It's nice when other researchers take your fossils as dating constraints for their chronograms and biogeographic inferences, especially when their "new" and "better" data confirms one's results. But should we really take a central European fossil as age prior for a clade that according to our biogeographic inference originated and never left Australasia? A comment to Liu et al. (2018). Historical biogeography of Loranthaceae (Santalales): Diversification agrees with emergence of tropical forests and radiation of songbirds. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 124:199–212, outlining what would be the next steps to further distangle the puzzling evolution and global diversification of loranths.