How To Write Meta Ads That Scale: Copywriting Masterclass

In this video, I'm going to teach you how to write a winning ad that will scale in your account. I'm not just going to hand you a framework. I'm also going to accompany it with building a script live so you can see the exact thought process. By the end of this video, you'll know the nine things that every ad that's ever sold anything actually does. You'll be able to read any script from your team, and you'll be Able to give them feedback beat by beat. And you'll know which of the 40 drafts that are put

in front of you is the is the one that's actually worth running. Now, nothing that sells in copywriting or script writing has really been invented since 1966. Every ad script that you see these days has core fundamentals and principles that were developed years and years ago. And so, we're going to pull them into this video. We're going to teach you the Fundamentals of copywriting so that you can understand where all this theory came from and then how you can actually go and put it into application. So, here's how this video is going to run. We're

going to start off with the buyer and understanding the consumer. We'll then move into the research and the offer piece. Then we go into writing the argument line by line. Then we're going to take that one argument that we write and we're going to put it into three Completely different formats. And lastly, we'll finish with what kind of AI scripting can be done to complete it. We are aiming to make this video the most valuable copywriting, script writing, ads scaling video that exists on YouTube. Tens of hours of prep has gone into this video. So

let's dive in. So firstly, 99% of sales theory or copywriting hasn't really been invented since 1966. Kennedy in 1904, Hopkins 1923, Collier 1931, Capable 1932, Reeves 1961, Oglev 1963, Shorts, Eugene Schwarz 1966. If you see any copywriting content, if you see any sales content, if you see any sales books that come out these days on how to copyright, it's all just a distillation of these people, okay? Okay, it's all just this stuff reworked. And I want to say that up front because this video is the same thing. I'm not inventing anything new here in sales

copy. We're just taking all of the OG Legends and we're distilling it into a consumable format so that you can take all of these lessons and then apply them into your own script writing process. Now, I want to fix two core concepts that I have said in previous videos that I've said on Instagram reels that I put out. Number one is I have said quite often that the hook is 80% of performance. I said this in my creative strategy video as well. The hook is 80% of performance. This is not true. This Wording is actually

bad by me. The hook is not driving 80% of performance. Really, what I should have said here and the correction is that the hook is 80% of the audience. Roughly none of it is persuasion. And so the hook is selling no one. Okay? No one gets sold by the hook. there's nowhere near enough scripting within the first 3 seconds to actually be able to sell someone. However, it is where 80% of the audience lies. So, that is a Slight refinement of on what I've already said. Uh, which is a really important note for when we

start building these scripts and thinking through these frameworks. Another thing that I said back on the 29th of Jan in both a YouTube video and an Instagram reel was that I was pushing the fact that you need to move away from frameworks. stop using frameworks because frameworks are incredibly generic and they don't allow you to Actually have top 1% expertise and do something that's outside of the box and that stands out. Correct. I still stand by this. However, the refinement is that frameworks are really good to be able to get competent to be able to

become top 20% at a skill. Frameworks will get you there. In fact, they could probably even get you to the top 10%. Now, there's going to be some people watching this that are already really, really good at copywriting. And then there's going to Be a lot of people just by the law of averages that are not very good at copywriting, and that's why you're watching this video. So, we're going to be giving you frameworks. We're going to be giving you ways to be able to create much better copy, much better scripts than you ever would

have made before. Then, once you've become competent, you can break the frameworks because you've earned the right to. Now, a little side note here is in the preparation of Putting this video together, I went and scraped 360 YouTube video transcripts on how to write good ads because I want to see what was already out there in market. What were people talking about? And 75% of the content in like time duration of those 350 plus ads, 70% of it was just on hooks. Now, it makes sense, right? Hooks is where 80% of the audience is. But

the hooks don't sell anyone. And that's really important when we're Trying to write a script that sells. If the objective is to sell, to get a return on ad spend, to get a return on investment, to get more leads, you need to actually focus on the other 57 seconds of the 60-second script. And so, yes, we will go into hooks in this video. Yes, we will touch on them. But at the end of the day, your hook can be terrible. And as long as some people watch past it and then like get into the proper

meat of the ad, they will still Buy. And so yes, the hook is where 80% of the audience is, but the hook doesn't sell anyone at all unless there's a really prevalent unique mechanism that you can put at the start, which is going to be category specific. All right. So this is a real script that we have anonymized slightly and this is the premise of the entire video. So, as we move through the video, we are going to be teaching elements to be able to come back to this script and improve it. Now, This is

an okay script, but it's not going to sell that well. And so, we're going to turn it into a great script. Let's run through it really quickly. If you're finding more hair in the shower drain, you're not imagining it. Women lose it at the part line first, usually about 18 months before anybody notices, which is why we made Nourish Plus with six clinically studied ingredients, vegan, cruelty-free, and made right here in Australia. Head to the site and grab Yours. A very typical script that I'm sure a lot of you have written before. And on the

surface, this is like, yeah, this is good. Go and shoot it. Brand team would approve. Performance marketing team would probably approve. But if there is one thing that you take away from this entire video, let it be the finished version of this script. So at the very end, we are going to obviously chip away at this script, improve it line by line as we run Through frameworks and explain how they tie in to this particular script, and we're going to turn this into a really good app. Two disclosures. Number one, this isn't a real brand.

I've anonymized the script. Number two, we are going to change a lot of this script based on copyrightiting frameworks, but if the stuff that we say isn't true for your brand, don't say it because it's not compliant. Okay? So, I'm going to start to mess with these words and change them Into stuff that's a lot more convincing, that sells a lot better. But if I am saying stuff that is not actually true to what the product can deliver, then obviously don't say it. But we are going to assume a particular product here and assume a

particular outcome and then we're going to obviously write around that product. Let's dig into a few things here and then obviously throughout the next one to two hours we're going to continue to dive into Frameworks and understand how every single word here can be improved. Let's just dive a little bit into this one because this is very very common used all the time in like every script every ad I see. So this line is making three claims. They're making a claim that it's vegan, that it's crueltyfree, and that it's made right here in Australia. Firstly,

are these legitimate claims? Yes. Okay. We're compliant. Moving on to the next important question, which is, Can the tub or whatever this is next to it on the shelf say the exact same thing? And the answer is probably like I imagine a good chunk of the market is vegan, cruelty-free, and made in Australia. And if that is the case, then we have just wasted about seven, eight words, probably four and a half seconds of this ad on something that is not differentiated within the market. Now, what do you generally want to do towards the end

of an ad, towards the end of a Script? Generally, if you're using frameworks, you'd want to objection handle. So, we could look at this line and we could say this is an objection handling line. This is a very big mistake that people make, which is that they objection handle objections that the consumer doesn't even have. How many people get to the end of this script and go, "Oh, this is a really good product and yes, my hair is falling out, but uh better be vegan. It better be Cruelty-free." Like, is that really the core objective

of most people that have watched through this ad to this point? Probably not. Therefore, we need to understand the consumer intimately before we start going and writing scripts like this, or else we talk about stuff that no one actually cares about and it doesn't actually sell. So, should we go and try to rewrite this? Well, you don't have to rewrite everything. Lesson one arguably of this video is deletion Often is a lot better than uh trying to refine. And so we can just delete this line out. We don't need to replace it. We don't need

to come up with new things here. Let's remove it. And the reason why we'll remove it is because we need to replace this with something. But no one yet, me, you guys, no one has actually done any research yet. So if we haven't done research, if we don't know what is actually unique about this product, what is unique about this brand Compared to the competitors? We haven't done the competitor research. I don't know what to go and put in here. Like I'm just going to be also making up stuff that is also not convincing to

the consumer. We need to start with the consumer. We need to start with the research. And it is that that is going to build in and potentially give us the capability to rebuild this sentence. Now, that was a quick 90 second script breakdown cuz what I wanted to do was Tease what we're going to be doing for the next 2 hours. This is actually I'm not meant to be talking about this right now. This is meant to be in about 60 minutes into the video and we'll go into more detail and start to flesh this

out. Uh, but I wanted to show you the process that we're going to be running through over the next two hours, line by line, lesson by lesson, explaining how we can improve scripts. Now, you might be thinking, ah, I just came here for Hooks. I just want some framework. Just give me the swipe file and let's go. Probably the wrong video for you. If you want to become really good at script writing, if you want to become really good at copywriting, if you want to become good at a skill that is actually very difficult to

do, a swipe file, couple hook templates, not going to get you there. Like the best copywriters I've seen, the best script writers I've seen have written a thousand scripts and Consumed all of the content from all the people that I showed you at the start, all of the OGs in uh selling and copyrightiting. And so if you just want a swap file, if you just want some hooks, leave the video. Don't continue watching. It's good. It gives everyone else who does watch the video a bit of arbitrage. So let's dive into section one, which is

the buyer. Starting off on one of the best copyrightiting quotes by Eugene Schwarz. Copy cannot create Desire for a product. It can only take the hopes, dreams, fears and desires that already existed in the hearts of millions of people and focus those already existing desires onto a particular product. So this is the fact that you cannot create desire in the consumer. You simply need to channel existing desire into your product. So you want to always find the desire and then speak to the desire rather than just writing it. And so people will Write what they

think but you need to start from the first principle which is what is the desire that we're actually focusing towards our product. Almost every brief that I get handed starts with the product and then it tries to reverse engineer a reason to care about the product. So you might have magnesium as a product and then you go, "Okay, we need to create an ad for magnesium." But that's backwards and it's the specific thing that ends up producing flat Unwanted ad copy that everybody in the audience has seen before and that all your competitors are just

producing 40 times a month. The general rule of thumb is that if you can't find evidence for the underlying desire somewhere outside of your own marketing, whether that's in a review, a support ticket, a Reddit thread, a call recording, then you don't have a concept and you don't have a desire that you can speak to. You have a product description where then you're Just like slapping on a hook at the start and calling it an ad script and then it never performs well. Most scripts aren't bad because the hook's bad. Most scripts are bad because

they don't even speak to an underlying desire and it's just like a Shopify description page put into an app. Here's a real example for a client that I worked on a couple years ago. They were using as their core messaging gentle shampoo for sensitive scalps. That was really the Angle. That's what they were coming at most of their ads with. But we then went into all of their reviews and we started looking through tickets as well that were getting sent to their email support. And what we found was a recurring theme that the shampoo had

a lovely fragrance that didn't activate histamine issues. Now, this speaks to a much more specific underlying problem, underlying desire. The specificity here is so much better than this one. It Stands out in the crowd. How many people are actually using this kind of messaging? And so suddenly we have a script rewrite available here which is rather than saying I love this gentle shampoo because it helps with sensitive scalps which I think 5,000 people are saying you've differentiated the product cuz now you can say every fragrance-free shampoo I tried still sets my histamines off. This one

fragrance didn't. There's a really famous story about how Helbert Asked a classroom of I think marketing students and he said, "What advantage would you want if you were trying to sell hamburgers?" And people would say, "Well, they want the best meat. They want the best location. They want the lowest price." And then his answer was, "The only advantage I want is a starving crowd." Now, when you have access to serving ads nationwide, worldwide, you can find the starving crowd. Okay? You don't need a starving crowd locally Around the hamburger shop, right? You just need to

speak to that crowd and then you'll have a script and copy that sells incredibly well. Translating this into the ad platforms for a second, this isn't through audience settings anymore. You're not trying to find a persona that's starving in the metaphorical context of whatever you're selling. Instead, you're going to do this through the first line of the ad and more specifically the messaging. What you'll Start to figure out about Facebook advertising is the number one most important thing about Facebook ads is the messaging. You want to be talking to the right person. And it's through

every single word being selected correctly that speaks to that individual. And when you get one word wrong, they can feel something's off. They're like, "Uh, this are they really talking to me? That wasn't how I would say it. That isn't how I'd interpret it. That isn't the Emotion that I actually feel at this moment." And so the messaging becomes phenomenally important for targeting the right people, which is metaphorically the starving crowd. Here's a headline example that leans into a persona call out, but not in the way that you think. Amazing secret discovered by one-legged golfer.

Adds 50 yards to your drives, eliminates hooks and slices, and can slash up to 10 strokes overnight. John Carlton, written in the early 1990s, Apparently one of the highest performing ads in this niche at the time. Now, you might think, "This makes no sense. How is this one of the most highest performing ads when it's doing a persona call out on one-legged golfers? How many one-legged golfers are there?" Well, it's not doing a persona call out. This is instead using this as a proof device. It's really saying without having to say it that this guy

had every reason possible to have a terrible swing and to Be horrific at golf. Which means that the secret to him actually being able to be good at golf must not be some kind of rare athleticism where it could be with a normal person, could be with an elite pro golfer. Instead, it has to do with the device. The most specific detail in your opening is doing the targeting, proof, and casting all at the same time. So, it's not just a targeting mechanism. It does a lot. On every differentiator that you use, you want to

be asking Three questions if you're going to use it in your copy. Number one, is it a proposition? Which means, does it say buy this and you get this specific thing? Number two, is it unavailable to competitors? Meaning, can competitors just say this too or is it like uniquely differentiated to just you? And then number three, is it going to move a stranger? Or like more importantly, the way to frame this is, is it strong enough to pull a mass audience? Another Way to think about this. Are you making a claim? Can everyone else make

the claim? Is it really a good claim? Like that's that's kind of another way to think through this. So, let's look through some really common differentiators that you see all the time. Familyowned since 1994. Is this a proposition? Yes. Is this unavailable to competitors? Yeah, probably. Like unless a competitor started in the exact same year as you and their family owned, you Might be uniquely differentiated here within the market. Is this strong enough to move a mass audience towards purchasing from you? No. Ultimately, this might be a huh that's nice to know, but ultimately this

isn't going to cause like conversion rates to double. What about made in Australia? Yes, that is a proposition. Is it unavailable to other people? Technically, yes. It depends on the market that you're in. If everyone's producing in Australia, this would be a No. If you are uniquely differentiated here, then yes, sure. Is this going to materially move a stranger? Probably not. Probably not a mass market. Definitely not. If there's other people doing it as well, and like this is some of the most commonly used messaging that exists. Free shipping. Is this a proposition? Yes. Free

shipping by itself, sure, it is a proposition. Now, what you'll often see with free shipping is you'll see free shipping and like Free returns or you'll see free shipping and great worldclass is the classic worldass service. Worldass service or great service is not a proposition because you don't actually get it. There's no proof of like, hey, no, this is factually 100% true. This is a proposition of the brand. Great service is more of a claim. It's like trust me, we have good service, but it's not a core proposition. Is it available to everyone? Yes, it's

available to Everyone. So, no, it is not unavailable. It is not unique. And is this going to move a stranger? No, not really. What about third-party lab tested published results on the website? Is this a proposition? For sure. Is this unavailable to everyone else? For sure, because there's a barrier of entry. It's expensive to do. Most people aren't going to do it. Is it going to move a stranger? Yes, probably. Because it's expensive. It's a high barrier of entry. Most people don't do this. And so because of that, this actually is likely going to have

a material impact here. And so of all of these, the only one that you would really even want to consider mentioning in your copy and script writing is the bottom one that is a proposition that is uniquely differentiated that is going to move a mass market. Now, something I've heard quite a bit is, I don't need all of this copywriting and script writing Capability. I'll just go to the Facebook ad library. I'll pull up my competitors. I'll try to find what are the longest running ads and I'll just run them, right? They must have the

most amount of spend. They must be the winners because that's what's been running in the competitor's ad library the longest. But longevity of an ad in a competitor ad library doesn't mean that that ad copy and pasted into your ad account is going to work. What it really means is that That ad works for that brand at that spend level against that audience that they're talking to with that level of existing belief in that brand's name. which is why you see a lot of really big brands, nine figure ad accounts with some pretty mediocre ads

that are holding a ton of spend. And it's because the ad in the context of your brand is not going to perform. But the ad in context of their brand, their audience, or the existing belief that they have Built does work. When you steal someone's ad and you steal someone's copy and you steal their script, you don't inherit their entire belief chain that they've built in their consumers and target demographic, their brand recognition, their proof assets, and they're all the things that do most of the hard work in the ad account and the ad that

you're looking at. Now, I put a YouTube video out on similar topic here 2 and 1/2 years ago. Sort the YouTube Channel by oldest and go back. It's it's super obvious. It probably has 80 views. But the point in that video was I was talking about this gentle shampoo concept where the client was using all their messaging as this is a gentle shampoo for sensitive scalps, but we should reframe it towards histamines and allergies because that seemed to pop up quite a bit in their reviews and in their ticketing system. Now they didn't want to

do it because they wanted to Have this premium aspirational style brand rather than to make money and so they didn't want to pivot messaging in that way and wanted to continue going down the same route. So then we chose a second like method here to be able to differentiate the product without just being in the red ocean which is that we combined two generic propositions together. This is something I've said a little bit, which is like take something generic, add it to something that's also Generic, and then you should hopefully get something unique because your

competitors aren't doing this. This is also called like just offer stacking or USP stacking. It's an okay strategy. It isn't very good. Like I would never build a brand on just USP stacking. An example of this is that for this brand, we took like Australia made, we took great fragrance, we took gentle on the scalp, like we took all of these different things and we just tried to Value stack them together. And the idea is that if a competitor isn't value stacking in this particular way, we do uniquely differentiate. Particularly if you can get two

like USPS that often aren't seen together. An example of this might be like a really good fragrance shampoo that also doesn't irritate your scalp. Okay, that is unique in a way because most fragrances will have some kind of irritation and stuff that doesn't irritate is usually all natural Which doesn't have a good fragrance and doesn't last. And so that's a way like you can take two value propositions, combine them and make it unique in a way. The issue with this kind of stuff is that everyone's done it. Like this is very red ocean still. You

might think it's blue ocean. Oh, we're coming up with two things and we're putting it together. But ultimately, it fails on the one thing that this entire thing is about, which is right up the top here, Which is that you can combine value propositions all that you want. You can mix and match generic stuff to try to uniquely differentiate. But who cares about you being uniquely differentiated? Being unique actually does not matter if we are not talking to an underlying desire and channeling it into the product. So we can combine free shipping and free returns

and make some kind of unique prop. But if it doesn't speak to an underlying desire that people have, Which is that people really care in this particular niche in this industry about free shipping and free returns, like is that speaking to an underlying design? No. No one has an underlying core human desire that has existed for the last 100 years that they want free shipping and free returns. Like you could argue that's potentially low risk, like a lowrisk desire. But you need to be always asking yourself that question. How are we speaking to an underlying

Human desire that has existed for hundreds, thousands of years? All right. Where can you start sourcing these ideas from? Where can you start getting inspiration? Where can you start linking to underlying desire? Well, you've got really these core categories. You've got call recordings, support tickets, reviews, post purchase survey, and then Reddit, Facebook groups, forums. So, stuff that's just widely available on the internet that isn't specific to you. Now I'd be thinking through these in order of yield. So how much can we actually get out of it in really high quality relevant information to our particular

product? And then effort, how hard is it to actually collect this? And then all of them actually have something unique. So each one of these tells you something that none of the other ones do. So call recordings. This is super high yield because you're actually talking to your customers. So this is You could talk to them in person or obviously record the calls. This is also super high effort cuz you got to go and talk to your customers. What this one is going to give you that none of the other ones are is the final

objection prior to purchase. So finding out like why were you not going to buy just before purchase? What was going to stop you or what was stopping you for weeks and then you decided to actually convert. Not going to get that as well from any of These other ones because reviews, they're not going to talk about the final objection. Support tickets, you might get a little bit of it. A little bit maybe. Post-purchase survey, it's not a good use of questions. And then public forums where people aren't even a customer, you're not going to get

it. Support tickets and return reasons. Yield is high. Le e effort is very, very low because you're collecting this already. So, you just pull it in through An MCP or an API into Claude or any LLM and just have this populating into a Slack channel. What this is going to give you that the other ones aren't cuz these are unhappy customers, is it's going to give you the failure modes. So where does this product actually fail in the customer's own escalating language and then how do we repel that those type of people those that type

of messaging that led to the failure mode. You see this all the time in consumer package Goods or any kind of product that you need to use and you see a transformation like you might have makeup and you're claiming that it makes your skin glow and then it doesn't make your skin glow but you're saying tons of stuff. So you're saying it makes your skin glow, it helps with covering up acne, it does this, it does that. And a bunch of them it works really well at, but one particular value proposition it doesn't falls apart.

