The ten
Ordered by how much they should worry us, not by size. Days live is from the Meta Ad Library and is the only honest proof of profitability available from outside a business.
Unorthodox · Liam Evans
Two businesses stacked on one buyer. The public face is a done-for-you AI sales and marketing agency for service businesses over $50k a month, sold on a demo call with a "pays for itself in 90 days or you do not pay" guarantee. Underneath it sits a $97 product that feeds it.
- Front end
- DFY VSL script written from scratch, delivered in 24 hours. $97, anchored against $197.
- Bumps
- Full production package, professional editing, slide design, graphics, post production. Prices not published on the page.
- Back end
- The agency retainer. AI sales systems, 4 to 6 week implementation.
- Qualifier
- "You should be doing at least $10k+ per month and already running traffic." Printed on the sales page.
- Risk reversal
- 7 day refund, unlimited revisions.
- Proof
- $10M+ generated, 300 agencies and coaches served, "our own VSL books 200+ qualified calls a month", hundreds of Trustpilot reviews.
"DFY VSL Delivered In 24 Hours. We'll build you a high converting VSL in under 24 hours using our battle tested framework (Just $97)."
The qualifier on a low ticket page. This is the whole insight. A $97 product normally drags you down-market, and they solved it by printing "$10k+ per month, already running traffic" on the page itself. The cheap product becomes a paid filter instead of a discount. Also steal: 24 hour delivery as the differentiator, the anchor from $197, and the refund window that is shorter than the delivery cycle.
They hide the bump prices until checkout, which is fine for them and wrong for us. Our whole position is that we publish what things cost. And their proof is all self-reported round numbers, "$10M+", "300 businesses". Ours has to be one named client with a dated P and L.
Sofia Rose Bernardi
She runs the exact play we are about to run: buy Meta traffic, fill a free 90 minute masterclass, no price on the event, book a free Roadmap Call, sell on the call. She renames the masterclass every cycle and runs ads in bursts around each live date. Her own term for it is the Monthly Event Engine.
- Offer
- Scale School, 12 month mastermind, two tiers, price never published.
- Front end
- Free 90 minute masterclass, renamed per cycle ("Spacious Scaling", "The 30K Month Plan"). Free Skool community as a secondary net.
- Promise
- $10k to $30k months, plus a clear calendar and energy back. Money and freedom, not money alone.
- Ad structure
- One control body, many tested headlines. High volume, low variance.
"It all changed when I fixed my model. Not my content. Not my offer. My model."
Her go. subdomain used to serve the masterclass registration. Today it lands on a 45 minute Roadmap Call booking calendar, and the copy says you will speak with "one of our scale strategists", not with Sofia. Two reads: the masterclass runs on a separate URL between cycles, or she has moved to a straight book-a-call funnel. Either way she has taken herself off the sales calls, which is the clearest sign in this whole teardown that her model is working.
The recurring event cadence. "Monthly Event Engine" is the same idea as The Perpetual Launch and she has proven the ad economics of it. Steal the reframe structure too: name three things it is not, then name the one thing it is. Ours writes itself as "It is not your offer and it is not your content. It is that you still sell every single client by hand." And the go. subdomain, funnel kept clean and separate from the content site.
Her proof is a wall of roughly 50 anonymous dollar screenshots plus a self-flex, "7 figure coach, $2M by 27", plus a paid-PR credential. To a stage 5 buyer that reads as noise. Also note her organic is dead: 1,674 posts for 5 to 66 likes a reel. Her engine is ads, not content. Do not copy her content strategy, she does not have one.
Russ Ruffino · Clients on Demand
The flagship of this category. Ad campaign, webinar registration page, close on the phone after the event. Sold to coaches, consultants and experts enrolling clients at $5k to $15k. Reported price around $10,000, revealed only on the call after the free webinar.
- Offer
- Clients on Demand programme. Positioning, ads, automated webinar, sales training, coaching from his team.
- Price
- Reported ~$10,000. Never published, revealed on the call.
- ICP
- Explicitly not beginners. Seasoned coaches and consultants only.
- Their angle
- The counter-intuitive one: the funnel does not matter, the person does.
"The Real Reason Coaches With Mediocre Funnels Scale to $100K/Month. We've all been told the funnel is everything... But here is the uncomfortable truth: I've seen coaches with embarrassingly simple one-page websites scale past $100K/month, while others with perfect funnels stay stuck at $5K forever. The leverage is in the person, not the funnel."
