jax 🥀

jax#0260

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

Activate young Chinese boy chad scaling method

Private jet to Monaco

Play Minecraft with the homies

Pull up in crocs (get rejected at restaurants)

Scale FB ad budget

+1000 China points

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

Evolve bro fired his whole creative team and went back to the trenches creating ads himself...
⠀
Then Chad scaled from $54K/day to $109K/day in 4 days.
⠀
Meanwhile y'all out here looking for ways to get out of the trenches and focus on "CEO sh*t" 💀
⠀
Most ecom bros start outsourcing tasks the second they get some traction, hoping it scales them even further.
⠀
Then growth stalls.

Turns out the thing they outsourced was what scaled them in the first place.
⠀
This is why Ronaldo's always played the same role, the one he's best at.

Everything else on the pitch, he leaves to the other ten. He's just operating in his zone of genius.
⠀
Zone of genius is the one thing you do that doesn't feel like work and still moves the most revenue.
⠀
It's also the one zone where your worst day still beats a whole team's best one, because nobody else can replicate what comes naturally to you.
⠀
Don't confuse it with something you just enjoy either.

If you love doing it but it's not moving revenue, that's zone of luxury. Keep that for your actual free time, don't build the business around it.
⠀
If you can't name it, you can't protect it.

And whatever you can't name is exactly what gets handed off first the moment you start scaling.
⠀
Out of the 49 brands that scaled to $100K/day in Evolve, I've never seen one hit hypergrowth without the founder locked into their own zone of genius.
⠀
The business can still grow without it. It just won't grow as fast.
⠀
For most successful ecom founders, their zone of genius could be marketing, strategic vision, building and scaling systems, or product development.
⠀
Shopify's CEO is a product guy. When his chief product officer left, he didn't hire a replacement. He took the role back himself, because he was good at it and genuinely enjoyed doing it.
⠀
That's one zone. You've got two more you should identify.
⠀
1) Zone of incompetence:
You hate it, and it doesn't move much revenue either way. Hire it out immediately, there's minimal revenue at risk. ⠀

2) Zone of resentment:
You hate it, but it drives real revenue. You can't just quit this one cold, that revenue's still coming from you. You keep doing it while you actively hunt an A-player to take it over. ⠀

Find someone whose zone of genius is your zone of incompetence or resentment.

Once your entire team is operating in THEIR zone of genius, you'll really start to see hypergrowth.

Back to Evolve bro though. He's the example of getting that diagnosis backwards.

He never stopped to ask if creative was his zone of genius. He just assumed the problem was headcount, and handed off the one thing that was actually working.

Pick the next thing you're about to hand off. Ask what happens to revenue if you stop touching it for 30 days.

If nothing changes, hand it off. If everything slows down, that's your zone of genius.

Then check how much of your actual week goes to it. If that number's embarrassingly low, that's the real fix, not another hire.

Few

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

The room you're in matters way more than most people realise
⠀
We hosted a $3B Ecom event with Evolve.

18 year olds pulling $100k days, dudes doing 8 figures a month, 9-figure brand owners, all in the same room.
⠀
Ky showed up to that one doing $0.

He'd built an ecom store, shut it down, came in with nothing running.
⠀
3 months later he's doing consistent $100k days.
⠀
The room didn't do the work for him. Skill and effort are still the ceiling, that never changes.
⠀
What it did was make the next level feel real instead of theoretical. Once you've stood next to someone your age already doing it, you can't un-see it.
⠀
Most of the room had never met another person doing this in real life.

Then suddenly they're surrounded by people who think the same way, swapping real stories, picking stuff up on the spot. Had guys telling me it was the best week of their life.

And it's rare. Most industries run on ego, drama and gatekeeping. In this one I watched 9-figure brand owners spend their downtime helping dudes half their age figure it out.
⠀
Felt the exact same energy at @iamshackelford's event.

Different crowd than ours, same effect.

People who've coached the biggest names you follow, sitting right next to 20+ year olds just getting started. Proof of an even higher ceiling than most of them thought was there.
⠀
Between our room and his, it's the same thing every time.

We handed out awards at ours. Watching someone your age walk up and collect one does something no course can.

The whole room left wanting one, and went back grinding for it.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

Literally broke down the easiest way to stand out from competitors with an Ecom brand in 2026:

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

Update: bro doubled his Ecom brand AGAIN, just 2 months later.

