Meet The 171 Banks For Which The Margin Of Failure Is One Thousand Dollars

Tyler Durden's picture

At this point the majority of the population is transfixed by the biggest borrowers from the discount window. Yes, we know by now that the bulk of these were foreign banks, primarily Dexia and Depfa, but that is simply because only Bank Holding Companies, or depository institutions (and yes, last we checked Goldman deposit branches are still sorely missing), are allowed discount window access. Keep in mind that most banks were Investment Banks and not under the BHC umbrella until after the Lehman collapse. Which is why most banks only had access to the PDCF, which is how the Fed eliminated the loophole for emergency liquidity trickling down to everyone. The majority of US investment banks therefore accessed Fed rescue funding via the PDCF, of which JPMorgan and BofNY Mellon were intermediaries due to their position as the only two tri-party repo clearers and keymasters of the shadow banking mechanism. A quick glance at the PDCF confirms that all banks, pre their conversion to Bank Holdings Companies in the week following Lehman's failure, borrowed from the Fed, if not necessarily from the Discount Window (and yes, as Bob Ivry confirmed, Goldman did borrow directly from the Discount Window on at least five occasions post its "depository status" conversion despite Gary Cohn's perjury to the contrary even as Goldman repeatedly dipped in the PDCF both before and after Lehman's failure, even setting the precedent of first pledging defaulted bonds as collateral before any other solvent bank). Yet what we are more concerned by is not the mega borrowings: after all, it makes sense that if you need tens of billions you will go to the Fed. We are far more concerned by the banks for whom the marginal amount of cash was smallest. Below we present the 171 banks that had to access the Discount Window for the paltry sum of $1,000.00. That's right - these are the banks for whom the margin of failure is as low as one thousand dollars. Any readers who have cash deposited with these banks (many of whom have not yet been visited by the FDIC's Failure Friday phenomenon), are urged to immediately remove all funds and run, Forrest, run.

The banks in question:

1St Source Bk
Albany B&Tc Na
Alpha B&Tc
Ameriana Bk Sb
American Eagle Bk
American Nb
Ameristate Bk
Andrew Johnson Bk
Atlantic Coast Bk
Banco Popular N Amer
Bank Of Alpena
Bank Of Dudley
Bank Of Elmwood
Bank Of Fl Se
Bank Of Fl Sw
Bank Of Fl Tampa Bay
Bank Of Hiawassee
Bank Of Marin
Bank Of Miami Na
Bb&T Fncl Fsb
Belmont B&Tc
Benjamin Franklin Bk
Beverly B&Tc Na
Boone Cty Bk
Byron Bk
Capital One Bk Usa Na
Capital One Na
Cedar Rapids B&Tc
Centier Bk
Central Il Bk
Central St Bk
Chain Bridge Bk Na
Chesapeake Bk
Citizens & Farmers Bk
Citizens Bk
Citizens Cmrc Nb
Citizens Nb
Citizens St Bk
Clear Lake B&Tc
Coastal Cmrc Bk
Coastal Fcu
Columbus Cmnty Bk
Community B&Tc
Community Bk Of Tri-Cty
Community Cap Bk
Community First Bk
Communitysouth Bk And Tr
Connecticut Bk & Tr Co
Cornerstone Cmnty Bk
Csb Bk
Dnb First Na
East Carolina Bk
Eastern Mi Bk
Elizabeth St Bk
Enterprise Nb Of Palm Beac
Enterprise Nb Of Palm Beach
Equitable Bk Ssb
Farmers St Bk
Fidelity Bk
Finance Fact
Finemark Nb&Tc
First Amer B&Tc
First Century Bk
First Century Bk Na
First Chatham Bk
First Cherokee St Bk
First City Bk Of Fl
First Cmnty Bk
First Dupage Bk
First Ga Cmnty Bk
First Nb Danville
First Nb Midwest
First Nb Of Brookfield
First Nb Of Chester Cty
First Nb Of Muscatine
First T&Sb
First Tr Bk
Firstbank Fs
Franklin Svg Bk
Frederick Cty Bk
Freedom Scty Bk
Frontier Bk
Gateway B&Tc
Gateway Bk Of Cent Fl
George D Warthen Bk
Glens Falls Nb&Tc
Grand B&Tc Of Fl
Great Eastern Bk Of Fl
Greeneville Fed Bk Fsb
Harborone Cu
Heritage Bk Central Il
Hinsdale B&Tc
Home Fed Bk Corp
Home S&Lc
Home Svg Bk
Howard Bk
Idaho Tr Nat Bk
Ing Bk Fsb
Integrity First Bk
Irwin Union Bk Fsb
Killbuck Svgs Bk Co
Kress Nb
La Porte Svg Bk
Lake Cmnty Bk
Lloyds Tsb Bk Plc Miami Agy
Main St Bk
Mansfield Co-Op Bk
Marine Bk
Marine Bk Springfield
Mcintosh St Bk
Merchants Bk Of Bangor
Meredith Village Svg Bk
Midcarolina Bk
Middleburg Bk
Millennium Bcpbank Na
Minster Bk
Mitsubishi Ufj Tr & Bkg Ny Br
Morris Bk
Mount Vernon Bk
Mountain Valley Cmnty Bk
Mutual Bk
National B&Tc Of Sycamore
National Bk Indianapolis
Nationwide Bk
Nbt Bk Na
New Frontier Bk
Norstates Bk
North Bk
North Shore Bk A Co-Op Bk
North Shore Bk Fsb
North Shore Cmnty B&Tc
Northmark Bk
Northpointe Bk
Northwest Cmnty Cu
Northwest Ga Bk
Orlando Fcu
Oxford B&T
Park Ave Bk
Patterson Bk
Peachtree Bk
Peoples' Bk Arlington Heights
Pioneer Bk
Pna Bk
Premier Bk
Rainier Pacific Svg Bk
Red River Bk
River Cities Bk
Sandy Spring Bk
Security Nb Of Omaha
Signature Bk
Southwest Ga Bk
Statewide Bk
Sterling Bk
Strategic Cap Bk
Tower B&Tc
Traverse City St Bk
Treynor St Bk
Union Fsb
United B&T
United B&Tc Na
Unity Nb
Village B&Tc
Warren Bk
Washington Tc
Waterstone Bk
Webster Bk Na
Wheaton B&Tc
Whitesville St Bk

