Managing Partner @ Brick | Ads & Creative for 100+ DTC brands - $300m+ in sales | I write content about paid ads, performance creative & e-commerce

We scale 7 to 9-figure DTC brands using a creative-first, full-funnel approach that blends paid ads, landing pages, and performance-driven creative.

Brick isn’t a bloated agency juggling 50 clients. 

We’re a boutique team of senior strategists, creatives, and media buyers working closely with a small group of brands we genuinely believe in.

Everything we do is grounded in research, strategy, and execution. No juniors, no handoffs, no fluff.

We’ve driven over $400M in trackable revenue for some of the fastest-growing DTC brands. Our work has been featured in Entrepreneur, Social Media Examiner, and other leading publications. More importantly, 92% of the brands we work with hit all-time revenue highs in under 90 days.

If you're spending on ads but not seeing consistent growth, we can help. 

We focus on fixing the bottlenecks that are holding your brand back—whether it's creative fatigue, poor landing page performance, or inefficient account structure.

Message me “GROWTH” or check the link in my featured section to see how we work.

Toby W.

Scaling Meta ads is WAY HARDER when your account is a mess.

If your campaigns aren’t structured properly, you’re wasting money every single day.

I built a Meta Ad Account Framework that fixes this.

Like this post + Comment ‘Meta’ and I’ll send it over.

{We must be connected}

Toby Waller

I help eCom brands scale past $25M/yr with Ads + Retention. $450M+ in revenue | Moto, Leica, Kodak, Drake + 200+ more.

Most brands have at least 1 of these 3 creative bottlenecks that stop them from scaling their meta ads:

1️⃣ Not knowing what to test next
2️⃣ Not knowing how to test it
3️⃣ Not knowing how to turn test results into new winning creatives

I put together The Ultimate Creative Guide to fix all 3.

This guide breaks down the entire creative testing process - from generating data-backed ideas to structuring tests effectively and analyzing results to create high-performing ads.

By the end, you’ll have a proven framework for consistently producing top-tier ad creatives that drive conversions.

Want the guide?

1. Like this post
2. Comment ‘CREATIVE’ and I’ll DM it.

{Must be connected}.

Scaling META to $1M+ per month requires precision, not guesswork.

After deploying 9-figures in ad spend, I’ve built a Meta Scaling Blueprint

It covers:

📌 How to scale without spiking CPAs
📌 The best budget adjustment method
📌 Key metrics to track

Want it? 
 
Like this post & Drop ‘Scale’ & I’ll send it over.

You don't have a creative problem.
You have a strategic angle problem.

Most brands hit a wall at <$100k/month in Meta spend, not because they've run out of ideas, but because their creative isn't mapped to the buyer journey.

Every piece of creative needs a job. 

And that job changes depending on where the buyer is.

Cold audiences need pattern interrupts. Warm audiences need proof. Hot audiences need urgency. 

Run the wrong angle at the wrong stage, and you're burning budget wondering why your "winning" creative stopped working.

That's why we mapped out the 7 angles we use across every account we scale.
Swipe through this carousel - it breaks down:

→ The 7 angles that actually move buyers at each funnel stage 
→ Which angle to deploy where (and why it matters) 
→ Real examples you can adapt and test this week

I'm Toby, the data-nerd, dog-loving, Ex-apple, combat sports enthusiast, and foodie CEO of Brick Social. 

We help 8-figure DTC brands scale with paid ads. I'm passionate about Facebook Ads, DTC Growth, Google Advertising, Performance Creative, and Conversion Rate Optimisation. 

When I'm not helping clients grow, you can find me volunteering at my local dog shelter, exploring new cities, or tasting amazing food at new restaurants.

𝐃𝐓𝐂/𝐄𝐜𝐨𝐦 𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐫? 𝐈 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐲𝐨𝐮’𝐫𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡.

I get it. You've been burned by other agencies, flooded with cold emails, and worried about poor communication or outsourcing to inexperienced talent. I'm here to change that. 

I take a holistic approach to growth by providing the attention and expertise you need to drive results. 

No overpromising, no underdelivering – just real growth.

𝐒𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐈’𝐯𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐞𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡:

Patch Plants, Bougie Bakes, SHITI Coolers, Brooklyn Brew Shop, Moto 360, Kodak Smart Home, Paddywax Candles, PetFusion and many other awesome brands.

𝐒𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐈’𝐦 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐝 𝐨𝐟:

-Generated $300,000,000+profitable revenue for clients
-Dozens of 5⭐️ reviews from our partners on Clutch.co
-Featured in industry publications talking about e-commerce growth 
-Client retention 1+Years 

𝐋𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 & 𝐠𝐫𝐨𝐰𝐭𝐡 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐦𝐲 𝐋𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭.

As your go-to marketing professional, I’ll write here weekly about growth tips in e-commerce, paid ads, CRO, direct response creative, copywriting, and funnels. I'll also sprinkle in some personal stories that closely examine my internal world, adventures, and experiences. So hit the 🔔 to never miss a post! 

𝐈𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮'𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧 𝐄 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐜𝐞 𝐅𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐫 𝐂𝐄𝐎 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐬:

-To achieve sustainable growth while building unshakeable foundations that last 

-To work with a partner who does all the heavy lifting so you won’t have to 

-To have a team of experts on your side that supports you through thigh & thin and has a ZERO BS and sugarcoating policy-

 I'm your guy.

If you’re interested to learn more:

👉🏻Dm me on Linkedin
👉🏻email me at: toby@bricksocial.co.uk
👉🏻apply to work with me here:  https://bricksocial.typeform.com/to/rnERXIke

Or simply follow my LinkedIn profile. 

Let's forge a strong connection and help your brand grow!

Angles

We’re on the hunt for a world-class Senior Meta Media Buyer to join our team at Brick.

You’ll be working with some of the most recognised and fastest-growing DTC brands in the world, managing millions in ad spend and helping scale brands through creative-first paid media.

