Latest / Scalability School / Stop Making More Ads — Fix THIS Instead

Transcript

Stop Making More Ads — Fix THIS Instead · Scalability School

• 0:00
  Landing pages offers to a degree can like
• 0:02
  meet different people
• 0:03
  where they're at as well,
• 0:04
  different points of AOV. It's like you
• 0:05
  might have people who are
• 0:06
  willing to buy a one-time
• 0:07
  subscription. You might have people who
• 0:08
  don't want to buy a one-time
• 0:09
  subscription, but they'll
• 0:09
  spend three times as much as much on the
• 0:11
  first order because they'll
• 0:11
  buy three months in advance.
• 0:12
  It's like there's these varying people
• 0:15
  are coming in at different
• 0:16
  entry points and having your,
• 0:18
  I guess your tornado, your marketing set
• 0:20
  up in a way where you can meet those
• 0:21
  people where they're
• 0:21
  at. That's what I'm thinking about. I can
• 0:23
  get more specific
• 0:24
  examples, but that's kind of the
• 0:25
  general sense of how I'm looking at this
• 0:27
  is like, can you arm
• 0:28
  Meta with the creative,
• 0:30
  the landing pages and the offers and
• 0:32
  allow them to kind of dictate when to
• 0:33
  show it to the right
• 0:34
  person at the right time? They're running
• 0:36
  ads about testosterone and
• 0:38
  tying it to their main product.
• 0:40
  They're running ads about weight loss and
• 0:42
  tying it to their main
• 0:42
  product. They're running ads about
• 0:45
  prebiotics and probiotics and like all of
• 0:47
  this, like, you know, gut
• 0:49
  health stuff and tying it to
• 0:50
  their main product. They built a brand
• 0:53
  and a product and Grunz
• 0:55
  built a brand and a product
• 0:56
  where they can literally come and talk
• 0:57
  about it in 50 different ways and
• 0:59
  convince you to buy the
• 1:00
  product because it solves that problem.
• 1:02
  The time to actually test
• 1:03
  and try to find the winning
• 1:03
  variance is I want to test a five reasons
• 1:06
  why against this five
• 1:07
  reasons why I want to change
• 1:08
  this headline on the five reasons why or
• 1:09
  whatever. I don't know. Joked with Brad
• 1:12
  to like not talk about
• 1:13
  it on the podcast too much because it was
• 1:15
  like a big piece of like what was
• 1:16
  allowing us to scale in
• 1:18
  like February, March. Not that we're
• 1:19
  trying not to give value, but
• 1:21
  Brad really wanted to give the
• 1:21
  sauce. I was like, let's hold a minute.
• 1:23
  And of course, now you go
• 1:24
  and you scroll Twitter and
• 1:25
  Chad from Grunz is talking about it and
• 1:27
  other people are talking
• 1:28
  about it. So that's a big thing.
• 1:29
  I mean, like, candidly, like for Holo,
• 1:31
  we've been doing funnel
• 1:32
  congruency from the very beginning.
• 1:40
  And now let's take a listen to the
• 1:42
  Scalability School podcast.
• 1:45
  Okay. Welcome to another episode of the
• 1:47
  Scalability School podcast. We are so
• 1:50
  jacked. Nobody else is
• 1:51
  here. No guests. It's just us. It's just
• 1:53
  the guys just shooting the breeze,
• 1:56
  talking about landing
• 1:57
  pages, marketing tornadoes, and the
• 1:59
  return of intentionality.
• 2:01
  We're making shakes. We got a
• 2:03
  lot of stuff going. I was just listening
• 2:05
  to the history of Coca-Cola.
• 2:09
  Okay. On the acquired podcast
• 2:11
  and which is a four and a half hour
• 2:14
  episode above a podcast. Okay. It's the
• 2:16
  history of Coca-Cola.
• 2:17
  Anyway, so I'm 20 minutes in and here's a
• 2:19
  funny thing that's
• 2:20
  noticed. So when they started the
• 2:22
  Coca-Cola and they started selling it in
• 2:24
  soda fountains, this is in
• 2:26
  the early, this is in the
• 2:27
  late 1890s. They had the product itself
• 2:30
  had four times the amount of
• 2:32
  caffeine and sugar that the,
• 2:35
  that current day Coca-Cola does. And it
• 2:38
  had fucking cocaine in it.
• 2:41
  So no wonder they were selling
• 2:42
  this thing. Everybody felt incredible
• 2:47
  drinking this. I just
• 2:48
  thought that was insane. Yeah. So
• 2:49
  people would come in. Yeah. So that's
• 2:50
  like 200 grams. That's
• 2:51
  like a, that's like a proper,
• 2:53
  that's like a proper energy drink. Yeah.
• 2:55
  They, they said like, it's
• 2:56
  like, it's like four local
• 2:58
  before four local. Right. Like, yeah, no
• 3:00
  shit. And so I was like,
• 3:03
  no wonder it felt, everybody
• 3:04
  felt incredible drinking this. So that,
• 3:06
  you know, if you want to
• 3:08
  start a successful company,
• 3:09
  put drugs in it. I mean, it was like
• 3:12
  people, energy drinks are literally
• 3:13
  selling like addictive,
• 3:15
  addictive substances, you know? And it's
• 3:16
  like, look, I'm like,
• 3:17
  I'm, I drink my two, 200,
• 3:19
  250 milligrams a day. So I'm not, I'm not
• 3:21
  judging. I'm just
• 3:22
  saying it's like, it's not a,
• 3:24
  not a bad business model to sell things
• 3:25
  that are addictive, you know?
• 3:27
  Oh no, it's, it's not. Yeah. Yeah. It
• 3:30
  was, I was amazing. The
• 3:31
  amount of people that in,
• 3:33
  in Europe at our Foxville founders,
• 3:35
  Lisbon event that were,
• 3:37
  that were using either vape
• 3:39
  pens or Zinn like a lot to, so here, like
• 3:44
  being in California,
• 3:45
  like if you touch alcohol,
• 3:46
  people are like, you drink still. And
• 3:48
  it's like, it's so rare,
• 3:50
  you know? And like, obviously
• 3:52
  people could smoke pot all day. Like I
• 3:53
  saw a guy just literally
• 3:54
  asleep on the side of the
• 3:55
  road the other day. Like not a, not like
• 3:58
  a, not like somebody
• 3:59
  that had been up all night.
• 4:00
  Like, I think this guy had just like
• 4:02
  smoked and needed a nap.
• 4:03
  Um, he, he had, he had a
• 4:05
  white sweater wrapped around his
• 4:07
  shoulders is what I'm
• 4:08
  saying. Like a light, like he,
• 4:11
  he probably doesn't, he probably,
• 4:12
  probably calls the sweater
• 4:13
  a wrap. Sure. Do you know
• 4:15
  what I mean? It was an Armani sweater.
• 4:17
  Yeah. Yeah. It was an
• 4:18
  Armani sweater. Yeah. The guy
• 4:19
  was in a, the guy was in a Bentley. So it
• 4:21
  was, uh, speaking of
• 4:23
  pouches, Zach, when's,
• 4:24
  when's Marsman dropping the, uh, the
• 4:26
  pouches? Testosterone.
• 4:29
  That's the, that's the form
• 4:30
  factor. The test boosting pouches. Yeah.
• 4:33
  I see that. Throw a
• 4:34
  little nicotine in there.
• 4:35
  Get a little wild. Oh my gosh. Yeah. All
• 4:38
  right. Look, I tell you
• 4:39
  that we, we actually do have
• 4:40
  a podcast today. Let's talk about real
• 4:42
  shit. That's good. And, um,
• 4:44
  there's a lot of interesting
• 4:45
  things to talk about, uh, that Brad put
• 4:47
  together and Zach and I
• 4:48
  don't understand any of it. So
• 4:49
  we're flying blind into this. Actually,
• 4:52
  Zach understands that I
• 4:53
  don't. So let's talk about
• 4:56
  the, what we're getting into. So 2025 was
• 4:59
  all about creative
• 4:59
  diversity and volume. Everybody's
• 5:02
  into that game, right? So 2026, the
• 5:05
  question isn't, how do I
• 5:05
  make more? It's what is all this
• 5:08
  volume pointing at? Right. And I think
• 5:10
  this episode is basically a shift towards
• 5:13
  intentionality and part of
• 5:14
  the funnel that everyone ignored, the
• 5:16
  landing page. Brad, do you
• 5:18
  care to take it from there?
• 5:20
  Yeah. So I'll kind of set the stage with
• 5:22
  why this was interesting to me
• 5:23
  this, this week, uh, Twitter,
• 5:26
  this comes out a little bit after, so,
• 5:28
  uh, it's not gonna be
• 5:29
  super relevant in the immediate
• 5:30
  zeitgeist, but there was a conversation
• 5:31
  on Twitter about, uh,
• 5:33
  creative volume and the overwhelming
• 5:36
  sentiment that I was feeling is that
• 5:38
  people tried the volume game. It didn't
• 5:41
  work in the way that
• 5:42
  they thought it would, or it's not
• 5:44
  working as well as it was historically,
• 5:46
  or they're just like kind
• 5:47
  of getting burnt out on trying to make
• 5:49
  hundreds of ads a week or
• 5:50
  whatever it is. And there's some
• 5:52
  counterpoint saying is like, well, you
• 5:53
  don't have to do that. You should just
• 5:54
  make, make better ads,
• 5:56
  which I think is, uh, you know, that we
• 5:58
  can live in this like
• 5:58
  subjective, uh, opinion of like,
• 6:01
  okay, well, which one is better? Um, and
• 6:03
  obviously if you can
• 6:03
  make more of a good thing,
• 6:04
  you should probably make more of a good
• 6:05
  thing. But I think
• 6:07
  overwhelmingly, I've just seen people
• 6:08
  are kind of like frustrated with this
• 6:10
  idea of always trying to,
• 6:11
  to make more. And so what I
• 6:14
  wanted to open up discussion around was
• 6:15
  kind of like, how, what,
• 6:16
  what else can you do outside of
• 6:18
  creative to try and improve things? And
• 6:21
  where have we been seeing wins in the
• 6:23
  accounts that, that,
• 6:24
  um, that we see, uh, landing pages is a
• 6:26
  big one, uh, in general.
