ListNook

zombiekoalas Apr 11, 2026 +496

Lmfao 12 tankers a day. Im willing to bet there are 12 ships a day that have buyers lined up to pay....moreso as this drags on.

496

Gurashish1000 Apr 11, 2026 +280

The Tankers are worth like $200 million and are carrying $100-200 million worth of oil. $2 million worth of transit fee doesn't look that bad for safe passage.

280

Kendertas Apr 11, 2026 +47

Yeah tankers are weird since they pay for themselves so quickly, but there is only so many news ones being built so its more the opportunity loss when they are sunk that is catastrophic, not necessarily the value of the physical ship itself.

47

soks86 Apr 11, 2026 +3

That's the thing with the stock market though, it prices in expected profits that are totally based on capturing opportunity. The economy going south is the loss of opportunity expressed across the globe, since in many cases our economic inputs come from markets with international exposure.

3

dafunkmunk Apr 11, 2026 -39

Yea but I think the issue is what's to stop them from asking for more. If everyone relents and starts paying the toll, it does nothing but embolden Iran. Iran can look at people being desperate enough to pay $2 million and then start asking for $5 million. Then it could go up to $10 million. If they believe they have full control of the strait, then they can start acting like trump and keep grabbing for more money and more power until it boils over and countries band together to do something about it. It's risky business to placate people like this. Europe letting Hitler do what he wanted early on emboldened him to keep pressing for more which lead to a world war. The whole world playing nice with trump and stroking his ego thinking it would be easier has helped lead him into a full blown maniac invading countries on a whim. I feel like it's pretty slim odds that Iran leaves it at $2 million and doesn't start demanding more with threats of closing the strait again

-39

Lemzz Apr 11, 2026 +40

They won't raise it higher because Iran has a vested interest in oil flowing through the straight as well. The amount is technically $1 per barrel, and when the barrel is $100 no one will bat an eye at paying 5x that. The toll is more about exerting their sovereignty, and since they aren't stupid, they know they can't fight the US military directly. Economic warfare is 1000x more effective for them because the rest of the world wouldn't come defend them militarily either, or even attempt to stop the US and Israel from killing tens or hundreds of thousands of them, but the rest of the world damn well will put an end to this when they get no more oil, lng, fertillizer, sulfur, helium, and everything downstream from these products. They are also splitting the toll 50/50 with Oman. Almost every nation is already warning their populations that rationing is coming VERY soon, and shortage of fuel is going to happen. Our own president is trying to brush off 25% increase in gas in a month, as "just a cost of doing business". Mass flight cancellations, gas prices going vertical, and double digit inflation is coming very soon, and will end this. The toll will likely stay as a means of rebuilding the billions of dollars of damage to the oil infrastructure around the gulf.

40

redpandafire Apr 11, 2026 +15

What’s amazing is the ramifications of stopping oil for six weeks will be realized just in time for American mid terms.

15

FutureComplaint Apr 11, 2026 +10

Lets make prices skyrocket! That’ll get people to vote for us! - Republicans

10

teth21 Apr 11, 2026

You really don't think they would or could increase the toll? When introducing a toll which is illegal, it'd probably be better to start low at the start and eventually raise it later once it's been established that they own the strait. If they charged 20 million, they'd not only get more countries willing to go to war with them but even the citizens would become more in favor of it.

0

Lemzz Apr 12, 2026 +3

Legality would have to be up to some international lawyers to argue, which wouldn't be decided any time soon, and definitely not during this war. Iran's claim would be that their navy is properly identifying the vessels and cargo and escorting the ships through straight, which levying a charge for services would be appropriate, like the fees that are charged at every major canal crossing. This would also be the gray area by which they are attacking vessels breaking their blockade, like "we don't know if they are our enemies military ships" type thing. Maybe a sound argument against it just being a fee simply for transiting their waters ( which would be illegal ) and ultimately probably not something that stays in place permanently if they aren't actively engaged in war because of international pressure, but nothing would stop them from saying they are permanently "at war" either. You are probably correct in saying if they jacked the charge way up it would turn many nations against them, which is likely why it will stay low and eventually cease, but for now it's 1 effective piece on the chess board where nations can choose to pay it and get oil, or don't and get none ( and potentially lose the vessel/crew ). It puts other nations on the hot seat to pressure the US/Israel to stop because it doesn't seem unreasonable given the situation.

