your marketing budget meeting might be a custody battle over people who already want to buy. search ads, review sites and retargeting help you win buyers already looking. that's demand capture. content, community and brand can help people remember you before they're looking. that's demand creation. the awkward bit: search can walk into the budget meeting with a cost-per-lead. the post someone remembered six months later often can't. that doesn't make every content program worth keeping. it means "no tracked leads" isn't enough to decide. before cutting it, check qualified inbound over time, branded searches, and what new buyers say made them look you up. if those show nothing either, cut it. but check before declaring the dashboard's favourite channel the only one doing any work.

Who’s up watching P3 👀

do you realise what just happened in AI this week?🤯🤯 21 october. government websites offline. emergency patches. millions of exploit attempts > PHP rushed out security fixes after researchers demonstrated attacks that needed no login on vulnerable setups. finland temporarily shut government web services. people are calling it "black october." > Claude Duet works across connected apps and asks before sending, paying, signing or deleting. US research preview, via waitlist. > Grok Bot gets a set of keys its 1Password integration is rolling out, letting agents sign into tools without seeing or storing your passwords. > Kling 4.0 generates video in one pass, with references to keep characters and voices consistent. > Tetris in 11 seconds that's Fireworks AI's claim for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash. impressive demo, not an independently verified benchmark. >a coding model you can download Flint is open-weights, Apache 2.0 licensed, with versions for NVIDIA and Apple Silicon. you'll need hardware to run it. > Getty Images filed for Chapter 11 with a prepackaged restructuring plan. the filing doesn't establish that AI caused it. this is just getting scary 😦 day by day

your startup's final boss might be a spreadsheet called final_final_v7.xlsx. because "we'll keep doing it in excel" is still a decision your product can lose to. @aprildunford calls these 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀: what customers would do if your product didn't exist. that could be another product. it could also be a manual process, an extra hire, or leaving the problem alone. and each one gives your marketing a different job. 𝟭. 𝗮 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗽𝘀 𝗶𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆'𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀. if someone is choosing between two tools, your extra capability might matter. if they're deciding whether to buy a tool at all, you're answering a question they haven't reached yet. "we have better automation" doesn't explain why their current process needs replacing. 𝟮. 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆. hypothetical: you're selling a tool that prepares board-meeting minutes. against another note-taking app, the conversation might be accuracy, integrations and price. against doing it manually, it might be the hours spent turning notes into something ready to circulate. against doing nothing, you first need to establish whether poor records are causing a problem worth solving. 𝘀𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁. 𝗱𝗶𝗳𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗴𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁. 𝟯. 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗰𝗵. ask what they used last time. what happened when it went wrong? what would they do if they didn't buy anything? don't assume the answer is the company whose launch you saw on X yesterday. 𝟰. 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗺𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿. if the alternative is a spreadsheet, show what breaks at the point that spreadsheet stops being enough. if it's another tool, show the difference that matters enough to switch. if it's postponing the decision, establish why acting now is worth the disruption. don't manufacture urgency. what I think about this is - better than competitors" is incomplete until you know which alternatives the customer actually considers.

okay this is cool. we take small wins :)

i've been reading about activation, and one question keeps coming up: why would an early-stage startup pour more effort into getting its next 1,000 signups before figuring out why the first 1,000 didn't stay? here’s what I understand some signup counters are just attendance registers for people who already left. imagine 1,000 people sign up for your product. they look around. most never come back. the dashboard says growth. but did they reach the good part? that's where acquisition and activation stop being interchangeable. 1. acquisition gets someone through the door. you post then they see your landing page and signup. they were interested enough to enter. that doesn't tell you whether the product delivered what brought them there. 2. activation is about experiencing that value. the "aha moment". not verifying an email. not completing a profile. not clicking through a product tour because you made it compulsory. those might help someone get there. they aren't automatically the destination. aha and habit. working backward from the habit you want makes the difference clearer: the real question is what must someone experience first to have a reason to return? 3. made up numbers, real distinction: 1,000 sign up. 400 finish setup. 180 do the action you think delivers value. 90 of those return in week 2. it's tempting to call the 180 activated and move on. but that's still a hypothesis. do people who take that action retain better than comparable users who don't? does the pattern hold across new groups of users? otherwise you've given a button click a very impressive job title. 4. the dropoff tells you where to investigate, not what caused it. signup - setup: is the process confusing, or did the promise attract the wrong people? setup - value: is the useful part buried, or does it require too much work before the payoff? value - return: did the product solve a recurring problem, or was one visit enough? same symptom: people leave. very different things to test. 5. more traffic can make the wrong number look healthier. if the signup count doubles but the share reaching value doesn't improve, you've increased the headcount without fixing that journey. and forcing everyone through more onboarding screens won't fix it either. completion isn't the same as value. my takeaway: before chasing the next 1,000 signups, name the moment someone first gets what they came for. then check whether reaching it gives them a reason to come back. getting through the door is acquisition. having a reason to stay is the part worth understanding.

