Mitch

notes from a capitalist degen

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

Here is the reason why many agencies/consultants are allergic to 6 figure deals :

(should be behind a paywall)

The problem isn’t your offer, it’s your fundamental misunderstanding of how corporate money actually moves

When you position yourself as an "optional marketing expense," you're already drowning

Top-tier agencies and consultants NEVER sell themselves this way

Instead, they position their service as a MANDATORY MARKET PROTECTION strategy

Let me cook

The psychological shift is MASSIVE

When you say "We'll improve your marketing," clients ask themselves "Do I need this?" which ALWAYS results in a no

But when you say "Your biggest competitor just restructured their positioning and is capturing 80% of deals in your space"

The conversation shifts from “Do I need this ?” to “How much am I ALREADY losing ?”

And decision makers don’t like to feel behind

They don’t need “better marketing”

They need competitive insurance

Here’s what 99% of agencies & consultants fail to understand :

EVERY company has multiple budget pools with millions sitting there

They just haven't allocated it to YOU yet because you haven't framed your offer correctly

The growth budgets alone can be $2M+ in most medium-sized businesses

The compliance & risk mitigation reserves often remain untapped

These are GOLDMINES, while everyone and their mum fights over the scraps in oversaturated marketing budgets

Your prospects don't have a money problem, they have a PRIORITY problem

Fix that and watch budgets magically appear

And keep in mind that most business owners and CEOs don’t think logically about budgets

They allocate money based on :

- perceived urgency (fire drills always get funded first)
- power struggles (whichever department makes the most noise wins)
- boardroom politics (whoever has the CEO’s ear controls cashflow)

But when you show an executive how their current strategy is booty cheeks and that they NEED work on budget allocation, they don't "find new money" - they REALLOCATE from lower priorities and underperforming initiatives

Stop selling your solution and start selling better allocation of EXISTING resources :

1 - Find an underperforming spend (ex : outdated ad spend, underutilized tech, inefficient labor costs etc)

2 - Expose the financial leakage (ex : your team spends $500k/year on outbound prospecting, but 78% of those leads never convert because of poor nurturing systems)

3 - Redirect that money to you (ex : If we just reallocate 15% of that, we can turn it into $2M net profit within 6 months)

Now the company sees ZERO new spending, just a smarter budget move

Executives love this because it makes them look like financial geniuses (they’re not)

Most consultants sell a single benefit but you gotta sell CHAIN REACTIONS inside the company

BUDGET MOVES LIKE DOMINOES

So if you can prove that spending money in one area will create multiple financial gains across departments, the company has NO CHOICE but to approve your deal

$$$

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@fwraphl 🤝

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@IronRedSandHive appreciate you bro

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

This is a banger and you should definitely follow this guy if you're interested in building distribution

One thing I'd add, especially for people building organic distribution around high ticket B2B businesses, is that the people who help distribute your content and the people who eventually make you money aren't necessarily the same people

This distinction has a direct impact on how you should structure your content strategy, particularly when your buyers represent a very small percentage of the audience you can reach organically

Let's say you're selling 30K-70K+ advisory mandates to established founders

You know exactly who your ICP is, what problems they face, what triggers them to buy, how they talk about those problems and what kind of information they find valuable

So naturally, you start producing content that speaks directly to them

You publish detailed breakdowns of acquisition financing, exit multiples, capital structures, operational improvements and whatever else is relevant to the services you're selling

The challenge is getting that content to circulate beyond the relatively small group of people who already understand and care about those subjects

A founder running a $30M business can find your analysis of acquisition financing extremely valuable

Reaching that founder organically is a separate problem, especially when you're starting from zero

This is particularly relevant on algorithm driven platforms like Instagram, where you don't get to decide exactly who sees your content

Creating content that speaks directly to your ICP doesn't necessarily mean it'll reach them

The audience responsible for distributing your content doesn't have to be the same audience responsible for generating your revenue

When you're operating in markets where a single commercial relationship can be worth six or seven figures, those two audiences can be almost entirely different

