You guys want to hear something absolutely insane? I was able to take home more in a year than the CEOs of McDonald's, Ikea, Ford, Motorola, and Yahoo combined as a kid in my 20s, and I have continued to do so for over half a decade, which results in a $200 million per-year portfolio and a $100 million net worth by age 32. No one is more surprised than me.
Me expressing that fact will create envy in some, anger in others, skepticism in most, confusion in old people, and inspire a select few. You are who I made this presentation for. But before I dive in, raise your hand if you'd like any of the following things to happen: to be able to charge two times, five times, or ten times more than your competition for the exact same thing, like Yeti.
We have basically identical cups, and somehow they are able to charge $40 versus $10 simply because of what’s on the cup. If you'd like to have customers buy from you over and over and over again without considering competition, like Harley—once you're a Harley guy, you stay a Harley guy for life. And if you'd like to virtually guarantee sales in any new business or product that you launch, like Apple— a lot of people just wait in line; they say, “Just leave my credit card, just bill me, and send whatever you’re going to come out with,” and that’s more or less how a lot of Apple buyers are.
Once they become an Apple person, they become an Apple person for life. So if you like that stuff, great, because that’s what this talk is about. I couldn't figure out how these brands and companies were able to demand these prices and get people to stay loyal for a really long time.
I felt like for me, I always had to beg, borrow, and steal; I had to squeeze and push so hard just to get people to buy, whereas these companies made it look effortless. It’s because I didn’t understand this one thing, and that’s the subject of the talk today: branding. The thing is, even people who claim to understand it often don’t, and the few who do understand it do a terrible job teaching it.
So this definitely is going to be a marketing 101 class on branding—presentation, colors, and logos—and this definitely isn’t going to be about feelings, presence, intuition, or whatever. This is about making money, and this concept that I'm going to explain to you is how I built a 7. 8 million person audience across all these platforms.
In the past 40 months or so, I sold over a million copies of my last two books, and I have deals worth hundreds of millions of dollars in our holding company acquisition. That is why you build a brand, or at least that’s why I built mine. Today, I’m going to cover three things: 1.
What branding is. If you don’t know what it is, you certainly can’t build one. 2.
Why it makes money, because once you have it built, you’re like, “Okay, well how do I trade this thing for doll hairs? ” which is what we want. 3.
How to start and grow yours. So let’s start with the first one: what branding is. When I decided to build a brand, I looked at what many popular marketers said about it.
Here are some popular definitions that I have removed the marketers from. This is not throwing shade; I’m just saying them. A brand is a person’s gut feeling about a product, service, or organization.
A brand is not what you say it is; it’s what they say it is. A brand is a set of expectations, memories, stories, and relationships that, taken together, account for a customer’s decision to choose one product or service over another. A brand is emotional shorthand for accumulated and assumed information.
A brand is present when the value of what the product, service, or personality means to its audience is greater than what it does for the audience. A brand is a product, service, or concept that is publicly distinguished from other products, services, or concepts so it can be easily communicated and usually marketed. Branding is the process of creating and disseminating the brand name, its qualities, and personality, and the promotion of a particular product or company by means of advertising and distinctive design.
If these sound vague and confusing, it’s because they are, and I was just as confused as you when I was trying to figure this out because none of them told me what to do. After looking at all these marketers’ words, I think I pieced it together—at least enough that once I started thinking about this in a different way, I’m about to share with you, my brand grew, and it grew fast. The reason this is so important is that if you don’t know what to do, nothing’s going to change.
Fundamentally, if you don’t change your behavior, obviously nothing’s going to change as a result. I want to define this one term before we get going: learning. Who here came to learn?
Raise your hands. Fantastic! All other words are just being talked to the wall.
So, learning means same condition, new behavior. If I wanted to teach someone a phone script, then after teaching you, the phone rings again, and you say the new script you learned. Learning occurred.
On the other hand, if I tried to teach you the script and then the phone rings again, and you change nothing, no learning occurred; you learned nothing. That’s why none of this stuff that these guys said helped me, because I didn’t know what I could do. I didn’t know what behavior I had to change.
