If I Wanted To Grow An Audience In 2026, I'd Do This
In a Nutshell
Branding is the deliberate pairing of your business with outcomes ideal customers desire (e.g., Bud Light + UFC for sales recovery), enabling 10x pricing power, loyalty, and repeat buys by turning commodities into premiums—measure by influence (behavior change), direction (toward buying), and reach. To grow an audience in 2026, shift to education over edutainment, target business owners with narrow, stranger-friendly long-form content (Proof-Promise-Plan intros, data visuals, no razzle-dazzle), track ad revenue/RPMs over views, and use agencies to scale output while building SPCL influence (Status, Power, Credibility, Likeness). Monetize via affiliates (low risk), sponsorships (upfront pay), partnerships (equity), or your own brand; execute 6 proven shifts—edutainment to education, for us to for you, wide to narrow, views to revenue, shorts to longs, assume more to assume nothing—for 68% RPM uplift, 2x book sales, and 26% more opt-ins.
These notes were generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies.
In the last 12 months, social media hit three billion impressions and brought in 4.5 million new subscribers. Broke the world record for the fastest selling non-fiction book of all time, generating over $105 million in sales in a weekend. Top lessons on building a brand rate. Took home more in a year than the CEOs of McDonald's, IKEA, Ford, Motorola, and Yahoo combined as a kid in his 20s, continued for over half a decade, resulting in a $200 million per year portfolio and $100 million net worth by age 32.
Me expressing that fact will create envy in some, anger in others, skepticism in most, confusion in old people, and inspire a select few. You are who I made this presentation for.
Raise your hand if you'd like:
- To charge 2x, 5x, 10x more than competition for the exact same thing, like Yeti cups ($40 vs $10) because of what's on the cup.
- Customers buy over and over without considering competition, like Harley—once a Harley guy, you stay for life.
- Virtually guarantee sales in any new business or product, like Apple—people wait in line, say "leave my credit card, bill me and send whatever comes out."
That's what this talk is about. Couldn't figure out how brands like these demand prices, get loyalty. Always had to beg, borrow, steal to get buys, while they made it effortless. Because didn't understand brand.
Even people who claim to understand it often don't, and few who do teach it terribly. Not marketing 101 on branding, presentation, colors, logos. Not about feelings, presence, intuition. This is about making money.
Built 7.8 million person audience across platforms in past 40 months, sold over a million copies of last two books, do deals worth hundreds of millions at acquisition.com. That's why build a brand.
Today covers three things:
- What branding is—if you don't know, can't build one.
- Why it makes money—how to trade it for dollars.
- How to start and grow yours.
Looked at popular marketers' definitions (removed names):
A brand is a person's gut feeling about a product, service, or organization. A brand is not what you say it is, it's what they say it is. A brand is a set of expectations, memory, stories, and relations that account for a customer's decision to choose one product or service over another. A brand is emotional shorthand for accumulated and assumed information. A brand is present when the value of what the product, service, or personality means to its audience is greater than what it does for the audience. A brand is a product, service, or concept that is publicly distinguished from others so it can be easily communicated and marketed. Branding is the process of creating and disseminating the brand name, its qualities and personality. The promotion of a particular product or company by means of advertising and distinctive design.
Vague and confusing, didn't tell what to do. Pieced it together: Branding is a deliberate pairing of things through an outcome.
Learning means same condition, new behavior. E.g., teach phone script, phone rings, use new script = learned. No change = no learning.
Branding example: Coca-Cola + drinking it → yum (outcome). Next time want yum, reach for Coca-Cola.
Bad branding pairs with things people don't like, leads to losses.
Dylan Mulvaney x Bud Light collaboration: great advertising (lets people know about stuff), bad branding (pairing). Many hated it, sales dropped.
Fixed by pairing with Shane Gillis (man's man comedian), UFC (man's man sport), sales recovered.
Dylan Mulvaney pairing good advertising/good branding for some, bad for others. Objectively measure by money: more disliked → bad for Bud Light's ideal audience (conservative males).
301: Exists company/product where Dylan Mulvaney pairing would be good for majority (not Bud Light for that audience).
Gillis/UFC: more ideal customers liked → good branding, made money.
For Budweiser/customer base, pairing mattered.
Choose pairing where 75% like, 25% hate (vs reverse) → more money.
Branding always happens. Good branding: deliberate pairing of business with good outcomes for ideal customers.
What you pair determines:
- Who pays attention.
- Whether they go toward or away (UFC good, Dylan bad).
Good branding: deliberate pairing of business with good outcomes for ideal customers.