You have people who consume content because they find it entertaining, educational or aspirational

They engage with it, share it, discuss it and contribute to its distribution

Then you have people who operate closer to the markets you're targeting

Founders, executives, investors, advisors, industry professionals and people who have direct access to the buyers you want to reach

And finally, you have the actual economic buyers

The people with the problems, resources and authority to enter into the transactions you're trying to originate

These groups aren't completely separate, but they don't perform the same function

A younger entrepreneur who can't afford a $50K consulting mandate can still help distribute content that eventually reaches established founders

An advisor who has no intention of buying your services can become an important source of introductions

And a founder who never engages with your posts can consume your content for months before eventually contacting you about a transaction

So when I build a content strategy, I'm not exclusively thinking about how to make every publication appealing to the final buyer

I'm thinking about how to create enough circulation around a particular set of subjects that the right people repeatedly encounter the business, while making sure there's enough depth behind the content for those people to take us seriously once they do

That requires different types of content doing different jobs

For example, an advisory firm can publish a breakdown of how an entrepreneur built a billion dollar business through acquisitions

That's a subject with broad appeal

You can make it interesting to people who have never acquired a company, never raised capital and have no intention of hiring an investment bank

Then you can publish a much more technical analysis of how the acquisitions were financed, why the capital structure worked and what made the economics attractive

A much smaller audience will care about that second piece

But among the people who do, you'll find a greater concentration of mfs who actually understand the subject and have some commercial proximity to it

And you can go even deeper by addressing the specific situations that lead someone to hire an advisor in the first place

A founder preparing an exit has very specific questions about what buyers will scrutinize during diligence, how different deal structures affect his proceeds and what he can do to improve the terms of the transaction

The content addressing those questions can generate a fraction of the impressions and still bring in more valuable business opportunities

We applied a version of this with a client operating across high-ticket consulting and institutional advisory

We were building organic distribution around an offer targeting established founders and investors, with consulting mandates ranging from $30K to $70K+

We could have built the entire content strategy around highly technical subjects directly related to the firm's services

Instead, we deliberately used broader entrepreneurial content to generate discovery, while using more specialized material to establish the kind of authority required to originate expensive mandates

A lot of the material came directly from the client's existing expertise and conversations, but we were intentional about which subjects we extracted, how we framed them and which audience each piece was supposed to reach

Some of the content was designed to circulate well beyond our immediate ICP

Other pieces were much narrower and spoke to problems that only established business owners would recognize

The highest performing content in terms of impressions and the content originating the strongest commercial opportunities were often different pieces entirely

Some relatively modest performers in terms of views were attracting precisely the kind of founders we wanted

Within the first 30 days, we generated over 800K organic views, booked 48 qualified calls and collected $300K+ in front-end cash, without spending a dollar on advertising

The founders entering the pipeline also represented approximately $125M in combined net worth

That figure refers to the cumulative net worth of the founders we originated relationships with, which is relevant because the firm could serve them through several different types of mandates beyond the initial consulting engagement

The immediate consulting mandates were one way to monetize those relationships, but the firm also had the capabilities to serve those founders through financing, capital raising, acquisitions, M&A and other advisory mandates

The consulting business gave us a reason to establish commercial relationships with founders who had problems worth solving today, rather than waiting until they needed to sell a company or raise capital

And once you're working with someone on growing or improving his business, you naturally develop a much deeper understanding of his operations, ambitions and potential future needs

A $50K consulting client who eventually needs help financing an acquisition or selling his company can represent an entirely different level of economic opportunity

Those future transactions aren't guaranteed, of course, but the commercial relationship has value beyond the initial mandate because the firm has several ways to serve those clients over time

Our distribution was therefore feeding an advisory business where the same founder could generate revenue across multiple mandates, with the initial consulting engagement creating opportunities for a much longer commercial relationship

That same logic also influenced how we evaluated content performance

One thing mentioned in the original article is doubling down on content outliers, which makes sense