We want to make sure we Know what those failure modes are because we don't want to talk about that in ads. Then no matter how good the return on ad spend is, if we have a 50% return rate on one particular angle that we're pushing, we don't want to push the angle. Reviews are also quite high yields and also the lowest effort that exists cuz this is often just on an automated flow to collect reviews. What's unique here is the word. So the exact words that the consumer will use To describe the product. You often

end up getting some of the best stuff out of reviews. Post-purchase survey is medium yield. The reason being is that this is typically multi- choice. The second you move away from multi- choice, the submit rate will go down enormously. Quality of data here too is like not incredible because they don't have the product yet. So on call recordings they have the product, they've used it. On support they have the product, they've used it. On reviews, they have the product, they've used it. On post purchase surveys, haven't even got the product yet. They just bought it.

They might have impulse purchased. So the quality of the data on someone that hasn't even received the product yet isn't very high. The effort here though is low. What this is going to give you that's unique is the real time thinking on the moment of purchase. So, right as the consumer purchases, we're getting an Understanding what were they thinking that like got them over the line. Then we got Reddit and external stuff. This is medium uh potentially low. And this just depends on your quality of scraping and how relevant it is on the stuff that

you're looking at. The effort here is not high but not low. It's also medium. What this is going to give you is the language of people who haven't bought your product yet. And so what are people talking about in their industry? What Are they wanting to see? What is failures of competitors? How can you differentiate? So all there's no best one here. Obviously like the ones that are ranked high are obviously where you should start if you can only do one of them, but all of them have a unique piece of context that is going

to help in the broader picture. So, we would strongly recommend that you do all of them. If you are time constrained and capacity constrained, I would start at The top and work your way down. Now, if you're a startup and you have no uh customers, you have to start at the bottom and work your way up because you don't have any customers. So, you're going to have to start here and then as you start getting customers and on you go. I'll give you two tips here before we move on. Tip number one is on reviews.

Where there's a lot of value in reviews, particularly in the scripting structure and the framework we're going To go through, is in the like two to four star reviews. And where there is value there is that they think the product's okay, but they have some reservations. Those reservations are your objections. So the objections, the reasons why people wouldn't buy. Why wouldn't they buy? The service was bad. they wouldn't buy because they thought it would be a little bit better at doing this or whatever the specific mechanism is in the product, they were like, "Yeah, it's

not very good at that." Well, number one, it gives you good feedback on how your product needs to be better, like improve the product. Number two, now you know the exact hesitations and the language of why people are not buying and so you use that in your objection handling and your scripts. Now, if you don't actually fix the product, this is just deceitful and you're just conning the market. So like everything I'm saying here goes with Like make the product good and then also make the script good. So you can make the script good by

using these objections. It's obviously unethical if you don't make the product better as well. And then the second high effort thing but is worth doing is on call recordings I would look for specifically key terms like I nearly didn't. So take all of the call recordings transcribe them. What I would do is I would run them through Claude or a model that Cleans up the language too. And so we will always do this on transcripts rather than just having the raw transcript where words are like if you look at the transcript of this video you're

watching right now, it's going to be all over the place. It's going to say that I'm saying words that I'm not saying because of my accent. You want to clean that up. So you can just run it through a model and say clean up all the words, make the sentences make sense. And then once you do that, you make all the call recording transcripts searchable. very very searchable and so then you can go and uh tell a large language model hey I want to look for people who mentioned objections they will say something like I

nearly didn't or something relevant to why they didn't purchase go and look for it and you get a much higher quality output because you have cleaned up the source data so this is exactly what you want to be hunting For now that you have all the data you've done all the research what are you actually looking for number one you're looking for the accommodation this is what they've changed about their life to work around on the problem usually without admitting that they changed it. This becomes the part of the problem within the script. By the

way, we have a whole chapter on this. We're just going to be going through how to write the script around the problem as We go back to the script at the start and we start breaking down every single section. The next one is the failed solution. What did they try first? What did it cost them? And why did they stop with that solution? This goes into the objection handling part of the scripts. The nearly didn't buy. So this is the last thing standing between them and the purchase. This goes into the risk reversal and offer

section of the script. The word this is the noun they Use for the problem. You can you can expand this further into like talking about language. But what this really becomes is the hook. Like we want to really understand what language, what words are they using to where in just one sentence we can say something that's going to talk to that specific person and hone directly in on them. And then the moment, this is the specific trigger on the week or the month or the day that they started looking for a solution. This really goes

into the entire script, but if we want to hone it down, it goes into the urgency word or sentence of the script. So why should they buy now? What is the trigger? How do we problem agitate on that trigger? Now, the script writing framework that I'm going to give you further in on this video, it has nine core elements or nine core beats or nine sections. Five of these beats or five of these sections are here. This is how you find them. You can't go and just Write a script without first doing the research to

find content on the problem, the objection, the risk reversal, the hook, and then urgency and scarcity. Now, you can go and try write a script, but good luck doing any of this very well. Let me give you an example on the word because this is the one that's probably the most overlooked of all five of these, but the most important of the five cuz this is messaging, communication, language. Let's say that You're selling hair thinning. So, you're selling a hair thinning solution. Now, what most marketers will do is they'll just talk to hair thinning. They'll

say like, "Is your hair thinning? Are you having hair thinning problems? My hair is thinning?" Any kind of language that's around those two words. But as you start to dig into all of your research and you start to understand that the language of people that are dealing with this particular problem, You actually come to find out that they never say athenic. They don't like saying that word. Instead, they'll say stuff like, "I started to be able to see my scalp. I started to look down and see hair in the drain." The language is materially different.

And with that language, you better resonate with that particular persona and with that problem. Another thing you might be selling bloating. Now, you can say all day long, do you suffer with bloating? Do you have bloating all the time? But it's too broad of a persona call out, and it's too factual rather than emotional. And so, instead, we want to use language like, "I looked 4 months pregnant by 4 p.m. And this might be actual language that is getting used in your reviews." You might sell joint support. And rather than talking about joint support or

maybe I have pain in my joints, instead you talk to once again more emotional language that is the real Language of the consumer dealing with this problem, which might be stuff like I struggle to get off the floor without needing support. Much more viscerally connected to the actual problem and the state in which that consumer is in. Every time you try to use your own language, your marketer language, the language that is plastered on the packaging of your product like joint support, what you were doing is you are asking for the consumer to try to

Translate that into their own emotions, their own feelings, their own perception of what they are dealing with. That's not what you want to do. You want to meet them where they are. Okay, what are they dealing with? Let's speak to that. Let's not try to speak to something that's irrelevant. Give you one last example, then we'll move on. Creatine. You can say creatine is great for muscle support, but that requires the consumer to connect muscle support to them Starting to get pain and aches at 55 years old when they go to they've never had that

before. Right? It's a big connection to make. You're trying to ask them to go from that all the way to this state that they're in. So instead, we want to skip straight to the state that they're in, and we want to speak that language to that person. All right. So now, let's go and apply that to the script that we started the video off with. And we're going to apply each of These pieces of research. The accommodation is actually already in here. It's already done, which is we already pulled this from either a call review

or actual review on the website, which is I stopped parting my hair in the middle because that's where you can see it thinning. And so this was used directly for this line. Women lose it at the part line first. So this was pulled from here. For the failed solution, we've got a quote that we pulled out. I Did the rosemary oil thing for four months. My pillowcase smelled, but nothing actually happened. You can see how this is going to be great to work into this script later on. The nearly didn't buy. We've pulled out I

almost didn't buy because everything in this category takes 6 months to actually work and I've been burned twice before. In terms of words from the research, we found that they say shedding and they say my part. So they talk about the part In their hair a lot. They don't say hair loss and they'll never say stuff like alipcia. So it'll always be shedding or my part. And then the moment we might find or pull out a moment where say it was at my sister's wedding photos. If you're calling customers, you want to be asking for

the moment as much as possible. Like what was that inflection point? When was it that you realized you needed a change? You needed a solution. You needed to buy a product in this Category. needed to buy our product because this becomes really great material to then use in the copy. So ultimately, look at all this, right? This this is the ad. Like the ad is pretty much almost done here. We just need to clean it up. We need to format it correctly. We need to add a few sections in that we haven't even spoken about

yet. And you pretty much got a really good ad. None of this was us writing. Like we haven't even written a Single word yet. This is all just from pulling research and data out of the buyer and the consumer. And so this is why uh people say that the research portion is the most important biggest component of writing because if you don't do all this stuff, if you don't understand the consumer, if you don't understand the buyer and what they're doing, what they're saying, then you'll never get an ad as good as this. And this

is some like really great material To start running with. Now, as a quick example as to why this is so much more important than you just asking CHBT or an AI model for all of this data, what you can do right now, and I've just done it on my computer to the left, is go and type into Chacht, "What objections might buyers have to a hair thinning supplement?" And the response that you'll get, cuz I've got it right here, is will this actually work for me? Where's the proof? How long will it Take? What if

I stop taking it? Could it make my hair worse first? Are there side effects? Like this is all just super generic stuff that you will get back from any question that you ask a model because you'll just get the average. You will not get good research by using an LLM to go and pull data. You need to pull data from the categories that we showed you before in the order that we showed you before. And that's how you get a really high quality output that's Going to speak to the consumer. Make sure that if you

are going to use CHBT or an LLM that you always ask it to retrieve information. You don't ask it to go and invent information. So you never want it coming up with its own words. You want it going out and just scraping the internet and pulling quotes in. And you want it to give you the hyperlink to the quote because that way you can get stuff like this if it's publicly available on the internet and It's just a research tool rather than a tool that's making up the copy and the words for you. Now you

might go, Dan, we don't have time for all of this. like this is so much work. We need to pump out 50 ads a week. How are we going to do 50 ads a week if we're going to have to do this every time? Well, you batch it, right? You batch one large section of res research. You do as much as possible and you structure it through the concepting system. Now, if you've Watched our creative strategy video, which is on the way to 100,000 views next week. So, I'd strongly recommend that if you haven't watched

that, that's the next video that you watch from us. We break down exactly how we walk through creative strategy. But the idea here is you want to build concepts. And a concept is a persona. So who exactly are we talking to here? What is the angle? So what is the value proposition? How are we approaching it? This is the Messaging. And then what is the offer? What are we actually giving people? When you do all this research, you want to be researching and finding out who are all the personas, who are all the people that

are buying from us, and then what are all the angles? You want to pull in quotes, you want to save quotes under this structure. And what you'll end up being able to do is hopefully you can find a couple personas. You can find two to three different people. If you're a Larger brand, you can probably find more than that. You want to find three to four core angles that we could speak to. And then if you have two different products, like there's two offers here. If you have one product, there's one. And then you can

start obviously mixing matching these where relevant. Obviously, the angle needs to meet the persona. You can't give an angle to someone that's not relevant. But then you'll have like 30 or like let's say You'll have, let's be conservative here, right? Two personas. Let's say three angles work with each. So you're going to have six concepts. Now the nice thing about six concepts is that then underneath this you can make 10 ads per concept. So you've got 60 ads. So all you need is to find a few personas, a few angles and then you're good to

do quite a lot of volume. How are you actually getting this volume? If the persona and the angle in the offer is The same, you are getting this through different scripts, right? You can talk to the same person with the same angle and have a entirely different script. Okay? So it can be a very different ad. You're also creating variations through hook swaps. So change the hook a few times and you've got a few new unique ads which is actually worth doing because 80% of the audience hits the hook. So if you change the hook

slightly you'll get more people to watch through. And then the other is format variation. So you could do a VSSL animation claimation ad and then you could go into a piece of UGC then EGC then founder story like just switch the format but keep persona angle research scripting very similar and you will have differentiated ads which will reach new people which will count as diversity in the account. The next thing we need to understand about the buyer is what do they know and how tired are they of Hearing it. Now this is from Eugene Schwarz

breakthrough advertising. This is me simplifying down the language. What this is actually called is the stages of awareness and over here is the stages of sophistication within the market. So what they know what stage of awareness are they at? Are they unaware? Which means they don't know that they even have a problem. An example of this is that I see no problems with using this whiteboard, but you might educate Me that there are actually a lot of issues with using a whiteboard and instead you should use this other solution instead, whether it's an iPad or

something digital because there's a bunch of problems that I don't even know exist yet. Or I'm problem aware. I know that there are issues with this whiteboard. I have to wipe stuff out every time and then the markers left behind and so eventually I have to do a massive clean and so I understand the Problems or at least I'm aware of a couple of them. Then I could be solutions aware which is I understand the problem. I also understand that there is obvious solutions to this problem. Okay, I could get a better whiteboard. I could

use a digital whiteboard instead. We could do this in a few different ways. There might still be some solutions that I'm not not aware of but generally I know solutions exist. Then there is product aware which is That I know that this specific solution that you are selling exists. An example of that is that I know that an iPad is a solve for this problem. And then most aware means that I am all the way through the funnel. I have looked at the options. I have looked at iPads. I've seen what kind of apps I

could use to solve this particular problem for myself. And I'm pretty close to buying. The only thing holding me back is a really strong reason or probably Pricing. And so I'm likely shopping the market deciding what I'm going to do. Now dependent on where someone is in the stages of awareness, the script looks entirely different. If people don't know that there is even a problem, we cannot talk to the problem without first addressing them at the stages of awareness that they're at. So we have to meet people where they at in stages. It is also

the fact that most this is like a funnel, right? Most people are unaware Or problem aware and then some people are solution aware and then much less people are product aware of your product and then very few people are in market right now. Now you've seen people try to ascribe percentages to this and the percentages you normally see is like 3% of people are down here, 9% of people are down here. Then you have like 30% up here and then obviously the entire population, well the entire remainder of the population, sorry, is unaware at the

Top. What will also happen when you market is that your ROI, your return on investment will go down as you go up because you are speaking to less warm audiences. You're going colder and colder. So, you can go and put an ad in the market and say like, "Hey, we sell Nike shoes." And that's amazing because if you just target people that are currently most aware or product aware and they're looking for Nike shoes, they will buy simply because you have what They're after and they're educated. But going and trying to take Nike shoes and

then educate cold audiences on the product is a very expensive branding exercise because you have to go all the way up the stages of awareness and start selling value propositions, start objection handling against competitors, start telling them about problems they didn't know even existed that you solve. And so the skill required to go up in the stages of awareness increases a lot. It becomes much harder. It becomes very very hard. There's really not many people in the world like there'd be I'm going to argue they'd probably be in the tens of thousands at a maximum

people that can create phenomenal unaware ads. Very very rare skill. It's very hard to do. And you can almost think about your progression as a script writer or copywriter as progressing up in your ability to write scripts at the stages of awareness scale. Then we have the Layers of sophistication. Stage one means that you're speaking to a product and you're first to market. So the claims that you're making, it's the first claims that have ever been made. An example of this is let's say you were the first to GLP1s and you were saying that GLP1s

help with fat loss and they can help you lose x amount of weight in 4 weeks. Now, if you're the first person to ever make the claim, if you're the first person to ever say that, and Realistically in stages of awareness, we'd actually have to go back past JLP ones, and we'd have to go to the first weight loss solution ever, ever made, right? If we go all the way back like 60 years, first weight loss ads, they would have been stage one. The reason why stage one is so advantageous and the methodology and the

way that you script changes as you go to earlier stages is because you're first to market. No one's heard the claim before, and so people Believe you. It's very easy to convince people on something new, right? But then as we move to stage two, this is where the claim already exists in the market. So people have been making this claim and so with that people trust it less that we've heard this before. I've bought these weight loss products and these weight loss tablets and they don't actually work. And so why do I trust this brand?