Branding happens everywhere, businesses use for profit. Earliest: livestock branding—heat metal, sear logo into cattle.
Unbranded cow: treat as wild. Branded (recognized): return if like owner, steal if hate. Affects behavior.
Unrecognized brand: treat as belonging to someone, slightly different from wild.
Brand dictates tie between cow and human.
Tactical: weak brand (no association) → pair with people/experiences/stuff ideal customer likes (Nike + LeBron/Tiger = champions, GOATs). Sports/competition fans see positive → branding occurs, brand grows.
Weak brand vs strong brand (after pairing):
- Strong brand turns commoditized ($5 white t-shirt) into premium.
- Customers want to pair themselves with brand's outcome (e.g., winning) via money.
Process:
- Weak brand (logo means nothing).
- Pair with something customers like.
- Brand starts meaning that thing to them.
- They buy to associate (can't buy LeBron, buy shirt sliver).
Nike example: ideal customer likes sports/winning → more likely buy.
Dolce & Gabbana paired with Kim Kardashian line → women associate with fame/beauty/wealth/luxury buy to signal.
Two generic t-shirts: strong brand one more likely bought, at higher price, because buy paired elements they identify with.
Point of brand: change customer behavior in your favor.
Warren Buffett: "The single most important decision in evaluating a business is pricing power. If you've got the power to raise prices without losing business to a competitor, you've got a very good business. If you have to have a prayer session before raising the price by 10%, then you've got a terrible business."
$5 t-shirt → strong brand → 12x price, still sells.
Good branding improves advertising: generic t-shirt 0.5% clickthrough → Nike 6x clicks, higher price.
Cheaper acquisition, higher returns, better ad response.
Drives loyalty: buy once (Apple) → keep buying.
Protects from competitors.
Allows: charge 10x more, higher ad returns, lifetime buys.
Brands outperform commodities, lasting advantage.
Warren Buffett: "It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently."
Exact 10-stage roadmap from zero to $100M+ (done multiple times, <1% companies finish). Broke down by 8 business functions, constraints/symptoms, steps to graduate. Works for software, physical products, services, brick-and-mortar. Free at acquisition.com/roadmap.
Branding: deliberate pairing your thing + what ideal customer likes → good outcome. Good: Bud Light + UFC. Avoid: Bud Light + Dylan Mulvaney.
Assemble like bouquet from table of flowers (products, values, experiences, people). Flowers alone not bouquet/brand. Repeated pairing → association = brand.
Unravel associations → brand disappears.
Narrow brand: double down (tacos only → all taco flowers). Expand: tangential (tacos → quesadillas/burritos), broader (food → alcohol → restaurants).
Distant/random pairings hurt (bike + flower + socks + burger = nothing cohesive).
Most brands accidental. Good branding purposeful.
Curate garden: add good flowers, pull weeds.
Early brand weak (few pairings). More good pairings → stronger (one flower → many red roses bouquet).
What if make mistake, pair wrong thing?
One bad pairing can hurt a brand. For example, giving a bouquet with a rotten flower makes the whole bouquet seem bad, just like associating with someone who got a DUI hurts the brand's ethics image. To recover, overwhelm customers with positive experiences until the bad pairing becomes irrelevant. Don't eliminate the bad event; instead, flood with good stuff. Kanye West example: despite controversial statements, he released products people love, like a Super Bowl ad, shoes, and an album post-cancel culture issues. People forgot the bad and bought the good.
Decide on values, people, experiences to connect audience to product, and avoid what they hate. Even if positioned as premium, if the product sucks, that perception sticks.
Up to now, discussion focused on external associations pre-purchase. Post-purchase, the product itself does much of the branding. Bad product experience transfers negatively: a Nike t-shirt with a hole makes Nike and endorsers like LeBron seem bad. Conversely, if product is good enough (no immediate issues, even if not highest quality), brand elevates perception of value.
Pro tip: For premium pricing, ensure product is dialed to reinforce brand positively, not conflict with pre-purchase expectations.
Your premium brand had better be delivering something special or it's not going to get the business. (Warren Buffett, tweaked: it won't keep the business; first purchase happens, repeats don't.)
Brand pairing drives money via higher margins, CTRs, more buys. As long as product doesn't suck (ideally good), repeats follow.
Brand metrics:
- Influence: Likelihood to change behavior (recognition/reaction).
- Direction: Toward or away from desired action.
- Reach: How many people it affects.
Small, weak, neutral brand: few recognize, those who do don't care. Large, strong, positive brand: many recognize, changes behavior toward desired action.