But you have to be careful about what you're actually optimizing for

If you publish a video that generates 300K views and another that generates 4K, your instinct is naturally going to be to reproduce the first one

Except the first video could have attracted hundreds of thousands of viewers who will never have a reason to buy your services, while the second brought you two conversations with founders operating eight figure companies

That doesn't automatically make the first video useless

It could have introduced thousands of people to your brand, expanded your distribution and contributed to the discovery of other content that eventually generates business

And the second video could have generated more commercial value with a fraction of the reach, despite looking like a much weaker performer in your analytics

You're evaluating two pieces of content designed to perform different functions using the same metric

And if you keep optimizing exclusively for whatever gets the highest reach, you can gradually end up with an audience that's increasingly disconnected from the economics of the business you're trying to build

That's why I think content performance has to be evaluated at the level of the entire distribution system

You need to understand which subjects generate discovery, which ones attract relevant operators, which ones create qualified conversations and how those different interactions contribute to actual transactions

You also need to account for the fact that buyers rarely consume one piece of content and immediately purchase a $40K service

A prospect can discover your business through a broadly appealing video, follow the account, consume several more specialized pieces over the following weeks and eventually reach out when a particular problem becomes relevant

Looking exclusively at the last piece of content they engaged with would give you a distorted picture of which parts of your distribution actually contributed to the sale

And if you eliminate the broader content because it doesn't directly produce sales, you can end up destroying the distribution mechanism that was introducing those buyers to your business in the first place

So before producing content, I'd work backwards from the relationships I want the business to originate

Who are the actual economic buyers, what situations make them need your services, who influences their decisions and which people and networks surround them?

Then I'd look at the subjects connected to our expertise that can attract attention beyond those immediate buyers, without turning the account into something completely unrelated to what we're selling

The broader content still needs to create a logical connection to the more specialized material and the commercial audience you're ultimately trying to reach

Once you've figured that out, the storytelling, packaging and channel selection principles in the original article become much easier to apply intelligently

You know what subjects need broad distribution, where technical depth matters, which channels give you access to relevant networks and what commercial outcomes you're actually trying to produce

[Ryan @ryangrowthh]

https://t.co/IBrnqeQ20O

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@ryangrowthh 🤝

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

We work privately with a small number of founders on offers, distribution, deal flow and growth

DM “SOVEREIGN” if you want in

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@saintmonh 🤣🤣

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

This is such a retarded understanding of how wealthy people behave

I just sold a Louis Vuitton Keepall 55 to a footballer who had just been called up to his national team, and deliberately took no margin on it

I'm actually out of pocket because I added a bottle of Grand Soir by Maison Francis Kurkdjian and a handwritten card congratulating him on his selection

I genuinely wanted to congratulate him and do something special for him because getting called up to your national team for the first time is something you should be really proud of

The client absolutely loved the quality of the service and the personal touch, and has since asked me to source a Richard Mille, a Himalayan Birkin for his wife, and organise his entire December holiday, all of which we can take care of

Taking no margin on the initial purchase also helps me build the relationship with my supplier

He keeps his full cut, sees that I bring him serious clients, and knows I’m happy for him to make money, while the client gets the best price I can secure because there isn’t another commission added on top

My supplier didn’t ask me to give up my commission, and my client never asked for a gift

I could have added my commission, shipped the bag and everyone would have got what they agreed to

But I thought about what would make the deal worthwhile for my supplier and what would mean something to the client, without either having to ask

If we end up doing something bigger together, they already know they don’t have to negotiate with me for me to consider their interests

My clients also benefit from how I treat that supplier

When I need something difficult sourced, a request prioritised or a problem sorted out, I’m asking someone whose work I respect and who knows I look after his interests too

He has a reason to keep bringing me his best pieces and helping me take care of my clients because doing business with me is good for him

I work this way with pretty much every new concierge client because I’m happy to make nothing initially while they see how we operate and I build relationships with the best suppliers around them

I can afford to let those relationships develop without trying to get paid on every single interaction

The other thing you seem to miss is that before a client can measure your ROI, he has to trust you enough to give you the opportunity to produce it

