How To Write Meta Ads That Scale: Copywriting Masterclass

0:00In this video, I'm going to teach you

0:01how to write a winning ad that will

0:02scale in your account. I'm not just

0:04going to hand you a framework. I'm also

0:06going to accompany it with building a

0:08script live so you can see the exact

0:10thought process. By the end of this

0:11video, you'll know the nine things that

0:13every ad that's ever sold anything

0:15actually does. You'll be able to read

0:17any script from your team, and you'll be

0:19able to give them feedback beat by beat.

0:21And you'll know which of the 40 drafts

0:23that are put in front of you is the is

0:25the one that's actually worth running.

0:27Now, nothing that sells in copywriting

0:29or script writing has really been

0:30invented since 1966. Every ad script

0:33that you see these days has core

0:36fundamentals and principles that were

0:38developed years and years ago. And so,

0:40we're going to pull them into this

0:42video. We're going to teach you the

0:43fundamentals of copywriting so that you

0:46can understand where all this theory

0:47came from and then how you can actually

0:49go and put it into application. So,

0:51here's how this video is going to run.

0:53We're going to start off with the buyer

0:54and understanding the consumer. We'll

0:56then move into the research and the

0:57offer piece. Then we go into writing the

1:00argument line by line. Then we're going

1:01to take that one argument that we write

1:03and we're going to put it into three

1:05completely different formats. And

1:07lastly, we'll finish with what kind of

1:09AI scripting can be done to complete it.

1:11We are aiming to make this video the

1:13most valuable copywriting, script

1:15writing, ads scaling video that exists

1:17on YouTube. Tens of hours of prep has

1:20gone into this video. So let's dive in.

1:22So firstly, 99% of sales theory or

1:24copywriting hasn't really been invented

1:27since 1966. Kennedy in 1904, Hopkins

1:301923, Collier 1931, Capable 1932, Reeves

1:341961, Oglev 1963, Shorts, Eugene Schwarz

1:381966.

1:40If you see any copywriting content, if

1:43you see any sales content, if you see

1:44any sales books that come out these days

1:47on how to copyright, it's all just a

1:49distillation of these people, okay?

1:51Okay, it's all just this stuff reworked.

1:53And I want to say that up front because

1:55this video is the same thing. I'm not

1:57inventing anything new here in sales

1:59copy. We're just taking all of the OG

2:02legends and we're distilling it into a

2:04consumable format so that you can take

2:06all of these lessons and then apply them

2:08into your own script writing process.

2:09Now, I want to fix two core concepts

2:11that I have said in previous videos that

2:13I've said on Instagram reels that I put

2:14out. Number one is I have said quite

2:17often that the hook is 80% of

2:19performance. I said this in my creative

2:21strategy video as well. The hook is 80%

2:23of performance. This is not true. This

2:25wording is actually bad by me. The hook

2:28is not driving 80% of performance.

2:31Really, what I should have said here and

2:33the correction is that the hook is 80%

2:37of the audience. Roughly none of it is

2:40persuasion.

2:42And so the hook is selling no one. Okay?

2:45No one gets sold by the hook. there's

2:46nowhere near enough scripting within the

2:49first 3 seconds to actually be able to

2:50sell someone. However, it is where 80%

2:52of the audience lies. So, that is a

2:54slight refinement of on what I've

2:56already said. Uh, which is a really

2:58important note for when we start

2:59building these scripts and thinking

3:00through these frameworks. Another thing

3:02that I said back on the 29th of Jan in

3:05both a YouTube video and an Instagram

3:07reel was that I was pushing the fact

3:09that you need to move away from

3:10frameworks. stop using frameworks

3:12because frameworks are incredibly

3:14generic and they don't allow you to

3:16actually have top 1% expertise and do

3:18something that's outside of the box and

3:19that stands out. Correct. I still stand

3:22by this. However, the refinement is that

3:25frameworks are really good to be able to

3:29get competent to be able to become top

3:3220% at a skill. Frameworks will get you

3:35there. In fact, they could probably even

3:36get you to the top 10%. Now, there's

3:38going to be some people watching this

3:39that are already really, really good at

3:40copywriting. And then there's going to

3:41be a lot of people just by the law of

3:43averages that are not very good at

3:45copywriting, and that's why you're

3:46watching this video. So, we're going to

3:48be giving you frameworks. We're going to

3:50be giving you ways to be able to create

3:52much better copy, much better scripts

3:54than you ever would have made before.

3:56Then, once you've become competent, you

3:58can break the frameworks because you've

4:00earned the right to. Now, a little side

4:02note here is in the preparation of

4:04putting this video together, I went and

4:07scraped 360

4:09YouTube video transcripts on how to

4:11write good ads because I want to see

4:13what was already out there in market.

4:14What were people talking about? And 75%

4:17of the content in like time duration of

4:21those 350 plus ads, 70% of it was just

4:25on hooks. Now, it makes sense, right?

4:28Hooks is where 80% of the audience is.

4:30But the hooks don't sell anyone. And

4:32that's really important when we're

4:33trying to write a script that sells. If

4:36the objective is to sell, to get a

4:38return on ad spend, to get a return on

4:39investment, to get more leads, you need

4:41to actually focus on the other 57

4:45seconds of the 60-second script. And so,

4:48yes, we will go into hooks in this

4:50video. Yes, we will touch on them. But

4:52at the end of the day, your hook can be

4:54terrible. And as long as some people

4:56watch past it and then like get into the

4:58proper meat of the ad, they will still

5:00buy. And so yes, the hook is where 80%

5:02of the audience is, but the hook doesn't

5:04sell anyone at all unless there's a

5:06really prevalent unique mechanism that

5:08you can put at the start, which is going

5:10to be category specific. All right. So

5:13this is a real script that we have

5:15anonymized slightly and this is the

5:17premise of the entire video. So, as we

5:20move through the video, we are going to

5:23be teaching elements to be able to come

5:25back to this script and improve it. Now,

5:27this is an okay script, but it's not

5:30going to sell that well. And so, we're

5:31going to turn it into a great script.

5:33Let's run through it really quickly. If

5:34you're finding more hair in the shower

5:36drain, you're not imagining it. Women

5:38lose it at the part line first, usually

5:41about 18 months before anybody notices,

5:44which is why we made Nourish Plus with

5:46six clinically studied ingredients,

5:48vegan, cruelty-free, and made right here

5:50in Australia. Head to the site and grab

5:52yours. A very typical script that I'm

5:55sure a lot of you have written before.

5:57And on the surface, this is like, yeah,

5:58this is good. Go and shoot it. Brand

6:00team would approve. Performance

6:01marketing team would probably approve.

6:03But if there is one thing that you take

6:05away from this entire video, let it be

6:09the finished version of this script. So

6:11at the very end, we are going to

6:13obviously chip away at this script,

6:15improve it line by line as we run

6:16through frameworks and explain how they

6:18tie in to this particular script, and

6:20we're going to turn this into a really

6:21good app. Two disclosures. Number one,

6:24this isn't a real brand. I've anonymized

6:25the script. Number two, we are going to

6:28change a lot of this script based on

6:30copyrightiting frameworks, but if the

6:32stuff that we say isn't true for your

6:34brand, don't say it because it's not

6:36compliant. Okay? So, I'm going to start

6:38to mess with these words and change them

6:41into stuff that's a lot more convincing,

6:43that sells a lot better. But if I am

6:44saying stuff that is not actually true

6:47to what the product can deliver, then

6:49obviously don't say it. But we are going

6:51to assume a particular product here and

6:53assume a particular outcome and then

6:54we're going to obviously write around

6:56that product. Let's dig into a few

6:57things here and then obviously

6:59throughout the next one to two hours

7:01we're going to continue to dive into

7:03frameworks and understand how every

7:05single word here can be improved. Let's

7:07just dive a little bit into this one

7:09because this is very very common used

7:11all the time in like every script every

7:14ad I see. So this line is making three

7:16claims. They're making a claim that it's

7:19vegan, that it's crueltyfree, and that

7:21it's made right here in Australia.

7:23Firstly, are these legitimate claims?

7:26Yes. Okay. We're compliant. Moving on to

7:28the next important question, which is,

7:30can the tub or whatever this is next to

7:34it on the shelf say the exact same

7:36thing? And the answer is probably like I

7:39imagine a good chunk of the market is

7:43vegan, cruelty-free, and made in

7:44Australia. And if that is the case, then

7:46we have just wasted about seven, eight

7:49words, probably four and a half seconds

7:51of this ad on something that is not

7:53differentiated within the market. Now,

7:55what do you generally want to do towards

7:57the end of an ad, towards the end of a

7:59script? Generally, if you're using

8:00frameworks, you'd want to objection

8:02handle. So, we could look at this line

8:03and we could say this is an objection

8:04handling line. This is a very big

8:06mistake that people make, which is that

8:08they objection handle objections that

8:10the consumer doesn't even have. How many

8:12people get to the end of this script and

8:13go, "Oh, this is a really good product

8:15and yes, my hair is falling out, but uh

8:17better be vegan. It better be

8:18cruelty-free." Like, is that really the

8:20core objective of most people that have

8:22watched through this ad to this point?

8:24Probably not. Therefore, we need to

8:26understand the consumer intimately

8:28before we start going and writing

8:30scripts like this, or else we talk about

8:31stuff that no one actually cares about

8:33and it doesn't actually sell. So, should

8:35we go and try to rewrite this? Well, you

8:38don't have to rewrite everything. Lesson

8:39one arguably of this video is deletion

8:42often is a lot better than uh trying to

8:45refine. And so we can just delete this

8:47line out. We don't need to replace it.

8:49We don't need to come up with new things

8:50here. Let's remove it. And the reason

8:51why we'll remove it is because we need

8:53to replace this with something. But no

8:56one yet, me, you guys, no one has

8:59actually done any research yet. So if we

9:00haven't done research, if we don't know

9:02what is actually unique about this

9:04product, what is unique about this brand

9:06compared to the competitors? We haven't

9:07done the competitor research. I don't

9:08know what to go and put in here. Like

9:09I'm just going to be also making up

9:11stuff that is also not convincing to the

9:14consumer. We need to start with the

9:15consumer. We need to start with the

9:16research. And it is that that is going

9:18to build in and potentially give us the

9:20capability to rebuild this sentence.

9:22Now, that was a quick 90 second script

9:24breakdown cuz what I wanted to do was

9:25tease what we're going to be doing for

9:27the next 2 hours. This is actually I'm

9:29not meant to be talking about this right

9:30now. This is meant to be in about 60

9:32minutes into the video and we'll go into

9:34more detail and start to flesh this out.

9:36Uh, but I wanted to show you the process

9:38that we're going to be running through

9:39over the next two hours, line by line,

9:41lesson by lesson, explaining how we can

9:43improve scripts. Now, you might be

9:44thinking, ah, I just came here for

9:45hooks. I just want some framework. Just

9:47give me the swipe file and let's go.