Joined Evolve 4 months back at <$1M/month. 4 months later, he hit a $5.3M month.

First, he Chad scaled to $1M/month through:

- Finding a unique mechanism
- Making it instantly believable for his audience
- Combining that with a winning angle

With the mechanism and angle already locked in, here's what made the difference scaling to $5M+/month:

1 ) Finding the right format

Most Ecom bros obsess over format first, before they even have a real mechanism or angle. "UGC or static?" "AI animated or talking head?"

Homie didn't touch format until the mechanism and angle were already locked in.

Once it was locked, testing formats was just finding which one carried the message.

The format wasn't special. The message underneath it already was.

When your ad "fatigues," you didn't burn the messaging. You burned ONE consumption door. One placement, one audience segment.

There's a dozen more that never saw it.

2 ) Intent over volume

Most Ecom bros think more volume means more winners.

So did he. Pumped out concept after concept, hoping enough of them landed.

But new customer ROAS kept dropping. So he flipped it. Every concept had to earn its spot by being high intent. Not another line in the testing queue.

More ads without more thought isn't more chances to win. Adding volume to a broken process just makes you lose faster.

3 ) Stayed in the trenches

Scale past $1M/month and the standard move is handing research off to a creative strategist.

Homie never let go of it. Still deep in the trenches doing research and concept ideas himself, even at $5M+/month.

Constantly looking for new stats and emotional angles to use in his ads.

Don't erode your edge.

That's what scaled you in the first place.

4 ) Built his own content library

Everyone is using AI b-roll right now because it's fast and cheap.

He didn't. Instead he studied what actually makes a b-roll good, what makes an animation grab attention. And shot his own B-roll, footage, and animations.

His words: "Even if AI b-roll looks almost real, it still doesn't."

This is a very underrated lever most of you don't pull.

We might bring him on to do a call in Evolve to share the sauce as well 👀

Tis the way of the chad scaler.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

I used to be in the trenches making $400/mth selling vacuums

Yesterday I spoke on stage at GreekOut, @iamshackelford's event. The same guy whose FB ads course changed my life back in 2020.
⠀
Back then I was broke and trying everything. I spent a month straight sending Upwork proposals, cold DMing people, even applying for VA jobs just to get out the trenches.

Then I went through Nick's course and used the information in there to land my first job online as a media buyer making $4k/mth.

10x'd my income at 18.
⠀
Fast forward to today and it's honestly insane.

From a kid making $400 a month to scaling brands to $100k days and $1M days.

So much of what I do now traces back to that one course, even me sharing everything on here.
⠀
From Nick teaching me to now me helping others as well

Helping Rafi get out the Bangladesh trenches and scale his brand to $50k/day.

Helping some kids as young as 17 and 18 years old do $100k days

I wouldn't be here sharing everything with you guys, or even be in Ecom if I didn't learn from Nick

From me learning from Nick 6 years ago to now me speaking at his event, we've come full circle.

One thing I'll never forget. Before I ever started posting online, Nick had one line in his bio:

"There's enough for everyone to eat good."
⠀
That was rare back then. The industry was full of people gatekeeping everything they knew, guarding it like there was a fixed amount of money to go around.
⠀
Now it's flipped.

Everyone at GreekOut was completely open about what's actually working for them. No gatekeeping. Just sharing so everyone eats.
⠀
And it's not only media buying anymore.

Creative strategy, hiring, ops, finance. Every part of the game someone's teaching now.

The stuff you couldn't find in 2020 is just out there now
⠀
In the age of AI, that's what I'm betting on.

Not more tools.

People. Community. Getting everyone in a room, online and even better in person, and building together.
⠀
Nick's been doing this a lot longer than me and kept his reputation the whole way. That's rare. He's someone I'll always look up to.
⠀
None of us knew what we were doing when we started.

We were just clicking buttons seeing what worked. And the crazy part is you still can.

From clicking a few buttons online you can build something that actually lasts. Wild that this is still true in 2026.
⠀
If a scrawny broke kid selling vacuums could make it out, so can you.

There's enough for everyone to eat good.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

Update: French homie @worldexFrancois went from $100K/day to $330K/day just 50 days later.
⠀
He shut down his French store 8 months ago. Was even close to quitting ecom.