The uncomfortable truth construction: state the thing everyone believes, then break it with a specific contrast. It is the same skeleton as our CTR trap board and it works because it is checkable.
This ad is aimed directly at us before we have even launched. "The leverage is the person, not the funnel" is a pre-emptive strike on everyone selling funnel builds. We cannot argue with it head on because he is partly right. The answer is not to defend funnels, it is to agree and go one level down: the person still has to say it to more than one room a month, and that is the part we build.
Anna Konchar
The closest position to ours on this entire list. She sells an evergreen webinar system to course creators and coaches who already have something that sells, and her whole angle is that most evergreen funnels fail because they were built for warm audiences and then pointed at cold traffic.
- Ladder
- 7-Figure Funnel Framework (free) → 30 Day Sprint (guided implementation) → Sell While You Sleep (the system) → 60 minute calls.
- Proof
- Scaled to $1M+ a year. Claims the system enrols 1 to 3 students a day and $100k+ months.
- ICP
- Already has an offer, wants predictable sales without launches. Same person we want.
"Evergreen still works... Yours just wasn't built to convert strangers. Most 'evergreen' funnels are just recycled launch assets with the deadline removed: Same webinar. Same pitch. Same assumptions about trust. But cold traffic doesn't show up pre-sold. They don't know you. They don't trust you. They're not emotionally invested. So the funnel has to do more."
"Yours just wasn't built to convert strangers." That is a rescue hook, not an attack hook. It lets the reader keep their belief and blame the build instead of themselves, which is far easier to sell than telling someone their whole approach was wrong. We should be writing in this register far more than we currently are.
She is going to be in our auction and saying a version of our sentence. Our separation is that she teaches it and we build it, and that we will publish real client numbers where she publishes her own. Do not compete on the promise. Compete on who does the work and who shows the receipts.
Alejandro Reyes
The single most profitable ad we found in this market. Live since January 2024 and still spending. A 19 minute free training, sold to a tightly niched audience, and the entire pitch is against the thing we sell.
- Offer
- Automated Client Engine. High ticket clients without sales calls and without funnels.
- Niche
- Christian coaches and consultants. Named in the first three words of the ad.
- Front end
- 19 minute free training, plus a newsletter.
"Christian Coaches & Consultants: Watch this FREE training to get high-ticket coaching clients fast, even if nobody's heard of you... Grow their email list and community faster with ads. Ditch Webinars and 'FrEe StRaTeGy CaLls'. And do it without the need for 'funnels' or landing pages."
Name the audience in the first three words. "Christian Coaches & Consultants:" is doing more work than the rest of the ad. It is the same job our registration page eyebrow does, moved up into the ad itself, and it is the most proven single element in this whole teardown. Also: 19 minutes. A specific, small, non-round number of minutes reads as real where "free training" reads as a pitch.
The most profitable ad in our category has been telling coaches to ditch webinars for nearly three years, and it is still paying. We should not pretend that is not evidence. What it actually proves is that the tired mechanism is a better enemy than the tired audience, and that people are sick of bad webinars, not webinars. Our answer has to acknowledge the bad ones by name.
Richmond Dinh
Second longest running ad in the set. His mechanism is the Tiny Challenge, positioned explicitly as the replacement for webinars and funnels, and his ad does not sell the mechanism at all. It sells Russell Brunson interviewing him about it.
- Ladder
- Tiny Challenge book (low ticket) → Tiny Challenge course → Underdog Academy, $1,197 one time or $395 x 4.
- Mechanism
- Tiny Challenges. Trademarked, repeated relentlessly.
- Proof
- Students making $100k+ from Tiny Challenges. Brunson's endorsement doing most of the lifting.
"Watch Russell Brunson's interview on me about the newest way to convert clients online without any marketing skills required. We talk about my Tiny Challenge(TM) model where initially it was designed for early stage coaches under 100K/yr but Russell took it to the next level..."
Third party authority beats self-authority. He never says he is credible, he shows someone credible taking him seriously. Nick Saraev does the same thing with a client testimonial ad. Our version is not a guru interview, it is a client talking about their own numbers while we stay off camera. Same mechanic, better proof.