Because I tr I trusted these other brands and it didn't work. So what Happens at stage two? Claims increase. They enlarge. So rather than claiming that this will help you lose weight, suddenly the claims go from this will help you lose weight to this will help you shred 40 lbs in 7 days while still eating whatever you want. So the claims become crazy and the reason for that is that people stop converting as well because they're used to the claims. So everyone has to become like more verbose in what they're saying, which is where Compliance

gets pretty sketchy. Stage three, the market becomes tired of all these claims. They've been burned at stage one. We've gone through stage one. We've gone to stage two. Claims have gone ridiculous. Everyone's like, "This stuff doesn't work." Like this guy is saying, "I can make money online. I've gone through four courses before and like this clearly isn't true." This is the stage in where people start to introduce unique mechanisms. And so this And I'll use the like make money online option is that rather than just making a claim, hey, you can make money online by

the course, it becomes you've tried a bunch of stuff. You've tried A, you've tried B, you've tried C. And all of these were from gurus making false claims. But this isn't anything that what we're doing. Instead, we're doing the Tik Tok ad method, which is completely new and unfounded. No one's even touched this. This is a digital Gold mine. You want to pivot into this completely new mechanism because that is what's going to get you there. And so what they're introducing there is like clear uniqueness in the market through a mechanism that no one's heard

of before. And so this effectively revitalizes hope. It's like, oh, we've been told this would work. Then people got ridiculous with their claims. But okay, this seems to be differentiated. Then we move into stage four. Everybody now has A mechanism. So what happens? The mechanism claim then goes and enlargements. Just like from stage one to stage two where the claims got bigger. Now the mechanisms get bigger. The mechanisms get crazier. And then stage five is the mechanism exhausts. And now the market has become used to the mechanism. And so instead, where does messaging pivot? It

pivots to you selling transformation and who the buyer becomes. And so rather than now talking To some unique mechanism that's going to make you money online that you've never heard of before, now all the messaging switches to emotion and it goes, imagine the life you can live. Imagine how things will change. Imagine that you don't have to get up worried. Like all of this kind of language starts to become very prevalent because we've exhausted mechanisms. We've exhausted claims. They don't work anymore in this market. Everyone's used to it. And so, We have to really tie

into emotion. Now, it's important to know in your particular industry, in your niche, where you're from, what stage of sophistication are you in? Just look at your competitors. You can identify this pretty quickly. Now, the cheat code is that ads at higher stages of sophistication are better at. And so, I don't even really care if the market is in stage one, which not a lot of markets are, but let's say the market is in Stage one. Good example of this actually would be AI. So AI is probably in stage two, right? Like claims are pretty

big. There's a lot of claims in the market that all these AI rapper softwares can do a lot of stuff. There are some unique mechanisms getting introduced, but generally speaking, I'd say we're still quite low on the stages of sophistication and people aren't exhausted yet with AI. People are still hyped. They still think like this is This is something that is going to revolutionize at least their work and whatever you tangibly apply it to through the desire that you speak to and you use AI as a unique mechanism. But ads that are up here are

always better, right? Like even if like AI right now is in stage one, you will have a better ad that will do better talking to AI if you talk to what the buyer can become through AI and if you have some kind of unique mechanism within the AI frame. If You can do that, it's much better ad than just making claims. Now, you can make claims with AI and you can get away with it. People are getting away with it right now. Like, you just make a claim that AI can do some stuff. You'll sell

some courses, you'll sell some software, you'll sell whatever it is that you're selling, but you'll sell a lot better if you go up here. Before you write every ad, identify, circle, who are you talking to? What stage of awareness are We talking to? What stage of sophistication are we speaking to? Because also, although the whole market will sit in one stage of sophistication, the reality is is that there is a bell curve of people sitting across these stages. as an example for AI, I would be very high up in the stages of awareness. I'm very

skeptical of the topic. Like I'd say that I've I was an early adopter and so I've gone through the bell curve faster and so to speak to me, you Wouldn't be able to speak to me at all or sell me through these stages. You'd have to go way up on the stages of awareness to actually convert me. And I would probably sit on product solution to product aware on AI products and AI solutions. And so if you wanted to talk to me, you would have to select here and here. Now, you might want to talk

to me in some ads and then talk to other people in other ads. That's how you open up your total addressable market. You Get more scalability in the account. You get more scale in the business. Ultimately, the more people you can talk to, the better. And so, you might do some ads like that. And then, you're going to do some ads at problem aare on stage two to three. And then, you're going to do more ads on unaware stage five. And you mix and match. And that will obviously change the language, change the ad, change

who you're talking to, and ultimately change who you reach On the platforms in terms of targeting. A phrase that Dan Kennedy would use is you want message to market match. And so whatever your messaging is within the ad, it needs to meet the market that you're speaking to. So you need to identify who is the market that you're speaking to so you can start crafting the message. Awareness and stage of sophistication is a property of the whole ad rather than a unit uh that sits within the script alone. And so I have Seen before a

video will get written by an in-house copywriter as a problem aware ad because the copywriter went and put the brief together. Then that will go into the creative team and they will create a static that gets built at the product aware level because the designer just pulled in a shot of the product rather than actually being across what stage of awareness we're talking to here. Then the primary text will get written as solution aware because Somebody in the team or the agency just went and quickly put the copy together but didn't actually think about what

stage of awareness are we in right here. Meaning that nobody in that chain really did anything wrong. It was just that no one clearly stated and labeled and said this ad is at this stages of awareness. Does everyone understand this? All of the production line has to be congruent. So what ends up happening is this ad doesn't work because the buyer is Hitting three different starting points in terms of stage of awareness. the targeting doesn't know who to go after and the messaging is just really messy. Let me give you stages of sophistication examples for

this core script that we're going through. Stage one would be you saying this is a supplement for your hair. Stage two would be you saying this is the strongest hair supplement on the market. So you've increased the claim. Stage three would be you saying it's not About the hair, it's about the follicle. And DHT is what's shrinking it. So we've introduced a unique mechanism. We use pelito at the dose that the studies actually use, not the dose that everyone else is using. So we've got the unique mechanism, but we've ramped up the claim on the

unique mechanism, which is that yeah, everyone's using this mechanism, everyone's using this ingredient, but not at the dose that it should be based on the clinical studies. And then we go All the way to stage five, which is leaning into emotion and what the buyer is going to become, which is the women who keep it are the ones who started before they could even see it. And so we're going to be integrating some of this kind of language, some of these kind of quotes into this script as we continue to iterate on it. What about

stages of awareness? How does this tie into the script that we're working on? An example of unaware would be the Photos you don't like of yourself are usually taken from behind and there's a reason for that. So they don't even know that they're thinning. They don't even know it's a problem, but we're going photos from behind, you don't like them. Here's why. Here's the reason. If we go to problem aare, we're saying if you've started parting it on the side, this is for you. So, we're speaking to the problem, but we're not doing a persona

call out. We're actually speaking and Agitating on the problem that they have. Solution aware. Most hair supplement doses use pelito, by the way. That's the ingredient at a fifth of what the studies used. So, they know the solution exists. They know about the unique mechanism, which is the ingredient, but now we're objection handling against other solutions and why ours is better. Then product and most aware kind of the same thing in terms of messaging. It's becomes very similar. What actually Starts to differentiate these two stages is the ad type more than anything. Messaging in product-most

aware would be the 90day pack is back and it's the last run at this price. Okay. So like they're very very product aware. They're very low down in the stages of awareness and we're just trying to convert them. Now we understand the stages of awareness. We understand the layers of sophistication and we still technically haven't written a single word yet on This script. And that is on purpose because we need to understand these things. We need to start selecting, okay, what are we going to what is all the research? Who are we talking to? What

layer of sophistication is this going to be? 90% of the work is done before we even put the pen down. And once we get to the scripting stage, it's going to be pretty quick. Now, a bit of an important caveat to throw into this, which is that thing that'll ultimately Beat everything is the offer. And so, if we start ranking a list of importance, number one is the offer. Then it is the market that you take that offer to and speak to. Then it is the unique mechanism. Then it is the proof and the credibility

in which you can sit the brand. And then there's everything else you've ever focused on within scripting. The reason why I say this and put this in this video is because you can go and become the best copywriter script writer In the world, but ultimately if you do have a bad offer, people just will not buy from you. And the subset of the offer to be clear is and we we have a one maybe one and a half hour video on offers in e-commerce. So I would highly recommend you watch that video. But to break

this down really quickly, the offer is going to be the product and it's going to be the value perception. That is really the two core components of what an offer is and why this is so Important. What do I mean? If the product sucks, if you just have a really bad product, good luck. Now, you can be good enough at marketing to sell bad product. People do it all the time. Like literally all the time. The issue is no one will ever repeat buy. And the only reality is that as you scale, CAC will continue

to go up no matter how good you are at marketing. And if you do not have repeat purchasing and if you're not building brand over a long time horizon, You are just capitalizing on a short-term arbitrage opportunity that is going to shrink and you're gonna have to move on to the next thing and just continue scamming people if the product's not good. So the product has to be good. Step one. Step two, consumers have to see some kind of value perception here. Now, you can write scripts good enough to increase value perception, but one of

the easiest ways to do that is to just reo the offer. And So like can we go on a quarterly bundle but then add in five gifts that they get and then we can write our script around why those gifts are so valuable. Like if you make the offer better everything else will become a lot easier. And if you have a really bad offer and a really bad product you will find it very difficult no matter how good you become at script writing and copywriting and talking to the buyer and the consumer psychology. It doesn't

matter doesn't Matter if the offer is bad and the offer is used in a lot of the scripting as well. And so we will be limited in our ability to copyright and script if the offer isn't good. Let me tell you the elements of an offer that's important when it comes to scripting. It's the thing, the terms, the reversal, the reason for now and the effort. So the thing is what do I actually get in my own words? So like what are we selling them? The terms is what does it cost me Framed against them?

The reversal is what happens if it doesn't work? How do we risk reverse? And if that's not in the offer, then obviously we can't risk reverse in the script. We can't say that they can get their money back in seven days if it doesn't work. If they can't get their money back in seven days and it doesn't work, right? So the offer is reliant for a lot of these tactics that we can use in the script. The reason for buying now like why should they buy this Week rather than in 2 months time? Once again,

this is really contingent on the offer. So is there some kind of urgency or scarcity on the offer? We framing the product as something that is required now rather than later. Offer becomes important here. And then the last is the effort. So what do I have to do and how long does it take for me to get this to work? And so that is also once again contingent on the offer because there is stuff that you can do with bundles or Changing uh the product slightly or changing the offering so that you can decrease effort

and increase perceived likelihood of outcome. I wouldn't mind getting a little bit tactical on how you can actually script around pricing. So some pricing tactics that we might even put into this script later on. Number one is that you can anchor against an alternative. So an example of a bad script. What people will do here is they will say it was $89, now it is $69. A Better rewrite of that would be that you can say one appointment with a hair specialist doctor will cost you $200 and they're just going to tell you to take

this product. Okay? So you're reframing as what's the alternative? You can go to a doctor to try to fix your hair thinning or you can just buy this which they're going to tell you to buy anyway. Number two is you can reduce to the ridiculous. And so this is where you'll reduce to like a daily rate that can be Compared to a coffee. So a bad script would be it's just $69 for a 90-day supply. A rewrite a good version of that script just spend 73 cents per day, which is less than the coffee that

you're drinking while you read this or watch this right now. And so you're reframing down to a day by day or a dose by dose. Number three is you want to price the problem rather than pricing the product. So a bad version of this script would be it's only $68. The Rewrite would be you've spent more than this on two other solutions and they didn't even work for you or like what is the price of the problem? If you don't get your interest rates down on your loan, then what's the price of that? Like for

the average person with a home loan, it's $500,000 2%. That's going to cost you $50,000 a year if you don't fix this problem. And we can solve it for you for $400. Last tactic is you can make the effort the price. So rather Than saying something like free shipping on orders over $50 or whatever your price frame is going to be, rewrite it, scrap it. Instead, frame against how loweffort this is going to be. And so if it is taking creatine and like creatine powder often people can't get into a habit because creatine powder is

terrible to take unless you put it in like a protein shake and mix it in. Instead you say it's one gummy every morning. You'll forget you're even doing It because it's just a part of breakfast. And so you substantiate price through the decrease in effort. And then quick tactical rewrite on guarantees. Classic guarantee that people will put in scripts is we have a 30-day money back guarantee. So if you don't like it, you can get a refund. pretty apt rewrite for this particular script which we'll include later. Take it for 90 days. If your part

hasn't changed, send us the empty tubs and we'll refund all three. What does this do better than this? Well, like so much. Almost every word is better. But if we're to framework it up, number one, it is very specific. Everybody has a 30-day money back guarantee. If you can get much more specific with like what specifically we're going to guarantee, it's going to cut through and uniquely differentiate. Number two is that it is slightly uncomfortable. A guarantee that costs the seller nothing really doesn't prove Anything. So a 30-day money back guarantee to most people is

like ah if they're doing that they must not be like losing much money. But if we're like if we increase the stakes we're like no no we're not just going to refund you. We're going to refund you 3 months worth and we will pay for you to send us the tubs. By increasing the stakes it increases the confidence and what you're saying is actually true. And so when I say slightly uncomfortable, it doesn't Make the consumer uncomfortable. Like me as the person watching that ad, I go, "That's amazing." It should make you feel slightly uncomfortable

because with you making this claim, you're like, "Oh, that's a that's a little bit of a big claim. That's not just an easy 30-day money back guarantee. Like, we're we're really putting ourselves behind this." And because of that, that's actually what's going to make it work. Number three is that it's directly matched to The mechanisms timeline. So, we expect this ingredient and this product to work over a 90-day period. So why would we guarantee on a 30-day, right? We guarantee on a 90. Reinforces the mechanism, reinforces our confidence in the fact that it takes 90

days, reinforces any studies that we show that might also be similar to this. And then number four is the most important thing in meta advertising, which is the messaging. So it's reinforcing the Unique mechanism of 90 days. It's reinforcing the language here that we're talking about the hair part. We are also reinforcing that if you actually just use the product and you empty out the tubs, that is what will make it work. And that's why we will only refund if you use it. Before we move to section two of this video and we move away

from the buyer, a common objection I'll get, particularly when saying the offer is really, really important when we're Framing up and scripting the ad is that I'll get I'm just the creative strategist. I'm the the copywriter. I can't change the offer. that's a business direction move and it's three levels above me which is half true but it's also half not true and that's the half that I would actually be worrying about. I wouldn't worry about the stuff that you can't control. Sure you can't control changing the price and you shouldn't really be changing the price

As the copyriter or the creative strategist or the agency. Like that should be determined by the highest uplevel people within the business that understand the price elasticity and where we want to sit within the market. Really what you want to do on the offer is identify things that the business is already doing or would be very low risk and easily implementable and then just use that better within the messaging and the language of the ads. If you think Back to the stuff that I put up before, four of five were things that the business was

already doing, but they just never said free returns isn't a pricing decision, right? Most people do free returns anyway. It's just how are we going to package this up and present it within the messaging rather than saying free returns putting it into the primary text or putting into the script. We're going to say the exact same thing, but we're going to reframe it around We're going to refund the first 90 days, but you got to send the stuff back to us and prove that the tubs are empty and prove that it actually didn't work cuz

we're so confident it will work. The 90-day pack, right? So, we're putting that guarantee on the 90-day. The offer would need to change to someone actually buying 90 days worth. And so the 90-day pack probably already exists. Everyone in the company would be probably happy to just put a three-pack bundle on the Website, even hide it, put it on a custom landing page. Like that isn't a big offer change at all. But now it's congruent with the messaging and what we want to do here. The reason for why they should buy right now, the urgency,

the scarcity in the offer. Well, that's probably built into the mechanism of the product, right? Which is that like if you're losing your hair, you should buy it as soon as possible because you can never get your hair back. Like you can't Reverse thinning. You can only stop it. And so that wasn't a now it seems like a change to the offer because we're increasing urgency and scarcity, but we're not. So you can really change the perception of the offer without actually materially changing anything about pricing or structure on the website or the product. An

offer isn't a discount. It isn't a bundle. It isn't a free shipping threshold. An offer is a reframe from the consumer's perspective Of the value that they're getting. So we have covered the buyer, we've covered the market, and we have covered offers. and we still haven't written a single sentence. So, I want to start writing. I want to start fixing this script. So, we're going to go into section two of the video. And we're going to start with the highest yield mechanical edit that you can make on this script. All right. So, let's start with

specificity within the arguments that we're going to make. I want to start off with pulling a lot of lessons from Hopkins. A lot of this is directly from his work around specificity. So, we want to be specific in whatever we talk about, whatever we script, whatever copy we write. The latter of what the specificity looks like is we want to start off with numbers. We want to be using measured numbers rather than just random statements. Now most people should know this. If you don't know that use a Number like it's much more powerful saying 98%

of people get clearer skin than saying most people get clearer skin. Okay? So using a number is good. A named third party is the second. Number three is specificity in a very specific physical detail. Number four is specificity in a time. For example, it will take 87 days to for you to start saying results rather than just saying it'll take some time. And then you want to use proper nouns. A little bit on This adjectives. Anyone can use an adjective. Any competitor can use any adjective. And that's why it's not very good. Adjectives are the

writer's opinion or the ad creator's opinion whereas specifics are evidence. And so what we're doing here is building evidence rather than just making subjective claims or subjective opinions. I'll give you two examples. Example number one, our serum leaves skin looking healthier. Probably heard That a thousand times. Instead, it's 0.05% retinol and the first tube is dose low on purpose. What we're also doing there is creating a curiosity gap that we'll then solve by the end of the ad. But this is obviously much better specificity. Another example, a shorter example is rather than saying fast absorbing,

we say it's dry in 40 seconds and we actually timed it. Much more specific. There's proofing built in at The end here as well, which makes it a much better script. Oglev says that research will always be adjectives. I'll give you an example. You can say luxury craftsmanship you can feel. Now, the issue with this is you're sitting outside of the manufacturing process. You're sitting outside of the brand and you're trying to come up with descriptive language. Okay? It's really luxury. You can really feel it. Like you're trying to convince people through Adjectives. Instead, one

simple fact about the manufacturing line if you just went in and looked at how they made stuff is you could instead say one person stitches each pair start to finish. It takes her 4 hours. Now suddenly you're like, well, 4 hours to stitch this and it's all stitched start to finish. It must like we know it's luxury then and we know that like we must be able to feel it. We don't even need the emotive language. We know the Stakes. Hopkins wrote this in 1923 and it's and it couldn't be more true than it is