As a result of this, I didn't know how to do it. So here's how branding happens: branding is a deliberate pairing of things through an outcome. I'll say that again: branding is a deliberate pairing of things through an outcome.
Let's use Coca-Cola—drinking it and liking it—as our example. The "yum," aka the outcome, is what people get; they pair that with drinking, the action. So, what they do to get it is with Coca-Cola, the product.
The next time you want some yum, you're probably going to reach for a Coca-Cola if that was paired for you successfully. Thus, branding is a deliberate pairing of things through an outcome. That's it.
But sometimes, businesses pair their stuff with things that people don't like—that's bad branding. This leads to losses for the business. Now, some of you may have seen this: this is Dylan Mulvaney doing a collaboration with Bud Light.
There's a lot of press around this advertisement. This advertisement was actually great, and you might think I'm crazy, but it was. Let me explain: it's just not the way you might think it was.
This is a great advertisement because it let a lot of people know about their stuff. It let a lot of people know about the product—Bud Light. By the way, if you're curious, that is the definition of advertising, not branding.
Advertising is letting people know about your stuff; branding is the pairing that occurs as a result. So, it was good advertising but bad branding. Many customers hated this pairing; lots of people found out, but a lot of people hated it.
Good advertising, bad branding. As a result of this bad branding—people not liking the pairing—fewer people bought the product, which netted a loss for the business. To fix this, Bud Light paired the product with stuff the audience liked, like Shane Gillis, who is a "man's man" comedian, and the UFC, a "man's man" of sports, if you will.
Sales began to recover. So, that's one explanation of branding. Let's go into 2011 to go a little deeper, because the better you get at this, the more money you will make.
The more nuanced your understanding of how to brand and build a brand for yourself, the more money you will make, I promise you that. To some people, the Dylan Mulvaney pairing was actually good—in general, both good advertising and good branding. Hear me out.
For others, it was bad. Obviously, all pairings have positive and negative results, and that's because everyone is different; everyone has different preferences. But for a business, you can objectively see if a pairing was good or bad—whether it netted you more money.
More people disliked the Dylan Mulvaney pairing, so sales suffered, making it a bad pairing. This isn't opinion; they objectively made less money. This pairing was bad for their ideal audience.
Now, the 301 version of this is: is there a company or a product where the Dylan Mulvaney pairing could have been both good advertising and good branding, so that the majority of people would have bought? I think the answer is yes. It just doesn't necessarily mean it's Bud Light for conservative males as the primary audience.
On the other hand, some people love the new Gillis and UFC pairings, while some hated it. But more of the audience that is their ideal customer liked it, saw it as good, and so the business netted sales as a result. They made more money—good branding.
For Budweiser, I just want to call this out specifically for Budweiser and their customer base: it's not that Shane Gillis or the UFC is "magic" in some way or that Dylan Mulvaney is "unmagic" in some way, but for that specific audience, yes, the pairing mattered and how much of the base liked it or disliked it. If you're anything like me, making money is the point. So, let's drive this home.
If you made a pairing of your thing and your customer and you got to choose which outcome you had happen—so you have your product and they drink it—there's an outcome that happens afterwards, right? That pairs with it. On one hand, 75% like it and 25% hate it; on the other hand, 25% like it and 75% hate it (which would be the bottom example).
Which would you choose? More money? Good.
The big green one? Yes, of course, the top one, because it would make you the most money. To be clear, for the 301 level of understanding: branding always happens; branding always occurs.
But our goal is good branding, and good branding is a deliberate pairing of our business with good outcomes for our ideal customers. What you pair your business with determines two key things: one, who pays attention to your business; and two, whether they go towards your business (like the UFC example) or away from a business (like the Dylan Mulvaney example). At the beginning of this, I said I was going to cover three things.
The first thing I said is, "What is branding? " But now that we have gone through that, I want to restate what I walked us through, which is what good branding is—ideally, what we're shooting for. Now that we've covered that, let's talk about why it makes you money.
Why does good branding make you money? Branding, as I said, happens everywhere all the time, but businesses use it for profit. So, let's look at some of the earliest uses of branding to figure out how we can use it.