Switched to the US market and went all in on one product.
⠀
Then Chad scale from $0 to $330K/day in less than 8 months.

He didn't change much once he hit $100K/day. Just did more of the same, and did it better.

Most EU guys think the US market is too hard. He did the hard work anyways, and not only did good but CRUSHED it.⠀

Few.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

You think your editors are why your ads keep dying.

Most of the time, it's your own skill issue.
⠀
It's both a teaching and a hiring skill, and it never stops being both.

You keep leveling up how you coach, and there's always a better editor out there.

It's never just one or the other.
⠀
But the lever you control right now is how you level up your team.
⠀
Had a student doing $8M/mth with his Ecom brand.
⠀
He had like 20+ editors to push more volume, thinking more ads meant more winners.
⠀
It backfired. More editors just meant he spent most of his time doing revisions instead.
⠀
This dude had a newborn at home, but every spare hour went to leaving revisions instead of moving the business.
⠀
Working around the clock but not actually working. Just stuck in the review seat. So he plateaued.
⠀
The problem wasn't the team. It was his feedback.
⠀
This is super common across 8-9 fig brand owners who are monster direct response marketers.
⠀
You can chad scale to $100k/day all by yourself. But past that, staying in the trenches becomes the ceiling. You can't sustain the scale unless your team learns to think without you.
⠀
Most of y'all tell your editors "change the b-roll" or "the visual doesn't match the script."
⠀
That's a command, not a reason.

You're expecting them to read your mind, and most editors don't even know what a good ad looks like yet.
⠀
Give them the WHY, not just the what. That's coaching the lens, teaching your editors to see a winner the way you see one.

Every note trains their eye, so they start judging their own edits before you ever have to.
⠀
This one shift was a big reason he went from $8M to $30M/mth in a year. From living in the revision trenches to barely touching the business now.
⠀
Flip side. Another student did $75M last year and figured he'd earned a step back.
⠀
His creative team couldn't scale without him and revenue dropped.
⠀
He never built the lens in his team, so his editors never leveled up to think without him in the seat.
⠀
Here's how to fix it:
⠀
When you're doing learnings on your ads, figuring out why one worked and why one didn't, pull your whole team onto a call to do it together.
⠀
Walk them through why you think something's a winner and why something's not, so they align on what good actually looks like and what you expect.
⠀
The biggest issue with editors is they don't understand your vision. You just tell them to find the visuals, so what they pick never matches the script or what you had in your head.
⠀
Do it enough and they stop repeating the same mistakes. You stop being the bottleneck.
⠀
We train and hire all our editors through @ecomtalent Doesn't replace explaining your own reasoning, but they pick up the rest way faster.
⠀
Every role you hire needs a system to perform inside.
⠀
Not "I pay this guy so much, he should just come in and crush it." Cmon bro.
⠀
As much as we all love to chad scale, click buttons and do nothing, you've got to build this muscle first to get there.
⠀
Tis the way of the chad scaler.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

He almost quit ecom.

7 months later, his brand hit $226k/day

Most EU guys think the US market is too hard. He did it anyway

French homie @worldexFrancois breaks down how he cracked the US, built a team from zero, and the CRO fix that tripled his CVR:

https://t.co/aF4xXpn8Ox

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

"My ad fatigued, I need a new angle."

A student of mine almost killed the angle that took him from $100k/mth to $1M/mth.

Same angle the whole time.

He just served it a way he'd never tried.

That's the loop 90% of you are trapped in.

Winner dies. Hunt a new angle. It dies. Hunt again. Forever.

You're not running out of angles. You lack depth.

Meta isn't magic. It puts your ad in front of people who'll watch it, because engagement is what keeps them on the app. That's the whole game.

So your one angle isn't one audience. It's ~20 cohorts split by how they like to consume.

Some want a simple image comparison ad. Some want a Pixar-style edit. Some want raw UGC. Some are on the train with no sound and just want to read text.

When your ad "fatigues," you didn't burn the angle. You burned ONE consumption door out of 19. The other 18 never saw it.

Wanting to look better isn't a dead desire. The angle didn't die.

So stop hunting. Start mining.

One angle. 8 messaging formats. 18 visual styles.

That's 144 unique ads out of a single idea, before you even touch tone or avatar.

And no, this isn't "change the hook, same message." That's the cosmetic iteration Meta started nuking after Andromeda.