For those wondering what the full borrowing histogram looks like by bucket, here it is, by key distributions, with the mode between $10,000,000 and $50,000,000. And on the top side, there were 3 distinct discount window borrowings for over $50 billion, the biggest of which was for $61 billion by, surprise, AIG, and the next two were for CPFF (Commercial Paper Funding Facility) in yet another SPV shell funding scheme.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
macholatte's picture


Nice work.


Eternal Student's picture

Ditto. I'd also like to add one important thing which should be mentioned. If you want to see the health of your Bank, or find one which is in relatively good shape, the best resource on the net is here:

You can also use it for Credit Unions. And for amusement, you can look at some of the banks in this article, to see what a troubled bank looks like. From just a couple that I've seen, the FDIC used to be closing down banks which were in better shape a couple of years ago. Since then, the FDIC has seriously slacked off, and now these banks are operating with Troubled Asset Ratios which are way higher now.

Myself, I use Credit Unions. They are generally in better shape than the banks. And I look for one with a TAR that is much lower than the mean.

macholatte's picture

How about forming a ZH syndicate and buying up some of these "troubled" banks for 50% of asset value via a credit line from Benny like the Soros machine did with Indy Mac. No money out of pocket & No risk.

Harlequin001's picture

Just buy gold, and this won't matter...

Harlequin001's picture

'How about forming a ZH syndicate and buying up some of these "troubled" banks for 50% of asset value via a credit line...'

but seriously, these losses are not finished yet, so even at 50% discount I think you would probably lose your money...

Urban Redneck's picture

That is what FDIC loss sharing agreements are for.  One must be either extremely stupid or extremely reckless to lose money with a banking license.

chumbawamba's picture

I operate my own bank.  It's local and has one branch.  It has only one account.  On despoit are objects that are lustrous and dense.

You could consider me a community central bank of sorts.  Remember the golden rule.

I am Chumbawamba.

chumbawamba's picture

Fuck no!  First (And Only) Sovereign Bank of Chumbawamba is inherently solvent.  We do not require government oversight.

I am Chumbawamba.

TheMerryPrankster's picture

Do I get a toaster if I open a checking account?

knukles's picture

Do I get to get toasted if I open a checking account?