Misnomer: strong brands must be polar (equal love/hate). Not true by percentage. Polar example: Donald Trump silhouette—high reach, strong influence (reactions positive/negative), polar direction.
Non-polar strong positive examples: Taylor Swift (vast majority react toward), Mother Teresa, Apple (majority like products despite some haters).
Applies even to small audiences. Small high-influence example: parents (high influence on kids' behavior, low reach).
Track growth: more people finding out (reach), more changing behavior (influence), ideally toward desired direction (e.g., click, download, buy, attend).
Pair with what highest percentage of ideal audience likes. Every new pairing (especially when starting) risks losing some audience but aims for net gain.
Example: small town band goes big—loses some locals who say "sold out," gains broader audience (net positive if more green than red).
New pairings lose some ("I liked the old stuff") but gain others who love the new. Bet: more ideal audience likes it than not, netting reach/influence/positive direction increase.
Don't let 5 mean comments stop gaining 500 new fans.
Real example: Associate with business value (making money, growing businesses). Make content/books for small business owners; they profit, associate growth with brand, consume more, higher likelihood of desired actions.
People who hate business won't like it—that's fine. Business-liking people want more, tell others, creating positive pairings and growth.
If viewers use this info to make money, good branding occurred.
Fulfilled promise: what branding is, good branding, why it makes money, how to start/grow.
Test: For ideal customer (business owner), did this provide positive value?
Further value: two free gifts.
- For scaling business owners: video versions of $100 Million Offers and $1 Million Leads (5-star reviews, made people money) at acquisition.com/training.
- Audio versions on The Game podcast (starts episode 570+).
- For starters: schoolgam.es (co-owner school.com)—step-by-step business start tools, training, community, competition/prizes, free to start.
Gained 7.8 million followers in 40 months:
- YouTube: 0 to 2.23M subscribers
- Instagram: 7K to 2.5M followers
- LinkedIn: 0 to 324K
- TikTok: 0 to 856K
- Twitter/X: 0 to 617K
- Facebook: 0 to 25K
- Podcast: 3K to 25M downloads
- Email: 0 to 700K
- Total: 2B impressions, 7.8M subscribers, 1M book copies sold.
Proof it works without babes/stunts/kittens. Avoids sucky fluff from unproven teachers.
Started with zero, "fancy plan": 1) make good stuff, 2) post everywhere, 3) learn.
After $4M spend, 10,000 hours on camera, 35,000 content pieces: learned six key lessons.
Six changes that worked:
- Edutainment to education
- For us to for you
- Wide to narrow
- Views to revenue
- Shorts to longs
- Assume more to assume nothing
Content buckets:
- Entertainment: Goal to get watched/consumed.
- Education: Goal to change behavior (e.g., learn phone answering, apply next call).
- Edutainment: Tries both.
Category by most common outcome (audience decides, not creator).
Examples: MrBeast (mostly entertains), Wall Street Millennial (mostly educates).
Shift: Going all-in on education because:
- All views not equal.
- Likes making educational videos.
- Likes audience that wants to learn.
Views not equal: Funnel theory (entertainment → education) wrong. Data (book sales, opt-ins, applications) shows entertainment viewers want more entertainment; education viewers want more education. No appreciable crossover to build business on.
To attract education people, give them what they value.
Personally aligns: loves business talk, ideal customers are business owners/enthusiasts.
Feedback confusion: Some prefer entertaining content, but those aren't ideal audience. Read between lines of comments.
Mutual friend (10M+/year business owner) stopped watching: "doesn't resonate as much." Gut punch—realized comments led astray; "for you" shift needed. I'll give some data
Realized they were serving the wrong audience, which impacted content creation. Tactical changes to make content for business owners meant five things:
- Different packaging
- Different introductions
- Different meat
- Different visuals
- Different pre-work
Thumbnails and headlines changed from vague to clear. Left thumbnail: vague rule about money. Right thumbnail (yellow background): clear map/blueprint from zero to a million, matching content exactly. Clear packaging increases likelihood of delivering what viewers expect. Rejected curiosity gap narrative—better to tell exactly what it's about.
Shift from confirming thumbnail/headline (entertainment style) to providing proof for education. Entertainment works for everyone; education doesn't because knowledge varies. Biggest media creators are entertainers, but their tactics don't apply to education.
Principle: Increase perceived likelihood of getting what was clicked.
- Entertainment: Show thumbnail promise immediately (e.g., Lamborghini to smash it).
- Education: Edify the creator (e.g., PhD physicist for physics lesson).
Analyzed top 35 educational videos: Developed framework Proof, Promise, Plan (any order, emphasize most important):
- Proof: Prove you know what you're talking about, give reason to believe.
