The Influencer Era Is Over! This Lawsuit Proves It.

Summary

The Art of the Brand: Episode Summary – "The Influencer Era Is Over! This Lawsuit Proves It"

Release Date: July 7, 2025

Hosts: Camille Moore and Philip Miller

---

Introduction to the Episode’s Theme

In this compelling episode of "The Art of the Brand," hosts Camille Moore and Philip Miller delve into the turbulent changes reshaping the branding and influencer landscape. Opening with a bold statement, Philip Miller declares, “If you're cheating, you're not really an influencer, you're a prostitute,” setting the tone for a critical examination of influencer authenticity and the evolving dynamics between brands and their ambassadors.

Alo Yoga Class Action Lawsuit and Its Impact on Influencers

The conversation swiftly pivots to a significant legal case involving Alo Yoga and its network of influencers. Philip Miller articulates the gravity of the situation, stating, “Once you get into Amazon and become dependent on the sales, they start to increase the cost to you,” highlighting how influencers are entangled in restrictive contracts that stifle their authenticity.

• Details of the Lawsuit:
  The Alo Yoga lawsuit names 14 to 15 influencers accused of promoting the Alo brand covertly, without proper FTC disclosures. Philip explains, “These litigators are like a pack of wolves. They will devour areas that they identify as profitable,” emphasizing the aggressive legal environment targeting influencer practices.

• Influencer Authenticity Crisis:
  Camille Moore adds, “Influencers stopped having influence because they were no longer focused on truly being influential. They were just pay to play, they were billboards,” critiquing the shift from genuine influence to mere advertisement. This erosion of trust has led to a surge in User-Generated Content (UGC), as consumers seek more authentic connections.

• Notable Quotes:

  • Philip Miller: “If you're cheating, you're not really an influencer, you're a prostitute.”
  • Kalu Moore: “We probably will never buy another product again from them because we no longer trust them.”

Authenticity and Branding: American Apparel Case Study

Transitioning to brand authenticity, the hosts discuss the American Apparel documentary. Kalu Moore critiques the documentary, stating, “It was truly a documentary of nothingness,” arguing that it failed to authentically represent the brand’s promise and the experiences of its employees.

• Brand Dissonance:
  Philip Miller counters, “They made their clothes in America, which I thought was cool, but there’s a lot of stuff going on that was attractive to these hipsters,” pointing out the disconnect between brand ideals and internal practices.

• Cultural Impact:
  Camille shares personal anecdotes, reflecting on how American Apparel created a sense of community yet devolved into dysfunctional practices, ultimately harming the brand’s reputation.

Array's Clear Protein Launch: Deception vs Trust in Brands

The episode shifts focus to Array’s latest product launch, Clear Protein, dissecting the deceptive marketing tactics that undermine consumer trust.

• Product Misrepresentation:
  Kalu Moore narrates her disappointment, “Their number one ingredient and pretty much their only ingredient is collagen, which is not a complete protein,” revealing that Clear Protein fails to deliver genuine nutritional benefits despite claims of high protein content.

• Impact on Brand Trust:
  “Once you get into Amazon and become dependent on the sales, they start to increase the cost to you,” Philip emphasizes how misleading practices damage long-term brand integrity.

• Notable Quotes:

  • Kalu Moore: “It's wrong to do it, period.”
  • Philip Miller: “Never rely on one platform for 90% of your business.”

Aesop's Queer Library Pop-Up: Brand Dissonance and Customer Experience

Camille Moore recounts her unsettling experience at an Aesop store in Yorkville, Toronto, where the store was transformed into a “Queer Library” pop-up.

• Brand Misalignment:
  Kalu describes, “The entire store has been overrun by becoming a queer library,” indicating a stark departure from Aesop’s traditional branding focused on skincare products.

• Customer Alienation:
  “It felt super uncomfortable,” she shares, highlighting how forced cultural statements without proper brand integration can alienate loyal customers.

• Brand Dissonance:
  Philip summarizes, “Your brand has become a thought police,” underscoring the pitfalls of brands attempting to impose specific cultural or social narratives without alignment.

Amazon's Monopolistic Practices and Seller Challenges

A significant portion of the discussion centers on Amazon’s monopolistic control over its marketplace and the detrimental effects on sellers.

• Monopoly Mechanics:
  Philip explains, “Amazon controls how you price and they charge the most,” detailing how the platform enforces pricing neutrality and imposes escalating fees, squeezing seller margins.

• Seller Dependence and Exploitation:
  “Once you become dependent on Amazon sales, they start to increase the cost to you,” echoes the earlier sentiment, emphasizing the vicious cycle that traps sellers.

• Legal and Structural Barriers:
  Kalu notes, “Amazon has that arbitration clause,” which prevents sellers from pursuing class-action lawsuits, further entrenching Amazon’s dominance.

• Monopolistic Strategy:
  Philip references Peter Thiel’s philosophy, “Build a monopoly… It is the fastest way to create wealth,” critiquing the ethical implications of such business strategies.

• Notable Quotes:

  • Philip Miller: “Never rely on one platform for 90% of your business.”
  • Kalu Moore: “If you’re 95% dependent on Amazon, they essentially own you.”

Social Media Algorithms: Optimal Content Strategies for Brands

The hosts delve into the complexities of social media algorithms and how they influence content strategies for brands at different growth stages.

• Posting Frequency:
  Kalu proposes a tiered approach: “When your page hits different milestones… post quality multiple times per day,” recommending high-frequency posting during the awareness phase and reducing to a few quality posts as the community matures.

• Algorithm Adaptations:
  “The algorithm is going back to if you’ve expressed interest in that person, you’re going to see their content,” Philip explains, noting shifts towards quality over quantity in content delivery.

• Strategic Content Creation:
  “Every post matters and it matters more,” Camille emphasizes the importance of each interaction once a brand has established a loyal following.

• Notable Quotes:

  • Kalu Moore: “Once your page gets to a point where you've really built a community… every post matters.”
  • Philip Miller: “You need to be dynamic to be able to break into your markets.”

Insights and Conclusions

Throughout the episode, Camille Moore and Philip Miller offer profound insights into the fragility of brand integrity amidst evolving market dynamics. They stress the importance of authenticity, the dangers of over-reliance on monopolistic platforms like Amazon, and the necessity for adaptive and strategic content creation in the age of sophisticated social media algorithms.

• Brand Integrity: Maintaining genuine connections and transparent practices is paramount for long-term success. “Integrity is critical in personal brand,” Philip asserts, warning against the short-term gains of deceptive marketing.

• Diversification: Businesses must diversify their sales channels to mitigate the risks of platform dependency. “Never rely on one platform for 90% of your business,” they advise, encouraging brands to seek multiple revenue streams.

• Authentic Content Strategies: Adapting content strategies to align with brand growth stages ensures sustained engagement and community building. “Quality of followers in the end,” Kalu notes, emphasizing meaningful connections over mere follower counts.

Closing Remarks

In their concluding remarks, Camille and Philip promote their specialized coaching cohorts and personal branding courses, encouraging listeners to invest in robust branding strategies to navigate the increasingly complex landscape.

• Camille Moore: “Send me a message on any social media platform….”
• Philip Miller: “What you need is the best deal in the history of the world for how little it costs to get six weeks of your attention and time to build a brand.”

---

Key Takeaways:

1. Authenticity Over Advertisement: The influencer landscape is shifting from genuine influence to commoditized advertising, eroding trust.
2. Legal Scrutiny on Influencers: Increasing lawsuits are holding influencers and brands accountable for deceptive marketing practices.
3. Monopolistic Risks: Over-dependence on platforms like Amazon can compromise a business’s autonomy and profitability.
4. Strategic Content Management: Adapting content strategies to brand growth stages optimizes engagement and community building.
5. Brand Integrity is Paramount: Transparent and genuine practices are essential for long-term brand success and consumer trust.

