Work

Creative, built to be bought.

Short-form video our team produced for paid placements: client spots in English and Spanish, affiliate campaign creative across personas, accents and verticals, and animated product demos. Plus a look inside the account structure they run in.

Client work

Made for real businesses.

A model-home walkthrough for a Boca Raton home builder, and Spanish-language spots for a South Florida car-inspection company. Each piece shows the idea behind it and a full transcript.

Why it works

A host who walks every room and names the real specs turns listing photos into a tour, and gives buyers a reason to book a visit.
- Real model-home photography; every room she names is the room you see
- Spec captions for sound-off viewing
- One clear action: book a private tour
Transcript

A presenter guides viewers through the Santorini model at Lotus Edge in Boca Raton: five bedrooms, six baths, four-car garage. She moves through the great room with its coffered ceiling and full-height sliders, the chef's kitchen with an oversized island and walk-in pantry, the primary suite, and the covered patio with a summer kitchen, ending at the heated pool and spa: "Book your private tour today."

Selected work by our team for GL Homes. Real model-home photography used with permission; the presenter is AI-generated.

Language test

Spanish-first buyers, in their own Spanish.

Variable: Language and dialect: native Cuban Spanish for Miami, with the brand URL kept in English.
Held constant: The same true-story structure as the English versions: the loss, the villain, the new rule.
How we call it: Cost per lead and booked-inspection rate by language and audience. In Miami, Spanish-language creative often reaches buyers English ads never do.

A bilingual market is two markets. Translating isn't enough; the speaker, dialect and story have to belong to the audience.

Creative testing

One variable at a time.

This is how we structure creative for scale. Each set changes one thing (the persona, the creator, the angle, the format or the proof) and holds everything else constant, so the result tells us something we can act on. The videos are affiliate campaign creative our team produced.

Persona test

Same scare, two different messengers.

Variable: Who delivers the hook: a rural Southern dad or an Atlanta creator.
Held constant: Same offer (vehicle protection), same moment (the repair estimate), same 7–8 second length.
How we call it: Hook rate and cost per lead by persona, then lead quality downstream. The winner tells us who the message actually reaches, not who we assumed would buy.

On Meta, the face and voice in the first second choose the audience. Testing personas is audience targeting done through creative.

Creator test

One product, his voice and hers.

Variable: The creator: a woman in the gym versus a man before leg day.
Held constant: Same pre-workout, the same three benefits (pump, focus, no crash), same setting.
How we call it: Thumb-stop rate, hold rate and CPA by creator. If both win, they scale in parallel to reach different buyers instead of competing for the same impressions.

Creator fatigue is the first thing to cap scale in fitness and supplements. A bench of proven creators keeps spend growing.

Angle test

Same jar, different reason to buy.

Variable: The problem the product solves: camera-ready skin versus sun and salt damage.
Held constant: Same skincare product, the same UGC format and length.
How we call it: CTR and conversion rate by angle. Angles that convert become separate concepts with their own hooks; angles that only earn clicks get cut.

Most products have several buyers with different reasons. Finding the reason that converts is worth more than polishing the ad.

Format test

Talking head or tactile demo.

Variable: Format: a presenter talking to camera versus a claymation product demo.
Held constant: Same category (skincare, hydration), same 7–8 second slot, the same simple benefit.
How we call it: Hook rate and cost per purchase by format. Animation often wins attention in feeds full of faces; the question is whether it also wins the sale.

Format diversity fights ad fatigue and gives the delivery system genuinely different creative to work with.

Proof test

Five ways to make a claim believable.

Variable: The type of proof: insider (the clerk who restocks it), referral ("my boy showed me"), savings, a founder's workflow, and the checkout moment.
Held constant: UGC format, one speaker, one line, under 8 seconds.
How we call it: Which proof style lifts conversion rate per vertical. Insider proof tends to work for retail products, referral for considered purchases, savings for budget-led buyers.

Proof is the gap between a click and a purchase. Matching the proof type to the buyer is a structural choice, not a copywriting flourish.

Characters · Big Shot Pets, our own brand

Not every spokesperson has to be human.

Big Shot Pets is a brand we built and run ourselves: it turns one phone photo of a pet into a talking character. It's also our proving ground for character-led advertising, one of the most effective pattern interrupts in a feed full of talking heads.

Pattern interrupt
A golden retriever reading the news breaks the scroll before anyone decides to skip. Attention is earned in the first half-second, and animals win it.
No talent to renew
A character has no appearance fee, no usage window to renegotiate and no off-brand posts. Once it works, it can carry a brand for years.
Built for series
Same character, new episode every week. That's fresh creative without re-casting, which is how you stay ahead of ad fatigue.
Made to be shared
Comedy that leaves people feeling good gets passed along, so paid placements pick up organic reach on top of what you buy.

One photo in. A character out.

