24hoursworld

SVB collapse: how its subsidiary in China reacted after the bankruptcy in the US

SVB collapse: how its subsidiary in China reacted after the bankruptcy in the US

SPD Silicon Valley Bank is a joint venture between Silicon Valley Bank and China’s state-owned Shanghai Pudong Development Bank.

He SPD Silicon Valley Bank (SSVB), a joint venture created by the US bank Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and the Chinese state Shanghai Pudong Development Bank (S.P.D.), ensured that its operations were always maintained independently of the of the collapsed US entity and regulated by the regulations of the Asian country.

He SSVB is he China’s first bank dedicated to promoting the country’s technology companieswith operations that mainly covered areas such as healththe smart manufacturingsemiconductors or services technofinanciers (also known as fintech).

Before the fall of the bank of reference for startups, the Chinese entity published a statement last Saturday in which it indicated that its accounting balances operate “independently” of those of the SVB. In addition, they highlighted that the SSVB always operated in a “regulated and solid” way.

Implications of the fall of the US bank in China

Throughout the past weekend, various Chinese companies recognized that they had deposits in the US, in the SVB. Many of the companies that made these claims are from the sectors pharmacist and biotechnological. And, while they admitted having money in US banks, they qualified the importance of the matter by clarifying that they were small percentages of your liquidity and that, therefore, the bank’s crisis would not affect its operations.

Among the Hong Kong-listed firms that indicated US holdings, the one that acknowledged the highest percentage of committed funds was Brii Biosciences. According to the statement published by said company, they have “less than 9%” of their funds in SVB.

However, in the same statement, the company remarked that “despite the closure of SVB, the company’s existing cash and bank balances remain sufficient for (…) the next three years”. In addition, he reinforced the idea by stating that he does not expect the situation that the US entity is going through to generate an “adverse material impact”.

Source: Ambito

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest Posts