- Promise: What they'll get/learn.
- Plan: Expectations of what happens next.
For business education, lead with proof ("Why should I listen to you?").
Example from presentation:
- Proof: Started with data showing results.
- Promise: "Six things that made money and grew brand; save $4 million in 3.5 years."
- Plan: "Six changes, walk through them."
This frames content better for business owners.
Educational content that performed best: More list steps and stories, less razle-dazzle (effects, high production).
Instagram example (last 30 days):
- Bottom 12 videos: 8/12 emphasized razle-dazzle.
- Top 12 videos: 9/12 (75%) emphasized language/message over production.
Emphasize language, not razle. Best video: 70-80% screen words. Applies to long-form too.
Overproduction distracts from education objective.
- Distracting: Changing background colors.
- Enhancing: Clarifying words on screen, visualizing data (charts for scale, scope, changes over time).
From visual effects (flames) to visualizing data.
Shift from heavy post-production (4 weeks editing after minimal prep) to pre-search (4 weeks research, minimal editing).
Results: Quarter the time on pre eliminates 90-95% post-edit work. Saves costs, increases output 4x, higher quality.
An ounce of pre-work is worth a pound of post.
Narrow to business, business models, business leverage, selling in business. Avoid relationships, college, food, lifestyle—those attract wrong audience who want more of the same.
Business topics feel comfortable; others are hot takes.
Stopped tracking views as primary metric (can't pay rent with views).
6-12 month deal cycle; needed faster feedback. Ideal: Low latency between metric and behavior change (daily/hourly vs. yearly).
Best fast metric (besides book sales, opt-ins, applications): Ad revenue.
Background: Exited first company for $46.2 million (Dec 2021, American Pacific Group, from Gym Launch/Prestige). Own companies doing $200M+/year. Ad revenue not primary income, just offsets media costs.
Ad revenue = views × RPM (revenue per mille/thousand views). Single metric pairs quantity (views) and quality (RPM reflects audience spending power, e.g., business owners have highest RPMs).
Highest RPM/ad revenue months correlated with most book sales, opt-ins, business applications—independent of views.
Experiment: 90 days edutainment/entertainment → views 2-3x up, ad revenue down 50% (wrong audience).
Team tracks real-time ad revenue per content piece for baselines (e.g., 100k views better than 10M if higher ad revenue).
Ad revenue as leading indicator (real-time vs. rearview).
Free resource: 10-stage roadmap from zero to $100M+ (<1% companies finish). Breaks down by 8 business functions: constraints/symptoms/steps. Works for software, physical products, services, brick-and-mortar. acquisition.com/roadmap.
Rejected funnel myth (shorts → longs → customers). Data: Shorts viewers watch more shorts; long viewers watch more longs; customers buy more.
Different audiences (may vary by platform; cross-platform discovery possible, e.g., TikTok shorts → YouTube longs).
Longs drive more conversions (book sales, opt-ins, applications). Business content brings business owners.
Double down: More longs on business; shorts keep volume but business-focused. Less emphasis on shorts despite obsession.
Assume more means making content assuming people already knew me, but that's a mistake for attracting new people. Examples of past content that assumed familiarity: 'The Alexi guide to haters', 'Day in the life of Alex Hormozi', 'The Alex Hormozi diet'. New viewers think, 'Who is this guy?'
To fix this, craft headlines that provide context:
- 'Business influencer crushes haters and shows how you can too'
- 'Day in the life of $200 million per year CEO'
- 'Alex Hormozi diet: 16 hour workday, six-pack diet for business owners'
These signal value without prior knowledge (e.g., CEO implies wealth more clearly than vague references; people might mistake for rapper or athlete).
Introduce yourself every time: 'I'm Alex Hormozi. This is what I do. These are the subscribers I've gotten.'
Tell people why they should listen to you every time.
Fully explain inside jokes and references—viewers haven't seen prior content. If they don't get it, they feel on the outside, and outsiders don't spend money.
Shift from acting like friends to addressing strangers.
Content welcoming to strangers attracts more of them.
Would you rather fewer people know who you are or more people who have no clue?
Warm audience likes reminders; cold audience needs introductions.
Experiment: Repost your #1 content from last year—it will perform as well or better because new audience members haven't seen it. Consistent posting means more new people need to see your greatest hits to compound the lore.
People need reminders more than teaching (e.g., repeat quotes from Sophocles or Epictetus are welcome).
TV shows had theme songs and introductions every episode (e.g., Cheers), despite ad revenue—reminders build positive associations.
Make introductions sing-songy or consistent for positive associations with value delivery.