This episode serves as a critical examination of current trends affecting branding, offering actionable insights for business owners and industry experts seeking to maintain relevance and integrity in a rapidly evolving market.

Transcript

[Philip Miller]

If you're cheating, you're not really an influencer, you're a prostitute.

[Kalu Moore]

Influencers stopped having influence because they were no longer focused on truly being influential. They were just pay to play. They were billboards.

[Philip Miller]

You also have to sign a contract that you will never say anything bad about Amazon. So once you get into Amazon and become dependent on the sales, they start to increase the cost to you.

[Kalu Moore]

I probably will never buy another product again from them because I now no longer trust them.

[Philip Miller]

Been hired from time to time to help brands fix it. Like if I was the CEO or advising the CEO, I'd say you need to take action.

[Kalu Moore]

Today she had to go to three different associates because they couldn't even find where they put their inventory for their store during regular work hours. What a brand, what a brand, what a brand what a mighty good brand what a brand, what a brand what a mighty good. Well, welcome back, everybody, to another week of the art of the brand. We've taken a few weeks off.

[Philip Miller]

It's always a great opportunity to talk about the business of branding. It sure is, because branding is all about business.

[Kalu Moore]

So we got a lot of interesting topics today to cover. We're going to be covering the aloe class action lawsuit in the state of influencers. We're going to talk about the array launch of Clear Protein and how business owners beware.

[Philip Miller]

You've got a strong opinion on that. I look forward to diving into that.

[Kalu Moore]

And I want to talk about Amazon. I think there's a lot of, of really interesting things on Amazon. And then to wrap up today's.

[Philip Miller]

No, I want to talk about Amazon.

[Kalu Moore]

True dap.

[Philip Miller]

I want to talk about Amazon and Tucker and a bit of a scandal there and expose the unfairness of Amazon.

[Kalu Moore]

And finally, I want to talk about some changes I'm noticing and predicting for where the algorithm is going based on how much you should post today dependent on what size or what state your brand is at.

[Philip Miller]

Yeah, I think people should listen to that because nobody really knows what's going on. So any insight can help you with your social planning.

[Kalu Moore]

All right, so let's kick it off. Let's talk about alo yoga. Philip, how many influencers are going to be sued with where the FTC is going, how these law firms are cracking down? Let's break it down.

[Philip Miller]

Well, how many influencers are going to be sued? You could probably divide the number of influencers by five times it by three, and then calculate how many are peeing themselves, knowing that everybody is getting sued right now. But in the alo lawsuit, they named 14 to 15 influencers who were getting paid kind of under the table or secretly to promote the Alo brand. And it's definitely, there's a disruption going on to, going on in the influencer space in terms of how they get compensation and what the government wants to do. But what's relevant, I think from the perspective I can bring, is once you get litigators in the US who are very hungry, these, these litigators are. They're like a pack of wolves. And they were. They will devour areas that they identify as profitable.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah.

[Philip Miller]

And what you can see now is a trend of 5 to 10 class action lawsuits against big brands who are breaking the FTC rules, which gives them a pathway to a class action lawsuit in the hundreds of millions. And a lot of people who thought they could get away with this are now going to have to be a lot more careful about how they're getting paid when they're doing their content.

[Kalu Moore]

What's interesting with the last point that you said is that lawyers in the US like to look for places where there are laws that have been enforced but have low regulation. And that's what this entire space has really. It's really has been the Wild west and the ftc. You kind of hear about these cases, they pop up every few years. The FTC likes to use someone as a scapegoat just to kind of remind brands like to stay in line.

[Philip Miller]

But no, this isn't the FTC doing it though.

[Kalu Moore]

I know, but I'm saying people know about this. But we like, no one really fears it. And these law firms that are coming in is because there's space to lean into where there's laws, but there's lack of regulation just kind of as a.

[Philip Miller]

Public service announcement for people listening. The regular, like, I'm not for big government. Like I want markets to run, but certain regulatory bodies need teeth. Like the Environmental Protection Agency has no teeth.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah.

[Philip Miller]

The Federal Drug Administration has no teeth. It's all populated by people in the industry. The FTC is similar. So they create these guidelines that are supposed to promote fairness to the consumer, but they have very little ability to enforce it. But what's happened here, the FTC has these rules, but some smart litigators found out that they can litigate the breaking of the guidelines. And it's actually one of the good things about lawyers, even though it's easy to hate them. I understand. Because they're now holding big brands accountable who are misrepresenting their products to consumers.

[Kalu Moore]

Well, let's get into the case. So this case is really interesting because it's not the regular influencer case you're used to. So on one hand it has those elements of influencers are being named in the suit because they're being paid to promote content without the hashtag paid ad. That is pretty much what the FT guidelines like FTC guidelines, why they were introduced. So they were first introduced in California, Iowa and Illinois and then it became national legislation because it the consumer became frustrated and angry that they were buying products that they thought that they were buying based on someone they trusted online using it. But the person people online were never using these products and they would just show up and like post their. Whatever they were paid to post or three posts or five posts and people would go and buy this with their hard earned money. And the reason why it was problematic wasn't mostly on like T shirts and blush. It was more in areas of like weight loss and transformation and people saying like their hair grew back from this product and then you go and buy it for 300 bucks and you never see a new hair. So that's why it was kind of introduced. And there's been laws for years that influencers when they're paid should be doing paid or ad. The problem is the algorithm doesn't promote those posts because. Because as consumers almost every single post by an influencer, let's be real. Is in some way a paid post. Cause that's how they make money. And we don't want to be just scrolling on Instagram and only seeing ads. So it became more productive for influencers to with like forego those hashtags because to cheat. To cheat. But this is where it's a bit of a nuance.

[Philip Miller]

Is that zero nuances.

[Kalu Moore]

Hear me out. A lot of the brands that the influencers. The reason why that job is so alluring is that you can get paid by the brands you love. So brands you would already buy gift you products because you're brand aligned.

[Philip Miller]

Okay. But you have endorsements what that aren't a secret. Right? Like when you watch Jordan or. You know what I mean? Like that endorsement was real. They liked it. It was clear they were being paid for it. Right.

[Kalu Moore]

But they're not paid on engagement. Right? So if they, if their only source of revenue and income is 3 through brands.

[Philip Miller]

If you're cheating, you're not really an influencer, you're a prostitute. Let's be real. There's no nuance. If you're just selling your image, you know what I mean? For money, you're Just a prostitute of product. And, and then if you're hiding it, the message that I would say is I think it's going to change the nature of influencers. I, I think you're going to find less influence by these people who became influencers by prostituting themselves.

[Kalu Moore]

The change has already happened. That's why UGC really bloomed and blew up, because we no longer trusted influencers. So the title influencer was because you were influential. And because you were influential when you posted something as a regular person, I would buy it. Influencers stopped having influence because they were no longer focused on truly being influential. They were just pay to play, they were billboards. And that became annoying on the algorithm. So what blossomed and what bloomed was basically these nobodies that, that were invested in building up their community and people would just buy what they were truly buying on Amazon and what they were truly like purchasing at Walmart or Target. And that became a big thing that brands started to chase. And then it became the same issue where now nobody's are like all over these ads and people are buying products, but the whole thing is just broken because it's all pay to play. Like everyone is just trying to vie for attention.

[Philip Miller]

So let me ask you your opinion, because what happens is big companies, big money. You know, they can, they can always bend the rules. Like, I don't have a problem if somebody sends free samples to people and you try it on and you like it, right? Free samples. If people are sending to you, you can try it on. If you like it, you can wear it on a set, you can wear it at a show, you can wear it to dinner. But when you're being paid to wear it, making it look like it's your personal choice, that's deception.

