Ben Fletcher

CEO & Founder @themothershipai. A platform building consumer brands to their full potential | Founder @FastGrowthIcons

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@moizali Lisbon. Good startup scene too.

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@Peston Unless the greens do not stand, this probably flips to Reform. Hilarious

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@MrDylanCollins Some people actually think it’s called annualised revenue run-rate…

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

Sometimes you see a demo and you’re like ‘wow, the future is here’. This is not that demo…

[Figure @Figure_robot]

We taught two F.03 robots to clean a room and make a bed in under 2 minutes - fully autonomous.

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@jspujji UGC please kind sir

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@aschwags3 This is the perfect articulation

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@s_gtucker Exciting! Missed that you were doing this. I built this last year as a side project https://t.co/Bl17sBCqTv. Would be good to catch up!

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

Holy shit… are you paying minimum wage?

You have an entry level position, and that person works a ‘normal’ week - 9-5 plus an hour or two of extra work per day.

48 hours per week is £31,746

I think some startups have people working longer hours on less money…

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@thulme @GeminiApp The paperclip?

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@GeorgeBevis I think they have a different approach, I've run up against rate limits a fair bit especially running cowork and claude for excel. But more at the start - maybe I was just hitting it harder...

[Olly Hudson @oliverwhudson]

This is what a properly built persona system looks like in practice.

3 micro personas. 4 angles each. 4 vehicles each. 48 genuinely distinct ads from a single macro persona.

Take one macro persona: "The Conscious Parent." On paper, one audience. In reality, completely different people with completely different fears, motivators, and trigger points.

That's the micro persona layer. And it's where most creative strategies stop being strategic.

P1.1, P1.2, and P1.3 sit inside the same macro. Same broad demographic. But each one needs a different hook, a different setup, a different cognitive bias tapped to actually convert. An ad built for one will not land the same way with another. If you're writing to all three with the same message, you're reaching none of them properly.

Here's what building to that level of specificity actually unlocks.

Each one a different signal. Each signal giving Andromeda something new to work with. Each piece of creative capable of reaching a person the last one couldn't.

That's how incremental reach actually grows. Not by producing more, but by covering more psychological territory with what you produce.

Most accounts have far more creative territory available to them than they realise. The personas are there. The angles exist. They just haven't been mapped and briefed against each other yet.

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@aaronrubin @ShinghiD Came here to say that…

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@jspujji @aschwags3 AI

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@TomBrown What platform did you build that on?

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

25 companies now. And first customer issue: the pay me money button wasn't working...

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

I built an app today on Lovable, launched it 10 mins ago and I have 5 companys signed up....

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

@MrDylanCollins I agree. I’ve been trying to build a model so people can state their assumptions and see the impact. Haven’t factored in under investment in AI as a factor yet https://t.co/RMPYwSp29x

[Macken @MackenMurphy]

There’s a well-known phenomenon in the facial aesthetics literature whereby “average faces” (that is, faces formed by superimposing many faces atop one another) tend to be more attractive than the average person.

This may be counterintuitive, but it makes sense when you consider the following: Individual faces are all slightly flawed, from a beauty perspective, in idiosyncratic ways. And when you average lots of faces, you average out all of these minor issues. So, an “average face” is errorless and looks quite pleasant as a result.

However, another thing you’ll notice about these “average faces” is that none of them could be models. They’re more attractive than the average human, yes, but less attractive than the most attractive humans.

This is because extremely attractive faces tend to have certain features that are, mathematically, extreme. (For example, male models tend to have lower-set brows and larger jawbones than you would see in any average face.)

Recently, I have begun to wonder if LLM-writing faces a similar challenge. It’s always “more attractive than average,” because all of the flaws of normal human writing have been averaged out. But it's also missing the unusual taste and style of the best human writers I've read. In my experience, it's only ever 85%-good; like an "average face," it's never flawed, but equally, it's never exceptionally beautiful.

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

What will be the impact of AI on jobs? I can’t tell you, but if you put your assumptions in here: https://t.co/RMPYwSp29x then it will calculate the impact over different time horizons.

[Ben Fletcher @BenFletch]

Do you think at some point, saying you use ChatGPT will be like having a Hotmail email address?