3

VelvetCowboy19 Apr 11, 2026 +4

Small toll = lots of people pay, big $$$ Big toll = nobody pays, no $$$

4

texachusetts Apr 12, 2026 +1

The insurance d******* rates for toll payers should make the tolls worth it.

1

apexxin Apr 11, 2026 +787

“The tankers” don’t gaf if the owner of the cargo is willing to pay and wants it out.

787

Myjunkisonfire Apr 11, 2026 +148

Right? Their $50m cargo has gone up in value to $110m. The buyer would happily pay an extra $2m to guarantee its delivery.

148

organasm Apr 11, 2026 +287

They kept talking about providing insurance and I kept thinking about it like who cares about boat/cargo insurance when you might not make it through alive.

287

kullwarrior Apr 11, 2026 +114

If theres no insurance to cross the strait, it's unlikely companies will attempt it in the first place.

114

organasm Apr 11, 2026 +127

No, what I'm saying is if there were a threat to my life as a crew member/captain, no amount of insurance would get me to attempt it.

127

Ixisoupsixi Apr 11, 2026 +38

It’s an attitude like this that will keep you from moving up in this company. We’re looking for people that are willing to stay late, work on weekends, AND forfeit their lives so we can build more plastic and make more money.

38

Mother_Airline_6276 Apr 11, 2026 +5

“We’re looking for Rockstars at our company!” Rockstar= underpaid/overworked boot licker

5

22over7closeenough Apr 11, 2026 +70

But but it's the capitalists who are really risking everything! /s

70

Psychoanalytix Apr 11, 2026 +3

Don't talk like that, you're hurting my money's feelings!!!!!!!

3

FlashyHeight9323 Apr 11, 2026 +5

But how much money?

5

New_Blacksmith_709 Apr 11, 2026 +1

Anyone who spends half their life away from family and is in charge of expensive cargo probably makes bank. Kind of like oil rig workers.

1

Stonp Apr 11, 2026 +9

Yeah usually you have to get special war insurance, but it wouldn’t cover this instance. It doesn’t even cover costs of waiting for safe passages of transport

9

Grow_away_420 Apr 11, 2026 +8

Owners have a lot to consider, the sailors well being, the safety of their property. Two million seems like a small price for someone who owns a VLT or other gigantic ship to get it out of the gulf, the sailors on shore, and the ship back to moving goods around safer waters.

8

StephenHunterUK Apr 11, 2026 +3

>the sailors well being A lot of people in the maritime industry would laugh at that comment, considering the widespread use of flags of convenience: [https://safety4sea.com/itf-issues-three-new-additions-to-flags-of-convenience-list/](https://safety4sea.com/itf-issues-three-new-additions-to-flags-of-convenience-list/)

3

Anyales Apr 11, 2026 +5

They should just zig zag the missiles, im sure it would be fine

5

joelfarris Apr 11, 2026 +4

You joke, and I have to admit it would be funny for tankers to be running S-patterns through the strait while trying not to run into each other while coming and going, but remember that this is somewhat of a bluff on Iran's part as well. If they f*** up and accidentally sink a massive tanker in that strait and block it, and they can no longer get their oil out, ~50% of their nation's economy disappears in a _poof_, and not to mention they're gonna start getting some really angry phone calls from China.

4

Fallen_Jalter Apr 11, 2026 +2

Not to mention they lost track of their own mines if they are to be believed

2

StephenHunterUK Apr 11, 2026 +3

The strait isn't that narrow - it's not the Suez Canal (which was blocked for eight years after 1967), but a massive oil spill would be an environmental disaster, especially for the UAE's tourist industry. Or what's left of it.