[Kalu Moore]

Here's what's complicated though.

[Philip Miller]

But is it not deception?

[Kalu Moore]

It's totally deception. But here's what's complicated about it. Just to give a different perspective, you don't get paid by Instagram and you get paid very little on TikTok. Getting paid on TikTok is a new thing. The only platform you really got paid on was YouTube. And that's why Snapchat. Yes, of course, Snapchat is like spending a lot of money because they're trying to become bigger in the Western, because they're huge in the Middle east and in, in rest of the world. But the issue is that people who are big on Instagram that have like half a million or 1 million followers, the only way that they can generate a living is by brand Partnerships and this is what became very difficult is that brands wanted to just gift free product. They actually really didn't want to pay like influencers and creators. But when you're a full time influencer and creator and your only source of revenue is by getting it from brands, it makes sense to in your piece of content be wearing alo. Even if the post isn't about alo. Because at least one, it's a brand you're aligned with and two, you're able to generate income for the content. You're putting a lot of time into editing, shooting, planning and piecing a piece of this villain that needs to be addressed is meta makes so much money off of the platform and the ad network that it's kind of forced people who are spending their like lives creating content to have to receive income from brands and then be creative in the way in which they create content to connect with their audience.

[Philip Miller]

We could even get intellectual in this discussion because when you ask young people what their number one career aspiration, it's YouTuber or influencer. Totally right. But is that an informed decision? Do they know what it takes to get there? Because if you want to have a great career generally it takes 10 years to really realize the fruits of your labor. Yeah, too many people want is they think they could just do two years of like whatever, become an influencer and make tons of money. Like so it's kind of greed will always result in the destruction of wealth at the end of it. And so I think there's too many people who think that being an influencer is, is a way to make money. They don't really understand how to make money. Like you can, you can build influence by being real, by being interesting, by being entertaining or creative. But then you lose your value if you then just sell your, your platform for brands. So it's not a long term goal. A lot of people are thinking short term and I think a lot of these influencers are going to crash because in the end consumers are going to liven up.

[Kalu Moore]

Well, you're not the reason. What makes this entire thing so complicated is that one, obviously it makes sense for children to or to. Yeah for young people to desire to be an influencer or a YouTuber. Like it just sounds like the best job. Like you get to travel all over the world, people send you free product, you have presents showing up at your house every day that you get to like unbox. And it just, it's celebrity, it's attention, it's gluttony, it's everything to do with gluttony, right? It's celebrity. The only issue with it is that the people who can then afford to become a content creator and to, like, do it right come from very wealthy homes because they basically, like, don't have to work and they can just, like, create content and for.

[Philip Miller]

Can pay for production, can pay for.

[Kalu Moore]

Production assistance and, like, not need to take money from brands. And then the issue is that those people tend to scale and grow because they have, like, glamorous lives. Like what they're able to shoot when they're shooting in their kitchen, it's not an average kitchen, it's like a crazy big kitchen. And then the issue becomes the only people that you're seeing online and kind of goes back to that, like, influencer celebrity. And the person that was better was more like, was more relatable. And then the question becomes like, if I genuinely bought that snack box on Amazon and I linked it in my story as a regular person and I get commission off of that link, is that a problem? If I'm sharing the link to 25,000 people that follow me, I paid for it myself. It's truly the one that I like. And then I get commission off of recommending it. Is that a problem? But if you don't indicate hashtag paid or hashtag ad, you are now in hot water.

[Philip Miller]

And you know what I would do as a lawyer, like, from my legal background is I wouldn't put the hashtag on the post. I would just, in the post talk about it. Hey, look, they sent me this, they asked me to do, they paid me to do an assessment of it. They paid me. I'm not gonna corrupt my opinion of it. I'm going to tell you if I like it or not. Like, just be, just be authentic in what you're doing in your content. I think that's fine. If the hashtag results in the algorithm not putting it legally, you're protected. If in your post you're actually being honest about what's happening and you bring.

[Kalu Moore]

Up a great point. The only other caveat to consider with this is a lot of the way that the negotiation works is that you put forward a brief and a concept for the brand to approve. And the biggest issue that a lot of influencers face is that they will actually get quite creative in their approach to doing content so that the post actually, like, does better and performs. But the person that sits in the, like, the lowest rung influencer partnership seat that's managing it has zero creativity, is like half slow and doesn't like, doesn't allow for the innovative. They're like, no, you know, we just kind of want you to, like, hold it and post about it. And then, yeah, you can just put like, hashtag paid in the caption. And then the issue is that, and this is with a lot of the top influencers I speak to, is they're professional creators. Like, they really want to show up and do things not only for the brand to do well, but for their own community. Like, they want every piece to be, like, interesting, engaging, even if it's an ad.

[Philip Miller]

This is where juvenile thinking it's like, oh, I put paid, so I'm getting 40% less. Well, that's the rules of the game. Be 40% more creative.

[Kalu Moore]

But they can't because of the brand.

[Philip Miller]

No, no, but okay, but that's the issue, right? That's the issue. The issue is realize that you're gonna get less engagement when it says hashtag paid.

[Kalu Moore]

Well, the reason why this lawsuit is so interesting is because it now forces brands to change. And that's been the issue, is that a lot of brands have wanted to gift for free in order to curb this entirely, which isn't fair to the influencer or the creator, because the only way that they can make money is through partnerships. So big brand, big businesses.

[Philip Miller]

Well, there's other ways to make money. It' they. They want to make money in a certain way. Right?

[Kalu Moore]

But that's their prerogative, like if they've built up a million dollars.

[Philip Miller]

But their only way to make money is not by cheating.

[Kalu Moore]

No, no, I'm not saying that they're cheating. I'm saying. Let me break this down. Let me finish what I'm saying. The number one issue is that brands, and we've seen through the brands that we've worked with, they think it's an honor to give someone free product. Like, they just, they don't want to pay anybody to do create content for them. They just want them to, like, create it for them out of the goodness of their heart because they sent them a few pairs of leggings. And that has to change because the alternative is brands are trying to be sneaky so that they don't have to actually do the work, which is work with creators to create influential strategic campaigns that move the needles that were within the rules laid out by the government. That is the law.

[Philip Miller]

You know, there's a phrase, pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered. So, you know, for the small business owners, the medium business owners there, like, you need to be. You need to be dynamic to be able to break into your markets. The top people who have a monopoly, as we talked about earlier, they can afford sometimes these fees or the settlement. They make a cost benefit analysis whether or not they want to continue doing it and pay it off. For a billion dollar company like Alo.

[Kalu Moore]

Well, that's the arbitrage, right? It's like the, the fear of the fee is 150 million. When they make over a billion per.

[Philip Miller]

Year, it can ruin their brand. But what I wanted to share with people, to me it's ruined the brand. I'll never, I just won't buy Aloe anymore. Like I won't buy a product that has to secretly pay somebody to pretend that they like it. Never. Integrity is critical in personal brand. And if you just think that you can trade your integrity for revenue, you're going to live a short lifespan and people aren't going to believe in you. And what I wanted to believe in about Aloe is that it was kind of a replacement for Lululemon as a brand that was true to its claims. When I see this lawsuit, I, I have no faith in Aloe that any of its claims are true. We're going to talk about that later. But the last point I want to make on it was just for people who are indemnification clauses. I just want to share. This is like a public service announcement. Whenever you're doing a contract like this and you're the person with less power, always ask for an indemnification clause. So if a big brand comes and asks you to do something for them, two influencers put in an indemnification clause which means that the big company will indemnify you against a lawsuit. So these 14 to 15 influencers have been sued in the Allo lawsuit. They probably don't have an indemnification clause so they can be liable for some amount of this $150 million. So I would just say make sure. I don't think a lot of people in this space have good legal advice. They need to get it and understand what they're exposed to as opposed to thinking short term, short term profits.