This is the same angle as a genuinely different watch experience. Meta reads that as a brand new ad.

Open your top 10 ads right now. Count how many share the same first 3 seconds (message-wise).

Your second winner is probably just an iteration of your first, you did it by accident. Imagine doing it on purpose.

The problem is you don't know why the ad worked.

The messaging, the desire, the avatar - far more important than the format.

Understand why it hit, then translate that across every way people consume.

$100k/day sustained could be 10 angles. For some it's 1-2 angles with a variety of ads. That's it.

The game was never collecting angles. You strike gold, you don't walk off with one nugget.

"But what if the angle's actually dead?" Run it in different ways.

Product demo, founder talking head, raw UGC. All flop at the same avatar, fine, kill it.

That's rarer than you think. You just hadn't found the door yet.

A lot of people only think black and white. "Iterate more volume" or "find new ideas."

Most can't think past "saw a cool one on Atria, swiped it, remade it, sent 10 this week." That's area.

Depth, not area. Mine, don't hunt.

When something's working, we go as deep as we can.

When nothing is, we spend more time hunting new ideas. No set ratio. It's a sliding scale.

Back to that student. Stuck at $100k/mth, I told him product-aware ads would work best for him right now.

He thought that capped his scale, so he kept chasing new angles and ideas.

The ad that took him to $1M/mth was still product aware, same angle. Just in an AI-animated style.

Your next winner isn't a new angle. It's the one you already killed, served a way you never tried.

Tis the way of the chad scaler.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

It's 2026 and copying big Ecom brand ads is still your creative strategy.

AI just made it faster.

Now you clone someone's winner in seconds without thinking 💀
⠀
"That must be their winner, Claude rewrite it for my brand." Then it flops.
⠀
Here's why copying them won't work for your brand:
⠀
1) That might not even be their best ad
⠀
Longest running doesn't mean best performing.

Could be a branding ad, a retargeting ad, or one they never bothered to turn off. You're copying a guess.
⠀
2) Their business model could be completely different from yours
⠀
IM8 and Grüns have warm audiences, repeat buyers, social proof, and LTV you don't have. You're cold traffic with none of that behind you.
⠀
For a brand like Grüns they don't need insane DR ads. Their moat is their product, positioning and LTV, not the creative.

They know what a customer's worth over 6, 12, 24 months and can lose money on the first purchase because the backend makes it back. You can't.
⠀
That's why they can run "boost your energy" broad as hell and still convert. You run the same line from cold traffic and it dies.

They're already the market leaders and people trust them.
⠀
That's why people think markets are too saturated.
⠀
Imagine you're selling a greens supplement again, competing against AG1, saying the same sh*t as everyone else.
⠀
Big brands have fixed positioning they can't move from. That doesn't change. But it leaves gaps.
⠀
Even the brands you want to copy got there by finding those gaps, not by copying.

IM8 and Grüns are both derivatives of AG1. IM8 made a more scientifically dosed version. Grüns made it a gummy. Neither won by running AG1's ads.
⠀
67 Water found the avatar Liquid Death wasn't targeting. Liquid Death was already doing 9 figures. Didn't matter. Water's a commodity and they still found the gap.
⠀
That's the game.
⠀
Identifying white space
⠀
Take supplements. Instead of "supplement helps you fall asleep" — as a newcomer you'd go after moms who can't sleep because of a newborn.

Way more specific. Way less competition in the auction. You could be the only one talking to that mom.
⠀
Unless you have an insane product edge, you have to position your brand differently.
⠀
Don't look at what competitors are doing to find these. You'll always be second best. People already know IM8 is the best.

Go after the same avatar and you're just a worse version of it.
⠀
The idea for your ad/angle should start from research.
⠀
Go where your avatar is already venting. Reddit. Facebook groups. Parenting forums. Postpartum recovery groups. Breastfeeding communities. Moms with newborns aren't just in sleep supplement groups.
⠀
Find their exact words. That's your ad copy. Not what you think they want to hear — what they're already saying about their problem.

People still think creative strategy comes from being creative. It doesn't.
⠀
This is the Spider Web Method.

Moms who can't sleep leads to postpartum recovery. That leads to breastfeeding forums. Keep pulling the thread and it goes deeper.
⠀
Claude Code can scrape and summarise it all for you, but it still takes manual work on your end.