9:48Probably the wrong video for you. If you

9:50want to become really good at script

9:51writing, if you want to become really

9:52good at copywriting, if you want to

9:53become good at a skill that is actually

9:56very difficult to do, a swipe file,

9:59couple hook templates, not going to get

10:01you there. Like the best copywriters

10:03I've seen, the best script writers I've

10:04seen have written a thousand scripts and

10:06consumed all of the content from all the

10:08people that I showed you at the start,

10:09all of the OGs in uh selling and

10:12copyrightiting. And so if you just want

10:14a swap file, if you just want some

10:15hooks, leave the video. Don't continue

10:17watching. It's good. It gives everyone

10:18else who does watch the video a bit of

10:20arbitrage. So let's dive into section

10:23one, which is the buyer. Starting off on

10:27one of the best copyrightiting quotes by

10:28Eugene Schwarz. Copy cannot create

10:31desire for a product. It can only take

10:33the hopes, dreams, fears and desires

10:35that already existed in the hearts of

10:37millions of people and focus those

10:39already existing desires onto a

10:41particular product. So this is the fact

10:43that you cannot create desire in the

10:45consumer. You simply need to channel

10:48existing desire into your product. So

10:50you want to always find the desire and

10:53then speak to the desire rather than

10:55just writing it. And so people will

10:57write what they think but you need to

10:58start from the first principle which is

11:00what is the desire that we're actually

11:01focusing towards our product. Almost

11:03every brief that I get handed starts

11:05with the product and then it tries to

11:07reverse engineer a reason to care about

11:10the product. So you might have magnesium

11:12as a product and then you go, "Okay, we

11:13need to create an ad for magnesium." But

11:16that's backwards and it's the specific

11:18thing that ends up producing flat

11:20unwanted ad copy that everybody in the

11:22audience has seen before and that all

11:24your competitors are just producing 40

11:26times a month. The general rule of thumb

11:28is that if you can't find evidence for

11:30the underlying desire somewhere outside

11:33of your own marketing, whether that's in

11:35a review, a support ticket, a Reddit

11:37thread, a call recording, then you don't

11:40have a concept and you don't have a

11:42desire that you can speak to. You have a

11:44product description where then you're

11:46just like slapping on a hook at the

11:48start and calling it an ad script and

11:49then it never performs well. Most

11:51scripts aren't bad because the hook's

11:52bad. Most scripts are bad because they

11:54don't even speak to an underlying desire

11:55and it's just like a Shopify description

11:57page put into an app. Here's a real

12:00example for a client that I worked on a

12:01couple years ago. They were using as

12:03their core messaging gentle shampoo for

12:05sensitive scalps. That was really the

12:07angle. That's what they were coming at

12:08most of their ads with. But we then went

12:10into all of their reviews and we started

12:12looking through tickets as well that

12:13were getting sent to their email

12:15support. And what we found was a

12:17recurring theme that the shampoo had a

12:20lovely fragrance that didn't activate

12:23histamine issues. Now, this speaks to a

12:27much more specific underlying problem,

12:30underlying desire. The specificity here

12:31is so much better than this one. It

12:33stands out in the crowd. How many people

12:34are actually using this kind of

12:36messaging? And so suddenly we have a

12:37script rewrite available here which is

12:40rather than saying I love this gentle

12:42shampoo because it helps with sensitive

12:44scalps which I think 5,000 people are

12:46saying you've differentiated the product

12:48cuz now you can say every fragrance-free

12:51shampoo I tried still sets my histamines

12:53off. This one fragrance didn't. There's

12:56a really famous story about how Helbert

12:58asked a classroom of I think marketing

13:00students and he said, "What advantage

13:03would you want if you were trying to

13:05sell hamburgers?" And people would say,

13:06"Well, they want the best meat. They

13:08want the best location. They want the

13:09lowest price." And then his answer was,

13:11"The only advantage I want is a starving

13:13crowd." Now, when you have access to

13:15serving ads nationwide, worldwide, you

13:19can find the starving crowd. Okay? You

13:22don't need a starving crowd locally

13:23around the hamburger shop, right? You

13:25just need to speak to that crowd and

13:27then you'll have a script and copy that

13:30sells incredibly well. Translating this

13:32into the ad platforms for a second, this

13:34isn't through audience settings anymore.

13:35You're not trying to find a persona

13:37that's starving in the metaphorical

13:39context of whatever you're selling.

13:41Instead, you're going to do this through

13:42the first line of the ad and more

13:43specifically the messaging. What you'll

13:45start to figure out about Facebook

13:47advertising is the number one most

13:49important thing about Facebook ads is

13:52the messaging. You want to be talking to

13:54the right person. And it's through every

13:55single word being selected correctly

13:58that speaks to that individual. And when

14:00you get one word wrong, they can feel

14:02something's off. They're like, "Uh, this

14:03are they really talking to me? That

14:04wasn't how I would say it. That isn't

14:06how I'd interpret it. That isn't the

14:07emotion that I actually feel at this

14:09moment." And so the messaging becomes

14:11phenomenally important for targeting the

14:13right people, which is metaphorically

14:15the starving crowd. Here's a headline

14:17example that leans into a persona call

14:19out, but not in the way that you think.

14:20Amazing secret discovered by one-legged

14:23golfer. Adds 50 yards to your drives,

14:26eliminates hooks and slices, and can

14:28slash up to 10 strokes overnight. John

14:30Carlton, written in the early 1990s,

14:33apparently one of the highest performing

14:35ads in this niche at the time. Now, you

14:38might think, "This makes no sense. How

14:40is this one of the most highest

14:41performing ads when it's doing a persona

14:43call out on one-legged golfers? How many

14:45one-legged golfers are there?" Well,

14:47it's not doing a persona call out. This

14:49is instead using this as a proof device.

14:52It's really saying without having to say

14:55it that this guy had every reason

14:58possible to have a terrible swing and to

15:00be horrific at golf. Which means that

15:02the secret to him actually being able to

15:05be good at golf must not be some kind of

15:07rare athleticism where it could be with

15:09a normal person, could be with an elite

15:11pro golfer. Instead, it has to do with

15:13the device. The most specific detail in

15:16your opening is doing the targeting,

15:18proof, and casting all at the same time.

15:20So, it's not just a targeting mechanism.

15:22It does a lot. On every differentiator

15:24that you use, you want to be asking

15:26three questions if you're going to use

15:27it in your copy. Number one, is it a

15:29proposition? Which means, does it say

15:31buy this and you get this specific

15:34thing? Number two, is it unavailable to

15:36competitors? Meaning, can competitors

15:38just say this too or is it like uniquely

15:40differentiated to just you? And then

15:42number three, is it going to move a

15:44stranger? Or like more importantly, the

15:46way to frame this is, is it strong

15:48enough to pull a mass audience? Another

15:50way to think about this. Are you making

15:52a claim? Can everyone else make the

15:53claim? Is it really a good claim? Like

15:55that's that's kind of another way to

15:57think through this. So, let's look

15:58through some really common

15:59differentiators that you see all the

16:00time. Familyowned since 1994. Is this a

16:04proposition? Yes. Is this unavailable to

16:08competitors? Yeah, probably. Like unless

16:11a competitor started in the exact same

16:12year as you and their family owned, you

16:14might be uniquely differentiated here

16:16within the market. Is this strong enough

16:18to move a mass audience towards

16:19purchasing from you? No. Ultimately,

16:22this might be a huh that's nice to know,

16:24but ultimately this isn't going to cause

16:25like conversion rates to double. What

16:27about made in Australia? Yes, that is a

16:30proposition. Is it unavailable to other

16:32people? Technically, yes. It depends on

16:35the market that you're in. If everyone's

16:36producing in Australia, this would be a

16:38no. If you are uniquely differentiated

16:40here, then yes, sure. Is this going to

16:43materially move a stranger? Probably

16:46not. Probably not a mass market.

16:48Definitely not. If there's other people

16:49doing it as well, and like this is some

16:51of the most commonly used messaging that

16:53exists. Free shipping. Is this a

16:56proposition? Yes. Free shipping by

16:59itself, sure, it is a proposition. Now,

17:01what you'll often see with free shipping

17:03is you'll see free shipping and like

17:05free returns or you'll see free shipping

17:06and great worldclass is the classic

17:09worldass service. Worldass service or

17:11great service is not a proposition

17:14because you don't actually get it.

17:16There's no proof of like, hey, no, this

17:18is factually 100% true. This is a

17:21proposition of the brand. Great service

17:22is more of a claim. It's like trust me,

17:24we have good service, but it's not a

17:27core proposition. Is it available to

17:30everyone? Yes, it's available to

17:31everyone. So, no, it is not unavailable.

17:33It is not unique. And is this going to

17:35move a stranger? No, not really. What

17:38about third-party lab tested published

17:40results on the website? Is this a

17:42proposition? For sure. Is this

17:44unavailable to everyone else? For sure,

17:46because there's a barrier of entry. It's

17:48expensive to do. Most people aren't

17:49going to do it. Is it going to move a

17:50stranger? Yes, probably. Because it's

17:53expensive. It's a high barrier of entry.

17:55Most people don't do this. And so

17:56because of that, this actually is likely

17:59going to have a material impact here.

18:01And so of all of these, the only one

18:03that you would really even want to

18:05consider mentioning in your copy and

18:07script writing is the bottom one that is

18:10a proposition that is uniquely

18:11differentiated that is going to move a

18:13mass market. Now, something I've heard

18:14quite a bit is, I don't need all of this

18:17copywriting and script writing

18:19capability. I'll just go to the Facebook

18:21ad library. I'll pull up my competitors.

18:24I'll try to find what are the longest

18:26running ads and I'll just run them,

18:28right? They must have the most amount of

18:29spend. They must be the winners because

18:31that's what's been running in the

18:32competitor's ad library the longest. But

18:34longevity of an ad in a competitor ad

18:36library doesn't mean that that ad copy

18:38and pasted into your ad account is going

18:40to work. What it really means is that

18:43that ad works for that brand at that

18:46spend level against that audience that

18:48they're talking to with that level of

18:50existing belief in that brand's name.

18:53which is why you see a lot of really big

18:55brands, nine figure ad accounts with

18:57some pretty mediocre ads that are

18:59holding a ton of spend. And it's because

19:01the ad in the context of your brand is

19:04not going to perform. But the ad in

19:05context of their brand, their audience,

19:08or the existing belief that they have

19:10built does work. When you steal

19:11someone's ad and you steal someone's

19:13copy and you steal their script, you

19:14don't inherit their entire belief chain

19:16that they've built in their consumers

19:18and target demographic, their brand

19:19recognition, their proof assets, and

19:22they're all the things that do most of

19:24the hard work in the ad account and the

19:26ad that you're looking at. Now, I put a

19:27YouTube video out on similar topic here

19:302 and 1/2 years ago. Sort the YouTube

19:32channel by oldest and go back. It's it's

19:34super obvious. It probably has 80 views.

19:36But the point in that video was I was

19:37talking about this gentle shampoo

19:39concept where the client was using all

19:41their messaging as this is a gentle

19:43shampoo for sensitive scalps, but we

19:45should reframe it towards histamines and

19:48allergies because that seemed to pop up

19:51quite a bit in their reviews and in

19:52their ticketing system. Now they didn't

19:55want to do it because they wanted to

19:57have this premium aspirational style

20:00brand rather than to make money and so

20:03they didn't want to pivot messaging in

20:05that way and wanted to continue going

20:06down the same route. So then we chose a

20:08second like method here to be able to

20:11differentiate the product without just

20:13being in the red ocean which is that we

20:15combined two generic propositions

20:18together. This is something I've said a

20:19little bit, which is like take something

20:21generic, add it to something that's also

20:23generic, and then you should hopefully

20:25get something unique because your

20:26competitors aren't doing this. This is

20:28also called like just offer stacking or

20:30USP stacking. It's an okay strategy. It

20:33isn't very good. Like I would never

20:35build a brand on just USP stacking. An

20:38example of this is that for this brand,

20:40we took like Australia made, we took

20:43great fragrance, we took gentle on the

20:46scalp, like we took all of these

20:48different things and we just tried to

20:49value stack them together. And the idea

20:51is that if a competitor isn't value

20:53stacking in this particular way, we do

20:54uniquely differentiate. Particularly if

20:56you can get two like USPS that often

20:58aren't seen together. An example of this

21:00might be like a really good fragrance

21:03shampoo that also doesn't irritate your

21:05scalp. Okay, that is unique in a way

21:07because most fragrances will have some

21:09kind of irritation and stuff that

21:12doesn't irritate is usually all natural

21:15which doesn't have a good fragrance and

21:16doesn't last. And so that's a way like

21:18you can take two value propositions,

21:19combine them and make it unique in a

21:20way. The issue with this kind of stuff

21:22is that everyone's done it. Like this is

21:23very red ocean still. You might think

21:25it's blue ocean. Oh, we're coming up

21:26with two things and we're putting it

21:28together. But ultimately, it fails on

21:31the one thing that this entire thing is

21:33about, which is right up the top here,

21:34which is that you can combine value

21:36propositions all that you want. You can

21:38mix and match generic stuff to try to

21:40uniquely differentiate. But who cares

21:42about you being uniquely differentiated?

21:45Being unique actually does not matter if

21:48we are not talking to an underlying

21:51desire and channeling it into the

21:53product. So we can combine free shipping

21:55and free returns and make some kind of

21:56unique prop. But if it doesn't speak to

21:58an underlying desire that people have,

21:59which is that people really care in this

22:01particular niche in this industry about

22:03free shipping and free returns, like is

22:05that speaking to an underlying design?

22:06No. No one has an underlying core human

22:08desire that has existed for the last 100

22:10years that they want free shipping and

22:12free returns. Like you could argue

22:14that's potentially low risk, like a

22:16lowrisk desire. But you need to be

22:18always asking yourself that question.

22:20How are we speaking to an underlying

22:22human desire that has existed for

22:23hundreds, thousands of years? All right.

22:26Where can you start sourcing these ideas

22:28from? Where can you start getting

22:29inspiration? Where can you start linking

22:30to underlying desire? Well, you've got

22:32really these core categories. You've got

22:35call recordings, support tickets,

22:37reviews, post purchase survey, and then

22:41Reddit, Facebook groups, forums. So,

22:43stuff that's just widely available on

22:45the internet that isn't specific to you.