• 6:28
  And I have some opinions about
• 6:29
  marketing tornadoes, which I feel like
• 6:31
  I've mentioned this, maybe it's in, I
• 6:32
  don't know if I'm saying
• 6:33
  these on internal calls or what, but I
• 6:34
  said the word marketing tornado about
• 6:36
  8,000 times in the last two weeks.
• 6:38
  Shireen, um, uh, DTC love DTC, Twitter
• 6:42
  love Shireen. Uh, she, she
• 6:44
  was actually the like original
• 6:45
  person that, uh, that coined the
• 6:47
  marketing tornado, but
• 6:48
  I'm just thinking more about
• 6:50
  landing pages, intentionality and, and
• 6:52
  what else you can do outside of the ad
• 6:53
  creative land to improve
• 6:56
  your marketing stack. So that's where I'm
• 6:59
  at. Zach, I don't know
• 6:59
  how you, you guys are,
• 7:00
  you guys are probably pumping out a ton
• 7:02
  of volume of ads and landing pages. So
• 7:05
  like, I know you guys
• 7:05
  are, you guys are already bought into the
• 7:07
  intentionality thing, but yeah, I don't,
• 7:09
  you guys are still pumping out a ton of
• 7:10
  volume. We're so Mars is in an
• 7:13
  interesting spot where we
• 7:13
  have like too many ads to launch, which
• 7:16
  is like a weird spot to be in where we
• 7:19
  don't want to offset
• 7:22
  our testing budget with our business as
• 7:24
  usual budget to lower overall
• 7:28
  performance. So we're like,
• 7:31
  the team is like, has a massive backlog
• 7:33
  of just ads and then the
• 7:34
  head of growth and head of pay
• 7:35
  just kind of get to pick what they have
• 7:37
  the most, you know, intuition
• 7:40
  of, of what could work, which
• 7:41
  is, you never know if that's true or not.
• 7:43
  Right. But, um, so I would
• 7:45
  say even us like hit a point
• 7:46
  where like my head of growth of Mars
• 7:49
  reveal today was like, yo, we
• 7:51
  got to stop signing creative
• 7:53
  agencies. Like we have too many creative
• 7:55
  agencies, uh, specifically
• 7:57
  for meta ads. So we're going to
• 7:58
  probably like, you know, not saying that
• 8:01
  we're going to go chop a
• 8:02
  bunch of agencies, but we're
• 8:03
  probably going to like slim that out,
• 8:05
  figure out who's got the most
• 8:06
  scale and then maybe probably
• 8:08
  divest into more creative for other
• 8:11
  channels. So like that's where
• 8:12
  Mars is at now. I'd say hollow
• 8:14
  is definitely still in the camp of like,
• 8:17
  just trying to make the
• 8:17
  best ads possible. I mean,
• 8:19
  we're out of like our peak season. So
• 8:22
  it's like how much, how many
• 8:23
  compression socks can we sell
• 8:25
  and how can we, you know, approach this a
• 8:27
  different way? So
• 8:28
  anyways, I would agree with
• 8:29
  the sentiment that intentionality is like
• 8:31
  the thing. And we definitely over
• 8:33
  indexed. Like I would
• 8:34
  say if we look back like two, two months
• 8:36
  ago, three months ago, we were over
• 8:37
  indexing in volume big
• 8:39
  time and we had to slow down and be like,
• 8:41
  okay, what the hell are we
• 8:42
  doing here? And that's kind of
• 8:43
  why we signed so many creative agencies.
• 8:44
  Cause we were like, we just
• 8:45
  want net new, really interesting
• 8:47
  ideas to add to the mix. Like outside of
• 8:49
  just our own team, kind
• 8:50
  of like hammering the same
• 8:51
  concepts. So what are some ways, Brad, in
• 8:53
  your opinion or Zach,
• 8:54
  that you would see marketing
• 8:57
  tornadoes, which is essentially assuming
• 9:00
  the person, same person
• 9:01
  sees you 15 ways and the job is
• 9:03
  consistency of message within that. Like
• 9:06
  what are other ways that you
• 9:07
  can do this? I mean, obviously
• 9:08
  metas, you can do this with meta ads to a
• 9:10
  degree with different types of ads
• 9:12
  talking about the same
• 9:13
  pain points or whatever else, but what
• 9:15
  are other ways instead of just looking at
• 9:17
  like the linear journal
• 9:18
  or the linear journey of, of, of add to
• 9:20
  funnel or to land or whatever.
• 9:23
  Yeah. So I think it, you can actually
• 9:25
  think about this from an account
• 9:26
  structure perspective and we
• 9:28
  don't have to spend too much time on this
• 9:29
  cause I don't, I don't
• 9:30
  think that's really the point of
• 9:31
  the conversation. But even if you think
• 9:33
  about this from like an
• 9:33
  account structure perspective,
• 9:35
  if you go back far enough, it's like,
• 9:37
  okay, you're running, like
• 9:38
  I'm talking 2017 far enough.
• 9:40
  It's like, you're running traffic
• 9:41
  campaigns. You're trying to retarget
• 9:42
  those people intentionally.
• 9:43
  It's like, you've tried to architect the
• 9:44
  perfect funnel from
• 9:46
  creative and targeting
• 9:48
  all the way from the top through
• 9:49
  conversion. And so
• 9:51
  obviously over time, meta has said,
• 9:53
  go broad, give us the keys, let us figure
• 9:55
  it out. And I think people
• 9:56
  have largely shifted that
• 9:57
  direction. Obviously people still have
• 9:59
  degrees of opinion on how
• 10:00
  much you should let meta do that.
• 10:02
  But from an account structure
• 10:03
  perspective, when I think about this from
• 10:05
  like the tornado philosophy
• 10:07
  is you want to have ads, ads in
• 10:09
  particular that speak to people at
• 10:10
  different parts of their buying
• 10:12
  journey. I think people are mostly bought
• 10:14
  into that. I think people realize, Hey,
• 10:15
  you might have a video.
• 10:17
  I think Mars posted a great founder video
• 10:19
  today. It was like a really nice,
• 10:20
  nice done video. I saw you post on
• 10:21
  Instagram. A really nicely
• 10:23
  well done videos. Like that's
• 10:24
  going to speak to a certain person. Some
• 10:26
  of this whitelisting
• 10:27
  influencer stuff is going to speak
• 10:28
  to a certain person. But on top of that,
• 10:29
  it's like, maybe you need to have offer
• 10:31
  ads. Like you want to
• 10:31
  have ads that reach people at different
• 10:33
  points in their, their
• 10:33
  awareness journey. I think people are
• 10:35
  mostly bought into that, or I think it
• 10:36
  starts to deviate. Maybe this
• 10:37
  is where it starts to answer
• 10:38
  your question. Landing pages offers to a
• 10:43
  degree can like meet
• 10:44
  different people where they're at as
• 10:45
  well. Different points of AOV. It's like,
• 10:47
  you might have people who
• 10:47
  are willing to buy a one-time
• 10:49
  subscription. You might have people who
• 10:50
  don't want to buy a one-time
• 10:51
  subscription, but they'll spend
• 10:51
  three times as much as much on the first
• 10:53
  order because they'll buy
• 10:54
  three months in advance.
• 10:54
  It's like, there's, there's these varying
• 10:57
  people are coming in at
• 10:58
  different entry points and having
• 10:59
  your, your, I guess your tornado, your
• 11:01
  marketing set up in a way
• 11:02
  where you can meet those people
• 11:03
  where they're at is this is, that's what
• 11:05
  I'm thinking about. I can
• 11:06
  give more specific examples.
• 11:07
  Like that's kind of the, the general
• 11:08
  sense of how I'm looking at this is like,
• 11:10
  can you arm meta with
• 11:12
  the creative, the landing pages and the
• 11:14
  offers and allow them to kind
• 11:16
  of dictate when to show it to
• 11:17
  the right person at the right time? Cause
• 11:19
  that's kind of the whole point of
• 11:20
  Andromeda, right? Is
• 11:21
  meta spends billions of dollars on GPUs.
• 11:24
  That's what they want you
• 11:25
  to do. Yeah. It's like they,
• 11:26
  they're trying to do personalization at
• 11:28
  scale because they want to deliver you
• 11:29
  the best ad at the best
• 11:30
  point in time when you're ready to make
• 11:32
  the most, when you're ready
• 11:33
  to make a purchase decision.
• 11:34
  Cause then morons like us will keep
• 11:36
  giving Zuck money. Let me,
• 11:37
  let me ask a question. I think
• 11:39
  it's really interesting that we've, I've
• 11:40
  been kind of posing to the
• 11:41
  team, which is how do you set
• 11:44
  targets of performance based on the type
• 11:46
  of creative or funnel that you
• 11:48
  are making the assumption of?
• 11:49
  So are you going to lower the CPA target
• 11:51
  or rise target? If you
• 11:52
  think it's a top of funnel ad,
• 11:53
  or are you going to basically assume all
• 11:56
  of it has to be treated the same way?
• 11:58
  Like I think most people
• 11:59
  aren't thinking that deep on this and
• 12:01
  they're kind of like, maybe they're
• 12:03
  making top of funnel ads,
• 12:04
  but then they're like, Oh, I killed it
• 12:05
  performance or shit. It's like, well,
• 12:07
  what was the percentage
• 12:07
  of new visitor? What was, you know? So
• 12:09
  how are you thinking about
• 12:10
  that? I tend to be a little bit
• 12:12
  more in the camp of allowing meta to
• 12:14
  dictate spend between ads. Um, I think
• 12:17
  what that can mean in the
• 12:18
  short term is that maybe they're wrong on
• 12:20
  a couple of like, here's an
• 12:22
  example. Like you launch an ad,
• 12:24
  it has an insane click the rate. It
• 12:25
  gobbles up a bunch of spend two days
• 12:27
  later, it's going to stop
• 12:27
  spending against that. If you are like,
• 12:29
  if you are somebody who has,
• 12:31
  you know, substantially more
• 12:32
  hands on keyboard wants to be, have full
• 12:34
  control over exactly what meta is doing,
• 12:36
  you probably would have paused it a day
• 12:37
  earlier than maybe I would
• 12:38
  have had. But what I think
• 12:40
  that allows me to do is get these other
• 12:42
  things that pick up and over time, I
• 12:44
  think you just notice
• 12:45
  a shift in how those things, in how ads
• 12:47
  landing pages deliver over
• 12:49
  time. And so I think that's,
• 12:50
  that's the value of the tornado as well
• 12:52
  as if you have these things live, when
• 12:54
  seasonality changes,
• 12:55
  and all of a sudden an ad that wasn't
• 12:56
  relevant two weeks ago, but
• 12:57
  now it's hot as balls outside
• 12:59
  and ever, you know, it's like, it's
• 12:59
  relevant again, that
• 13:00
  picks back up and spend like,
• 13:02
  am I setting different targets? I think
• 13:04
  at this point, no, not
• 13:05
  yet. I think to your point,
• 13:06
  like where it starts to get tricky is
• 13:07
  when you're at an insane level of scale
• 13:10
  where it's like meta
• 13:12
  maybe isn't as incremental and isn't
• 13:14
  making good decisions
• 13:15
  because it doesn't know that your
• 13:17
  influencer whitelisted ad is more
• 13:18
  incremental than the branded ad that's
• 13:20
  whatever right next to it,
• 13:21
  but that ROAS looks better. Um, that's
• 13:23
  where it starts to get
• 13:23
  tricky. I don't have a great
• 13:24
  answer for you, but I think it's a good
• 13:25
  thing to be thinking about.