He hasn’t worked with you yet, so he’s judging how you communicate, whether you follow through and how you handle the things he does let you take care of

And as the requests get more personal, he’s trusting your judgement and your discretion just as much as your ability to get shit done

If I’m bringing someone in to discuss his finances, he needs to know I’m very careful about who I introduce him to and what I share with them

And this mf can only learn that from dealing with me

When you’re genuinely kind to people and consistently take care of them, they become comfortable coming to you with more of their needs

Over time, I can centralise those requests and bring in partners I trust for everything from luxury goods and experiences to wealth management, structuring and tax advice

That’s how an initial purchase can develop into years of business together and multiple six figures in revenue from a single client

Being kind has also helped me build the relationships with the partners who make all of this possible

One of them is worth multiple eight figures and has always appreciated that I take his constraints into account in the way we work together, that he can rely on me and that I’m very discreet

I ended up launching several offers with him that had absolutely nothing to do with what we initially worked together on

Apparently, I was supposed to be worried he’d mistake me for customer service

I have no problem being generous with people, making sure they’re looked after and being pleasant to deal with

I also have no problem telling someone to fuck off when necessary or standing my ground, regardless of how much money they have

The fact that you see basic kindness as some form of submission is genuinely retarded

And if you think making someone money gives you a free pass to act like an asshole, go ahead and try it and see how long they keep you around

They can value what you do for them and still want you nowhere near their friends and family

If you’re pushy with their wife, running your big mouth about their finances or being a pain in the ass with someone they introduce you to, they’re the ones who have to deal with it

So why tf would they recommend you?

[Yegor @yegormethod]

Only poor people care about being nice

If you're nice to a rich guy he will literally see you as customer service for the rest of his life

Most people in business are optimizing for the completely wrong traits

Your only value in a client relationship is whether him paying you has a measurable ROI on his business or his life

If it does, you can do whatever the fuck you want

If it doesn't, nothing you say, nothing you do & the way you act will ever fucking matter anyway

In fact it's more rude to waste his time yapping about bullshit

Best advice I can give you

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@SniperLions

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@arunkatariaa Not bad

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@arunkatariaa What’s your top 5?

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

Nah bro, I’ve got plenty of stories that prove the exact opposite

With the 8 figure partner I mentioned, we weren’t even talking business at first

I wasn’t selling him anything or making him any money

I was just genuinely kind to him without asking for anything, which made him curious about me, and we eventually ended up doing business together

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@yegormethod Mf made the most absolute statement possible and now he’s telling me the world isn’t black and white 🤣

But if you’re adding nuance, then yeah we can agree

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@ryangrowthh @tristan_content @hectorserrranoo @TheJeremyHaynes Appreciate you bro 🤝

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

We work privately with a small number of founders on offers, distribution, deal flow and growth

DM “SOVEREIGN” if you want in

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

We spend so much time competing in online markets where everyone is running increasingly sophisticated distribution systems that we forget how primitive customer acquisition still is across entire industries

It’s standard practice for anyone operating online to build and enrich lists, segment markets, identify decision makers, run cold email and cold DMs, build paid acquisition funnels, test offers and creatives, retarget and deploy all of it at scale

One of our consulting clients runs an influencer agency in the European market, where nobody in the industry has a proper distribution system

Deals are still generated through existing relationships, inbound opportunities, introductions, agencies circulating briefs within their existing networks, or managers manually pitching brands one by one

Agencies representing large rosters of creators don’t have shit in terms of infrastructure for mapping the full universe of potential buyers, identifying the relevant decision makers inside those companies, segmenting them properly, reaching them across multiple channels and doing it at enough volume to generate a consistent flow of opportunities

So we had our client run two test campaigns simultaneously for one of the influencers his agency represents

She operates around motherhood, family and lifestyle, and the first step was figuring out how many different pools of buyers we could realistically sell her audience and content to

We looked at the categories where she had already landed partnerships, the ones she wanted to enter and adjacent categories where her audience made commercial sense