This role is not for beginners.

We’re looking for someone who:

• Has deep Meta Ads expertise
• Is comfortable managing large budgets and complex accounts
• Thrives in fast-paced, high-performance environments
• Can translate data into clear strategic decisions
• Understands that creative & post-click is the biggest lever in performance

You’ll be working closely with our strategy, creative and growth teams to push accounts forward every single day.

If you’ve scaled serious ad spend, love solving complex performance problems, and want to work with ambitious DTC brands, we’d love to hear from you.

Comment “Buyer” or DM me and I’ll share more details.

Creative is now the PRIMARY targeting mechanism on all major ad platforms.
This isn’t a hot take… It’s reality ⇓

→ Meta’s ASC (Advantage+ Shopping)
→ Google’s Performance Max
→ TikTok’s Smart+ campaigns

All three use your creative as the targeting signal, not your manual audience selections.

The algorithm reads:

• Who engages
• Who watches
• Who clicks
• Who converts

And then finds more people like that.

Which means…

If your creative lacks depth, range, and persona clarity...
your targeting lacks depth, range, and persona clarity.

This is why we built our internal Creative Variety Matrix at Brick.

The graphic below is a simplified, front-end version of the much deeper backend system we use with partners.

Most brands think scaling means:

“Find a winning ad → increase budget.”

That worked in 2018.
It does not work in 2026.

Today, scaling requires structured creative expansion.

The 3 Dimensions We Scale Across

1️⃣ Content Type
Image
Carousel
Short-form video
Long-form video

2️⃣ Polish Level
Native / “Ugly” / UGC
Chameleon (blends into feed)
Branded / high production

3️⃣ Persona
This is the multiplier most brands ignore.
Instead of making 10 ads for “everyone,”
We build creative clusters around distinct buyer profiles.

Each persona gets:
Content type ×
Polish level ×
Angle.

Now you’re not launching random variations.

You’re building a creative ecosystem.

Why this matters:

• Meta rewards diversity in delivery
• Fatigue slows dramatically
• CPAs stabilise at scale
• ASC & PMax get stronger targeting signals
• Budget increases stop breaking performance

Most accounts plateau because they try to scale spend without scaling signal.

And modern platforms reward signal depth.

Creative variety, when structured properly, becomes a competitive advantage - not just a testing tactic.

Most brands kill ads too early.

Not because they don’t work…

But because they don’t understand why they work.

I broke down 3 static ads from Hume Health that refused to die. 

Hume Health

Different angles.
Different psychographics.
Same product.

Here’s the bigger lesson:

Winning creative isn’t about making “better ads.”

It’s about building a system.

• One ad that sells to past pain
• One ad that sells to ego + identity
• One ad that dominates a niche community

3 emotional entry points.
1 product.
Full market coverage.

Most brands rely on one angle and call it testing.

The brands that scale past $25M/year build psychographic coverage.

If you want your ads to last, stop asking:
“Is this creative good?”

Start asking:

“Who is this for - emotionally?”

Steal the framework inside the carousel 👇

Hume

This $4B company doesn’t run complicated ads.

They run simple ones.

And that’s exactly why they work.

Most brands try to win with:

• More features
• More claims
• More design
• More “polish”

hims & hers does the opposite.

They lead with:

👉 A shared frustration
👉 A seasonal anxiety
👉 A reframe of the status quo

No aggressive before/afters.

No over-explaining.

No feature overload.

Just emotional truth + smart positioning.

A few things worth stealing:

1️⃣ Start with the feeling, not the fix.
If your audience has heard the phrase before (“Your blood work looks fine”), you’ve already won attention.

2️⃣ Let typography do the heavy lifting.
Strikethroughs. Corrections. Visual tension.
The design itself tells the transformation story.

3️⃣ Compete against the default, not a competitor.
“5x more than routine bloodwork” is stronger than naming a brand.
Position against the status quo.

The biggest mistake I see eCom brands make?

Trying to prove they’re better.

Instead, show people what they’re missing.

If you’re running static ads right now, ask yourself:

Are we leading with emotion?

Or are we leading with features?

Big difference.

Hers

We started working with this health brand at the beginning of 2026.

Here’s the YoY comparison:

• Revenue: $4.53M (+61%)
• AOV: $125.40 (+14%)
• Conversion rate: +34%
• Sessions: +7%

No new channels.
No viral product.
No “one big unlock.”

Just better execution across the fundamentals.

Operators fall into the trap of thinking scale comes from one big idea.

In reality, it’s small, often ignored optimisations stacked together that compound.

Here’s what actually moved the needle for this brand 👇

1️⃣ Fixing fundamentals before scaling spend

Before increasing budget, we:

– Deep audited creative (angle gaps, objection blind spots, avatar depth)
– Restructured the ad account for cleaner testing + faster feedback loops
– Audited the site for clarity, proof, and friction
– Implemented stronger attribution (Triple Whale, KnoCommerce)
– Built a proper creative analysis workflow

Most brands try to scale with brute force.

Scale happens when you obsess over the fundamentals.

2️⃣ In health, trust > production quality

Overproduced ads underperform in health.

Raw founder content.
Educational iPhone breakdowns.
UGC that feels real.
They convert better.

Why?

Health purchases are trust-driven.

But authenticity only works when:

– Creators sound like themselves
– Claims are clear
– Objections are addressed directly

Clarity > aesthetics.

Especially in health.

3️⃣ Offer engineering lifted AOV

Scaling past $2M/month required structured offer testing:

• Bundles built around use-case
• Subscribe & save optimisation
• Threshold incentives
• Value-add bonuses instead of discounts

$100 + added value

Beats

$80 with margin erosion.

4️⃣ We optimised for contribution, not ROAS

Serious scale comes from knowing:

• CAC thresholds
• Contribution margin
• Payback window
• LTV:CAC

Once you understand those, you stop guessing.