• 13:26
  Yeah. I mean, I think it's,
• 13:27
  I think to your point, Zach, and we were
• 13:30
  having a discussion in the
• 13:30
  founders community the other
• 13:31
  day with a couple of our bigger spenders.
• 13:33
  And I think if you have the scale, I
• 13:35
  think you absolutely
• 13:36
  need to be setting different targets for
• 13:37
  these things because you,
• 13:39
  you know, you have to look,
• 13:41
  there has to be benchmark and looking at
• 13:42
  an account wide, especially
• 13:43
  if you have a product mix,
• 13:45
  it's not going to be useful to judge them
• 13:47
  all the same. I think
• 13:49
  it's, it's very similar to
• 13:50
  why you have different funnels based on
• 13:52
  the product types. Like
• 13:54
  it's, you know, it's like
• 13:55
  there's going to be a funnel, you know,
• 13:57
  for, for this product,
• 13:58
  that product A, B, C, D, F,
• 14:00
  as you get more scale, and that's a way
• 14:01
  that you're going to be
• 14:02
  able to squeeze more out of it.
• 14:03
  But I think, so, so the answer is yes.
• 14:05
  And I think judging it based
• 14:06
  on yes, you know, new customer,
• 14:09
  whatever you want to look at, whatever
• 14:10
  the metrics are that are
• 14:11
  important, that are really
• 14:12
  important in the business. I think it's
• 14:13
  important to start to
• 14:13
  differentiate those as you get more
• 14:15
  sophisticated. To me, though, when you
• 14:17
  start to look at that type
• 14:19
  of thing is, I'm going to say
• 14:22
  when you're sort of in the like hundred
• 14:24
  thousand a month range and
• 14:26
  spend on meta. I don't know how
• 14:27
  you guys feel about that number, but I
• 14:29
  got, there was a comment
• 14:30
  somebody sent me and they were like,
• 14:32
  can you guys talk about when you're
• 14:33
  talking about big or small?
• 14:35
  And so that's how I'm trying to
• 14:36
  define that. I think you should certainly
• 14:37
  see opportunity with
• 14:38
  certain ones. If you're doing
• 14:40
  75k a month and spend, some of the
• 14:42
  smaller brands are listening to this,
• 14:44
  right? Like, I think you
• 14:44
  could start to do some splits like that
• 14:46
  if there's different
• 14:46
  products. But I think as you,
• 14:48
  as you incrementally scale, that's one of
• 14:50
  the things that you
• 14:50
  want to be watching is yes,
• 14:51
  having those things be separate because
• 14:53
  they're not all created
• 14:54
  equal, especially if you have
• 14:55
  different bundles and you know, that have
• 14:57
  higher margin, like you're
• 14:58
  going to want to optimize for
• 14:59
  that. And you're going to want to think
• 15:00
  about that a little bit differently in
• 15:01
  terms of measurement
• 15:02
  and going through versus just like sort
• 15:04
  of boiling it down. Now, to your point,
• 15:06
  Brad, I think you can
• 15:06
  still have all of these ads in the same,
• 15:09
  they can still be running together,
• 15:10
  letting meta sort of do the
• 15:12
  combinations it needs to. Right. But I
• 15:14
  think that in terms of measuring it,
• 15:16
  looking at only one thing
• 15:18
  in terms of like CPA or whatever the
• 15:20
  metrics are across all of them, isn't
• 15:22
  going to be useful as
• 15:23
  you go forward. I think you have to do a
• 15:24
  little bit of delineation
• 15:25
  between. Yeah. I don't know,
• 15:27
  Zach, is that what you, is that what do
• 15:28
  you think? Is it the reason
• 15:29
  why you asked me the question?
• 15:29
  Yeah, I mean, I'm asking the question
• 15:31
  because I think it's, it's
• 15:32
  interesting. I mean, I think that
• 15:34
  that's one thing that I've just been kind
• 15:36
  of, I wouldn't say struggling with, but
• 15:37
  thinking about a lot
• 15:38
  because if we're hitting for, you know,
• 15:41
  for, um, for Marsman or hollow, like our
• 15:44
  NC Ross or NCPA target,
• 15:47
  Mars is easier because it's basically
• 15:49
  NCPA. But if we're
• 15:52
  hitting our CPA, our CPA target,
• 15:54
  do I really give a shit what's happening
• 15:56
  inside the ad account?
• 15:57
  Right. Do I really care as long
• 15:59
  as performance is stable and it's like
• 16:01
  doing, doing its thing.
• 16:03
  Right. So that, that's the one
• 16:05
  piece that I'm kind of like a little
• 16:07
  indifferent about. If, if
• 16:09
  your business is simpler, I think
• 16:10
  it's easier to kind of let it play itself
• 16:12
  out. If it's more
• 16:13
  complicated to your point, uh, even
• 16:15
  like hollow, for example, like we have
• 16:17
  different funnels with
• 16:17
  different AOVs, whatever, like we
• 16:19
  have to obviously like keep an eye on
• 16:21
  that, but it's more about like
• 16:22
  the funnel stage that I think
• 16:23
  is like the, the next added layer of
• 16:25
  like, do I actually, you
• 16:27
  know, step in and get in, in
• 16:29
  meta's way because this ad is spending a
• 16:31
  shit ton and it's like a static ad.
• 16:33
  That's like a discount
• 16:34
  ad or because like CPA looks really good
• 16:38
  or maybe it's average
• 16:39
  for that ad that I know
• 16:40
  should be bottom of funnel. Should I kill
• 16:41
  that? Because if it's
• 16:43
  a bottom of funnel ad,
• 16:44
  that's like an offer edge, it should have
• 16:46
  a higher ROAS to
• 16:47
  offset the lower ROAS top of
• 16:48
  funnel ad. So it's like, how much do you
• 16:50
  want to play God in that
• 16:51
  situation? I think is like
• 16:52
  a really interesting, like, yeah, I think
• 16:55
  thing to mess around with.
• 16:56
  One is, I mean, one is, I think that
• 16:58
  it's, it's very hard to
• 16:59
  accept the meta of today versus
• 17:01
  meta that we were all raised on, which is
• 17:03
  like, we would be doing
• 17:04
  that. Right. So that's one.
• 17:06
  I think that, you know, over time, you
• 17:10
  know, metas would like to
• 17:11
  say, look, we're going to,
• 17:11
  we're going to definitely only show that,
• 17:13
  you know, here and there, but
• 17:14
  like meta, we sort of all know
• 17:16
  that if there's a discount ad in the
• 17:18
  account and it's got a ripping CPA,
• 17:20
  they're going to show that
• 17:20
  more. Like it's true. Like they're,
• 17:23
  because it's going to optimize for
• 17:24
  results and that's what you try,
• 17:25
  that's what you say your goal is. Right.
• 17:26
  So they're going to,
• 17:27
  that's going to be shown more.
• 17:28
  So I think that there are absolutely
• 17:29
  instances where with, especially with
• 17:31
  discount ads or with
• 17:32
  something that's a prime promotion, or,
• 17:35
  you know, you only want to
• 17:36
  show it to people that are,
• 17:37
  you know, haven't purchased in 60 days or
• 17:39
  whatever. The thing is, like, I think
• 17:40
  it's okay to separate
• 17:41
  those things out. Like, even if they
• 17:44
  don't, if they're not going
• 17:45
  to hold the incremental scale
• 17:46
  and it's not to throw it all together,
• 17:47
  let meta decide. I do think
• 17:49
  that if it's something that's
• 17:50
  going to degrade the overall account,
• 17:52
  absolutely. The separation of those is
• 17:54
  still a valid tactic.
• 17:55
  That's why that still exists. Right.
• 17:57
  Like, I don't know, Brad,
• 17:58
  do you think that's wrong or
• 18:00
  what's your opinion? Not to be the cost
• 18:04
  control guy here, but like,
• 18:05
  that's where cost controls
• 18:06
  are interesting. If nothing else is
• 18:08
  because like, if you, let's say, let's
• 18:10
  say you do have them in
• 18:10
  separate campaigns, like you've got your,
• 18:12
  your normal kind of
• 18:13
  evergreen ads, and then you launch
• 18:15
  a separate campaign for a promo and
• 18:17
  you're running both of those things on
• 18:18
  cost caps. To your point,
• 18:20
  what you might see is maybe the evergreen
• 18:22
  starts to throttle down and
• 18:23
  spend because all of a sudden
• 18:24
  the attention that would otherwise go to
• 18:25
  that campaign is being
• 18:27
  absorbed by the promo campaign.
• 18:30
  And that's what, that's what, I have a
• 18:31
  couple of examples that I
• 18:32
  think are, are interesting
• 18:33
  for this. And I kind of, kind of brings
• 18:35
  us back around to the
• 18:36
  whole point of tornadoes,
• 18:38
  generally speaking. But I think, I think
• 18:40
  the, I guess the, the goal
• 18:42
  in the ad account is having,
• 18:44
  having as many things that are
• 18:46
  thoughtfully built out that
• 18:49
  can reach different people at
• 18:50
  different points of the buying journey.
• 18:51
  And then I personally lean towards
• 18:54
  letting that meta allocate
• 18:55
  between those through a function of
• 18:58
  jamming everything into a
• 18:59
  CBO, cost controls and things
• 19:00
  like that.
