0:00 Once you understand the psychology 0:02 behind YouTube, the platform becomes 0:04 embarrassingly simple. You see, most 0:06 people think succeeding on YouTube is 0:07 about figuring out the algorithm, but 0:09 the algorithm isn't the one deciding 0:12 whether to click your video. The 0:13 algorithm isn't the one that gets bored 0:15 and stops watching. The algorithm isn't 0:17 the one that trusts you and subscribes 0:18 to your channel and buys your product, 0:20 either. The viewer does. All the 0:22 algorithm can really do is measure those 0:24 viewers' decisions and scale the 0:26 response of those viewers, which means 0:29 your idea, title, thumbnail, editing, 0:31 and call to action if you have one, 0:33 aren't really separate algorithm 0:35 tactics. They're all different ways of 0:37 influencing the psychology of the person 0:40 on the other side of the screen, which 0:41 is the viewer. And across every single 0:43 YouTube video, there are four key parts 0:46 of psychology you need to get right if 0:48 you want to grow your channel. If you 0:50 get any one of them wrong, it creates a 0:51 bottleneck, and it can stop the entire 0:54 video from performing. And that's 0:55 regardless of how well you do everything 0:57 else. But, once you understand all four, 1:00 you can look at almost any single video 1:02 that you make and identify where exactly 1:05 the bottleneck is and know which part 1:07 you actually need to fix in [music] 1:08 order to get your channel to blow up. 1:10 Now, if you don't know who I am or why 1:11 you should listen to me, my name is Jake 1:12 Trinder, and I'm the guy behind the 1:14 scenes running YouTube channels for some 1:15 of the biggest [music] creators and 1:17 online businesses and brands in the 1:18 world, including Gary Vee, Ali Abdaal, 1:21 as well as many others. I built multiple 1:23 YouTube channels from zero to over 1:24 $100,000 per month completely 1:26 organically from scratch, and everything 1:28 I'm about to show you comes from the 1:29 [music] actual videos and data behind 1:31 those results. So, in this video, what 1:33 I'm going to do is break down all four 1:35 parts of YouTube psychology and give you 1:37 a simple way to identify [music] what is 1:39 actually stopping your videos from 1:41 performing the way that you want them 1:42 to. Starting with the first part, which 1:44 is demand psychology, [music] or more 1:46 simply put, do they actually care? 1:48 Because if somebody doesn't care about 1:49 the video in the first place, there is 1:51 no reason for them to click it, let 1:53 alone watch it. You can create the 1:54 nicest-looking thumbnail on YouTube, but 1:56 if nobody cares about the actual video 1:58 in the first place, nobody's going to 2:00 click it. And if they never click, they 2:02 can never watch, subscribe, watch 2:04 another video, or become a customer. And 2:06 so, everything downstream has been cut 2:08 off before even gets a chance [music] to 2:10 work. When people say the video idea is 2:13 the most important part of a YouTube 2:14 video and growing your channel, that is 2:16 the reason why. Because the demand 2:19 around the video idea in the first place 2:21 is what dictates whether the video can 2:24 even succeed at any layer below it. So, 2:26 first, understand the target market 2:28 you're making the video for, who the 2:30 viewer is, the outcome they want, and 2:32 where they are in terms of awareness, 2:34 which means what they understand and 2:36 what they value enough to give attention 2:39 to. When you genuinely understand your 2:40 target market properly, you're able to 2:42 form a hypothesis about what they 2:43 genuinely care about and what they 2:45 actually might watch. But, at this 2:46 point, it's still a hypothesis. So, to 2:48 turn that hypothesis to a fact and know 2:51 that the viewer cares about it and know 2:53 that there's demand around it, with 2:54 every video you want to validate the 2:55 demand around the topic, and [music] you 2:57 want proof of that specifically on 2:59 YouTube, nowhere else, not on LinkedIn, 3:02 not on paid advertising, not in blog 3:04 articles, on YouTube specifically, 3:07 organic traffic. Because it's very easy 3:09 to come up with a topic that logically 3:11 makes sense for your target market, but 3:13 that doesn't mean that people actually 3:15 want to watch it on YouTube. Literally, 3:16 all you have to do to validate this 3:18 demand is go to YouTube, search the 3:20 topic, and look [music] at several 3:21 recent comparable videos from relevant 3:24 channels in the niche. And you want to 3:25 be asking what amount of views did it 3:28 typically get? What does the realistic 3:30 upper end of that look like? And would 3:31 that amount of demand actually be enough 3:34 for what you're trying to achieve in 3:35 [music] terms of growth, but also in 3:37 terms of getting buyers? Now, to 3:39 emphasize, the word recent matters a lot 3:41 here, because you're trying to 3:42 understand what this viewer is choosing 3:44 to watch right now, which can change 3:46 incredibly quickly in a niche, for 3:48 example, like AI. And another thing 3:49 that's important but heavily overlooked 3:51 when assessing demand around something, 3:53 is check where the traffic is coming 3:55 from. Click on the video, look at the 3:57 comments. Does the amount of comments 3:59 look skeptical for the amount of views 4:01 the video