Salif S.

Direct Response Creative For eCommerce Brands | Clients Include Setu, eComm Scaling Secrets, True Classic, FitTrack, Laura Geller, Perk, Alpha Lion, Glow25, PetLab, KraveBeauty, and more...

Siba Consulting is a lean eCommerce agency that helps 7-9 figure brands scale their new customer acquisition through Meta and YouTube ads. 

Our partners include Omnilux, Laura Geller, True Classic, Obvi, FitTrack, Solawave, PetLab and more...

We specialise in end-to-end performance creative development, media buying and multi-funnel testing.

Check out our work -> https://www.sibaconsulting.com/

Book an intro call with me -> https://calendly.com/sibaconsulting/discoverycall

Founder

Founder of a boutique performance marketing and creative agency for high-growth eCommerce brands and info-products.

We specialise in direct response creative and landing page development.

Learn more here: sibaconsulting.com

Currently paying some of my creative strategists $10,000+ per month.

Looking for more strategists to join my agency 🚨👇 

Only apply if:

- You worked for/with 8-9 figure DTC brands
- You've made ads that spent $100k+ and you have proof to show
- You're serious about growing with a lean team

If you want to apply, send me a DM with your portfolio.

Or drop a comment below and I'll send you more info 👇

Salif S

Founder @ Siba Consulting | Lean creative agency for 7-9 figure DTC brands

Winning angles don't last forever.

You should always have multiple big ideas (angles) selling your product.

Ideally 2-3 at the same time.

Let’s say that you’ve been scaling hard with “Cortisol imbalance”.

As you iterate on that angle, you also need to expand. 

For example introducing stuff like “Menopause” or “PCOS”.

The more the better.

Creatives die out fast and you should always be exploring new messaging.

-- 

Follow for more.

My whatsapp right now is:

- 10% family
- 20% friends
- 70% biz opportunities

Q1 in Dubai was amazing for networking.

Hope this whole thing calms down so I can move there.

No alternative text description for this image

If you’ve been running a lot of cold traffic ads, you have a huge pool of warm traffic ready to convert.

Here are 2 ad frameworks we ran on product aware audiences that printed for us:

--

1) 1st Person Customer Experience

Relate

“Ugh… I got suckered into buying this from Instagram”

Outcome

“If I ever meet the owner of this product I’ll give them a hug”

Benefit

“Who knew this product was the key to…”

Address skepticism

“And what made me finally try it was…”

Objection handling

“But secondly, this has been clinically proven…”

CTA

“If you’re also going through something similar… you have to try this”

--

2) 3rd Person Authority Figure

Hook (Myth Bust)

“Is this dental powder a scam? Vet review”

Authority

“My name is ___ and I’ve been a vet for 15 years”

Build hype

“My clients are raving about this product…”

Reveal / Research

“So I had to do a deep dive into their formula and research"

Benefits

- Benefit 1
- Benefit 2
- Benefit 3

How to use

“It’s super easy to use…”

CTA

--

Follow for more.

Copying other brands is fun until you realize they run at 0.7 ROAS.

Just because a $50M brand is doing it doesn't mean it works for you at $400k/month.

For the past 2 years I’ve worked closely with a ton of 8-9 figs brands.

I’d NEVER start a brand if it didn’t tick all these boxes:

1. Huge TAM
2. Product that actually impacts people lives
3. Subscription model

Huge TAM = Sell to basically anyone.

Subscription model = High LTV, high spending power. 

Great product = Makes everything easier.

--

Follow for more.

We delivered a new creative batch to a client

One ad has already scaled to $8k/day 🤷🏽‍♂️

Tomasz Sledz

Running ads that 10x your business | Helping brands with media buying | Spent 20 000 000$+ on ads. | Driving results that Soar | DM for a 1:1 Power Hour | Business Consultancy | Funnel Optimization | Paid Social Ads

Your ads are spending.
But your results are stuck.

Read this. ↓

You launch a few new creatives.
They work for a week.
Then CAC climbs, ROAS drops, and scaling breaks again.

So you do what most brands do:
You blame the media buyer.
You tweak targeting.
You "optimize" the account.

But the real issue is simple:
You do not test enough new angles, fast enough.

You have spend.
You have a product that sells.
You just do not have a creative system that keeps performance alive while you scale.

That's what we build.

I'm Tomasz, founder of Impact Media.
We craft research-based direct-response ads, both video and static, built to scale.

