It’s crazy how ONE person can change your life FOREVER. Here’s how I went from an average college dude with no clear direction to working directly with @patrickbetdavid the last 5 years 🧵 🧵 Use these 3 lessons to work with high profile people. – at Oakland Park, FL

9 days later, another 500. We are compounding growthhh🚀

The end of an Era for "ugly ads" RIP

A year later, but with the first month of consistent posting, we just crossed 3,500 views! (1,500 form the last 28 days alone) Next up is 10K, should happen in a month or 2🚀

FULL AI Quiz Funnel Breakdown coming to YT Soon! Breaking down @TheJeremyHaynes funnel for his Jeremy AI

How to ruin someones day REAL quick…

New YT video dropped! The Ugly Truth About Why Your Ads Don’t Covert

Gotta see what all the hype is about

Does @shelbysappp need an extra $100 to keep her funnel up?

About to do a deep dive on some of the biggest funnels in the game right now and the things they all have in common! Dropping on YT soon!

Most of the fixes I get asked for in ad accounts are additions. - New creative concepts. - A smarter campaign structure. - Splitting the audiences out. - Testing another placement. The fix that usually works is subtraction. I've opened accounts running a dozen campaigns where most of them share the same audience and the same objective. Every one of those campaigns bids against the other 11 in the same auction, splits the conversion data 12 ways, and keeps them all in the learning phase permanently. Consolidate them down and the budget stops fighting itself. The algorithm finally sees enough events in one place to learn something. The reporting gets readable. And when something breaks, there's one place to look. The account I've been simplifying all month is sitting at 8 to 10x ROAS right now. Most of the work was deleting things. Fewer moving parts means fewer parts that fail on a Tuesday while you're on a call. That's most of the job.

A coach I talked to last week spends $25,000 to $30,000 a week on ads. Between 40 and 60% of the people who land on her page leave without giving her anything. No email, no name, nothing. She already paid for every one of them. She asked me about launching a new campaign to more traffic. I'd rather put a second door on the traffic she's already buying. Here's the shape of it. The people who don't apply for her high ticket program aren't one person. Some of them can't afford it. Some of them aren't ready yet. Some of them showed up with a completely different problem than the one her sales page was built to solve. Right now all 3 groups get the same page and the same silence. A quiz sorts them on 2 questions, income and relationship status, then hands each group something built for them. The ones who can afford coaching go to a call. The ones who can't go to a $2,500 self study version. The ones who aren't ready go to a $99 a month membership and stay in her world until they are. There's a version of growth that means going out and finding new people, and there's a version that means finishing the conversation with the people already standing in your room. The second one is cheaper, and it's the one that gets skipped.

One of the businesses I work with was close to not making it. Today it acquires leads at about 20 cents and runs a campaign at 2.2 ROAS, which means the acquisition pays for itself before anybody walks through the door. Everything past that point is margin. What got it there was finding the one offer people already wanted, then putting real money behind it once the numbers held long enough to trust them. I think about this whenever somebody tells me their business is too far gone for marketing to help. Sometimes that's true. More often they've spent years buying things that were never going to pay for themselves, and somewhere in there they stopped believing anything would. A self liquidating offer repairs the cash problem and the belief problem in one move. You stop asking whether you can afford to advertise this month and start asking how fast you can recycle the money. The business is still hard. The constraint moved to the sales floor, and that's its own fight. But it has a future now, and it didn't have one before.

Facebook works fine for B2B once you fix the signal you're sending back to it.

Meta holds something like 52,000 data points on a person. It'll find whoever you ask it to find. The problem is 90% of the people who don’t make money with Meta is they either: Don’t ask for the right people Don’t have tracking setup to capture the people It really just is a skill issue at the end of the day..

I think Facebook Ads is giving @GadzhiIman a hard time rn...

Every business owner who tells me Facebook doesn't work for B2B has run the same test. They ran lead ads, got bad leads for $75 to $100, and every one of those leads wanted a price and nothing else. So they shut it off and filed the platform under e-commerce. What happened is they told the algorithm to go find people who fill out forms, and it went and found the world's most enthusiastic form fillers. Meta holds something like 52,000 data points on a user. It will find you exactly who you ask for, at speed. Almost all of the work is in the asking. A quiz changes what you send back. Someone answers 6 or 7 questions about their business (how many employees, what they're insuring, when the policy renews) and only the ones who match the profile get counted as a conversion. The tire kickers still take the quiz. They just never get reported as a win. Now the algorithm is hunting for a 30 employee contractor with a renewal 60 days out instead of hunting for anyone with a thumb. You also come out the other side knowing something real about every person who converted, which means the follow up email can mention the thing they actually told you.

Who you turn down matters about as much as who you sign as an agency. The clients who end up resenting you are usually the ones you talked yourself into.

Fixing your lead problem earns you a sales problem. Fixing your sales problem earns you a fulfillment problem. That's the whole game, and it doesn't stop.

2 of my clients have the same problem right now, and it's a problem neither of them had before I started working with them. Their sales teams can't keep up. One of them generates leads at about $1 leads... Thousands of those leads are sitting in the CRM, uncalled. The campaign producing them runs at 2.2 ROAS on a self liquidating offer. The other just hired someone whose entire job is answering the phone and doing sales calls. When I started with both, the problem was "we need more leads." I solved that one. Now the problem is "we can't process the leads," which is a better problem, and it's still a problem. This is the part of building something that took me a while to accept. You trade problems for the next set of problems. The reward for fixing lead gen is getting to meet the sales bottleneck. The reward for fixing sales is meeting the fulfillment bottleneck. It keeps going, and it's supposed to. The people who last are the ones who stopped waiting for the problems to run out. Whatever comes in the way becomes the way. I keep relearning that one.

Just had the Best month I've had in an ad account for a client this year, the work was mostly deleting things. We spent the last 4 months by continuing to simplify his campaign structures.