From there, we ranked each segment based on the depth of the brand pool and whether those companies had enough budget to make it worth attacking

That gave us multiple segments across baby and kids products, skincare and clean beauty, home cleaning, home services, appliances, food, furniture, supplements and other consumer categories

The segmentation matters because “brands that work with mum influencers” is useless as an outbound strategy

A baby food company, a robot vacuum brand, a skincare company and a home services platform might all want access to the same audience, but the reason they would work with the creator, the person responsible for the budget and the angle you use to approach them can be completely different

Once those segments were mapped, we built the first campaign around direct access to the buyers

For each segment, we built the company lists, identified the people responsible for influencer marketing, partnerships and relevant marketing budgets, and reached them through cold email and cold DMs

At the same time, we built a second campaign around access to the buyers

We targeted media agencies, PR agencies, social agencies, influencer marketing teams operating on behalf of brands and other intermediaries already sitting on relationships with multiple companies in those segments

The economics of that relationship are completely different

Going directly to a brand gives you a shot at that brand’s budget

Building a relationship with someone managing campaigns and creator spend across a portfolio of brands can give you access to multiple budgets and a recurring stream of briefs

We ran both campaigns simultaneously because they compound each other

The direct campaign created conversations with the companies holding the budgets, while the partnership campaign built relationships with people already managing those budgets across multiple brands

Within a few weeks, the combination secured six figures in annual deals from a test campaign for a single influencer

There are thousands of businesses with great products, real demand and shit distribution

Meanwhile, online mfs are fighting over the same audiences with the same acquisition channels, bloated tech stacks and more expensive infrastructure

A lot of the skills you had to learn just to survive online are still barely being used in other industries

Take them somewhere distribution is shit and put them behind a banger product or service

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@yegormethod @iblamejulius where’s my paper big man?

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@chenzhangreal Open your DMs

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

You might be sitting on a $30K+ offer that you're currently selling for a fraction of that

Without changing much about what you actually do

We had a client who was already building media engines for info guys, building the content infrastructure, personal brands and distribution behind them

Then he took the exact same expertise into politics and started closing politicians on $25K-$45K+ deals

In Greek mythology, Prometheus stole fire from the gods and gave it to humans

That's pretty much what you're doing when you take a capability that's already everywhere in your industry and bring it into a market where almost nobody has it

Info guys have spent years obsessing over how to capture and monetize attention

They've had to figure out how to turn one person into a media property, produce enough content to stay everywhere, build distribution around it, understand what gets watched and systematically turn that attention into money

Politics has PR people, communications teams, campaign strategists, press relationships and all the traditional machinery you'd expect around a politician

But attention is worth a fucking lot to a politician

So the same media expertise our client had been selling to info guys could suddenly command $25K-$45K+ per deal

And you can find this kind of pricing disconnect all over B2B

Something everyone around you already knows how to do can be worth $30K+ to people in a completely different industry

People spend their careers moving between the same companies, hiring from the same talent pools, going to the same conferences and learning from the same people

So entire bodies of knowledge can get developed inside one industry without traveling very far outside of it

And instead of trying to invent another offer from scratch, you can steal from all of that accumulated R&D

Years of testing, millions spent figuring out what works, and thousands of operators iterating on the same problems

Then you figure out who else should have it

Obviously you can't just copy and paste the exact implementation

A media engine built around some 22 yo ecom course seller in Miami can't be dropped unchanged onto a politician

You're now dealing with a completely different audience, layers of approval, reputational risk and consequences for getting shit wrong

The mechanics that made the original model work are what you steal

Everything around it has to be rebuilt for the market you're bringing it into

Now think about how many industries you've never even looked at

Find the fire

Then find the humans who still don't have it

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

We work privately with a small number of founders on offers, distribution, deal flow and growth

DM “SOVEREIGN” if you want in

[Mitch @benjaminprinter]

@youngrichgreek I’m dead serious, pretty sure whop or commas would be down to sponsor the event, and we could even set up our own internal betting system