Fully understand this lesson and it will save you a sh*t tonne of money.

Before we dive in, Alin is a marketing beast who's worked with Fortune 500 companies and used to be Vice President and co-owner of a multi 7-figure ads agency. He gave me lots of advice when I first got started with ads almost two years ago, so it was a nice full-circle moment to be invited to his community to speak about them.

Now back to it. Most businesses fail at Meta ads because they don't understand how the algorithm thinks.

My favourite way to explain it is to picture a hyper-efficient robot dog.

Ask it to fetch you a drink, and it'll find the nearest, cheapest, fastest drink on the planet.

It won't ask if the drink is tasty. It won't ask if it's healthy. It won't even check if it's poisonous.

You asked for a drink. It got you a drink. Job done.

That is exactly how the Meta algorithm works.

Set up a normal broad campaign and ask it for "a customer" and it fetches the cheapest conversion it can find.

Which is usually someone who's already about to buy from you. Or someone on your site, already aware and halfway to checkout.

In short: Meta nips in and takes credit for a sale that was happening anyway.

The ad account looks great. The bank account doesn't move.

Now, give the robot dog guardrails and everything changes.

Tell it the flavour you want. Tell it the drink needs to be healthy. Suddenly it's scarily good at finding exactly that.

In ads terms you can:

• Exclude existing customers.
• Exclude your site visitors if you want properly cold traffic.
• Feed it data on your higher-LTV buyers.

Now it will fetch brand-new customers that move the needle in your business.

Your numbers will look "worse" in Ads Manager. But this is the difference between running Meta ads that look nice, and using Meta ads to grow a business.

One last thing. Targeting isn't the only guardrail. Your creative is one too.

If your ad is so specific to your dream buyer that NOBODY else would dream of clicking it, you've done half the robot dog's job for it.

Guardrails plus persona-specific creative is how you profitably spend 6-figures a month.

Happy fetching,

Tatsuki

The problem with email is that it disappears. You send it, a few thousand people read it, and a week later it is buried under everyone else's newsletters. A good idea deserves a longer shelf life than a few days in an inbox.

So from now on, the emails get a second life here.

Each post is one email, lightly edited for the page. That means:

• Short. You can read most of them in under three minutes.
• Opinionated. These are field notes, not textbook chapters.
• Practical. Angles, hooks, offers and tests you can lift for your own brand.

No content calendar, no keyword-stuffed filler. Just the same thing I send to the list, made permanent and searchable.

Founders and marketers at B2C brands running paid traffic on Meta, Google or X. If you write your own ads, or brief the people who do, this is for you.

Steal freely. That is the point of publishing it.

You'll know I bloody love crisps.

And I recently saw the best ad selling some bloody good looking crisps.

So good that I've just started my first paid subscription for thinly sliced fried potatoes in a bag.

(I'll share the link to the ad in a sec)

It's like a founder ad but it doesn't feature the founder in it.

I love it because it's near impossible to copy.

And the issue I see with a lot of founder ads is they're hella generic.

They just copy what they've seen other brands do.

There's no edge. Nothing unique to it.

They miss the whole point.

A good founder ad should be so personal no one can copy it.

The key is finding a unique part of your story, situation, skills or surroundings to leverage.

In this case the founder leveraged her situation and surroundings.

Situation: Doesn't have 1.5k to pay an influencer to promote her product

Surroundings: Having her 91 year old grandad nearby who's happy to be filmed on camera.

You can click below to watch the ad:

-> Watch on X

-> Watch on IG

Happy snacking,

Tatsuki

To a noob, things looked impressive.

From 2023 to 2024 my revenue had dropped over 60% as I'd quit my coaching business to offer done-for-you services.

But things had recovered.

I had an almost fractional CMO type role with a fast-growing SaaS.

I was running ecom Meta ads with my coach in a different mentorship group.

I was building the cold traffic funnel for two of Ben Settle's businesses with this same coach and our mentor.

I was building an agency doing launches for YouTubers with a previous mentor and had just done a 6-figure launch for a big creator.

But the reality is I was a business f**kboy

DEFINITION: A "f**kboy" is a slang term for a man who pursues casual sx while actively avoiding romantic commitment*

This is what the mentor of this new program said to me:

"So you're like all over the place. And these are all good opportunities. I mean, they're all great companies. But what I'm trying to figure out is, what exactly do you want to build here, right?

...Do you want more fractional CMO stuff? Do you want to do more ad stuff? Do you want to do more ecom stuff? Do you want to do stuff for YouTubers in terms of digital products?

Because those are like four very different directions. They're all good directions. But, in my opinion, I think it's going to be a little bit easier on you long term if you choose a specialty and go all in on that."

See, I didn't have a business problem. I had a focus problem.