3

Initial_E Apr 11, 2026 +1

Why should I risk my life if my boss is a cheapskate? I think they do care, but in the opposite direction.

1

Individual_Door_3251 Apr 11, 2026 +224

That meeting in Pakistan going to be a lost cause.

224

r2k-in-the-vortex Apr 11, 2026 +136

The point of the talks is for both parties to show the world how hard they are working for peace before they start bombing eachother again.

136

00-Monkey Apr 11, 2026 +97

Idk, there’s a slim chance that JD simply doesn’t show up, and then they bomb the meet up location. Surely that will bring about the “regime change” needed

97

Minguseyes Apr 11, 2026 +62

I dunno, getting rid of Vance and Kushner could be appealing to the orange blob …

62

TheDungen Apr 11, 2026 +12

I see the appeal myself though I wouldn't want Witkoff feeling left out.

12

NoFox1446 Apr 11, 2026 +28

Based on the reports this week of threatening Leo, it would not surprise me if he was diverted to the Vatican to kill again.

28

Aggressive_Chair1470 Apr 11, 2026 +14

it definitely feels like a trap but im not sure for who. surely both sides taking extreme precautions

14

GoodTeletubby Apr 11, 2026 +13

I mean, there's a slim chance that Vance shows up, and the US *still* bombs the place through some back channel. Protestant armageddonists won't blink twice at sacrificing a Papist to get their holy war to end the world started again.

13

rapax Apr 11, 2026 +3

Why not have Vance skip the summit, and you bomb Mar-a-Lago instead?

3

TheDungen Apr 11, 2026 +2

Won't Thiel be upset though? Vance is his proxy.

2

Jayrodtremonki Apr 11, 2026 +3

Is The Godfather playing on TV at Mar a lago tonight?

3

fec2245 Apr 11, 2026 +1

I don't think you'd bet on that even with favorable odds but it probably was fun to write.

1

00-Monkey Apr 11, 2026 +1

I said a slim chance. I’ve never bet on anything that I feel like I have a sub 40% chance of winning. Even then I rarely bet as I’m fairly risk averse.

1

fec2245 Apr 11, 2026 +1

>Even then I rarely bet as I’m fairly risk averse. Probably for the best if your putting the probability within an order of magnitude of 40%

1

00-Monkey Apr 11, 2026 +1

I said I don’t bet under 40% chance. I have not assigned a probability to them bombing negotiators besides saying slim. 40% is obviously not slim

1

flybydenver Apr 11, 2026 +1

Eyeliner meets oceanliner

1

Virtblue Apr 11, 2026 +1

and blame it on afganistan

1

foul_ol_ron Apr 11, 2026 +1

Or Iceland.

1

Effectuality Apr 11, 2026 +2

Icy what you did, there.

2

TheDungen Apr 11, 2026 +1

Its essentially what they did last time.

1

Weissritters Apr 11, 2026 +8

Depends, Pakistan may roll out their best couch…

8

Myjunkisonfire Apr 11, 2026 +12

Yep. This war has created a tollbooth opportunity for Iran that didn’t exist in peacetime. They either happily maintain the war with their new windfall income or accept peace with the tolls in place, which would be a symbolic defeat for America. Combined with Netanyahu not wanting peace. Trump has got himself in a shitty situation.

12

Tsquare43 Apr 11, 2026 +2

Which is why is expecting NATO, Japan, South Korea, etc to clean it up.

2

cheerfulwish Apr 12, 2026 +2

This issue will go beyond a symbolic defeat for America if they are allowed to interfere with freedom of navigation. This will open up the possibility of other countries (China for example) to also claim fees for usage of “their” waters for transit. Trump has really ducked the whole world over (again) with this one

2

fec2245 Apr 11, 2026 +2

How would peace with a "toll" in place look? They attack any ship that passes through without paying? A war crime that risks ecological disaster?