What we install:

✅ Deep customer research and angle mining
✅ High-volume creative production (often 100+ ads per month)
✅ Fast testing system to find winners
✅ Scale plan that keeps CAC under control
✅ Funnel and offer fixes when ads need it

Who we've worked with:

Icybear Dental • BioID Health • Dr. Forbes Riley • Crucial Four • Pure Over • Olive + Crate • Star Magic Healing • Awkward Media • 1FIT • Jope • Munera Ventures • Pela Terra • Absolute Dogs • A-OK9 • 3Y Health • Energized Health • EcoWise Supplements • Cadence • Secret Element • Seller Champ

(And other 8-9 figure business covered under NDA)

What this looks like in the real world:

→ 234 ads launched in 6 weeks
→ $50,254 spent
→ $208,265 generated
→ Stock sold out, 1,000+ new customers in a month

If your brand is doing real revenue, but ads are not scaling, send me a DM with "SCALE".

I'll show you the exact gaps in your creative system and what to build next.

Chief Marketing Officer

I've managed $30M+ in Meta ad spend and built a dashboard that tells you if your creative can scale.

Most brands don't know they're dying until ROAS tanks.

The pattern is always the same:
- Creative fatigue kills the account
- Nobody tracks it
- By the time you notice, you've burned 2-3 weeks of budget

So I built the system I wish I had.

Paste 14 numbers from Ads Manager. Takes 5 minutes.

The dashboard auto-calculates 25+ metrics and tells you exactly where you're bleeding:

→ Creative fatigue rate (are your ads dying faster than you're replacing them?)
→ Top 3 concentration risk (one fatigue spike away from disaster)
→ Hook decay rate (catches fatigue before ROAS drops)
→ Creative runway (how many weeks until your winners die?)
→ Launch deficit (are you killing more ads than you're launching?)
→ Win rate trend (is your creative research getting stale?)

Green, yellow, red scoring. You see your creative health at a glance.

For brands spending $50K-$500K/month on Meta:
- Your media buyer is reacting to problems instead of predicting them
- Your creative team doesn't know which ads are about to die
- You're scaling into fatigue without realizing it

This dashboard fixes all of it.

Benchmarks from $30M+ in spend built in. Yours for free.

Comment "HEALTH" and I'll send it over.

(We need to be connected for me to DM you)

♻️ Repost and I'll include the video walkthrough showing exactly how to use it.

I scale 7 to 8-figure brands with ads | $30M+ managed | 100+ creatives per month | Scale to $1M/month spend

I've run ads for Acquisition.com Portfolio and other 8-9 figure businesses. Most brands I talk to still don't understand this one thing:

Creative is targeting.

Meta's algorithm handles audiences now. Your job is feeding it the right creative for each awareness stage.

Most brands blast the same ad to everyone. Cold traffic, warm traffic, retargeting. Same hook. Same angle. Same offer.

Then they wonder why CPAs keep climbing.

Eugene Schwartz figured this out 60 years ago. 5 levels of awareness. 5 different messages.

→ Unaware: They don't know they have a problem
→ Problem Aware: They know the problem, not the solution
→ Solution Aware: They know solutions exist, not yours
→ Product Aware: They know you, haven't bought yet
→ Most Aware: They just need the right offer

Your static ads, UGC, VSLs should strategically map to these stages.

I've managed $30M+ in Meta spend. The brands that scale past $100K/month all have this dialed.

The ones stuck at $20-50K? They're running the same 3 ads to everyone and hoping something sticks.

I put together the exact framework I use on day 1 with every client.

The "Andromeda" Creative Strategy Framework includes:

✅ The awareness stage breakdown (know exactly which ads to run where)
✅ Creative mapping template (match ad types to buyer stages)
✅ The research-first methodology behind $30M in spend
✅ Why "creative is targeting" and how to use it

Comment "CREATIVE" and I'll send it over.

(We need to be connected for me to DM you)

♻️ Repost and I'll include the full strategic memo I give to new clients.

🚨 We're hiring a Full-Time Creative Strategist at Impact Media

We're a performance marketing agency that's manage over $1 mil+ monthly in Meta ad spend for 7-8 figure brands 

We work across e-commerce (D2C), B2B, and lead generation, so you won't be stuck in one niche. Real budgets, variety, and creative freedom to test at scale.

This is a full-time, fully remote position. Not a freelance gig.

What you'll actually do day-to-day:

Research (40%) - Use tools like Foreplay and Meta Ad Library to find winning angles and concepts, then turn that into actionable creative briefs.

Copywriting (30%) - Write high-converting ad scripts for video and static ads across multiple clients. You'll use AI tools to move faster, not as a crutch, but as a multiplier.

Visual Direction (15%) - Develop the look and feel of ads and brief designers and editors on how a concept should come to life.