By chasing multiple different chicas I wasn't just wasting energy wondering what direction to go in.

I was wasting my best opportunity by missing out on the gains you get from going all-in on one thing.

A recent tweet from the ol Sahil Bloom puts in perfectly:

"It took me 35 years to learn this: If you're half-in, you're actually all-out. Even 90% in gets you nowhere. There's something magical in that last little bit. It's where you unlock new levels to the game. Simply because so few have the courage to do it."

And since then I've cut away EVERYTHING that isn't B2C paid ads.

Not a single random project in sight.

Every day in my business I either make ads, learn about ads or talk about ads.

The results I'm getting for clients is the best I've ever gotten. The amount I can charge per client is the highest I've been able to charge. And the speed I can deliver the work is the fastest I've been able to deliver.

All because I'm doing just ONE thing.

Food for thought, Tatsuki

Got a quick snack for you.

There's an ad style that's quite simply crushing it for every brand I make it for.

I just made it for a big multi 8-figure brand and it's now the #1 winning ad in the whole account.

And the best part?

It's so damn simple to make.

Here's all I did:

1. Take my winning script for this brand (AI voice over + human B-roll video ad)
2. Turn it into a song using AI (Use the Suno platform)
3. Get a cracked editor to overlay Pixar animation B-roll

That's it.

I always assume every brand in the world is doing this because of the little bubble I live in on ecom X/Twitter.

But when analysing most D2C brand's ads this is really not the case.

We're in a unique period of time where these type of ads now cost so little to make thanks to AI but most people are yet to catch up.

Give it a try.

Thank me later.

Cheers legend, Tatsuki

P.S. Recorded a quick vid on this ad type. Click your fav platform to watch it:

> Watch on IG

> Watch on TikTok

> Watch on YouTube

• $6,888/week
• 1 month later: $43,417/week
• 2 months later: $64,355/week

That's over $250k a month in sales driven primarily by Meta ads.

But growth has recently slowed.

This is due to a mixture of factors, but the only one I have some control over is the ads.

So I've been back to the drawing board thinking of the best way to make the ads that are going to help scale this to $500k a month and beyond.

To do this, I've gone back to first principles. I've crystallised my entire system for finding winning ads and thought I'd share the most important part with you today.

When most people run Meta ads they:

• Waste money on random tests that don't have a clear goal aside from "let's test this idea I had last night".
• Have no idea whether their test has a high or low probability of success, and invest the same amount of money and time into both.
• Have no creative strategy system for finding new winning angles and capitalising on the learnings they've made so far.

So to solve ALL of this, I want you to realise that finding winning ads is less about 'just making better ads' and more about finding winning angles, then making lots of ads to reap the rewards of those angles.

So what we really have is a 'search problem'.

Anyone can make lots of ads. Not everyone can make the right ads with the right angle. The real alpha is being able to do this with AS LITTLE wasted resource as possible. The more efficient you are, the less money you waste on losing angles, and the more you spend on winning ones.

To create a system for this, I've borrowed a few frameworks from the mathematician Bernard Koopman. During WWII, he developed breakthrough search frameworks for the U.S. Navy to help them find submarines and downed aircraft. He's regarded as the father of modern search theory.

Imagine finding winning ads is like mining for gold in a forest. To find the pockets of gold as fast as possible, there are three types of search:

1. Parallel Search

If you have NO knowledge where the gold is, your best bet is a broad search of an area in the pattern of parallel lawn mowers. The goal here is not a 'deep search'. Instead you want each 'probe' to search as wide a radius as possible.

2. Spiral Search

If you have info that the treasure is near a specific point, your best bet is to have your probes spiralling outwards from that point.

3. Optimum Effort Search

Map out the entire area that you can search. Assign a probability to each section. Then focus all energy on the area of highest probability. If the search fails, update the probabilities of every area and move to the next highest probability spot.

We can apply these SAME strategies to find winning ads. I've adjusted it slightly to the context of Meta ads, but the principles are the same. Essentially you want to categorise every ad as either a miner, a spiral or a probe.

1. Probes

Ads where you're testing a completely new angle or avatar. If your primary audience for an acne product has been teenagers, you test running ads to pregnant women with acne breakouts.

2. Spirals

Where you've had some positive data from your probe, but don't yet have a strong winner. You're testing around an angle that you think has promise but haven't hit the spot yet.

3. Mining

You've got a winning angle. Now your job is to extract as much value from that angle as is humanly possible. Different messaging, formats, hooks etc, all hitting the same angle.

But we don't stop here. Next we can steal Google's 70-20-10 innovation rule to really make this efficient. Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google, often credits the company's success to this rule. Essentially it says:

• 70% of efforts should be devoted to core business activities.
• 20% should be focused on projects adjacent or related to the core business.
• 10% should be dedicated to completely unrelated or experimental projects.