2

AK_Panda Apr 11, 2026 +2

If they aren't at war, then they likely seize the ship if it hasn't paid the toll and hold it till the owner agrees to pay.

2

fec2245 Apr 11, 2026 +2

The Somali approach? But ships started carrying armed guards to deal with that.

2

AK_Panda Apr 11, 2026 +1

Big difference between scaring off pirates with a couple armed guards and fending off a nation state actor.

1

fec2245 Apr 11, 2026 +2

They don't have naval vessels, it'd be the same speed boats the Somali pirates used

2

7ddlysuns Apr 11, 2026 +8

JD will totally ace it Edit: Jesus no he won’t, I’m amazed anyone took that seriously 😂

8

whatproblems Apr 11, 2026 +9

i bet he yells at them for wearing the wrong suit

9

LeviAEthan512 Apr 11, 2026 +8

He's the guy with a death aura right? Might not be a complete waste for their objectives

8

TheDungen Apr 11, 2026 +4

Doesn't seem to work on Trump unfortunately.

4

Autisum Apr 11, 2026 +1

[ Removed by Listnook ]

1

Yvaelle Apr 11, 2026 +1

Your thinking of Steven Miller, Trump's senior advisor on evil

1

joelfarris Apr 11, 2026 +3

The Senior Evil Advisor?

3

kingcakeaholic Apr 11, 2026 +1

* Is a lost cause

1

Lundetangen Apr 11, 2026 +1

3D chess would be Iran using the same tactics as Israel and the US and just bomb the shit out of the negotiators

1

ausmomo Apr 11, 2026 +167

Didn't Trump say they should pay a toll to the USA to use the strait?

167

VexedCanadian84 Apr 11, 2026 +175

He's trying to figure out how to make money out of this. He seems to like the idea of the tolls, just as long as he benefits.

175

redyellowblue5031 Apr 11, 2026 +43

I mean they are requesting 1.5 trillion for next years defense budget not including the 200 billion drunkard Hegseth requested. They’re gonna need that toll money.

43

OozeNAahz Apr 11, 2026 +52

You don’t understand. He wants the toll money. It will never hit the US treasury. Just like the Venezuelan oil money. Offshore accounts controlled by him.

52

redyellowblue5031 Apr 11, 2026 +5

Oh I know. I was being facetious.

5

tierciel Apr 11, 2026 +7

Lol the toll wouldn't go in the government coffers! It would go straight into Trump's personal offshore account.

7

redyellowblue5031 Apr 11, 2026 +2

100%.

2

ekobres Apr 11, 2026 +2

War budget. It’s the Department of War now. So it’s a war budget.

2

Pik000 Apr 11, 2026 +1

Bold to assume the US is going to get it and not directly into his bank accounts

1

TheDungen Apr 11, 2026 +2

He wants his share. Not for the US for him personally. He should be more worried considering these are extremists and he did kill a lot of their people. Of they promised to cut him in I would be very suprised if it wasn't to get a chance to bump him off later.

2

ary31415 Apr 11, 2026 +1

I think it also comes across to Trump as a way that he can accede to Iran's demand to control the strait, but be able to claim it as a victory still cause the US gets paid too.

1

TheDungen Apr 11, 2026 +1

Yes... about the part there the US gets paid though.

1

that1tech Apr 11, 2026 +10

See that’s different because it funds Freedom and Eagles and shit

10

whosthatcarguy Apr 11, 2026 +4

You gotta pay the troll toll…

4

duaneap Apr 11, 2026 +2

And this dumb f*** talks about paper tigers.

2

dragon_idli Apr 11, 2026 +120

* A tanker waiting at sea is more costly than the toll * With reduced insurance cover providers, a loss of one tanker - minimum $120 mil loss(ship cost) + oil load + crew recovery & rehabilitation + revenue loss from no ship until a replacement is built + insurance hike for the ship's operator across their fleet due to risk assessment. Good luck urging ships to take the risk and loss upon themselves by not paying toll.

120

dgkimpton Apr 11, 2026 +22

Indeed. As Trump is so fond of saying "just the cost of doing business".