• 19:02
  Yeah. So, so to your point, you're saying
• 19:04
  instead of having it be
• 19:05
  the container of an ABO, CBO,
• 19:07
  whatever, with certain, you know, it's
• 19:09
  like cost control it and let
• 19:11
  that be the way that you're,
• 19:12
  that you're limiting it,
• 19:13
  which I think is valid.
• 19:15
  Yeah. And because like, so if you've
• 19:16
  ever, you know, if you, if you watch
• 19:18
  campaigns, it's like,
• 19:18
  there's only so much available volume
• 19:20
  every single day. And so
• 19:22
  let's say that the available
• 19:23
  volume today for your, your campaign is,
• 19:25
  is $3,000. And, but your,
• 19:28
  your, your highest volume,
• 19:30
  lowest cost, however you want to phrase
• 19:31
  it, budget is set at $4,000. Like you're
• 19:33
  going to be off target.
• 19:35
  But if you, if you are, have two
• 19:37
  campaigns set up and they're both set at
• 19:39
  $3,000, they have cost
• 19:40
  controls set up. It's like, well,
• 19:41
  depending on the day, the dollar is going
• 19:43
  to allocate to the one
• 19:44
  that's going to be most efficient. And
• 19:45
  it's not perfect every single
• 19:46
  day, but over time you just,
• 19:48
  yeah. I think that the idea of the ad
• 19:52
  account kind of being this
• 19:53
  like pipeline that can expand
• 19:54
  and contract based on what's in it,
• 19:56
  seasonality, things like that helps kind
• 19:58
  of visualize this in
• 20:00
  my brain. So, I mean, I want to ask Zach
• 20:04
  about landing pages. Brad's got an
• 20:06
  example of sort of going
• 20:08
  from having not no real landing page,
• 20:10
  having landing pages and
• 20:12
  seeing like accounts scale,
• 20:15
  you guys are obviously building a ton of
• 20:16
  different landing pages all the time.
• 20:19
  Do the landing pages, you know, how, how
• 20:22
  important to you guys is landing page
• 20:24
  congruency between the
• 20:25
  ad and landing page? And how important is
• 20:27
  the diversity of offer or
• 20:29
  type of landing pages as
• 20:31
  well? Like five reasons why, listicle,
• 20:34
  how do you, how do you even
• 20:36
  begin to sort of think about
• 20:37
  that and that testing all of those things
• 20:40
  to make sure that there's,
• 20:41
  you're giving that options and
• 20:42
  there's congruency, but there's also
• 20:44
  choice. This episode is
• 20:45
  brought to you by Northbeam,
• 20:46
  the marketing attribution platform that
• 20:48
  we love over here at
• 20:49
  scalability school. If you're a
• 20:50
  marketer, I mean, you probably agree,
• 20:52
  right? Incrementality
• 20:53
  testing is broken. They were,
• 20:54
  these tests require tons of labor,
• 20:57
  spreadsheets, statistical
• 20:58
  reference, and the designing of a
• 21:01
  test is slow and error prone. How are you
• 21:03
  supposed to know what to
• 21:03
  test in the first place,
• 21:05
  right? There's a million factors that can
• 21:06
  make incrementality testing difficult,
• 21:09
  but the good news is Northbeam has
• 21:10
  completely changed the game and they
• 21:12
  fixed this. Only Northbeam
• 21:13
  incrementality automates your
• 21:15
  incrementality test design and monitoring
• 21:17
  while protecting you from
• 21:19
  the major mistakes that plague
• 21:20
  incrementality testing. Northbeam builds
• 21:23
  tests using your own
• 21:24
  MTA data, launches them directly in ad
• 21:27
  platforms, and automatically monitors
• 21:29
  them throughout. If something
• 21:30
  threatens validity, you're alerted before
• 21:33
  it ruins the result. With
• 21:34
  Northbeam, you can launch tests
• 21:36
  in platform with a single click, saving
• 21:38
  you tons of time and reducing any chance
• 21:41
  for errors. And when
• 21:42
  the test concludes, your results flow
• 21:45
  straight into your MTA, meaning you can
• 21:47
  easily see results alongside
• 21:49
  the rest of your data. Incrementality was
• 21:51
  broken. Northbeam fixed
• 21:53
  it. And there's congruency,
• 21:54
  but there's also choice. I could talk
• 21:56
  about this for like an hour, but I think
• 21:58
  like speed, speed run it.
• 22:00
  Start with listicles. It's the easiest
• 22:02
  thing to do. It's the,
• 22:02
  it's the simplest template.
• 22:04
  It does what the human brain likes, which
• 22:06
  is like simplifies things
• 22:07
  down into a step-by-step
• 22:09
  process, which is why I think, I think
• 22:10
  most consumers resonate
• 22:12
  with it. Cause it's like,
• 22:13
  what is this thing? Five, five different
• 22:14
  reasons, seven different
• 22:15
  reasons why you might like this
• 22:17
  or why it's going to solve your problem
• 22:18
  or whatever. Right. So I always say,
• 22:20
  start with listicles.
• 22:21
  I'm still top performer for what it's
• 22:22
  worth for hollow Mars. Like we still
• 22:24
  spend the most behind them.
• 22:26
  Then obviously there's like advertorials.
• 22:28
  I think advertorials are just really hard
• 22:29
  to do. So I usually tell
• 22:30
  people to like wait until you like have
• 22:33
  absolutely optimized the
• 22:34
  shit out of your listicles.
• 22:35
  And then there's what there's quiz, which
• 22:38
  is like, I think a bigger one that more
• 22:40
  people now on Twitter,
• 22:41
  especially like in the supplement or
• 22:43
  health and wellness
• 22:43
  space are starting to pursue
• 22:45
  and rip our quiz off for what it's worth.
• 22:47
  That's okay. Cause I think
• 22:48
  we ripped like a couple other
• 22:49
  people's quizzes combined to create ours.
• 22:51
  So all is good at the end of the day. But
• 22:55
  quiz is a huge one. Like I think not
• 22:57
  enough brands are, are
• 22:58
  building quizzes that should be,
• 23:01
  if you're a problem solution product at
• 23:02
  the end of the day, you
• 23:02
  should be running quizzes.
• 23:04
  And that could be anything from health
• 23:05
  and wellness to physical
• 23:06
  goods to whatever. Right. So
• 23:09
  outside of that, I mean, the congruency
• 23:11
  piece is huge. I've like
• 23:12
  joked with Brad to like not talk
• 23:14
  about it on the podcast too much because
• 23:16
  it was like a big piece of like what was
• 23:18
  allowing us to scale
• 23:20
  February and March. Not that we're trying
• 23:21
  not to give value, but Brad
• 23:23
  really wanted to give this
• 23:23
  to us. And I was like, let's hold a
• 23:25
  minute. And of course now you
• 23:26
  go and you scroll Twitter and
• 23:27
  Chad from Gruens is talking about it and
• 23:29
  other people are talking
• 23:30
  about it. So that's a big thing.
• 23:32
  I mean, like candidly, like for hollow,
• 23:34
  we've been doing funnel
• 23:34
  congruency from the very beginning,
• 23:36
  right? Like that business was built on me
• 23:38
  trying to find pockets and
• 23:39
  cohorts of customers where we
• 23:40
  would match the listicles to the static
• 23:43
  ads. So I've been a fan of
• 23:45
  that strategy for a long time,
• 23:46
  but doing it to a level that we are now,
• 23:48
  even like for Mars is like super
• 23:50
  interesting where we have,
• 23:52
  you know, a pain point or something that
• 23:53
  we're going after, which
• 23:54
  might be like dad bods for
• 23:56
  weight loss for summer. And we're going
• 23:58
  to have ads match the listicle or ads
• 24:00
  match the first page
• 24:01
  of the quiz and then follow through. It's
• 24:03
  a big thing. The only other
• 24:04
  sentiment that I would say is
• 24:06
  we've been testing and this is like some
• 24:07
  alpha is that we've been
• 24:08
  testing like running a congruent
• 24:11
  landing page and then putting PDP on the
• 24:13
  bottom of the page. So
• 24:14
  there's like one full funnel
• 24:15
  within a single page that's been like
• 24:17
  ripping. So I think we're going to see
• 24:19
  more congruent funnels
• 24:22
  that basically go from ad concepts,
• 24:24
  angle, hook, whatever you want to call
• 24:26
  it, positioning to a
• 24:28
  page that's talking about the same thing
• 24:30
  to a product page that's
• 24:31
  talking about the same thing.
• 24:32
  Because I think what happens is like we
• 24:34
  used to say, hey, run ad.
• 24:36
  That's like the angle to a landing
• 24:38
  page that's probably talking about it,
• 24:39
  congruency. Then they go on to the PDP
• 24:41
  and the PDP is general
• 24:42
  because you don't want to make a PDP so
• 24:43
  specific that then it can't
• 24:45
  be sold to all these other
• 24:46
  different positions. Now I think it's
• 24:48
  going to be congruent ad
• 24:50
  lander PDP, but you can do that all
• 24:52
  within like the landing page ecosystem
• 24:54
  because pages are getting
• 24:55
  so much easier to build.
• 24:57
  All right, friends, quick break. This
• 24:58
  episode is brought to you by Northbeam,
• 25:00
  the marketing attribution platform that
• 25:02
  we love over here at Scalability School.
• 25:04
  If you're a marketer,
• 25:05
  I mean, you probably agree, right?
• 25:06
  Incrementality testing is broken.
• 25:09
  These tests require tons of labor,
• 25:11
  spreadsheets, statistical reference,
• 25:13
  and the designing of a test is slow and
• 25:15
  error prone. How are you
• 25:17
  supposed to know what to test
• 25:18
  in the first place, right? There's a
• 25:19
  million factors that can make
• 25:21
  incrementality testing
• 25:22
  difficult. But the good news is Northbeam
• 25:24
  has completely changed the
• 25:25
  game and they fixed this.
• 25:27
  Only Northbeam incrementality automates
• 25:29
  your incrementality
• 25:30
  test design and monitoring
• 25:32
  while protecting you from the major
• 25:33
  mistakes that plague
• 25:34
  incrementality testing.