has? There's also free 4:02 extensions you can use like ViewStats 4:04 free extension, where it shows you the 4:06 shape of the view graph. So, you can 4:07 look at it and see, does this look like 4:09 it's had maybe paid traffic or external 4:11 traffic pushed to it? Because we don't 4:12 care about videos that have 2 million 4:14 views, but 2 million of those views came 4:16 from paid ads. Now, when we find that 4:18 evidence of demand and significant 4:19 amount of it, those views are behavioral 4:22 evidence of care. That first piece that 4:24 we need. If we're seeing repeated recent 4:26 performance around a given topic, that 4:28 is a far stronger signal than just one 4:30 old video or random outlier. Now, what 4:32 if the demand doesn't exist around the 4:35 exact thing that you want to discuss and 4:36 make videos around? Now, this doesn't 4:38 necessarily mean that the information 4:40 isn't useful, but what it does mean is 4:42 that you have an extra psychological 4:43 job. You need to make it relevant to 4:45 something the viewer already does value. 4:47 Let me give you a real example with a 4:49 channel that we're running right now. 4:50 So, we have a client called Tessa, who 4:52 helps women with insulin. And these 4:54 women want help with their insulin 4:55 levels in order to achieve outcomes like 4:57 better health and fat loss. Now, as I 4:59 said, Tessa's main selling point was 5:01 insulin. That was her main 5:02 differentiator and what she specialized 5:04 in and that's what she told me when she 5:05 came on board. But, the problem was that 5:07 most of the market just simply wasn't 5:09 aware of insulin as the mechanism 5:11 [music] and they just didn't demand that 5:13 content out directly. And compared to 5:15 things like fat loss, they just simply 5:17 didn't place anywhere near the same 5:19 value on understanding insulin. So, if 5:22 we simply led with a clinical video 5:24 about insulin resistance, we'd just be 5:25 asking them to care about the mechanism 5:27 before actually showing them why it 5:29 mattered [music] to the outcome they 5:30 wanted. They wouldn't have resonated 5:32 with that as the topic, because at this 5:34 stage, they didn't even know they cared 5:35 about it. Some of them might have not 5:37 even known what insulin was. So, instead 5:39 of trying to get videos to succeed that 5:41 pretended [music] 5:42 that people cared about this thing that 5:43 she did specialize in, instead what we 5:45 did was we repositioned it. We made 5:48 videos around what they genuinely cared 5:49 about, fat loss, and we used insulin as 5:53 a unique mechanism. So instead of making 5:55 videos around a topic that didn't have 5:57 demand, we used the topic as a way to 6:00 differentiate for this broader in-demand 6:03 topic, which was fat loss. This super 6:05 competitive topic, which otherwise would 6:07 have been hard to stand out in, we 6:08 leveraged insulin, this new unique 6:10 mechanism that not a lot of people would 6:12 have either known or understood to drive 6:15 curiosity to get [music] them to click 6:17 and choose our video over all of the 6:19 others. The first video we did on this 6:21 was if you don't understand insulin, you 6:23 don't understand fat loss. We discovered 6:25 a proven title format, which I'm going 6:26 to discuss in a bit by the way, which 6:28 was if you don't understand X, you don't 6:30 understand Y, where X is typically the 6:32 thing that they either don't know or 6:34 aren't putting their attention towards 6:35 and they definitely don't understand, 6:37 and Y is the actual outcome that they 6:39 want. [music] And it makes sense why 6:41 this format works because they don't 6:43 understand X, but they want Y, and so 6:45 they feel the need to click to 6:47 understand X. [music] And bearing in 6:49 mind Tessa was pretty much starting from 6:50 zero, and that was one of her first 6:51 videos, that video has now done over 6:53 130,000 views, probably much larger at 6:55 the time of publishing this. But more 6:57 importantly, her calendar has been 6:58 absolutely full. In fact, I might be 7:00 able to play a clip of Tessa right now 7:02 so you can see the impact that that 7:03 video has had on her, as well as the 7:05 other ones that we made around it. It 7:06 was like almost like a switch turned, 7:08 right? Like all of a sudden, people 7:09 piling into my world, booking 7:11 appointments, 7:13 um and I'm like, this is amazing. Very 7:15 [music] palpable change in people coming 7:18 into my CRM, people booking calls. Like 7:20 literally this week I am fully booked. 7:23 So before you approve any idea, define 7:25 the viewer [music] and the outcome, and 7:26 then search the topic and establish what 7:28 several recent comparable videos 7:30 normally get. If the demand is there, 7:32 then build around it. And if the demand 7:33 isn't, then choose another idea or 7:35 connect it to a subject that the viewer 7:38 actually already values. Please do not 7:40 sit in a room deciding what people 7:41 should care about. It's [music] not 7:43 going to change anything. Find 7:44 behavioral evidence of what they already 7:46 care about or accept the extra job of 7:49 making the relevance [music] 7:50 obvious to them. And this is why the 7:52 idea dictates everything downstream. It 7:54 determines [music] the demand that 7:55 you're trying to capture, what the title 7:57 and thumbnail need to