22

fec2245 Apr 11, 2026 +5

The Gulf countries' don't want to surrender their sovereignty to Iran, the terms could change at any point and throttle their economies if they allow this precedent to be established. They could make it conditional in their contracts.

5

dragon_idli Apr 11, 2026 +4

Gcc and iran have had a long standing disagreement about multiple things. Gcc are based on monarchies which iran back then was against it, arab vs persians, shia vs sunni and add usa cia along with idf/israel medling with the region and destabilising it further since 1950's. Cia and mi6 overthrew/killed a democratic iran in 1953 coupe because the then Iranian leaders wanted their own country to prosper from their oil resources. Irgc got founded as a result of that cia and mi6 operation. They successfully installed a monarch(shah) in iran. Too long of a history where cia, mi6 and idf/mossad kept playing/meddling iran/iraq and are the reason for the current irgc + conflict and basically the reason for the last two major wars on this planet. The ones who really suffered were the iranians, iraqi civillians and usa armed forces who thought they were fighting for their country. Iranians lost their freedom after the regime change in 50's due to cia in my view. Iran has a very few bargaining chips and the straight is one of those and they will play it to their advantage.

4

fec2245 Apr 11, 2026 +7

Most countries could sink civilian ships at will, Iran advantage is their willingness to.

7

AK_Panda Apr 11, 2026 +2

Or they could bite the bullet, pay the toll for now and get to work on pipelines to the red sea and/or Mediterranean. Better than having your oil infrastructure and potentially desalination plants spontaneously exploding.

2

fec2245 Apr 11, 2026 +2

If you ever looked at a map of the region you'd realize that most gulf countries don't have access to the Red Sea.

2

AK_Panda Apr 11, 2026 +1

You are aware infrastructure can span multiple countries right?

1

fec2245 Apr 11, 2026 +1

You think Qatar wants to surrender their sovereignty to the Saudis? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_diplomatic_crisis

1

AK_Panda Apr 12, 2026 +1

Then they can negotiate with Iran.

1

fec2245 Apr 12, 2026 +1

Or else they'll commit an act of terrorism in violation of the laws of war?

1

dragon_idli Apr 11, 2026 +1

Problem is the existing pipeline aswell had an attack at the end and that stopped the operations. Not sure if it is back up now after ceasefire. Natural geographical advantage cannot be bypassed with built structures due to the vulnerability. But yes, they should invest in having atleast 80% transfer capacity. The current pipelines combined are at 45%.

1

Lanster27 Apr 11, 2026 +1

Just think of all the detention fees.

1

thenasch Apr 11, 2026 +1

He's urging operators to not go through the strait at all, not to go without paying.

1

Awkward-Candle-4977 Apr 11, 2026 +25

That can create precedence for south of china sea, taiwan strait

25

mapadofu Apr 11, 2026 +10

Malacca

10

Awkward-Candle-4977 Apr 11, 2026 +1

malacca strait isnt under conflict situation

1

mapadofu Apr 11, 2026 +11

For now ;)

11

Awkward-Candle-4977 Apr 11, 2026 +2

Even so, alternative routes through sunda strait or makassar strait aren't much further

2

PhysicallyTender Apr 12, 2026 +1

Indonesia would like to have a word with you.

1

Awkward-Candle-4977 Apr 12, 2026 +3

I'm Indonesian btw. In 1982, Indonesia agreed for 3 free north-south international sea routes crossing the archipelago

3

PhysicallyTender Apr 12, 2026 +1

Which can be revoked if any of the major superpowers are dumb enough to start some shit with you.

1

Telcontar77 Apr 11, 2026 +8

You mean the precedent the **if** you can survive more then a month of large scale terrorist attacks by the US and Israel, **then** you get to leverage your relatively unique geographical position to impose a toll on shipping? I'm sure countries will be rushing to be have their country be assaulted and violated by the Axis of Epstein, just to make some extra money.