• 25:36
  Northbeam builds tests using your own MTA
• 25:39
  data, launches them
• 25:40
  directly in ad platforms,
• 25:41
  and automatically monitors them
• 25:43
  throughout. If something threatens
• 25:45
  validity, you're alerted
• 25:46
  before it ruins the result. With
• 25:49
  Northbeam, you can launch tests in
• 25:50
  platform with a single click,
• 25:52
  saving you tons of time and reducing any
• 25:55
  chance for errors. And
• 25:56
  when the test concludes,
• 25:58
  your results flow straight into your MTA,
• 26:01
  meaning you can easily see results
• 26:02
  alongside the rest of
• 26:03
  your data. Incrementality
• 26:05
  was broken. Northbeam fixed it.
• 26:07
  I'll stop there. What's interesting,
• 26:09
  there's like, if do we tie this back to
• 26:11
  being intentional about
• 26:12
  building a congruent funnel, how many
• 26:14
  times can we say those
• 26:14
  random words? Like you didn't just
• 26:17
  start by saying, somebody told me on
• 26:18
  Twitter to make a listicle,
• 26:19
  I'm gonna go make a listicle.
• 26:20
  It's like, no, we saw that this specific
• 26:22
  cohort was resonating
• 26:23
  with this specific message.
• 26:24
  And then we watched our ads, we watched
• 26:26
  all the ads that were
• 26:27
  grouped into these categories of
• 26:28
  this specific persona. So we always use
• 26:30
  the hunter example,
• 26:32
  historically. So it's like you saw
• 26:35
  people, hunters were buying hollow socks.
• 26:37
  And there was probably a
• 26:38
  handful of reasons why people
• 26:40
  were buying those socks that informed the
• 26:42
  listicle. And then just kind
• 26:44
  of becomes this circular thing
• 26:45
  of, okay, these ads are informing the
• 26:46
  landing page, landing page can form the
• 26:48
  ads. And then you can,
• 26:49
  you can kind of build this, this cycle of
• 26:51
  testing and learning
• 26:52
  within that. But then it's like,
• 26:53
  there's, there's a bunch of other things
• 26:54
  you can do. Like that's
• 26:55
  where I think we had this whole
• 26:56
  episode on playbooks. Like this, the
• 26:57
  playbook episode was like a
• 26:58
  pre, this was months and months
• 26:59
  ago. It was like, it was a preview to
• 27:00
  this. Cause it's like,
• 27:01
  once you have hunters ripping,
• 27:02
  you can go to, I'm just pulling random
• 27:04
  people out. I don't
• 27:05
  know shit about hunting.
• 27:06
  Joe Rogan is a really well-known hunter.
• 27:08
  It's like, you can go,
• 27:09
  obviously it's a, that's a stretch,
• 27:10
  but like you can go to hunters and you
• 27:11
  can get them to create
• 27:12
  content. You can figure out
• 27:13
  whitelisting partnerships with them.
• 27:14
  Maybe you can make products
• 27:15
  for these people. It's like,
• 27:16
  that's like the level of being
• 27:18
  intentional. It's like,
• 27:19
  there's, there's progression to it.
• 27:20
  It starts with trying to get the ads that
• 27:22
  are, that people are
• 27:23
  resonating with and then going,
• 27:25
  there with it. Yeah. I'll give you the
• 27:27
  one example that I, that
• 27:28
  I have, where it's like,
• 27:29
  it's so obvious that this was meaningful.
• 27:31
  We came in to a brand, uh,
• 27:32
  they sell high OV, um, beauty
• 27:35
  product as kind of where I'll leave that.
• 27:36
  And they were, they had a
• 27:37
  great founder ad that was just
• 27:39
  like crushing literally like the only
• 27:41
  thing that we did, we were, we were
• 27:42
  trying to launch ads that
• 27:43
  could beat it. And we were like, ah,
• 27:44
  getting tiny little incremental wins here
• 27:46
  and there. And then we
• 27:47
  just like took the transcript of the ad,
• 27:50
  looked at who was responding to the ad,
• 27:51
  which was women 45 and up.
• 27:53
  Uh, and then said, okay, what is this ad
• 27:55
  saying? And in what order?
• 27:56
  And then turn that into a
• 27:57
  listicle. And it literally increased,
• 27:59
  like we, we scaled their
• 28:00
  spend 60% month over month twice
• 28:03
  with no new ending ads. Like, I wish I
• 28:05
  could say we hit on a
• 28:06
  banger new ad, but it's like,
• 28:07
  we just made the ad more consistent. It
• 28:08
  said it spoke exactly to, to,
• 28:10
  to the demo that was buying it,
• 28:12
  listed out the reasons from the video
• 28:13
  that they resonated with in the first
• 28:14
  place. Um, and it just,
• 28:16
  yeah, it, it ripped. And there's like
• 28:17
  countless examples of
• 28:18
  this where it's like,
• 28:19
  if you're going zero to one to your point
• 28:21
  on landing pages, it's
• 28:22
  okay. Go watch your top
• 28:23
  performing ads and figure out what the
• 28:25
  hell it's saying. Go look at the
• 28:26
  breakdown and meta of who
• 28:27
  it's delivering to go look at some of the
• 28:29
  comments and then boom, now
• 28:31
  you can build a landing page
• 28:31
  with that information. The other part
• 28:33
  that people forget is
• 28:34
  people don't watch your whole ad.
• 28:37
  You may tell a story and they get like
• 28:40
  through chapter three and
• 28:41
  you're, you've got 20 chapters,
• 28:43
  you know what I mean? So it's like taking
• 28:45
  the ad and they get a taste
• 28:47
  of it, like letting them like,
• 28:49
  whatever, get that same taste the second
• 28:50
  they land on it and then
• 28:51
  continue to go through the rest of
• 28:52
  the story on the pages. It just makes
• 28:54
  sense, right? It's like
• 28:55
  telling the whole story before
• 28:55
  they're sold on the product. This is just
• 28:57
  like something I've been
• 28:58
  thinking a lot about lately,
• 29:00
  about like future, future product ideas,
• 29:02
  future brands, whatever.
• 29:03
  Um, and the brands that are
• 29:04
  crushing. I think a lot of people need to
• 29:06
  think about this before
• 29:07
  they start a product or start a
• 29:08
  brand, or even if they're like looking at
• 29:10
  their own business and what
• 29:11
  to focus on is create a product
• 29:13
  or sell a product, which this sounds like
• 29:15
  maybe fucking obvious, but
• 29:16
  it's just like it clicked the last
• 29:18
  couple of weeks that you can sell it with
• 29:21
  like 50 fucking angles. Like
• 29:23
  you want the ability to sell
• 29:25
  it to all these different things. So I'll
• 29:27
  use I made as an example,
• 29:28
  cause this is one that's just
• 29:29
  been like tripping me up. They're running
• 29:32
  ads about testosterone and
• 29:34
  tying it to their main product.
• 29:36
  They're running ads about weight loss and
• 29:38
  tying it to their main
• 29:39
  product. They're running ads about
• 29:41
  prebiotics and probiotics and like all of
• 29:44
  this, like, you know, gut
• 29:46
  health stuff and tying it to
• 29:47
  their main product. They built a brand in
• 29:51
  a product and Grunz
• 29:52
  built a brand and a product
• 29:53
  where they could literally come and talk
• 29:54
  about it in 50 different
• 29:56
  ways and convince you to buy
• 29:57
  the product because it solves that
• 29:59
  problem. I think this is why hollow,
• 30:01
  despite it being like
• 30:02
  fucking alpaca socks has worked is
• 30:04
  because we take the same
• 30:05
  approach, which is like, I can sell
• 30:06
  you these socks, but I will sell it to
• 30:09
  you how you want to be sold. Not like how
• 30:11
  I think it should be
• 30:12
  sold. So thinking about products in the
• 30:14
  future, I think is like not
• 30:16
  going so tight and so narrow
• 30:18
  and having the ability to say, Hey, we
• 30:19
  can tie it to all these different
• 30:21
  pillars, but still land
• 30:22
  you on the same thing. It just gives a
• 30:24
  business so much more scale
• 30:26
  to grow. And like people talk
• 30:28
  about Tam. Sure. Tam is a thing, but it's
• 30:30
  like, what is your, what
• 30:31
  are your angles, Tam? What is
• 30:32
  your like positioning Tam? Like those I
• 30:35
  think are things that not a
• 30:36
  lot of people think enough about.
• 30:37
  And that's really where the scale
• 30:38
  happened. So a little bit of a rabbit
• 30:40
  hole off of what you're
• 30:41
  talking about, but I think it's super
• 30:42
  interesting. Yeah. I think that's, I
• 30:44
  think it's huge. I mean,
• 30:45
  it's, you want to give yourself as many
• 30:47
  options as possible. And I
• 30:48
  totally agree with you on the,
• 30:50
  on the landing pages that you guys are
• 30:52
  talking about, um, you
• 30:54
  know, outside of taking sort of
• 30:55
  a copy of the ad and re-explaining it and
• 30:57
  things like that. Um, talk
• 30:59
  to me about the components of
• 31:02
  what you've seen with winning landing
• 31:04
  pages. Are we talking about,
• 31:05
  you know, is there a nav bar?
• 31:08
  Is there, you know, is, is it, is it
• 31:10
  built for mobile first?
• 31:12
  Like what are, are there some
• 31:13
  components of here? Like, does it, does
• 31:15
  it make the buy box, you
• 31:17
  know, or subscribe? Like,
• 31:18
  does it ask for an email first so that
• 31:20
  there's a cappy signal? Like
• 31:22
  what are some pieces of this
• 31:23
  that you've seen that are more
• 31:25
  successful? I can, I'll go on a couple of
• 31:27
  things that stand out. And I
• 31:28
  think Zach, you've probably mentioned
• 31:29
  some of these in the
• 31:30
  past, but like I click on,
• 31:31
  I click on a lot of ads from people that
• 31:33
  I recognize on Twitter.
• 31:34
  Cause like they pop up
• 31:35
  in my feed. The amount of times I've seen
• 31:37
  a comparison chart at
• 31:38
  the top, it looks exactly
• 31:39
  like hollows, like not even changed
• 31:41
  colors is incredible. But
• 31:43
  the comparison chart at the top
• 31:44
  of like a listicle page is like a nice
• 31:45
  little like summary view,
• 31:47
  whether it's comparing it to
• 31:48
  a direct competitor or like alternative
• 31:50
  options. Um, but it's kind of like
• 31:51
  resonating with the ad.