Snidley Whipsnae's picture

+1 I also use a Credit Union and have used the same one for almost 20 years.


Yen Cross's picture

The ambulance chaser is back.

Hephasteus's picture

Are you still mad that all the cool kids hate dollars.

Heroic Couplet's picture

Thank you. I've seen this website before and had forgotten about it; and I thought BoA and Wachovia would have caused enough trouble without the credit unions getting involved. All the credit unions in North Carolina are in trouble, including IBM's Coastal Federal Credit Union. Also would point out, under the North Carolina Credit Union tab, I noticed that the Y axis does not always have the same values; the X axis does.

DarthVaderMentor's picture

Coastal Federal Credit Union, although still having a large number of depositors with a past or current relationship to the Blue Pig is not longer carrying the IBM name, to my knowledge. When I asked an office manager a few years back, the response was that it does not have any formal relationship with IBM anymore.

DosZap's picture

An important bit of data left out of the FDIC Guarantee of $250 k per customer limit.

IF a bank bellies up, you could have to wait for a year or two to get THAT Insured money back.

It's not automatically back in your hands.

So, food for thought.

Also,one bank on the list in the DFW area that took 2B in bailout money, repaid it, and ar BACK over the mean.

They are in the swamp again.

Don Birnam's picture

Staying in the same church but just a different pew, the estimable Lawrence Yun, Chief Economist and Bottle Washer of the NAR ( although the man's " .gov love" tone would suggest a Deputy Assistant Secretary at HUD ), is on C-SPAN this morning, as this is written. As can be expected ( angry callers notwithstanding ), the worst is behind is all skittles and rainbows. Just give it a little more time, good homeowners.

Sancho Ponzi's picture

Couldn't they have gotten a grand from the neighborhood payday loan store?

chumbawamba's picture

I'm ignorant about this stuff, but I seem to recall that many banks were "forced" to take a loan even if they didn't need it, because the Fed wanted to save face for all the TBTF's by making everyone take a bailout so no one could be singled out.  Might these have been those banks?

I am Chumbawamba.

Eternal Student's picture

I believe that you're talking about TARP, and it was some of the TBTF's which were forced to sign up for it. Here's the article on Paulson forcing them:

The banks in this ZH article are too little to give a d*mn about, and probably weren't worth Paulson even thinking about.

But the very amusing thing with Tyler's article is something that isn't very well known about TARP. You see, not every bank could get a TARP loan. The Treasury actually rejected a number of the smaller banks, because the Treasury thought they weren't good enough to try to prop up.

Or, in otherwords, only the smaller banks that the Treasury thought were likely to survive got TARP money. Being rejected for TARP was a very bad snub.

This has been kept quiet mostly, because if you look at the above list, a number of the TARP recipients there have already failed. That's lost TARP money, and something you won't hear much about, because it's part of the failure of the TARP program. Not even the bankers can tell what is a good bank.

Yes We Can. But Lets Not.'s picture

In the recent debacle, smaller banks that did the right thing, that were prudent, have been hosed, big banks that did not do the right thing, that engaged in the practices that created the housing bubble, that went all in assuming Uncle Sam would be there for them if they lost, have received generous rescue packages

MachoMan's picture

Also something that isn't talked about much...  the bank runs on smaller and regionals when tarp was announced...  causing risk averse smaller institutions to try and pony up to the tarp...  fdic raised their limits shortly after to help curb the run...

DosZap's picture


You sir are entirely correct.

Some banks that did NOT need bailing out, were FORCED to take loans.

No if's and's or but's. Why?, CONTROL.

Harlequin001's picture

hell, I could have loaned them that...

Twindrives's picture

Have them call Pimp Daddy Ben, he's got plenty of free fiat to go around for his banker buddies.

TruthInSunshine's picture

If you owe $1,000 to Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan, or their proxy, The Federal Reserve Crime Syndicate, they own you.

But if you owe over 30 billion to Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan, as AIG did, or their proxy, the Federal Reserve Crime Syndicate...

...they own you even harder and deeper!

*By own you, I mean they own the taxpayers, who are like...totally pwned.

Silver Alert's picture

Is it possible that they borrowed 1K just to be sure it worked and/or open up a line rather than needing only 1K to remain solvent?

Tyler Durden's picture

Virtually all of these banks borrowed repeatedly from the Discount Window, often for amounts also much greater than just $1,000. And if $1k was a test of the Discount Window for wire transfer purposes every single bank would have been required to do it, not just 171 banks.

