@natsmlth Even shipping ads is a feature most tools already offer. The real challenge isn’t just shipping more ads, it’s shipping high-quality creatives that actually match your vision, without spending hours tweaking the output to get what you wanted in the first place
Feel like new tools like this pop up every single day, but they all pretty much do the same thing.
I think it just spreads your attention too thin, and it’s getting harder to figure out which ones are actually worth it and, more importantly, which ones are genuinely useful
bro, your competitors are handing you creative briefs in public.
find the ad in ecomtrackr.
give claude the reference + your product brief.
build 3 angles. test one. check sales in shopify.
then feed what you learn into the next ad.
Jsuis 100% d’accord. Je trouve que les gens en font un peu trop sur le hook rate.
Ça reste une metric comme une autre. LA vraie metric sur laquelle il faut prêter de l’attention c’est le SPEND (bien sûr à un CPA qui te convient).
Ton hook rate a beau être élevé si t’arrête pas les bonnes personnes ça sert à rien.
Et même si disons que tu réussisses à arrêter les bonnes personnes avec des hooks comme tu as cité : « mom of 13 years hold” cest pas encore gagné. Il faut que tu leur donne une raison de continuer à regarder. C’est la qu’il faut que ton bridge soit percutant.
Le bridge on en parle pas bcp mais c’est quasi aussi important que le hook
Sometimes the most valuable thing in a winning ad is something you’d never think to test.
I recently watched a creative strategist explain how her team noticed a weird purple wig in one of their top-performing static ads.
Instead of moving on, they had UGC creators wear similar wigs in their videos.
Those ads became winners too.
Pretty funny when you think about it.
We spend so much time analyzing hooks, angles and scripts that we sometimes overlook the simplest visual elements.
Sometimes all it takes is noticing something everyone else ignored.
Plans on the pricing of Sume API:
1. We're keeping 0% markup.
We've checked our prices against the foundation model providers more than 20 times. If you find any model where our price is different from what the foundation model company charges, tell me and we'll fix it.
2. "Is this business model actually sustainable?"
Yes. Even at 0% markup we're not losing money, so keeping it is not a problem. Because of the competition, video model prices will converge to 0% markup anyway. We're just doing it first.
Our plan is to bring in users by providing models, and later offer a separate SaaS product subscription that covers marketing workflows. So markup on video models stays at 0%.
3. "Kie AI is cheaper on some models?"
If you look at Kie AI, they act like they're giving big discounts on cheap models, but they put a pretty big markup on frontier models like Seedance. My guess is they heavily discount some low-usage models to look cheap, bring users in with that branding, then make their net profit from the markup on Seedance and others. We hate that kind of trick and care about transparency, so it's 0% markup on everything. No tricks.
As you know, other providers play games. The "most accessible" pricing only gets you that price if you subscribe annually to credits that expire every month. And Higgsfield looks cheap with their discount events, but when you buy top-up credits, they take a huge markup.
We learned trust is the most important thing in business. As an early startup, we're promising 0% markup to earn that trust. In return, just recommend us to your friends!
hiring: creative strategist
you make the ads.
you run the ads.
you scale the ads.
ecom + apps. meta + tiktok.
top of market comp.
DM me your portfolio
paying 5k+ month
#hiring#ecomads#appads#creativestrategist#mediabuying
You could steal a top creative strategist’s entire AI workflow and still get mediocre results.
I recently watched an interview with an agency founder who built an AI system that helps his team produce more winning ads.
He said something interesting:
He could literally give away his entire prompt, and most people still wouldn’t get the same results.
Why?
Because the real advantage isn’t the prompt.
It’s the data feeding it.
For every client, his team stores 10–40 learnings from previous ad tests.
Winning angles, proven messaging, creative patterns, things that worked and things that didn’t.
And here’s the interesting part:
Those learnings are identified and validated by humans, not blindly generated by AI.
Then the AI uses that knowledge to help write new briefs.
That’s a completely different approach from opening Claude and asking:
“Give me 20 viral ad concepts for this product.”
The more I learn about AI workflows, the more I realize:
The real competitive advantage isn’t knowing how to prompt AI. It’s knowing what to feed it.
Dis lui ce qui va pas avec tes propres mots. Dis lui ce que tu aimerais améliorer pour les prochaines générations. Demande lui comment on pourrait améliorer les outputs ... En gros faut que tu lui donnes un max de learnings que tu peux et là normalement tu devrais avoir des outputs bien plus quali !
C’est exactement ça. J’ajouterais même qu’il faut regarder cmt les clients décrivent leur problème, pas seulement les mots qu’ils utilisent.
Parfois juste un commentaire d’une personne sous une vidéo tiktok peut donner un putain de hook qui va être 1000x plus puissant que des idées que t’as brainstorm avec Claude.
Et pr les 3 premières secondes, je nuancerais : pas forcément besoin de texte à l’écran. Un bon hook visuel peut qualifier l’avatar directement.
Par ex, tu montres une femme de 60 ans qui grimace en montant les escaliers ça va résonner chez quelqu’un qui souffre des genoux.
L’important, c’est que la bonne personne se reconnaisse faut qu’elle se dise « putain c’est exactement moi »