Todd Clouser 🧙‍♂️💜

I learned content growing a YouTube channel from 0 - 10M+ monthly views.
I learned social by building an audience of over 1M followers across channels.
I learned community growing two Facebook groups to 12k+ monthly active users.
I learned influencer marketing building a team of 15+ creators that drove millions in DTC revenue.


Now I help B2B companies incorporate those strategies and tactics to build their own marketing machine.

DM me to chat.

Party Wizard

https://qrco.de/be1MOp

Todd Clouser

Things I want to see more (and less) of on LinkedIn this year:

MORE:
- detailed playbooks on small experiments that you've run with real numbers/results (wins and losses)

- entertainment connected to messaging and povs (not just product)

- community -- at one point LI felt like a big community, now it feels like ground zero for the dead internet theory

- collabs -- speaking of community, we used to collab for the fun of it and to see how audiences reacted. Nowadays pretty much any collab comes with a dollar sign.

*personal one* - a return of cheat codes (Obaid?)


LESS:

- 'hooks' -- we've glorified clickbait as 'good hooks'. I'm so tired of reading/watching content where every sentence is a tease to the next sentence. Yes, I understand that you want me to get to the end, but once upon a time we did that with good content instead of holding value hostage with every freakin sentence.

- AI generated content -- probably gunna get hate for this one, but i don't agree with the 'typing my thoughts into ChatGT and then refining the output is not the same as ai-generated content' argument. feel free to disagree, but (in my opinion) ChatGPT is a crutch and makes you far less creative the more you use it and LI far less enjoyable.

- AI comments -- 18 months ago (when AI was more obvious) we all pointed and laughed at the ai comments. Now that AI is good (and harder to spot) everyone has adopted ai comments.  **see community bullet above**

What do you want to see more/less of here this year?

Shout to Jen Allen-Knuth for prompting the idea for this post.

Tech hub people be ravin on rooftops and shit in their "day in the life".

I haven't shaved in a month and just kinda move throughout my house a lot.

Anyone else?

Sr. Growth Manager @ ActiveCampaign | Institutional Consultant | Founder

Casey is a growth veteran, with over a decade of experience in helping software companies scale fast. 

Whether it's garnering 28,000,000+ views across Linkedin, Reddit and Quora, or pioneering new growth levers (like booking his team on hundreds of podcasts), Casey is always looking for creative and value-led ways to grab attention and break from the mold. In his current role leading marketing at DoWhatWorks, he is looking to reshape how brands split test and experiment online. 

On the consulting side, Casey has worked with some of the world's biggest firms including places like McKinsey, Blackrock, Colemans, GLG, Guidepoint, etc., where he provides institutional guidance to PE/VC teams around topics such as: SMB marketing vendor selection, SaaS pricing, SaaS marketing/CRM tool differentiation, market analysis, inbound marketing, conversion rate optimization and marketing automation.

Casey also teaches classes at UCSD and Stanford extension around demand creation, email marketing and content marketing.

I run a Substack that does analysis on the world's top websites based on our proprietary database of A/B test results: https://dowhatworks.substack.com/

Current areas of extensive experience...

-> B2B SaaS / B2B Enterprise SaaS / SMB SaaS

-> CRO (Conversion Rate Optimization) / Website optimization

-> Email marketing

-> Content marketing (especially LinkedIn and Reddit)

-> B2B Influencer marketing

-> Pricing optimization

Casey Hill

I looked at over 50 competitor comparison pages. PostHog had the best ⬇️

Let me start by saying that most competitor comparison pages are dreadful.

They are dishonest (like factually inaccurate about the competitors).

They are misleading. They don’t build trust. They treat the prospect like they are dumb.

And here is the kicker… they don’t convert. 

I have worked with a handful of marketing teams (startups to at-scale orgs) who have shifted retargeting budget away from competitor comparison pages because the CPA was just too high (one spent $800k/m for a quarter and had just 7 sales at a 5-figure ACV)

It makes sense to educate prospects about your strengths (and even mention competitor weaknesses), but the framing is what is killing all these pages.