[Kalu Moore]

Your point on the reason, like why I don't think Alo's brand is actually going to be impacted by this is because the target customer of who they're going after cares more about what's hot in the moment than the longevity of a brand like the Aloe. The true Aloe customer, like the primary customer, cares more about their very social media focused. The reason why Aloe has done so well is because all of the models and the top influencers wear the product. They've made it, like, more stylish, more trendy than Lululemon. Lululemon has really been built and designed, up until, I'd say, recently, to be more like staple pieces you keep for a long time. Right. Their whole idea of you can, like, it has a lifetime warranty and a lifetime guarantee. Aloe's kind of the opposite. Aloe is very much like, get this color of the month, and then it's going to be in a. In a value village pile in, you know, three months. Like, they're more trendy styles focused on, like, who's the model of the moment. It's honestly kind of like premium sheen. So I don't think it's going to be hurt by this, because the core person that is buying it is only buying it because someone on Instagram told them that it was cool.

[Philip Miller]

I think you're breaching your own principles of branding.

[Kalu Moore]

I don't think Alo has a great.

[Philip Miller]

Brand in that brands take a long time to build. It's kind of like it takes, you know, years to build a brand and months to destroy one.

[Kalu Moore]

But I think that they started to destroy it a long time ago. Like, them going public, you go into their store, they have no good anymore. They have, like, 300 SKUs. It's overwhelming. You don't really know what their brand represents anymore. I don't think they have a great brand. And I think because they're riding out the valuation.

[Philip Miller]

That's the public company. That's the public company. The pressure for quarterly profits. Like, I'm looking for brands where I go into a store and I'm not overwhelmed by a thousand pieces. It just has amazing pieces that. That I know are good.

[Kalu Moore]

Aloe is another brand where you're actually buying it for the brand and not the product. Like, just purely the logo. Like, I don't love their leggings. They're, like, sweaty. They're thick. Like, they're just. Everything about it is, like, for it to be a fashion show, like, for you to get a photo for Instagram. It's not the best workout clothes.

[Philip Miller]

It's. I'm just thinking about the American Apparel documentary we watched.

[Kalu Moore]

Okay, we have to talk about that.

[Philip Miller]

Because it seems like there's an interesting angle in. In clothing.

[Kalu Moore]

Here's my controversial take on the American Apparel documentary. It was truly a documentary of nothingness. And hear me out. Everything about the brand's promise, positioning, and statement is that it was hypersexualized very weird and like on the fringes of society. And nothing in the documentary seemed inauthentic to how the brand is presenting themselves. Like every single ad is half naked women in sexualized positions. Employees are living at the house. He's has like multiple consensual relationships with employees and girlfriends. To be in that. In that culture and community is to not be shocked by the way in which it led the brand.

[Philip Miller]

You're talking about the people who are on the documentary. It. I'm not sure I would recommend it to people to watch the whole thing. We ended up fast forwarding through it because essentially, essentially what they did is they found three ex employees, a scandal that was in American Apparel, and then just dragged out three employees telling their story who weren't really. You were led to believe they were high up in the company, but you don't because there were some clips of them. But what I thought was most interesting about American Apparel is yes, it was sexualized, but their models were real people. I love that they weren't wearing makeup, that they were actually just taken right out. Like that was kind of an authentic nature to. I think that's what attracted people to it. It wasn't overdone filters. It was just real people being sexual in their own way. I thought that was cool. And they called it American Apparel and they made their clothes in America, which I thought was cool, you know, but there was a lot. And it's a Canadian in LA making American Apparel. There's just a lot of stuff going on there that was attractive to these hipsters. And the pieces weren't even that interesting, right?

[Kalu Moore]

No, I mean, I lived through the American Apparel craze, like huge. Cause I was in high school and my good friend's older sister ended up being a photographer for American Apparel. It was a really big deal because the way that is exactly what they did in the documentary you shot in the store. So you did casting calls. And this is the age of Abercrombie, which was doing the exact same thing. Right. Their employees were their models and they would do casting calls in their stores. And it made you feel like you're a part of something bigger to work for their culture because it was. It was ingrained in like you were one of them to work there. And that's why it was such a big deal to work at American Apparel or Abercrombie. And I remember my. My friend whose older sister is a photographer, she got a job at American Apparel and it was like such an honor. We'd go and visit her after school. And it was like, in the bottom, in the subway. And it was. But the thing about American Apparel is that it didn't really make sense. It almost felt like a costume store. Like, you were kind of forced to, like, make outfits out of weird pieces. It wasn't like a. It wasn't a fully functional, like, clothing store. And then they had random jewelry that was, like, at the front, like this calculator watch. And I just. I remember feeling like it's such a great study of nobody really knows what's going on, but, like, because everybody else is interested in it, like, it's cool. And it was like, nobody really got it.

[Philip Miller]

That's the hipster thing is you wear your sweater backwards and everybody thinks that's.

[Kalu Moore]

The cool new train, and then everyone starts wearing it. It was like that study of, like, when if everybody says one thing and you, like, are the outlier, you, like, go with that one thing. And I remember never really liking the patterns or the clothes or the colors. And they never really looked good on anybody. Like, the Justin Bieber Bieber purple was, like, not nice. But then we were all buying these hoodies. It was just.

[Philip Miller]

That study is interesting for people who are branding as. I can't remember the university, but one person was the subject of the study. Nine people were part of it.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah.

[Philip Miller]

And they would show a picture of, like, what circle is bigger? And 9 of the people would pick the smaller one. And it was like 6 out of 10 people or 4 out of 10 people would just go with the group, even though they knew it wasn't true. Like, and it shows how humans can be herded into. Into doing things they don't believe in.

[Kalu Moore]

The other piece, though, that I want to add to the American Apparel documentary is that I think it needs to be said that I'm sick of watching these, like, or hearing these statements of a job you didn't deserve to have by zero credentials and then complaining that the environment was less than perfect. Like, it just. These people were literally saying they showed up for, like, a base level job interview. So someone at a table asked them what they wanted to do with the company. They said maybe merchandising, which is like setting up the mannequins. And they put them as, like, in charge of district merchandising for the state of California. And they had zero credentials or background.

[Philip Miller]

They essentially get three people and they make it, like, kind of, oh, my God. We ultimately were victims. We were taken advantage of. But your point is, if you show up for a job Wanting to be a cashier and they make you director of marketing because you're cool looking, you're probably in a dysfunctional space.

[Kalu Moore]

It's a red flag.

[Philip Miller]

So, you know, like you're getting something you didn't deserve. And then if you stay there for a year, don't in the end do a documentary and say, oh my God, we were so mistreated. Like, you know, you took advantage of an early jump up a thing and then in the end criticized the place for being dysfunctional. You know, I thought it was really astute point.

[Kalu Moore]

It just, I just, to me, that is not tv. Like, if you're, if you're being, if you're showing up for a job that you don't deserve and you get an insane, insane credential bump and then it ends up being a dysfunctional space or.

[Philip Miller]

Or a Ponzi scheme. Like, that's usually what happens, you know, in the Wolf of Water.

[Kalu Moore]

Oh my God. I was taken advantage of.

[Philip Miller]

No, you, you enjoyed your.

[Kalu Moore]

That's why you are not being hired for head of merchandising at Google. Like, it. Because it was a dysfunctional company, but everything about the company and the branding and the photo shoots was dysfunctional. Like, to me, this isn't a case of like the owner of Abercrombie being like a, like a secret child rapist and pedophile and like having this crazy.