These are the first entrepreneurs who used branding to make money. The earliest version of branding that we can think of—or at least that I can think of—happened on livestock. It was literally a brand; they would heat up metal and sear it into the side of cattle, creating a lovely little logo.
Maybe we'll have a Nike Swoosh cow someday! So, they literally burned these symbols into animals, and those symbols had a magical effect. Let's say you're walking around and you see a cow with no brand.
You say, "Hello, cow," and the cow says, "Moo! " Back. It has nothing on it; this is just a cow.
You might leave it alone, and that might be it. On the other hand, let's say the cow has a brand you recognize—say, it's your neighbor's. You might think, "Hey, that's Bill's cow!
" If you like Bill, you might grab the cow and pull it by whatever you pull cows by, and probably return it to Bill. If you hate Bill, then the cow may stay lost in the wilderness forever and become lunch for your family for the next month or two in the form of delicious burgers. But either way, for better or for worse, the brand affected what you did; it affected your behavior.
To take this to the 2011 level, what if you see a branded cow but you don't recognize the brand? You might think, "Who is this? I see a logo, but I don't know anything about it.
" Well then, you would treat it how you treat branded animals in general—in that you just know it belongs to someone. You would treat it as though it belonged to anybody else, and even if only a tiny bit, you would treat a wild cow differently from a branded cow in general. So if you had one that was wild and one that you didn't recognize but was branded, you would still probably treat them differently.
This just shows you the power of brand as a concept because it dictates a tie between that cow and a human being—or some complex animal that can brand cows. These are all effects of branding in general. Now I want to get tactical on how we translate that concept into getting them to buy.
Let's say we pair our brand. This is where we get really tactical, and this is like, "Okay, if you don't have a brand, this is the step-by-step right now. " So you have a weak brand, and we say it's a weak brand because it's starting up; you don't really have a lot of associations.
Fantastic! Now you want to pair with people, experiences, or other stuff that your ideal customer likes. In this instance, I'm using little Nike, pairing with LeBron and Tiger, who are champions, world-class goats, etc.
People who like sports and competition would see that as a positive pairing—aka good stuff. If we do that pairing, or we make that pairing, for the majority of people, branding will occur, and the brand grows. So the question then follows: What's the benefit of a strong brand versus a weak brand?
The weak brand is before the pairing; the strong brand is after the pairing. A strong brand turns commoditized products, like a $5 white T-shirt, into a premium product—a higher value brand-name product. Premium products with a strong brand then get customers to want to associate themselves with the product so that they can connect their outcomes with the outcomes the brand delivers, which they do with their money.
So how do they make that association? They give money, they get the shirt, and the association happens based on what they've seen; where that logo has been elsewhere, they go from "I want to be a winner" to "I am a winner" or "I feel like a winner. " That's how this works.
This means that if the ideal customer likes sports, winning, competition, etc. , then they're more likely to buy stuff from a brand paired with those things. So let's lay it all out: a weak brand paired with stuff customers like creates a strong brand; a strong brand gets put onto a winning product, transforming a generic product into a winning product.
Then, customers want to associate with that winning product, so they buy it, and they put money into your bank account to do so. As long as you net a positive between what it cost you to associate with Tiger and LeBron and how many T-shirts you can sell as a result, you make money. Here are some steps in words for those of you who are more word-oriented: 1.
You start with a brand that means nothing. You have a logo, just like the cow that the other person didn't recognize. People know it is a brand; they just don't know what that brand means yet—it means nothing right now.
2. Then you pair that brand with something or someone that your customers ideally like. 3.
Third, your brand starts to mean the thing the customer likes to them. 4. Then they want to associate themselves with that thing they like or get more of it, but they can't buy that thing.
However, they can buy a tiny sliver of that association, so they buy the shirt with the logo that means that thing to them. 5. They get the shirt, you get the money, and it all happens because you deliberately paired it with something they like.
This happens everywhere, so Dolce & Gabbana. . .
Classic example: they paired with Kim Kardashian. They made a line specifically for her. And so, for a lady who wants to associate with fame, beauty, wealth, that would be a pairing that makes sense.