You know when you can push.

You know when you need to pull.

5️⃣ Scale is compounding

Better creative depth.
Better offers.
Better structure.
Better data clarity.

Individually small.

Collectively massive.

There was no “magic tactic.”

Just disciplined stacking of the right levers.

Not sexy.

Extremely effective.

---

If you’re running a health brand and want a second set of eyes on your setup, I’m happy to take a look.

No pitch.
No obligation.

Just an honest audit of where the leverage probably sits.

In 2025, we scaled a fashion brand from $150k to $1.2m/month.

The bottleneck wasn’t creative volume.
It wasn’t CRO.

It was creative depth.

When we audit fashion brands spending £50k–£500k/month, we see the same pattern:

• Same formats
• Same messaging
• Same angles
• Different colours

That’s not testing.
That’s rotation.

The top-performing brands we work with are obsessed with creative diversity.

Not more ads.

More angles.
More formats.
More avatars.

So I pulled together 100+ high-performing fashion ad concepts - the exact types driving scale right now.

If you want the swipe file:

Like this post + comment “Fashion” below, and I’ll send it over.

Most brands kill their best ads too early.
In reality, your best creative has 10x more life in it than you think.
Here’s how you extract it:

For video ads:

• Test new hooks (change the text overlay or reshoot the first 3 seconds)
• Swap in different opening lines while keeping the rest identical
• Use the same script with different creators
• Change the B-roll (especially powerful with AI voiceover ads)
• Adjust pacing (speed up or slow down key moments)
• Cut down to the core message or extend with additional proof
• Swap in different testimonials

For static ads:

• Winning visual + new headlines
• Winning headline + new visuals
• Animate winning statics

For native-style ads:

Use AI tools to swap the main subject across different demographics while keeping the rest of the ad identical.

The key rule:
Change one variable at a time.

This is how you squeeze far more performance from every creative winner.

Most brands see an ad work and immediately move on to building something new from scratch.

The sophisticated approach treats creative iteration like a controlled experiment.

And that’s where the real scale comes from.

We have 2 final slots available for brands to join us for Q2.

If you're looking to scale paid acquisition with a more structured creative testing system:

I'll leave a link in the comments 👇

Your customers already told you how to scale.

You're just not listening.

Most brands install a post-purchase survey…

…ask “how did you hear about us?”

 …and call it a day.

That’s leaving money on the table.

Post-purchase surveys aren’t for attribution.

They’re for leverage.

When structured properly, they unlock:

• Better ad hooks (real language buyers use)
• Stronger offers (what actually tipped them)
• Higher LTV (why they come back)
• Clearer positioning (why you vs competitors)
• New product ideas (what they want next)
• Margin protection (discount sensitivity insights)

The key is asking questions that ladder into strategy.

Every high-value survey falls into one of 6 buckets:

1️⃣ Attribution (but smarter - time to convert, influence layering)
2️⃣ Motivation (what problem were they solving?)
3️⃣ Objection (what nearly stopped them?)
4️⃣ Retention (what would make them reorder?)
5️⃣ Competitive (what alternatives did they consider?)
6️⃣ Expansion (what else do they want from you?)

The moment after purchase is the highest-truth point in your funnel.

Intent is fresh.

Emotion is active.

The real reason is still conscious.

Most brands guess at creative angles.

The best brands read what buyers already told them - and reflect it back in ads.

Meta will get noisier.

First-party insight compounds.

If you want the full framework (200+ question examples broken down by use case), comment “SURVEY”, and I’ll send it over.

What got you to $10M won't get you to $50M.

And most brands don't figure that out until growth has been flat for 2 yrs.

When we audit and consult with brands around $10M that have plateaued, the pattern is almost always the same. 

The founding playbook: early brand awareness, a strong launch offer, a tight subscription base... did exactly what it was supposed to do. 

It got them here.

But somewhere along the way, the strategy stopped evolving. The team kept executing the same plays because they worked before. 

The acquisition engine never got rebuilt for the next stage. And the subscription base that was masking the problem slowly stopped being enough.

The uncomfortable truth is that most plateaued brands aren't suffering from bad execution. 

They're suffering from comfort.

Nobody wants to question the thing that built the business. But there's a difference between what's driving growth and what you're just used to doing.

The audit question we always start with:

If you stripped out your existing subscriber/repeat buyer revenue, would your new customer acquisition actually sustain this business?

Most brands don't like the answer.

If you're at 8-9 figures and growth has been flat, the problem probably isn't your ads. 

It's that the strategy underneath them hasn't been pressure-tested in years.

If that sounds familiar, we do a limited number of audits each month. 

Link in my profile.

Something I've noticed while auditing ad accounts recently.

There are two types...

The ones that are scaling, and the ones that are busy.

The busy ones all look the same.

150 ads a month. Full Slack channels. Weekly production calls. An organised shared drive. A learnings doc that hasn't actually changed how anything gets built.

And the account hasn't moved in three months.

The problem isn't output. It's that most of what gets produced isn't testing anything. 

It's content. And content and creative testing are not the same thing.

A real test has a question before it goes into production. 

One variable isolated. 
A hypothesis. 
A clear definition of what a result actually means.

What most brands have is a brief that says "let's try a UGC version" and a learning doc full of opinions.

The fix isn't producing more. It's asking better questions before you brief anything.

What don't we know about this audience? 
What's the gap between our best performer and everything else, and what does it actually tell us?

Build the creative to answer that. 

Ship it. Read it properly. Let it change the next brief.

That's it. That's the whole system.

The brands I've seen scale fastest on Meta aren't the ones with the highest creative output. 

They're the ones who know exactly what they're trying to learn each week - and build around that.

Volume is a crutch.

Brands brag about creative testing…

…but avoid the one test that actually unlocks scale:

Price.