today, which is platitudes and generalities roll off the human understanding like water from a duck. They leave no impression whatsoever. To say best in the world, lowest prices is at best to simply claim the expected. This is what most of the scripts that you read and the ads that you watch are doing. Premium ingredients, superior quality, unmatched results. Every one of Those is a word that your competitor can also just use whenever they want, which means it carries no information. It gives no reason for people to buy the product, which means that the buyer and

the consumer will just delete it from their memory from the script before you've even finished saying it cuz it's meaningless. It holds no weight. If you remember at the start, this is what all these claims were. Vegan, cruelty-free, made right here in Australia. These hold No weight. They're meaningless. they don't even need to be here because they get the consumer no closer to purchasing. Specificity also translates into urgency messaging. This is something that Albert talks about which is that you don't just want urgency. You want honest urgency because honest urgency creates specificity which is much

more powerful than just saying stuff. For example, a weak example of urgency would be you saying limited time Only. Don't miss out. Weak meaningless would never do it. Instead, if you rewrite that to something honest, let's say you're a creative agency. Let's change industries for a second. You could say, "We make 400 ads a month. October's already gone. Our next batch ships on the 14th of November. You need to get in before the end of this month to be able to be involved in that batch." That's real. It's real scarcity with a real number, with

a real date. It's not manufactured. And people can feel that. And it also carries with it specificity. There's this really good story about Hopkins and it's when he went to the Schlitz brewery in 1907 looking for a claim that he could put within the marketing and he watched them sterilize the empty bottles with live steam and asked why nobody had ever mentioned that they do that. The answer was that every brewer did it. He ran it anyway because no one had it in the Messaging and Schlitz climbed from fifth in the market to the very

top of it. There are a couple good lessons and questions you should be asking off the back of that. Three questions I'd ask is what does your factory do that you assume is boring? Can probably be used in messaging. What did you reject during the formulation process? There's a story there. There's something that you can weave into ad messaging. And what constraint did the product impose on you That you've never mentioned before? There's usually a bunch of constraints all over the place and you could probably use them in the messaging and the reasoning as to

why someone should buy and how you're uniquely differentiated. An example of this is that you could say that we have the best magnesium on the market. It's going to soothe your muscles. It's going to make you feel way better than the other magnesium. Or we can go ask these Questions and then dig into a unique mechanism and what separates us, which is that we could say uh most magnesium is magnesium oxide. It passes straight through you and it's the easiest to manufacture, which is why all of the factories produce it. But ours is magnesium glycinate,

which is what your body actually absorbs, but it's much harder to produce. We had to jump over hurdle after hurdle. We have to do XY Z in the factory. But it actually works And that's why we did all this stuff and that's why we put in all this effort. Important thing to understand here is that you can take a process which is in the factory and you can turn it into a unique mechanism and that's really powerful. Now a common push back that I'll get on the specificity section here is well we can't be specific

because that puts us at compliancy risk. Okay. So like we can't say that it will do XY Z with this specificity because we can't Back the claim. You can still be specific without making a claim. Okay, you just have to be more careful and you have to uh guide the narrative a little bit better. So you might say that you might do a time duration like a 90day rather than talking about a very specific time component in which it will fix. All right. So what is the script structure? What is the framework? There are nine

core sections, nine core beats that I mentioned before. Number one is The hook. Number two is the problem. Number three is the promise. Number four is the mechanism. Number five is the objection. Number six is the proof. Number seven is the offer. Number eight is the risk reversal. And number nine is the call to action. This is how you should be scripting all of your ads. This is the exact framework. Let's go through what each one does. So the hook buys the attention at the start. So this isn't going to sell Anyone, but it's going

to capture the right people. It's important because if people don't like the hook, they scroll past and they don't watch the app. So we all know the importance of a hook. The problem is important because we're problem agitating and we're naming the consequence that they've already accommodated or that they already have. This is for context from Eugene Schwarz. Number three is the promise. This states what they get in their terms. The Mechanism gives them a reason to trust or believe the promise. We then move into objection handling which is uh talking about all the other

solutions that they have tried in the past. We then move into proof. So we're substantiating the claims on the offer. We actually present the product. Then what is the product? What is the offer? We then risk reverse to make the offer look a lot better and be more convincing. And then we have a call to Action. Let's dig into the problem. When we're scripting out the problem section of the script, we want the symptom and we want the consequence. We always want to be agitating the consequence, not the symptom. A symptom is what the body

or the day is doing. But the consequence is what the buyer has already had to change about their life to accommodate the symptom. And the consequence is what the buyer can't unsee or forget about once you've mentioned it and brought it to Light, said it out loud. The symptom they likely already know about. You also don't have to invent the symptom. We actually called this something else at the start, which is that we called this the accommodation. Let me give you an example and then we'll actually pull this in and we'll start rewriting some of

the script. Weak would be saying uh bloating can be uncomfortable and frustrating. The rewrite is you've started planning what you wear around Which days are bad. Now, why does this work so much better? Well, it's because the weak version describes the state that the buyer already knows that they're in. So, it buys nothing. But the rewrite describes the accommodation that they have made in their personal life that they've never publicly admitted. And so it's directly calling out a persona without needing to directly state them or call them out. And it's going to stop their scroll

and actually Get them interested. So here's the rewrite. And I actually made a mistake before, which is that the accommodation is not the symptom. The accommodation is the consequence. And so you're accommodating your life in some capacity due to the consequence of the symptom. Just for clarity, that was messed up. That's where the arrow should go. Currently, this is actually the best part of the script. And we're rewriting the best part of the script, but this Actually isn't that bad. If you're finding more hair in the shower drain, you're not imagining it. And then arguably,

this is also proper agitating a little bit. Women lose it at the part line first, usually about 18 months before anybody notices. Now, what we've rewritten this to is you've stopped parting it in the middle. You didn't decide to do that. You just started doing it. Now, why does this sell harder? It sells harder because the Shower drain is a symptom. So, this script right here is talking to symptoms. Number two, the shower drain is owned by anyone and so your competitors can write this as well. And you would argue that the category already leans

pretty hard into it. The difference between the shower drain and parting your hair is that parting your hair is a consequence, an accommodation for the symptom. And so we can agitate on consequences. We can't really agitate On symptoms. Like us saying, "Oh, there's shower in your drain. Sorry, there's hair in your drain. Ah, no one cares about there being hair in their drain. As long as it goes down and it doesn't cause a bass and etc. No one really cares. What do they care about? They care that the hair is falling off their head. Like

that is the that is the consequence of that symptom. Why this works even better is that the target demographic probably hasn't heard this Before in an ad. She hasn't said it out loud, but it's a direct problem that is she has actually dealt with. Now, where this can get even more powerful, in my opinion, this type of script and this type of frame is if you change from first to second to third person. And so, you can change this to first person and put it into a piece of UGC, EGC, or a creator content or

a VSSL, even even an animation VSSL would be good. And you instead switch it to I stopped parting My hair in the middle. I didn't decide to do it. I just had to start doing it. Right? that will be a little bit more personal and it'll just be another angle and a variation that you can test. It might outperform this second third person framing. So you want the problem part of the script to last about 10 to 15 seconds. Any longer than that and we're just agitating on consequences for way too long. Now I have

seen formats in which you can drag this out. A good Example of this is like claimation AI animation VSSL ads. They will problem agitate for a long time. I've se I've seen really good high performing VSSLs probably agitate for like 2 minutes not needed like you can do them do them as variations put them in the account I've seen some of them hold like half a mill million dollars in total ad spend but you don't need to do it for your average script okay every script doesn't need 3 minutes of problem agitating give it a

Shot but generally 10 to 15 seconds there is a way that you can really fail on problem agitating and problem scripting and that's where the agitation starts to read as complaining. It'll happen whenever you go and stack a bunch of symptoms instead of escalating towards a consequence. And the tell on whether you're doing this or not is whether you can swap any of the lines with any other line and it won't actually change the argument. Meaning That if the order doesn't matter, you've written a list rather than escalating the viewer or the prospect towards something.

You can enter into a problem script with really like three core entry pathways. One is you enter with the accommodation. Number two is you enter with the moment. Number three is you enter with a failed solution. Just worth noting that this puts you into the solution aware stages of awareness, which is totally fine. You can have tons Of ads in the solution aware stage of awareness. Just important to note that's then who you're speaking to. You lock yourself in. What do these actually sound like? Accommodation is what we just did here. You've stopped parting it

in the middle, right? We're talking to a consequence, an accommodation. The moment is what I said before when I said it was a photo from the wedding, but from behind. So, we're talking about the moment in which someone realized they Started feeling uncomfortable with their hair thinning. We speak to the moment or we speak to a failed solution, which is that you did the rosemary oil thing for 4 months, did nothing, just made your pillowcase smell, and nothing really happened. Right? That's what we're talking about the failed solution as the opening of the problem agitating.

People often think that failed solutions only land in objection handling because we want to objection handle everything else That they've done. But you can agitate on failed solutions. Right now, an objection that I'll get here on this part of the script writing is that our brand doesn't want to be negative. Right? Our brand is aspirational. Our brand is looking up. We don't want to problem agitate on your hair parting. Right? That's fine. You can give them aspiration and you can keep the same level of accuracy because they're not in conflict. Nothing on this board is

Necessarily negative. You've stopped parting in the middle, right, which is what we used. It's not an insult. It's an observation. And the reason it works is that it's true when nobody has said it. What brand teams or yourself actually probably objecting to is pity. You don't want there to be pity within the brand's messaging. Pity is what you get when you stack a bunch of symptoms and you describe someone as a sufferer. So you're framing them into being a Sufferer. Now you can take problem agitating too far and that is where you start to frame

someone as a sufferer. And that's what happens really when you extend the problem agitating part of a creative out to 2 3 4 5 minutes is that you are really starting to lean into this kind of messaging and totally fair that you think that that would be an objection to the brand. The difference here is that we're naming just one thing and we're letting the consumer recognize It in themsel. The rule I would give is that you always want to frame against an accommodation, never the affliction. And that should generally allow you to pass through

brand reviews and stay more on brand. There's a few things to be careful of when you are going and you're writing out the problem part of the script. Number one is you generally want to argue to a degree at a category level rather than a product level. At this point in the script, you haven't Introduced the unique mechanism yet. So, we're not really trying to talk about your product. In fact, we're really trying not to introduce the product at all. And instead, we want to talk about the category at large. Reason being is that you

can't dismiss an entire category as like marketing hype. You might be able to with AI and stuff like that, but generally speaking, like you can't say the entire industry of preventing hair loss is completely a Lie, right? There's a little bit of authority automatically built into the category level. And so you want to move up to the category and then home down into the product as you move through the script. If you do this too, you're not asking them to believe anything about you yet. You're not really asking them for belief until you get all

the way down here towards the end of the ad. The next thing is that you always want to problem agitate on one person, not two. This is the single biggest predictor of really whether the problem agitating part of an ad will work well. You can't problem agitate everyone. You can't problem agitate multiple people. You have to problem agitate one single person. And then the last thing is do not resolve the problem in the problem part of the ad. The whole point in this part of the ad is to create discomfort. It's to be uncomfortable. You

don't want to resolve it straight away. You want to Sit them in the discomfort and then you want to move into the other stages. So what you can actually use from this right now latest script that you've written is take the problem section out of the script and ask whether it names a symptom or an accommodation. If it's an accommodation, aka a consequence, you're on the right track. If it's a symptom, which most people use, the fix is going back to the start of the video, doing research, and finding out what are some Accommodations, what

are some consequences of the core problem, and then pull that into your script. So now the prospect recognizes themsself in the ad. Now we need to tell them what are they actually going to get and what is the promise of delivery here? How are we going to solve? And so that's where we move into the promise and the mechanism. So we want to answer what does she get? The woman that we're talking to in this particular ad, the target demographic, What is she actually going to get? Most scripts that people write never actually answer that

question in a single sentence. Instead, what you will often do is you'll describe a problem. You'll then explain the mechanism. You'll list a bunch of proof, and then you'll have a call to action, and you'll ask for the sale. But then the buyer in this case the person that we're trying to talk to is left to work out what the actual outcome is for herself from the context Of the little amount of information that you've provided. So what are the failure modes of promise mechanism? Well number one that there's no promise at all. People will

often go problem straight into mechanism but they won't have the promise section. This is really common in like technically minded brands. So brands that sell a very like technical solution. It's a really common shape in supplements as well. Second failure mode is five promises. People make way too Many promises and so they all lose their value. An example of this is the vegan cruelty-free made in Australia, right? Just a bunch of promises that are meaningless. Promise stated as a feature. This is actually kind of common. For example, people would sometimes say that this part of

the script with six clinically studied ingredients, they're saying that's a promise. Not a promise at all. It's just a a feature. It's an input. it's not What we want to be talking about here. And then a promise bigger than the proof. We actually dive into this in a lot more detail in probably another 30 to 40 minutes in the video. So I'll leave that there. So with our original script, we don't have the promise, right? This is one of the issues with it is we go straight from the problem into the mechanism. So let's add

a line. We're going to add the line into here. Here's the promise we're going to add. This is about keeping what you've still got, not getting back what's gone. And to my understanding of hair loss, that actually is a really good compliant claim, which is that I don't really know of any solutions other than surgery that allow you to increase the density of hair. You can just stop it going away. You can stop it getting worse. And so that's what we're saying here. And it's truthful if they know anything about the topic, which they should

because they're Dealing with this problem. So this is a great way in which we can implement a promise that is talking to them in between the problem and the mechanism. This also effectively uses the Ben Svena rule which is that a smaller promise that you can prove will outsell a larger promise that you can't prove every single time. So we can prove this. We can't prove something more extreme. So we shouldn't say something more extreme. So what people will commonly do is they Will only have two of these three elements but the three elements all

work together to push someone through the cell. So the feature is what it is. The promise is what you get and the mechanism is how you get it. Aka the thing that produces the promise. Features alone sell to an already convinced audience which when you're trying to push to cold audiences and scale cold targeting that's no one. So a feature by itself is selling to Absolutely no one. The promise also really won't sell people by itself because anyone can make a promise. The whole category is probably making promises and dependent on the stage of sophistication,

it's probably not going to work in isolation. Although you need it as a bridging mechanism and as a way to complete the story so that then when you introduce the mechanism it makes the promise believable and it differentiates you inside of the one sentence. So you Can promise mechanism feature all very quickly and you get a script that convinces someone and pulls through and gives them a reason to buy. A good way to think about this is that you're saying the feature which means the promise which is why the mechanism and I'll give you an

example. So saw pelmet meadow. So this is a ingredient 320 mg that's the feature then the promise. So you can ask yourself which means you stop losing hair at the part which is Why DHT is what shrinks the follicle every cycle. Pelito blocks the DHT enzyme. So we're listing what the feature is. We're then listing the promise. So like what does it actually mean? And this is why the promise is important because people skip the promise because it's like anyone can make a promise. But the promise to an unaware or cold audience explains like what

does this actually mean for them? We can explain the features, the Mechanism, the jargon. What does it mean? Well, it means that you won't lose your hair. Why won't I lose my hair? Well, because there's this unique mechanism that you didn't know about, and this product actually fixes it. So, the next thing is a promise always has to be followed by a mechanism. An example of this is that a weak script would say it has as much caffeine as an energy drink, but you don't get the crash. Why don't you get the crash? There's no

unique mechanism that explains the why or gives the consumer a reason to believe this is different. And so instead, you would rewrite it to caffeine gives you the alertness and the jitters in the same dose, but eltheanine cancels the jitters out. So you no longer feel the crack. And so you introduce that unique mechanism, which in this case is elanine. In the case of supplements, it's pretty much always just the ingredient. When you list a Feature and it has no mechanism, you need to either go and find a real mechanism to be able to put

in there or you need to switch the feature out. If the feature isn't paired with the mechanism, there's no point in even putting it in. Or if you cannot find the feature with a unique mechanism in your entire product and all of your advertising, then you need to just switch it out for proof. And so this is very commonly done at the lower down in The stages of sophistication, which is that you will just promise and proof, promise and proof. So you're like, we can do this for you because look at our results. But you

never actually introduce any kind of unique mechanism. It's not going to work as well as this, but it's your alternative. Now, the order in which you present these two is really important. Some people, and you see this very commonly in scripts, probably now that I've told you this, 30 To 40% of ads that you watch now on your feed, you'll notice that people make this mistake, which is that they introduce the mechanism before they introduce the promise. Example of this is, and this is a real ad, they say lowers grein and increases leptin, which makes

you less hungry. Now, the issue with structuring in this way is that the retention curve falls as people go through the ad. And if you're opening at the front of the ad with technical Jargon language that people don't understand, you'll just lose a bunch of people and they won't even understand what it means and they won't even get to the promise. And so you want to introduce the promise because everyone knows what the promise is. It's going to hit the whole TAM and then you move into the unique mechanism which also then makes sense cuz

it's clarified by the promise. So how you would rewrite this is you stop thinking about food at 11:00 A.m. because the ketones suppress ghrein which is the hunger hormone. So suddenly you stop thinking about food at 11:00 a.m. We're actually problem agitating on something that they're feeling and then we're moving into the unique mechanism and explaining it. Always present the promise then the mechanism. And if you do not have a mechanism, find a different feature or value proposition that has one. And if you still can't do that, switch it all out for proof. Now The

objection we'll get here is, well, my product doesn't have a mechanism because it's a t-shirt or it's clothes. But there's still a bunch of unique mechanisms that you can talk to there, right? It has a fabric which could be unique. It has a construction process. It has a supplier. It has likely some kind of wash test that is done during the supply process. There's a person who cuts the t-shirt out. A mechanism is just the reason that the feature Produces the promise. Every physical product still has one because somebody made a decision and that decision

has a consequence that you can go and name. Marino wool in a t-shirt is an argument. The fiber is crimped so it traps air so it holds odor in the fiber rather than on your skin when you're working out. There's no chemistry in it. There's no ingredient technically that we're using like we would in supplements, but there's still so many unique mechanisms That you can find. Another really important disclaimer here on this part of the script is you don't want to name the product before the un before the mechanism is introduced and understood by the