01 The photo · An owner's phone photo of their golden retriever
Why it works

Transcript
02 The character
01 The photo · An owner's phone photo of their Devon Rex
Why it works

Transcript
02 The character

Where we use it: brand mascots, pet and family brands, local businesses that want a recurring face, and any account that needs a new pattern interrupt.

Inside the accounts

The structure behind the creative.

Great ads still need the right account around them. These views show how we split, test, cap and scale on Google and Meta, and how we check the results against the business.

Google Ads E-commerce brand · United States Last 30 days

Google Ads campaigns, Last 30 days
Campaign	Budget / day	Impr.	CTR	Cost	Conv.	CPA	ROAS	Status
1SRCH \| Brand \| Exact Search · Target impr. share	$3,500	1.38M	23.0%	$96.4K	9,820	$9.82	12.22×	Capped
2SRCH \| Non-brand \| High intent Search · Target CPA	$22.0K	6.91M	7.0%	$611.8K	13.6K	$44.85	2.78×	Scaling
3SRCH \| Non-brand \| Category \| Broad Search · Target CPA	$10.0K	9.24M	3.8%	$288.3K	5,060	$56.98	2.09×	Active
SRCH \| Competitor \| Exact Search · Max. clicks (capped CPC)	$2,500	1.12M	3.7%	$64.2K	820	$78.29	1.44×	Limited
4SHOP \| Hero SKUs \| Margin tier A Shopping · Target ROAS 340%	$12.0K	14.8M	2.7%	$341.0K	8,910	$38.27	3.48×	Scaling
5PMAX \| Feed only \| Brand excluded Performance Max · Target ROAS 260%	$9,500	22.6M	1.3%	$274.1K	5,380	$50.95	2.49×	Testing
6DGEN \| Prospecting \| Video Demand Gen · Max. conversions	$4,000	31.4M	0.4%	$118.2K	1,060	$111.51	1.02×	Active
Total · 7 campaigns	$63.5K	87.5M	2.3%	$1.79M	44.7K	$40.14	3.10×	1,490/day

Ad groups · SRCH | Non-brand | High intent

Ad group	Keywords	CTR	Conv.	CPA	Status
AG \| [Category] for [use case]	38 exact · 12 phrase	7.9%	4,420	$38.73	Scaling
AG \| Best [category]	24 exact · 9 phrase	7.2%	3,310	$46.19	Active
AG \| [Product] vs [alternative]	31 exact	8.1%	2,130	$41.60	Active
AG \| [Problem] solution	19 phrase	5.8%	2,060	$53.16	Testing
AG \| [Category] price	14 exact · 6 phrase	6.1%	1,720	$52.09	Active

Search terms · this week's review

Negative“free [category]”No free offer
Negative“[category] near me”Online only
Monitor“[product] coupon code”Low intent, brand-adjacent
Promote“best [category] for [use case] 2026”Converts at 2.1× the ad-group average; added as exact
Promote“[competitor] alternative”Moved to the competitor campaign

Responsive search ad test · AG | [Category] for [use case]

A · Benefit-led headlines

CTR: 8.3%
Conv. rate: 2.60%
Conv.: 2,060

B · Price and guarantee headlinesWinner

CTR: 7.5%
Conv. rate: 3.29%
Conv.: 2,360

B wins on conversions despite a lower CTR. B rolls out; A's best benefit line joins B's headline pool for the next round.

Brand is split out and capped. Branded clicks are cheap and convert well, so blending them in makes non-brand look better than it is.
High intent is organized by search theme, not by product SKU. Each ad group points at a page that answers the query.
Broad match only runs where conversion volume can steer it, with search terms reviewed weekly and negatives added.
Shopping is split by margin tier, so the bid target reflects profit, not just revenue.
Performance Max runs feed-only with brand excluded and is reported on its own, so it can't take credit for brand demand.
Video prospecting is judged on blended lift and branded-search growth, not on platform-reported conversions alone.

Illustrative account · names generalized · not a specific client's results

Meta Subscription app · United States Last 30 days

Campaign ASC | Prospecting | Purchase · Value optimization

Meta ad sets, Last 30 days
Ad set	Budget / day	Spend	CPM	Hook rate	CTR	Purchases	CPA	ROAS	Status
1PROS \| Broad \| Concept test \| Wk 40	$6,000	$171.0K	$10.75	32.0%	1.35%	3,480	$49.14	1.58×	Testing
2PROS \| Broad \| Scale \| Winners	$38.0K	$1.13M	$11.46	34.0%	1.41%	26.1K	$43.22	1.86×	Scaling
PROS \| Advantage+ audience \| Scale	$22.0K	$641.0K	$10.47	32.0%	1.20%	13.7K	$46.79	1.69×	Active
3PROS \| LAL 1% payers \| Holdout control	$3,000	$88.5K	$12.83	30.0%	1.12%	1,610	$54.97	1.48×	Active
4RT \| Engaged 30d \| Capped at 8% of spend	$5,500	$161.0K	$16.43	28.0%	1.54%	4,920	$32.72	2.28×	Capped
Total · 5 ad sets	$74.5K	$2.19M	$11.39	32.8%	1.34%	49.8K	$43.96	1.80×	1,660/day