22:46Now I'd be thinking through these in

22:48order of yield. So how much can we

22:51actually get out of it in really high

22:54quality relevant information to our

22:56particular product? And then effort, how

22:59hard is it to actually collect this? And

23:00then all of them actually have something

23:02unique. So each one of these tells you

23:04something that none of the other ones

23:05do. So call recordings. This is super

23:08high yield because you're actually

23:09talking to your customers. So this is

23:12you could talk to them in person or

23:13obviously record the calls. This is also

23:15super high effort cuz you got to go and

23:16talk to your customers. What this one is

23:18going to give you that none of the other

23:20ones are is the final objection prior to

23:24purchase. So finding out like why were

23:26you not going to buy just before

23:29purchase? What was going to stop you or

23:31what was stopping you for weeks and then

23:32you decided to actually convert. Not

23:34going to get that as well from any of

23:35these other ones because reviews,

23:37they're not going to talk about the

23:38final objection. Support tickets, you

23:40might get a little bit of it. A little

23:41bit maybe. Post-purchase survey, it's

23:44not a good use of questions. And then

23:45public forums where people aren't even a

23:47customer, you're not going to get it.

23:48Support tickets and return reasons.

23:51Yield is high. Le e effort is very, very

23:54low because you're collecting this

23:55already. So, you just pull it in through

23:57an MCP or an API into Claude or any LLM

24:00and just have this populating into a

24:02Slack channel. What this is going to

24:03give you that the other ones aren't cuz

24:05these are unhappy customers, is it's

24:07going to give you the failure modes. So

24:10where does this product actually fail in

24:11the customer's own escalating language

24:14and then how do we repel that those type

24:17of people those that type of messaging

24:19that led to the failure mode. You see

24:21this all the time in consumer package

24:22goods or any kind of product that you

24:24need to use and you see a transformation

24:25like you might have makeup and you're

24:27claiming that it makes your skin glow

24:29and then it doesn't make your skin glow

24:31but you're saying tons of stuff. So

24:32you're saying it makes your skin glow,

24:34it helps with covering up acne, it does

24:36this, it does that. And a bunch of them

24:38it works really well at, but one

24:40particular value proposition it doesn't

24:41falls apart. We want to make sure we

24:43know what those failure modes are

24:44because we don't want to talk about that

24:45in ads. Then no matter how good the

24:47return on ad spend is, if we have a 50%

24:48return rate on one particular angle that

24:50we're pushing, we don't want to push the

24:52angle. Reviews are also quite high

24:54yields and also the lowest effort that

24:58exists cuz this is often just on an

25:00automated flow to collect reviews.

25:02What's unique here is the word. So the

25:06exact words that the consumer will use

25:08to describe the product. You often end

25:10up getting some of the best stuff out of

25:12reviews. Post-purchase survey is medium

25:14yield. The reason being is that this is

25:16typically multi- choice. The second you

25:18move away from multi- choice, the submit

25:19rate will go down enormously. Quality of

25:22data here too is like not incredible

25:24because they don't have the product yet.

25:26So on call recordings they have the

25:28product, they've used it. On support

25:29they have the product, they've used it.

25:30On reviews, they have the product,

25:32they've used it. On post purchase

25:33surveys, haven't even got the product

25:34yet. They just bought it. They might

25:36have impulse purchased. So the quality

25:38of the data on someone that hasn't even

25:40received the product yet isn't very

25:42high. The effort here though is low.

25:46What this is going to give you that's

25:47unique is the real time thinking on the

25:52moment of purchase. So, right as the

25:54consumer purchases, we're getting an

25:56understanding what were they thinking

25:57that like got them over the line. Then

25:59we got Reddit and external stuff. This

26:01is medium uh potentially low. And this

26:03just depends on your quality of scraping

26:05and how relevant it is on the stuff that

26:06you're looking at. The effort here is

26:09not high but not low. It's also medium.

26:12What this is going to give you is the

26:14language of people who haven't bought

26:17your product yet. And so what are people

26:19talking about in their industry? What

26:21are they wanting to see? What is

26:23failures of competitors? How can you

26:25differentiate? So all there's no best

26:28one here. Obviously like the ones that

26:30are ranked high are obviously where you

26:32should start if you can only do one of

26:34them, but all of them have a unique

26:36piece of context that is going to help

26:38in the broader picture. So, we would

26:40strongly recommend that you do all of

26:41them. If you are time constrained and

26:43capacity constrained, I would start at

26:46the top and work your way down. Now, if

26:49you're a startup and you have no uh

26:51customers, you have to start at the

26:52bottom and work your way up because you

26:55don't have any customers. So, you're

26:57going to have to start here and then as

26:58you start getting customers and on you

27:00go. I'll give you two tips here before

27:02we move on. Tip number one is on

27:04reviews. Where there's a lot of value in

27:07reviews, particularly in the scripting

27:09structure and the framework we're going

27:10to go through, is in the like two to

27:12four star reviews. And where there is

27:14value there is that they think the

27:17product's okay, but they have some

27:18reservations. Those reservations are

27:21your objections. So the objections, the

27:23reasons why people wouldn't buy. Why

27:24wouldn't they buy? The service was bad.

27:26they wouldn't buy because they thought

27:28it would be a little bit better at doing

27:30this or whatever the specific mechanism

27:32is in the product, they were like,

27:33"Yeah, it's not very good at that."

27:35Well, number one, it gives you good

27:36feedback on how your product needs to be

27:37better, like improve the product. Number

27:39two, now you know the exact hesitations

27:42and the language of why people are not

27:44buying and so you use that in your

27:45objection handling and your scripts.

27:47Now, if you don't actually fix the

27:49product, this is just deceitful and

27:50you're just conning the market. So like

27:52everything I'm saying here goes with

27:53like make the product good and then also

27:55make the script good. So you can make

27:57the script good by using these

27:58objections. It's obviously unethical if

28:00you don't make the product better as

28:01well. And then the second high effort

28:04thing but is worth doing is on call

28:06recordings I would look for specifically

28:09key terms like I nearly didn't. So take

28:13all of the call recordings transcribe

28:15them. What I would do is I would run

28:17them through Claude or a model that

28:20cleans up the language too. And so we

28:23will always do this on transcripts

28:24rather than just having the raw

28:25transcript where words are like if you

28:26look at the transcript of this video

28:28you're watching right now, it's going to

28:29be all over the place. It's going to say

28:30that I'm saying words that I'm not

28:32saying because of my accent. You want to

28:34clean that up. So you can just run it

28:35through a model and say clean up all the

28:37words, make the sentences make sense.

28:40And then once you do that, you make all

28:42the call recording transcripts

28:44searchable. very very searchable and so

28:46then you can go and uh tell a large

28:48language model hey I want to look for

28:51people who mentioned objections they

28:53will say something like I nearly didn't

28:56or something relevant to why they didn't

28:57purchase go and look for it and you get

28:59a much higher quality output because you

29:02have cleaned up the source data so this

29:04is exactly what you want to be hunting

29:05for now that you have all the data

29:06you've done all the research what are

29:07you actually looking for number one

29:09you're looking for the accommodation

29:11this is what they've changed about their

29:13life to work around on the problem

29:15usually without admitting that they

29:17changed it. This becomes the part of the

29:21problem within the script. By the way,

29:23we have a whole chapter on this. We're

29:24just going to be going through how to

29:26write the script around the problem as

29:27we go back to the script at the start

29:29and we start breaking down every single

29:31section. The next one is the failed

29:32solution. What did they try first? What

29:35did it cost them? And why did they stop

29:37with that solution? This goes into the

29:39objection handling part of the scripts.

29:41The nearly didn't buy. So this is the

29:43last thing standing between them and the

29:46purchase. This goes into the risk

29:49reversal and offer section of the

29:51script. The word this is the noun they

29:55use for the problem. You can you can

29:58expand this further into like talking

29:59about language. But what this really

30:00becomes is the hook. Like we want to

30:03really understand what language, what

30:05words are they using to where in just

30:08one sentence we can say something that's

30:10going to talk to that specific person

30:11and hone directly in on them. And then

30:13the moment, this is the specific trigger

30:16on the week or the month or the day that

30:18they started looking for a solution.

30:20This really goes into the entire script,

30:23but if we want to hone it down, it goes

30:26into the urgency word or sentence of the

30:29script. So why should they buy now? What

30:31is the trigger? How do we problem

30:33agitate on that trigger? Now, the script

30:34writing framework that I'm going to give

30:36you further in on this video, it has

30:38nine core elements or nine core beats or

30:41nine sections. Five of these beats or

30:44five of these sections are here. This is

30:46how you find them. You can't go and just

30:47write a script without first doing the

30:49research to find content on the problem,

30:52the objection, the risk reversal, the

30:55hook, and then urgency and scarcity.

30:58Now, you can go and try write a script,

30:59but good luck doing any of this very

31:01well. Let me give you an example on the

31:03word because this is the one that's

31:04probably the most overlooked of all five

31:06of these, but the most important of the

31:08five cuz this is messaging,

31:09communication, language. Let's say that

31:11you're selling hair thinning. So, you're

31:13selling a hair thinning solution. Now,

31:15what most marketers will do is they'll

31:18just talk to hair thinning. They'll say

31:20like, "Is your hair thinning? Are you

31:21having hair thinning problems? My hair

31:23is thinning?" Any kind of language

31:25that's around those two words. But as

31:27you start to dig into all of your

31:29research and you start to understand

31:30that the language of people that are

31:31dealing with this particular problem,

31:33you actually come to find out that they

31:35never say athenic. They don't like

31:37saying that word. Instead, they'll say

31:39stuff like, "I started to be able to see

31:41my scalp. I started to look down and see

31:43hair in the drain." The language is

31:46materially different. And with that

31:48language, you better resonate with that

31:50particular persona and with that

31:51problem. Another thing you might be

31:53selling bloating. Now, you can say all

31:55day long, do you suffer with bloating?

31:57Do you have bloating all the time? But

31:59it's too broad of a persona call out,

32:03and it's too factual rather than

32:05emotional. And so, instead, we want to

32:07use language like, "I looked 4 months

32:09pregnant by 4 p.m. And this might be

32:12actual language that is getting used in

32:14your reviews." You might sell joint

32:16support. And rather than talking about

32:19joint support or maybe I have pain in my

32:21joints, instead you talk to once again

32:23more emotional language that is the real

32:26language of the consumer dealing with

32:27this problem, which might be stuff like

32:29I struggle to get off the floor without

32:31needing support. Much more viscerally

32:34connected to the actual problem and the

32:36state in which that consumer is in.

32:38Every time you try to use your own

32:40language, your marketer language, the

32:42language that is plastered on the

32:44packaging of your product like joint

32:46support, what you were doing is you are

32:48asking for the consumer to try to

32:49translate that into their own emotions,

32:51their own feelings, their own perception

32:53of what they are dealing with. That's

32:54not what you want to do. You want to

32:55meet them where they are. Okay, what are

32:57they dealing with? Let's speak to that.

32:58Let's not try to speak to something

33:00that's irrelevant. Give you one last

33:01example, then we'll move on. Creatine.

33:03You can say creatine is great for muscle

33:05support, but that requires the consumer

33:06to connect muscle support to them

33:09starting to get pain and aches at 55

33:11years old when they go to they've never

33:12had that before. Right? It's a big

33:14connection to make. You're trying to ask

33:15them to go from that all the way to this

33:17state that they're in. So instead, we

33:19want to skip straight to the state that

33:21they're in, and we want to speak that

33:23language to that person. All right. So

33:25now, let's go and apply that to the

33:27script that we started the video off

33:30with. And we're going to apply each of

33:32these pieces of research. The

33:34accommodation is actually already in

33:36here. It's already done, which is we

33:38already pulled this from either a call

33:41review or actual review on the website,

33:44which is I stopped parting my hair in

33:46the middle because that's where you can

33:48see it thinning. And so this was used

33:50directly for this line. Women lose it at

33:53the part line first. So this was pulled

33:56from here. For the failed solution,

33:58we've got a quote that we pulled out. I

34:00did the rosemary oil thing for four

34:02months. My pillowcase smelled, but

34:04nothing actually happened. You can see

34:05how this is going to be great to work

34:07into this script later on. The nearly

34:09didn't buy. We've pulled out I almost

34:11didn't buy because everything in this

34:12category takes 6 months to actually work

34:15and I've been burned twice before. In

34:17terms of words from the research, we

34:20found that they say shedding and they

34:22say my part. So they talk about the part

34:26in their hair a lot. They don't say hair

34:29loss and they'll never say stuff like

34:30alipcia. So it'll always be shedding or

34:33my part. And then the moment we might

34:35find or pull out a moment where say it

34:38was at my sister's wedding photos. If

34:41you're calling customers, you want to be

34:43asking for the moment as much as

34:45possible. Like what was that inflection

34:46point? When was it that you realized you

34:48needed a change? You needed a solution.

34:50You needed to buy a product in this

34:51category. needed to buy our product

34:53because this becomes really great

34:56material to then use in the copy. So

34:58ultimately, look at all this, right?