[Philip Miller]

Just say because we don't know for sure it's alleged.

[Kalu Moore]

Like to me, when you watch a documentary like that, you're like, holy, this is stressful. But like the American Apparel one, like, the guy was a weirdo. Like, it just, it like, and there was no hiding it. Like, he's walking into stores and being like, you're a model, Take off your shirt, we're gonna take a photo. And the girl's like, okay.

[Philip Miller]

Like, I actually think what should come back in style are those kind of Adidas green jockey underpants. He was walking around, oh my gosh. Like those, those things are going to.

[Kalu Moore]

Learn, but also like, accept it for what it is. I just, I'm, I'm not, I'm not advocating for abuse in the workplace, but.

[Philip Miller]

I just like, thanks for that quality.

[Kalu Moore]

I know. I just, I feel like it's coming for me, but I just. To me, that documentary was a waste of space. Okay, so moving on to the next one, let's talk about clear protein. Clear protein. Man, this one is a tough one, but I think it's very important to discuss it. And it's tough because it makes me Sad when I really respect business owners and a brand and how they do things. But I'm finding more and more the brands that are really killing it on social understand the power of deception and kind of use it as like it's like signaling the noise, right? Like they're just, they're so good at putting together vibe, aesthetic and swipe through. And that's actually what hurts the well intentioned business owner is that they care so much about their product that they can't deceive their customer. But they also can't get critical mass.

[Philip Miller]

No, but that's the long game versus the short game, right? Like the long game. As we say, you build a reputation over a decade, right. You can ruin it quickly, but there's such a pressure to sell and that's especially when they go public and they have quarterly returns and everybody's compensation is based on quarterly revenue. The pressure of these big brands to do whatever it takes to sell more. And what you're going to talk about, clear protein is fascinating, but it's not new because you see it when you're buying something like when you're buying butter and it says no sugar added and.

[Kalu Moore]

They never had no sugar or like it's gluten free and it's always been gluten free.

[Philip Miller]

There's no way there would be gluten in it. Right. It's just ways to try and kind of try and trick people to buy your stuff. But the clear protein, I think they.

[Kalu Moore]

May be, to me it's different.

[Philip Miller]

They're hurting their brand.

[Kalu Moore]

To me it's different. So the clear protein story is if you don't know who array is, they're kind of like a vitamin brand. They're a vitamin brand that's growing into different consumable SKUs. And the latest product they dropped is clear protein. And their whole marketing play was we wanted to get into the protein space, but we wanted to do it different because the protein space is very saturated and if you were going to do it, we had to do it right. The whole idea is it speaks to the current trend that women need way more protein. And the best way to consume more protein is not just drinking more protein, Shakespeare. It's adding this almost like electrolyte powder to your water. And it's like more water soluble. So it's like, tastes kind of more like an element, like an electrolyte drink than it does a protein shake or smoothie. And the whole, the whole marketing of it was brilliant because it was 15 grams of protein. It had collagen in it and had electrolytes in it. So it's kind of like your all in one drink. And we're working on a protein brand right now. So I went and ordered it as a way to like test it, to try it out and. And I was really excited to receive the product because the messaging was so well done. The website was so well done.

[Philip Miller]

Packaging is great.

[Kalu Moore]

The packaging is great and I really respect this brand. So I'm going to meet a client of ours and who we're working on with this protein stuff. And she's also a good friend and she also. I bought it and she kind of comes to me a bit deflated and she's like, have you seen the comments? Have you seen what's going on? And she goes on to explain to me that their number one ingredient and pretty much their only ingredient is collagen, which is a. It is not a complete protein. It doesn't break down in the body as a complete protein. So. And there's a bunch of dietitians and nutritionists commenting and being like, you basically are only getting maybe 3 grams of protein. And the last ingredient is whey. Whey doesn't taste very good and whey doesn't break down in water the same way. So they've got.

[Philip Miller]

I put a minimal way to give the three grams, fill it with collagen and say 20 grams of protein.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah. And it says 15 grams of protein. And there's really like no protein in it. And so I want to break down why I'm not happy with this. Because one, I feel duped as a customer. I feel dumb and I'm embarrassed that I spent money on kind of buying something because I kind of tout myself as an informed consumer. And that's what really, what this breaks down is Array's consumer is an informed consumer.

[Philip Miller]

What I think is interesting is you feel duped, but it's because Array had built trust with you.

[Kalu Moore]

Yes.

[Philip Miller]

Right. And so you felt like everybody comes out with something, you can, you can buy it without doing the kind of research investigation used to. They had built trust.

[Kalu Moore]

Even the video that's smack on their website and they put on socials and they collab with is like, we wanted to do protein differently. Like, we spent a lot of time building this and researching this. Like, how. How can you say that? When I'm spending, it's 20 sticks in a box, I'm spending, like, what does that math make? Like eight bucks a stick.

[Philip Miller]

And that's ridiculous.

[Kalu Moore]

And it's for three grams of Protein.

[Philip Miller]

No. And what's, what I think is this is where I want to hold those corporate boardrooms responsible. Like, the person who made that call in that company should be fired. But what happens is people don't get fired because it's nefarious in that women are being told all over the place they need more protein. And so people with limited budgets would say, oh, you know, area has given me this clear thing. I can get protein from this. Right. Thinking that they're meeting their dietary and health needs to be healthier, spending a large amount of money on it and not getting what they, they need.

[Kalu Moore]

It's wrong to do it, period. Yeah, it's. It's wrong to do it, period. It's doesn't provide you longevity in the market to make decisions like that. Especially when you're doing so much for a personal brand. You're so public, you're so vocal, you've built so much trust and credibility with your customer base. But more than that, it's a massive brand error because it doesn't connect with. And that's why I talk so much about brand pillars. It doesn't align with their brand pillars because their customer is an educated and informed, highly researched individual that spends a lot of time on social media, consumes a lot of comments, and it is going to watch videos from people like myself or other, like creators, influencers, who are going to, to say this and it's going to erode the brand trust for the community. And it really only takes one move like this where I probably will never buy another product again from them because I now no longer trust them.

[Philip Miller]

We've been hired from time to time to help brands fix it. Like if I was the CEO or advising the CEO, I'd say you need to take action today.

[Kalu Moore]

That's what I'm saying in the video. I'm going to.

[Philip Miller]

You need to make a public statement, apologize, change the price or explain it better. Right. But thinking about earlier, what we were talking about, if there's a US litigator that wants to get into this action, that seems like deceptive advertising to me.

[Kalu Moore]

Major.

[Philip Miller]

Right. And if aloe just got hit with $150 million lawsuit, I think they could. If they're saying 15 grams of protein and they know that it's not the protein that people think it is, but.

[Kalu Moore]

That'S why it's sneaky. So they're not mismarketing it. It's 15 grams of protein, but your stomach doesn't break down the entire protein.

[Philip Miller]

So because it's wrapped in Collagen.

[Kalu Moore]

Because the protein source is collagen. Protein.

[Philip Miller]

Yeah. Which means. So not all proteins are the same, I guess, but you know what I mean, like if it's not the protein people need anyhow, it's an interesting thing to look at.