The trademark symbol on everything, and the "designed for coaches under $100k/yr" tell. That sentence quietly reveals the buyer is a beginner, which is why the ladder tops out at $1,197. Price ceiling follows buyer stage. It is the exact trap I flagged on our own $97 idea.
VF Sales & Recruiting Solutions
Not really a competitor. They sell sales teams and recruiting, not funnels. But they have written the single sharpest description of the feast-or-famine problem in this entire market, and it is aimed at exactly our buyer.
"If your sales team only performs the week of the webinar... you have a webinar dependency problem. And this is one of the biggest reasons high-ticket businesses stay stuck in inconsistent revenue cycles. Because here's what usually happens: Webinar launches. Calendar fills up. Revenue spikes. Closers eat. Then 7 days later? Silence. No outbound. No follow-up intensity. No reactivation process. No pipeline ownership."
The four word staccato ladder. "Webinar launches. Calendar fills up. Revenue spikes. Closers eat. Then 7 days later? Silence." That is the feast-or-famine angle done better than we have written it, and the rhythm is doing half the work. Rewrite our angle 04 using this shape.
Their conclusion is the opposite of ours. They say the answer to webinar dependency is a sales team. We say it is a webinar that runs every month instead of twice a year. Same pain, two vehicles. If a prospect has read their ad, we need an answer to it ready.
Casey Zeman · EasyWebinar
He sells webinar software and the coaching around it, which makes him the only competitor here who is not arguing against the thing we do. His ad does not sell the software at all. It describes a feeling.
"You've been meaning to launch your webinar. The idea is there. The expertise is real. You have clients who pay you for what you know. And yet the webinar, the thing that could sell what you know to an entire room at once, keeps getting pushed to next month. Most coaches and consultants I work with have been in that place for 6, 12, sometimes 18 months. It doesn't mean they're not serious. It usually means nobody..."
"Keeps getting pushed to next month." This is the most accurate description of our actual buyer that exists in this market. He is not failing, he is postponing, and he does not feel judged by the sentence. Then the absolution: "It doesn't mean they're not serious." That line removes shame before the pitch arrives. If we only take one hook from this entire teardown, take this one.
Software is a $78 to $499 a month decision and ours is a build. He is proving the pain and then selling a tool that does not solve it, because the reason it keeps getting pushed to next month is not that they lack a platform. That gap between his hook and his product is our entire opening.
Charlie Morgan · Imperium
Big name, dead account. 134k followers and recent posts landing between 123 and 300 likes, about 0.15%. Sells EasyGrow at roughly $9k to $12k with a guarantee of 20 high ticket clients in 180 days or a refund plus $5,000.
- Funnel
- Free training opt in on a go. subdomain, then an application call.
- Guarantee
- 20 clients in 180 days or refund plus $5,000. The best de-risk structure in the set.
- The irony
- Publicly says "funnels suck, free webinars suck" while running a free training opt in funnel.
"MARKETING AGENCY OWNERS, COACHES & COURSE SELLERS ONLY. Learn How You Can Fill Your Pipeline With 100+ Qualified Appointments Every Single Month. Guaranteed."
The negation opener. "No funnel, no webinar, no $97 course" is a trust device: you name everything you are not before you say what you are. And the guarantee shape: a number, a timeframe, and money back plus extra. Ours has to be honest and smaller, but that structure is right.
Unverifiable "$40M+" scale claims, hidden pricing, a suspicious volume of five star reviews, and "Imperium scam" as a live search suggestion. He is the cautionary version of the position we are taking. Anti-guru language plus unverifiable numbers is worse than no position at all, because the first thing a stage 5 buyer does is check.
William Brown · Build Grow Exit
58,000 followers, eleven posts, several sitting on three likes. Content is a Two Comma Club X award, a Porsche for his dad, a business class hack. Sells roughly a year of advisory on systemising and exiting an education business, price gated behind a call, no webinar and no ads we could verify.
The founder-operator authority hook, "I built and sold the real thing, here is the system", which reframes a coach as a proven operator. But only in a form we can evidence.
Trustpilot around 3.2. Reddit accuses him of inflating a claimed $16.4M exit down to roughly $22k a month in reality. The done-for-you tier is reviewed as rushed. This is what happens when the claim outruns the delivery in a market that checks. He is on this board as a warning, not as competition.