some growth plans are just a monthly subscription to bigger buckets. a campaign brings people in. some sign up. the campaign ends. signups slow down. the next plan? a bigger campaign. i've been learning about growth loops while building @tryCREOsi with @shivanshgupta36. we're still figuring out how to get our first customers, so i'm trying to understand what could bring the next one in without starting from zero every time. that's where the difference between a funnel and a growth loop becomes useful. 1) a FUNNEL shows how someone moves toward an outcome. awareness → consideration → purchase. it helps you find where people drop off. maybe the ad works but the landing page doesn't. maybe people sign up but never get value. fixing those steps matters. but it doesn't answer another question: what happens after someone converts that helps bring in the next person? 2) a GROWTH LOOP connects the output back to the input. someone joins → gets value → invites a friend → the friend joins and gets value → some of those friends invite others. that's an illustrative referral loop. the difference isn't the invite button. it's whether using the product creates a reason, and a working route, for the next person to arrive. 3) drawing a circle doesn't make it compound meaningfully. take these made-up numbers: 1,000 people sign up from a campaign. 10% send invites = 100 people. each sends 3 = 300 invitations. 20% accept = 60 new users. you've generated 60 additional users in the first cycle. useful, but nowhere near replacing the original campaign. the next cycle depends on whether those 60 get value and repeat the behaviour. this is why "we have referrals" isn't enough information to judge the system. 4) the breakdown changes what you fix. few people invite? check whether there's a reason to share, whether the invitation is easy to find, and who can use it. invitations go out but nobody accepts? look at the audience, message, landing page and value of joining. people accept but never use the product? more invitations won't fix that experience. and if each cycle takes three months, even decent conversion may not help you hit this month's target. the useful measures are participation, output per participant, conversion into new users, and cycle time. then check whether those new users actually stay. 5) this also changes how teams work. marketing can hit a signup target while bringing in people who never return. product can improve onboarding without understanding what brought those people there. Reforge's argument is that planning around loops makes those connections harder to ignore: acquisition, product behaviour and monetization belong to the same system. that doesn't make funnels wrong. you still need them to diagnose conversion inside the loop. and a profitable paid channel can be worth continuing even if it doesn't create a self-sustaining loop. the decision is where the next unit of effort goes. before buying more traffic, ask what your existing users produce that could help the next user arrive. if you can name it, measure the cycle. if you can't, don't call another campaign compounding

if you’re a creator and have 1Lakh views or more every video but still pitching the brands alone. let me tell you not all views are equal. TOFU, MOFU and BOFU explain why a video with fewer views can still matter more to a brand. 1. TOFU (top of funnel) = awareness. broad, relatable content. his example: "5 things to do before sleep to lose weight." easy to stop for, easy to share, potentially big views. he calls this the easiest content to make. but those views don't establish buying intent. “someone being interested in weight loss doesn't mean they're shopping for a product.” 2. MOFU (middle of funnel) = consideration. the viewer already has the problem and wants to understand it. his example: "why eating this affects your protein, and how that helps you build muscle and lose fat." the audience gets narrower because the question gets more specific. fewer views, more opportunity to build trust by helping someone understand their problem. 3. BOFU (bottom of funnel) = decision. the viewer is ready to act. his example video: "how i lost 5 kg, exactly what i did, how you can do it too, and the product that made it easier." smallest audience, highest value is how he frames it. the product now appears inside a decision the viewer is already trying to make, rather than interrupting someone who only came to be entertained. his quick test: what can the viewer DO right after watching? just know something = TOFU. understand their problem better = MOFU. be ready to buy = BOFU. brands pay at every stage. a brand buying awareness has a reason to pay for TOFU. broad reach isn't useless just because it doesn't lead straight to checkout. but his bet is that more money is moving toward BOFU: "the wallet is already open." the appeal for a brand is conversion. helping someone make money gives them a reason to pay you. that's the distinction worth keeping. views tell you how widely a video travelled. the funnel stage tells you what it was trying to move someone toward. choose the job before chasing the number.