You have to read the threads and understand word for word how the avatar thinks.
⠀
And if you're looking for inspiration, look at niches outside the one you're selling in.

You could be in health gadgets, pull an idea from a skincare brand, and translate it over.
⠀
The point is, you can't copy what's working until you understand why it's working — then figure out what translates to your brand and what doesn't.
⠀
Most of you copy big brands, target super broad angles from day one, compete in auctions you can't win, then cope and say it's saturated.
⠀
Dropshippers, this is you. Selling yet another of the same product, copying whatever the big dawg is running, maybe slightly better. Same same.

Your customer is sitting there thinking "why don't I just buy from the original instead." That's you 💀
⠀
Scale from a position of strength, not weakness.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

Everyone loves talking about testing offers.

No one talks about how to plan them.
⠀
It's not just "Buy 1 Free 1" then "Buy 2 Free 1".
⠀
You could get revenue and AOV up and still make less profit.
⠀
First, what even makes an offer?
⠀
There's no magic formula.

Anyone selling you their "copy my exact offer" formula is lying.
⠀
It could be dollar amount off. A percentage off. Bundle and save. Buy-2-get-1. Free gift. Free shipping. Stack a few. They all print for someone.
⠀
Your job is finding which prints for you. That's a test, not a guess.

But you can't test blind. I can't run buy-1-get-3, I'd go broke. Your numbers tell you what you can even afford to put in the ring.
⠀
Get the numbers right first.

Then here's what tells you if an offer's actually printing:
⠀
1) Revenue Per Session
⠀
Most of you think "bump AOV, make more money." Not how it works.
⠀
AOV and conversion rate are a balance scale, not a lever. Tip too hard on one side and the other drops with it.
⠀
RPS = AOV × Conversion Rate
⠀
In the image example:
⠀
AOV actually dropped, $70 to $60.
But CVR went 3% to 5%.
RPS climbed $2.10 to $3.00 and profit per session went up with it.
⠀
Lower AOV, more money. That's the balance working.
⠀
It cuts the other way too. Grüns nails it.

More kids, you need more packs, so the bigger bundle is the obvious buy. Price per pack drops, AOV and RPS climb together, because they gave you a reason to buy up.
⠀
A guy in Evolve did the same, AOV $93 to $135, revenue and profit up 40%.
⠀
Set up a custom AOV and conversion rate metric inside your ad account. Stop checking it off Shopify.
⠀
Now the benchmark. Below $2.50 RPS on US traffic and something's off. $2.50–3.00 is healthy. We aim for $3.
⠀
But a benchmark in a vacuum means nothing. The real test is whether RPS clears your cost per click with room to spare.
⠀
CPC $2, RPS $3. You've got a dollar a session to cover product and still profit. Good.
⠀
CPC $3, RPS $2. Underwater before product cost even lands.
⠀
Track it in Meta.
⠀
But even RPS can lie. That's why you also track:
⠀
2) Profit Per Session
⠀
Guys constantly tell me "yo my new offer is printing, revenue's up massively."
⠀
Then unknowingly lose money.
⠀
I had a guy run buy-2-get-1 and never reset his target ROAS.

Bigger bundle, so cost per unit changed. Shipping per unit changed. He priced the new offer off his old numbers and never checked if they still applied.
⠀
The fix is boring.

Before you launch any offer, the numbers go in a sheet. Not after. Not "I'll check once it's live."
⠀
Every offer test gets a row. Product cost at that quantity. Shipping per unit, confirmed with your supplier, not assumed flat. Pick-pack, processing, gateway fees.

Rough number? Round up, never down.
⠀
Product X as a 2-pack at $139.98: 72% margin, break-even ROAS 1.39.
⠀
The same two units as "Buy 1 Get 1 Free" at $79.99: margin craters to 53%, break-even jumps to 1.89.
⠀
Same product. Same units. The offer alone moved your break-even target from 1.39 to 1.89.

Scale off the old number and you're bleeding without knowing it.
⠀
That's why you rerun the sheet every single time.

Out of it you get two targets before a dollar is spent. Break-even ROAS and CPA. Your scaling target is roughly break-even + 1.
⠀
But read it next to RPS.

Break-even ROAS can rise and your profits can still be up if the CVR jump more than covers it. Never trust one number alone.
⠀
And track contribution margin, not just gross. Gross looks healthy while ads, shipping and fees quietly eat the order.
⠀
If it sounds complicated, just screenshot your costs into Claude.