35:00This this is the ad. Like the ad is

35:03pretty much almost done here. We just

35:04need to clean it up. We need to format

35:06it correctly. We need to add a few

35:07sections in that we haven't even spoken

35:08about yet. And you pretty much got a

35:10really good ad. None of this was us

35:11writing. Like we haven't even written a

35:13single word yet. This is all just from

35:15pulling research and data out of the

35:17buyer and the consumer. And so this is

35:19why uh people say that the research

35:23portion is the most important biggest

35:25component of writing because if you

35:27don't do all this stuff, if you don't

35:28understand the consumer, if you don't

35:29understand the buyer and what they're

35:30doing, what they're saying, then you'll

35:32never get an ad as good as this. And

35:33this is some like really great material

35:35to start running with. Now, as a quick

35:37example as to why this is so much more

35:39important than you just asking CHBT or

35:42an AI model for all of this data, what

35:45you can do right now, and I've just done

35:46it on my computer to the left, is go and

35:48type into Chacht, "What objections might

35:51buyers have to a hair thinning

35:53supplement?" And the response that

35:55you'll get, cuz I've got it right here,

35:56is will this actually work for me?

35:59Where's the proof? How long will it

36:01take? What if I stop taking it? Could it

36:03make my hair worse first? Are there side

36:05effects? Like this is all just super

36:08generic stuff that you will get back

36:10from any question that you ask a model

36:12because you'll just get the average. You

36:14will not get good research by using an

36:17LLM to go and pull data. You need to

36:19pull data from the categories that we

36:21showed you before in the order that we

36:23showed you before. And that's how you

36:25get a really high quality output that's

36:27going to speak to the consumer. Make

36:28sure that if you are going to use CHBT

36:31or an LLM that you always ask it to

36:33retrieve information. You don't ask it

36:36to go and invent information. So you

36:38never want it coming up with its own

36:40words. You want it going out and just

36:42scraping the internet and pulling quotes

36:44in. And you want it to give you the

36:45hyperlink to the quote because that way

36:47you can get stuff like this if it's

36:48publicly available on the internet and

36:50it's just a research tool rather than a

36:52tool that's making up the copy and the

36:54words for you. Now you might go, Dan, we

36:56don't have time for all of this. like

36:58this is so much work. We need to pump

36:59out 50 ads a week. How are we going to

37:02do 50 ads a week if we're going to have

37:03to do this every time? Well, you batch

37:05it, right? You batch one large section

37:07of res research. You do as much as

37:10possible and you structure it through

37:12the concepting system. Now, if you've

37:13watched our creative strategy video,

37:15which is on the way to 100,000 views

37:17next week. So, I'd strongly recommend

37:19that if you haven't watched that, that's

37:20the next video that you watch from us.

37:22We break down exactly how we walk

37:24through creative strategy. But the idea

37:26here is you want to build concepts. And

37:28a concept is a persona. So who exactly

37:31are we talking to here? What is the

37:33angle? So what is the value proposition?

37:35How are we approaching it? This is the

37:37messaging. And then what is the offer?

37:40What are we actually giving people? When

37:41you do all this research, you want to be

37:44researching and finding out who are all

37:45the personas, who are all the people

37:47that are buying from us, and then what

37:49are all the angles? You want to pull in

37:50quotes, you want to save quotes under

37:52this structure. And what you'll end up

37:53being able to do is hopefully you can

37:55find a couple personas. You can find two

37:57to three different people. If you're a

37:58larger brand, you can probably find more

37:59than that. You want to find three to

38:01four core angles that we could speak to.

38:03And then if you have two different

38:04products, like there's two offers here.

38:06If you have one product, there's one.

38:07And then you can start obviously mixing

38:09matching these where relevant.

38:11Obviously, the angle needs to meet the

38:12persona. You can't give an angle to

38:14someone that's not relevant. But then

38:15you'll have like 30 or like let's say

38:17you'll have, let's be conservative here,

38:19right? Two personas. Let's say three

38:21angles work with each. So you're going

38:22to have six concepts. Now the nice thing

38:25about six concepts is that then

38:27underneath this you can make 10 ads per

38:29concept. So you've got 60 ads. So all

38:32you need is to find a few personas, a

38:34few angles and then you're good to do

38:36quite a lot of volume. How are you

38:37actually getting this volume? If the

38:39persona and the angle in the offer is

38:40the same, you are getting this through

38:42different scripts, right? You can talk

38:43to the same person with the same angle

38:45and have a entirely different script.

38:46Okay? So it can be a very different ad.

38:48You're also creating variations through

38:50hook swaps. So change the hook a few

38:52times and you've got a few new unique

38:54ads which is actually worth doing

38:55because 80% of the audience hits the

38:57hook. So if you change the hook slightly

38:58you'll get more people to watch through.

39:00And then the other is format variation.

39:02So you could do a VSSL animation

39:05claimation ad and then you could go into

39:06a piece of UGC then EGC then founder

39:08story like just switch the format but

39:10keep persona angle research scripting

39:12very similar and you will have

39:14differentiated ads which will reach new

39:15people which will count as diversity in

39:17the account. The next thing we need to

39:19understand about the buyer is what do

39:21they know and how tired are they of

39:23hearing it. Now this is from Eugene

39:26Schwarz breakthrough advertising. This

39:28is me simplifying down the language.

39:30What this is actually called is the

39:32stages of awareness and over here is the

39:34stages of sophistication within the

39:36market. So what they know what stage of

39:38awareness are they at? Are they unaware?

39:41Which means they don't know that they

39:43even have a problem. An example of this

39:45is that I see no problems with using

39:47this whiteboard, but you might educate

39:49me that there are actually a lot of

39:50issues with using a whiteboard and

39:52instead you should use this other

39:54solution instead, whether it's an iPad

39:55or something digital because there's a

39:57bunch of problems that I don't even know

39:59exist yet. Or I'm problem aware. I know

40:00that there are issues with this

40:02whiteboard. I have to wipe stuff out

40:04every time and then the markers left

40:06behind and so eventually I have to do a

40:07massive clean and so I understand the

40:09problems or at least I'm aware of a

40:10couple of them. Then I could be

40:12solutions aware which is I understand

40:14the problem. I also understand that

40:16there is obvious solutions to this

40:18problem. Okay, I could get a better

40:19whiteboard. I could use a digital

40:21whiteboard instead. We could do this in

40:22a few different ways. There might still

40:24be some solutions that I'm not not aware

40:26of but generally I know solutions exist.

40:28Then there is product aware which is

40:30that I know that this specific solution

40:33that you are selling exists. An example

40:35of that is that I know that an iPad is a

40:36solve for this problem. And then most

40:38aware means that I am all the way

40:40through the funnel. I have looked at the

40:42options. I have looked at iPads. I've

40:44seen what kind of apps I could use to

40:46solve this particular problem for

40:47myself. And I'm pretty close to buying.

40:49The only thing holding me back is a

40:50really strong reason or probably

40:52pricing. And so I'm likely shopping the

40:54market deciding what I'm going to do.

40:56Now dependent on where someone is in the

40:57stages of awareness, the script looks

41:00entirely different. If people don't know

41:03that there is even a problem, we cannot

41:06talk to the problem without first

41:08addressing them at the stages of

41:10awareness that they're at. So we have to

41:11meet people where they at in stages. It

41:13is also the fact that most this is like

41:16a funnel, right? Most people are unaware

41:19or problem aware and then some people

41:21are solution aware and then much less

41:23people are product aware of your product

41:25and then very few people are in market

41:27right now. Now you've seen people try to

41:29ascribe percentages to this and the

41:31percentages you normally see is like 3%

41:34of people are down here, 9% of people

41:36are down here. Then you have like 30% up

41:39here and then obviously the entire

41:41population, well the entire remainder of

41:43the population, sorry, is unaware at the

41:46top. What will also happen when you

41:48market is that your ROI, your return on

41:50investment will go down as you go up

41:53because you are speaking to less warm

41:54audiences. You're going colder and

41:56colder. So, you can go and put an ad in

41:58the market and say like, "Hey, we sell

42:00Nike shoes." And that's amazing because

42:02if you just target people that are

42:03currently most aware or product aware

42:05and they're looking for Nike shoes, they

42:06will buy simply because you have what

42:08they're after and they're educated. But

42:10going and trying to take Nike shoes and

42:11then educate cold audiences on the

42:14product is a very expensive branding

42:15exercise because you have to go all the

42:17way up the stages of awareness and start

42:19selling value propositions, start

42:20objection handling against competitors,

42:22start telling them about problems they

42:24didn't know even existed that you solve.

42:25And so the skill required to go up in

42:27the stages of awareness increases a lot.

42:30It becomes much harder. It becomes very

42:32very hard. There's really not many

42:34people in the world like there'd be I'm

42:36going to argue they'd probably be in the

42:37tens of thousands at a maximum people

42:39that can create phenomenal unaware ads.

42:41Very very rare skill. It's very hard to

42:43do. And you can almost think about your

42:45progression as a script writer or

42:47copywriter as progressing up in your

42:50ability to write scripts at the stages

42:52of awareness scale. Then we have the

42:53layers of sophistication. Stage one

42:56means that you're speaking to a product

42:59and you're first to market. So the

43:02claims that you're making, it's the

43:03first claims that have ever been made.

43:05An example of this is let's say you were

43:09the first to GLP1s and you were saying

43:12that GLP1s help with fat loss and they

43:16can help you lose x amount of weight in

43:184 weeks. Now, if you're the first person

43:20to ever make the claim, if you're the

43:22first person to ever say that, and

43:23realistically in stages of awareness,

43:25we'd actually have to go back past JLP

43:27ones, and we'd have to go to the first

43:29weight loss solution ever, ever made,

43:31right? If we go all the way back like 60

43:33years, first weight loss ads, they would

43:35have been stage one. The reason why

43:36stage one is so advantageous and the

43:39methodology and the way that you script

43:40changes as you go to earlier stages is

43:42because you're first to market. No one's

43:44heard the claim before, and so people

43:45believe you. It's very easy to convince

43:46people on something new, right? But then

43:49as we move to stage two, this is where

43:51the claim already exists in the market.

43:54So people have been making this claim

43:55and so with that people trust it less

43:58that we've heard this before. I've

43:59bought these weight loss products and

44:01these weight loss tablets and they don't

44:02actually work. And so why do I trust

44:04this brand? Because I tr I trusted these

44:06other brands and it didn't work. So what

44:07happens at stage two? Claims increase.

44:12They enlarge. So rather than claiming

44:14that this will help you lose weight,

44:16suddenly the claims go from this will

44:18help you lose weight to this will help

44:20you shred 40 lbs in 7 days while still

44:24eating whatever you want. So the claims

44:26become crazy and the reason for that is

44:29that people stop converting as well

44:30because they're used to the claims. So

44:32everyone has to become like more verbose

44:34in what they're saying, which is where

44:35compliance gets pretty sketchy. Stage

44:38three, the market becomes tired of all

44:40these claims. They've been burned at

44:41stage one. We've gone through stage one.

44:43We've gone to stage two. Claims have

44:44gone ridiculous. Everyone's like, "This

44:46stuff doesn't work." Like this guy is

44:47saying, "I can make money online. I've

44:49gone through four courses before and

44:50like this clearly isn't true." This is

44:52the stage in where people start to

44:54introduce unique mechanisms. And so this

44:57and I'll use the like make money online

44:59option is that rather than just making a

45:02claim, hey, you can make money online by

45:04the course, it becomes you've tried a

45:07bunch of stuff. You've tried A, you've

45:09tried B, you've tried C. And all of

45:11these were from gurus making false

45:12claims. But this isn't anything that

45:14what we're doing. Instead, we're doing

45:16the Tik Tok ad method, which is

45:19completely new and unfounded. No one's

45:21even touched this. This is a digital

45:22gold mine. You want to pivot into this

45:24completely new mechanism because that is

45:26what's going to get you there. And so

45:27what they're introducing there is like

45:29clear uniqueness in the market through a

45:31mechanism that no one's heard of before.

45:33And so this effectively revitalizes

45:35hope. It's like, oh, we've been told

45:37this would work. Then people got

45:38ridiculous with their claims. But okay,

45:40this seems to be differentiated. Then we

45:42move into stage four. Everybody now has

45:45a mechanism. So what happens? The

45:47mechanism claim then goes and

45:49enlargements. Just like from stage one

45:51to stage two where the claims got

45:52bigger. Now the mechanisms get bigger.

45:54The mechanisms get crazier. And then

45:56stage five is the mechanism exhausts.