• 31:53
  I'm struggling to think of like an
• 31:54
  immediate example on top of my head, but
• 31:56
  obviously the headline
• 31:57
  is extremely meaningful. But then having
• 31:59
  that like summary view, whether it's a
• 32:01
  little bit of like a TLDR and it's
• 32:02
  extension of what the
• 32:03
  messaging is in the ad, but that
• 32:05
  like a comparison chart literally
• 32:06
  directly at the top of a listicle
• 32:08
  consistently works pretty well for,
• 32:09
  for us, especially if it aligns with some
• 32:12
  of the messaging in the ad.
• 32:13
  Like the, if I go back to the
• 32:14
  product that I was previously talking
• 32:16
  about at the top of their page, it's got
• 32:17
  a comparison chart to
• 32:18
  alternative products. It's like, there's
• 32:20
  two, there's two distinct
• 32:21
  reasons why somebody might buy
• 32:22
  this product. It's either because they're
• 32:24
  concerned about like how
• 32:26
  they look or about their,
• 32:28
  eyesight. There's competitive products.
• 32:30
  Don't solve both of those at
• 32:31
  once, but this product does.
• 32:33
  And so that quickly addresses it in that
• 32:35
  comparison chart before you actually go
• 32:37
  and consume the rest
• 32:38
  of the page, which details it. Um, that's
• 32:40
  like one of the things that I've seen
• 32:41
  consistently showing up.
• 32:42
  Something that I will say is a lot of
• 32:46
  brands aren't like telling the story of
• 32:48
  their offer well enough.
• 32:49
  They like put it maybe in like the little
• 32:52
  top bar and it's like you
• 32:52
  rip scroll through that,
• 32:54
  or like maybe there's a tiny little call
• 32:56
  out in the hero section of a
• 32:57
  page or it's all the way at
• 32:58
  the bottom. I think teasing that more
• 33:02
  throughout the page, I think is, is
• 33:03
  helpful. And not a lot of
• 33:05
  brands are thinking about that. So I
• 33:06
  would say that's something
• 33:07
  that we've tested recently.
• 33:08
  That's like helped a lot is, is actually
• 33:10
  like bringing that offer
• 33:11
  language more to the forefront
• 33:13
  to kind of like keep them compelled. It's
• 33:15
  like, yeah, you can learn
• 33:16
  this, this, this also you get
• 33:18
  this offer while you learn this, this,
• 33:19
  this, and then shop now. So it's like,
• 33:23
  that's just one other
• 33:24
  sentiment I guess I'll, I'll share, but I
• 33:26
  was going to say, are you
• 33:29
  guys like, I don't, I don't even
• 33:31
  know where this would show up, but like
• 33:33
  when, when you want, when you get people
• 33:34
  on subscription and you
• 33:35
  want them to be sticky, like in the case
• 33:37
  of like Mars, are you thinking about any
• 33:40
  ads or landing page or
• 33:42
  pre-purchase? Like how, Hey, in the first
• 33:45
  30 days, I know you
• 33:46
  guys, I think there's like,
• 33:47
  everybody's ripped off the timeline thing
• 33:49
  too. Like the timeline is
• 33:50
  like by day three, you're
• 33:52
  going to see this, this, and this. So are
• 33:53
  you guys like pre-positioning to say
• 33:54
  like, Hey, the first
• 33:55
  three days you might feel something, but
• 33:57
  like by day 90, that's when
• 33:58
  you're really going to see
• 33:59
  something. So try to like plant the seed
• 34:01
  ahead of time. I don't know
• 34:02
  how you'd even measure that
• 34:03
  impact on retention, but kind of like
• 34:04
  planting the seed that yes, you'll feel,
• 34:06
  you'll feel solid in a
• 34:07
  couple of weeks maybe, but really by
• 34:09
  month three, month six, month 12, like
• 34:11
  that's where you're going to see
• 34:11
  the meaningful impact. Does that show up
• 34:13
  on your pages? That ties
• 34:15
  in with the offer piece too,
• 34:16
  right? It does. Yeah. Another thing I've
• 34:18
  been thinking a lot
• 34:19
  about is just like, how do we
• 34:21
  get people compelled to use the product
• 34:22
  for 90 days? Cause that's,
• 34:23
  that's where you're going to
• 34:24
  get the best results. And we've played
• 34:25
  around with like showing a 90 day or
• 34:27
  quarterly subscription or
• 34:28
  not. And like for us, it just doesn't
• 34:30
  make as much sense. Some brands
• 34:32
  justified. I think that
• 34:33
  more should audit if they should do
• 34:34
  quarterly or not and actually look at
• 34:36
  their contribution margin
• 34:37
  by month and payback period and ability
• 34:39
  to scale faster. If
• 34:40
  they, if they don't defer
• 34:41
  revenue, but yeah, I think like we use it
• 34:44
  and we kind of try to tell
• 34:45
  that story and we've, we've,
• 34:47
  we've taken some of those elements. Those
• 34:48
  are more, I think PDP
• 34:49
  elements from our ends than they are
• 34:51
  like, do I need to tell us where they
• 34:53
  need to take it for 90 days while I'm
• 34:54
  trying to educate them
• 34:54
  before I sell them. I think a lander
• 34:57
  sometimes like that's where it's like, if
• 34:58
  you, if you're going to
• 34:59
  try to do the one shot, you know, what
• 35:02
  Gurns used to do, which is
• 35:03
  basically like shoot everyone to
• 35:04
  the Gurns.co, you know, their, their
• 35:05
  homepage and just like all traffic goes
• 35:07
  there. You've got content,
• 35:09
  learn and then shop. I think if you're
• 35:10
  going to do all that one
• 35:11
  experience or like a primal queen
• 35:14
  situation where it's like all in one
• 35:15
  experience, I think that
• 35:17
  makes sense to then add that. But
• 35:19
  if it's not, I would probably move that
• 35:20
  content. We've, we've,
• 35:22
  we've tried it. It just hasn't
• 35:22
  really made an impact. I think it's like
• 35:24
  convincing someone that they need to do
• 35:25
  something for 90 days
• 35:26
  before they've even seen the price is
• 35:27
  like maybe not as ideal, but that's just,
• 35:30
  that's just my take.
• 35:31
  No, it makes a ton of sense. Aviating
• 35:34
  slightly and we don't have to go down
• 35:35
  this rabbit hole too much,
• 35:36
  but we're talking about like having all
• 35:39
  of these different entry
• 35:40
  points. You're talking about
• 35:40
  having 50 angles that you should go into
• 35:42
  the brand with. What does
• 35:44
  that mean for the value of,
• 35:46
  this is like very philosophical. Like we
• 35:49
  don't have to spend too
• 35:49
  much time on this at all, but
• 35:50
  it's like, what does that mean for the
• 35:51
  value of brand? If like
• 35:53
  everybody like comfort, right?
• 35:55
  Comfort's a great example of this, where
• 35:56
  they have an army of 8
• 35:57
  million creators or whatever,
• 35:58
  some insane number where all those people
• 36:00
  are kind of saying a lot of,
• 36:01
  like some of them are saying
• 36:02
  the same thing, maybe in some in
• 36:03
  different ways, but it's like, what role
• 36:05
  does brand play when people
• 36:07
  are coming in on like a completely
• 36:09
  different experience? Like
• 36:10
  what is the, what is the shared
• 36:11
  thing, if anything, or is that where this
• 36:14
  like amorphous word of
• 36:15
  like, I mean, especially from
• 36:16
  the perspective of like everything looks
• 36:18
  consistent and looks the same.
• 36:19
  That seems to be like melting
• 36:21
  away a little bit more. I don't know. I
• 36:26
  don't even know my question.
• 36:26
  I think, yeah, no, I think, I think I'm,
• 36:28
  I mean, I'm picking up what you're
• 36:29
  saying. I think it's,
• 36:31
  would you rather be the wellness brands
• 36:33
  or would you rather be
• 36:34
  the green powder gummy
• 36:37
  brands? Right. I think I'd rather be the
• 36:39
  wellness brand. So I think
• 36:40
  it's okay if the brand is known
• 36:42
  for being a little bit more holistic
• 36:44
  thing. Right. So Mars men, we want to be
• 36:47
  known as like the men's
• 36:48
  health brand. We don't just want to be a
• 36:49
  tea booster brand
• 36:50
  forever. Right. So I'd say like
• 36:53
  even comfort, like I think they have, you
• 36:56
  know, a million different
• 36:57
  angles and positioning and
• 36:58
  whatever, and it all ends up being comfy
• 37:00
  clothes for the most part.
• 37:01
  It's like, I think that that
• 37:02
  has like a, you know, a mental health
• 37:04
  like component to it as well. Like I
• 37:06
  think that that's what they're
• 37:07
  okay being known for that, like big halo
• 37:09
  thing. And that is their
• 37:10
  brand. I'd almost say like not
• 37:12
  being super niche and having a little bit
• 37:13
  more holistic is like what
• 37:15
  a brand is known for. Right.
• 37:16
  When you think Nike, I think shoes, I
• 37:17
  don't think like fucking track jackets
• 37:19
  and shit always. Right. So
• 37:22
  I think that that's okay. Yeah. Yeah. I
• 37:23
  agree. I think it's, I
• 37:24
  think it's an interesting point.
• 37:25
  It's like how, I think there's a lot of
• 37:27
  people that are trying to
• 37:28
  go more niche and, and, and
• 37:29
  thinking about it that way. But I think
• 37:31
  as you start to get
• 37:32
  bigger and want to have,
• 37:33
  want to scale into a lot of different
• 37:35
  angles, you turning it into
• 37:36
  a brand and a brand that's
• 37:38
  known for something is going to create a
• 37:40
  totally different ballgame
• 37:41
  for a lot of folks and is going
• 37:42
  to help you scale ultimately as well,
• 37:44
  just because it's like, they can trust
• 37:46
  the name that's behind it.
• 37:48
  And they know that that's what they're
• 37:49
  buying that with comfort
• 37:51
  with, you know, they're buying
• 37:52
  comfortable stuff. That's what they're,
• 37:54
  you know, that's what it is,
• 37:55
  regardless of what the product
• 37:56
  particularly is going forward. It's
• 37:58
  interesting. Within this is a talk about
• 38:02
  partnership ads really
• 38:03
  briefly. Do you, you know, also match
• 38:07
  landing pages with the
• 38:08
  partnership ad or the partner,
• 38:10
  the person that you're working with? I
• 38:11
  mean, I've seen it done both
• 38:13
  ways, right? Like if it's a big
• 38:14
  enough person, you can do that. And you
• 38:15
  put the video on there.