consumer. An example of this is that if you sell electrolytes, right? You don't want to give away that you sell electrolytes right at the start and that's what the product is because then you just fall into the sea of every other electrolyte provider and then why Don't you just go to the cheapest option cuz they're all just selling salt and a little bit of magnesium, right? So instead, when you're at this part in the script, you want to introduce some kind of mechanism that differentiates your electrolytes from everyone else in some kind of way. Now,

once again, your electrolytes could be the exact same as everyone else, but you look at the manufacturing process. You look at something that's in the supply chain and You can pull on that and then make an argument for why it's better. Even if it's just the flavor, like you can speak to the fact that you spent 6 months in the factory doing this, that, this, and then discovered this process, which allowed for the flavor of the electrolytes to be substantially better. Like, whatever the mechanism is, you need to lean into the mechanism and then you

need to introduce the product later down. What I also don't like is that Sometimes people use a contradiction and they think that a contradiction is a mechanism, which it isn't. So, an example of a contradiction would be saying that this caffeine gum gives you as much energy as a coffee, but you don't get the crash. Now, you look at that and you go, "Oh, that's like that's a good line. We should probably run that." But the issue is you're not actually introducing any kind of mechanism there. You're just in Introducing a contradiction. You're trying to

open a curiosity gap, but we don't have any way to substantiate it at this part in the script. And so you either need to in introduce the mechanism here, you need to move that and make it the hook instead or you need to remove it entirely and think about a rewrite. A little side note, all of this also applies into the design of static ads. So when you're putting static ads together and you're trying to get Something that's a little bit more top of funnel, it's effectively the exact same process is we want to think

about where are the where's the eyes going first. That's going to be the hook. Then we want to move people into some kind of problem agitation. Now that could just be in the imagery. And then we need a promise, a mechanism. And then we need to ideally have some kind of objection proof offer. If we don't, this stuff then all goes on the landing page Because we don't have enough room to work with in just one static ad. And we keep all of this in the static. Now, we've talked about the problem promise mechanism, but

we skipped the hook at the start. So, let's dive into the hook. First thing is the visual element. So, right out of the gate, you can choose two different formats. You can go like lowfi native or you can go hi-fi clearly an ad. That's really the two distinctions that I'd make here. In Bucket A, we have hero. We have polished up hero shots. We have like your logo is centered in the middle. You've got a tagline. You've got something that's obviously an ad, very professional. On B, we have an example of like it opens with

a screenshot. We've got notes to self. We've got loi talking cam. So, we all intuitively know what this is. This looks native to the platform. This is something you would actually potentially post on organic. This does not look Native. This looks like an ad. Generally speaking, we would opt to put majority of your focus over here. This has a role. It creates some kind of branding effect where people will associate aspiration to the brand. This is like particularly important in fashion. You still need your photo shoots that go up as ads. However, if you're trying

to really cut through and get performance, performance normally comes out of bucket B and then bucket A kind of helps it by Substantiating value and making the brand look better. The idea of the hook is to pre-qualify the consumer before they go through the ad as opposed to trying to hook and capture everyone's attention. Really critical. Also really critical in the optimization of the campaigns. The campaigns will optimize towards the people that are actually watching the ad. Even if you're optimizing for the purchase objective, they're going to go people watch this Ad, this type of

person. Let us serve more to those people. An example of a weak headline, a weak piece of copy on the hook, or even just a weak piece of primary text would be introducing the new summer collection. Now, I know a lot of like high-end aspirational fashion brands, you have no other choice. Like, this is what you have to do. This is the messaging of the brand. This is the positioning. You can't really go outside of the box here. But if you can, and you Have the luxury too, then you can rework this entire front end

of the ad. You can rewrite too. I ordered this dress in three sizes because I had no idea which one I was. Opens up a curiosity gap. Actually fills native to the platform. Probably shot on lowfi talking cam. This is a substantially better hook. Now, we want would want to like risk reverse out of this by talking about how they don't actually need to buy three sizes and how there's a size guide because this would Obviously just lead to people buying a bunch of sizes and returning. So, we don't want to encourage this behavior, but

it's an incredible hook to be able to get people listening and watching through. Hellbert came up with this idea back in the 80s. It's like this is nothing new for digital and social. What they used to look at this in in terms of pile A and pile B is that pile A is everything that's obviously advertising when you get letters in the mail. So you Can look at the letter and you just immediately know it's advertising and so you put it into pile A. And then pile B is everything that appears to be a personal

letter. And so this is where this concept comes from which is you get a bunch of letters and you quickly sort into two piles and one you probably never look at and throw in the bin and the other one you'll work through. you want to make sure you land in the one that people actually work through on and Actually open and read. And so it's the exact same concept in a hook on a video ad. Now, these concepts that we're talking about here in terms of hooks, this applies not only into the hook of the

script of a video ad, but it applies into the hook on the headline of the Facebook ad. It applies into the hook of the primary text and it applies into the hook of the landing page if we're driving to some kind of listical, some kind of advvertorial or long form Preander. you really ultimately have a bunch of hooks that are all getting presented to the consumer at the exact same time. And we want to make sure there is congruency in the argument. What you'll see very commonly is the first frame of the ad speaks towards

luxury, but then the spoken word over the ad has cheap language in it. Then the overlay or maybe the primary text has sale messaging and then the primary headline down the bottom is talking to Science or some kind of science backing. And so there's immediately a disconnect between all of these things. And you could argue, oh, it's creating a curiosity gap, but we don't want them to conflict each other. We want them to make one clear claim out of the gates that gets people to start watching. An example of a bad headline would be, and

once again, this is bad hook, bad headline, bad primary text, bad top of a avitorial landing page, introducing Nourish Plus. Remember, this is the product that we have over here in the script that we're working on. Stronger version would be why hair thins at the part line first. Now, this obviously immediately encapsulates the persona that we want to talk to because if your hair is parting, you're going to keep listening. The core objection to having a hook that feels native to the platform that fits in feeds and that actually gets your target demographic to continue

Watching. Brand teams will often go, we'll never get this signed off. We can't go and launch like influence UGC or EGC or anything that's lower than what we're currently running. And that's kind of fair enough, but I wouldn't think about the difference between pile A and pile B in terms of fidelity. Like the actual resolution of the content is not what makes it feel native. You could take the pile A, which is the stuff that is obviously an ad. And you could just Make this a little bit lower quality and it will still be seen

as an ad. So what makes it look like an ad? It's the marketing language. And so you want to move away from heavy marketing language within the hook and you want to move towards more native language that feels like you're not about to get sold to. So this is less of a visual thing, although it is definitely a visual thing. Like changing the visuals to some native format on the platform does work Phenomenally well. Like if you can hide in plain sight, it's going to work. But if you can't do that, I would more so

be thinking about the marketing language than just the quality and the format. Now, I would go deeper on the hook, but we already have a 1-hour video on how to write and script good hooks in Facebook ads. So, I recommend going to that video. I just search up hook strategy, blue sense digital. We also have our 2 and 1/ half hour creative strategy video Where we also spend about 25 minutes on this topic. So, there's a lot of pre-existing content if you want to go deeper on hooks, but that is the core premise on how

to script and write that portion of the ad. Now, the section that isn't listed here that I want to quickly touch on is these transitions. So as you move from the hook into the body and from the body into the offer, these are bridges. And people will often write all of these separate sections in isolation And not think about how they bridge into each other. And what that ends up causing is this retention decay. So if we have retention in seconds on the y- axis and then we have the amount of people watching on the

x- axis, this is what a normal retention curve will look like. If you have a bad bridge, what will happen is you'll have everyone at the hook and then it will fall like that and then as you move from proof to offer, it'll do that again. So, you'll End up losing a lot of people cuz it's very obvious that you're either moving into a sale or the content just isn't good. Cuz at the end of the day, a video ad is just a piece of content. And if people are watching it and suddenly there's a

disconnect and they're like, "I'm going to scroll." They're going to scroll and you're going to lose them. A good way to really sum bridges up and to be thinking through them is that the whole objective of the first line in Your script is to get the user to watch or read the second line in the script. And the whole objective of the second line in the script is to get the user to watch and listen to the third line in the script. That's the entire discipline here. And if the hook suddenly h is disconnected in

some way from the problem or if the objection and proof is somehow disconnected from when the offer and then the product gets introduced, there will be a large drop off in Retention. Now just thinking tactically for a second, how do people make this mistake? Like how do you not do this? Well, the easy way that people make this mistake is they make a bunch of hooks and then they put them onto the front of the ad and they don't think about how all of these 20 hooks that they made are going to flow into the

second line of the ad. And so what ends up happening is you have a bunch of hooks. There might be good hooks in isolation. You look at Them and you go, that's good. And then you see it stitched onto the second sentence, which becomes the problem agitation, and you go, that's a that makes no sense. Like why did you stitch that hook onto that body? And that's where you get this massive retention fall off because there's this discontinuity down the bottom here. How people people often make the mistake on the second bridge that occurs. And

this bridge can actually be like anywhere Here. It's just really when you go from the consumer not knowing about the product to knowing about the product. So it's the moment in which the product is introduced. this bridge is also messed up a lot of the times because people will just go through all of this good scripting a good ad and then they'll go and that's why the Nourish Plus is your best solution and they'll just introduce the ad almost like a TV advertisement and you're like what you were just Telling me about hair loss and

educating me about these chemicals and then just bang suddenly your product like you need to kind of ease into the product getting introduced and there's ways to do this and like you could visually introduce the product without talking about it yet and then you can actually mention the product a few lines later. Like there's a lot of good ways in which you can bridge in without substantially like shocking the user that like, oh, this is An ad I'm getting sold to right now. I would argue this script that we're working through and we're going to

have a final version of this script by the end of the video. Um, I would argue this script does a pretty average job on the bridge, right? So, women lose it at the partline first, usually about 18 months before anybody else notices, which is why we made Nourish Plus. And I bet B-roll of Nourish Plus is going to appear in the video. As that said, I Think that this could be smoothed out quite a bit. Now, trying to smooth this out in the existing script is actually very difficult to do. There's not an easy edit

or an easy rewrite of one line here that's going to fix it. This whole second half of the script really needs an entire rework to where we can go and introduce the product way later down where it really should be introduced, which is in the offer stage or even sometimes you can push all the way to The CTA. So attempting a rewrite hair, let's say we remove line three and we go from women lose it at the part line usually about 18 months before anybody else notices. The fix isn't a better shampoo. It's getting the

follicle to stop shrinking. Three things that do that and the first is the reason most people fail. And then we go into the three reasons and then we introduce the product later on. What this will immediately do other than it being Better scripting is that it will hold users through. And then for the call to action bridge when you're introducing the product, a weak example is so head to the site and grab yours. But a rewrite and how you can introduce the product slower is you can buy those separately and people do. So we're talking

about three different ingredients or three different products there or you can take them all in one capsule. Here's what's in it. And so We're introducing the product subtly. The product is probably going to get introduced in some capacity in the visual. Um but we're not calling out the name of it. We're not calling out the brand. We're not going this is the solution. So, the important thing to understand about bridging through the ad is that nothing will make you scroll past an ad faster than watching like a storytime video or something that's very storytelling based

and then 5 seconds in Suddenly obviously becomes an ad, right? What you don't want is product awareness to go from zero to 100 immediately. We need to smooth it in because in an organic feeling piece of content, how people will normally talk and walk through organic content is they'll go random thought, small complaint, personal story, and then maybe they'll mention the product. That's how people normally communicate. And so that is how you need to communicate through the Creative so it doesn't abundantly feel like an ad. People typically don't go random thought story, this is the

product, please buy. Okay, there needs it needs to be smoothed out. And you see this in all really good creative. So the next section of the video, we're going to dive into the objection portion of the script. Now, this is really underlying beliefs. And an exercise that I would recommend is that you sit down, you grab a pen and paper or you grab a Word document and you start to walk through what beliefs does my customer have to have for them to buy? What beliefs are true? Now in objection handling beliefs are often actually very

similar. People think that objections are individualized to your particular business. Like the reason why your customers don't buy is very different from why these guys customers don't buy. There is a bit of nuance for sure. Generally we can categorize it into six Core objections. Number one is this isn't for me. Number two this won't work. Number three it might work but it won't work for me. It's not worth it. What if I'm wrong and then I'll do it later? Now, how do you fix all of these objections in your script? Because they all have a

very easy fix. This isn't for me. We want the language to be persona specific. This is why you are generally better off talking to a specific person rather than a very large wide audience Because if you talk to a specific person, they know it's for them because you're speaking to the exact profile that they are. This won't work for me. You need mechanism which is already built into this scripting structure which is great and you need proof. It might work but not for me. This is where you need testimonial or evidence of proof for this

specific persona. So rather than having generalized mechanisms and proof, you need proof That is specific to the persona. It's not worth it. This ultimately comes down to the offer which is uh the product and the perception of value. Also you could argue that this is the like cost of not purchasing which is like if you're selling anti acne cream you could say well the cost of you not doing this is that you'll have to go hop on rowacetine which is medication that you'll need to be on for 2 to three years which will cost thousands

of dollars over its Lifetime. you'll need to get a medical appointment and because of that the cost of you not just simply buying this product is going to be in the thousands long term. What if I'm wrong? This is where you require a guarantee or some kind of risk reversal which is down here and then I'll do it later. This is obviously why we require some kind of urgency as well. That's why during sales periods or like Black Friday this is built into the day and so you get a Natural spike in sales. Now, I've

also done it in this order because this is also the direct order of how the script has to run. You do not want to go and objection handle what if I'm wrong, I'll do it later. At the beginning, obviously, right, we're starting off with this is for you. This will work. It will actually work specifically for you. It's absolutely worth the money and value. We guarantee that it will work or you'll get your money back and you have To buy it today. That's like effectively the message structure here. and it's objection handling all of these

issues through this script structure. I'll give you an example of really good script writing that handles an objection before the customer even thinks about it. So what we could say is it's gentle enough for sensitive skin. Okay, it's gentle enough for sensitive skin. the stronger reframe of that script. The great rewrite for this is you're going to React to this in week one. Everyone does. That's why we made the first tube just 0.05% concentration and why the second one bumps up slightly. So rather than us just saying, "Yeah, it works for gentle skin." We're specifically

calling out an experience that the customer has had before, which has to be done through the research phase. We can't just invent these things. And we know that customers often have bought stuff that is claimed It's good for gentle skin, but then on the first round, bang, they get a flare up because their skin isn't used to it. It's not tolerated at whatever the dose of this particular mechanism is at. And so, we're calling it out. We're saying, "Yeah, we know that is why we did this." So, we're preempting. And that's really the key here

with objection handling is that you want to preempt as much as possible what the core objection is going to be. And you want to answer the Objection in the customer's own language through the customer's own experience that they're used to. Okay? We're not just saying yes, trust us. We're threading it through an experience that they have had. All right. Here is the proof ladder, which is effectively the strongest to the weakest proof that you can have in an ad. Number one is demonstration. Pretty obvious. This is just the thing clearly working on camera. An example

of this would be a Before and after. Before and afters are some of the most powerful things you can have because you can real time demonstrate like here's the makeup before, here's the makeup after, here's the weight before, here's the weight loss after. That would also be included inside of demonstration. Number two is third-party verification. This is typically going to be within supplements and consumables, which is going to be clinical results, lab tests, Certifications. Independent press is also a really good one here. So, if you've actually like been on the news, if there's been a

news article does work phenomenally well, okay, some of the best performing ads I have seen have actually been like news anchor style ads that are real, like they were on the news and they absolutely crush. Number three is volume of specific social proof. So, this is how many reviews do you actually have? How many total amount Of customers do you actually have? That ends up being the third. Number four is a named individual testimony. You can sometimes argue that this is more important than this, it ends up being brand specific, but as an example, for

a marketing agency, which I know we're talking about ecom here, but for a marketing agency, a very specific test uh testimonial outweighs a million reviews any day of the week. Because if you as a makeup brand see a video Testimonial on the BlueSense website from a $100 million makeup brand founder, you are going to go, I trust Blueense because that's one of our biggest competitors and they work with very specific and that's why it works. Compared to you might look at another agency, they have 5,000 fivestar reviews, but there's no specificity anywhere. So you're like

this, these could be brick and mortar hairdressing shops that they're servicing. has Nothing to do with me. So, it is going to be like brand and niche and industry specific. But that's number four. Number five is the mechanism explanation. It's not really proof, but it leans on making the claim plausible through logical selling. Right? So, whenever you're explaining like creatine, how creatine works and you explain the mechanism of creatine, that ends up being proof in itself for the expected out. And then we've got founder assertion. This is the Weakest of all of these. Sometimes people

will just go on with this and think it'll g a brand. It won't. This will really only work when the founder has some kind of like standing in the market. So, is the founder David Beckham, right? Is the founder a really decently well-known scientist? Does the founder have incredible credentials within the domain in which they're selling that therefore acts as a point of proof? Like you could be one of the Leading uh neurosurgeons in the world and you come out with a cognitive health product. Yeah. Like okay that's like not bad. That's not bad. We

should we should probably use that. We should probably capitalize on that. That's not bad proof. All of these things still necessary but this has some weight. Vice versa. If you're like a 20-year-old who is like didn't go to uni trying to get a startup, made like a cognitive enhancer, don't talk about the founder story. That's not much proof there to be able to back the claims that you're making. I'll give you an example of a rewrite of bad to good social proofing. So weak social proofing is you say in your script, customers love it. This

is unfortunately in a lot of ad scripts. The strong version of this would be to include this stuff and have specificity. Now, this could be enormous. I can make this like four sentences by including all of this. We're just keeping it Short. We can go, we have 360,000 happy customers. And the word finally appears in our reviews over 6,000 times because our customers so happy that they could finally find a solution to their acne problems. Right? So, two pieces of specificity there. Specificity in exactly how many customers we have, which is number three. And then

