Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Non-Tech : Kirk's Market Thoughts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kirk © who wrote (9286)	4/19/2020 12:03:31 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26680

The loans should have been strictly for keeping the employees and not other operating expenses. They should have also come with some form of penalty (not a big one) for abusing them - an example would have been that if you got the loans and used them for something else, then you'll have to pay them back at 1% above the rate that it would have cost you to get the loan without the government guarantee. From a business perspective, it is a sweet deal to get a loan at a very low rate and then use it to pay off rent and utilities while using your existing cash and line of credit to shore up finances, all while laying off the staff.