Most brands obsess over:
Creative angles
Audience targeting
Campaign structure

And never touch the most powerful variable in the system: pricing.

Why this matters.

Let’s say you’re selling a supplement at $79.

Current state:
Price: $79
COGS: $18
Conversion rate: 2.8%
CAC: $52

Media contribution: $79 − $18 − $52 = $9 per order

You’re profitable, but capped.

At around $150K per month in spend, CAC starts to break and scale stalls.

Now test $89.

Price: $89
COGS: $18
Conversion rate: 2.4%
CAC: $60

Media contribution: $89 − $18 − $60 = $11 per order

That’s a 22% increase in contribution per order.

Same product.
Same traffic.
More room to scale.

Higher media contribution lets you:
Bid more aggressively
Tolerate higher CPMs
Target broader audiences

Now push it to $99.

Price: $99
COGS: $18
Conversion rate: 1.9%
CAC: $68

Media contribution: $99 − $18 − $68 = $13 per order

At $150K per month in spend:
$79 price → ~$26K total contribution
$99 price → ~$29K total contribution

Fewer orders.
More profit.

Most brands never test this because they’re scared.

They’d rather tweak creative endlessly than touch the variable that actually decides how far they can scale.

End of week wins 👇
Our Head of Google, David Shelton, just dropped performance updates from two recently onboarded CPG brands...

Both came to us in similar positions:

Under-structured accounts.

Low efficiency.

Untapped intent.

Brand 1 -(starting almost from scratch on Google)

First month after rebuilding properly:

• +173% increase in click volume + traffic

• +15% lift in AOV

• +48% increase in ROAS

• Meaningful incremental revenue built immediately

Not from increasing spend.

From fixing structure, feed optimisation and tightening intent capture.

-----

Brand 2 -(had been running Google but struggling with ROAS)

Without increasing spend:

• +28% ROAS

• +21% purchases + revenue

• +13% new customers

• +16% AOV

• -20% CPC

Again - efficiency driven.


------

On the retention side, Brad Neil (our Head of Email) wrapped the week by completely re-architecting a partner’s Klaviyo setup.

We:

• Rebuilt high-impact flows from the ground up

• Tightened segmentation based on real buyer behaviour

• Refined offer positioning inside campaigns

• Cleaned deliverability and send logic

Result:

Significant incremental revenue lift - without increasing send volume or discount dependency.

That’s the part most brands miss.

Scaling isn’t about “more”.

It’s about better architecture and synergy across paid + retention.

Proud of the team.

If your Google account is plateauing or your email channel feels like it’s just ticking along, there’s usually a structural unlock sitting there.

We started working with this CPG brand at the beginning of 2026

And I'm posting this because it shows how scale actually happens.

$4.37M in roughly 54 days (up 60%)

No single “unlock”.

Most brands think scale comes from one big idea.

In reality, it's small, often ignored optimisations stacked together that compound.

Here are some of the biggest I see consistently 👇🏼

1. Testing and scaling in the same place

A brand finds a winner, increases budget… and performance falls apart.

Why?

Because testing budget + scaling budget creates chaos.

You can’t tell if results dropped due to fatigue, bad tests, or a learning reset.

Fix:

Separate testing from scaling entirely.

Tests prove themselves fast. Winners graduate to efficiency-focused campaigns.

2. Overproduced creative kills performance

The most common mistake: ads that look too polished.

Founder iPhone videos and raw UGC consistently outperform studio-quality content.

Why?

Because authenticity beats production value.

UGC only works if creators sound like themselves. 

Give them an angle, not a script.

And don’t underestimate text overlays:

Clear, bold claims beat subtle lifestyle visuals every time.

Clarity > aesthetics.

3. Your offer is stale

If you’re running the same offer you launched with, you’re leaking revenue.

Brands scaling past $3M/month constantly test:

 • Bundles to lift AOV
 • BOGO structures
 • Threshold offers
 • Time-limited bonuses

Adding perceived value beats cutting price.

$100 + $40 bonus > $80 discount (and your margin stays healthier).

4. The metrics most brands ignore

ROAS is a vanity metric.

Serious scaling happens when you have clarity on:

• LTV:CAC ratios
• CAC Thresholds
• Contribution margin
 
If you don’t know these, you’re optimising blind.

Once you do, decisions get simple:

You know when you can push, and when you need to pull back.

You allocate capital where unit economics justify it.

5. Scale comes from compounding, not breakthroughs

Brands that scale don’t chase silver bullets.

They stack small wins:

 • Better structure
 • Better creative systems
 • Smarter offers

Individually small. Collectively massive.

Bottom line:

Scaling isn’t about one magic tactic.

It’s about tightening the 10–15 levers that quietly determine performance.

Not sexy. 

Extremely effective.

This furniture brand has been one of the hardest accounts we've scaled.
It’s tested us in ways no other client has.
Here's the 30 days👇 (after finally cracking it)

Total revenue: $601,371 (+18% MoM)
CVR: 2.2% (+8%)
✅All above our pre-determined KPI's

But getting here required us to throw out our entire playbook and rebuild from scratch.

Here's what nearly stopped us - and what eventually worked 👇

1️⃣ The purchase cycle demanded a different kind of patience

Furniture converts in weeks, not days.

The frameworks that work at lower ticket sizes assume faster feedback. 

Here, by the time the data matured, we'd already made decisions based on incomplete signals.

Fix: extended attribution windows, weekly cohort reviews instead of daily reads, and trusting the process longer than felt comfortable.

2️⃣ Such a High AOV forced us to rethink everything

Not just creative. Not just targeting.

Everything - from the ad creative to the landing page experience to how we thought about retention and repeat purchase.

The bar for every touchpoint is higher. The margin for mediocrity is zero.

3️⃣ The creative that works elsewhere failed completely

Raw UGC. Talking heads. "Real people" testimonials.
All of it underperformed.