Creed's picture

 And if $1k was a test of the Discount Window for wire transfer purposes every single bank would have been required to do it, not just 171 banks.



This does not follow, it assumes all banks march lockstep to the beat of the FED drummer.


There are 1,000's of banks and it would not surprise me in the least that a small portion of them would test funds availability IN CASE it were needed.


There is hyperbole in the assumption all these banks would fail for lack of 1k. Love ya man, but this is some fail here.

SamuelMaverick's picture

+1. My exact take on this .

AGoldhamster's picture

Add me too. Also A Tyler fan - bug also not smart enough to see the point!

Just 1000 bucks doens't make any sense at all.

Could as well be just another Maddoff scam too.

gkm's picture

Add me as well.  

You could make the suggestion that the banks that took 1k at least were worried enough to have to ensure the mechanisms worked smoothly so they could use the facility if needs be.  But then again, given where we were at the time, if you weren't worried then maybe you just didn't get it.  

Alternately, sometimes there is simply information to be gained by doing something.  Obviously not knowing the inner workings it is hard to surmise what that might be, but those who do know probably had some motive.

I'm not sure which TD this is but I'd have to say this is substandard.

Hephasteus's picture

Maybe there's a 171 banks that the fed forced to use the discount window for 1000 and were ordered to buy one 1000 hooker with the money. But to do it only once to show that they were dirty enough to be part of the criminal banking industry.

i-dog's picture

"to show that they were dirty enough to be part of the criminal banking industry"

Ding. Ding. Ding.

bugs_'s picture

171 banks worried enough about their own situation to get off their ass and "test the system".  Either way you look at it you still come to the same conclusion about the Team 171.

Blano's picture

I don't know, these could have been banks who have nevery done anything like this before unlike Goldman, JPM et al.

How many of these banks are on the problem list??  Seems like that would be more telling.

Selah's picture

to be sure it worked

Like this is some kind of mechanical linkage?

How can they be sure that it will "work" again without repeating the "test"?


knukles's picture

You mean like the ECB/EU stress tests?  Repeat it until you're sure somebody, somewhere, somehow, for some yet to be discovered reason thinks that it just has something of a farts chance in a windstorm of being something functionally, operatively somewhat right and possibly somehow works for some reason.

Milton Waddams's picture

I was wondering the same; perhaps this was a drill to test operational readiness.  I guess the way to find out is to determine when the $1000 transactions occurred within all transactions of a single bank.  In other words, do they represent the first transaction between the bank and the discount window, signaling a test of operational readiness, or the last, perhaps signaling something much worse.

New_Meat's picture

we just changed finance systems and the test was for $0.01/employee.  I'm sure that my organization will find a way to recover that vast wealth. - Ned

SimplePrinciple's picture

Capital One? I bet these banks are taking a token $1,000 with some arm twisting, just to show they are part of Team Bailout. I would not interpret this data to mean much of anything.

SignsAndWonders's picture

The obvious spin on this will be that banks were testing the discount window to make sure the hookup was good in case trouble came in the future.

CaptFufflePants's picture

Capital One Bk Usa Na
Capital One Na



SparkyvonBellagio's picture

I think it's time for some payback.

These Guys are Worst then Rapists/Murders,,,, Why?


Rapists/Murders (though it's horrible and truly tragic) only PHHHHHUCK WITH A HANDFUL.



I smell a Gold/Platinum ALLTIME WORLD RECORD.

Don't mess with the legitimate small town banks and hard working souls.

Heroic Couplet's picture

Excellent, but one point: what is "Coastal Fcu"? If it's IBM's Coastal "Federal Credit Union," the acronym needs to be clear "Coastal FCU."

Remember all the crap about "take your money out of banks and put it in a credit union, where it will be safe"? Agree that a credit union like IBM's may have just been testing out their ability to draw $1,000. May, may not have been the case.

ArsoN's picture

They were just testing their ability to draw funds.  Non issue.  

TruthInSunshine's picture

Well, many of you claiming this is a non-issue may be interested to know that many of these banks are indeed already vaporware. I count 5 just in my home state that are on this list.

That may or may not change the fact that some/all/a few of them were just doing a 'test access' of sorts.

I don't know whether this is true, or not.