And so, that lady who wants other people to associate her with fame, high class, money, luxury, and wealth will then buy Dolce & Gabbana and be like, "I'm just like him. " Now, she might not say that directly because she might just associate with the values, but the transfer still happens. And so, when someone looks at two products that, on the surface, are generically the same—you've got two T-shirts, one that has a weak brand or no brand, and the other that has a strong brand—the person with the strong brand is going to be more likely to buy and pay more for it.
This happens because they actually buy the elements that we've deliberately paired with the brand, which they identify with. At this point of building a brand, you do this to change customer behavior. Excuse me, that is the point of building a brand: to change customer behavior in your favor when they see it with a product.
And so, this is a quote from Warff that I like a lot, signifying some of the elements of the benefits of branding: "The single most important decision in evaluating a business is pricing power. If you've got the power to raise prices without losing business to a competitor, you've got a very good business. If you have to have a prayer session before raising the price by 10%, then you've got a terrible business.
" So, if we have an unbranded T-shirt for $5 and we say, "You know what? We think we have a strong enough brand that we can raise the price," then boom! We can raise the price and still not lose that many sales.
In this case, we 12x the price. Good branding drives that premium pricing. Good branding also improves advertising.
With the generic brand, if you're marketing this white T-shirt, you might get half a percent of people. There are many white T-shirts; there are many like it. "This one is mine!
" Just kidding. So, the point for those of you who got the reference—if you have a 0. 5% click-through rate on something that's generic, there's nothing special about it.
On the flip side, if you have a Nike-branded T-shirt, the same identical T-shirt, but it has the swoosh, now you might get six times as many people to click and buy at a higher price. See how these things stack together? That is why these brands exist for such a long period of time and make so much money.
They get cheaper customers, they get higher returns, and they have better response rates in advertising. On top of that, if that weren't enough, good branding also drives customer loyalty, a. k.
a. they buy more stuff more times. So, like the Apple example I gave earlier: once you buy one Apple product, you tend to buy more, and you tend to keep buying them.
A good brand also protects your business from competitors stealing that customer in the future. As I promised in the beginning, seeing how all this stuff allows you to: 1) be able to charge 10 times or more than your competition; 2) get higher returns in advertising, so you can scale that much faster; and 3) get people to keep buying for life, compounding your money-making skills for good. Okay, which is why building a brand will make you lots of money.
It's also why brands outperform commodities in every single industry and give a lasting competitive advantage that, to be fair, is theirs to lose. Here's another quote from Uncle Warren: "It takes 20 years to build a reputation and 5 minutes to ruin it. If you think about that, you'll do things differently.
" So, I said that I was going to cover three things: 1) what branding is (which we renamed "what good branding is"); 2) why it makes you money; and now let's go to 3) how to start or grow your own brand. Branding is the deliberate pairing of things—your thing plus what your ideal customer has through an outcome. Good branding is the deliberate pairing of your thing with something good.
To start a brand, we have to know what we want to pair it with to attract ideal customers. So, here we've got light, UFC, a good outcome for the majority of the audience. We want to understand that just as much as we should also understand which pairings to avoid, as these could lose customers—like the D'Mia example.
Here's how I like to think about assembling the pairings for a brand: if you're at ground zero, you have no brand. You’ve got these elements that haven't been put together yet, so I think about it like a table full of flowers. If you want to put a bouquet together, you start by having lots of different flowers all over the place.
On their own, those flowers are not a bouquet, just as products, values, experiences, people, etc. on their own are not a brand. The flowers are like the brand elements that we pair with stuff or audiences.
With enough pairing, over and over and over again, they form a bouquet. Now, replace the word bouquet with brand. That assembly is the connection; it's the association between those things.
Because the brand fundamentally doesn't actually exist. If I take the flowers out of the vase and scatter them across, was there ever a brand to begin with? It's simply the.
. . Association we make between those things creates the one-of-one brand.
If we unravel it, the brand disappears. The deliberate pairing of those things makes the brand. If we want to get narrower on our brand—let's say I talk about tacos, lifting, and philosophy—if I want to narrow my brand, I'll just talk a bunch about tacos, and then all of my flowers are just taco-related.