[Kalu Moore]

It's just, it's not. That's what makes us actually extra sneaky. And why I dislike the brand more because they made this move is that nothing that they put on the box is inaccurate. It's that it's not the best product for their community based on what their message is because their community member is an educated and informed person. Like this is someone that's prepared to spend $8 a stick to put yuzu raspberry in their cup of water to get 15 extra grams of protein when they're done their 45 Pilates class. Like that is their customer. Now the issue is that how many rebuys is that customer going to make? Probably not more than two or three because they're effectively, they're not going to get any benefit when they're. If they're tracking their protein. Which is why especially them launching it during summer like this is a whole like summer body play. Like it's after their creatine gummies. Now the other piece so I want to put to this is it's exactly what you're saying. To me, this move signals they're trying to get acquired, they're trying to put big numbers on the board. They've got crazy sales. I have a membership with Particle that allows you to track inventory. They have something like 425 million sales today. It makes me nuts. And they make a ton of money. And this product probably puts them into the like billion dollar valuation category and they're getting prepped to sell their business and they no longer care about their brand relationship with their customers. And to me that's something that needs to be called out because if the entire sister, the entire populace, if all that we are is a guinea pig for, for a handful of people to get rich. That's when the pitchforks start coming out and it's. We're seeing way too much of it. And the problem is the reason why personal brands and founder led brands have been all the rage is that it was something that we could trust more. It's something that we could connect to more so that stuff like this we could feel like we were navigating wasn't happening. And when stuff like this starts happening with those who invested in strong personal brands is when it kills it for everybody.

[Philip Miller]

You know what the problem is with what you just said, nobody uses pitchforks anymore, so the yoga mats will come out, but it's a little harder to kind of scare the elite with yoga mats, you know what I mean? As opposed to pitchforks.

[Kalu Moore]

Ah, you're so funny.

[Philip Miller]

Let's move on.

[Kalu Moore]

All right, let's move on. So let's talk about Aesop. So last week I went into an Aesop store in Yorkville.

[Philip Miller]

Can I just give a legal disclaimer? Camille has decided to push the boundaries today, not be scared to say exactly what she thinks and be true to her listeners.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah, I mean, I feel like I'm showing up pretty authentic these days. This one's a tough one. This one's a tough one and I really want people to listen to the end. So I walked into an Aesop store in Yorkville and Toronto.

[Philip Miller]

In Toronto, like kind of Rodeo.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah, Rodeo Drive, 5th Ave. Like our kind of high end shopping area. And I had happened to be going in to get some hand soap and I had a gift card and I'd met the manager a few weeks before and she was lovely and I, I'm. She had kind of told me about this event was happening but like again, I didn't really know what it meant, so. But I didn't put two and two together. Anyways, I go into the store and the entire store has been overrun by becoming a queer library. So all of the product, like I'm not over exaggerating. I should have taken a fricking photo or video. I was just like, this is overwhelming. Every single product was taken off the shelves and replaced with a hand selection of books from queer authors.

[Philip Miller]

And that's what they called it. Queer Authors.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah, Queer Authors. It was called the Queer library. And all of the employees had to become that day guides to help people who've come in for the queer library pop up select queer reads for them. So they, instead of becoming like sales associates or like showing up for their job that they're being paid for, they were needing to guide people coming in into which of the queer options would be best for them. And I came in like, hey, like, can I get some hand soap?

[Philip Miller]

Well, first you have to read six pages.

[Kalu Moore]

And they're like, oh, hi. The best part is actually the person who helped me, she actually recognized me from content. She's like, hey, you're the girl on Instagram. And I'm like, yeah, that's me. Not a good day for it though. Can we, can you hand me. I need some hand soap. I want the One that like, has like, blah, blah. And anyways, she had to go to three different associates because they couldn't even find where they put their inventory for their store during regular work hours because of them taking over this whole queer library. And basically I end up checking out. And then a part of their, like, checkout process is that they try to push like, one of the books on you. And I said, no, thank you. And they asked if I wanted a queer library bookmark. And I said thank you. But then I kind of regretted it afterwards because I flipped it over and it was like. It was like this whole statement of like, basically, I'm not welcome. Like, it was a really. It was. The whole thing was like super uncomfortable.

[Philip Miller]

Yeah.

[Kalu Moore]

And I wanted to talk about it because the way that these events are designed is for you to not be able to question them and for you to not be able to have a brand conversation. But I felt very much as an Aesop customer, a regular Aesop customer, that the brand isn't openly pride adjacent. I have no issue with the brand being like, connected with pride or maybe providing a pride story. But the way in which they executed this pop up had no alignment with the brand, had no communication with the brand, and I think will greatly impact the brand of making continued decisions like that to forego being a store and being focused on selling hand soap for doing something completely different and very niche and. And also misaligned with the area in which the store is placed. Like, it's not like they're placed at like Church and Jarvis, which is like the gay part of town. Like, it just. Everything about the experience felt off brand.

[Philip Miller]

I love Aesop for the Ansel. I love Aesop and I like their product and I like the way that they're. The vibe of their store where it seems like it's like, like it's like a pharmacy, but it's like a pharmacy, Japanese pharmacy, like, with a cool almost butchers, but, you know, like actually kind of more kind of a chemist.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah.

[Philip Miller]

You know, there's like a. You know what I mean? But it was. It's clean, it's pure, it's chemist. And it had like, I, I liked going into that store with the hand washing. Like, it. Even. The hand washing even has like a little bit of a Jesus element to it. Right. Where you can do it. Like, it created a vibe that I get. And my question is one, does brand headquarters know that this store did it because you create brand dissonance? Because I don't want to go into that store and Be subject to compelled thought. And when you overwhelm the whole store with just one thing and it's kind of being forced on you, to me, it becomes like you're kind of compelled to accept everything. And there are some people who are religious in that neighborhood. There's many totally very religious Jews.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah.

[Philip Miller]

And it doesn't mean that they don't like it or not, but it might not be in their comfort level. So what you have is kind of. It seems like one person or somebody deciding to compel thought at their customers. And that hurts the brand. Because what we've seen in society is what's called social desirability bias. That means people don't want to offend each other. They'll go in and just nod their head. But you don't know how many customers you lose because of that. When your brand does that, especially when.

[Kalu Moore]

You take, like, this is the most extreme stance that it could have taken. When you truly take your inventory off the shelves. Right. Like, it wasn't like.

[Philip Miller]

No. Your brand has become a thought police.

[Kalu Moore]

Yes. It was massive brand dissonance because it just. Not for nothing, the books were, like, aggressive.

[Philip Miller]

No. Yeah. When it says queer library, I think when they put queer, it means that it's going to be very intentionally sexual.

[Kalu Moore]

Not only even sexual, but it was also very much like, society has wronged me. Like. Like I should be shamed into consuming this book. Which not for. That's a lot when you're buying hand soap. It was a Tuesday afternoon and I was like, whoa. Like, okay. And. And that's. You know what. What you said is actually perfect. Is the reason why it didn't sit correctly for me. It has. It has nothing to do with Pride Month or lgbtq. It's that I can't express that I felt like that moment is off brand without being pegged as part of the.

[Philip Miller]

Problem, as being a bad person without.

[Kalu Moore]

Being a bad person. And.

[Philip Miller]

And you don't want to. You don't want to feel like that. So you don't go back.

[Kalu Moore]

I don't want to feel like that. And I also haven't shut it down early. Like, close the store at 5pm like, not for nothing. Everyone that gate went to the store was not Aesop customers. Like, they weren't also being like, hey, love this book. Can I get a soap? Can I get a cream? Like, there was nothing tied to the sales or the brand or the reason why Aesop exists. And it could be a really great community activation after hours because I left there feeling like I can never give feedback to that brand or that store. And Aesop at the HQ will never know that that experience happened. And I might go and buy my soap somewhere else. And you know what? We got a lot of bathrooms, so.

[Philip Miller]

Well, kudos to you for saying it like it is because I think people need more of that.

[Kalu Moore]

I'm always going to keep it real on the art of the brand and move on to Amazon.