this is a quote, which is a testimony. It's a testimony that has been done 6,000 times. A really important principle to Remember is that you always want to match the proof to the claim. Modest claim with strong proof beats a large claim with weak proof any day of the week. So you always want to make sure that your proof is higher than whatever the claim is because you can always inflate claims all day long. And this is really like what happens when you move into the level two of market sophistication. But just making large claims

is likely not going to do much Because most people are not operating in a level two market. They're operating in a level four, five market. And so claims need greater proof. This all comes from Chel Deini's book influence in 1984. I'm trying to write this somewhere. Influence 1984 where there are core principles of the book as to the psychology of how you build proof. Number one is authority. And this is really through number two and arguably number six. Number two is social proof. Now this applies to multiple of this. Number three is scarcity which is

what we actually talked about when we were talking about the objection types. Number four is reciprocity which honestly is explaining the mechanism. So we're giving education about how something works. So we're giving information hoping for something back. Number five is commitment and consistency. The next one is liking. The next one is unity. Unity is about Identity, which is in the next chapter, what we're going to go into in about 15 minutes. Liking is about casting and register, which is what we've already talked about previously. Commitment and consistency. This is really to do with how we

approach the call to action and how we make some asks throughout. So, the call to action isn't crazy. Now, I prefer personally the way that we've frameworked everything so far, which is why we're not just using and just Regurgitating this book and this framework because this can be hard to start to pull apart and demonstrate into an actual script. But I always have to give credence to where these ideas come from. I'll quickly just give you how you should think through call to actions, which is that you should always structure the script around a call

to action by number one naming the action that we want taken. Number two, we want to state what happens next. Number Three, we want to price the effort. And then number four is we want to give a reason for now. Effectively, we want to push urgency and scarcity. This writing quality is terrible. Let's move over to here. A weak example of this is to just say like learn more. Click the link below is much better or like shop now at the link below. Like all of this stuff isn't great. Let's just go learn more. learn

more by like clicking below. What does this do? It um if you say by Clicking below, it names the action that should be done. It doesn't state what happens next. It doesn't price the effort and it doesn't give a reason for now. And so a stronger version of this call to action, the strong rewrite here is take the 60-second quiz. You'll get your size and two cuts that suit your shape. So here we're driving to a quiz funnel. We're pricing the effort, which it's only 60 seconds. We're naming the action. Take the quiz. We're going

to State what happens next. You'll get your size and two cuts that suit your shape. And we give them a reason why, right? They're going to find out what suits their particular shape. Actually, to be fair, we didn't give a reason for why they should do it right now. So, we could add something like these are our our top selling products are about to sell out or like some kind of real urgency or scarcity as to why they should buy. We can add that as a final Line down the bottom here. Now, using everything we've

just gone through, we'll do another rewrite on this script and we'll show what it's turned into at this point. But before that, a lot of people are probably thinking, well, that ladder of proof doesn't apply to us because we don't have proof. We're not a clinical brand. We can't afford a trial and we just started. So, like, we don't have reviews. How do we have proofing within our ads to make them good? And That's why that ladder applies more to you than it does to anyone else. Cuz if you remember what I put as number

one there or if you want to skip back on the video, it was demonstration. Demonstration anyone can do. I just like you can invent a product tomorrow and you can demonstrate it. You have no proof from customers. You have no proof from third party uh clinical tests, but you can demonstrate all day long. So I would be leaning into demonstration as Much as possible. Then number four here was specific testimonial from customers. Now, you can very easily give your product out to 20 people and say, "Please give us a review and please be detailed in

exactly what you say and precise as to how the product helped you." Don't just say, "Yeah, it was good. Tell us why." Like, dig in. Give us something and we'll give you the product for free. Then you'll get 20 reviews with a lot of specificity in the Language and then you just pull out that specificity and you use it within your ads and you use it within your landing pages and there you go. Now, yes, the other options are probably off for now, like you can't claim volume of customers or volume of reviews. You can't

go and have like third party uh testing like founder story might not be relevant. So, yes, you do lose elements of proof, but you still have a lot here to work with. All right, so as a reminder, we started Here with this script. Then we went through having an accommodation replace the symptom. And so we did that with a basic rewrite here, which is where rather than us talking about women lose it at the part line first, usually about 18 months, we moved to actually talking about well, how is this person accommodated this particular symptom,

which is you've stopped parting it in the middle. You didn't decide to do that. You just started doing it. Right? Then we went and introduced a promise because it's always important to have a promise before the unique mechanism, which is this line right here. This is about keeping what you've still got, not getting back what's gone. So, a promise has been made. Then we have moved through bridging through the script. So, we've improved it to you stopped parting in the middle and there's nothing in the shampoo aisle for it. The fix sits upstream of the

shampoo aisle. It's Getting the follicle to stop shrinking. Follicles shrink when DHT binds to them. Every cycle, the hair comes back finer until one cycle it doesn't come back. Three things slow that down. Saw palmeo blocks the enzyme that makes the DHT. Rosemary oil keeps blood at the root and a keratin precursor gives the follicle something to build with. You can buy those three separately and plenty of people do or you can take one capsule at night. So we have introduced a lot of The mechanism work that we went through. We've got bridging introduced as

well. So, this does a really good job at going problem, solution, mechanism, specific solution, product. And then finally, getting up to speed on everything that we've learned and taught so far in this video. This is where your script writing should be at. You've stopped parting it in the middle. You didn't decide to do that. You just started doing it. This is us speaking to an accommodation. This is About keeping what you've still got, not getting back what's gone. This is our promise. The fixed sits upstream of the shampoo aisle. This is the bridge. Follicles shrink

when DHT binds to them and every cycle the hair comes back finer until one cycle it doesn't come back. We've moved into the unique mechanism. Three things slow that down. We're using a retention mechanism here. So, we're opening a curiosity gap. So, people want to know what the three Things are. Saw pelito blocks the enzyme that makes the DHT. Rosemary oil keeps blood at the root. A keratin precursor gives the follicle something to build with. You've done the rosemary oil, four months, smelly pillowcase, nothing. That's our objection handling. Then we move into proof. 4,812 reviews.

The word that comes up most is finally. Then we move into the offer. It's the 90-day pack because the cycle is 90 days and a 30-day pack is designed to fail. 76 Cents a day. Send back the empties if your part hasn't changed and we'll refund all three. Now, this script isn't done. As you can see here, over the next 1 hour of this video, we are going to continue to iterate into a even better version of this script. We're going to do one more iteration, then another, then another, and then we are going to

have the final piece of script writing at the bottom here, which I hope is going to be a winning ad. At the very Least, it's going to have a much much higher hit rate than anything that you were producing before you watch this video. In this section, we'll be going through emotion and identity. Now, where this script that we just went through starts to break down is when we do the so what test against emotion and identity. So, if you go through every single line in what we just went through and you ask so what

and the answer to so what can't be the mechanism, right? It Has to be like why do people actually care about this? This starts to break down a little bit. The reason being is that nobody has ever bought a supplement simply because they want a supplement. Just like nobody buys hair or like a wig because they just feel like buying a wig. What they're actually buying is a version of themsel that did something about it early instead of waiting, right? They're buying the future outcome. And at the end of the day, They're buying the emotional

connection and the identity that they believe they are. The Robert Kellier letter book from 1931 has a really good sentence on this, which is that you shouldn't enter the conversation. Instead, you should find where their attention already is, arrive there in the register of someone who belongs, and only then introduce your subject. Now, this is sales 101, but at the end of the day, marketing or Scripting is just one-on-one sales, but to the masses. And so, we want to arrive at the identity and the emotional position that the consumer is in. And only then do

we want to start to guide them towards the subject that we want to talk about and that we want to get in front of them. How is this applicable into what we're writing? We want to ask where is their attention right now? Where is their attention right now which typically is not where your product is? What register belongs there? We'll come back to this in about 20 minutes time in the video. And then what did they already feel before they arrived? Because you're not creating a feeling. You're just joining into it. Let's run through some

examples of how what it does connects to what it makes them. And this is us creating identity or thinking about what is the identity behind why this thing matters at all. So it blocks DHT. What does that mean for them? It Means that if they care about this, then they're the type of person who wants to start before the hair loss becomes visible. That's their identity. What about someone that gets sold on 12 g of collagen? It's someone who takes it seriously rather than dabbling in lower doses. What about marino wool? Well, marino wool is

like light and it generally doesn't hold a smell and so it's for someone who just wants to pack one bag. Okay, that's the identity. Why Would someone care about wearing something for 4 days straight and it not having a smell? It's probably someone who wants to only pack one bag and that's a core part of their identity. They travel light. What about a 90-day guarantee? This connects to the identity of someone who has already been sold to before and it failed. And so their identity is nope, I don't trust things. I don't trust this category.

And so the guarantee gets around that and speaks to That particular identity. What about a supplement that absorbs in 40 seconds? Why would anyone care? Well, the type of people that would care how this would connect to their identity is the kind of person who's on the move who needs to leave the house at 6:30 a.m. in the morning. They need to quickly take the supplement and go. What about third party tests? Well, third party tests, how that connects to identity is somebody who likes to check things. Somebody who doesn't just rush into taking a

supplement, but they want to know, okay, what's the what's the scientific backing? Now, even whether they do that or not doesn't matter. It's all about the cognitive identity. How do they see themselves? And as long as they see themselves as someone that does their due diligence and checks around and makes sure that everything's valid, that's all that matters because we're playing to that identity. This is Schwarz's fifth stage of sophistication. So, if you remember back to the very start when we talked about the stages of sophistication, level one, and this is going to test my

memory, level one is that you can just make claims and it'll sell people because they've never seen the product before. Level two is now everyone's making claims, so you need to make your claim larger. Level three is now everyone's making large claims, so you have to introduce a unique Mechanism. Level four is everyone's got unique mechanisms, so you need to make yours bigger. Level five is everyone in the market is sick of unique mechanisms. all of these claims being made. And so now what do you need to do in the fifth stage? You need to

speak to identity and to emotion. You need to speak to the person that they become. And that is how you cut through on a level five market in the stages of sophistication. Now, how do you just not turn this into like Branding fluff? How is this actually mechanically applicable into scripting? Well, we're going to go through it later. like we're going to pick apart the scripts and I'm going to show you how this actually materially changes the way that the sentences are crafted and additional sentences that should be put in. However, the important headline is

that identity without mechanism is just a lifestyle brand with some kind of supplement attached. So the identity Can't exist without the mechanism. This is where like branding exercises and a brand team in isolation can do a lot of work that doesn't actually really materially move the business is that they'll just get stuck in over here. So it's like what's the identity of the customer? We believe the customer is someone like this, someone like this. And it's like okay great but how does that materially matter at all in regards to what the product actually does? What

The mechanisms and value propositions are? Because like we can talk about their identity all day long, but it needs to actually materially tie to something that exists within the product or else we're just stuck in brand land and none of this actually shows up into any kind of scripting or any kind of ads or any kind of copy on the landing page. So how do we go and add this into the running script? As a reminder, this is the running script. And what we will do Is we will add a line to the very end.

And the line is going to be the women who keep it are the ones who started before they could see it. This is us making a direct play to their identity. Are they the kind of person that's going to prevent their hair from falling out before or are they not? And if they're not, that's totally fine. They're probably not the target demographic. We probably don't want to convince them to buy because they're not going to keep The habit anyway, right? Like if you aren't willing to prevent hair loss before it starts being visible, then if

we sell you a hair loss prevention product, you're going to use it a bit and you're going to be like, "Ah, this is annoying. I don't want to use this." And you're going to go back to your old ways. So, we don't even really want to sell you anywhere. Which is why this is a really powerful sentence that is not only speaking to identity and emotion, But it is also technically like a persona call out because we're saying like, "Don't even buy unless you're going to do this." Honestly, here's the thing that I got wrong

for years in scripting and the first version of this video didn't have this in it was that I used to teach the mechanism as though believing was the same as wanting, but it's not. And they're not even remotely close. You can build an argument so logical that a buyer agrees with every Single sentence and still does nothing. And that ad and that script will look completely fine in every review meeting that it goes through because everybody in the room is checking whether it's correct. It's like, "Yep, that's correct. That's correct. Yep. It's following the framework.

Amazing." But nobody in the room is checking whether anybody actually wants it. Every great direct response copywriter knew this. And it's the half that doesn't survive Being turned into a framework, which is why it's often left out of frameworks because it's like, where do I put the emotion and identity in here? It should be throughout. should be bleeding through every single word. There should be some dedicated sentences here and there, but there's no rule. It's not like put the identity at the ends like we just did, right? So, it's hard to framework it, but it's

absolutely critical to take the script that we've Worked all this time on perfecting and then elevating it. A good line to remember here is a checklist produces competence. Great, we're competent now. But competence is not what anybody actually remembers because the checklist doesn't connect to emotion and identity. Now, the objection at this point in the video is you're sitting there and you're going, "Wow, Nathan, who's so performance-driven and all of the videos are so logical, has just gone and turned A performance video into a brand video. What are we doing? I want him talking about

finance and CFO and logical checklists again. I'm not watching a Blue Sense video for this kind of stuff." And I agree. I don't claim to be on the brand side. I'm much more leaning towards performance. And that's why we want to make this logical. I want to give tangible examples like I've already done and then we want to actually start thinking through the application here. The example I gave you I think is a really good logical like non-branding way to represent this idea which is that effectively like rather than us ending this ad on a

call to action and an ask which most people do. Most ads end in like buy my stuff at ends. Instead we're going like a very smooth nice call to action of like here's why you should buy the 90 instead of the 30. We'll do a risk reversal. Every month you wait is another cycle which is a little bit of An emotional play. And then we round the whole thing out with a play towards identity. So you could take this as the framework if you want. It's like final sentence in the ad should be a play

towards the identity of the consumer. Also this is brand work. Absolutely. This is all brand work if you're not connecting it to mechanisms. So if you're just like coming up with all this identity stuff. If you're just like living here for sure this is like this Is not a blue scans video. You can go and talk about this elsewhere. We're not going to do this on our channel. We don't claim to be like branding experts. But if you're going to do this indirect connection to this, oh well now like this is performance marketing, right? This

is direct response copyrightiting. This is sales because we're taking unique mechanisms and we're connecting it to identity like sales 101. This is a great section. We are now going to talk About storytelling. Some of the best brands right now doing a million dollars a day. incredible storytellers and they're doing this through really long format ads that can be as long as seven to eight minutes where they're telling these intricate stories and it weaves in your product and it problem agitates and it does everything here but it does it through the lens of a story. An

important first note here is that a story is not a beat in here. So we're Not going like okay story is number four or story is number seven. The story is interwoven across the entire script. It's a way of carrying all of these things. The reason most storytelling advice in this industry is really bad is because people treat it as an add-on. Like, cool, you've written your script, you've got all these elements. Now, let's just add a story in or let's like like bolt on a 30-cond story. Maybe at the start, maybe in the middle,

maybe at The end. Don't do that. That the whole ad has to be the story. It's really like this is a good way to think about it. It's really the delivery mechanism. It's the same thing on scripting as changing between like second or first person. When you change the point of view, this also materially changes the whole app. So what's happening when we put this through a story is that we're carrying the viewer through a sequence of events happening to somebody changes nothing About this. It just changes the way that we present it and potentially

the way that it lands with the consumer. Let's run through some examples of how we can take specific beats within the overall uh script. So a beat being the hook, problem, promise, mechanism, etc. And then how does this actually tie into a specific script? Let's start here. So the shape, this is the failed solutions journey. Very very common when anyone's doing storytelling scripting in ecom. It'll open something like this. I tried the rosemary oil, then the supplements, then my GP told me it's hormonal and there's nothing I can do. What does that say? and objection

handling. Obviously, we're using a story to be able to objection handle a bunch of stuff that didn't work. Then there's the discovery section of the script. I found out why it happens at the part first and it changed the way that I bought. This is obviously leading into and talking to The mechanism. They went through this discovery journey of understanding why the accommodation tied to the symptom tied to the mechanism actually occurs. The transformation with a witness is a great one. My my sister noticed it before I did. That's the bit that got me right.