• 38:17
  It's not as common. Most of the
• 38:18
  time I just see it sent to like a
• 38:19
  general, like successful
• 38:21
  lander. But what do you guys think?
• 38:22
  And what have you heard? I can go first.
• 38:24
  We've tested it for small
• 38:25
  creators and big creators.
• 38:26
  It only really matters for the big ones
• 38:28
  is like what we found. If
• 38:29
  it's just like, whatever,
• 38:31
  Sally Smith, like it doesn't matter as
• 38:34
  much unless it's going to
• 38:35
  be a, like a, a more, um,
• 38:38
  like a doctor or something that, that
• 38:40
  then even their following
• 38:41
  doesn't have to be that big and
• 38:42
  then it can follow through. Or if it, if
• 38:44
  it goes to like more of an
• 38:45
  advertorial, like their story,
• 38:47
  but if it's like a listicle and then it
• 38:49
  includes Sally Smith, like
• 38:50
  doesn't matter as much. But if
• 38:51
  it's like a celebrity, A, B, C list
• 38:54
  celebrity, like I think then it can
• 38:56
  usually carry more weight.
• 38:57
  And that's what we've
• 38:58
  seen in performance.
• 39:00
  Yeah. I, I haven't, I haven't done a ton
• 39:03
  of this, but, um, this could be an
• 39:05
  interesting segue into
• 39:06
  kind of having a bunch of different
• 39:07
  landing pages live at once. But, um,
• 39:10
  we've got, we've got brands
• 39:12
  where they have like an advertorial or
• 39:14
  like a page that's the founder's story
• 39:15
  and it's coming from
• 39:16
  attached to the founder's ads, uh, has
• 39:19
  not historically been the
• 39:20
  top spending landing page
• 39:21
  at any given time, but it does a really
• 39:23
  good job at like capturing
• 39:24
  additional volume, um, from,
• 39:27
  you know, maybe people that are a little
• 39:28
  bit further down the
• 39:29
  funnel and they've already been
• 39:30
  do the listicle page. Maybe they've seen
• 39:32
  a couple of ads. So haven't done any
• 39:34
  crazy testing on that.
• 39:34
  It's something I'd like to do a little
• 39:35
  bit more of, but the, the founder
• 39:37
  advertorial kind of pages
• 39:39
  is what we've seen some solid success
• 39:40
  with. I'm going to, I'm just
• 39:42
  going to go back to this point
• 39:43
  I was making earlier. Okay. So I think we
• 39:46
  used to, I maybe used to
• 39:47
  say, and I will change my
• 39:48
  perspective on this, that having like
• 39:51
  this niche that to go after
• 39:52
  is like the best way to build a
• 39:54
  business. You want to build a $10 million
• 39:56
  business, like in e-com, that
• 39:57
  is a great opportunity to go
• 39:59
  do, right? It's like have this thing to
• 40:01
  go do. But if you're trying to build a
• 40:02
  big nine figure business,
• 40:04
  you need the ability to like really
• 40:06
  broaden, broaden that out.
• 40:09
  I'm in Atria right now. I don't
• 40:10
  know if this is against the sponsor, if
• 40:12
  it is beep that name, but,
• 40:14
  um, I'm in Atria looking at
• 40:15
  IM8s at angles and it's fucking crazy.
• 40:20
  It's like, they are
• 40:21
  talking about, let's see here.
• 40:23
  They're talking about cellular support.
• 40:25
  They're talking about
• 40:26
  naturally like declining with like
• 40:28
  things naturally declining with age.
• 40:30
  They're talking about
• 40:30
  improving guts. They're talking
• 40:32
  about stress management. They're talking
• 40:34
  about like so many muscle
• 40:36
  recovery. Like, it's just like
• 40:38
  the broadest ability to talk about all
• 40:40
  these things. These are the brands that
• 40:42
  scale to nine figures.
• 40:43
  If you, if you really are just like, Hey,
• 40:45
  we're a sleep supplement,
• 40:47
  like you're probably going to
• 40:48
  have a harder time scaling to nine
• 40:50
  figures because you can only talk about
• 40:51
  sleep. So anyways, I mean,
• 40:53
  like that's where I'd almost question
• 40:54
  myself now, but when I just said that
• 40:55
  where I'm like, okay,
• 40:56
  well it could, sleep could impact your
• 40:58
  recovery, which could
• 40:58
  impact all these other things. So
• 41:00
  I think that goes back to the point of
• 41:02
  saying, can you sell your product a
• 41:04
  million different ways?
• 41:05
  And I think you need to like look outside
• 41:06
  that, that scope besides
• 41:08
  just saying, can you, can I,
• 41:09
  can I help you sleep better? Like what
• 41:11
  else does sleep do to
• 41:12
  impact people's lives?
• 41:13
  And like, maybe you can reposition it 20
• 41:16
  different ways to get more scale.
• 41:18
  Well, we wouldn't be e-commerce D2C gurus
• 41:21
  if we didn't say
• 41:22
  something and then completely
• 41:23
  contradict ourselves later so that people
• 41:26
  listening are confused.
• 41:27
  That's just part of our,
• 41:28
  our, this is, you know, that's, that's
• 41:30
  where we live. You know, that's why we
• 41:31
  get to say it depends.
• 41:34
  It depends. It does. Yeah.
• 41:35
  No, I mean, I think it's, I mean, I, but
• 41:37
  I think it's true. I
• 41:38
  think it's true. Like it's,
• 41:39
  that's, that's the next level of growth.
• 41:41
  You have to become more to
• 41:43
  more people. Like you can't just
• 41:45
  be a person. You can build a $10 million
• 41:47
  company on being the person
• 41:49
  that sells shoes to mountain
• 41:50
  bikers or whatever it is. Like, you know,
• 41:52
  I can, I completely agree
• 41:53
  with you. And that's when it's,
• 41:54
  it's shifting into becoming a brand or,
• 41:57
  you know, or you also do a
• 41:59
  brand, but you also do something
• 42:00
  like Sean is done with Ridge, which is
• 42:02
  like product diversification that are
• 42:05
  completely different from one
• 42:06
  another. And like, there is a brand
• 42:08
  there, but there's also like massive
• 42:10
  product diversification
• 42:11
  that like they're able to cross sell and
• 42:13
  upsell, you know? So it's
• 42:14
  like, I feel like yours are more
• 42:17
  adjacent in terms of you're going to sell
• 42:19
  a T supplement and then
• 42:20
  it's going to be other
• 42:21
  products that are closer to that
• 42:23
  necessarily. Right. But I think that
• 42:25
  that's, if you look at,
• 42:26
  you know, you look at even like comfort
• 42:28
  or you look at quince, the men, like a
• 42:29
  clothing brand quince,
• 42:31
  like we all know them. They're a huge
• 42:33
  company now, largely on the
• 42:35
  back of like being creative
• 42:36
  in terms of product categories are going
• 42:38
  after. They're just,
• 42:39
  now they're like, yeah,
• 42:39
  you know what, we're going to try that.
• 42:40
  And that's that
• 42:41
  inflection point happened when they
• 42:43
  got outside money. Like they were like,
• 42:46
  this is what you're
• 42:47
  going to go do now. So yeah,
• 42:48
  it's interesting, but. Well, exact to
• 42:50
  give you credit in the past,
• 42:51
  it's like, I think when you've
• 42:51
  said this in the past, maybe not on this
• 42:54
  immediate like episode, but
• 42:55
  like in previous episodes,
• 42:57
  like maybe the playbook episodes, like
• 42:58
  you can take a specific
• 43:00
  persona angle, whatever,
• 43:01
  like pretty far, obviously TAM dependent,
• 43:03
  right? Like maybe hunters
• 43:05
  isn't the most massive category,
• 43:06
  but compression socks are, it's like, you
• 43:08
  could take compression
• 43:09
  maybe way further than you could
• 43:10
  say hunters, but like you can take it far
• 43:12
  by being more
• 43:13
  intentional, kind of the whole,
• 43:14
  whole theme here. But yeah, yeah, for
• 43:16
  sure. And I think that
• 43:17
  that's mostly just where
• 43:18
  when people talk about like getting stuck
• 43:20
  with their business, I
• 43:21
  think they need to assess that.
• 43:22
  And they need to think about the next
• 43:24
  product being something
• 43:25
  that can be sold 50 different
• 43:27
  ways, but still come back to the same
• 43:29
  simple product, right?
• 43:30
  That's why, that's why these
• 43:31
  businesses grow. It's like when you have
• 43:33
  to buy sizes and all this
• 43:34
  different shit, like it just
• 43:35
  overcomplicates the company when it's
• 43:38
  literally a one product
• 43:39
  that can ship in a poly mailer,
• 43:40
  like it really does simplify that. So
• 43:42
  yeah. Can we, can we deviate
• 43:44
  to this all like landing page
• 43:45
  diversification thing for a second? Can I
• 43:47
  give a, can I give an example of this?
• 43:49
  Yes. Perfect. I've been
• 43:51
  dying to do this. I'm just like,
• 43:53
  shaking over here. So, okay. So I think
• 43:55
  what's really interesting is like, okay,
• 43:56
  everybody's been talking about this idea
• 43:57
  of ad diversity, ad
• 43:59
  volume, et cetera. And
• 44:00
  to your point earlier, it's like landing
• 44:01
  pages are getting
• 44:02
  progressively easier and easier to
• 44:04
  build on the back of AI mostly. And with
• 44:06
  that, I don't think the
• 44:07
  goal of landing page testing is
• 44:09
  necessarily to find the one winner, just
• 44:11
  like it's not, you don't,
• 44:12
  you don't need your goal
• 44:13
  isn't just find one ad. Like you're
• 44:14
  trying to find a bunch of
• 44:15
  bangers that can kind of support
• 44:16
  the entire thing, whether you're talking
• 44:18
  about a bunch of different angles or
• 44:19
  you're focused in on
• 44:19
  one specific angle. And we started to see
• 44:21
  this to be true with,
• 44:22
  with landing pages this year.
• 44:23
  So I've got an example pulled up the last
• 44:25
  30 days, brand spent around
• 44:26
  300 grand. Half of the spend
• 44:28
  is going to a five reasons why page,
• 44:30
  right? So like that's half the spend.