Creative Collaboration (15%) - Work closely with our Creative Director and brief the production team directly when needed. Clear vision and sharp feedback matter here.

Who we're looking for:
- 1-2+ years of hands-on Meta ads experience (non-negotiable)
- Strong understanding of direct response, you know what makes people stop scrolling and click
- Experience writing video scripts and static ad copy
- Comfortable using AI tools daily to research, write, and iterate faster
- Familiar with Monday.com and Slack
- Perfect English communication skills
- Detail-oriented and self-driven
- Preferably based in or near CET timezone, but open to strong international candidates

The logistics: 
✅ Full-time only, no freelancers or part-time 
✅ Fully remote 
✅ Daily team sync at mid-day CET 

We plan ahead and get tasks to you at the start of each week, but flexibility is essential. Clients send feedback, things shift, and we need someone with full-time availability to move quickly when that happens.

Why this role:
- Lean, high-performing team. 
- 1000 creatives tested per month. 
- Real budgets.
- Full autonomy over your work.

How to apply:

Connect with me and send a DM with:
1. Your portfolio or ad examples
2. A summary of your relevant experience
3. Why you'd be a great fit
4. Your salary expectations

I'll be reviewing applications personally and scheduling calls with the right candidates.

If you don't have Meta ads experience, this isn't the right fit, but feel free to tag someone who'd be perfect for it 👇

I've spent $30M+ on Meta ads. I just built a creative scaling calculator that gives you my creative volume formula for scaling past $100K/month:

Most brands hit $50K/month and crash.

The pattern is always the same:
- 5 ads carrying the whole account
- No creative pipeline behind them
- ROAS dies and nobody saw it coming

I tracked every failure pattern across 200+ accounts. Built the math into one sheet. You just paste 8 numbers from Ads Manager which takes 3 minutes.

Here's what it spit out:

→ Your exact creative burn rate per week
→ How many ads you need launching monthly to stay alive
→ Which ad formats are fatiguing 40% faster than others
→ Your concentration risk score (most brands score "critical")
→ The spend ceiling your current creative volume supports
→ When your next ROAS drop will hit based on decay curves

Green. Yellow. Red. One glance.

Benchmarks from $30M+ in spend baked in.

I packaged the whole thing:

→ The calculator spreadsheet
→ My creative volume formula for scaling past $100K/month

Comment "SCALE" and I'll send it over.

We need to be connected for me to DM you.

We produce 100-170 ads per month. Most inhouse teams struggle to get 10 out the door.

The difference isn't talent. It's workflow.

I've watched brands hire great editors, great strategists, great media buyers. Then lose weeks to revision cycles, unclear briefs, and miscommunication.

One video takes 5 rounds of feedback. By the time it's approved, the trend is dead.

We fixed this with a 12-person team structure that syncs strategists, editors, and media buyers into one machine.

The system:

→ Strategists brief with research, not opinions
→ Editors know exactly what "good" looks like before they start
→ Media buyers flag winners and losers in real-time
→ Feedback loops are 2 rounds max, not 5

At scale, creative velocity is the only competitive advantage. The algorithm rewards volume. The brands testing 15-20 ads per week win. The ones testing 3-4 fall behind.

For brands spending $50K-$500K/month:

- Your team is slow because the process is broken
- Your editors are guessing what you want
- Your strategists aren't connected to performance data

This workflow fixes all of it.

I packaged our entire production system:

✅ Organizational chart (who does what, when)
✅ The feedback loop SOP (2 rounds max)
✅ Brief templates that eliminate guesswork
✅ How to sync strategy, editing, and media buying

Comment "WORKFLOW" and I'll send it over.

(We need to be connected for me to DM you)

♻️ Repost and I'll include the exact brief template we use for every ad.

We tested 600 research based ads in 6 months for one client.

(gemini 3.1 made it possible)

Star Magic needed volume. Not 10 ads a month. Not 20. Hundreds.

The old way: hire UGC creators, wait 2 weeks for deliverables, hope something works, repeat.

The new way: use Gemini 3 to generate scripts, angles, and hooks based on what's already performing. Then hand creators a brief they can't mess up.

The system:

→ Feed Gemini your top 10 performing ads
→ Extract the hook patterns, emotional triggers, and CTAs that work
→ Generate 50+ script variations in an hour
→ Brief creators with research-backed scripts, not vibes

We maintained profitable acquisition for 6 months straight. 2,941 new customers. High subscription retention.

Most brands can't produce enough creative to feed the algorithm. They test 5 ads, find 1 winner, ride it until it dies, then scramble.

This system keeps the pipeline full.