Furniture is an identity purchase. People aren't buying a sofa. They're buying a version of their home.

Once we shifted to aspirational lifestyle creative - room-in-context, design-led, emotionally driven - performance changed.

4️⃣ The offer structure was wrong for the category

Discounting an $1000+ piece of furniture. It signals quality problems, not value.

We pulled back on blanket discounts entirely. Replaced with: financing messaging, white-glove delivery framing, and room-bundle incentives.

Perceived value went up. Conversion rate followed.

5️⃣ We had to accept a longer payback window

This brand's LTV:CAC doesn't resolve in 30 days. It resolves in 6 months.
Once we reframed the economics - and got client alignment on that - we stopped making short-term decisions that were sabotaging long-term scale.

We now know this brand can hit $1M/month. 

We know exactly which levers to pull to get there.

The work that got us to this point wasn't glamorous. It was dismantling what we thought we knew and rebuilding it for a category that doesn't forgive shortcuts.

That's the real unlock, not a tactic. 

Not a creative hack. Just the willingness to start from first principles and do the work properly.

Running a high AOV brand on Meta and hitting a ceiling?

Happy to take a look at what's actually blocking you

Drop me a DM.

I just wrapped up an audit for a beauty brand spending $100K/month on ads and made a concerning discovery...

Their static ads were performing terribly:

Unique CTR: 1.31%
CPM: $10.11
CPA: $178

The culprit?

Product-obsessed creatives that look like every other beauty ad.

Same glossy product shots.

Same perfect models.

Same "revolutionary formula" claims.

Here's the problem with product-focused ads on Meta and Google: 

they scream "THIS IS AN AD" and users scroll right past them.

After analyzing 200+ top-performing beauty ads, we found that the best-converting creatives don't just showcase products, they tap into specific customer motivations.

Our Creative Matrix Worksheet revealed 7 concepts they're completely missing:

Testimonial Ads (real people sharing authentic results)
Lifestyle Ads (showing the product in everyday contexts)
Problem → Solution Ads (addressing specific pain points)
Comparison Ads (clear differentiation from competitors)
Ugly Ads (organic-looking content that doesn't feel polished)
Authority Ads (leveraging press mentions and accolades)
Before & After Ads (visual proof that creates desire)

The beauty brands scaling profitably on Meta and Google right now are the ones testing across ALL these concepts, not just product shots.

Most beauty brands we audit are only using 1-2 of these concepts in their ad arsenal.

No wonder CPAs are through the roof.

We're confident we can turn their ad account around with these adjustments + our Brick-by-Brick Framework to systematically test each concept.

When brands follow our framework, they typically see CTRs double and CPAs cut by 30-50% within 45 days.

The lesson? Stop making ads that look like ads.

If your CTRs are below 2% on Meta, you're paying a massive "boring tax" on your ad spend.

Running $50K+/month on beauty ads but struggling with rising CPAs?

Let's chat.

“Our main issue now is delivering on the growth you guys are generating.
 I don’t know what you’re doing… but f* it’s working.”

That was a message from a client last week.

We started working together 12 months ago.

Since then:

• $33M+ in gross sales
• +26% YoY growth
• CVR% up 10% 
• AOV up 10%

But the reality is…

There wasn’t a single “silver bullet”.

No viral ad.

No one optimisation that changed everything.

Just dozens of optimisations compounding over time.

Things like:

• Restructuring the ad account to scale spend more efficiently
• Building a much deeper creative testing pipeline
• Using customer reviews and research to inform new ad angles
• Improving landing page conversion paths
• Tight feedback loops between media buying, creative and retention teams
• Expanding the creative variety in the account
• Doubling down on what customers actually respond to

None of these changes are particularly sexy on their own.

But stack them together for 12 months…

…and the results compound.

That’s how most brands actually scale.

Not with one breakthrough.

But with consistent, methodical improvements across the entire growth engine.

----

We’ve got one client slot left for March.

If you’re doing $2+ a year and looking to scale paid acquisition properly

Feel free to drop me a message - we'll see if we're a fit!

Co-Founder @ Hydra | Co-Founder @ Howl Campfires | I Help Agencies & Professional Service Firms Scale Revenue & Profit

I help agencies, and consultants B2B service providers scale their revenue & profitability. 

My track record speaks for itself:

- I've helped 250+ agencies scale in the last 36 months. 
- Personally built 3 businesses to multiple millions in annual revenue. 
- 1 successful exit of my own, and 3 among our advisory team. 

How I can help you scale your business: 

1. Our D.N.A. Days

Where you come in person to Nashville, TN and sit alongside myself and our team, where we’ll complete a full audit of your business, establish your goals, and design a clear roadmap to solve what’s holding you back from scaling. 

Then, we give you our exact systems & processes to make it reality. 

2. Our Mastermind Program, the Hydra Growth Collective. 

This is our flagship offering that bundles all our proven systems, lead-gen, ops, and AI frameworks into weekly group calls, a private community, a full curriculum library, and two live, in-person growth intensives each year.

3. The Hydra Portfolio 

An invite-only offer for a minority stake of your business where we invest capital and work hands-on as part of your management team until we both win.

If you’re running a service business in the $500k–$10M range and want predictable scale, not more theory, fluff, or advice that keeps you spinning your wheels…

DM me “grow” to learn more. 

Also founder at HOWL Campfires, a DTC brand. We're a 100% Made In The USA, patented, portable propane fire pit line. 

Learn more about how we keep the forest & fire alive for generations to come at www.howlcampfires.com

Nicholas Kirchner

The best agencies are firing 80% of their clients right now.

And they're making more money because of it.

Ok, not literally 80%, but check out the math on simplifying your roster:

Before: 25 clients. $150K/month revenue. $60K profit. 40% margins.

After firing 20 clients and keeping the top 5:

5 clients. $75K/month revenue. $52K profit. 70% margins.