This is moving into proof. We've then got and this is also like you can see how this is tied so directly into identity as well. And then the confession I stopped parting it in the Middle about a year ago. I never told anyone I'd done that. That is the problem. We're directly problem agitating. But instead of us uh speaking through in like second or third person, this is all first person storytelling, right? into just a shift a shift in point of view and we can move this into a storytelling journey and we can often in

these scripts actually get a lot more emotion. You can still do this in second person. You can just talk about someone. This is very common in you'll see this in the AI like claimation kind of ads, right? Which is that you have a lot of first person ones, but then you have a lot of second person ones which we can say like Gracie tried the rosemary oil, then she tried the supplements, then she went to her GP and the GP told her it was hormonal and we have like obviously animations going over the top. She

actually went and discovered why it happens at the part first and it Completely changed how she went about the solution. And oh god, did we mention that the first time she noticed it, it was her sister. And then like obviously there's a bunch of visuals over the top that's demonstrating the entire story. These storytell telling ads right now at the 18th of September 2026 end up being very heavily AIdriven ads because it is so easy to suddenly just put visuals over a story using AI video. Otherwise, previously you would have to like chop a Bunch

of B-roll clips together. you'd probably have to go and actually film like this story and you'd have to have an actor acting it all out or it's just a piece of UGC talking a camera. But uh that gives a bit of context as to why AI is being leveraged so heavily here. Now the reason why I've listed these four different story types is that these are very commonly like 90% of storytelling in ads and direct to consumer ecom which is that the stories are pretty much Always some kind of failed solution journey some kind of

discovery process over like I discovered creatine and it transformed my life transformation with a witness so there was a witness involved or there's some kind of confession these are 80% of stories not to say that there's other stories stories that exist and there's other like script writing narratives. There are you can find them, you can use them, but we're trying to cover the most bases Here and this is most of the bases. So now, how does storytelling translate into our script? We have redone the whole script now into first person through the lens of a

story. I stopped parting my hair in the middle about a year ago. This is the hook. I didn't decide to do that. I just started doing it. And then I saw a photo from my sister's wedding from behind and I understood what I'd been avoiding. This is the problem agitation. Here's what I Didn't know. It's not the hair, it's the follicle. And it's shrinking a bit every cycle because of DHT. And every cycle it becomes it comes back thinner until one cycle it doesn't come back at all. This is further problem agitating plus actually talking

to the mechanism. Now here we can't make a promise before the mechanism because this is a first person story FYI. Otherwise, a promise would be in it. I've done the rosemary oil 4 months. My pillowcase smelled and Nothing happened. And that's because it was never going to work upstream of the thing that's actually doing it. So, this is more talking to the mechanism and we are directly objection handling on the rosemary oil. Three things slow it down. Saw pelito blocks the enzyme. We already know this from the previous scripts. Rosemary oil keeps the blood, which

is why it half worked. And keratin precursor gives the follicle something to build. You can buy those separately And people do or you can take one capsule at night. It's 90 days because the cycle's 90 days and if your part hasn't changed, you can send it back with the empties. The women who keep it are the ones who started before they could see it. Right? So, we've integrated all of this storytelling into the front end of the ad. Now, do I think this is a perfect ad? No. And that's why we have one more rewrite

left because I think the bridge could have been Significantly improved here. We could have bridged more carefully between the story into the call to action. Generally with these storytelling ads, they have to be longer in length. Like I don't think I've seen a 30 second storytelling ad or a 45 second storytelling ad because you can't talk about a story and then just say buy this supplement, right? The the bridge is off here. It feels off. And so if we wanted this to continue with this storytelling Narrative all the way to the call to action, I'd

probably need two pages. this this script would need to be a lot longer to be able to effectively walk through a bridge into proof offer etc. Now the reason why this script in particular works is because people like stories. The story ends up changing the consumer's perspective or job. When a consumer is watching an ad, their job is to evaluate you. So, she's sitting outside of it deciding whether to agree. And every sentence you write is a sentence that the consumer or her in this instance is going to be auditing you. In a story, her

job is to find out what happened. She's like inside the narrative and the argument arrives while she's doing something else, which is just consuming the story. Every single beat is still there, but the consumer isn't actively like marking through them. Instead, they're just consuming the information because they think They're being walked through a story that's very familiar to their own experience. There is three things that break a storytelling ad. Number one is the bridge and we purposely kept that as a failure of the script that we looked at before so you can see the actual

impact of this because this is the most common uh miss. This is the most common mistake that people make when doing a storytelling script is that effectively the story runs and then the ad starts. You don't want that. You want to bridge into introducing the product very naturally. Number two, where this breaks is if the narrator is obviously an actor. Effectively, this will break if you are doing this as a piece of UGC and just the UGC creator isn't very good at acting quite frankly. Now, if you are making claims, then it's not compliant for

someone to make claims if they haven't actually used or bought the product, FYI. So, usually this is a Customer. But even if it is a customer, a customer can be an actor, right? Because they can record a testimonial ad for you, in which case they could just be bad. Like, you could just not believe them. You could look at it and go, "Ah, this person is obviously just reading off a script and this doesn't look natural." And that will ruin a storytelling ad a lot of the time. And then the third is a story with

no stakes, right? All right. So if nothing Was risked, nothing was lost, no one was embarrassed, then no one cares about the story, right? This is uh the most common failure of the three alongside the bridge. And it is because there's not enough research done because typically the script writer is not the person in the circumstance, right? Generally, you're not losing your hair or at least probably the person writing the script to the woman who is losing her hair probably isn't an older woman losing Their hair writing the script. Okay, generally you don't match the

ICP. It would be pretty unlikely. Helpful if you are, but unlikely. And so with that, people don't do enough research and the writer doesn't have an accommodation. They have no failed solution. They have no moment of realization. So there was nothing to build a sequence out of. So they just went and invented a story themselves that like doesn't really exist and is a little bit off and no One's actually experienced that. So a weak example of this would be, I've been looking for something to help with my hair for a while. A better rewrite of

that would be, "I'd stopped going to the hairdresser because I thought she'd say something." So, you can see we've reframed from something that had no stakes. I've been looking for something to help with my hair. Who cares? To I stopped going to the hairdresser cuz I thought she'd say something. Now, bang, We've got stakes. We've got risk. We've got something to lose, which is the hair. And we've got something that's embarrassing. So, such a better script, better story. That's obviously going to work. Now, the objection to storytelling is you might be thinking, "This only works

for UGC and founder ads. My category is not personal." Well, the narrator does not have to be a customer and it does not have to be a person. The four shapes that we went through before, They're structures. They're not like casting notes on who has to be in the ad. You can just change from first to second to third person and you can pretty much have anyone like in a story. This is applicable anywhere. For example, like the discovery part where we're talking about discovering the mechanism, discovering that you ended up having this problem. This

can be the through the lens of like literally the brand talking about it. The brand can Say somebody worked out why this happens. Here is what they found. Here is what changed. Okay, it's the same thing, but you're talking in third person about something else. Very common storytelling thing that people will do here is talk about like something getting discovered hundreds of years ago. There's actually a really good one in supplements where there will be a supplement that you probably haven't really heard of much and they're like, "This was a natural remedy used in 1,000

BC by this tribe for hundreds of years and it went undiscovered and everyone forgot about it and now we have brought it back because this like that is a story where it has nothing to do with the founder. You're just doing a third person story that anyone can tell about some old age herbal remedy that fixed a problem. This is pretty much what every good long form static and every advvertorial ever written has done. And It's the shape of most of the best B2B copy in existence. What you can't do is run any of them

without stakes. And if your category genuinely has no stakes, then the problem isn't the story, it's that you've not found the accommodation yet. And that's chapter 3 problem. So 10 to 18 minutes into this video where we talked about accommodations. And so you need to go back there and try to find one. Three quick tips. You don't have to do these, but they're tips. Number one, The best tense and person rule is first person past tense. That is generally the best performing script type. It is not to say you can't write in present or future.

It's not to say that you can't write in second or third. And in fact, that's a really easy way to take a winning ad and get way more volume is you just take this whatever the script was and you switch it into past tense, switch it into future tense, switch it into second, third person, etc. Great Way to get more volume. But if you're just going to choose one and if you're just going to write one script, first person past tense. Second thing, do not resolve the story in the hook. Really important. Some people who

are nervous about retention on an ad will just try to like resolve the story as quickly as possible. Do not do that. I have seen phenomenally good ads spending so much money um that are 9 minutes long. So I like do not stress about trying to Resolve quickly. Number three is if the story didn't happen, it's fiction and it's got to read like fiction. If you want to retain ethics and if you want to retain compliance and so do not make up stories, which makes you wonder where do we get the stories, you get the

stories from the truth which is discovered through research. So you need to talk to your customers. You need to ask them about their stories, their experiences. You need to go and talk to real things That happened in the past and you need to be very careful about claims in a story that is fictional. Now, let's talk about writing for voice. We would be doing a disservice if we didn't do a chapter on this because this whole video is about what to say, but not how it sounds when you say it, which is a completely different

skill, right? I can tell you what to say all day. We've given you all the frame. We've given you so many frameworks in this video. take Them all, write a ton. But if they don't write through something that actually sounds good, that sounds natural, that you can actually pass that script off and you can make a good ad out of, um, then it doesn't matter. So, you need to have sentence level craft or you need to write for the voice. Let me give you an over-the-top example just to push home the point. Let's say you

wrote this. Follicular miniaturization occurs when dihydrotestosterone Binds to receptors at the base of the follicle resulting in progressively finer hair with each successive growth cycle. Or the better version, there's a hormone that binds to the follicle. Every cycle the hair comes back a bit finer. Then one cycle it doesn't come back at all. Obviously substantially better. But why is it better? Number one, we only want to have one idea per sentence. So you notice this is three sentences. This is one. Okay? We don't Want to have tons of stuff in one big large sentence. We

want to move through it like in a staccato fashion. Number two is the verbs need to be moved to the front of any meaning. So the verbs here binds and doesn't come back and comes back. So this is just like this is simpler sentence structure which is effectively the takeaway here. But we want to go verb white matters. Verb white matters. We don't want verb and then like trailing sentence and then Like we get to it. So an example here is in the first sentence it's resulting in progressively finer hair with each successive growth cycle.

So it's long and winding like there's not a clear connection between verb this is what happens whereas over here it's verb binds to the follicle here comes back a bit finer doesn't come back right so it's like straight to the point it's much more simple to understand. Number three is all complex words have been Removed. Number four is we're using shorter sentences. My number five tip, this is probably the biggest tip of writing for voice is you always want to say your script out loud. Always. This is like number one. You will I will write

stuff all of the time and I will read it in my head and I'll go, "That's great." And then we'll sit down and we'll go to record and I'll be looking at the teleprompter and I'll start reading and I'll go, "What is this Script? This is terrible. This doesn't sound natural at all." And it's because I didn't actually say it out loud. So, you don't just want to say it in your head. we want to actually say it out loud cuz it does make a substantial difference. And what you will realize is, oop, that sounds

a bit complex. Uh, that sentence is a little bit long. Uh, we probably need to shorten and just have verb outcome. And you will notice all these things naturally cuz you'll be Like, that's not how I talk. Here are the six writing decisions, sentence level decisions that you need to think about every time you're writing. Number one is uh what's the person? So, is it first, second, or third person? Um, generally first person for storytelling, second person for most scripting. Um you can also go to third person but really performance is in that order best

performance first second third um so second person is saying you you have This problem you are trying this etc um third person describes and first person is like we me this is what I've dealt dealt with tense you want to go past for stories and you want to go present for mechanisms in terms of sentence length. You generally don't want them to be very long, but uh you do want to vary sentence length or else it sounds super robotic. Um a big giveaway of AI is super short sticado sentences and uh contrast negation. So you

don't want Contrast negation and you don't want short short sentences. But you want to vary this because it's actually what like creates rhythm in talking. If you even just look at the transcript of how I've spoken over the last two minutes, you'll notice I probably have a long sentence, then a short one, and then I go back to long sentences and then I have a short one. And it's because that's the natural speech pattern of how people communicate. So, you want to Mimic that as well. Now, if you actually want a rule, you could get

like Claude or any of your AI models to just look for this and go, "Okay, in my script, make sure there is a consistent pattern of like long, long, short." So, there's a long sentence, long sentence, short. that ends up being like this is a really good writing structure that I like. Reading level, you want to keep reading level in my opinion below grade seven. Some people will say like grade five English at a maximum. I like I don't like restricting. You notice by my content like I don't speak at a grade five level because

I am trying to attract between $10 million to $1 billion founders and marketing managers. And so I want to speak in the language that they talk in. Same thing with like your product. You just have to think about who like who is our target demographic? Who are we selling to? Are we selling some like supplement that Actually has quite a complex mechanism and the type of people that we're selling to aren't the general public? Instead, we're selling to athletes. Well, we can probably increase our language a bit in complexity and reading level because the athletes

probably have a little bit more education around type one and type two muscle fibers. And so, we can go to that level. Contractions. You always always want to contract. Um, if you don't know what contractions are, It's rather than saying cannot, you're saying can't or instead of do not, don't. Um, AI, I don't know why, will always do this by default, which is so robotic and so not how people actually talk. And so, you always want to contract. I would, if you're using AI to script, I would put all of this into like your MD

file as instructions for the script. last word. You always want the last word to be uh an important word. Now, this is obviously not always Going to be possible, but it's generally a good writing methodology. So, you do want some deliberate use of the final word. I'll quickly just say three examples of mixing this stuff around. So, you can see that you can actually get quite a lot of diversity, new scripts, um like slightly new angles just by changing the writing style. Number one would be like a UGC ad which is second person present tense

and generally low reading level, lots of Contractions, very casual. Okay, so I stopped parting in the middle. I didn't even notice I was doing it. That's the crazy part. So that would be UJC script. Now saying the exact same thing, we could switch to like a documentary style. So we go third person, slightly older, no enthusiasm. There's a point where the accommodation in your life happens before the awareness. She changed where she was parting her hair about a year before she even admitted to Herself. Why? Then we can change again and we can go to

like a diary register. So this is first person past tense, but it's being written to nobody. I stopped partying in the middle today. I didn't decide to. I just started doing it. So we're using the same angle. We've got the same persona, but we just wrote three very different feeling and scripted ads by simply changing the writing style here. Now, the best advice I can give you, the most helpful advice I've ever received and that I do now all the time when I have time to, is to read the script out loud. Stand up. Don't

read it in your head. Say it out loud. Project properly and read it at the pace that somebody would actually say it. Every time you trip up, and I' I've tripped up quite a few times reading scripts throughout this. That's where you actually want to stop, cut and fix it. Every time you run out of breath, the sentence is way too long. Every time You feel embarrassed saying a line because it's written weirdly, and you're like, I would never say that, then don't say it, rewrite it, rescript it. And that's really like the whole technique.

Takes 4 minutes, requires absolutely no talent, no software. You just need to take your script and you need to say it out loud and read it as if you're the one recording it. So now you've got a finished script. We're all the way we've finished the script, but now you should Make the decision as to, well, what does this actually get made into? And most people start there, which is the wrong thing. They go, "Oh, let's make a piece of UGC." And then they go into the scripting process, research everything we've done so far, and

only now, only at this point in all this script writing that we've done, do we go, "Okay, now what does this ad actually look like? What are the visuals? What are we creating here?" And so this is what we Will call surfaces. How is the ad actually surfacing into the creative? So here's what we want to do. We want to find the loadbearing beat. We then want to score the surface on six properties. Then we want to write what is the loadbearing beat. This is the part of this script that does most of the persuading.

As an example, for products whose unique edge is invisible, like a multivitamin or a supplement, well, the biggest loadbearing beat usually in the Script is going to be the actual mechanism. For a product whose edge is that it very visibly shows what works. It's not invisible in the body somewhere, but it's very visual. Well, then it's going to be the proof because we can just show before and afters and very clearly demonstrate how the product works. And so this is going to be like gadgets that have a unique mechanism. They end up just being very

proof and demonstrationheavy rather than mechanism Heavy. For a product whose edge is in the actual like terms or like the the offer is differentiated in some way, then obviously the offer becomes the loadbearing beat. The beat that's important is a property of the proposition, not the format. So [snorts] these are the six properties that you need to score against to know which format to go into. Number one, can it carry a human face? So based on the scripting, can it or does it need to Carry a human face? What does this relate to in terms

of structure, in terms of loadbearing? It relates to the problem and it relates to proof. If for social proofing we actually need a face and someone showing up, well obviously we need an asset that's going to have that. And then the same for problem agitating. If we're going to be problem agitating and it requires a human actually going through the problem, there you go. Can it show what a camera Cannot? This is like showing the the unshowable. Where this shows up is in the mechanism, particularly in supplements and sometimes in proof as well. An example

of this is that we might be talking about how this supplement helps help helps with gut health. Now, we could show gut health through like bloating of an actual person or we could use an AI video or we could use like a real animation that someone's built and it goes into the gut And it shows like the gut lining repairing and stuff like that. And so suddenly that visual is required in the asset which restricts what the asset can be. Number three, do you control the order in which it is received? Number four, can you

assume sound? So, will it have sound? Will it hold attention long enough to develop something? Does it read as a person rather than as an advertisement to quickly match these in terms of beats? So number one car can it Carry a human face? This is number two and number six. Can it show what a human camera cannot? This is related to the mechanism and the proof. Can you control the order in which it is received? This is relevant to the promise through to the end. Can we control the sequence of the script or does the

script have to differ here? Like for example, before I showed you a script that uh couldn't have a promise because it was first person, someone talking to a story. So We actually physically couldn't put a promise at the start. And that's going to change the modality. Number four, can you assume sound? This is going to be relevant to pretty much all of these. Number five, will it hold attention long enough to develop into something? This is going to be in the problem mechanism and the offer. And then this will be relevant to the start of

the ad. So the hook and the problem. Every format failure that I've seen is typically part Of the script that's placed on a format that can't hold it. So, it's not actually a production failure. It's typically a writing failure that ends up looking like a production failure, which is exactly why it keeps getting sent back to the editor on multiple revisions. An example is that a proposition resting on proof should not be made on a surface with no believable face. Right? Like if we're relying on proof, we need some kind of human in There. A

proposition that's resting on a mechanism that's invisible should not be a talking head. Typically, you want to go into a format that is going to visually represent the mechanism. This is why you often end up with much greater performing ads. When you script everything and then you think, okay, now that it's all there, let's find like what's the loadbearing beat? How do we score across these properties? Cool. What should the formats look like? And Formats can even like change materially across the ads in terms of the visuals because we could start with like a talk

to camera UGC, then we can blend into AI animations, then we can blend back into that same talking camera UGC. So there's also flexibility here in terms of how the ad shows up. So let's just break the properties down across three different styles. Now there are like infinite styles and new formats come about all the time, right? like the new formats That are like pretty hot right now is obviously the claimation AI ads which is why I've mentioned them quite a bit but new formats are always getting invented there's always format innovation and so this

is just a generalization across like larger level formats that are relatively consistent over time but you can do this exercise down to every single different format that you have live action what I'm saying here is like live action in terms of a person is on Camera talking one person so it could be UGC it could be EGC it could be founder story it doesn't matter one person on the camera talking a camera like this are they a believed human face. Can we show the unshowable here? No. Can you control the sequence? Yes. Can we get

sound here? Yes. Can we sustain attention? I would say like yes dash no. Typically, if it's just like a talking head to cam, it's actually not a very good asset for holding attention Throughout. reads as a person depends entirely on the actual scripting as well as the talent actually reading the script as if it is a person and it's not an actor. Now, what if we do drawn, rendered, AI, etc. Some kind of like animation style? Is there a believed human face? No. Does it show the unshowable? Yes. Can you control the sequence? Yes. Can

we have sound? Yes. Can we sustain attention much better in this format because we have much more Flexibility to cut and change? It's generally a more engaging format. And then does it read as a person? Yes, we can definitely get it to read as a person. And we're not pretending like someone is talking through our voice. And so it's actually arguably easier here. What about a long form native static? For those that don't know what this is, it's a static image ad that looks incredibly native to the platform. Think a photo of a garden and