8

VilleKivinen Apr 11, 2026 +3

Turkey might have just found out that they have a new source of revenue.

3

AK_Panda Apr 11, 2026 +3

Let's be honest, if Turkey told Russia that they had to pay $2m per ship to transit or they could f*** off, we'd probably think that was hilarious. Or at least I would.

3

Sacaron_R3 Apr 11, 2026 +2

If the international community doesn't want to pay tolls, they could also simply freeze american assets and use them to benefit Iran. That seemed to do the trick after Russia invaded Ukraine.

2

ozrocket Apr 11, 2026 +45

I'm assuming the people who are urging the tankers not to pay Iran are safe and sound on dry land thousands of kilometters away

45

PracticalAd5050 Apr 11, 2026 +12

Yes. Probably in America, exporters of overpriced gas and oil.

12

rabidstoat Apr 11, 2026 +7

It's actually a group called Intertanko which represents about half of the oil tanker fleet. They are also advising not to use the strait currently due to safety concerns, and to instead wait for a more certain peace agreement.

7

cogit2 Apr 11, 2026 +71

Some business guy is saying paying the toll isn't the way to go. Does business guy have a military he can use to secure the strait? No. Business guy clearly doesn't understand Iran has the strait under its control with as little as one $50k Shahed drone, and until that is addressed, not paying only means future ship explosions. Evidently dude doesn't understand the hornet's nest the US has unleashed.

71

wiseoldfox Apr 11, 2026 +29

Business guy needs to meet Insurance guy. Maybe have lunch.

29

cogit2 Apr 11, 2026 +8

Insurance guy: "Thanks for the free lunch. You don't need my service anymore right? Nah, what do you have to lose? Just sail!"

8

bixtuelista Apr 11, 2026 +11

not just any business guy, but business guy who is a legend for sucking at business.

11

TheDungen Apr 11, 2026 +2

Philip Belcher? Never heard of him.

2

HadoBoirudo Apr 11, 2026 +9

The first rule I learned in business from my boss is that "there are no moral high points to defend and no points of principle in business, you just need to stick to doing what makes economic sense". If you win a legal case, you win, if you lose but are actually morally right, you still lose - move on. Simple. I am not saying I agree with that view, but it is how businesses largely work. If the toll is the new cost of doing business for shipping oil, and if you need to pay it to stay in business, then companies will pay the toll.

9

StephenHunterUK Apr 11, 2026 +1

That's literally how we got slavery. It made more "economic sense" to bring millions of slaves over from Africa to work the land because they were less likely to die of disease than white people.

1

cogit2 Apr 11, 2026 +1

This is a shipping rep literally saying people shouldn't pay. They're trying to organize a boycot basically.

1

AK_Panda Apr 11, 2026 +3

Seems unlikely it'll work. Price will just rise until whoever owns the ship decides it's too lucrative to not pay the toll.

3

turbo_dude Apr 11, 2026 +1

Tolls/tariffs, same difference to the raping ape

1

doolpicate Apr 11, 2026 +8

We have the idi*t king Donald to thank for this "improvement."

8

nicethingslover Apr 11, 2026 +7

If the Iranians were Americans they would advertise for a subscription model. Buy your basic tier for 10 tankers per month or choose the most popular tier: the unlimited enterprise tier. Even cheaper if you pay per year!

7

drewid9 Apr 12, 2026 +1

Call the Iranian Embassy. They just found their new negotiator.

1

uberduck Apr 11, 2026 +7

Let me guess. It's the US urging?

7

Zorops Apr 11, 2026 +6

But putting tariffs on your own population is fair.

6

MoveEither1986 Apr 11, 2026 +43

In other news: Iran urged to ignore the assassination of their leaders, the slaughter of their children, and play nice like everyone else.

43

Resident_Monk_4493 Apr 11, 2026 +4

“Poor USrael, we will forfeit our sovereignty and economy to appease the shareholders, don’t worry “

4

meechmeechmeecho Apr 11, 2026 -4

They got over all those dead protestors pretty quickly

-4

MoveEither1986 Apr 11, 2026 +6

Hey, don't get me wrong, I think all the governments involved are assholes. I just find it absurd when one of them tells the other to play fair or else. It's like they're in a bar room brawl and one of them calls the other out because: dress code.