45:59And now the market has become used to

46:02the mechanism. And so instead, where

46:04does messaging pivot? It pivots to you

46:07selling transformation and who the buyer

46:10becomes. And so rather than now talking

46:13to some unique mechanism that's going to

46:14make you money online that you've never

46:16heard of before, now all the messaging

46:19switches to emotion and it goes, imagine

46:21the life you can live. Imagine how

46:22things will change. Imagine that you

46:24don't have to get up worried. Like all

46:26of this kind of language starts to

46:28become very prevalent because we've

46:30exhausted mechanisms. We've exhausted

46:32claims. They don't work anymore in this

46:34market. Everyone's used to it. And so,

46:35we have to really tie into emotion. Now,

46:37it's important to know in your

46:39particular industry, in your niche,

46:40where you're from, what stage of

46:42sophistication are you in? Just look at

46:43your competitors. You can identify this

46:45pretty quickly. Now, the cheat code is

46:47that ads at higher stages of

46:49sophistication are better at. And so, I

46:51don't even really care if the market is

46:53in stage one, which not a lot of markets

46:55are, but let's say the market is in

46:56stage one. Good example of this actually

46:58would be AI. So AI is probably in stage

47:04two, right? Like claims are pretty big.

47:07There's a lot of claims in the market

47:08that all these AI rapper softwares can

47:11do a lot of stuff. There are some unique

47:13mechanisms getting introduced, but

47:15generally speaking, I'd say we're still

47:16quite low on the stages of

47:17sophistication and people aren't

47:19exhausted yet with AI. People are still

47:21hyped. They still think like this is

47:23this is something that is going to

47:25revolutionize at least their work and

47:28whatever you tangibly apply it to

47:30through the desire that you speak to and

47:32you use AI as a unique mechanism. But

47:34ads that are up here are always better,

47:35right? Like even if like AI right now is

47:37in stage one, you will have a better ad

47:39that will do better talking to AI if you

47:42talk to what the buyer can become

47:44through AI and if you have some kind of

47:46unique mechanism within the AI frame. If

47:49you can do that, it's much better ad

47:50than just making claims. Now, you can

47:52make claims with AI and you can get away

47:53with it. People are getting away with it

47:54right now. Like, you just make a claim

47:55that AI can do some stuff. You'll sell

47:57some courses, you'll sell some software,

47:59you'll sell whatever it is that you're

48:00selling, but you'll sell a lot better if

48:01you go up here. Before you write every

48:03ad, identify, circle, who are you

48:05talking to? What stage of awareness are

48:07we talking to? What stage of

48:08sophistication are we speaking to?

48:10Because also, although the whole market

48:11will sit in one stage of sophistication,

48:13the reality is is that there is a bell

48:15curve of people sitting across these

48:16stages. as an example for AI, I would be

48:19very high up in the stages of awareness.

48:21I'm very skeptical of the topic. Like

48:24I'd say that I've I was an early adopter

48:26and so I've gone through the bell curve

48:27faster and so to speak to me, you

48:28wouldn't be able to speak to me at all

48:30or sell me through these stages. You'd

48:31have to go way up on the stages of

48:33awareness to actually convert me. And I

48:35would probably sit on product solution

48:38to product aware on AI products and AI

48:41solutions. And so if you wanted to talk

48:43to me, you would have to select here and

48:46here. Now, you might want to talk to me

48:48in some ads and then talk to other

48:49people in other ads. That's how you open

48:50up your total addressable market. You

48:52get more scalability in the account. You

48:53get more scale in the business.

48:54Ultimately, the more people you can talk

48:56to, the better. And so, you might do

48:57some ads like that. And then, you're

48:59going to do some ads at problem aare on

49:01stage two to three. And then, you're

49:02going to do more ads on unaware stage

49:05five. And you mix and match. And that

49:07will obviously change the language,

49:08change the ad, change who you're talking

49:10to, and ultimately change who you reach

49:12on the platforms in terms of targeting.

49:14A phrase that Dan Kennedy would use is

49:16you want message to market match. And so

49:21whatever your messaging is within the

49:23ad, it needs to meet the market that

49:26you're speaking to. So you need to

49:27identify who is the market that you're

49:29speaking to so you can start crafting

49:31the message. Awareness and stage of

49:33sophistication is a property of the

49:35whole ad rather than a unit uh that sits

49:38within the script alone. And so I have

49:40seen before a video will get written by

49:43an in-house copywriter as a problem

49:45aware ad because the copywriter went and

49:48put the brief together. Then that will

49:49go into the creative team and they will

49:51create a static that gets built at the

49:54product aware level because the designer

49:56just pulled in a shot of the product

49:57rather than actually being across what

49:59stage of awareness we're talking to

50:00here. Then the primary text will get

50:03written as solution aware because

50:05somebody in the team or the agency just

50:06went and quickly put the copy together

50:08but didn't actually think about what

50:10stage of awareness are we in right here.

50:11Meaning that nobody in that chain really

50:13did anything wrong. It was just that no

50:15one clearly stated and labeled and said

50:17this ad is at this stages of awareness.

50:20Does everyone understand this? All of

50:22the production line has to be congruent.

50:24So what ends up happening is this ad

50:25doesn't work because the buyer is

50:26hitting three different starting points

50:28in terms of stage of awareness. the

50:30targeting doesn't know who to go after

50:31and the messaging is just really messy.

50:34Let me give you stages of sophistication

50:37examples for this core script that we're

50:40going through. Stage one would be you

50:42saying this is a supplement for your

50:44hair. Stage two would be you saying this

50:47is the strongest hair supplement on the

50:49market. So you've increased the claim.

50:50Stage three would be you saying it's not

50:54about the hair, it's about the follicle.

50:56And DHT is what's shrinking it. So we've

50:59introduced a unique mechanism. We use

51:02pelito at the dose that the studies

51:05actually use, not the dose that everyone

51:06else is using. So we've got the unique

51:08mechanism, but we've ramped up the claim

51:10on the unique mechanism, which is that

51:12yeah, everyone's using this mechanism,

51:13everyone's using this ingredient, but

51:14not at the dose that it should be based

51:17on the clinical studies. And then we go

51:18all the way to stage five, which is

51:20leaning into emotion and what the buyer

51:21is going to become, which is the women

51:23who keep it are the ones who started

51:26before they could even see it. And so

51:28we're going to be integrating some of

51:29this kind of language, some of these

51:31kind of quotes into this script as we

51:33continue to iterate on it. What about

51:34stages of awareness? How does this tie

51:36into the script that we're working on?

51:38An example of unaware would be the

51:40photos you don't like of yourself are

51:42usually taken from behind and there's a

51:44reason for that. So they don't even know

51:46that they're thinning. They don't even

51:47know it's a problem, but we're going

51:49photos from behind, you don't like them.

51:50Here's why. Here's the reason. If we go

51:52to problem aare, we're saying if you've

51:54started parting it on the side, this is

51:56for you. So, we're speaking to the

51:59problem, but we're not doing a persona

52:01call out. We're actually speaking and

52:03agitating on the problem that they have.

52:04Solution aware. Most hair supplement

52:06doses use pelito, by the way. That's the

52:10ingredient at a fifth of what the

52:12studies used. So, they know the solution

52:14exists. They know about the unique

52:16mechanism, which is the ingredient, but

52:17now we're objection handling against

52:18other solutions and why ours is better.

52:20Then product and most aware kind of the

52:23same thing in terms of messaging. It's

52:25becomes very similar. What actually

52:26starts to differentiate these two stages

52:28is the ad type more than anything.

52:30Messaging in product-most aware would be

52:32the 90day pack is back and it's the last

52:35run at this price. Okay. So like they're

52:37very very product aware. They're very

52:38low down in the stages of awareness and

52:39we're just trying to convert them. Now

52:41we understand the stages of awareness.

52:43We understand the layers of

52:44sophistication and we still technically

52:47haven't written a single word yet on

52:49this script. And that is on purpose

52:51because we need to understand these

52:53things. We need to start selecting,

52:54okay, what are we going to what is all

52:55the research? Who are we talking to?

52:56What layer of sophistication is this

52:58going to be? 90% of the work is done

53:00before we even put the pen down. And

53:01once we get to the scripting stage, it's

53:03going to be pretty quick. Now, a bit of

53:04an important caveat to throw into this,

53:07which is that thing that'll ultimately

53:08beat everything is the offer. And so, if

53:10we start ranking a list of importance,

53:13number one is the offer. Then it is the

53:16market that you take that offer to and

53:17speak to. Then it is the unique

53:19mechanism. Then it is the proof and the

53:22credibility in which you can sit the

53:24brand. And then there's everything else

53:26you've ever focused on within scripting.

53:28The reason why I say this and put this

53:30in this video is because you can go and

53:32become the best copywriter script writer

53:34in the world, but ultimately if you do

53:35have a bad offer, people just will not

53:37buy from you. And the subset of the

53:39offer to be clear is and we we have a

53:42one maybe one and a half hour video on

53:43offers in e-commerce. So I would highly

53:46recommend you watch that video. But to

53:48break this down really quickly, the

53:49offer is going to be the product and

53:51it's going to be the value perception.

53:52That is really the two core components

53:55of what an offer is and why this is so

53:56important. What do I mean? If the

53:57product sucks, if you just have a really

53:59bad product, good luck. Now, you can be

54:01good enough at marketing to sell bad

54:03product. People do it all the time. Like

54:04literally all the time. The issue is no

54:06one will ever repeat buy. And the only

54:07reality is that as you scale, CAC will

54:09continue to go up no matter how good you

54:11are at marketing. And if you do not have

54:13repeat purchasing and if you're not

54:14building brand over a long time horizon,

54:16you are just capitalizing on a

54:17short-term arbitrage opportunity that is

54:19going to shrink and you're gonna have to

54:20move on to the next thing and just

54:21continue scamming people if the

54:22product's not good. So the product has

54:24to be good. Step one. Step two,

54:26consumers have to see some kind of value

54:27perception here. Now, you can write

54:29scripts good enough to increase value

54:31perception, but one of the easiest ways

54:32to do that is to just reo the offer. And

54:35so like can we go on a quarterly bundle

54:38but then add in five gifts that they get

54:40and then we can write our script around

54:42why those gifts are so valuable. Like if

54:45you make the offer better everything

54:46else will become a lot easier. And if

54:48you have a really bad offer and a really

54:49bad product you will find it very

54:51difficult no matter how good you become

54:53at script writing and copywriting and

54:54talking to the buyer and the consumer

54:56psychology. It doesn't matter doesn't

54:57matter if the offer is bad and the offer

55:00is used in a lot of the scripting as

55:02well. And so we will be limited in our

55:04ability to copyright and script if the

55:06offer isn't good. Let me tell you the

55:07elements of an offer that's important

55:08when it comes to scripting. It's the

55:10thing, the terms, the reversal, the

55:12reason for now and the effort. So the

55:14thing is what do I actually get in my

55:16own words? So like what are we selling

55:17them? The terms is what does it cost me

55:20framed against them? The reversal is

55:22what happens if it doesn't work? How do

55:25we risk reverse? And if that's not in

55:26the offer, then obviously we can't risk

55:28reverse in the script. We can't say that

55:30they can get their money back in seven

55:31days if it doesn't work. If they can't

55:32get their money back in seven days and

55:34it doesn't work, right? So the offer is

55:35reliant for a lot of these tactics that

55:37we can use in the script. The reason for

55:38buying now like why should they buy this

55:41week rather than in 2 months time? Once

55:43again, this is really contingent on the

55:45offer. So is there some kind of urgency

55:47or scarcity on the offer? We framing the

55:49product as something that is required

55:50now rather than later. Offer becomes

55:52important here. And then the last is the

55:54effort. So what do I have to do and how

55:57long does it take for me to get this to

56:00work? And so that is also once again

56:02contingent on the offer because there is

56:04stuff that you can do with bundles or

56:05changing uh the product slightly or

56:07changing the offering so that you can

56:10decrease effort and increase perceived

56:12likelihood of outcome. I wouldn't mind

56:14getting a little bit tactical on how you

56:16can actually script around pricing. So

56:18some pricing tactics that we might even

56:20put into this script later on. Number

56:22one is that you can anchor against an

56:23alternative. So an example of a bad

56:26script. What people will do here is they

56:28will say it was $89, now it is $69. A

56:32better rewrite of that would be that you

56:34can say one appointment with a hair

56:37specialist doctor will cost you $200 and

56:39they're just going to tell you to take

56:41this product. Okay? So you're reframing

56:42as what's the alternative? You can go to

56:44a doctor to try to fix your hair

56:45thinning or you can just buy this which

56:47they're going to tell you to buy anyway.

56:48Number two is you can reduce to the

56:50ridiculous. And so this is where you'll

56:52reduce to like a daily rate that can be

56:55compared to a coffee. So a bad script

56:57would be it's just $69 for a 90-day

57:00supply. A rewrite a good version of that

57:02script just spend 73 cents per day,

57:05which is less than the coffee that

57:07you're drinking while you read this or

57:09watch this right now. And so you're

57:10reframing down to a day by day or a dose

57:13by dose. Number three is you want to

57:15price the problem rather than pricing

57:18the product. So a bad version of this

57:21script would be it's only $68. The

57:25rewrite would be you've spent more than

57:28this on two other solutions and they

57:31didn't even work for you or like what is

57:33the price of the problem? If you don't

57:35get your interest rates down on your

57:37loan, then what's the price of that?