For brands spending $50K-$500K/month:
- Your UGC process is too slow
- Your creators are guessing what to say
- You're not testing enough volume to find consistent winners

I packaged the entire Gemini 3 UGC workflow:

✅ The prompt sequence for script generation
✅ Hook pattern extraction framework
✅ Creator brief template (research-backed, not vibes)
✅ The 100-ad testing calendar we used

Comment "UGC" and I'll send it over.

(We need to be connected for me to DM you)

A clinic owner told me: "We get 200 leads a month. Maybe 15 book. I don't understand."

I looked at their funnel. The problem was obvious within 5 minutes.

Their ads were generating curiosity. Not commitment.

People clicked because the hook was interesting. They landed on a page that looked fine. They filled out a form because it was easy.

Then they ghosted.

No call booked. No appointment scheduled. Just a CRM full of names that went nowhere.

This was BioID Health. Stuck at 120 patients per month for over a year. Spending £5K/month on ads that filled a pipeline nobody could close.

I've managed $30M+ in Meta spend. I've seen this pattern kill more clinics and high-ticket businesses than bad targeting ever has.

The fix wasn't the ads. It was the script.

We rewrote everything from the hook to the follow-up:

→ Ad scripts that pre-qualify before the click (filter out tire-kickers early)
→ Landing page headlines that match the ad promise exactly
→ Form questions that create micro-commitments
→ Follow-up sequences that assume the sale, not beg for it

Same clinic. Same offer. Same budget.

120 patients became 500+. £5K spend became £40K. Because now the leads actually wanted to show up.

Most businesses optimize the wrong thing. They tweak audiences, test placements, adjust bids.

The script is what converts. Everything else is noise.

I put together the exact scripts and headlines we used:

✅ Ad script swipe file (the copy that scaled 4x)
✅ Landing page headline templates
✅ The pre-qualification framework
✅ Follow-up sequence that converts form fills to bookings

Comment "SCRIPTS" and I'll send it over.

(We need to be connected for me to DM you)

I watched a brand burn $47,000 in 3 weeks because of one hook.

They had a winner. 4.2 ROAS. Scaling beautifully.

Then day 4 hit. ROAS dropped to 2.8. Day 7, it was 1.6. By day 12, they were losing money on every sale.

The founder called me panicking. "The algorithm broke. Meta hates us. What happened?"

Nothing happened. The hook just died.

I've managed $30M+ in Meta spend. I've seen this exact pattern hundreds of times.

Your best-performing ad isn't actually your best ad. It's just the hook that resonated with the warmest slice of your audience.

Meta shows it to the easiest buyers first. They convert. You celebrate.

Then it expands to colder people. Same hook. Same angle. Same words.

But these people need a different entry point. Your hook doesn't hit the same for them.

The ad isn't broken. The hook is exhausted.

That brand I mentioned? We took over and launched 91 new ads in 3 weeks. Same product. Same offer. Different hooks.

→ Pain hooks for people who know they're struggling
→ Desire hooks for people chasing a result
→ Proof hooks for skeptics who need evidence
→ Contrarian hooks for people who think they've tried everything

One hook fatigues. The next picks up. Account stays stable.

They went from bleeding $47K to $180K profitable months. Not because we found one magic ad. Because we built a system that never runs dry.

I put together the exact hook bank we use internally:

✅ 50 proven hooks across static, UGC, and B-roll
✅ Hook categories mapped to awareness stages
✅ The research process for finding fresh angles
✅ How we launch 91+ ads in 3 weeks without burning out

Comment "HOOKS" and I'll send it over.

(We need to be connected for me to DM you)

We took a client's CPL from €59 to €19 in 30 days. No budget increase. No new audiences.

Just funnel friction.

Most high-ticket lead gen campaigns bleed money in places nobody checks.

The landing page asks for too much information. The hook attracts the wrong people. The form fields kill conversion. The follow-up sequence is too slow.

Every friction point costs you leads. At €50-80 per lead, that adds up fast.

This was a German SaaS brand in the legal space. Smart team, good product, terrible unit economics.

We audited the funnel and found 4 friction points killing their CPL:

→ Form had 7 fields (cut to 3)
→ Hook attracted tire-kickers (rewrote for qualified buyers)
→ Landing page buried the offer (moved it above the fold)
→ No urgency in the CTA (added scarcity)

Same spend. 3x more leads. Profitable acquisition in 30 days.

For brands running high-ticket lead gen:

- Your CPL is high because your funnel has friction
- Your sales team is drowning in unqualified leads
- You're optimizing ads when you should be optimizing the page

I put together the exact audit framework we used:

✅ The "Funnel Friction" audit checklist
✅ 3 script templates for high-ticket lead ads
✅ Form field optimization guide
✅ The landing page fixes that dropped CPL 67%

Comment "LEADGEN" and I'll send it over.