Variety example: The Simpsons has consistent intro elements (e.g., Bart writing on board in detention) with small variations/Easter eggs—serves superfans and new viewers.
- Title like they don't know you.
- Introduce yourself.
- Say why they should listen.
- Prioritize stranger-friendly content (deprioritize vlogs, hot takes, opinions).
- Serve both audiences.
- Let new people in on jokes; fully explain references.
- Make all jokes inside jokes for everyone.
- Mentally talk to strangers always—successful content means you're talking to them.
Everything has a cost. Past variety yielded 7.8 million subscribers, 2 billion views in business niche—messups worked somewhat, but not as well.
Entrepreneurship: Maximize bang for buck with limited resources (time, money, energy) to reach right people.
Principles:
- Anything works better than nothing (if no content in 90 days, just do something).
- Some things work better than others.
- Nothing works forever.
Start, find what works best, double down until it slows, repeat.
Audience confirms helpfulness; saves tiny % of $4 million learning what didn't work.
For beginners starting business:
- Co-founder of School.com/games: courses, trainings, easiest business model using media (sandbox to practice).
- 30.44% finishing first month make first dollar online via online community.
- Start free at school.com/games.
For further along:
- Free courses for two books with 25,000+ five-star reviews, 1M+ copies sold: acquisition.com/training (offers, advertising, leads, paid ads, content).
Execute one lesson from $4M, 35,000 pieces of content, 1,000 hours recording.
Grew audience by 5M in <24 months from <10k followers, knowing nothing about platforms.
Method: Pay agencies to shortcut skill gaps (vs. celebrities' personalized strategies or outdated gurus).
Agencies sell ad/content services.
Tiers: Basic ($3-5k/month), advanced ($15-30k/month).
Hire $3-5k/month for YouTube: commit to 3 videos/week, trim (remove ums/uhs), add intro/thumbnail. Goal: consistent cadence, learn basics (3-6 months).
Part ways with basic when needs exceed capacity.
Negotiate with advanced: 6-month commitment to learn processes/decision-making (pay extra for breakdowns). Then transition to lower-cost consulting.
Set clear intentions upfront for mutual benefit (LTV visibility).
Overlap payments build in-house team/enterprise value (avoid reliance/gouging).
Document processes, co-create, transition when internal matches/better (more time/context).
Deadlines: E.g., $6k/month = $36k commitment. Drives team speed.
If team lags: Change people or agency not teaching fully. Continue until match, then downgrade consulting; cut if no value.
Agency repurposed existing content to shorts (zero work from me), gained traction.
Director of brand had premium agency experience; bought SOPs, scaled output in 6 months.
Set expectations: Learn to in-house for more output/quality (cover costs, 5x output).
Avoids agency traps (first good, next 10 bad):
- Excitement about leads.
- Valuable onboarding.
- Best senior rep.
- Initial results.
- Senior to new client.
- Junior rep, results suffer.
- Complain.
- Senior returns briefly.
- Results never recover, cancel.
- Repeat cycle.
Decide on agency: More money or time? No money = learn yourself (master one platform, generate cash flow, then accelerate).
Usually, you master one platform, get some success and cash flow, then more quickly pay to learn others. Pay down your ignorance faster. If you have the money, it's always worth paying down that debt. This process applies to LinkedIn, podcasts, paid ads—all of them. Run the same playbook. To build a stronger personal brand, build influence, not just views. We got 32.7 million views on YouTube this month. Posted 35,000 pieces of content this year. Did a $100 million book launch—$100 million in sales in 72 hours (3 days). Most people struggle with making not enough content and the wrong types that don't attract desired customers.
Promise: SPCL framework (like "special") to build influence, not just views. Four-part framework to approach content and brand building.
Status: Define operationally—what you see with your eyes. Status is controlling reinforcers (scarce resources people want) in a given environment. Example: Busy bar bartender controls drinks (scarce resource), has status there but loses it outside. All four SPCL elements work independently but stack for maximum influence.
Example: Kid who inherits money has status (controls money people want). But kid with money who also gives 10 crypto picks that all pop off has more influence—e.g., higher compliance with requests like investing.
Power: From say-do correspondence in behavioral dynamics. Say something, they do it, reinforcing event follows—increases compliance with future requests. Example: Guy gives 10 stock picks, you buy, stocks rise—builds power over trust fund kid with just money.
One event can check multiple boxes. Book launch: $100M+ sales gives status (money), credibility (observable event, e.g., $10M building hard to fake), power (directions lead to good outcomes).
Credibility: Third-party validation, observable proof.