• 44:32
  Then the other half of the
• 44:33
  spend is going to a different five
• 44:34
  reasons why page. And then another, or
• 44:36
  not, sorry, not another half,
• 44:38
  half the spend, 15, 20% of the spend is
• 44:40
  going to another five reasons why page.
• 44:43
  An advertorial style page is taking up
• 44:45
  another chunk of that
• 44:45
  spend. We had a quiz page,
• 44:47
  which if you asked me this, if I was
• 44:48
  sharing these numbers 60
• 44:50
  days ago, the quiz was the
• 44:51
  top spend. It was, it was 50% of the ad
• 44:52
  account. And that's kind of,
• 44:53
  that's kind of a point of the,
• 44:55
  if I'm looping this back to the tornado
• 44:56
  piece, it's like, if you
• 44:57
  have all these pages live
• 44:58
  and they all have the same ad going to
• 45:00
  them, right? Like it's not
• 45:00
  like the ad is specifically
• 45:02
  different. And for this product that
• 45:03
  works, but it's like all, all
• 45:05
  of the ads are the same to all
• 45:07
  the different landing pages. But what
• 45:08
  you'll find is that meta will deliver
• 45:10
  them differently to the
• 45:10
  person that's going to resonate with that
• 45:12
  page. So it's, you have
• 45:13
  a five reasons why page,
• 45:14
  you have a quiz page, you have an
• 45:15
  advertorial, you have
• 45:15
  these different types of pages,
• 45:16
  and then you still have your PDP. Cause
• 45:18
  there's going to be people who are
• 45:19
  clicking on the product
• 45:21
  on white background. Cause they've seen
• 45:22
  all 10 of your ads so far.
• 45:24
  And they, all they need is the
• 45:25
  final one that says, here's the offer,
• 45:26
  click to buy, and it sends them to the
• 45:28
  PDP. But if you have
• 45:30
  all those things available, you'll see
• 45:31
  different delivery. And one,
• 45:32
  one more piece I found that
• 45:34
  was really interesting on this, if I go
• 45:35
  back to the example of the
• 45:37
  brand that I was talking about
• 45:38
  earlier, the beauty brand, when we
• 45:39
  launched that landing page, everybody's
• 45:40
  obsessed with CPMR right now.
• 45:43
  They were able to scale their spend and
• 45:44
  CPMR went down as a result
• 45:46
  of this page. Cause all of a
• 45:47
  sudden this ad is more relevant and meta
• 45:49
  knows that the ads are
• 45:50
  relevant. People are going to
• 45:51
  convert better and there's a better
• 45:52
  experience overall. So
• 45:53
  they're going to, they're going to
• 45:54
  give you that little back tap in the
• 45:55
  auction to like, say, cool, we, we like
• 45:58
  this. Like, you know,
• 45:58
  you're, this is great. Like keep, keep
• 46:00
  going. So a lot of, a lot of
• 46:02
  points in there, but I think
• 46:03
  there, there can, you can have, you're
• 46:04
  not just trying to find one
• 46:05
  winning page. Like you're not
• 46:06
  testing your PDP versus your landing
• 46:07
  page. You can have them all live, just
• 46:09
  like let them all live
• 46:10
  and let meta allocate the spend between
• 46:12
  them is my opinion. The time
• 46:13
  to actually test and try to
• 46:14
  find the winning variances. I want to
• 46:16
  test a five reasons why
• 46:17
  against this five reasons why,
• 46:19
  or I want to change this headline on the
• 46:20
  five reasons why or
• 46:21
  whatever. Um, I don't know.
• 46:22
  Just dying to share that. You're, you're
• 46:24
  spot on. I mean, I'm
• 46:26
  looking at, I'm looking at Mars
• 46:27
  Landers, which just has more scale than
• 46:29
  hollow now. So I think it's just
• 46:30
  interesting to call out
• 46:32
  29 pages have gotten spent in the last 14
• 46:34
  days. Like the, it takes
• 46:37
  having these like different
• 46:38
  pockets to be able to get more scale. And
• 46:41
  I think also more
• 46:41
  efficiency at the same time.
• 46:43
  So it's like, yeah, I mean, one has, one
• 46:45
  has 450 K in spend one
• 46:47
  has 200, once 150, then 150,
• 46:50
  then 120, then a hundred. But like that,
• 46:53
  you know, there's so many
• 46:54
  like 80, 50, 60, 40, 40,
• 46:57
  40, 40, 40, 40, 40. Like there's so much
• 46:59
  spread out. Right. So I think just to
• 47:02
  assume, like you said,
• 47:03
  one banger isn't going to, you know,
• 47:05
  maybe if you've not tested landing pages
• 47:07
  before to get the one
• 47:08
  banger is great, but like to get more
• 47:09
  scale and get more efficiency,
• 47:11
  especially if you're running,
• 47:12
  I think, especially if you're running
• 47:13
  cost controls, like
• 47:14
  having more shots at goal is
• 47:17
  actually like the best way to do it. And
• 47:18
  if you can tie it into
• 47:19
  congruency, I think meta actually
• 47:21
  sees it as a completely different funnel,
• 47:22
  which I think helps with, with auction.
• 47:24
  Yeah. And you have the same ads going to
• 47:27
  like those page, like
• 47:28
  maybe it's the same ad going to
• 47:29
  several of those pages. Right. And I'm
• 47:31
  sure there's a mix, but
• 47:32
  like you're trying to do less
• 47:33
  probably going to three.
• 47:34
  We're trying to do less of that now
• 47:36
  though, and try to keep it like we're
• 47:37
  only launching ads if
• 47:38
  there's a congruent page to launch it to,
• 47:40
  if it's about weight loss or if it's
• 47:41
  about GLPs or if it's
• 47:42
  about whatever, uh, you know, anti-aging
• 47:45
  or whatever. We're seeing
• 47:47
  that that's working better
• 47:49
  and more efficient if you can just wait
• 47:50
  and actually tie it to a page that said
• 47:52
  we do, we would run the
• 47:53
  ads to a 10 reasons, like our top 10
• 47:55
  reasons and our top quiz. Right. So it's
• 47:57
  like, of course that's
• 47:58
  still going to happen, but I think
• 47:59
  there's less and less of that now.
• 48:00
  I think, um, you guys, maybe this is a
• 48:03
  lot of alpha that I'm
• 48:04
  going to share, but I don't
• 48:04
  know if you've ever heard of the six
• 48:06
  reasons why, but it's
• 48:08
  pretty, it's pretty dope. It's
• 48:09
  actually one more reason why, which is
• 48:11
  what makes it great. Um,
• 48:13
  then you have. So all y'all
• 48:15
  suck is out here still doing five. You
• 48:18
  know, I'm over here doing six.
• 48:20
  Ironically, seven has been
• 48:22
  working better than five recently.
• 48:24
  Well, look at Mars. We're running 10.
• 48:25
  Yeah. Well, Hey, thanks for tuning in
• 48:31
  everybody. If you loved
• 48:32
  this, please email me,
• 48:33
  Andrew at foxhole digital.com rate us on
• 48:35
  your favorite platforms.
• 48:36
  Tell all the SAS companies
• 48:38
  that we mentioned on this episode that
• 48:39
  you heard about, heard
• 48:40
  about them from us. Uh,
• 48:41
  and we are appreciative of you listening
• 48:44
  all the way to the end. So
• 48:45
  until next time, take care.
• 48:51
  This episode is brought to you by Brad's
• 48:53
  company, work marketing. If you need a
• 48:56
  DTC marketing agency,
• 48:57
  let me tell you, Homestead is great, but
• 49:00
  work marketing is also
• 49:02
  fantastic. And let me tell you,
• 49:03
  you aren't going to find friendlier
• 49:06
  people out there, uh, in the e-commerce
• 49:09
  space. So we decided
• 49:11
  to do these little ads for each other's
• 49:12
  companies. So hopefully you find it
• 49:14
  interesting, but seriously,
• 49:15
  great team at work marketing, very smart.
• 49:17
  Brad and Jordan are
• 49:19
  incredibly dialed in. Um, I just gave
• 49:20
  them a lead already made this brand that
• 49:23
  I gave them. Like, I don't even know,
• 49:25
  double, double revenue
• 49:27
  that they had in the previous month or
• 49:28
  something. So, you know, it's very
• 49:30
  exciting to, to be connected
• 49:31
  with Brad. And if you need a great
• 49:33
  agency, there's really no one better, uh,
• 49:35
  Zach, anything to comment
• 49:37
  on work marketing? Yeah. I mean, if you
• 49:38
  want an agency that cares about your
• 49:41
  business much more than
• 49:42
  they care about their own website, I just
• 49:43
  tried to load work
• 49:44
  marketing.com and it was broken.
• 49:46
  So they're definitely going to give more
• 49:47
  of a shit about your
• 49:48
  business than their own. So I
• 49:50
  highly recommend Brad and the team over
• 49:52
  at work. They've been
• 49:52
  incredible. We've referred a lot of
• 49:54
  business over to them as well. Really,
• 49:56
  really good as far as like cracking
• 49:57
  funnels and figuring out
• 49:58
  like rapid growth for brands. So I highly
• 50:01
  recommend these guys.
• 50:11
  The only way that we grow this podcast is
• 50:13
  by you sharing it with
• 50:15
  your friends. Honestly,
• 50:16
  like reviews kind of don't really mean
• 50:17
  anything too much anymore.
• 50:18
  They're really meaningful,
• 50:19
  but they don't do a lot for the growth of
• 50:21
  the podcast. Um, and so
• 50:23
  sharing YouTube links,
• 50:24
  sharing Spotify links, sharing Apple,
• 50:27
  whatever we call it under the podcast
• 50:29
  app. Now, anything you
• 50:30
  can share the better we're going to be,
• 50:33
  um, guys, anything else
• 50:34
  you want to say on this?
• 50:35
  Yeah, please go check us out on YouTube,
• 50:37
  rack up those views for us.
• 50:38
  We'd love to see it. And then
• 50:40
  subscribe, make sure to subscribe on
• 50:41
  YouTube as well. And I
• 50:42
  relentlessly refresh the YouTube
• 50:43
  comments because it dictates my mental
• 50:45
  health for the day. So please say
• 50:46
  something nice about all of us.
• 50:49
  Thank you everyone.
• 50:49
  Thanks for listening. Honestly.