Price, product cost, shipping, fees. Have it build the sheet and walk the math.

Even better, get an accountant to pull real numbers from your bank. Just don't guess.

Then once it's live, profit per session is the number you optimize. Sessions in, profit out, tracked per offer in the same sheet.
⠀
Give any test 2 weeks minimum before you call it. A month if traffic's low. ~1,000 orders per variant before the data means anything. 10 purchases in 4 days tells you nothing.
⠀
Then the part almost nobody zooms out to:
⠀
3) Absolute profit > ratios
⠀
RPS green, margin healthy. Good. But those are ratios. Ratios don't spend.
⠀
$10k spend at 4x ROAS. That's $16k profit.
Bump to $20k spend at 3.5x ROAS. That's $25k profit.
⠀
Lower ROAS. More money in the bank.
⠀
A higher ROAS isn't automatically better. You can hit 4x on $10k and leave money on the table. You can drop to 3.5x on $20k and print more.

The ratio was never the point. The bank balance is.
⠀
4) The first order isn't the whole story - for LTV brands
⠀
RPS and profit per session score the first order. But your customer doesn't stop at one.
⠀
IM8 ran a 30-day supply offer. Once they'd stacked enough trust, they added a 90-day supply. Same product.

Take rate stayed the same and AOV jumped. Higher RPS, and the lifetime value locked in on day one.
⠀
So two things the first order hides.
⠀
Your new-customer count. Revenue can look good new customers quietly drop. That's not scaling, that's milking repeats. For LTV brands, no good.
⠀
Your take rate and LTV. An offer can lose on the first order and still win, if enough customers stick and the lifetime value outweighs it.
⠀
The first order is a snapshot. LTV is the movie. Judge the offer on the movie.
⠀
RPS clears your CPC. Margin healthy. Absolute profit up. LTV climbing.

Then you're actually printing.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

A complete breakdown on how to build a customer avatar that actually gets your brand to $100K/day in ecom:
(save for later)

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

"Fable 5 just dropped, should I automate my creatives with it?"

"I feel so behind in AI. Should I spend more time there instead of testing ads?"

I get these questions all the time.

You're not behind. You're using AI backwards.

Here's the fix 👇

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

‘’What ratio should I test new angles vs iterate on proven winners?’’

People make it seem like there's a magic number to it.
⠀
But there's no golden ratio.

It depends on where you're at.

There are two testing phases you'll go through.
⠀
Each one has a specific job. Which one you run depends on where you are right now.
⠀
Let's break them down, starting with the one for when you don't have a winner yet.
⠀
1) Marksman
⠀
Marksman is the middle ground.

Not as careless as flooding your account. Not as locked in as going all in on one angle.
⠀
Think of a 3-round burst. Pull the trigger once, you get 3 shots. Same idea here. You test 3 angles in one batch, same format, same offer, and let Meta tell you where to lean.
⠀
We ran this on a humidifier brand. 3 angles, one execution each.
⠀
Stainless steel. Easiest to clean. Doctor designed.
⠀
Stainless steel took off. Doctor designed died, and kept dying every time we retested it.
⠀
You'd think "doctor designed" sounds like the smart angle. Customers didn't care. They just wanted a humidifier that didn't suck.
⠀
That's the tradeoff with Marksman. You get direction, not proof.
⠀
Use it on a fresh account with no data. Or when your current winner plateaus and you need a new direction.
⠀
2) Sniper
⠀
Sniper is one bullet. Reload. One bullet again. Slower, but way more accurate.
⠀
Once Marksman gives you a direction, you go all in on that one angle. Different hooks, formats, images. Same angle, no exceptions.
⠀
Back to the humidifier. Stainless steel won. We started sniping it.
⠀
Small swing first. New images, new subtext, same angle. Spend went up 80%, same ROAS.
⠀
Most of you stop there and call it a win.
⠀
We didn't. Went back for a bigger swing.

More research, brand new format entirely, AI voiceover storytelling instead of a static image, narrowed down to parents specifically.
⠀
Spend went up another 4.4x. Same ROAS the entire time. Now we’re at $100k days already.
⠀
That's the actual unlock. Not the size of one ad. The fact that one angle, sniped correctly twice, compounds into a completely different scale without touching ROAS once.
⠀
Most people's learnings after a test are "it's a video" or "good hook rate" or "reuse this clip." None of that tells you why someone bought.
⠀
The real learning is who the sub-avatar is, what they actually care about, and why the angle made them stop scrolling.

