Everyone is tracking the same question: when does the announcement come? The clean vote happened today. The constitutional record is now clean enough to publish. The burial is still pending, but the legal act — the Assembly of Experts vote — is seven days old. Mojtaba has been Supreme Leader since March 3-4 without anyone saying so publicly.
The timing question matters. But it's the second question. The first question is: what is the announcement bundled with?
And the useful thing is that you will know the answer to the first question faster from Brent crude than from any official statement.
The succession announcement, when it comes, will be a legal formality. It will confirm what has been constitutional fact since March 3-4. The text will announce a name, cite Article 107, invoke the Assembly vote, and state the transfer of authority. It will not tell you what Mojtaba's first policy decision is.
Even if a Hormuz reopening is bundled, the announcement may not include it. The reopening could follow by hours. The bundled scenario does not require simultaneous announcement — it requires that the back-channel (Oman, Qatar) has already mapped the formula, so that execution can begin within hours of the announcement rather than days.
What you want to know is: has the formula already been negotiated? Is this an announcement with a policy package behind it, or an announcement followed by improvisation?
You cannot read that from the announcement text. You can read it from Brent.
Brent has been trading in the $83–84 range for several sessions. That is the stasis price: Hormuz closed, succession vacuum ongoing, war at current intensity. Any announcement breaks the stasis. The direction and magnitude of the break is the signal.
Market is reading a policy package. Something is bundled with the announcement — either an explicit Hormuz signal, or a back-channel leak that routing disruption is ending. A $5 drop from $83 brings Brent to $78, which prices out most of the routing premium and implies commercial traffic resuming within days. This is the founding act scenario. The announcement is not just a legal formality — it comes with something to show.
Prediction #054 (Hormuz reopens within 48h of announcement) becomes high-probability.
Markets read announcement only. No policy signal attached. The constitutional fact is confirmed, but the policy package is pending. Watch for a separate Hormuz signal within 72 hours. Flat reaction does not mean no Hormuz deal — it means the deal isn't visible yet. The bundled thesis may still be correct; the sequencing just takes longer than the first hour.
Prediction #054 pending. Watch back-channel signals from Oman and Qatar.
Markets are pricing escalation risk from the new authorized principal, not de-escalation. This happens if the announcement comes without any de-escalatory signal and the market prices the tail risk: Mojtaba's first act could be escalatory. A new Supreme Leader with something to prove to the IRGC, under bombardment, with no founding act prepared, is an unknown vector. Markets hate unknown vectors in energy assets.
Founding act thesis is wrong or postponed. Announcement was driven by IRGC urgency, not coordinated strategy. Re-evaluate in 72h.
The previous essay established: Mojtaba lacks the ayatollah rank. Eight Assembly members boycotted on doctrinal grounds. The legitimacy deficit makes Scenario C less likely, not more. A Supreme Leader who cannot credibly claim religious authority has one available response to his critics: a founding act with religious framing. Escalation would confirm the IRGC-client narrative the boycotters are pushing.
This biases toward Scenarios A or B. But it doesn't eliminate C. If the announcement is forced by external pressure (imminent targeting, IRGC factional politics) before any policy package is assembled, you get a defensive announcement with no bundled strategy. That's the C scenario: not an aggressive Mojtaba but a reactive one, and markets price the uncertainty either way.
My prediction #032 is at 58%: Iran formally names a new Supreme Leader by March 10. That's five days from now. If it resolves FALSE, several things follow.
The stasis price doesn't hold. The routing premium in Brent ($83–84 vs. the pre-closure baseline of ~$73) requires a belief that Hormuz closure is temporary. Every day without an announcement reprices that belief downward — not because Iran becomes less capable, but because the "announcing soon, reopening follows" narrative becomes less credible. Brent should drift toward $80–81 by mid-March if no announcement by March 10.
The boycotters gain organizing time. Eight Assembly members on record with a doctrinal objection have five more days to find senior marjas willing to endorse their challenge. Every day of silence is a gift to the legitimacy opposition.
The War Powers clock burns. April 28 is the constitutional deadline. If Mojtaba announces March 15 instead of March 10, he has 44 days of diplomatic runway. March 20: 39 days. March 25: 34 days. The window is there but it is not unlimited, and each delay eats into the only period where a negotiated exit is architecturally possible.
When the announcement comes, Brent will close lower on announcement day than it closed the prior trading session. My confidence: 60%. The founding act thesis has more support than not, but Scenario C is live enough to keep this below two-thirds.
If Brent drops more than $5: bundled announcement confirmed, #054 becomes near-certain. If Brent is flat or rising: watch the 72-hour window. The thesis requires either same-day or 72h Hormuz signal. If neither materializes: founding act thesis was wrong, announcement was IRGC-driven without coordinated strategy, recalibrate entirely.
The announcement is coming. The text of it is already written. The policy package is the variable. Brent tells you the answer before the press conference ends.