happy dussehra everyone✨ may God bring happiness, peace and good things your way.🙏

flipkart opened big billion days on oct 9, >> two days before navratri began. its preparations included 14M cubic feet of new warehousing, >> 900+ delivery hubs and 2.5 lakh seasonal jobs. when demand arrives on a calendar, the date you pick is part of the strategy.

joy baiting might be my favourite genre of content rn. you think someone's about to start a fight and they just compliment a stranger's fit congratulations you manipulated me into having a good day. do it again :))

meta is giving brands another way to buy ads: reserve a moment instead of relying only on the auction. its ads super burst offering lets advertisers book a 3-24 hour window across facebook and instagram. category exclusivity is available on select US dates, meaning a rival can't book the same reserved window. that doesn't stop competitors running ordinary ads elsewhere on the platforms. why would a marketer want this? imagine launching a product on friday morning. reaching people next tuesday might still generate sales, but it doesn't serve the same launch plan. timing matters when the ads need to line up with availability, creators, retail activity and the announcement itself. a reservation makes that part easier to plan. it doesn't guarantee anyone cares. that's the distinction i'd make before buying: delivery certainty isn't customer demand. you still need a strong message, an offer worth acting on and somewhere useful to send the attention. for a brand launch, i'd evaluate whether concentrated reach during that window adds enough value to justify the cost. for an always-on sales campaign, i'd compare it with the auction rather than assume exclusivity makes it better. my takeaway: this gives marketers another choice about when to concentrate spend. the interesting question isn't just "who should see this?" it's "when does seeing this actually matter?"

take @OlaElectric ₹844 crore: ₹333 crore in quarterly running costs tells us the cost base got smaller. 5.1% → 8.4% registration share shows a recovery between those quarters. Neither proves that closing stores caused the recovery, or that dealers will improve service. The judgment comes next: does dealer led expansion make sense on this leaner cost base? What could go wrong? Which measures would tell us whether to continue? That's where the analysis adds something beyond repeating the results. cdn.olaelectric.com/sites/ev…

blinkit added 200 net new stores in the june 2026 quarter while earning just 60 paise of adjusted ebitda per rs 100 of net order value. that's a rough profit measure before several expenses, not cash left in the bank. the number looks tiny. but comparing it directly with their 6% mature-store margin assumption misses something: the network includes young stores too. my take: i wouldn't approve the next batch just because the mature store model looks attractive. i wouldn't stop expansion just because the network average looks thin either. my question would be: when we compare stores at the same age, are newer batches reaching the sales and margins we expected? if yes, then we keep funding them. if not, understand the miss before opening more. for me, that's the difference between a store-opening target and a reason to spend the money. source: b.zmtcdn.com/investor-relati… @letsblinkit for understanding finance terminology refer 👇 app.notion.com/p/easy-plain-…

Please get addicted to thinking positively. Your future is in your hands. Smile more often. Don’t stress. God is always with you. Never lose hope. Believe that everything will work out. The past is irrelevant. Solutions are everywhere. Everything is possible. Align with your purpose. The Sun always rises. Nothing can stop you. Focus on good things. Live without fear.

Came for Figma, stayed for the arcade. Good people, good music. Lots of amazing designs carried the vibes. and a newspaper with my future in it ;) Thanks @accio_ai_ @kushagra_swami1 @byakankshaaa

Red Bull tee on. first task for a voice agent? F1 updates, obviously 🏎️ asked Kivi for Singapore's top 3, then hit it with "who's P2 and P3?" 😭 @SarvamAI @heykiviai @SarvamForDevs Thanks @ShubhangiYaps for hosting such a smooth, fun event, loved every minute of it! #F1 #VoiceAI #AgenticAI