Latest / Influencer Marketing with Fexingo: Creators, Sponsorships, and Modern Endorsement Deals / Why Influencers Are Launching Their Own Talent Agencies
Transcript
- Lucas: There's a shift happening in the creator economy that I think goes beyond the typical 'influencer becomes CEO of their own brand' narrative. Luna: What do you mean? Like, influencers starting their own agencies? Lucas: Exactly. More and more top-tier creators aren't just launching their own product lines — they're launching their own talent management agencies. Not to manage themselves — they're signing other creators. It's a whole new layer of vertical integration. Luna: I've seen this with Emma Chamberlain. She started Chamberlain Coffee, but she also has a talent management arm now. Is that the model? Lucas: That's a perfect example. Chamberlain's company, which started as a coffee brand, now has a division that manages a handful of up-and-coming lifestyle creators. She's not the only one. MrBeast has his own talent incubator, and a bunch of beauty influencers are signing other beauty creators under their own banners. Luna: So what's the strategic rationale? Why not just focus on your own channel? Lucas: A few reasons. First, control. If you're a top creator, you've been through the ringer with brand deals, agency negotiations, algorithm changes. You know the pitfalls. By managing other creators, you can set terms that protect them — and yourself — from the kind of exploitation that was common early on. Luna: And you also capture a cut of their revenue. Management fees typically run 10 to 20 percent. Lucas: Right. That's recurring revenue that doesn't depend on your own content output. It's a diversification play. According to a recent report from Creator Economics, the number of influencer-founded agencies has jumped 34 percent since 2024. So it's not a fringe thing anymore. Luna: But doesn't that create a conflict of interest? If you're both a creator and a manager, who gets the best brand deal — you or your talent? Lucas: That's the elephant in the room. A creator-manager has to balance their own brand partnerships with those of their clients. If there's a limited pool of sponsorship dollars, do you prioritize yourself? It's a legitimate concern. Some of these agencies have responded by setting up separate teams — one for the founder's personal brand, one for talent — but the founder still owns both sides. Luna: I wonder how brands feel about it. If I'm a brand, do I trust a creator-manager to negotiate fairly when their own interests are in play? Lucas: Brands are actually pretty pragmatic about it. Most are just looking for effective campaigns. If the creator-manager has a track record of delivering results, they're fine. Plus, some brands see it as a way to access a portfolio of creators through a single point of contact. Luna: That makes sense. It's like a mini media agency. Lucas: Exactly. And platforms are catching on. TikTok and Instagram have been rolling out API tools that allow multi-creator campaign management — analytics, payout tracking, content approval — all in one dashboard. That infrastructure makes it easier for a creator-manager to operate at scale. Luna: So who else is doing this besides the big names? Lucas: A lot of mid-tier creators are forming collectives. Instead of a formal agency, they pool resources — editing, legal, booking — and share the overhead. It's less hierarchical than the Emma Chamberlain model, but it's still a form of vertical integration. Luna: And the legal side? If you're managing other creators, you need contracts, compliance, FTC disclosure oversight. That's a lot for someone who's used to just making content. Lucas: It's a massive operational lift. That's why most creator-founded agencies start by hiring a traditional talent manager or a lawyer. The founder provides the network and the brand cachet, but the day-to-day is run by professionals. Luna: So it's less about being a manager and more about being a founder who owns a management company. Lucas: That's the distinction. The creator-founder sets the vision, leverages their reputation to attract talent and brand deals, but they don't necessarily sit in on every negotiation. And that's where the conflict of interest gets diluted — if you're not making day-to-day decisions about deal allocation, it's easier to be fair. Luna: What about the financial upside? How does this compare to just doing brand deals yourself? Lucas: The margins are thinner on management fees — 10 to 20 percent — but it's more predictable. A creator's own income can swing wildly based on algorithm changes or audience fatigue. Management fees are annuity-like: as long as your talent is active, you get a cut. Plus, if the agency earns equity in the creators it manages — which some do — the upside can be huge if one of them blows up. Luna: So it's almost like a venture capital bet. You take a lower fee but get a piece of the growth. Lucas: Exactly. There's a firm called Creator Ventures that does exactly that — they take equity in creator businesses in exchange for management services. And some of these creator-founded agencies are doing the same thing informally. Luna: I want to talk about the risks, though. We've seen influencers try to expand too fast — remember the influencer-founded media networks that flopped a few years ago? Lucas: Oh, absolutely. The graveyard is full of them. The risk is that you overextend your brand. If one of your talent does something problematic, it reflects on you. Also, managing people is hard — creators are notoriously independent. You're essentially herding cats. Luna: And if the creator-founder's own audience declines, does that hurt the agency's ability to attract talent? Lucas: That's a real vulnerability. The agency's initial value prop is 'come work with me, I have clout.' If that clout fades, the agency needs to stand on its own operational merits. That's why the smart ones are building institutional infrastructure early — CRM systems, standard operating procedures, a real HR function. Luna: It's almost like they're building real companies. Not just content factories. Lucas: Exactly. And that's the through line of this whole trend. Influencers are realizing that their personal brand is a finite asset — it has a half-life. But a company that manages talent? That can outlast them. Luna: So it's a legacy play as much as a revenue play. Lucas: I think so. And if these episodes have given you a new way to think about the business side of influence — whether you're a creator yourself or just watching this space — that's the kind of thing that keeps us going. Luna: Totally. And if you've gotten real value from these conversations, the way we keep this show ad-free is listener support. You can help at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. Lucas: It's a small way to keep these deep dives coming — and we appreciate everyone who's chipped in. Luna: Alright, back to the trend. Where do you see this heading in the next 12 months? Lucas: I think we'll see more consolidation. The top 20 or 30 creator-founded agencies will start acquiring smaller collectives. And I expect traditional talent agencies — like CAA or UTA — will either partner with or acquire some of these creator-led shops to get closer to the influencer market. Luna: So the big guys eat the little guys, or they join forces. Lucas: Right. And the biggest question is whether creator-founded agencies can professionalize fast enough to compete with established players. If they can, they might redefine what talent management looks like in the digital age. Luna: It's definitely a space to watch. Thanks, Lucas. Lucas: Thanks, Luna. Talk next time.