1/23: One #startup trap to avoid (founders and VCs) is to fall in love with a value prop that can’t be delivered IRL now. Good diligence will surface disconnects but they’re often brushed under the rug by #VCs who believe fixing delivery over time will be fine. Unpacked:
More from Startup
How to build a $100/day digital side hustle.
A dead simple guide to get you started:
Since 2020, I've:
• Built an online audience of 80k+
• Sold $150k+ in digital products
• Secured $50k+ in contracts
• Generated 100M+ views
It all helped me build a side hustle that allowed me to leave my 9-5.
If I had to start from scratch, here's what I would do:
1. Find your "niche-of-one"
This is found at the intersection of:
• What you're good at
• What is already popular
• What is currently profitable
The three ingredients of a profitable, money-making side hustle.
2. Start on Twitter
Why?
Twitter is the best audience building platform because:
• You can DM creators
• You can collect rapid data
• You can quickly execute on publishing
• You can mix short and long form content
(And we'll leverage the content later)
3. "Borrow" your core audience
Most people:
• Publish into the void
• Purchase shares & retweets
• Join expensive engagement groups
To grow in the beginning.
There's another way...
The "Waffle House Marketing Strategy"
Check it out:
A dead simple guide to get you started:
Since 2020, I've:
• Built an online audience of 80k+
• Sold $150k+ in digital products
• Secured $50k+ in contracts
• Generated 100M+ views
It all helped me build a side hustle that allowed me to leave my 9-5.
If I had to start from scratch, here's what I would do:
1. Find your "niche-of-one"
This is found at the intersection of:
• What you're good at
• What is already popular
• What is currently profitable
The three ingredients of a profitable, money-making side hustle.
2. Start on Twitter
Why?
Twitter is the best audience building platform because:
• You can DM creators
• You can collect rapid data
• You can quickly execute on publishing
• You can mix short and long form content
(And we'll leverage the content later)
3. "Borrow" your core audience
Most people:
• Publish into the void
• Purchase shares & retweets
• Join expensive engagement groups
To grow in the beginning.
There's another way...
The "Waffle House Marketing Strategy"
Check it out:
In January of 2022, I started Twitter at zero
— Jon Brosio (@jonbrosio) April 2, 2022
As of April 1, I'm currently at:
\u2022 435 followers
\u2022 $500+ a month
\u2022 183k monthly views
What's my secret?
The "Waffle House Marketing Strategy"
99% of people are unaware of this predictable and repeatable growth technique \U0001f447
You May Also Like
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".