If I'm only talking about tacos, but I want to expand the stuff I'm talking about to my audience and maybe capture a wider audience, then I might talk about tacos, quesadillas, burritos—things that are tangential. If I wanted to expand even broader, I might just talk about food in general, and then I might talk about alcohol, then I might talk about restaurants, and then things that go wider and wider from there. We get narrower as we niche down, and we double down on one type of topic.
We go broader when we branch out, but distant and random pairings hurt a brand because they're so hard to make associations with. This is what most brands are and do; most people's brands happen by accident. It's just whatever they appear next to, whatever people associate their stuff with.
Good branding happens on purpose because, like, what are we looking at with a bike, a single flow, some socks, and a burger? Not a lot. Not a lot to hold together there.
Think about it like curating a garden: you want some flowers to grow, and you want to pull out the weeds. You have to do both. You have to add the good and take away the bad in order to assemble the ideal brand for you.
In the beginning, our brand won't be strong, just like yours. If you're building it, then you might only have a couple of flowers there, and it's because you haven't had that many instances to pair your brand for that customer. But the more good stuff we pair with our brand for the customer, the stronger it gets.
You go from one flower to many red flowers or many red roses that become a bouquet of red roses—that's what you're about. The more you're about it, the more the brand strengthens. Now, what if we make a branding mistake and pair with the wrong thing?
Because it's going to happen; one bad pairing can absolutely hurt a brand. If I now give my lovely red rose bouquet to my wife and I say, "Hey, don't you love this bouquet? " and she sees this rotten flower sticking out the front, she might be like, "Ew, this bouquet sucks," or "This brand sucks," or "Hey, that guy got a DUI, and I thought he was this paramount of good ethics.
" Well, that would hurt the brand. Just like one ugly flower messes up the whole bouquet, it changes how everyone sees the brand. This bouquet sucks.
To recover from something like that, you just have to overwhelm customers with the stuff they like until eventually the bad pairing shrinks into irrelevance. So we don't try to eliminate the DUI; we don't try to eliminate the dead rose. It happened; there's nothing we can do about it.
What we try to do is just overwhelm it with way more of the stuff that the majority of our people actually like. For example, Kanye has said some things that people don't like, but he also comes out with products that people love. He made a Super Bowl ad, he sold shoes, and he just came out with an album that followed some cancel culture stuff around him and things he had said.
Over time, people forgot the bad stuff and associated the good stuff back with him, and they still bought. You need to decide what values, experiences, etc. , that you want to use to connect the audience to your product, and equally importantly, what things you want to avoid, remove, or ignore from the stuff they hate.
It goes without saying that even if you say you're premium but people think your thing sucks, that suck will stick. Up to this point, everything I've talked about has been the things external to the product; they've been the people you associate the product with. Almost all of that occurs prior to purchase.
You can absolutely get someone to buy the thing, but how many experiences are people going to have with the thing once they've purchased it? Probably far more than they have with your advertisement. The advertisement can let people know about it.
The branding makes a good association for the person; they make the purchase, and then afterward, the product does a lot of the branding after that. Because if I buy that amazing Nike t-shirt and there's a hole in the armpit when it comes in, I might say, "If this is the first time I ever bought a Nike product, this product sucks; therefore, Nike sucks. " Then I think the whole thing is a sham, and I also start to hate LeBron for even recommending it.
It starts to transfer backwards. Now, on the flip side, a brand can influence how people see the product. So, if the product is what I would call good enough—not necessarily the highest quality it possibly could be, maybe not—but it's good enough that no one's going to find an immediate problem with the product, that's where brand can carry you the extra distance to still make it a positive experience for the person.
And so, brand, in a very real way, can affect how people. . .
Perceive value through products. Now, me personally, this is a pro tip: if I'm going to charge a premium price, I absolutely want to make sure that the product is dialed so that I only further reinforce how much they like my brand, rather than let my brand carry me, or at worst, have it conflict with the impression that I gave them of the thing they were going to buy prior to them buying it. This is a quote from Warren: “Your premium brand had better be delivering something special, or it's not going to get the business.
