ori mizrahi

It's insane how far you can go if you just show up every single day & trust God. All glory to God.

The most expensive ad you'll ever make is the one you love. Founders approve ads for the wrong reasons: - It looks like the brand. - It sounds smart. - It would impress another founder. Your customer doesn't care about any of that. They care about one thing: "is this about my problem?" You're not the customer. The best creative call I make is dropping the version I'd be proudest of and running the one that speaks plainly. I make Meta video ads for 7-8 figure brands. If your ads look great but don't move, DM me.

The biggest misconception in paid social: a high click-through rate means a good ad. It doesn't. It means a good reason to click. An ad can tease a secret, show something shocking, or stay vague on purpose. People tap to find out, land on your page, and leave. You paid for curiosity, not a customer. The ads that make money usually do the opposite. They tell the right person enough up front that the click already means "I want this." Fewer clicks, better ones. So don't just sort by CTR. Look at what the person knew before they tapped, and whether your page keeps that promise. If you want me to look at what your ads are promising, my DMs are open.

When I review an ad, I watch 4 moments. First second: would I stop for this between a friend's story and a meme? Third second: do I know who it's for, or could it be anyone? Middle: is there one moment I'd tell someone about? End: do I know exactly what happens when I tap? Most ads fail one of those, and usually not the one the brand is fixing. Score your last 5 ads against all four before touching the next edit. The weakest moment tells you what to fix first. If you want a second opinion on where yours lose people, my DMs are open.

Think of the last ad you watched all the way to the end. Not one you were paid to watch. One you chose to. What was it, and what kept you past the first 3 seconds? I'd bet the answer is rarely "great production." It's usually "it sounded like me" or "it showed the thing I was already worried about." Drop yours below. If you run a brand, tell me which of your own ads you'd still watch.

A good ad brief fits in three lines. Who it's for. The one problem or desire it speaks to. What the first three seconds show. If you can't write those, the ad isn't ready to shoot. A clear brief means fewer revisions and a faster edit.

Your ad isn't tired. You just stopped making it. A winner isn't one ad. It's an angle that's already proven. Same angle, new hook. Same angle, new opening scene. Same angle, new format. Every variant gets a fresh shot at people who already responded to the idea. Most brands find a winner, run it until it dies, then start from zero. Don't start over. Multiply what's proven.

Your best ad can't rely on sound. Watch your last winner on mute. If the message is still clear, the ad is doing its job. If you need the voiceover to get it, the visual isn't carrying the idea. Fix the first three seconds first. One problem, one promise, shown on screen. If you want a second pair of eyes on your ads, DM me.

One real customer review can become three different ads. 1. The problem they describe → your hook, in their own words. 2. The doubt they had before buying → an ad that answers it directly. 3. What changed for them after → your proof. Same review. Three angles. Each one speaks to a different person who's almost ready to buy. The more your ads sound like your customers, the less they sound like ads. That's how I like to build creative concepts. If you'd like me to do that with your customers' feedback, send me a DM.

The best hooks aren't written. They're collected. Read your reviews. Your support emails. The questions customers ask before they buy. Somewhere in there is the exact sentence your customer already uses to describe their problem. Use that one. It's true, it's specific, and it sounds like them because it came from them.

The product is rarely the hook. The problem is. Nobody scrolls thinking "I hope I see a new serum today." They stop when an ad says something they've already been thinking. Sell the thought first. The product is just what makes it solvable.

People have seen thousands of ads. They've learned to spot the ones that are stretching the truth. The ad that says one true thing, plainly, stands out for that reason alone. Honesty isn't just right. It's a creative advantage.

Before anyone opens an editing app, answer three questions in one sentence each: Who is this for? What do they already believe? What's the one thing that would change their mind? If you can't answer them, better cuts won't help. The editor can only polish what the brief decided.

Your ad isn't failing because the audience is cold. It's failing because the first line could have been said by any brand. Do the logo swap test: put a competitor's logo on your ad. If it still makes sense, you don't have an ad. You have a template. Specific wins. Generic loses.

On Meta, your ad is your targeting. Broad audiences don't mean random audiences. The algorithm finds buyers based on what your ad says and who it sounds like. Talk to everyone and you get nobody. Talk to one specific person with one specific problem and Meta finds ten thousand more like them. Stop tweaking audiences. Fix the message.

Most "bad creative" is a bad brief. "Make it feel premium." "Something fun and fresh." "Like our competitor but better." A good brief fits on a napkin: Who is it for. What do they believe right now. What do they need to believe to buy. The brief also decides the editing. A raw ad should be edited raw and unpolished. A premium brand needs a clean cut. The edit has to fit who you're selling to, not what looks "good." Nail the brief and the editing almost takes care of itself. Skip it and no editor can save you.

When a winning ad dies, most brands just make another ad. Almost nobody asks why the first one worked. Was it the problem it opened with? The person saying it? The proof? The first three seconds? If you can't name the reason, you can't make a second winner. You're just rolling the dice again with a bigger budget. Autopsy before the sequel. That's how I build every batch of ads. I break down your winners first, then make new ones from what actually worked. If you're running Meta ads and your best ad is fading, DM me and I'll tell you what I'd do with it.

Everyone can make an ad in an afternoon now. That's exactly why most ads look identical. Same voice. Same pacing. Same "stop scrolling" opener. When anyone can produce, the thing that stands out is a real point of view: someone who understands the customer and says something a little uncomfortable. Production is cheap. Taste isn't.

Ten versions of the same ad isn't testing. It's repainting. Same idea. Different font. New thumbnail. A slightly shorter intro. Real testing means changing the thing the customer actually reacts to: the problem you lead with, the person who says it, the reason to believe you. Change the angle, not the paint.

When ads stop working, brands usually blame the media buyer. Most of the time, the buyer is fine. They just don't have enough genuinely different ideas to work with. You can't optimize your way out of the same angle running again and again. A great buyer with weak creative is a race car with no fuel.

Your best ad is probably the one you almost didn't run. Too raw. Too simple. Doesn't look "on brand." The polished one gets approved in a day. The ugly one prints money for 3 months. Stop protecting the brand. Start protecting the sales.