So when it comes to making winning ads:

• 70% of your ads should be on Miners.
• 20% of your ads should be on Spirals.
• 10% of your ads should be Probes.

If you don't have any winning angles yet, then use 80% of your energy on Spirals and 20% on Probes.

Remarkably simple, but I find this is an extremely useful framework for instantly gauging whether your ads are being made in the right area.

Some businesses make the mistake of only spiralling and probing, always looking for new angles and never taking advantage of their current winning ones. Others make the mistake of stopping their search after finding one winning angle. Unless the market for that angle is huge, they'll eventually hit a plateau and wonder why they are no longer scaling.

This is why the best ad strategy fits into the 70-20-10 rule.

Happy scaling,

Tatsuki Thomas

This masterpiece was written over 500 years ago, when Leonardo da Vinci wrote to the Duke of Milan looking for work:

Most illustrious Lord, having now sufficiently considered the proofs of all those who count themselves masters and inventors of instruments of war, and finding that their invention and use does not differ in any respect from those in common practice, I am emboldened to put myself in communication with your Excellency, in order to acquaint you with my secrets...

1. I have plans for bridges, very light and strong and suitable for carrying very easily...

2. When a place is besieged I know how to cut off water from the trenches, and how to construct an infinite number of scaling ladders and other instruments...

3. If, because of the height of the embankment, and the strength of the place or its site, it should be impossible to reduce it by bombardment, I know methods of destroying any citadel or fortress, even if it is built on rock.

...In time of peace I believe that I can give you as complete satisfaction as anyone else in architecture, in the construction of buildings both public and private...

And if any of the aforesaid things should seem impossible or impracticable to anyone, I offer myself as ready to make trial of them in your park or in whatever place shall please your Excellency, to whom I commend myself with all possible humility.

He's literally writing copywriting bullets in the 1400s, yet I've heard almost no one mention Leonardo when it comes to copy.

My favourite part of this whole letter is his ability to foretell his reader's objections and answer them.

Bullet 3, for example, answers an objection you'd have to bullet 2 (what if bombardment doesn't work?), while also answering ANOTHER objection at the end:

3. If, because of the height of the embankment, and the strength of the place or its site, it should be impossible to reduce it by bombardment, I know methods of destroying any citadel or fortress, even if it is built on rock.

And then to finish off the letter, he answers the biggest objection of all.

Objection: "Is this really possible? Sounds too good to be true."

His answer: "And if any of the aforesaid things should seem impossible or impracticable to anyone, I offer myself as ready to make trial of them in your park or in whatever place shall please your Excellency."

500 years later, that's still exactly how you handle a sceptical prospect. Name the doubt yourself, then offer to prove it.

Tatsuki

"What's the biggest mistake 7 to 8 figure ecom companies make with their marketing?"

His reply.

Mistake 1: Trying to Do Too Many Things

All you need to hit $10M are 1 to 2 strong channels, i.e. Facebook and Google Ads.

Try to do everything and you fail to do anything.

Mistake 2: Majoring in the Minors

Focusing on the tiny details instead of the big needle movers.

"People who look into biohacking before getting enough sleep."

Mistake 3: Not Using a Front-End Product Properly

Companies get too caught up with maximising Return-On-Ad-Spend with their main front-end product. Instead, they should be aiming for break even, or even sometimes a loss, and making the money on the 2nd or 3rd sale on the back-end instead.

Whoever can spend the most, wins.

Have a cracking weekend,

Tats

Bill Beane (Brad Pitt) is trying to buy the baseball player Rincon for his team. He gets his player analysis assistant Peter Brand (Jonah Hill) to call their boss and ask for $225,000 to buy the player.

His boss refuses.

To which Billy tells his assistant to say: "Billy says he will pay for Rincon himself, but when he sells him for more money next year, he's keeping the profit."

To which his boss gives in and agrees to send the money.

You see, Brad's character did two clever things.

1. He Showed Full Conviction

He offered to pay for it himself. He put his own skin in the game.

The easiest way to show you have full conviction is to actually have full conviction, something Brad had. By truly believing in the product or service you're selling, you're already a better salesman than most people.

2. He Painted the Cost of Inaction

He painted the picture of the cost of not agreeing to the deal: losing out on the profits Brad would get when he resells the player for a higher price in the future.

To apply this to your own sales, simply find your prospect's problem. Then ask them, "what is the cost of not solving this problem?"

Conviction plus the cost of inaction. Two small moves, one big shift in how persuasive you are.

Tats

But there are simple copywriting frameworks the greatest marketers have used for decades. Since learning them, my hooks have performed considerably better. (Credit to Kieran Drew for sharpening these for me.)

