UGC, creators and influencers for acquisition

The ad that works best doesn’t look like an ad

In paid social, the creative matters more than the targeting. And what performs is almost never the polished brand piece: it’s someone on camera, with their own face and accent, explaining why they use a thing. Not because it’s cheaper to produce, but because it looks like what people were already watching when your ad turned up.

The catch is that it isn’t produced once. A creative burns out in weeks, and when it does, cost per acquisition rises with nothing else having changed. What you need isn’t a good video: it’s a system that produces many and knows which one works.

What we do

• UGC production for paid. Batches of pieces shot by real creators, with several versions of hook, body and close so you can test separately which part fails. It isn’t an influencer campaign: it’s ad material that looks organic, and the usage rights stay with you.
• Sector influencers. Profiles already talking about your category to an audience that understands it. In technical niches, and we see it weekly in crypto, one voice with real authority converts better than ten large generic accounts.
• Selection by audience, not by followers. We look at who actually watches, what comments they get and what happened the last time they recommended something. Follower count is the worst indicator available and it’s the only one almost everyone uses.
• Your own acquisition content. The kind that answers what people search once they already have the problem and are comparing solutions. It’s slower than paid and it doesn’t stop working when you switch the budget off.
• Cross-reuse. What performs in paid becomes organic content, and what works organically becomes an ad. They are two outputs of the same work and they’re usually run as if they’d never met.

How a creator gets measured

With their own link and code from day one, and by the same yardstick as any other channel: cost per qualified lead, cost per sale, and what happens at ninety days to the customers who came in that way. Not views, and not engagement.

This annoys part of the industry, and fairly so: it forces you to admit that a collaboration which generated plenty of conversation sold nothing. We’d rather know in week two than at the quarter’s close.

What we don’t do

We don’t buy followers and we don’t work with profiles whose audience doesn’t hold up on closer inspection. We don’t commission reviews from someone who hasn’t used the product. And we don’t sign campaigns where the creator can’t say what they actually think: credibility is precisely what you are renting, and its absence shows.

In regulated sectors there’s a legal limit too. In crypto, a creator promising returns creates a bigger problem than any result they could bring you, and under MiCA that is the responsibility of whoever commissions the campaign, not theirs.

Where it fits

This is the top of the system: it feeds acquisition and is measured with the attribution we build in the final stage. Without that measurement, creator spend is the first thing cut as soon as someone asks what it brought, because it’s the line that defends itself worst.