Wait. Read that again.

Half the revenue. Nearly the same profit. A fraction of the complexity.

Because those bottom 20 clients were eating your margins alive:

-> Constant scope creep
-> 80% of your support tickets
-> Lowest prices, highest demands
-> Team burnout from managing chaos

Your top clients are the opposite:
-> Clear expectations
-> Respect the process
-> Pay premium prices
-> Refer other premium clients

The Pareto Principle is real in agency life. 20% of your clients generate 80% of your profit.

The question isn't "can I afford to fire them?"

It's "can I afford not to?"

Every hour your team spends on a $2K client is an hour they're not delivering exceptional work for your $10K clients.

Protect your best relationships by removing the ones that drain you.

Built 3 Agencies | 1 Exit | Founder @ Hydra | Founder @ HOWL Campfires

3 revenue lines every agency needs to hit $100K/month:

Most agencies rely on one: monthly retainers.

That's like building a house on one pillar.

Here's the framework that changed everything for me:

Revenue Line 1: Core Retainers (60% of revenue)
-> $8-15K/month clients
-> Predictable, recurring
-> This is your foundation
-> Target: 6-8 clients at $10K avg = $60-80K/month

Revenue Line 2: Project Revenue (25% of revenue)
-> Strategy builds, audits, website launches
-> $5-25K one-time projects
-> These often convert to retainers
-> Target: 1-2 projects/month = $15-25K

Revenue Line 3: Strategic Revenue (15% of revenue)
-> Consulting, training, licensing
-> High margin, low delivery cost
-> Positions you as the expert, not the vendor
-> Target: $10-15K/month

Why this matters:

If you lose a retainer client, you don't panic. Project revenue covers the gap. Strategic revenue builds your moat.

The agencies at $100K+/month aren't just doing more of the same thing.

They built three engines, not one.

Which revenue line are you missing?

Your agency's biggest competitor isn't another agency.

It's your client's internal team.

Every day, someone at your client's company is making the case that they could do what you do in-house for less.

And if you're selling hours and deliverables, they're probably right.

Here's how agencies lose to in-house teams:

-> You send reports. They want strategy.
-> You execute tasks. They want someone who thinks about their business at 2AM.
-> You show activity. They want to see impact on revenue.

Here's how you become irreplaceable:

1. Own a metric, not a channel. Don't be "the SEO agency." Be "the team that generates 200 qualified leads per quarter."

2. Integrate into their decision-making. Attend their planning meetings. Know their pipeline. Understand their board's priorities.

3. Bring insights they can't get internally. Your advantage is seeing patterns across 10+ companies in their space. Use it.

4. Build switching costs through systems. Create proprietary dashboards, processes, and frameworks that only work with you.

The agencies that never get replaced aren't better at marketing.

They're better at making themselves essential to the business.

Are you a vendor or a partner? The answer determines your shelf life.

Every agency owner hits a wall at $30K/month.

You're working 60+ hour weeks. You're the salesperson, the strategist, the project manager, and the closer. Your calendar is full. Your bank account says you should feel successful.

But you're exhausted.

Here's why $30K/month is the hardest ceiling to break:

It's the maximum output of one person doing everything.

You can't sell more because you're delivering.
You can't deliver more because you're selling.
You can't hire because margins are too thin.
You can't raise prices because you're afraid of losing what you have.

The only way through is to break the cycle:

Step 1: Raise your prices 30-50% on new clients. You'll close fewer, but each one is worth more. This creates breathing room.

Step 2: Use that room to build ONE system. A repeatable sales process OR a standardized delivery playbook. Not both. One.

Step 3: Make your first hire against that system. Not a generalist. A specialist who can run the system you built.

Step 4: Repeat.

The agency owners I know who broke through $30K/month didn't find a secret strategy.

They gave themselves permission to stop doing everything and start building something.

An agency owner came to us doing $40K/month.

Solid team. Great fulfillment. Clients loved the work.

But every month was a coin flip on whether they'd hit their number.

Some months: 5 new clients. Other months: zero.

We built them a client acquisition funnel from scratch:

-> Custom VSL speaking directly to their ideal client
-> Paid traffic dialed in to their niche
-> Automated follow-up sequence
-> Booking page optimized for show rates

Within 60 days:

-> Customer acquisition cost: $2,400 (for $8K/month retainer clients)
-> Pipeline went from empty to 12+ qualified calls per week
-> Revenue hit $85K by month 3

The biggest shift wasn't the revenue.

It was the founder sleeping through the night for the first time in two years because they knew where next month's clients were coming from.

Predictability changes everything. Not just your P&L — your life.

If your agency relies on you personally to generate every client, something has to change.

"We just need one more client."

That's what every agency owner says right before they hire someone they can't afford.

Here's what "just one more client" actually costs you:

New client at $3K/month = $36K/year in revenue.

But to service them, you hire a junior PM at $50K/year.

That PM can handle 8-10 clients. 

Great.

Except now you need those 8-10 clients to break even on the hire.

So you start saying yes to bad-fit clients.
Scope creep goes unchecked.
Your best people get stretched thin.
Quality drops.
Your $8K clients start asking why they're paying premium prices.

You didn't grow. You diluted.

The move isn't to add clients until you can afford the hire.

The move is to raise prices until you don't need the hire.

One $10K client replaces three $3K clients and requires a fraction of the overhead.

The best agencies I know didn't scale by hiring. 

They scaled by subtracting.

6 months ago, an agency founder told me:

"I just need one more big client and everything will be fine."

I'd heard that line a hundred times. Usually from agency owners doing $40K-$80K/month who are one lost client away from a crisis.