[Philip Miller]

So a friend of mine sent me this video and I try to get information from any source, far left, far right, wherever. I think it's interesting, but Tucker Carlson did an interview and it's interesting in terms of how his media or that media is working with a person who's been on a bunch of documentaries about how Amazon's selling platform punishes vendors. And what was interesting is that. But Tucker is also an investor, an alternative to Amazon. And the theme of the piece was how Amazon, through its monopolization of the whole market, really essentially dictates to sellers how they do business. And so I thought we would talk about it today.

[Kalu Moore]

It's actually an interesting discussion to have because what makes Amazon great is that it's ruthless, right? Like, what makes Amazon fantastic is that they're so fixated on the customer having a fantastic experience and a fantastic price point. It's the easiest platform in the world to buy and receive and that's why they have the stats to back it up. It's something like 89% of searches for, like, purchasing happen first on Amazon. Now in order to get that level of monopolization, it requires a level of brainwashing to the populace because it has to just become so easy. Like, and that was Jeff Bezos's whole mantra, is that people are always going to want the lowest price, they're always going to want the less friction, the easiest option, and they're always going to want to be able to return things without a hassle. And like now, it's not environmental, it's not, you know, it doesn't help the other businesses, but it's very pro consumer.

[Philip Miller]

So what the essence of the story is, and this is how Amazon does things, is they control how you price and they charge the most. So let's say I'm selling a ball of vitamins and ebay, Walmart and Amazon. If I go on to Amazon, where most of the sales are, I have to sign a contract saying I cannot price my product cheaper anywhere else, whether on my own website or there. So Amazon has to be equal to the lowest price. You also have to sign a contract that you will never say anything bad about Amazon. So you can't really report on the Amazon practices once your business becomes dependent on Amazon sales. And so once you get into Amazon and become dependent on the sales, they start to increase the cost to you. And this is kind of the bait and switch, or they bring you in and the costs aren't that. The costs aren't that high early. But then once your businesses become dependent on Amazon sales, all of a sudden they throw on extra fees, extra inventory holding fees, extra this. And in this example, the company was selling something on Amazon for 15 bucks and it started off with just a 15% commission went to Amazon. That seems fair, right? But in the end, after doing business for five years, where now 90% of their sales come from Amazon, they only get 750 from that $15 because of all of these extra costs. And ebay charges way less and Walmart charges way less. But they can't move. And so if they try to increase their price because Amazon puts all of these extra fees on them and they want to increase it on Amazon because to keep their margins, they can't do it. And if they do increase their price, what they do is, and this is crazy if you've ever seen it, they removed the Buy now button so the actual algorithm will remove. And I've been on a couple products where I've wanted to buy it. I've seen a review, I've clicked on it and I'm like, where do I buy it? It's not there. So that button right there. And they can actually change the size based on how obedient you are. And so there. It's kind of this hidden secret that Amazon sellers have to deal with is that the Buy now button gets bigger or smaller or disappears based on how obedient they're being with Amazon. And it's interesting that this hasn't become a giant lawsuit, but I thought, how unfair is it to bring people in, make them dependent on their sales, and then be able to take away their profits without them being able to do anything else, or else they go bankrupt.

[Kalu Moore]

Well, the issue is that Amazon has that arbitration clause. So there's been tons of lawsuits against Amazon, but they, they make them all go to arbitration. So it's like you can't do the class action lawsuit.

[Philip Miller]

And most people do not know about arbitration clauses and how bad they are in terms of how they take away your rights. We talked about Disney and that arbitration clause. But what I think is interesting when we're advising business people like the paypal Mafia have made the most successful businesses in the last two decades, the most money. And their philosophy is not go where there's lots of competition. Their philosophy is build something and get a monopoly on it as soon as possible. Because, and Peter Thiel said this many times, whether you like them or not, politically, he says build a monopoly. And that is the fastest way to create wealth.

[Kalu Moore]

Well, that's why I recommend the play Bigger Book. Because the whole concept is you need to be focused on owning, becoming a category killer, killer, which is 76% of the market. If you can't own 70, 76 of your market, you're constantly fighting for the remainder and you're never going to make it through. So that's why that. Where that whole concept comes from is like, in order to do it well, you got to do it big. But the only thing that's complicated about this is as shitty and as unfair as it is. Amazon wouldn't be what Amazon is if we had to go and check out three other retailers and a website. And it wasn't the best price and it wasn't the easiest. Like, what's made Amazon so easy is that I can want to place an order for a air fryer. It's the same price on Amazon that it is on Canadian Tire, but on Amazon, I get it the next day, whereas Canadian Tire, I wait four to five business days.

[Philip Miller]

But the interesting thing, I've often thought, like, how am I getting free shipping on something that costs 499? Right. Like with Amazon Prime. And in the end, what we realize is that as consumers, we're benefiting from free shipping because they're screwing their sellers after the sellers have become dependent on the platform. So it's actually a brilliant model. Bring the sellers in, make them dependent on all of their sales coming from Amazon, and then hit them with the fees that take away all their profitability.

[Kalu Moore]

Same models as Uber. It's the same model as an Airbnb.

[Philip Miller]

Yeah, it's really interesting, like how much, how much the providers end up giving to the kind of. And the corporation could still be profitable, but once it becomes public and shareholders want bigger returns and bigger returns, they just screw the kind of people who are, who are.

[Kalu Moore]

The only thing, though that's also worth adding, though, is the free shipping comes when you pay for the prime membership, and that's the Costco model. So it's like, it's nothing. The prime membership, it's like 120 bucks a year. It's actually not cheap, but that's nothing. Yeah, but if you have millions and millions and millions of people paying that.

[Philip Miller]

But you're taking a product, putting it in a van and driving it to your doorstep, that costs eight bucks.

[Kalu Moore]

The only thing that they did well, which is like similar to Uber, is like they have very good like map tracking software. So like, because there's so many people that are on Amazon, the car, the way that the trucks are rooted is the most energy and gas efficient. So like they're, and they also, what they did too is the people who drive the trucks, they're independent contractors. So like they all own their independent like van delivery services and Amazon just outsourced them. So they're not employees of Amazon, they're just contractors and they get paid fees for delivering and dropping off. Not everywhere. Like there are major cities in the United States, States that actually have like dedicated, like almost like FedEx but like Amazon drivers, the Amazon trucks. But in many of the cities in Canada and, and in the US that aren't the major cities, they're independent contractors.

[Philip Miller]

What I thought was interesting is how Tucker Carlson was using a show to interview this person who is doing an expose on Amazon's practices. But at the same time, and it goes back to our lawsuit said he goes. And just so all of my listeners know, I'm an investor in this company in the US that is giving small sellers an opportunity to sell across North America for a flat fee commission. So, so trying to give another alternative.

[Kalu Moore]

But it's so smart because who's going to, who's going to flock to watching that video the most? Those who can't express public frustration with the brand. So the algorithm, because they're complaining so much at home to their wives and husbands, etc. They're, the algorithm is going to show them that video. So you're going to have so many disgruntled people that know an Amazon seller or are an AMAZ seller and that's such a perfect way to get more of them. But I think the only way that Amazon is going to, it has to be like an antitrust movement. Like the government has to come in and regulate or standardize because even with how much money they have, ebay and.

[Philip Miller]

Walmart should get together and bring this with their resources because otherwise it's very hard. Like Walmart is actually doing its best to be competitive.

[Kalu Moore]

The issue though is ebay is such a poorly managed company. It's. Walmart is not an expert on the digital side.

[Philip Miller]

They're trying to be.

[Kalu Moore]

They're trying to be, but that's the issue is that we actually probably need someone more like an Elon Musk, a Peter Thiel or Teal won't do it.

[Philip Miller]

Teal will just invest in it.

[Kalu Moore]

Zuckerberg.

