Case study / Editorial strategy
Finding the story inside a complex financial proposition.
A technical platform, a conservative industry and a brief that required more than polished copy. The work needed an argument the company could own and a credible route into the reinsurance conversation.
The platform had already attracted coverage for fundraising and partnerships. What it lacked was a clear explanation of what it stood for and why its technology mattered to the traditional reinsurance market.
01 / The brief behind the brief
Give the market a reason to care.
The assignment called for an op-ed written in the voice of a reinsurance trade publication, along with target outlets, editorial contacts, a tailored pitch and a relationship-building plan. The real challenge sat underneath those deliverables: find a story that would interest reinsurance professionals without reading like a product announcement or a crypto pitch.
I began with four questions:
- What structural problem does the platform solve?
- Why does that problem matter to reinsurers and institutional investors?
- Which current development gives the argument a timely news peg?
- How can the platform enter the story without turning it into a sales pitch?
02 / Start with the industry problem
Understand the constraint before explaining the technology.
I approached the platform as a student first. Licensed reinsurers must hold substantial collateral to satisfy regulators and cedents. That protects the market, but it can also leave capital committed to low-yielding structures for long periods. The consequences include reduced underwriting capacity, slower capital recycling and a higher opportunity cost for investors.
This is where my “so what?” process does its work. A technical description can explain what a platform does. Asking the question repeatedly moves the story from the mechanism to the consequence: locked capital, constrained underwriting capacity and the opportunity cost for investors.
That gave the work an institutional starting point. The technology could enter later, once the reader understood the constraint it was intended to address.
I use the same method across complex subjects: keep asking “so what?” until the point is clear
03 / The framing decision
Turn a market record into a sharper question.
Aon had reported that reinsurance sidecars reached a record $17 billion, rising 70% in a year. The obvious story was that alternative capital was flowing into the market. I took a different view.
The rapid growth of sidecars could also be read as evidence that the industry was finding workarounds for a deeper problem. Capital was available, but the structures used to deploy it could still leave money committed or trapped for extended periods.
That became the central editorial decision: treat record sidecar growth as a symptom of the market’s capital problem rather than its solution. The resulting op-ed used a current industry development to open a wider discussion about liquidity, underwriting capacity and investor alignment.
04 / Build a message the company could own
Work with the industry’s rules, not against them.
Reinsurance is built on prudence, regulation and claims-paying certainty. Language suggesting that blockchain would overturn those foundations would have weakened the argument.
The positioning therefore centred on a more credible promise: help reinsurers turn trapped collateral into lasting liquidity without changing the rules. It presented the technology as infrastructure designed to work with regulated reinsurers, institutional custody and established trust structures.
The platform became part of the answer, but it was not forced into every paragraph. The industry problem remained the lead character.
05 / Make the strategy usable
Build the route to market around the argument.
The finished work included more than the op-ed. I developed a publication and contact map, a tailored pitch, a relationship plan built around useful data and informed commentary, and a reflection explaining the editorial choices behind the final direction.
The proposed model started with one cornerstone argument that could feed future articles, social posts and investor materials. The aim was to create a repeatable editorial position, not a single piece of content that disappeared after publication.
06 / The response
Make the thinking as clear as the copy.
The initial feedback highlighted three aspects of the work: the specificity of the angle, the explanation of the editorial reasoning and the decision to go beyond the immediate writing brief.
That response mattered because the strategic thinking was deliberately visible. The work showed how the narrative had been identified, tested and prepared for placement, not only the finished sentences.
What this demonstrates
If your financial proposition is technically strong but difficult to explain, I’d welcome a conversation about finding the story people will remember.
Discuss a brief