Here's what his business looked like then:

-> Revenue: $55K/month (but swung between $35K and $70K)
-> Client acquisition: 100% referrals and word of mouth
-> Pipeline: Empty. Every new client felt like a miracle.
-> Founder time on sales: 20+ hours/week

Here's what it looks like now:

-> Revenue: $110K/month (and hasn't dipped below $95K in 4 months)
-> Client acquisition: Paid funnel generating 10+ calls/week
-> Pipeline: 6-8 weeks of scheduled demos at any given time
-> Founder time on sales: 2 hours/week (reviewing call recordings)

The difference wasn't "one more big client."

It was replacing hope with a system.

You don't need one more client. You need a machine that produces clients on demand.

What does your pipeline look like right now?

How I replaced my entire team with AI agents in just 2 weeks...

(You'll never believe how easy this was) 

I didn't. 

Now quit consuming AI fear slop larping as  productivity and get back to work.

Unpopular opinion: Most agency owners don't have a revenue problem.

They have a margin problem disguised as a revenue problem.

I've talked to dozens of agency founders doing $50K-$100K/month who are barely taking home $8K.

They think the answer is more clients. So they chase more revenue. Which means more team. More overhead. More complexity.

And somehow they end up at $120K/month still taking home $8K.

Here's what actually moves the needle:

-> Fire your bottom 20% of clients. The ones who drain your team, pay late, and scope-creep every project. They cost you more than they pay you.

-> Raise prices on new clients by 30%. If your funnel is dialed in and your positioning is sharp, the right clients won't flinch.

-> Systematize delivery so you're not throwing custom solutions at every engagement. Productized delivery = predictable margins.

Revenue is vanity. 

Profit is sanity. 

Cash in the founder's pocket is reality.

The fastest way to kill your agency is to say yes to everyone.

I learned this the hard way.

At $25K/month, I was taking every client who could fog a mirror and sign a contract. Restaurants, dentists, e-commerce, SaaS, coaches. You name it, I'd pitch it.

My team was drowning. Every client needed a different playbook. Every onboarding was starting from scratch. Every deliverable was custom.

Then I did something that felt insane at the time:

I fired 60% of my clients.

Kept only B2B companies between $1M-$10M in revenue.

Here's what happened in the next 6 months:

-> Revenue dropped 30% in month one
-> By month three, it was back to where it started
-> By month six, it had doubled

Why?

Because focus creates compounding advantages:

-> Your case studies are relevant to every prospect
-> Your team gets better at the same thing every week
-> Your processes scale because they're repeatable
-> Your content attracts the exact right audience
-> Referrals happen naturally because clients know who to send you

The math on specialization is brutal but simple:

A generalist can serve 100 industries poorly.
A specialist can dominate 1 industry completely.

Domination pays better than participation.

Who are you saying no to?

Unpopular opinion: Most agencies don't have a marketing problem.

They have a pricing problem.

I've consulted with agencies doing $50K-$1.5M/month. 

The ones that struggle all have one thing in common:

They charge based on what feels comfortable, not what the work is worth.

Here's the pricing ladder most agency owners never build:

Level 1: Cost-plus pricing

"Our costs are X, so we charge X + margin."
Result: You'll always be replaceable.

Level 2: Market-rate pricing

"Everyone else charges $5K, so we charge $5K."
Result: You're competing on sameness.

Level 3: Value-based pricing

"This will generate $500K in revenue for you. Our fee is $50K."
Result: The client sees you as an investment, not an expense.

Most agencies are stuck at Level 1 or 2.

The jump to Level 3 requires one thing: confidence in your ability to deliver a measurable result.

If you can't clearly articulate the ROI of your work, you'll always be stuck competing on price.

Three ways to start moving up:

-> Track every dollar of value you create for clients
-> Build case studies around revenue impact, not vanity metrics
-> Stop quoting hours and start quoting outcomes

The market will pay you whatever you have the courage to charge.

I used to think the hardest part of running an agency was getting clients.

I was wrong.

The hardest part is getting the RIGHT clients, consistently.

At my first agency, we'd have a great month, land 3-4 clients from a referral burst. Then nothing for 6 weeks. Team sitting idle. Cash flow tanking.

So we'd panic-discount. Take on bad-fit work. Restart the cycle.

The turning point wasn't a new offer or a better pitch.

It was building a client acquisition funnel that worked whether I was having a good month or a bad one.

-> Same cost per lead, every month
-> Same number of qualified calls, every week
-> Same close rate, within a few percentage points

That's when the agency stopped feeling like a rollercoaster and started feeling like a business.

Most agency owners are one predictable acquisition system away from the version of their business they've been chasing for years.

There's a ceiling at $1M that most agencies can't break through.

Not because they lack talent.
Not because their niche is wrong.
Not because the market is saturated.

It's because they built a job, not a business.

Here's the pattern I see every time:

$0-$100K: You do everything. Sales, delivery, admin. It works because you're hungry.

$100K-$300K: You hire help. But you're still the bottleneck. Every decision runs through you.

$300K-$500K: Revenue grows, but so does complexity. You're managing people, not building systems. Margins shrink. You're busier than ever but making less per hour than when you started.

The $500K ceiling isn't a revenue problem but really an architecture problem.

What do I mean by this? 

To break through, you need:

-> Productized services (not custom everything)
-> A sales process that doesn't require you
-> Delivery systems that scale without more bodies
-> Pricing tied to outcomes, not hours

The agencies that hit $5-10M+ didn't just get more clients.

They rebuilt the machine.

If you're stuck between $100K-$300K, the answer isn't working harder. It's working differently.

Your competitors aren't beating you on skill. 

They're beating you on packaging.

Two agencies. 
Same niche. 
Same level of talent.

Agency A charges $4K/month. 

Agency B charges $12K/month.

The difference isn't quality. It's how they present the exact same thing.

Agency A's website: "We offer SEO, PPC, social media, email marketing, and web design."

Agency B's website: "We help B2B SaaS companies generate 200+ demo requests per quarter through full-funnel demand generation."

Agency A's proposal: 8 pages of deliverables and timelines.