57:39Like for the average person with a home

57:41loan, it's $500,000 2%. That's going to

57:43cost you $50,000 a year if you don't fix

57:46this problem. And we can solve it for

57:48you for $400. Last tactic is you can

57:52make the effort the price. So rather

57:54than saying something like free shipping

57:56on orders over $50 or whatever your

57:58price frame is going to be, rewrite it,

58:00scrap it. Instead, frame against how

58:02loweffort this is going to be. And so if

58:04it is taking creatine and like creatine

58:07powder often people can't get into a

58:09habit because creatine powder is

58:10terrible to take unless you put it in

58:12like a protein shake and mix it in.

58:13Instead you say it's one gummy every

58:16morning. You'll forget you're even doing

58:17it because it's just a part of

58:19breakfast. And so you substantiate price

58:21through the decrease in effort. And then

58:23quick tactical rewrite on guarantees.

58:25Classic guarantee that people will put

58:27in scripts is we have a 30-day money

58:29back guarantee. So if you don't like it,

58:31you can get a refund. pretty apt rewrite

58:33for this particular script which we'll

58:35include later. Take it for 90 days. If

58:38your part hasn't changed, send us the

58:40empty tubs and we'll refund all three.

58:42What does this do better than this?

58:44Well, like so much. Almost every word is

58:46better. But if we're to framework it up,

58:48number one, it is very specific.

58:51Everybody has a 30-day money back

58:52guarantee. If you can get much more

58:54specific with like what specifically

58:56we're going to guarantee, it's going to

58:57cut through and uniquely differentiate.

58:59Number two is that it is slightly

59:02uncomfortable. A guarantee that costs

59:05the seller nothing really doesn't prove

59:07anything. So a 30-day money back

59:09guarantee to most people is like ah if

59:10they're doing that they must not be like

59:12losing much money. But if we're like if

59:13we increase the stakes we're like no no

59:16we're not just going to refund you.

59:17We're going to refund you 3 months worth

59:19and we will pay for you to send us the

59:22tubs. By increasing the stakes it

59:25increases the confidence and what you're

59:26saying is actually true. And so when I

59:28say slightly uncomfortable, it doesn't

59:29make the consumer uncomfortable. Like me

59:31as the person watching that ad, I go,

59:33"That's amazing." It should make you

59:35feel slightly uncomfortable because with

59:37you making this claim, you're like, "Oh,

59:38that's a that's a little bit of a big

59:40claim. That's not just an easy 30-day

59:41money back guarantee. Like, we're we're

59:43really putting ourselves behind this."

59:44And because of that, that's actually

59:45what's going to make it work. Number

59:46three is that it's directly matched to

59:49the mechanisms timeline. So, we expect

59:53this ingredient and this product to work

59:54over a 90-day period. So why would we

59:56guarantee on a 30-day, right? We

59:57guarantee on a 90. Reinforces the

59:59mechanism, reinforces our confidence in

1:00:01the fact that it takes 90 days,

1:00:02reinforces any studies that we show that

1:00:04might also be similar to this. And then

1:00:06number four is the most important thing

1:00:08in meta advertising, which is the

1:00:10messaging. So it's reinforcing the

1:00:13unique mechanism of 90 days. It's

1:00:15reinforcing the language here that we're

1:00:17talking about the hair part. We are also

1:00:20reinforcing that if you actually just

1:00:23use the product and you empty out the

1:00:25tubs, that is what will make it work.

1:00:27And that's why we will only refund if

1:00:30you use it. Before we move to section

1:00:32two of this video and we move away from

1:00:35the buyer, a common objection I'll get,

1:00:37particularly when saying the offer is

1:00:38really, really important when we're

1:00:40framing up and scripting the ad is that

1:00:42I'll get I'm just the creative

1:00:44strategist. I'm the the copywriter. I

1:00:46can't change the offer. that's a

1:00:48business direction move and it's three

1:00:50levels above me which is half true but

1:00:52it's also half not true and that's the

1:00:54half that I would actually be worrying

1:00:56about. I wouldn't worry about the stuff

1:00:57that you can't control. Sure you can't

1:00:59control changing the price and you

1:01:01shouldn't really be changing the price

1:01:02as the copyriter or the creative

1:01:03strategist or the agency. Like that

1:01:05should be determined by the highest

1:01:06uplevel people within the business that

1:01:08understand the price elasticity and

1:01:09where we want to sit within the market.

1:01:10Really what you want to do on the offer

1:01:12is identify things that the business is

1:01:13already doing or would be very low risk

1:01:15and easily implementable and then just

1:01:18use that better within the messaging and

1:01:19the language of the ads. If you think

1:01:21back to the stuff that I put up before,

1:01:23four of five were things that the

1:01:25business was already doing, but they

1:01:26just never said free returns isn't a

1:01:29pricing decision, right? Most people do

1:01:31free returns anyway. It's just how are

1:01:33we going to package this up and present

1:01:34it within the messaging rather than

1:01:36saying free returns putting it into the

1:01:39primary text or putting into the script.

1:01:41We're going to say the exact same thing,

1:01:43but we're going to reframe it around

1:01:45we're going to refund the first 90 days,

1:01:46but you got to send the stuff back to us

1:01:48and prove that the tubs are empty and

1:01:50prove that it actually didn't work cuz

1:01:51we're so confident it will work. The

1:01:5390-day pack, right? So, we're putting

1:01:55that guarantee on the 90-day. The offer

1:01:57would need to change to someone actually

1:01:59buying 90 days worth. And so the 90-day

1:02:02pack probably already exists. Everyone

1:02:03in the company would be probably happy

1:02:04to just put a three-pack bundle on the

1:02:06website, even hide it, put it on a

1:02:08custom landing page. Like that isn't a

1:02:09big offer change at all. But now it's

1:02:11congruent with the messaging and what we

1:02:12want to do here. The reason for why they

1:02:14should buy right now, the urgency, the

1:02:16scarcity in the offer. Well, that's

1:02:18probably built into the mechanism of the

1:02:19product, right? Which is that like if

1:02:21you're losing your hair, you should buy

1:02:22it as soon as possible because you can

1:02:24never get your hair back. Like you can't

1:02:25reverse thinning. You can only stop it.

1:02:27And so that wasn't a now it seems like a

1:02:29change to the offer because we're

1:02:30increasing urgency and scarcity, but

1:02:32we're not. So you can really change the

1:02:33perception of the offer without actually

1:02:36materially changing anything about

1:02:38pricing or structure on the website or

1:02:39the product. An offer isn't a discount.

1:02:42It isn't a bundle. It isn't a free

1:02:44shipping threshold. An offer is a

1:02:46reframe from the consumer's perspective

1:02:49of the value that they're getting. So we

1:02:51have covered the buyer, we've covered

1:02:53the market, and we have covered offers.

1:02:56and we still haven't written a single

1:02:58sentence. So, I want to start writing. I

1:03:00want to start fixing this script. So,

1:03:02we're going to go into section two of

1:03:04the video. And we're going to start with

1:03:05the highest yield mechanical edit that

1:03:08you can make on this script. All right.

1:03:10So, let's start with specificity within

1:03:12the arguments that we're going to make.

1:03:14I want to start off with pulling a lot

1:03:16of lessons from Hopkins. A lot of this

1:03:18is directly from his work around

1:03:20specificity. So, we want to be specific

1:03:22in whatever we talk about, whatever we

1:03:24script, whatever copy we write. The

1:03:26latter of what the specificity looks

1:03:28like is we want to start off with

1:03:29numbers. We want to be using measured

1:03:32numbers rather than just random

1:03:34statements. Now most people should know

1:03:35this. If you don't know that use a

1:03:37number like it's much more powerful

1:03:38saying 98% of people get clearer skin

1:03:41than saying most people get clearer

1:03:43skin. Okay? So using a number is good. A

1:03:45named third party is the second. Number

1:03:48three is specificity in a very specific

1:03:52physical detail. Number four is

1:03:54specificity in a time. For example, it

1:03:57will take 87 days to for you to start

1:04:00saying results rather than just saying

1:04:01it'll take some time. And then you want

1:04:04to use proper nouns. A little bit on

1:04:06this adjectives. Anyone can use an

1:04:08adjective. Any competitor can use any

1:04:09adjective. And that's why it's not very

1:04:11good. Adjectives are the writer's

1:04:14opinion or the ad creator's opinion

1:04:16whereas specifics are evidence. And so

1:04:18what we're doing here is building

1:04:19evidence rather than just making

1:04:22subjective claims or subjective

1:04:24opinions. I'll give you two examples.

1:04:26Example number one, our serum leaves

1:04:28skin looking healthier. Probably heard

1:04:30that a thousand times. Instead, it's

1:04:330.05%

1:04:35retinol and the first tube is dose low

1:04:37on purpose. What we're also doing there

1:04:39is creating a curiosity gap that we'll

1:04:40then solve by the end of the ad. But

1:04:42this is obviously much better

1:04:43specificity. Another example, a shorter

1:04:45example is rather than saying fast

1:04:46absorbing, we say it's dry in 40 seconds

1:04:49and we actually timed it. Much more

1:04:51specific. There's proofing built in at

1:04:53the end here as well, which makes it a

1:04:54much better script. Oglev says that

1:04:57research will always be adjectives. I'll

1:05:00give you an example. You can say luxury

1:05:02craftsmanship you can feel. Now, the

1:05:05issue with this is you're sitting

1:05:06outside of the manufacturing process.

1:05:08You're sitting outside of the brand and

1:05:09you're trying to come up with

1:05:10descriptive language. Okay? It's really

1:05:13luxury. You can really feel it. Like

1:05:15you're trying to convince people through

1:05:16adjectives. Instead, one simple fact

1:05:19about the manufacturing line if you just

1:05:21went in and looked at how they made

1:05:22stuff is you could instead say one

1:05:24person stitches each pair start to

1:05:26finish. It takes her 4 hours. Now

1:05:29suddenly you're like, well, 4 hours to

1:05:31stitch this and it's all stitched start

1:05:34to finish. It must like we know it's

1:05:36luxury then and we know that like we

1:05:38must be able to feel it. We don't even

1:05:39need the emotive language. We know the

1:05:41stakes. Hopkins wrote this in 1923

1:05:44and it's and it couldn't be more true

1:05:47than it is today, which is platitudes

1:05:49and generalities roll off the human

1:05:51understanding like water from a duck.

1:05:52They leave no impression whatsoever. To

1:05:55say best in the world, lowest prices is

1:05:57at best to simply claim the expected.

1:05:59This is what most of the scripts that

1:06:01you read and the ads that you watch are

1:06:03doing. Premium ingredients, superior

1:06:05quality, unmatched results. Every one of

1:06:08those is a word that your competitor can

1:06:10also just use whenever they want, which

1:06:12means it carries no information. It

1:06:14gives no reason for people to buy the

1:06:16product, which means that the buyer and

1:06:18the consumer will just delete it from

1:06:20their memory from the script before

1:06:22you've even finished saying it cuz it's

1:06:24meaningless. It holds no weight. If you

1:06:25remember at the start, this is what all

1:06:27these claims were. Vegan, cruelty-free,

1:06:29made right here in Australia. These hold

1:06:32no weight. They're meaningless. they

1:06:34don't even need to be here because they

1:06:35get the consumer no closer to

1:06:37purchasing. Specificity also translates

1:06:40into urgency messaging. This is

1:06:42something that Albert talks about which

1:06:44is that you don't just want urgency. You

1:06:46want honest urgency because honest

1:06:49urgency creates specificity which is

1:06:51much more powerful than just saying

1:06:52stuff. For example, a weak example of

1:06:54urgency would be you saying limited time

1:06:56only. Don't miss out. Weak meaningless

1:06:59would never do it. Instead, if you

1:07:01rewrite that to something honest, let's

1:07:02say you're a creative agency. Let's

1:07:04change industries for a second. You

1:07:06could say, "We make 400 ads a month.

1:07:08October's already gone. Our next batch

1:07:10ships on the 14th of November. You need

1:07:13to get in before the end of this month

1:07:15to be able to be involved in that

1:07:16batch." That's real. It's real scarcity

1:07:18with a real number, with a real date.

1:07:19It's not manufactured. And people can

1:07:20feel that. And it also carries with it

1:07:22specificity. There's this really good

1:07:24story about Hopkins and it's when he

1:07:26went to the Schlitz brewery in 1907

1:07:30looking for a claim that he could put

1:07:32within the marketing and he watched them

1:07:33sterilize the empty bottles with live

1:07:35steam and asked why nobody had ever

1:07:38mentioned that they do that. The answer

1:07:39was that every brewer did it. He ran it

1:07:42anyway because no one had it in the

1:07:43messaging and Schlitz climbed from fifth

1:07:45in the market to the very top of it.