[Philip Miller]

Those people have all created, but they've all created monopolies. So they only invest in monopolies because they're profitable. But what I would say to our listeners from a business perspective, what I'm doing, some coaching, is the lesson learned is never rely on one platform for 90% of your business or one customer, 80%. Like, if you look at your customer base and 80% of it comes from just one or two locations, in order to protect yourself, you have to start planning to diversify because you never know what will happen three months from now in today's society. Right. And if you're 95% dependent on Amazon, they essentially own you. So always have plans to create revenue from other places.

[Kalu Moore]

Totally. Let's wrap up. So the last, the last thing I want to talk about is a trend that I'm noticing on socials, and I feel like it's worth expressing as we're going through the motions of learning a lot of talk about how much content you should post per day. And there's one camp that talks about, you know, anywhere from three to eight pieces per day. And then there's another camp that talks about, like, you really only need to do two or three. And what I'm noticing is that there's different stages based on when your page hits different milestones and when you're in the growth phase, when you don't have tons of followers, you don't have tons of awareness, you haven't had a ton of viral hits. The best thing that you can do is post quality multiple times per day. So it's like to post anywhere from, as I'm saying, let's say three to eight posts per day. And that can be different, like, different formats. That could be like, if you did a podcast, getting 10 different clips from a podcast, that can be some iPhone content, that can be some, like, testimonial content, like, you can shake it up so that it's not eight pieces of content of, like, the same shit. But then once your page gets to a point where you've really built a community and people are really seeing and viewing your content for thought leadership. Every post matters and it matters more. And that's when you can drop down to, I wouldn't say more than three posts per day at minimum. One post per day. Like, you have to be doing at least a post per day. But of quality content. And because once you have that community and tribe, all the algorithm is focused on is keeping people on the app longer so they're more inclined now to share your content. And that has been a big change because about six months ago, a lot of influencers were complaining that their followers, their community, wasn't seeing their content. And that's when there was this like, spike in push. And it keeps happening, ebbs and flows and ebbs and flows where people were going back to posting a bunch per day. And I'm now noticing through studying the, a lot of top tape pages, they're dropping down now to two or three per day. And because of a shift in the algorithm.

[Philip Miller]

The algorithm is like this mystical thing that I think people are always trying to figure out or guess and, or look backwards in hindsight on what's going to happen in the future. But, but when I look at it, when you want to get followers, I tell people, don't try to get followers for followers sake. It's quality of followers in the end. But if you're posting, a lot more people are going to see you. And if your hooks and intros are amazing, you can get people to listen and follow you. But like, once I follow somebody, I find I get uninterested if I see too many posts because, like, there's lots for me to do and if I see too many posts from the person, it kind of dilutes the person. Like, I think sometimes we want to feel like we're getting a, a valued message by. When somebody pops up, I'm like, oh, I want to hear what they have to say this week. Right? As opposed to when I have my daily. That's why I like that suggestion that we can follow 100 people where we see all of their posts and then click to kind of a public one. Because there's like, I'd love to have 20 people or 50 people who I want to see what they post because it's quality and it's useful. But if you're just posting tons of stuff, you know, you can become overwhelmed with the person you're following's content.

[Kalu Moore]

Somewhat recently, like within the last, as I was saying, six months, you wouldn't see everything people posted.

[Philip Miller]

But, but think of it like, I want to learn from somebody who I follow.

[Kalu Moore]

I get what you're saying, what you're asking.

[Philip Miller]

And if I, and if I swipe through like they're kind of funny shit or whatever, right? But I might miss the content that I want from them. And so how do I get the content which is them sharing their brain power with me when they're social media.

[Kalu Moore]

That was a part of the issue is that because there was such an effort to have more and it was based on interest, doing some of those like funny skit posts are like easier to do and it like added to the number of posts per day and people weren't like seeing all of them. So it was like, it was kind of like a slot machine. Like you're just going to get what is most interesting now the algorithm is going back to if you've expressed interest in that person, you're going to see their content. And then if you're not interested in that content because they're putting out so much of it, you're going to get suppressed by the algorithm, which is a, which is a relevant change. Now to your point on this, like the mysticalness of the algorithm, you're right. The only thing that I would like to piece in for my speculation is it's not that the algorithm is like there's, it's this curtain of oz and there's all these people behind and they're like pulling it and tweaking it. And yes, there are AI algorithm engineers, but it's that all the algorithm cares about is increasing time on app, like time on platform. So if they're seeing attrition across the board or across different platform types because of people's behavior or the like, all the algorithm can control is the content that's put on the platforms. Right. There's so many pieces put on per day. So if there is a, a dip or if there's. They're looking at macro data, less interest, they tweak the way that they try to keep people on the app because ultimately these are advertising, advertising, advertising platforms and all Meta is wanting to do is serve more ads. So if they have a.02 or a 5% regression in people staying longer on the, on the in app, they're going to, the algorithm is going to, through AI is going to slightly learn to tweak and change to keep people on the platform longer.

[Philip Miller]

You know how I compare it and what Instagram can be care like Instagram is more like the inquirer. Right. Where YouTube is more like a good book.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah.

[Philip Miller]

Like if you want good content that's rewarding or whatever. Like you go to a YouTube page of somebody you follow and you watch, you know, Lex Freedman or Joe Rogan or whoever your person is and you get that content weekly delivered or the art of the brand weekly. You can get all of.

[Kalu Moore]

Yeah, deliver. It's exactly what you're asking for.

[Philip Miller]

So you go there to get the deep content. The inquirer, you know, is Instagram where you go there just to be entertained and there's like so much by buffoonery and craziness and hooks and it's like everybody is in a carnival to try to attract your attention and that, that feeds one part of your brain, I would suggest the part of your brain that needs nourishment is what you find kind of on a YouTube channel.

[Kalu Moore]

What's interesting about the difference is if you're looking at building a community over time, I'd be definitely focusing on YouTube. If you're looking for awareness to make sales, it still takes time. It's not like. But that's more Instagram or TikTok. The only piece to note like as a wrap up to this is for the brands that feel like they're struggling and they're wanting to create more content and they're wanting to connect with more people. If you don't have that built up community, if you're sub 20,000, you know, and you just don't feel like you've got that awareness, you do need to post more. And then once you start actually generating, you just need the. But the only goal for posting more is purely for getting better numbers. So you need to be getting at least a viral video per week and viral to whatever standards that you have by your follower count.

[Philip Miller]

And if anybody wants to be better at that, they need to take your social media masterclass. It just. I'm not pumping it just to pump it. It's actually a way to be, to feel a hundred percent more informed about strategy and doing things right. But don't fall victim to comparing follower numbers with people who are doing stupid stuff. Like you want to get followers who matter to you. Yeah, right. Like your followers are business owners and high level marketers. So you know you're not getting followers because you're doing other stuff that can just get 5 million easily. Like so people in their businesses need to figure out what is the success metric. And it's not by the person doing the wacko stuff on Instagram. Yep, totally good discussion there, son.

[Kalu Moore]

Happy to be back for another week of the art of the brand. As always, guys, we've got a July cohort launching, so if you'd like to be a part of our special group of professionals, I would love to have you in the next cohort in July send me a message. On any social media platform, literally, we.

[Philip Miller]

Get in arguments about this because I think it's the best deal in the history of the world for how little it costs to get six weeks of your attention and time to build a brand. And at some point, this argument may be resolved once you quadruple the price. But for now, you'd be foolish not to join that thing, honestly. Amazing.

[Kalu Moore]

And we also have another course that we recorded on personal branding, so we'll have a date deadline for that, which is exciting.

[Philip Miller]

Until next time, I'm Philip Miller, the rogue lawyer.

[Kalu Moore]

I'm Kalu Moore. Have a great night, guys.