Agency B's proposal: 3 pages focused on the client's revenue gap and a clear path to close it.

Agency A's sales call: "Here's what we do and how we do it."

Agency B's sales call: "Here's what's costing you $50K/month in missed revenue and how we fix it in 90 days."

Packaging is:

-> Who you say you serve
-> The problem you lead with
-> The outcome you promise
-> The language you use

You probably don't need to get better at your craft.

You need to get better at presenting it.

Your agency doesn't have a sales problem. It has a math problem.

Most owners think: "I need more leads."

What they actually need: Better unit economics.

Let me show you:

Agency A:
-> 100 leads/month
-> 10% close rate = 10 new clients
-> $3K avg deal = $30K new MRR
-> 4-month avg retention
-> Lifetime value: $12K per client
-> CAC: $2,500
-> LTV:CAC ratio: 4.8:1

Agency B:
-> 20 leads/month
-> 30% close rate = 6 new clients
-> $8K avg deal = $48K new MRR
-> 14-month avg retention
-> Lifetime value: $112K per client
-> CAC: $4,000
-> LTV:CAC ratio: 28:1

Agency B has 80% fewer leads and still wins by every measure that matters.

The difference:

-> Better positioning (higher close rate)
-> Premium pricing (higher deal value)
-> Stickier delivery (longer retention)

You don't need more leads. You need better math.

Fix the fundamentals before you scale the top of funnel.

Stop selling deliverables. Start selling outcomes.

"We'll post 3X per week on Instagram" = $2K/month

"We'll build a content system that generates 50+ inbound leads per quarter" = $8K/month

Same work. 4X the price.

The difference is what you're anchoring to.

Deliverables anchor to effort. Outcomes anchor to value.

When you sell deliverables:
-> Clients compare you to cheaper alternatives
-> They micromanage the process
-> They question every invoice
-> They leave when someone offers more for less

When you sell outcomes:
-> Clients see you as a strategic partner
-> They trust your process
-> They measure ROI, not activity
-> They stay because the results compound

Here's a simple reframe for any service:

OLD: "We manage your paid ads"
NEW: "We build a client acquisition engine that delivers X qualified leads at $Y cost per lead"

OLD: "We redesign your website"
NEW: "We build a conversion platform that turns 3% of visitors into booked calls"

The words you use determine the price you charge.

Choose them carefully.

Most agency owners are sitting on a goldmine and don't realize it.

You already have the hardest thing to get in business: paying clients.

But instead of going deeper with them, you're chasing new logos.

Here's the math most people miss:

Acquiring a new client costs 5-7X more than expanding an existing one.

Your current clients already trust you. They already know your work. They're already paying you.

The easiest path to $100K/month isn't 20 new clients.

It's turning your 8 clients at $5K into 8 clients at $12K.

How to do it:

Step 1: Audit every client's business for gaps you could fill
Step 2: Build a "next level" service tier that solves their biggest bottleneck
Step 3: Present it as a growth plan, not an upsell
Step 4: Tie your pricing to the outcome, not the hours

One of my clients went from $38K/month to $87K/month in 90 days.

They didn't add a single new client.

They just stopped leaving money on the table with the ones they already had.

Your next $50K/month is probably hiding inside your current book of business.

Your proposal isn't losing on price.

It's losing on positioning.

I've reviewed hundreds of agency proposals. The ones that lose all look the same:

-> "Here's what we'll deliver"
-> "Here's what it costs"
-> "Here's our timeline"

The ones that win at $10K+ look different:

-> "Here's the problem you don't know you have"
-> "Here's what it's costing you every month"
-> "Here's the outcome we'll create"

The first proposal sells tasks.
The second sells transformation.

A client will haggle over $5K for "social media management."

That same client won't blink at $12K for "a system that generates 40 qualified leads per month."

Same work but a different frame.

The highest-paid agencies aren't better at delivery. 

They're better at framing the problem in a way that makes their price feel like a bargain.

If you're competing on price, you've already lost the positioning battle.

Rewrite your proposal around the cost of inaction, not the cost of your services.

Unpopular opinion: 

Most agencies should stop doing outbound immediately.

Before you come for me...

Hear me out.

I'm not anti-outbound. 

I'm anti-outbound as your ONLY strategy.

Here's what I see at agencies doing $50K-$200K/month:

-> Founder sends 500 cold DMs a week
-> Books 10-15 calls
-> Closes 2-3 clients
-> Feels productive but is burning out
-> Revenue flatlines the second they stop

The agencies scaling past this have something different:

A funnel that generates inbound demand without the founder's daily effort.

-> Paid traffic driving qualified prospects to a VSL
-> Prospects self-educating before the call
-> Sales team closing warm leads, not cold ones
-> Founder focused on delivery and strategy, not prospecting

If you want to see how we set this up and why it works so well, hit the link in my profile.

"We can't afford to invest in client acquisition right now."

I hear this from agency owners doing $50K-$100K/month.

And I get it. Money feels tight when revenue is inconsistent.

But here's what they're actually saying:

"We can't afford to stop relying on unpredictable revenue."

Let me run the math on what "free" client acquisition actually costs:

-> Founder spending 15 hours/week on outreach
-> At a conservative $200/hour founder value
-> That's $12,000/month in hidden cost
-> For maybe 2-3 clients

Now compare that to a paid funnel:

-> $3K-$5K/month in ad spend
-> 0 hours of founder time
-> Same 2-3 clients, but consistent
-> Every dollar tracked and optimized

The agency that "can't afford" a funnel is already paying for one.

You're just paying with the most expensive resource you have: you (the founders) time.

taplio

The Battle

Toby W.

Nicholas Kirchner

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreToby W.'s LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreNicholas Kirchner's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Toby W.

Nicholas Kirchner

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Toby W.'s LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreNicholas Kirchner's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreToby W.'s LinkedIn Performance