1:07:47There are a couple good lessons and

1:07:48questions you should be asking off the

1:07:50back of that. Three questions I'd ask is

1:07:52what does your factory do that you

1:07:54assume is boring? Can probably be used

1:07:56in messaging. What did you reject during

1:07:58the formulation process? There's a story

1:08:00there. There's something that you can

1:08:01weave into ad messaging. And what

1:08:03constraint did the product impose on you

1:08:06that you've never mentioned before?

1:08:07There's usually a bunch of constraints

1:08:08all over the place and you could

1:08:10probably use them in the messaging and

1:08:12the reasoning as to why someone should

1:08:13buy and how you're uniquely

1:08:15differentiated. An example of this is

1:08:17that you could say that we have the best

1:08:19magnesium on the market. It's going to

1:08:20soothe your muscles. It's going to make

1:08:22you feel way better than the other

1:08:23magnesium. Or we can go ask these

1:08:25questions and then dig into a unique

1:08:27mechanism and what separates us, which

1:08:29is that we could say uh most magnesium

1:08:32is magnesium oxide. It passes straight

1:08:35through you and it's the easiest to

1:08:37manufacture, which is why all of the

1:08:39factories produce it. But ours is

1:08:42magnesium glycinate, which is what your

1:08:44body actually absorbs, but it's much

1:08:47harder to produce. We had to jump over

1:08:48hurdle after hurdle. We have to do XY Z

1:08:51in the factory. But it actually works

1:08:54and that's why we did all this stuff and

1:08:55that's why we put in all this effort.

1:08:57Important thing to understand here is

1:08:58that you can take a process which is in

1:09:00the factory and you can turn it into a

1:09:02unique mechanism and that's really

1:09:04powerful. Now a common push back that

1:09:06I'll get on the specificity section here

1:09:08is well we can't be specific because

1:09:10that puts us at compliancy risk. Okay.

1:09:13So like we can't say that it will do XY

1:09:16Z with this specificity because we can't

1:09:18back the claim. You can still be

1:09:20specific without making a claim. Okay,

1:09:22you just have to be more careful and you

1:09:24have to uh guide the narrative a little

1:09:26bit better. So you might say that you

1:09:29might do a time duration like a 90day

1:09:31rather than talking about a very

1:09:33specific time component in which it will

1:09:35fix. All right. So what is the script

1:09:37structure? What is the framework? There

1:09:39are nine core sections, nine core beats

1:09:41that I mentioned before. Number one is

1:09:44the hook. Number two is the problem.

1:09:48Number three is the promise.

1:09:51Number four is the mechanism.

1:09:55Number five is the objection. Number six

1:09:59is the proof. Number seven is the offer.

1:10:03Number eight is the risk reversal. And

1:10:07number nine is the call to action. This

1:10:10is how you should be scripting all of

1:10:12your ads. This is the exact framework.

1:10:15Let's go through what each one does. So

1:10:16the hook buys the attention at the

1:10:18start. So this isn't going to sell

1:10:19anyone, but it's going to capture the

1:10:21right people. It's important because if

1:10:22people don't like the hook, they scroll

1:10:24past and they don't watch the app. So we

1:10:25all know the importance of a hook. The

1:10:27problem is important because we're

1:10:29problem agitating and we're naming the

1:10:31consequence that they've already

1:10:33accommodated or that they already have.

1:10:35This is for context from Eugene Schwarz.

1:10:39Number three is the promise. This states

1:10:41what they get in their terms. The

1:10:43mechanism gives them a reason to trust

1:10:46or believe the promise. We then move

1:10:49into objection handling which is uh

1:10:51talking about all the other solutions

1:10:52that they have tried in the past. We

1:10:54then move into proof. So we're

1:10:56substantiating the claims on the offer.

1:10:59We actually present the product. Then

1:11:01what is the product? What is the offer?

1:11:03We then risk reverse to make the offer

1:11:05look a lot better and be more

1:11:06convincing. And then we have a call to

1:11:08action. Let's dig into the problem. When

1:11:12we're scripting out the problem section

1:11:13of the script, we want the symptom and

1:11:17we want the consequence. We always want

1:11:20to be agitating the consequence, not the

1:11:24symptom. A symptom is what the body or

1:11:26the day is doing. But the consequence is

1:11:28what the buyer has already had to change

1:11:30about their life to accommodate the

1:11:32symptom. And the consequence is what the

1:11:34buyer can't unsee or forget about once

1:11:37you've mentioned it and brought it to

1:11:39light, said it out loud. The symptom

1:11:41they likely already know about. You also

1:11:43don't have to invent the symptom. We

1:11:45actually called this something else at

1:11:47the start, which is that we called this

1:11:49the accommodation. Let me give you an

1:11:51example and then we'll actually pull

1:11:53this in and we'll start rewriting some

1:11:54of the script. Weak would be saying uh

1:11:56bloating can be uncomfortable and

1:11:58frustrating. The rewrite is you've

1:12:00started planning what you wear around

1:12:02which days are bad. Now, why does this

1:12:04work so much better? Well, it's because

1:12:05the weak version describes the state

1:12:08that the buyer already knows that

1:12:09they're in. So, it buys nothing. But the

1:12:11rewrite describes the accommodation that

1:12:15they have made in their personal life

1:12:17that they've never publicly admitted.

1:12:19And so it's directly calling out a

1:12:22persona without needing to directly

1:12:23state them or call them out. And it's

1:12:25going to stop their scroll and actually

1:12:26get them interested. So here's the

1:12:27rewrite. And I actually made a mistake

1:12:29before, which is that the accommodation

1:12:31is not the symptom. The accommodation is

1:12:32the consequence. And so you're

1:12:34accommodating your life in some capacity

1:12:36due to the consequence of the symptom.

1:12:39Just for clarity, that was messed up.

1:12:41That's where the arrow should go.

1:12:42Currently, this is actually the best

1:12:44part of the script. And we're rewriting

1:12:46the best part of the script, but this

1:12:47actually isn't that bad. If you're

1:12:48finding more hair in the shower drain,

1:12:50you're not imagining it. And then

1:12:51arguably, this is also proper agitating

1:12:53a little bit. Women lose it at the part

1:12:55line first, usually about 18 months

1:12:57before anybody notices. Now, what we've

1:12:58rewritten this to is you've stopped

1:13:01parting it in the middle. You didn't

1:13:02decide to do that. You just started

1:13:04doing it. Now, why does this sell

1:13:06harder? It sells harder because the

1:13:09shower drain is a symptom. So, this

1:13:11script right here is talking to

1:13:14symptoms. Number two, the shower drain

1:13:16is owned by anyone and so your

1:13:20competitors can write this as well. And

1:13:22you would argue that the category

1:13:24already leans pretty hard into it. The

1:13:26difference between the shower drain and

1:13:28parting your hair is that parting your

1:13:30hair is a consequence, an accommodation

1:13:33for the symptom. And so we can agitate

1:13:36on consequences. We can't really agitate

1:13:39on symptoms. Like us saying, "Oh,

1:13:41there's shower in your drain. Sorry,

1:13:43there's hair in your drain. Ah, no one

1:13:46cares about there being hair in their

1:13:48drain. As long as it goes down and it

1:13:49doesn't cause a bass and etc. No one

1:13:51really cares. What do they care about?

1:13:53They care that the hair is falling off

1:13:54their head. Like that is the that is the

1:13:56consequence of that symptom. Why this

1:13:59works even better is that the target

1:14:02demographic probably hasn't heard this

1:14:03before in an ad. She hasn't said it out

1:14:06loud, but it's a direct problem that is

1:14:08she has actually dealt with. Now, where

1:14:10this can get even more powerful, in my

1:14:12opinion, this type of script and this

1:14:13type of frame is if you change from

1:14:16first to second to third person. And so,

1:14:19you can change this to first person and

1:14:20put it into a piece of UGC, EGC, or a

1:14:23creator content or a VSSL, even even an

1:14:27animation VSSL would be good. And you

1:14:29instead switch it to I stopped parting

1:14:31my hair in the middle. I didn't decide

1:14:33to do it. I just had to start doing it.

1:14:36Right? that will be a little bit more

1:14:37personal and it'll just be another angle

1:14:39and a variation that you can test. It

1:14:40might outperform this second third

1:14:42person framing. So you want the problem

1:14:44part of the script to last about 10 to

1:14:4715 seconds. Any longer than that and

1:14:49we're just agitating on consequences for

1:14:52way too long. Now I have seen formats in

1:14:54which you can drag this out. A good

1:14:56example of this is like claimation AI

1:14:59animation VSSL ads. They will problem

1:15:01agitate for a long time. I've se I've

1:15:03seen really good high performing VSSLs

1:15:05probably agitate for like 2 minutes not

1:15:07needed like you can do them do them as

1:15:09variations put them in the account I've

1:15:11seen some of them hold like half a mill

1:15:12million dollars in total ad spend but

1:15:14you don't need to do it for your average

1:15:16script okay every script doesn't need 3

1:15:18minutes of problem agitating give it a

1:15:20shot but generally 10 to 15 seconds

1:15:22there is a way that you can really fail

1:15:25on problem agitating and problem

1:15:27scripting and that's where the agitation

1:15:31starts to read as complaining. It'll

1:15:34happen whenever you go and stack a bunch

1:15:36of symptoms instead of escalating

1:15:39towards a consequence. And the tell on

1:15:41whether you're doing this or not is

1:15:42whether you can swap any of the lines

1:15:45with any other line and it won't

1:15:48actually change the argument. Meaning

1:15:50that if the order doesn't matter, you've

1:15:53written a list rather than escalating

1:15:56the viewer or the prospect towards

1:15:59something. You can enter into a problem

1:16:01script with really like three core entry

1:16:04pathways. One is you enter with the

1:16:07accommodation. Number two is you enter

1:16:10with the moment. Number three is you

1:16:13enter with a failed solution. Just worth

1:16:16noting that this puts you into the

1:16:18solution aware stages of awareness,

1:16:21which is totally fine. You can have tons

1:16:23of ads in the solution aware stage of

1:16:25awareness. Just important to note that's

1:16:26then who you're speaking to. You lock

1:16:28yourself in. What do these actually

1:16:29sound like? Accommodation is what we

1:16:31just did here. You've stopped parting it

1:16:33in the middle, right? We're talking to a

1:16:35consequence, an accommodation. The

1:16:37moment is what I said before when I said

1:16:39it was a photo from the wedding, but

1:16:41from behind. So, we're talking about the

1:16:43moment in which someone realized they

1:16:45started feeling uncomfortable with their

1:16:46hair thinning. We speak to the moment or

1:16:48we speak to a failed solution, which is

1:16:50that you did the rosemary oil thing for

1:16:524 months, did nothing, just made your

1:16:54pillowcase smell, and nothing really

1:16:55happened. Right? That's what we're

1:16:56talking about the failed solution as the

1:16:59opening of the problem agitating. People

1:17:02often think that failed solutions only

1:17:04land in objection handling because we

1:17:06want to objection handle everything else

1:17:07that they've done. But you can agitate

1:17:09on failed solutions. Right now, an

1:17:11objection that I'll get here on this

1:17:13part of the script writing is that our

1:17:15brand doesn't want to be negative.

1:17:16Right? Our brand is aspirational. Our

1:17:18brand is looking up. We don't want to

1:17:21problem agitate on your hair parting.

1:17:23Right? That's fine. You can give them

1:17:25aspiration and you can keep the same

1:17:27level of accuracy because they're not in

1:17:29conflict. Nothing on this board is

1:17:32necessarily negative. You've stopped

1:17:33parting in the middle, right, which is

1:17:35what we used. It's not an insult. It's

1:17:38an observation. And the reason it works

1:17:40is that it's true when nobody has said

1:17:42it. What brand teams or yourself

1:17:44actually probably objecting to is pity.

1:17:48You don't want there to be pity within

1:17:49the brand's messaging. Pity is what you

1:17:51get when you stack a bunch of symptoms

1:17:53and you describe someone as a sufferer.

1:17:55So you're framing them into being a

1:17:58sufferer. Now you can take problem

1:17:59agitating too far and that is where you

1:18:02start to frame someone as a sufferer.

