Flexport and the Illusion of Disruption in Supply Chain Consulting

Why the logistics industry isn’t buying the hype and neither should we

Let’s talk about Flexport. Again. Because for some reason, a startup that has never made a profit, is barely in the top 50 freight forwarders in the U.S., and continues to hemorrhage investor money is still being portrayed by venture capitalists as some kind of revolutionary supply chain disruptor. It’s time to ask the uncomfortable question: what exactly has Flexport disrupted? And more importantly, who’s still buying this story?

A VC Narrative, Not a Supply Chain One

The LinkedIn post that sparked this debate came from Elana Gold, a partner at Red Beard Ventures. It painted Ryan Petersen’s Flexport as a classic underdog story - the hero who built an $8 billion company by solving the boring problems no one else wanted. The problem? People in the actual logistics industry didn’t see it that way. And they were vocal.

From comments that bluntly asked, "Elana, do your homework," to in-depth comparisons with industry stalwarts like DB Schenker, the response was a flood of skepticism, sarcasm, and hard-earned industry perspective. The consensus? Flexport is a well-funded freight forwarder with great PR and questionable results.

Hype Doesn’t Move Containers

Bill Paul probably put it best: "In order to solve a problem, there needs to be a problem." Freight forwarding isn’t a new industry. Technology-enabled solutions have been around for decades. Expeditors, Maersk, DHL, DSV—these companies built profitable, global logistics networks long before Flexport ever existed. And they did it while turning a profit. Flexport, in contrast, has never made money.

In fact, 2024 was supposed to be the year they turned the corner. Instead, they reportedly lost $650 million. For 2025, expectations aren’t much better, with insiders predicting continued losses and a revenue decline to under $1 billion.

The Smoke-and-Mirrors Playbook

Flexport’s valuation once hit $8 billion, propped up by backers like a16z, Shopify, and MSD Partners. But that valuation has since plummeted. Today, estimates put it closer to $1.5 to $2 billion—a generous figure by some accounts. And still, the company positions itself as "one of the largest freight forwarders."

Except it’s not.

According to multiple industry insiders in the comments, Flexport isn’t even in the top 50 U.S. forwarders. They have about 3,200 employees, 10 locations, and 3 warehouses globally. Compare that to DB Schenker’s 72,000 employees, 1,850 locations, and 725 warehouses, and you begin to see the absurdity of that $8B valuation claim.

Profitability: The Elephant in the Warehouse

Several commenters brought up the same issue: the company has never turned a profit. Ever. That includes during COVID, when almost every logistics company in the world saw record revenues. While established firms capitalized on the chaos, Flexport somehow managed to still lose money.

And it’s not just about numbers. It's about trust. Commenters like Kevin Higgins pointed out that real supply chain professionals have been solving "boring" problems for decades without needing media campaigns or overhyped valuations.

A CEO Obsessed with Optics, Not Operations

Perhaps the biggest criticism wasn’t even about the business model. It was about leadership. Ryan Petersen is described by some as a compulsive self-promoter. Instead of focusing on building a sustainable business, he seems to be more interested in podcast appearances and public narratives. As one commenter put it, "Real CEOs aren’t doing news bits nonstop. They’re running profitable businesses."

The Flexport Consulting Mirage

So why does this matter for supply chain consulting?

Because stories like Flexport’s muddy the waters. They confuse flashy tech demos and LinkedIn clout with real operational expertise. They mislead shippers, retailers, and even investors into thinking there’s a silver bullet out there for complex, global logistics challenges. There isn’t.

Good consulting is built on credibility, operational results, and domain expertise—not TikTok-style storytelling. As David Emerson aptly commented, "Oh dear..."

The Bigger Problem: Outsiders Defining the Industry

What angered many in the LinkedIn thread was that the loudest voices hyping Flexport often come from outside the logistics world. VC partners, content creators, or adjacent tech people who don’t understand the hard operational realities of shipping, customs brokerage, or capacity planning.

This disconnect creates a dangerous echo chamber. It leads to funding the wrong ideas, hiring the wrong leaders, and worst of all, eroding the credibility of real supply chain professionals who’ve been doing the work for decades.

What Should the Industry Actually Be Rewarding?

If we want true disruption, let’s start by rewarding:

• Profitability over press releases

• Execution over exaggeration

• Transparency over storytelling

And let’s ask better questions:

• Has the company actually added value to the industry?

• Can it scale without burning billions?

• Does it respect the complexity of global trade, or just talk about it?

Final Thoughts: Respect the Operators

Flexport might survive. It might even evolve. But it should serve as a cautionary tale, not a blueprint. Because real innovation in supply chain consulting doesn’t look like a PR stunt. It looks like quiet operators solving hard problems with efficiency, ethics, and humility.

And those aren’t buzzwords. They’re what keep the world moving.