6

No_Indication9630 Apr 11, 2026 +9

Is the person saying that Bibi who would like to keep the war going because he's a psychopath?

9

turb0_encapsulator Apr 11, 2026 +9

$1 per barrel is nothing to make sure you don't get blown up. Everyone but the US is just going to pay it.

9

SP1570 Apr 11, 2026 +10

Options: - wait for peaceful resolution: extra costs, loss of revenues, growing issues with crew morale and health - cross without paying: chances of BOOM! - pay the toll: c.1% extra cost and life goes on I hope someone will sue the US and Israel for compensation.

10

TellMotor3809 Apr 11, 2026 +48

I agree USA and Israel should pay instead

48

Dimhilion Apr 11, 2026 +8

Yep let Iran charge the 1 dollar pr barrel. When the world complains, just explain it is to cover the damage the US/Trump caused to their country. And that is what they get for letting someone that insane just do what he wants. Blame trump. Want it to go away? Lets negotiate a proper security deal, so the next madman cant just go do the same again. I dont support terrorists, or Iran in general, but this is entirely on Trump. I think, in this limited case, Iran has the right to charge for passage.

8

dave_gormen_3 Apr 11, 2026 +4

tanker1: after you tanker2: no, i insist, you first tanker1: no, really, YOU first Other tankers:

4

tiregroove Apr 11, 2026 +6

The US should pay a toll to the rest of the world for starting a war completely unprovoked and driving up the price of oil for everyone else. This is another tariff. Meawhile trump made out like a bandit buying oil futures as he bombed them. [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-04-10/senators-push-cftc-to-probe-oil-trading-before-trump-iran-news](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-04-10/senators-push-cftc-to-probe-oil-trading-before-trump-iran-news)

6

Ouch259 Apr 11, 2026 +3

The Comex is so corrupt and its not just oil trading. The banks are criminal.

3

OnePilotDrone Apr 11, 2026 +11

No pay = no access, simple as that. The fee is actually extremely low $2mil per ship. Surprised Iran even put it that low. Oil prices right now are hovering around $98, one large tanker can carry up to 2 million barrels of oil on the ship. The Iranian fee amounts to about a $1 per barrel which is basically 1% fee on each barrel of oil. Pretty sure every cargo owner would be more than happy to pay that price for safe passage. People need to realise that this illegal war started by USA and Israel has basically destroyed the freedom of navigation in Hormoz. Iran holds all the cards as we've seen during the last 6 weeks of the war.

11

reflect25 Apr 11, 2026 +6

mhmm i mean it's still quite a lot of money added up in the long run. 2 million per ship. with just 10 ships per day for a year that'd be 2 \* 10\* 365 = 7300 mill or 7.3 billion. and before the strait closure around \~100 ships per day or aka 73 billion

6

VhenRa Apr 11, 2026 +4

It sucks. But it sucks less than no fuel.

4

OnePilotDrone Apr 11, 2026 +2

Yes definitely but compared to the alternative which is no passage, a 1% fee or currently sitting at an extra dollar per barrel is miniscule. Instead of a barrel costing $96, it will now cost $97 a barrel with the fees and everything paid. Its the new truth after the illegal war USA and Israel staged against Iran. Before all this, passage was safe and free. Irans gonna need revenue to rebuild their hospitals/schools/universities etc so the fee is inevitable. The fee will be shared with Oman aswell. It's a perfect example of "cause and effect"

2

Current-Code Apr 11, 2026 +5

"Please die for me, Praise be to God! Thank you for your attention on this important matter"

5

MarmotFullofWoe Apr 11, 2026 +3

Is it ok to pay it if Donald Trump gets a cut?

3

pinewind108 Apr 11, 2026 +3

I'd think countries like South Korea would happy put up a dollar a barrel for a reliable supply.