Here are the three I reach for most.

P-A-S: Problem, Agitate, Solution

• Problem: Call out a problem, challenge or pain.
• Agitate: Poke the pain. Twist the knife.
• Solution: Present a solution.

This is a copywriting classic, and for good reason. Pain is one of the strongest motivators. If you can identify a pain, really make it hurt, and then present a solution, it's hard for your reader to ignore. The stronger the pain, the stronger the hook.

For example:

• Problem: Calling out the fear of becoming a manager.
• Agitate: Increasing that fear with a scary statistic.
• Solution: 15 principles that resolve the fear AND put you in the top 1%.

A-I-D-A: Attention, Interest, Desire, Action

• Attention: Grab attention with a strong statement.
• Interest: Create curiosity.
• Desire: Target a specific desire.
• Action: Call to action.

This is one of my favourites. It's simple, and very versatile. Now that you know it, you'll start to see it everywhere.

A variation I love is AIDA with a story twist, where you use an achievement to grab attention:

• Attention: State a clear achievement.
• Interest: Increase curiosity and make it relatable to the reader.
• Desire: The outcome they want.
• Action: "Read these 9 simple steps."

For example:

"I just quit my job and bought a ticket to Thailand. In the last 30 days I've made over $30,000 (with under 7000 followers). Here's exactly how I did it in under 5 months:"

Curiosity dialled up, and relatable to a larger audience.

B-A-B: Before, After, Bridge

• Before: Share the pain, struggle or problem.
• After: Show what life is like now you've solved it.
• Bridge: What allowed you to go from hell to heaven.

This hook is great because it's essentially a mini story transformation. The bigger the transformation, and the more relatable the struggle, the better the hook.

For example:

• Before: Relatable struggle of low engagement.
• After: Better engagement than much bigger accounts.
• Bridge: The exact blueprint that made it happen.

To recap:

• Problem, Agitate, Solution.
• Attention, Interest, Desire, Action.
• Before, After, Bridge.

Learn these three and you'll never stare at a blank page wondering how to start a hook again.

Tatsuki

Here are the six pillars of a hook people can't scroll past.

1. The Cliffhanger

This is the most important, but also the most obvious aspect of a brilliant hook. You state what the content is about. But you never say how or why.

For example:

"Storytelling is the most powerful skill in the world. But most people suck at it. Here are 9 rules to writing stories that sell."

You're stating what it's about (storytelling), but you're not giving away how to write stories. The curiosity of how or why is fundamentally what hooks your reader.

2. Specificity

Specificity does not simply mean being specific with numbers.

Save $1000 becomes Save $1234.23

This does increase believability (to an extent). But what is more important is that you are specific with the idea and outcome.

Save $1000 becomes: Save $1000 a year with a simple accounting trick that reduces your tax bill (legally).

3. Credibility

There are thousands of people writing online. And half of them don't know what they're talking about. So why should someone listen to you?

Credibility. It comes from what you, or the person you're writing about, has done. The more credibility, the better.

For example:

• "I've grown 2000 followers in the last 30 days."
• "I spent 6 months studying 30 copywriting books."
• "He sold over 20,000,000 pairs of sunglasses with a 240 word story."

This matters most when you're small. The bigger your track record gets, the less you need to lean on written credibility, because you already carry it.

4. Poke a Pain

Pain is one of the strongest motivators. So poking a pain is one of the best ways to hook attention.

Bigger the pain. Stronger the hook.

For example:

• "Finding clients is hard."
• "Most people suck at storytelling."
• "Struggling to write content alongside your 9 to 5?"

5. Minimise Effort

People are lazy. They want their problems solved and their dream achieved as easily as possible.

So always: minimise the perceived effort, maximise the benefit.

For example:

• "7 simple steps to get more work done in your day."
• "Here's my easy 3-step formula for viral posts."
• "Steal these 10 dead-simple tricks to make your stories sell."

Warning: don't take this too far, or it stops being believable.

"3 simple steps to make $1 million in only 2 hours today."

Just be honest.

6. Punchy and Clear

You're fighting against a sea of other hooks. So your hook needs to pack a punch. And NEVER confuse. Confusion is the biggest conversion killer.

Here's a hook I wrote a while ago:

"Get buff in the word gym with these 7 copywriting exercises."

Can you see what's wrong with it? I'm trying to be clever, not clear. What the hell does 'get buff in the word gym' mean?

An improvement would be:

"Get good at copywriting with these 7 easy exercises."

To recap:

• Have a cliffhanger.
• Be specific on the idea.
• Layer in credibility.
• Poke a pain.
• Minimise effort. Maximise benefit.
• Make it punchy and clear.

Master these six and you'll write hooks people can't ignore.

Tatsuki