Likeness: Relatability—share values, vibe matches positive past figures, or literally look like you. Example: Leila (talks money/business) has 54% female audience vs. speaker's 89% male, despite similar topics.
Influence defined as high likelihood of compliance with requests (e.g., buy book, attend webinar, subscribe). Like D&D charisma roll—stack SPCL to minimize required roll.
Likeness: Be you—zero ROI in faking it. Most people are NPCs following archetypes (e.g., barbecue/craft beer guy, hipster bro, gym bro). Lean into nuances that make you unique, defend why you do what you do. Avoid following others' programming.
Parents max SPCL early in life:
- Status: Control scarce resources (money, toys, food, shelter)—continuum, not binary.
- Power: Thousands of reinforcement cycles (say-do, good/bad outcome).
- Credibility: Varies by domain.
- Likeness: Look like you, share values.
This programs compliance, even if resisted. Reverse-engineer SPCL into content for influence (domain-specific).
Example in video intro: 32.7M views, $100M+ book launch in 72 hours = status. Breaking down 4 steps you can follow = power (increases future compliance: watch next video, CTA). Credibility: Third-party like Guinness verifying book launch records. Likeness: Be authentic (hates scripted YouTube, prefers live).
Media strategy: live interactive. Had convo with mega influencer (released podcast few weeks ago) about future of media. Story: UK vs. US soccer game with influencers/celebs—applause measured influence:
- A-listers (traditional celebs): Almost no applause.
- Shorts creators (TikTok/Reels): Slight applause.
- Long-form (podcasts/YouTubers): Way rowdier applause.
- Live streamers: Stadium erupted.
Shorts lead to longs (risk time investment). Reinforcement cycles: 30s short vs. 2hrs long—e.g., 2x1hr = 120min; equivalent shorts (15s avg) = 480 shorts. Podcast election: Trump-Rogan (3hr+), Elon-Tucker nudged votes via extended exposure.
Butts and seats: Meme content gets views but not compliance prospects.
Internet moves toward truth: A-listers curated/scripted; longs rawer; live rawest (us hanging out). Marry SPCL with live for max influence.
High-influence examples (Rogan, PBD, Dave Ramsey): Hours of content daily. 35,000 pieces this year vs. $1-2M businesses' 365/year—100x volume = 100x prospects. Linear: Jam input/output machine, make right content for right prospects. 1/10 shorts/longs are outliers.
Social media now interest media. Judge by views? Dumb. Grandma slaps face = views, but not customers/prospects. Shows to humor-interested, not business avatar. Business people: Educators (provide value, change behavior toward buying), not entertainers. To attract right avatar, make content
If you want to attract the right avatar, make content for that avatar. The content is the targeting. The algorithm judges what you're talking about, your background, what you're wearing, who you are, and displays it to people with a history of watching similar valuable content. For example, if you're a piano repair guy making content about fixing pianos, you'll attract people trying to fix their pianos. However, you might only get 1,000 views per video because the market of people buying pianos is smaller than those seeking entertainment. Don't compare your views to MrBeast's—it doesn't make sense. A room of 1,000 people all interested in fixing pianos is a huge opportunity. Prioritize IRL responses: texts from respected business owners saying "Yo, that was fire" confirm you're on track.
Some have seen the "cash cows" format: a business owner presents their business, then we discuss improvements. Let me know in comments: Like that style and business owner? Like and not? Don't like and business owner? Don't like and not? In Vegas with IRL business owners who fly out, their favorite content is cash cows. Make more of what they love, even if fewer people fit the avatar. Math shows why: 100% population (USA), only 9% own businesses (32-33 million business owners). 95% of that 9% below $1M revenue. 5% over $1M (~1.5M people). Over $10M: 4% (1 in 250). $100M (9-figures): 1 in 3,000. So 9% market means not all will watch; 100K views targeted at $1M+ owners is crushing it. Don't compare to 100M view videos—different games.
Create accurate expectations for market size and translate to IRL: two businesses doing over $1M/year with <5K followers. You can make plenty of money with small following if content is directly valuable.
Recap: Include SPCL (status, power, credibility, likeness) in videos. Go all-in on livestream for maximum prospect time. Make content on topics they find interesting (be interesting, not social). Realistic view expectations by market size.
Now, monetize audience: In Prestige Labs (2nd company), built 5K+ affiliates generating $20M+/year revenue (continues today). Allen (software, 3rd company): 1K+ agency affiliates white-labeling. $100M Leads book launch: 30K affiliates. Invested in endorsed companies.
Most don't know how to monetize. Outline four ways deals happen, combinations, considerations for both sides (audience owner or buyer/licensor).