1:18:04And that's what happens really when you

1:18:05extend the problem agitating part of a

1:18:07creative out to 2 3 4 5 minutes is that

1:18:10you are really starting to lean into

1:18:12this kind of messaging and totally fair

1:18:15that you think that that would be an

1:18:17objection to the brand. The difference

1:18:19here is that we're naming just one thing

1:18:21and we're letting the consumer recognize

1:18:22it in themsel. The rule I would give is

1:18:25that you always want to frame against an

1:18:27accommodation, never the affliction. And

1:18:29that should generally allow you to pass

1:18:30through brand reviews and stay more on

1:18:33brand. There's a few things to be

1:18:34careful of when you are going and you're

1:18:36writing out the problem part of the

1:18:37script. Number one is you generally want

1:18:41to argue to a degree at a category level

1:18:45rather than a product level. At this

1:18:46point in the script, you haven't

1:18:48introduced the unique mechanism yet. So,

1:18:50we're not really trying to talk about

1:18:51your product. In fact, we're really

1:18:53trying not to introduce the product at

1:18:54all. And instead, we want to talk about

1:18:55the category at large. Reason being is

1:18:57that you can't dismiss an entire

1:18:59category as like marketing hype. You

1:19:02might be able to with AI and stuff like

1:19:04that, but generally speaking, like you

1:19:06can't say the entire industry of

1:19:08preventing hair loss is completely a

1:19:11lie, right? There's a little bit of

1:19:12authority automatically built into the

1:19:14category level. And so you want to move

1:19:15up to the category and then home down

1:19:17into the product as you move through the

1:19:18script. If you do this too, you're not

1:19:20asking them to believe anything about

1:19:21you yet. You're not really asking them

1:19:23for belief until you get all the way

1:19:25down here towards the end of the ad. The

1:19:27next thing is that you always want to

1:19:28problem agitate on one person, not two.

1:19:31This is the single biggest predictor of

1:19:33really whether the problem agitating

1:19:34part of an ad will work well. You can't

1:19:36problem agitate everyone. You can't

1:19:38problem agitate multiple people. You

1:19:39have to problem agitate one single

1:19:41person. And then the last thing is do

1:19:43not resolve the problem in the problem

1:19:46part of the ad. The whole point in this

1:19:48part of the ad is to create discomfort.

1:19:51It's to be uncomfortable. You don't want

1:19:53to resolve it straight away. You want to

1:19:55sit them in the discomfort and then you

1:19:57want to move into the other stages. So

1:19:58what you can actually use from this

1:20:00right now latest script that you've

1:20:02written is take the problem section out

1:20:04of the script and ask whether it names a

1:20:06symptom or an accommodation. If it's an

1:20:09accommodation, aka a consequence, you're

1:20:11on the right track. If it's a symptom,

1:20:12which most people use, the fix is going

1:20:15back to the start of the video, doing

1:20:18research, and finding out what are some

1:20:20accommodations, what are some

1:20:21consequences of the core problem, and

1:20:24then pull that into your script. So now

1:20:26the prospect recognizes themsself in the

1:20:28ad. Now we need to tell them what are

1:20:30they actually going to get and what is

1:20:32the promise of delivery here? How are we

1:20:34going to solve? And so that's where we

1:20:36move into the promise and the mechanism.

1:20:40So we want to answer what does she get?

1:20:42The woman that we're talking to in this

1:20:44particular ad, the target demographic,

1:20:45what is she actually going to get? Most

1:20:48scripts that people write never actually

1:20:50answer that question in a single

1:20:51sentence. Instead, what you will often

1:20:53do is you'll describe a problem. You'll

1:20:56then explain the mechanism. You'll list

1:20:58a bunch of proof, and then you'll have a

1:20:59call to action, and you'll ask for the

1:21:01sale. But then the buyer in this case

1:21:03the person that we're trying to talk to

1:21:05is left to work out what the actual

1:21:06outcome is for herself from the context

1:21:09of the little amount of information that

1:21:10you've provided. So what are the failure

1:21:12modes of promise mechanism? Well number

1:21:15one that there's no promise at all.

1:21:17People will often go problem straight

1:21:18into mechanism but they won't have the

1:21:20promise section. This is really common

1:21:22in like technically minded brands. So

1:21:24brands that sell a very like technical

1:21:27solution. It's a really common shape in

1:21:29supplements as well. Second failure mode

1:21:31is five promises. People make way too

1:21:33many promises and so they all lose their

1:21:35value. An example of this is the vegan

1:21:37cruelty-free made in Australia, right?

1:21:40Just a bunch of promises that are

1:21:41meaningless. Promise stated as a

1:21:43feature. This is actually kind of

1:21:46common. For example, people would

1:21:50sometimes say that this part of the

1:21:52script with six clinically studied

1:21:54ingredients, they're saying that's a

1:21:56promise. Not a promise at all. It's just

1:21:58a a feature. It's an input. it's not

1:22:00what we want to be talking about here.

1:22:02And then a promise bigger than the

1:22:03proof. We actually dive into this in a

1:22:04lot more detail in probably another 30

1:22:06to 40 minutes in the video. So I'll

1:22:08leave that there. So with our original

1:22:09script, we don't have the promise,

1:22:11right? This is one of the issues with it

1:22:13is we go straight from the problem into

1:22:15the mechanism. So let's add a line.

1:22:18We're going to add the line into here.

1:22:20Here's the promise we're going to add.

1:22:21This is about keeping what you've still

1:22:22got, not getting back what's gone. And

1:22:24to my understanding of hair loss, that

1:22:26actually is a really good compliant

1:22:28claim, which is that I don't really know

1:22:30of any solutions other than surgery that

1:22:31allow you to increase the density of

1:22:33hair. You can just stop it going away.

1:22:36You can stop it getting worse. And so

1:22:38that's what we're saying here. And it's

1:22:40truthful if they know anything about the

1:22:42topic, which they should because they're

1:22:43dealing with this problem. So this is a

1:22:45great way in which we can implement a

1:22:47promise that is talking to them in

1:22:49between the problem and the mechanism.

1:22:50This also effectively uses the Ben Svena

1:22:54rule which is that a smaller promise

1:22:58that you can prove will outsell a larger

1:23:00promise that you can't prove every

1:23:02single time. So we can prove this. We

1:23:05can't prove something more extreme. So

1:23:06we shouldn't say something more extreme.

1:23:08So what people will commonly do is they

1:23:10will only have two of these three

1:23:12elements but the three elements all work

1:23:14together to push someone through the

1:23:16cell. So the feature is what it is. The

1:23:19promise is what you get and the

1:23:22mechanism is how you get it. Aka the

1:23:25thing that produces the promise.

1:23:27Features alone sell to an already

1:23:29convinced audience which when you're

1:23:31trying to push to cold audiences and

1:23:33scale cold targeting that's no one. So a

1:23:35feature by itself is selling to

1:23:36absolutely no one. The promise also

1:23:39really won't sell people by itself

1:23:41because anyone can make a promise. The

1:23:43whole category is probably making

1:23:44promises and dependent on the stage of

1:23:45sophistication, it's probably not going

1:23:47to work in isolation. Although you need

1:23:49it as a bridging mechanism and as a way

1:23:50to complete the story so that then when

1:23:52you introduce the mechanism it makes the

1:23:54promise believable and it differentiates

1:23:57you inside of the one sentence. So you

1:23:59can promise mechanism feature all very

1:24:01quickly and you get a script that

1:24:03convinces someone and pulls through and

1:24:05gives them a reason to buy. A good way

1:24:06to think about this is that you're

1:24:09saying the feature which means the

1:24:11promise which is why the mechanism and

1:24:14I'll give you an example. So saw pelmet

1:24:17meadow. So this is a ingredient 320 mg

1:24:21that's the feature then the promise. So

1:24:23you can ask yourself which means you

1:24:25stop losing hair at the part which is

1:24:28why DHT is what shrinks the follicle

1:24:31every cycle. Pelito blocks the DHT

1:24:34enzyme. So we're listing what the

1:24:36feature is. We're then listing the

1:24:38promise. So like what does it actually

1:24:39mean? And this is why the promise is

1:24:41important because people skip the

1:24:42promise because it's like anyone can

1:24:43make a promise. But the promise to an

1:24:45unaware or cold audience explains like

1:24:47what does this actually mean for them?

1:24:49We can explain the features, the

1:24:50mechanism, the jargon. What does it

1:24:52mean? Well, it means that you won't lose

1:24:54your hair. Why won't I lose my hair?

1:24:55Well, because there's this unique

1:24:56mechanism that you didn't know about,

1:24:58and this product actually fixes it. So,

1:24:59the next thing is a promise always has

1:25:01to be followed by a mechanism. An

1:25:03example of this is that a weak script

1:25:05would say it has as much caffeine as an

1:25:07energy drink, but you don't get the

1:25:08crash. Why don't you get the crash?

1:25:09There's no unique mechanism that

1:25:11explains the why or gives the consumer a

1:25:14reason to believe this is different. And

1:25:15so instead, you would rewrite it to

1:25:17caffeine gives you the alertness and the

1:25:19jitters in the same dose, but eltheanine

1:25:22cancels the jitters out. So you no

1:25:23longer feel the crack. And so you

1:25:25introduce that unique mechanism, which

1:25:26in this case is elanine. In the case of

1:25:28supplements, it's pretty much always

1:25:29just the ingredient. When you list a

1:25:32feature and it has no mechanism, you

1:25:34need to either go and find a real

1:25:35mechanism to be able to put in there or

1:25:38you need to switch the feature out. If

1:25:39the feature isn't paired with the

1:25:40mechanism, there's no point in even

1:25:41putting it in. Or if you cannot find the

1:25:44feature with a unique mechanism in your

1:25:46entire product and all of your

1:25:47advertising, then you need to just

1:25:48switch it out for proof. And so this is

1:25:50very commonly done at the lower down in

1:25:53the stages of sophistication, which is

1:25:55that you will just promise and proof,

1:25:57promise and proof. So you're like, we

1:25:58can do this for you because look at our

1:26:00results. But you never actually

1:26:02introduce any kind of unique mechanism.

1:26:04It's not going to work as well as this,

1:26:05but it's your alternative. Now, the

1:26:07order in which you present these two is

1:26:08really important. Some people, and you

1:26:10see this very commonly in scripts,

1:26:12probably now that I've told you this, 30

1:26:14to 40% of ads that you watch now on your

1:26:16feed, you'll notice that people make

1:26:17this mistake, which is that they

1:26:18introduce the mechanism before they

1:26:20introduce the promise. Example of this

1:26:22is, and this is a real ad, they say

1:26:24lowers grein and increases leptin, which

1:26:26makes you less hungry. Now, the issue

1:26:28with structuring in this way is that the

1:26:31retention curve falls as people go

1:26:33through the ad. And if you're opening at

1:26:35the front of the ad with technical

1:26:37jargon language that people don't

1:26:39understand, you'll just lose a bunch of

1:26:40people and they won't even understand

1:26:42what it means and they won't even get to

1:26:43the promise. And so you want to

1:26:45introduce the promise because everyone

1:26:46knows what the promise is. It's going to

1:26:48hit the whole TAM and then you move into

1:26:50the unique mechanism which also then

1:26:52makes sense cuz it's clarified by the

1:26:54promise. So how you would rewrite this

1:26:55is you stop thinking about food at 11:00

1:26:58a.m. because the ketones suppress ghrein

1:27:00which is the hunger hormone. So suddenly

1:27:03you stop thinking about food at 11:00

1:27:04a.m. We're actually problem agitating on

1:27:06something that they're feeling and then

1:27:07we're moving into the unique mechanism

1:27:09and explaining it. Always present the

1:27:11promise then the mechanism. And if you

1:27:14do not have a mechanism, find a

1:27:16different feature or value proposition

1:27:18that has one. And if you still can't do

1:27:20that, switch it all out for proof. Now

1:27:22the objection we'll get here is, well,

1:27:24my product doesn't have a mechanism

1:27:26because it's a t-shirt or it's clothes.

1:27:28But there's still a bunch of unique

1:27:29mechanisms that you can talk to there,

1:27:31right? It has a fabric which could be

1:27:33unique. It has a construction process.

1:27:35It has a supplier. It has likely some

1:27:37kind of wash test that is done during

1:27:39the supply process. There's a person who

1:27:40cuts the t-shirt out. A mechanism is

1:27:43just the reason that the feature

1:27:45produces the promise. Every physical

1:27:47product still has one because somebody

1:27:49made a decision and that decision has a

1:27:51consequence that you can go and name.

1:27:53Marino wool in a t-shirt is an argument.

1:27:55The fiber is crimped so it traps air so

1:27:57it holds odor in the fiber rather than

1:27:59on your skin when you're working out.

1:28:01There's no chemistry in it. There's no

1:28:02ingredient technically that we're using

1:28:04like we would in supplements, but

1:28:06there's still so many unique mechanisms

1:28:07that you can find. Another really

1:28:09important disclaimer here on this part

1:28:10of the script is you don't want to name

1:28:12the product before the un before the

1:28:15mechanism is introduced and understood

1:28:17by the consumer. An example of this is

1:28:19that if you sell electrolytes, right?

1:28:21You don't want to give away that you

1:28:23sell electrolytes right at the start and

1:28:25that's what the product is because then

1:28:27you just fall into the sea of every

1:28:29other electrolyte provider and then why

1:28:31don't you just go to the cheapest option

1:28:32cuz they're all just selling salt and a

1:28:34little bit of magnesium, right? So

1:28:36instead, when you're at this part in the

1:28:37script, you want to introduce some kind