Once you know that, you don't guess on the next swing. You already know what to say.
⠀
This is also why you kill winning angles too early. You call an angle dead when you never tested if it was a presentation problem, not an angle problem.

Sniper is how you find out which one it is before you throw away something that still works.
⠀
But which one should I use?
⠀
Most of you can only focus on a handful of high intent ads a week. So there's no fixed ratio.
⠀
It's a sliding scale, and it moves depending on what's happening in your account right now.
⠀
Multiple angles on the table, you're in Marksman mode. One proven angle, Sniper mode.
⠀
If you've got a fresh account with no data, start Marksman. Go as broad as you can.
⠀
If you already have a winner, Sniper it. 3+ executions minimum before you're allowed to call an angle dead.

Check your ads after 7 days. Did any Marksman angle eat 5-25% of spend with decent KPIs? It doesn't need to blow up yet. Meta just needs to show interest.
⠀
Before you Sniper it, ask why it's actually winning. Not the structure. The belief. Sniper that belief specifically.
⠀
If nothing showed a pulse, kill it. Run a new Marksman with different angles. Don't sit there sniping a corpse.
⠀
The follow-up test:

Build 3+ executions around your winning angle. Different hooks, formats, images. Keep going until you hit a hard ceiling or find the one that keeps scaling.
⠀
Eventually your Sniper winners plateau. That's the signal to go back to Marksman on a new avatar. Repeat until you've got multiple angles that scale.
⠀
Scale the budget up and the discipline doesn't change.

We've had guys in Evolve scale to $100k/day testing one concept per day with high intent like this. That's 15-21 ads a week. That's it.
⠀
There's no ratio to memorize. Just a decision to make every week.

Few.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

Literally 48 brands have scaled to $100k/day inside Evolve.

- Suraj and Aash were stuck at $3K/day then Chad scaled to $114K/day in just 30 days
- François almost quit ecom. 7 months later, $226k/day. French brand cracking the US market. ⠀
- Nikita went from $500k/mth to $5M/mth and hit a $300k day. ⠀

There are even 17-year-olds hitting $100k days while still in high school💀
⠀
We cover everything from creative systems and market research to copywriting, supply chain, and finance. New modules on iteration just dropped today.

The same systems we used to hit an $800K day.

48 brands already proved it’s possible.

If you're at $100k+/month and ready to be next, this is for you:
https://t.co/XE9spKscSL

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

.@EcomAashi and @surajecom spent months watching their Ecom brand bleed from $20k/day down to $3k...

Then flipped it to a $100k day in 30 days.
⠀
Most people would've killed the brand by then, but they didn't.
⠀
The whole time it was sliding, they were quietly custom developing a new product and getting better at the stuff that actually moves the needle - copywriting, creative strategy, feedback loops.
⠀
The new product hit $50k/day in two weeks off fresh creatives and positioning.

Then it started slowing down.
⠀
Instead of bailing, they doubled down.

Sat down and ran intense feedback loops on the winners that were dying and figured out exactly why they worked in the first place.
⠀
Gossip-worthy storylines. High stakes + authority. The pitch wrapped in a story.
⠀
Wrote one new ad off those learnings that took it to $100k/day.
⠀
All in 30 days, but it wasn't really 30 days.
⠀
It was months of reps before they had something that worked.

So the second they did, they knew exactly what to look for and how to double down fast.
⠀
Most of you already have an angle that's working. You just don't understand why yet, or what to look for.

Might take you months of feedback loop reps to see it. But once it clicks, it clicks fast.
⠀
Tis the way of the chad scaler.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

I've seen FB advertisers lose $300k to hackers.

And it's only getting more common.

What y'all need is a physical 2FA like a Yubikey.

Digital 2FAs still get hacked no problem. We ran into it a few years back.

Switched to physical keys. Zero issues since.

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

How to go from Dropshipper to Ecom brand owner.

Full masterclass👇

[Shaun Eng @shauneng]

Ecom bros will make millions and still not visit their suppliers.

The human touch in Ecom is your competitive advantage.

Few.