- Affiliates: Paid after sales.
- Sponsorships (endorsements): Paid first to advertise/endorses.
- Partnerships: Involve equity in existing business.
- Start your own brand (if influencer).
Behaviors similar across affiliate/sponsorship/partnership; difference is compensation. Continuum by difficulty, risk, value:
Fastest: Sign up automatically to programs with fixed terms. Low risk both ways—no pay until sale. Uncapped for you—prove value. Low exit value: multiple of cash flow, discounted by business reliability (e.g., US gov stable vs. arbitrage info product worthless).
Paid upfront, then endorse/advertise. Based on CPM (cost per thousand impressions/views). Forms: post to your audience (they see as free traffic); whitelisting (they run your posts as ads—scalable). E.g., make 1-2 posts occasionally; whitelist blasts wider without spamming audience. Win-win: they pay to grow your brand, you convert higher (warm audience, your on-camera skills). Harder than affiliates (custom deals, leverage-based: huge influencer/tiny company = great deal; reverse = none). Low exit value unless media company (army of influencers negotiating umbrella deals like talent agency).
Minority/majority equity (0.01%-99%, negotiable by relative size). Tie to performance (e.g., 1% equity per 1K customers, cap at 10%). Get upfront equity + performance-based (permanent association transfers goodwill). Consider time/vesting (e.g., 25% upfront, 25% performance, 50% over 4 years; forfeit if breakup). Define W's: who/what/where/when/why/how. Specify posts, bio links (1 week/month), 1 long-form + 5 shorts, monthly whitelist ads. Not exclusive—combine (e.g., partner + affiliate/sponsorship). More money now? Take cash over equity. Equity riskier (may not exit), so demand disproportionate reward.
White label (slap logo on existing): faster, cheaper. Custom (formulations/fabrics/cuts): preferred—no identical competitors, better pricing power/look (though white label OK). Custom costs more (templates/forms). Starts with 100% equity; you pay others down line. Borrow elements across to customize deals. Balance exit value, cash flow, work, risk.
Made 35K posts over 40 months, grew 7.8M audience. Three weeks ago, 6 shifts with data screenshots. First: edutainment to education (all-in; changes packaging/titles/special effects). Education changes behavior. Second: from 'for us' to 'for you'. Mistake: asked team "what do you think about content?" They'd say...
Started making videos for the team, not the ideal customer: business owners. A friend doing $10 million a year said he hadn't been paying attention to the content because he thought he wasn't the avatar. Realized the content felt irrelevant to business owners. Key lesson for content creators: your team might not be the type of people you're trying to make content for. Shifted from 'for us, our team' to 'for you, viewer, for business owners'.
Went from wide topics like fitness, relationships (more people in relationships, eat food, try to lose weight) to narrow: only 9% of people are business owners. Now talking just about business because that's what is loved. Business owners like it more when talking about business, and as a business owner, it's enjoyed more. Everybody wins.
Key shift: From views to ad revenue. Views alone chase wider topics. Ad revenue accounts for views + RPMs (revenue per thousand eyeballs). High RPM means valuable eyeballs to advertisers, thus valuable. Goal: show videos to the right people. Once RPMs are high, maximize views.
Pro tip for business: Paired KPIs work exceptionally well.
- Customer success: speed of resolution + quality metric.
- Cleaning company: reviews from customers + number of cleans per day. Use both edges to control both sides in any department.
No longer care about 'this one had a lot of views'. Focus: as many views with the right people.
Lows get the best people. Thesis that shorts create longs viewers not supported by evidence. Shorts viewers want more shorts; longs viewers want longs. Consumption preferences stick; people watch in the format they prefer on the platform that matches. Longs drove most applications for acquisition.com, book sales, opt-ins. Making more longs.
Stopped making videos like 'Alex Hormozi diet', 'Alex Hormozi vlog', 'the Hormozis' – assumes viewers care about who Alex Hormozi is. Unreasonable. Now assume nothing: introduce self because this might be the first video. Avoided this for a while thinking everyone knew, but way more people don't know. Trap: assuming talking to warm audience instead of cold (people who've never met you). No inside jokes that exclude newcomers. Goal: bring more people into the world, especially business owners.
RPMs up 68%. Deep business topics (reducing churn, increasing purchase frequency, scaling 40-person sales team case study, deconstruct/reconstruct a brand) attract business owners whose eyeballs are more valuable. Educational (purple) videos had higher average RPMs than wider topics (light blue).