(We need to be connected for me to DM you)

♻️ Repost and I'll include the before/after breakdown of the campaign.

We scaled PureOver from $250/day to $1,400/day spend. $208,265 in 6 weeks.

Most brands try to scale and ROAS tanks the next day.

The pattern is always the same:
- They find a winner
- They increase budget
- Performance crashes
- They pull back and start over

PureOver was stuck in this loop for months before we took over.

The fix wasn't complicated. It was systematic.

Week 1-2: Creative volume. We launched 15+ new ads to find 2-3 more winners.
Week 3-4: Offer testing. Same product, different positioning. Bundles, bonuses, urgency.
Week 5-6: Scale the winners. Increase budget 20% every 3 days on ads with stable ROAS.

The 2-3-4 rule:

→ 2 weeks to build creative depth (you can't scale 1 winner)
→ 3 offers tested (same product, different angles)
→ 4 winning ads minimum before scaling spend

Most brands try to scale with 1-2 ads. That's not scaling. That's gambling.

For brands spending $50K-$100K/month:
- You're scaling too fast with too few winners
- Your offer isn't strong enough for cold traffic
- You're optimizing campaigns when you should be optimizing creative velocity

I put together the exact system we used:

✅ 1-page launch checklist
✅ The 6-week testing calendar
✅ Creative volume benchmarks by spend level
✅ Offer stack framework for cold traffic

Comment "SCALE" and I'll send it over.

(We need to be connected for me to DM you)

We audited a brand spending $200K/month. They had 47 ads running. Only 3 were profitable.

The other 44 were bleeding money while nobody noticed.

This is concentration risk. And it's killing more accounts than bad creative ever has.

Here's what I see in almost every audit:

- 70%+ of spend going to 2-3 ads
- The "winners" are actually fatiguing
- Dozens of underperformers draining budget quietly
- No system to catch it before ROAS crashes

At $200K/month, you're pushing $6,500/day through Meta. If 90% of your ads are underwater, you're burning thousands daily on creative that stopped working weeks ago.

Most brands check ROAS at the campaign level. That hides everything.

You need to audit at the ad level. Weekly.

The 3-point audit we run:

→ Spend concentration: Are 2-3 ads carrying the whole account?
→ Efficiency decay: Which ads dropped 20%+ in the last 7 days?
→ Dead weight: Which ads have spent $500+ with zero conversions?

One audit. 15 minutes. Catches problems before they cost you $50K.

I put together the exact framework we use:

✅ The ad-level audit checklist (15 minutes weekly)
✅ Concentration risk calculator
✅ Efficiency decay tracker
✅ The "kill or scale" decision matrix

Comment "ROAS" and I'll send it over.

(We need to be connected for me to DM you)

I've reviewed over 200 ad accounts.

Brands stuck at $50K/month almost always have the same problem. And they're blaming the wrong thing.

They think it's targeting. It's not.

It's creative velocity. And it's only half the equation.

At $50K/month you're pushing roughly $1,600/day through Meta.

The algorithm needs fresh creative to keep finding new buyers. Most brands launch 5 to 10 new ads per week. Maybe one sticks. Meanwhile, 2 to 3 of your current winners are already dying.

You're not scaling. You're running to stand still.

The brands that break past $100K/month test 20 to 30+ ads per week. Different hooks. Different formats. Different angles.

They're not looking for a magic ad. They've built a system.

But here's what most people miss: the ad is just the door.

If your ad is punchy but your landing page reads like a corporate brochure, you've lost them.

If your ad makes a bold promise but your landing page doesn't back it up with a story that deepens belief, you've lost them.

If someone clicks a listicle expecting a helpful comparison and lands on a hard pitch with zero context, you've lost them.

The customer journey has to be congruent from the first frame of the ad to the landing page. Same voice. Same promise. Same energy.

Brands scaling past $100K aren't just launching more ads. They're building front-end systems where the ad matches the advertorial, which matches the landing page. Each piece carries the reader forward without friction.

I've managed over $30M in Meta spend. The pattern never changes.

Brands stuck at under $30K think they have a targeting problem.

Brands growing past $100K know they have a creative and congruency problem.

How many ads did you launch last week? And does everything after the click match what you promised?

taplio

The Battle

Salif S.

Tomasz Sledz

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreSalif S.'s LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreTomasz Sledz's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Salif S.

Tomasz Sledz

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Salif S.'s LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreTomasz Sledz's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreSalif S.'s LinkedIn Performance