Isn't the channel over-indexing on the AI automation agency model lately, at the expense of viewers who just want to implement automations in their own business?
I really appreciate that feedback and I think you're right. All roads eventually lead to the top of the funnel — when you're an info product creator, you usually start with very bottom-of-funnel content that serves a specific need, then over the lifetime of the channel you ramp up to more mid-funnel tactics content, and eventually top-of-funnel strategy content. That's why someone like Alex Hormozi's videos end up being mostly motivation, or why big creators drift into vague generalisms — it's not because they're dumb, it's incentives; it's what's most profitable to make at that stage. But I'm in this for the long haul, so I don't want to just optimize for top-of-funnel content right away. I'll probably be doing more mid-funnel and bottom-funnel stuff going forward instead of leaning so hard into the agency-model content.
Cuz watching Alex Hormozi's content, he always mentions how important it is to be really specific with your content because the algorithm knows who to feed it to, and then funnels that into monetized things. There's a difference between what people say and what they do: he'll say you need to be highly specific, but then he makes videos all about how to be motivated. One is very top of funnel and at odds with the latter. However, he can lead with a concept like how to be motivated and then be really specific with the content, and that's great—I think he does so later on. But that's what top of funnel really means here: is your packaging created for a very wide audience? If so, your content tends to be pretty top of funnel, pretty general. He gets super deep on a lot of stuff, but reserves some of that for his coaching content, which is more exclusive. How to be motivated is definitely something we would call top of funnel. I would say I do kind of mid funnel nowadays. I used to do really bottom of funnel, which is like, you know, how to use stuff like this to make money. There's also really bottom of funnel highly technical content that's like, 'Hey, let me walk you through the exact step‑by‑step XYZ thing.' People like all of them. It's just a question of how many pieces of the world you can actually cater a high‑quality specific piece of content to. It's very difficult to cover a very wide surface area if you're making highly in‑depth 4‑hour tutorials on tools that have five searches a year. So, it's just about strategizing that way.
I’m shifting the main channel away from pure AI‑automation tutorials toward business‑consulting‑style content with a technology focus. The reason is that automation will soon be commoditized—systems will build most automations for you—so my edge lies in teaching the underlying business concepts that let people sell those systems at scale. I’ll produce a high volume of content that delivers new value consistently, aiming to help viewers internalize those concepts and crush their goals. This pivot should unlock another 10× leverage: selling ten times more systems in a tenth of the time to ten times more people. I’ve spent three to four weeks refining this approach, paused most main‑channel content to get here, and expect subscriber growth to accelerate over the next year.
Most people see AI as a simple chatbot that answers questions like a search engine, not realizing it can be woven into a business’s core infrastructure—such as decision‑making routing—to act more like an intelligence that moves information through a network to solve problems faster. Over the next few years, companies that implement AI infrastructurally will see major gains in speed to market, customer‑need identification, and product development. For example, when I posted a job for packaging and ideation, applicants didn’t send simple pitch ideas; they built full applications showing how my YouTube titles and thumbnails would look with real‑time data, demonstrating how deeply AI can surface and address user needs.
I've tried the outlier approach many times — looking at what other people have done and duplicating it with mild changes. To me that's akin to old-school article flipping from SEO 5-10 years ago. I don't think it's very sustainable or high quality in the long run. When you do that, your channel ends up being a patchwork of different subjects, and though your view metrics look good independently per video, on net you're usually not getting a lot of returning people watching, which ultimately impacts your ability to monetize that audience. What I like to do is talk about what I like to talk about. If I have a subject I really like — for instance, I just recorded a video on how to use AI in learning — I'll record a video on it and try to fit it into some known outlier packaging. A lot of the time it's fitting a square peg into a round hole, but I try to make it work anyway for short-term metrics. And if it doesn't work, I don't care. You can call that a great strategy or a horrific strategy. But I have probably some of the best monetization of channels at approximately my size, for products I sell like low-ticket info products as well as agency work. There are very few people who can meaningfully compete with me on that despite my objective subscriber and view metrics not being very high. So clearly it works really well for me. I just ask: what the hell do I want to talk about? And then I talk about it.