With Posthog, they do several things that build trust and buck the trend:

1) When describing a competitor, they quote how the competitor describes themselves. No misrepresenting or trying to paint them into a certain box. Just be straightforward.

2) They include a “what people like about [competitor]” and “What people don’t like about [competitor] and then include quotes from reviews (I think they pull from G2). And the real part that builds trust is that they include honest positives. Not weird, fake compliments, “this is a perfect software if you are an enterprise org with 5,000+ employees and a $12 million a month budget for all the consultants you will need”. Just actual strengths. It then makes the weaknesses that they bring up next feel way more realistic. 

Ultimately, the most effective competitor comparisons start with honesty.

That in and of itself is so rare, it’s disarming, and builds trust and confidence in whatever you say next. 

Have you read a competitor comparison that really resonated (or created one that converted really well)?

Chief Marketing Officer @ DoWhatWorks | Institutional Consultant | Founder

I lined up a call with a top executive to talk through their A/B testing learnings. 

Then it went completely off course…

Them: “Yeah I ran a bunch of tests this quarter. Nothing works. Headline tests, section tests, button tests. None of it moved the needle. Not a focus area any more”.

I listened and took it all in. I had all these notes. 

All this data to compare against their test results. These follow up questions lined up to get into the “why it won”. 

But none of it worked for them. It wasn't even that the variants "lost", they just were the same. They didn't matter.

We still had a nice chat, but after I got to analyzing his situation.

I realized the experience of this exec is actually exceptionally common. 

Optimizely published data saying that 90% of A/B tests "lose" (as in the variant doesn’t show any statistical difference so they stay with the control).

A big part of the problem stems from how we approach testing. 

1. Do we really understand where our traffic comes from and how that impacts positioning? If your traffic comes from paid retargeting ads or if it comes from dark social, what resonates will be very different.

2. Do we design A/B tests with a specific, unified problem we are trying to solve for? Many brands just do a dozen homepage hero headline variants and try and see what wins. But the question always has to be what problem are you solving for? Everything should ladder up to that.

3. Are you testing things that are meaningful? A big gap I found from my chat with that executive was a lack of “meaningful testing”. This means you try 10 copy variants but none of them a) introduce new information or b) provide new direct value. 

I am teaming up with the incredible team from GrowthX AI this Thursday (9AM PST) to do a workshop, where we will get deep into how to better convert your web traffic in 2026. 

Not only will we look at specific A/B tests from dozens of the top brands in the world, but we will address what to test, and how to think about your website in an age of AI discovery.

There is a major problem across AI companies selling agentic products ⬇️

They are unbelievably vague in their messaging. 

I curated a list of 30 top companies selling agents. 

Here are the headlines…

Company A: “We are a frontier research and deployment company providing enterprises with a powerful, cost-efficient, and easy-to-adopt technology to integrate agentic AI directly into their core workflows and processes.”

Company B: “Deploy, orchestrate, and govern fleets of specialized AI agents that work alongside your team”

Company C: “Ops teams can build and manage an entire AI workforce in one powerful visual platform.”

Company D: “[company] is the simplest way for businesses to create, manage, and share agents.”

It took me until company eight on the list that I got one that actually gave me any real information about what it did.

Company H: “Docket's AI agent handles qualification, discovery, and booking while you sleep. Teams see 30%+ more qualified pipeline from the same traffic.”

I understand these brands want the optics of addressing a large TAM, but when you can go to ten sites, and the headlines are almost identical, this isn’t providing any clarity or insight that is helping prospects decide on your product.

What does the data say 💡: I looked at DoWhatWorks database of hundreds of A/B tests around AI messaging. Tests from brands like OpenAI, IBM, Hootsuite, GoDaddy, Notion, and beyond. The takeaway is clear → AI messaging that is clear and explanatory to the capability it solves for (i.e. our support agents provide 24/7 ticket coverage in 42 languages) dramatically outperforms vague or sweeping messaging.

taplio

The Battle

Todd Clouser

Casey Hill

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreTodd Clouser's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreCasey Hill's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Todd Clouser

Casey Hill

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);}Todd Clouser's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreCasey Hill's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreTodd Clouser's LinkedIn Performance