3

punkindle Apr 11, 2026 +3

(slaps head) Why didn't I think of that. Just don't pay. Of course!

3

HylanderUS Apr 11, 2026 +2

There's probably one of those reaaaaaally long red/white bar that needs to be lifted up, and they just figured out they can go around

2

millerlit Apr 11, 2026 +3

When your country is at risk of running out of oil and destroying their economy they would rather pay then have a revolt from the people. Also tankers are super slow so they are sitting ducks for a drone.

3

Amerlis Apr 11, 2026 +6

Yeah nah. Probably costs a Pretty Penny per day to keep those tankers hauling product to where you need them to go to get paid. 2 million for safe passage and getting paid or keep shelling out daily as they sit dead in the water. Tough call.

6

Thin-Discipline1673 Apr 11, 2026 +2

Bada boom!

2

BaselineUnknown Apr 11, 2026 +2

Gonna find those 11 mines really quick.

2

whatdabee Apr 11, 2026 +5

Don't pay, just tank the drones

5

FuckingColdInCanada Apr 11, 2026 +2

Can't. No healers in the party.

2

dxdifr Apr 11, 2026 +3

Here's an idea. Why don't the us government seize american oil and force them to build modern refineries with their billions of dollars of profit so we dont have to use the straight of Hormuz ??????????

3

potato_analyst Apr 11, 2026 +3

Was free before the attack on Iran

3

drewid9 Apr 12, 2026 +1

Yup and things changed. 2 nations bombed the everloving pants off a sovereign nation. Then made up reasons why they did it.

1

The_Island_Idiot Apr 11, 2026 +2

If you don’t want to pay a toll fee , don’t do business in the Strait of Hormuz

2

drewid9 Apr 12, 2026 +2

Ttttthhhats the capitalist answer

2

Daysaved Apr 11, 2026 +1

Yeah no one is going through that thing for a while. Iran came out today and said they have no clue where all the mines they put out there are.

1

makawakatakanaka Apr 11, 2026 +1

So what then, don’t go through, or risk getting blown up? Without outside intervention it’s going to be a stand still

1

Street_Anon Apr 11, 2026 +1

You think Arab countries would allow this? Nope!

1

NotSoSalty Apr 11, 2026 +1

Out of curiosity, Iran's fishing industry wouldn't be harmed by dumping tons and tons of oil into the water, would it?

1

stewmander Apr 11, 2026 +1

It's a sold strategy, let's see if it pays off for 'em.

1

isthereadrwho Apr 11, 2026 +1

Urged by whom? Donald Trump who's sitting safely in the White House surrendered by the army and Secret Service. Well let's put him on one of those tankers that decides not to pay just to see what happens, what do y'all think? He can bring Melania and Brandon if he wants

1

ImAjustin Apr 11, 2026 -8

So let’s say they don’t pay the toll. Is Iran going to bomb that tanker? Couldn’t that be an act of war in itself?

-8

AtrociousMeandering Apr 11, 2026 +17

I'm curious why you think it matters. Genuinely. Iran is in fact at war, so the only reason I can think it might matter is getting an additional country involved. Except, the ship won't be flying a major country's flag, they all register with the small countries that don't do inspections or have labor rights.

17

balooaroos Apr 11, 2026 +10

That's what's happened already. It's the reason ships aren't going through anymore, they don't want to get blown up too. Act of terrorism or piracy might be a better description since it's not against a military target or country.

10

3381024 Apr 11, 2026 +4

\>>Couldn’t that be an act of war in itself? What is Iran just call it a special military operation instead?

4

Natural-Strategy5023 Apr 11, 2026 +3

Sure, just as the US could blow up any tanker of theirs, China’s, Russia’s, India’s, etc

3

tiregroove Apr 11, 2026 +1

Who bombed who first? Take all the time you need.

1

Tankers urged not to pay toll to Iran for use of Strait of Hormuz.

💬 Send a Message

172 Comments