，社交媒体上开始出现恐慌情绪（人们担忧该银行陷入偿付能力危机），并由此演变为3月10日发生的420亿美元的历史性银行挤兑，导致硅谷银行破产。蒂尔和他的公司因为在随后发生的银行挤兑事件中扮演的角色而在网上遭到抨击，但这位亿万富翁投资者和PayPal的联合创始人否认他希望硅谷银行破产。蒂尔说，毕竟他还把自己的个人财富存在硅谷银行。
蒂尔在3月16日发表的一篇文章中对《金融时报》（Financial Times）的专栏作家吉莲·邰帝表示：“我有5,000万美元滞留在硅谷银行。”由于蒂尔将个人资金存在硅谷银行，这让他看起来有点像个异类，因为硅谷银行主要为初创公司和风投公司提供相关服务。据美国的联邦监管机构称，3月10日被查封时，该银行的存款总额为1,754亿美元。如果蒂尔认为硅谷银行会倒闭，他肯定也会撤出自己的5,000万美元？
两周前，当硅谷银行公开披露其部分财务问题时，许多客户都感到迷茫和慌乱，蒂尔就是其中之一，这可能有助于解释两周前的银行挤兑心态。据Axios报道，创始人基金在3月9日上午之前就撤出了在硅谷银行的所有资金，并打算在恐慌消退后再把资金存入该银行。据报道，蒂尔没有参与创始人基金从硅谷银行撤资决定的讨论。
随着3月9日一分一秒的过去，该公司更加担忧硅谷银行会破产，最终开始建议其投资组合公司将基金从硅谷银行撤出，称这样做的风险和弊端很少。这些公司在2022年的总投资额约为110亿美元。
创始人基金远远不是唯一一家放大恐慌（硅谷银行破产）的风投公司，这导致硅谷银行股价3月9日暴跌60%，盘后又下跌20%，然后在3月10日的盘前交易中进一步暴跌。硅谷银行破产被认为是第一起由社交媒体引发的重大银行挤兑事件，投资者和风险投资家两周前在推特（Twitter）和即时通讯应用程序等平台上传播消息，使得人们对该银行的财务状况感到恐慌。硅谷银行的首席执行官格雷格·贝克尔在3月9日的投资者电话会议上对这种现象提出了警告，称只有在“所有人都在传硅谷银行陷入困境”的情况下，该银行才会陷入危机。
投资者和创始人后来言辞激烈地指责对方在引发危机中扮演的角色。Loomia的首席执行官及创始人麦迪逊·马克西在3月10日告诉《商业内幕》（Business Insider）网站：“投资者陷入疯狂的境地，并策划了银行挤兑，这对紧急情况来说于事无补。”
许多风投公司，包括位于美国旧金山的Pear VC和英国伦敦的Hoxton ventures，都建议投资组合公司从硅谷银行撤出资金，但蒂尔的创始人基金仍然首当其冲，因为它行动迅速，而且其投资组合规模庞大。
创始人基金的首席财务官尼尔·鲁思文在给Axios的一份声明中说：“3月9日上午，很明显我们正处于银行挤兑之中，我们根据受托责任采取了相应行动。”
蒂尔告诉英国的《金融时报》，就像创始人基金的经理们建议客户暂时撤资一样，他也不相信硅谷银行最终会倒闭。
就像硅谷银行所有存款超过25万美元保险限额的账户持有人一样，在美国政府于两周前采取非常措施确保所有储户都可以得到全额补偿后，他将能够取回所有存款。虽然蒂尔肯定会对此感到高兴，但周末无法支取资金不太可能对他80亿美元的财富造成太大的影响。
创始人基金和彼得·蒂尔没有立即回复《财富》杂志的置评请求。（财富中文网）
译者：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.