that's it. And then there's long form copy that accompanies it that talks to a story. Is there a believed human face? No. Can it show the unshowable? Can you control the sequence? No. Because it's a static ad, so you don't have control over the sequence in which people will consume these components of the ad. How their eye moves is out of your control. Can we implement sound? No. Can we sustain attention? Yes. And then does it read like a person? Yes. Often this reads Like a person more than any of them. And so different formats

here will do different things. So if we need these elements for what we've scripted, then we go for this. If we need these elements for what we've scripted, then we go for this, etc. If we are happy with these elements, then we can go into a long form static. None of these perform better than the other, right? There's long form statics that have produced millions, rendered ads that Have produced millions, live action ads produced millions. They just have to be relevant to the ad and they have to complement the ad and the script that we've

created. Big question is what should the length of the ad be? Should it be 30 seconds? Should it be 60 seconds? Should it be 5 minutes? Now, the short answer is that all of them work. There are 30 secondond ads that have spent millions of dollars. There are 20inut ads that have spent millions Of dollars. There is no like perfect length of an ad that is going to be the best converting ad to get cold audiences across the line. Now, as you increase the length of the ad, the cost of production obviously increases. Not just

in actually creating the ad, like the shooting, the editing, the post, but also in the scripting. Going and scripting a 5minute ad takes a lot of time. That is like probably 2 days worth of work if you're going to manually go And write a 5minute ad and do it properly and it have a good chance of being a winner. Vice versa in the same amount of time you could whip out tons of 30-second ads. And so there is like a middle ground that you have to weigh in terms of as you lengthen creative does your

hit rate improve? because your hit rate must get better or the spend capacity of those ads must get better or else it's not worth it because you spend two days making one ad or you could Spend two days making 10 ads and if the hit rate is both 10% well you're way better off doing the 10 shorter ads cuz you're going to get a winner whereas you're only you're not going to get a winner here because you only made one ad. So you need to weigh that up. Generally speaking and most people I believe would

agree with me on this who have run tons of ads and have millions of dollars in ad spend under management. And for context, right now we spend About a million dollars a day on ads. The more the length of the ad increases, the more scalable the ad becomes because to increase the length of the ad, what you end up doing is just going more unaware because to get like if you just hook someone straight away and you start talking about their problem, well, like we're already deep into the ad by now. So like let's just

start moving through the elements. So how do you end up with an ad that's 5 6 minutes long? Well, you Go to something that's super unaware. And so you look at these like animation ads these days and they will start with something like my husband just broke up with me and then so when I went to work I had to tell everyone and then I went home and did this and then I did this and they talk through a story and you have that like they haven't even really started problem agitating till we're like 10

seconds in and then they just problem agitate for like 2 minutes and This is where most of the length ends up coming from through like a bunch of storytelling and then they will storytell through how they found some kind of mechanism that helped them through this like breakup that they're going through, etc., etc. Objection handling ends up getting lengthened quite a bit. Proof then ends up going on for quite a while and then there's a bunch of risk reversals. So, honestly, my like generalized recommendation is to Test a bunch like I would do bunch of

30-cond ads, bunch of 60-second. I would really encourage you to test in three, five, six minute ads as well. It's just when you're testing longer ads, you want to be extending the problem agitation. This is where you're going to get length. You want to be extending sometimes the mechanism like you can draw the mechanism out a little bit rather than just explaining it succinctly. You can explain all of like The different mechanisms of the supplement that helps. And then what you end up wanting to do like this is something that IM8 does very well to

extend the length of their ads is they cycle between these. And so you will go problem, you will generally go like problem, promise, mechanism, objection, proof, back to problem, promise, mechanism, objection, proof, back to problem. And you will loop through this like three times. And that allows you to Increase the duration of your ad. Now, how do you do this? Well, in the example that we've been using this whole time on DHT for hair loss, what we would do is we would choose one of the mechanisms, which might be DHT, we would problem agitate. We

would then promise that this is going to work. We would talk about DHT as a mechanism. We would do a bunch of objection handling. Then we would loop back and we would problem agitate again on like let's say DHT is great, But DHT by itself is actually not going to fix the problem because I bet you've tried DHT products before. And so what actually makes DHT work is when you combine it with rosemary oil at the same time because and then we go into the mechanism. Rosemary oil helps with blood distribution to the hair which

helps the DHT actually find the hair follicles. We can go into more objection handling. We can go into proof behind it and then we can loop back again and we can loop back To another problem and then we can go through another promise, another mechanism or how the mechanism ties into that promise and problem and then back to the objection. The way that IM8 does this is, and honestly, it's actually how I would do it here, is they do it through timelining the impact of the supplement over time to your health. And so they will

do a off the top of my head, it's something like a 7-day, 14, 30, 90, and then like a 180. And so they Will go by day seven, you will already start feeling your gut lining healing, but by day 14, you will then have this transformation. So this problem that you've been having becomes solved and then back to this problem you have well this is going to be solved by day 30 90 180 etc. So they use this as like a scripting vehicle for being able to just cycle around problem promise problem promise mechanism to

be able to extend the length of their ad. Why does the Length of the ad help improve and get better performance? It's like the exact same thing with content, which is that if you're at this stage of the video, you're probably 3 hours, I'd say, we're in right now to this video. The chances of you reaching out to work at BlueSense Digital or work with us is substantially higher than if this video was 8 minutes because you have spent 3 hours with me. And so there is a lot of credibility built by this point. Same

thing with Direct consumer and creative. If you spend 30 seconds trying to convince someone why to buy, obviously like you're not going to convert as many people as if you spend seven minutes trying to convince them why they should buy. So how these change as you increase the length of the ad is the hook always remains the same. The hook doesn't lengthen like the hook is a oneliner. The problem will be just a oneliner. If your ad is 15 to 45 seconds, then as you Go to 90 seconds and above, the problem extends to multiple

lines. And then as you go to like a six to 10 minute ad, the problem becomes a scene in itself. And this is where the problem section can become two to three minutes of problem agitating and storytelling. For the promise, in a 15-second ad, you're not even going to have a promise. There's not enough time. In 30 seconds, the promise will get introduced as one sentence, maybe two. As you go up to 3 To 10 minutes, the promise can extend to two sentences, but you're really not going to get much length there. in the mechanism.

You're honestly in a 15-second ad, not even going to be able to get the mechanism in. It's too short. Once you go to 45 to 60 seconds, you're going to get the mechanism in in one single sentence. For 3 minutes or like a 1 to 3 minute ad, the mechanism can get drawn out into 2 3 4 sentences. It can become actually the majority of the Watch time in the creative if the mechanism is good enough. And then as you go for like five, six, 10 minutes, this becomes a very large loadbearing portion of the

ad. And so just like the problem can come out and become 3 minutes, so can the mechanism section of the ad. I would think about this as like edutainment, right? We're educating people, but we're keeping it entertaining as we're going through. That's what these ads generally do quite Well. And so as people watch them, they actually feel accomplished. Particularly like an older demo watching through a a VSSL style ad, they feel accomplished cuz they're like, I've learned so much. Like I didn't know that my problems with getting tired at the end of the day was

due to menopause causing this specific hormonal imbalance that causes this that has a knock-on effect that then causes these mechanisms and because I'm eating that, it's causing these problems. like They feel like they're getting watching a YouTube video educating themsel about the mechanisms of menopause when in reality maybe they like they are sure like it's all true but it's pushing them on a narrative towards an underlying desire towards a product that solves it. We then go to the objection in very short 15-second ads no room for an objection. If you go up to a 60

to two minute ad, 60 seconds, two minutes, you can have two to three sentences on Objections and you can handle multiple objections. And then in a six minute plus ad, you can have multiple large blocks of objection handling. So you can really fill like 2 minutes of objection handling. And this objection handling will often get filled into the problem agitating block. Where you're spending 3 minutes problem agitating, you're normally going to include a lot of preemptive objection handling. on proof. This never gets too long. 15-second ad Doesn't exist. 60cond to 2 minute, you'll often have

one, two, maybe three pieces of proof. And then as you go to a super long ad, you can you can honestly start going to like an infinite proof level. And you could put like five to six different pieces of social proofing. And remember back to my proof ladder from before, you would be putting all six in at the back of the ad. On the offer, this is always going to remain short. The offer isn't going to be a Part where you get length out of the ad, and you don't want to. You don't want the

ad to just be you talking about the offer. Risk reversal isn't going to fit in a sub 60-cond ad. Once you go over 60 seconds, the risk reversal will fit. It will always be one single line. And then the call to action will be in every ad. As the ad gets a bit longer, you will have a longer CTA like what we scripted out before. Rather than one line, it becomes two or three. If you have a long Enough ad that is 4 minutes plus, you will have multiple CTAs. So you won't just make an

ask at the end, you will make an ask at the 3 minute mark, 5 minute mark, 7 minute mark, right? You will make an ask like Yeah. And by the way, click the link in the description and you can find out about the product. But look at what John did when he got and then you go you go back into proof back into offer back into risk reversal CTA and then you so you loot back Through the script structure so that you can make multiple call to actions. I've said in a reel that I put

out before that what you want to do is script an ad, hand it to an editor and get a five minute version and then you want like a one to two minute version to test. That was bad advice. I don't advise doing that because if you script for a six-inute ad and you try to cut it down into a two-minute ad, it's often going to be very difficult to do. Instead, you Want to do the script cutting yourself. And so, if you want to test a few different lengths of ads, write your six-inute ad, but

then you yourself need to refine the second script down to 2 minutes, and it's ultimately going to look materially different. Like, the bridges are going to look different. When you try to take a really long ad and just edit it down, it doesn't end up being that good. It's just the reality. Sometimes you can make it work, Sometimes it does work. I would build for the length. I wouldn't just make a long ad and then try to snip it into shorter ones. So, the issue with AI script writing is that it's using abstraction. So, it's

always trying to find what is the most probable next thing to say and then filling it with the probability of what the next word should be. And so what you end up with is the mean, the average, the average regression. A lot of the time, even when You do have good training data and context, it will inevitably move towards the average. That is not to say that AI can't write really good copy. It's not to say that we haven't received copy before that's been like excellent and not actually needed any any revisions and pushed it

straight into a script and straight into production. But it is to say that if you don't put a lot of context and instructions, it will revert to the average. and the script writing Will be very very mediocre. So you actually have to put a lot of effort into getting a good outcome here. One of the main issues with using AI scripting is that you don't want it to really use any of its existing context from the training data on the internet. Instead, you want to give it all of the research that we went through at

the start and you want to tell it just use that. Like don't go and make stuff up. like use the exact words and stories that have come From our customers on phone call recordings, on reviews, on testimonials. That will give you an incredible output because it will just take all of the corpus of data that you have in the research and then it will just like cherrypick out points and then structure it against a good uh copyrightiting structure. What AI won't be able to do well too is it won't it will hallucinate a mechanism if

you don't have one. You want to make sure it doesn't go and Hallucinate mechanisms or it will use just a generic mechanism that everyone else is using. Once again, reverting to the mean. And so you want your input data across all of this and your research to be really good. Like the thing is like the reason why AI script writing isn't actually super high leverage is because you still have to do all of the work up until writing the actual words. And then like yes, you can save time on writing the actual words Because like

AI will output it. But writing the actual words was kind of never really the hard bit about writing good scripts about writing good copy. Like the hard bit is the 80% of time that is spent on this enormous corpus of research and structure and thinking about all of these things. It's all in the prep work. You still have to do a lot of the prep work. Like AI can help here and there. You need to come up with a mechanism. You need to come up and Find not come up. You always need to find the

mechanism. You need to find the objection. You need to find the problems. You need to find the proof. And then you need to give all of that and say, "Hey, right." I would also think very closely about what your source material is in how you are uh directionally telling it to write. So the as an example you can tell it to write your give it all this stuff and tell it to write your copy and it will Be writing of training data of 40,000 product description pages or you could tell it to write but write

with always top of mind in using frameworks from Oglev Schwarz Halbert Sugarman Benanger like you can have all of their writing you can have all of their books transcribed you can have it sitting in a context file and you can Okay, every time you write a script, read all of their books, read all of their content, and then write the script. You will Probably get a better output, having better context relevant to the types of frameworks and the types of writing that you want to go for rather than letting it just revert to the mean

where it's probably been trained like how many oggov books was Claude trained on and then how many product description pages on Shopify was Claude trained on? It's probably like a 300 to1 ratio towards the product description pages on Shopify because it's just the the corpus of Learning data is just scraping from the internet. That's why the writing isn't that good. So, what ends up becoming the job here is selection. Selection is the job. Okay? You need to be able to do all of this stuff and then be able to throw it in an AI script

writer and then be able to understand whether it's good or not and be able to select the good parts, the bad parts, the rewrites, etc. I'll give you a bunch of really good tactical instructions that you should Use and things that you should think about. Retrieval, not invention. I already said this before, but you want to make sure it's retrieving content from your research, not just inventing stuff. Transposition. AI is really good at taking an existing winning script that's worked and transposing it into a different format. And so if you have a winning uh storytelling

ad that's in first person past tense, then you can tell it, hey, take this winning ad, keep It as similar as possible, but transpose it into, you could either change the persona, you could change the mechanism, or you could say, change this into present tense, third person, and then it will do an incredible job at that very quick, much faster than you could do it. It's also decent at cutting down ads, extending ads, as long as you give clear instructions about what specific component of the creative it should spend more or less time on, or

else It'll just like loop around on the hook more, loop around on the risk reversal more. It's really good at variant volume. So once again, winning ad. Don't just transpose it. Make a bunch of variants of this. Here are what we believe makes it a winning ad. Don't adjust that much. Change it up. Structural checking. It's very good at this. models are very good auditors against a framework. And so if you for example load this framework into a Markdown file, every time you write a script, put it in there and say audit it against this

framework. Is it a good script or not? No, your script is missing a promise. Okay, great. Give me five promise options. All right, I'm going to select this one cuz our job is selection and I'm going to put it in. The next is that it's really good as a first draft. Obviously, sometimes people have writers block. they even with all this research and stuff, you get there And you're like, I don't I don't know where to start on this particular ad. So, dump it all, get the first draft, and then from there, refine. So, here's

all the lessons, everything that we've gone through. We're about to pull up the script, and we'll go through the final read of how this all applies into the script. Number one, the first thing you need to do is you need to find the desire and you need to evidence it. Okay? You always need to speak to an Underlying pre-existing desire and then you need to have actual evidence within your customer base to prove how we are going to speak to the desire. You don't invent either of these. Number two, you then run the five stages

of research that we went through. Number three, you then place the buyer on the stages of awareness and sophistication. So, what stage of awareness are we speaking to here? Where does this person exist? And what level of sophistication are they At? Number four, we need to fix the offer. Before we do any kind of script writing or we put any kind of ad together, the offer needs to be good. So, we can't understate that. Number five, you need to come up with unique adjectives. Anyone can say, "This shampoo makes my hair soft." What can you

say that's unique to you? How can you be one of one? How can you combine multiple adjectives that people normally don't do to position you in a unique Way? But we need unique adjectives. You're not just going in with common language. Number six, we need to agitate the consequence, never the symptom. You never want to be agitating on the symptom, which people do all the time. Instead, you want to be agitating on the consequence or the accommodation. Number seven, we want to promise, then we want to go into the mechanism. The promise always precedes the

mechanism. Big mistake doing it in the opposite Direction. Number eight, the hook needs to sell line two. More importantly, when you go and write out three to five hooks, the hook needs to make sense as it flows into line two. Biggest mistake people make is they just go and get AI to make them 10 hooks and they make absolutely no sense as they bridge into the problem agitation. So, we need to make sure that the hooks are well scripted and make sense in conjunction with the body. Number nine, the proof Must always be greater than

the claim. A claim with a great amount of proof is always better than a great claim with no proof. Number 10 is the format needs to match the visual requirements of the ad. So, let's do the full read. Original ad. Here's where we started the video. If you're finding more hair in the shower drain, you're not imagining it. Women lose it at the part line first, usually about 18 months before anybody else notices, which is why we made Nourish Plus with six clinically studied ingredients, vegan, cruelty-free, made right here in Australia. Head to the site

and grab yours. Now, the finished version, which you should be creating after everything that we've gone through and learned. I stopped parting my hair in the middle about a year ago. I didn't decide to do that. I just started doing it. And then I saw a photo of my sister's wedding from behind and I understood what I'd been avoiding. What Are we doing here? We're creating an incredible hook that plays to identity, plays to emotion, and it probably agitates incredibly well. Here's what I didn't know. It's not the hair, it's the follicle. And it's shrinking

a bit. Every cycle because of DHT. And every cycle, it comes back finer until one cycle it doesn't come back at all. This is about keeping what you've still got, not getting back what's gone. That's an identity sentence. And this is the Unique mechanism. I've done the rosemary oil. 4 months. My pillowcase smelled and nothing happened. And that's because it was never going to work upstream of the thing that's actually doing it. What have we done? We've objection handled clearly. Three things slow it down. We're using a retention mechanism. Salt palm blocks the enzyme that

makes the DHT. Rosemary oil keeps blood at the root, which is why it half worked, and a keratin precursor gives the follicles Something to build with. 4,800 people have reviewed it. The word that came up the most was finally. You can buy those three separately, and people often do, or you can take one capsule at night. It's the 90-day pack that I bought because the cycle is 90 days and a 30-day pack is designed to fail. 60 cents a day. If your part hasn't changed, you can send back the empties and they refund you for

all three. The women who keep it are the ones who Started before they could actually see it. This phenomenally better ad than this, right? We've gone and increased the chances of this creative working and scaling by 10fold. and it's through implementing the script structure and everything that we have gone through and learned in this video. With all of that being said, if you're an e-commerce brand or retailer doing over $5 million a year, click the link in the description to reach out to us for a Completely free audit. It's a one to one and a

half hour Loom video where we will break down your technical account structure, data integrity, and creative to help you grow. If you are a performance marketer with at least two years experience in media buying on Facebook and ideally Google, please reach out to us at [email protected]. We will also have a link in the description below to see what the job Application looks like and so you can reach out to us and apply. And if you are neither of those buckets, would really appreciate if you like, comment, share, subscribe if you can boost this video as

much as possible. I am really hoping that this is the highest performing video on the channel considering how much effort we put into this.