” And the only tweak I'd have on this is that it's not going to keep the business. You'll get the first purchase; you just won't get the ones after that. And so all the things are like, “Okay, got it, so brand is pairing.
I get how the pairing makes me money. I have these big margins, I got more CTRs, more people buy, and as long as my thing doesn't suck—and ideally that it's good—people will keep buying. Awesome!
But how do I measure that? ” So, brand has three main metrics. One, which is influence, is how likely it is to change someone's behavior.
So if I show someone a brand and they react in any way—they recognize it and they do something about it—then we have influence. Second is direction: are they changing the way we wanted, or are they running away? And third, how many people it changes for.
That's it. So if I show a room of 100 people and 100 people react versus two people react, the 100 people reacting means at least recognition; that is the reach—how many people it changes it for. So taking to the hypothetical extreme, a small, weak, and neutral brand has very few people recognizing it, and the people that do don't care that much about it either way.
On the other polar extreme, you have a large, strong positive brand—so that would be lots of people recognizing the brand, it changes behavior when they see the brand, and the behavior is generally towards doing what that brand is asking someone to do. And I want to make this point: a lot of people have this misunderstanding that any strong brand is polar, that because lots of people love it, lots of people also have to hate it. Now, I say this by percentage, not necessarily by absolute numbers.
If the whole United States knows who you are, you're going to have a percentage of people that hate you just because there are crazy people. What I'm saying is, is there a brand that can't have that kind of status that isn't polar? So I'll give a polar example first.
I have the silhouette of Donald Trump here, and he has a very strong brand. He has a big reach; lots of people recognize him, even just the silhouette alone. He has a strong influence, as in the percentage of people that when they see this have a reaction in either direction, positive or negative.
But just that they react shows that he has strong influence. And then third is the direction. Now for him, he is polar, meaning many people move towards him very strongly, and many people move away from him very strongly.
And so many assume that all brands are that way, and that's just because there are many examples of that. But that doesn't mean it has to be that way. So I'll give you a different example: some brands manage to change many people's behavior towards them all at once.
Take Taylor Swift, for example. I'm sure she's got some crazies—don't get me wrong—but the vast majority of people who see Taylor Swift recognize her; she changes their behavior, and most of the time it's towards her. So she is a large, positive, strong brand.
This is also personally why I think the idea of seeking out controversy absolutely gets you recognized, but you don't have to make that trade. You can absolutely just build a strong, positive brand. Mother Teresa has a strong positive brand; a lot of people know her, influenced a lot of behavior, and did a lot of good stuff.
Must be work! Like, I hate Mother Teresa. Some people do, but most people don't.
The same thing goes with Apple: a lot of people like their products. I'm sure there are some tech people who say, "Android's way better," or "PC is awesome," and that's great; that's good for them. But the vast majority of people who encounter the product like it, which is why they're one of the largest companies in the world.
So all those examples that I gave you up to this point have assumed a large audience, and I do that because this is a presentation and it makes more sense for me to work with you on stuff that you already know. But this concept carries independent of whether you have large reach, and this is why it applies to you. So if you had a small audience with high influence, what would you have?
Mom and Dad. They are high influence, as in most people, when they see their parents, their behavior changes. They have low reach because for you they're only your parents.
They might be some other people's parents, but not very many people's parents, so you have low reach. Your behavior will be towards some and away for others, meaning some people hate their parents and don't want to do anything they say, and some people like their parents and do whatever they say. There's a lot of people in between, and so that's how we measure influence.
What we're doing to grow our brand is actually working. Are more people finding out about it? Are more people changing their behavior when they do it?
And ideally, are they doing that in the direction that we want them to go? So if I say, "Hey everybody, go click here, go download this thing, go attend this event, go buy this product," whatever it is, if a lot of people do that, then we know that the brand is growing. When we want to build our brand, we want to pair our stuff with the things that the highest percentage of our ideal audience likes.
Whenever we pair anything with a brand, especially if you're starting out, everything is new. Every new pairing has risk, and you risk losing a certain percentage of your audience who has a bad experience with the thing you pair. There's always that risk.