Concept × hook test · hook rate and CPA vs. target

Concept H1H2H3

C01 Confession 0.82× 34% hook 0.88× 29% hook 0.74× 38% hook

C02 Demonstration 1.04× 27% hook 0.97× 31% hook 1.18× 25% hook

C03 Comparison 1.31× 22% hook 1.22× 24% hook 1.40× 21% hook

C04 Founder story 0.93× 30% hook 1.09× 26% hook 0.88× 33% hook

CPA at or under 0.90× target 1.20× or worse

The call

C01 wins across all three hooks, so the idea is working, not one lucky ad. It earns new voices and formats. C03 is retired after a diagnosis: the comparison read as an attack ad.

New concepts enter a dedicated test ad set with its own budget, so testing never resets the learning in the scaling campaigns.
Winners graduate as concepts, not single ads, with fresh hooks queued before the current ones fatigue.
A small lookalike cell runs as a control to check whether broad delivery is actually finding better customers.
Retargeting is capped as a share of spend, so it can't inflate results by claiming people who would have bought anyway.

Illustrative account · names generalized · not a specific client's results

Measurement Consumer brand · all paid channels Last 30 days

What the platforms claim vs. what the business recorded

Platform-reported 51.4K

Business recorded 38.2K

Google Ads 21.4KMeta 26.9KOther paid 3,100

35% over-claim. Budgets set on platform totals would be funding conversions that happened once but were counted twice.

Paid media spend: $2.86M
Revenue (business): $4.91M
MER (blended): 1.72×
New-customer CAC: $104.76
90-day repeat rate: 34%
Meta incrementality (geo holdout): 0.71× reported

Budget decisions use the business view (blended MER and new-customer CAC), with platform data steering optimization inside each channel.
A holdout test showed the platform's reported conversions overstated true incremental impact, so its CPA target was set against the incremental figure, not the reported one.

Illustrative account · names generalized · not a specific client's results

Search & AI B2B services brand · organic and AI referrals Last 90 days vs. prior 90

Organic search and AI answer-engine referrals, Last 90 days vs. prior 90
Source	Type	Sessions	vs. prior	Leads	Lead rate
Google organic	Search	48.2K	+31%	1,010	2.1%
Bing organic	Search	6,900	+22%	166	2.4%
1ChatGPT	AI answer	3,140	+184%	144	4.6%
Perplexity	AI answer	1,080	+142%	44	4.1%
Copilot	AI answer	610	+95%	20	3.3%
Gemini	AI answer	420	+120%	16	3.8%
Total organic + AI		60.4K	+36%	1,400	2.3%

UTM convention for answer-engine links

?utm_source=chatgpt.com&utm_medium=ai-referral&utm_campaign=answer-engine

AI answer engines, share of sessions: 8.7%
AI answer engines, growth: +155%
Lead rate: AI vs. organic search: 2.00×
Pages indexed / submitted: 138/142
IndexNow submissions: 37
Median crawl lag after publish: 19h

Each answer engine is its own source, identified by referrer and UTM rules, so AI visits never disappear into "direct".
Leads are followed into the CRM, so organic and AI channels are judged on pipeline, not pageviews.
Every publish is submitted through sitemaps and IndexNow, and coverage is checked in Search Console and Bing Webmaster Tools.

Illustrative account · names generalized · not a specific client's results

How we build a creative test

Concepts first. Variations second.

A test is only useful if it can teach you something. We vary one meaningful thing at a time: the idea, then the hook, then the format, and read results at the level where they mean something.

Illustrative structure. When one concept outperforms across several hooks, that's a signal about the idea rather than about one lucky ad, and that concept earns more production.

Pick the angle

One reason to buy, aimed at one kind of customer or one objection.
Write several hooks

Different first three seconds for the same idea, because that's where most of the difference sits.
Produce for the placement

9:16 for Reels and Shorts, 4:5 for feeds, captions on, safe zones respected.
Read by concept

Hook rate, hold rate, click-through and conversion rate, compared across the concept rather than ad by ad.
Iterate what earns it

Winning concepts get new hooks, voices and formats. Losing ones get a diagnosis before they're retired.

Performance creative in detail

About this page

What you're looking at

Client work is shown with permission and credited to the business it was made for.

Affiliate creative was produced by our team for affiliate campaigns promoting the products named. It's real campaign work, but those brands are not MSG clients and haven't endorsed us.

Presenters and characters in these videos are AI-generated, and each piece is labeled. They aren't real customers, and we don't present them as such.

The account views are illustrative: they show how we structure, test and read accounts, with names generalized. They aren't a specific client's results.

Want ads built to be tested?

Share your goals, your channels and roughly what you spend. We'll reply with an honest view of where we'd start, or tell you if we're not the right fit.

Discuss your growth See our approach