25% more comments per view. Engagement metric: 'Wow, this was good', 'I missed this style'. Business owners signaled in comments what they wanted, but wasn't listened to initially. Overwhelming positive response to hardcore business education: 'I'm coming back', 'This is what I came for'. More shares, slightly fewer likes (comments/shares rated higher). Higher engagement on narrower topics: better for fewer people than little good for many.
29.56% more long-form views across channel (6 weeks average) despite fewer absolute views per long-form video. Education requires less post-editing, so more content can be made (what is done every day). No high-fi post-production whizbangs; audience prefers less distraction.
Subscriber conversion up 24.6%; absolute subscribers per week increased despite fewer views (more watch-to-subscribe).
26% more opt-ins per week. Surprising yet obvious: business content attracts business owners taking action (portfolio companies, workshops). Educators often go broad/entertainment for views, chasing vanity metrics. Focus on bottom line.
2x book sales despite fewer views. Two bestselling Amazon books (#1 and #2 in marketing/sales for 2-3 years). Books free at acquisition.com (video course, podcast audiobook). Physical copy has printing/shipping costs. Leading indicator of traffic quality. Fitness/relationship content doesn't attract leads/offer-makers; business content does (books about leads, offers, money).
Some keynotes deep and wide: highest revenue-per-view video also most viewed. 'Branding video' recent, climbing.
- Leverage: applies to all business owners.
- Brand: tremendous value to any business.
Deeper/less wide okay:
- Scaling 40-person sales team: not for e-commerce.
- 10xing business overnight via mega influencers (MrBeast, Logan Paul, Dwayne Johnson, Conor McGregor, Huda Beauty, Taylor Swift): low relevance for local businesses, better for national e-commerce.
Okay with 10k views vs 400k if 10k are $10M+ business owners. E.g., 46-min video on packing company to sell: applies to ~0.1% ($10M/year businesses, $5M+ profit). Big owners: 'This changed my life', 'Insane you gave this out'.
Advice: Don't gauge video quality by views (shows relevance to many). E.g., e-commerce offers video: slice of slice but super applicable. Okay with small views if quality changes behavior (makes money), associating value with acquisition.com.
Started at zero subscribers on every platform. First YouTube videos: ~100 views. Would speak to 100-person lunch audience or 10-person lunch-and-learn to sell weight loss. 100 or 10 people is not bad. Comparison makes people feel bad about social media numbers.
Platforms distribute for free – infinite leverage. 1,000 people/month seeing content = 1,000 people. E.g., 50k-view video = 50x 1,000-person conference audience. Curate high value-per-second.
Deep content feedback: DMs/Slack from portfolio founders: 'That last video was so sick', 'New/old whiteboard deep tactics great, team's watching'. Hadn't had that in 6 months of wider content. Reinforcing; made for business owners (9% of people), what wished had when coming up.
Hypothesis crushed: view-to-subscriber ratio higher, absolute subscribers higher, opt-ins higher, book sales higher, applications higher, stuff enjoyed making, more content possible (less post-production).
Future plans:
- Volume negates luck: Create more within directional constraints to find what works better.
- Don't get the same scar twice: Mistakes are lessons; don't repeat (e.g., always introduce self, avoid high-fi for business owners).
- Slides vs. heavy prep: Similar performance. Stage presentation (to team, empty room) ≈ direct camera/slides/whiteboard.
- Show what only you can show/say: E.g., marketingisms like 'state the facts and tell the truth'. It's always that way
State the facts and tell the truth to never get in trouble, avoid worries about claims. This requires collecting data to state the truth accurately.
Say what only we can say and show what only we can show through demonstration. Use accomplishments to prove knowledge: built 8 million personal audience, made 35,000 posts independent of outcome. Do more work than anyone else to show and say what no one else can. If starting out, outwork people even if you can't outoutcome yet. Compress lessons from 35,000 posts to provide value.
Still doing wide shorts. Run ads using our face; main ROI from shorts is top-of-funnel brand awareness, specifically facial recognition—people see face and remember value received. Shorts are harder for deep business concepts, but maintain some wider shorts on business philosophy, personal development, productivity.
Keep making content enjoyed like philosophy and wide business concepts. ROI not from shorts driving book sales or opt-ins, but from retargeting later with ads—people recognize face and take next funnel step (e.g., 'if starting a business, check out school'). Makes sense for wide audience trying to start business. For business owners, still have business content in shorts.
Next steps outlined. Updates with metrics valuable. TLDR: What was said worked. For educators, toss out views, focus on customer, make stuff for them—likes ain't cash, views ain't cash, cash is cash. Growing business? Make stuff for people you want, not ego.
Keep Alex Hormozi in your library
Save the videos and channels worth coming back to, and find them again in one place.