There's always going to be some people who don't like something you do. If anyone has seen a small-town band go hit it big, some of the old towners might say, "Oh, they sold out. They did whatever.
" But what they did was gamble the short-term loss of that local audience potentially for a much broader, bigger audience. They made a bet; they did lose people, but they gained people too. They just gained more than they lost.
To the same degree, when you make that bet as the local band, you risk gaining other people who have had a positive experience with this new thing. Ideally, we have more in the green than in the red. Those new pairings you make with a brand always lose some audience.
"He's sold out; I liked the old stuff better. " This also happens with content, by the way. This person is in the red bucket, while the new stuff might also cause people to say, "No, this new stuff rocks," and that person is in the green bucket.
Whenever you try to grow and you make any new pairing—meaning you create new content, you make a new genre, you make a new song, or you create anything—you make a bet that more people from your ideal audience will like the pairing than those who won't. TL;DR: You'll net an increase in reach, influence, and positive direction. So my ask here is: don't let the five mean comments stop you from gaining the 500 new people who like the new thing.
To finish, I'll give a real-life example to make this whole concept clear. I want to associate myself with business value, so I connect with making people money and growing their businesses. There's me, making content, and ideally, money.
The best way I can do this is to create content for small business owners to consume and books for them to read and use so that they can then profit. The good thing is that they associate that growth and profit with me, which leads them to consume more of my stuff; they drink the next soda, they buy the next shirt, and the next time they want it to happen again, they are more likely to take the desired action. Equally important, people who don't like business stuff won't like my work or will just prefer to watch other things.
You've got this married couple who say, "We hate people who talk about money. " They are probably not going to like my stuff, and that's okay. However, people who like business, have a business, or are trying to start one might want more.
This grows the brand because people consume the content, say, "Hey, you got to check out Herzi's stuff," and then that person they tell says, "Right on! " They check it out; they get a positive outcome; they make the pairing as well, and the brand grows—ideally with my ideal audience. To see this in action, if you use the information from today to make money, good branding has occurred.
I said I was going to cover three things: what branding is, what good branding is, why it makes you money, and how to start and grow yours. Hopefully, you feel like I've fulfilled those three objectives. Now we can test if good branding actually occurred.
If you are my ideal customer—so here's a business owner, okay? Awesome! A lot of you?
Fantastic! We can see objectively if this provided value. Did we get a good positive outcome, a neutral outcome, or a negative one?
You might think, "I hate this guy talking about money," or, "You know what? I think this could make me a ton of money. " Well, we'll see!
I want you to further associate myself with value, making you money, and growing your business. So I'm going to give you two gifts for free. The first is for existing business owners who want to scale.
Most of you should raise your hands! I have two books: *$100 Million Offers* and *$100 Million Leads. * People say they made their money with these books and there are a lot of five-star reviews on them—fantastic!
I also mean to provide video versions of these books that you can get absolutely free on my site at acis. com. This is me further associating with you: if you like this, you're going to love that, and they'll make you more money—absolutely free!
That's what it looks like on the inside. These are legit courses, and you can get those video versions on my site again—absolutely free—at acc. com/trining.
Now, if you're like, "Man, I don’t like watching stuff, I like listening to stuff," I want to provide value for a different type. . .
Of ideal audience, which is still business owners, but business owners who listen rather than business owners who watch, which is also fine. So, if you are somebody who's not a reader or not a watcher, I've got the books on my podcast absolutely free. It's called "The Game.
" They started episode 570-something. And so that's what I have for business owners who hear earlier on, and they're like, "I want to start a brand! " Okay, cool!
So this is for you. I just became a co-owner of school. com, a really awesome platform that helps people get started in their business.
So anybody here who watches this or listens to this and wants the tools, the training, and a community of other people starting brands with a little friendly competition and some prizes, we made a step-by-step process on school to help you get started, and you can start for free. So, hopefully, I succeed in providing value and a good pairing occurred, a good branding happened; otherwise, I'm sorry. Everybody else, I hope good branding occurred.
And for those of you who either start the school games for free or use my stuff to grow your business, I will see you guys soon! So go to schoolgames. com, and I will see you all there.
Thank you guys so much for your time!