communicate, and 7:59 also what the video has to actually 8:01 fulfill in order to get pushed by the 8:03 algorithm, which is really the viewer 8:04 deciding now. But even when the demand 8:06 is there, your video is still sitting 8:08 beside every other video competing for 8:10 the same [music] viewer. And so that 8:12 proves people want the subject, but it 8:14 doesn't give them a reason to choose 8:16 your video over everyone else's. And 8:17 that is where choice psychology comes 8:19 into things. You see, if you think about 8:21 YouTube, it's a winner-take-all 8:22 platform. If somebody searches for a 8:24 given topic, YouTube might give them 10 8:26 different videos about essentially the 8:28 exact same thing, but they can 8:29 physically only click on one at a time. 8:31 So the question isn't just is this a 8:33 good title and thumbnail, it's compared 8:35 to everything else in front of them, why 8:37 would they choose yours over everyone 8:40 else's? Demand tells you the attention 8:42 exists, but the packaging determines how 8:44 much of that attention your video 8:46 actually captures. [music] And so the 8:47 question that you need to answer is how 8:50 do you know which title and thumbnail 8:52 they're actually more likely to choose? 8:53 You [music] simply look at the choices 8:56 the same or similar viewers have already 8:58 made. Let me explain. If a certain 9:01 framing of title, for example, has 9:03 repeatedly made those people click, that 9:05 is behavioral evidence that it 9:06 resonates. A title format is simply a 9:08 repeatable way of packaging [music] 9:10 different topics around the same 9:12 underlying reason and psychology of 9:14 clicking. So for example, how to get an 9:17 outcome so fast it feels like cheating. 9:20 This is a real title format that's mega 9:22 successful on YouTube and proven across 9:23 many different niches. As you can see, 9:26 the outcome in the middle is variable, 9:28 it can change, but the psychology 9:30 underneath why this title works stays 9:32 similar, which is that it makes the 9:34 result feel unusually fast, easy, and 9:36 almost like an unfair advantage, like a 9:38 cheat code. Before we get ahead of 9:40 ourselves, though, that doesn't mean you 9:42 can just copy the words. You need to 9:43 understand why they worked and whether 9:46 that reason genuinely meshes with what 9:49 your viewer wants. Because a mistake I 9:51 see a lot is seeing a title format that 9:53 is genuinely successful and a proven 9:55 format that works very, very well in 9:56 some niches. And people try and take 9:58 that over to their niche, but the 9:59 reasons as to why it worked in that 10:02 niche do not transfer over to their 10:05 audience. Because the psychographics and 10:07 the viewing behaviors of those audiences 10:09 are entirely separate. For example, 10:11 people have taken videos from the 10:12 entertainment niche, like Mr. Beast's $1 10:15 versus $1 million, 10:17 >> [music] 10:17 >> and taking it over to the educational or 10:19 business niche, and it completely flops 10:20 for the educational and business 10:22 channels [music] because they are two 10:23 completely different audiences with 10:24 different preferences, and their brains 10:27 >> [music] 10:27 >> work differently. Now, to give you an 10:29 example, we had already validated demand 10:31 around losing visceral fat for our 10:33 client Dr. Shawn O'Mara. This is another 10:35 channel that we run. But we still needed 10:36 to give those viewers a reason to choose 10:38 his video over the thousands of others 10:40 that it would be competing against, cuz 10:41 that is a very competitive topic. 10:43 Essentially, again, fat loss, [music] 10:44 visceral fat, a little bit more niche, 10:46 but these videos were getting millions 10:47 of views still. So, we had to figure out 10:49 how to stand out. So, what we did is we 10:51 found videos like how to [music] study 10:52 so fast it feels like cheating, along 10:54 with the same format working across 10:56 many, many other niches as well. Very 10:58 proven format, but hadn't been done in 11:00 his niche. And when I was doing this 11:01 research to find these formats, [music] 11:03 it wasn't so that I could find some 11:04 magic words that I could copy. It was 11:06 understanding the actual psychology 11:08 behind why those words worked and if 11:10 that would also transfer over to our 11:12 audience. Which, when you think about 11:13 the person who wants to lose visceral 11:15 fat, it most definitely does. Because 11:17 visceral fat is dangerous. They don't 11:19 just want to lose it, but they want it 11:20 gone as quickly as possible. Ideally, 11:22 they'd literally delete it right now. 11:24 So, naturally, the so fast part of the 11:26 title speaks directly to that agency. 11:28 And the feels like cheating part makes 11:30 it sound easy, like there's some 11:32 unfairly effective cheat code they don't 11:34 currently know. And by the way, 11:35 everything I just went over in terms of 11:37 finding proven titles, so you know what 11:39 your viewers will resonate with, goes 11:40 the exact same for thumbnails. So, if 11:42 the thumbnail for one doesn't get the 11:44 attention of your target market and 11:46 immediately resonate with them, then 11:48 knowing that this video is for them, 11:49 [music] and two, making the idea clear, 11:51 so the value proposition of what they're 11:53 going to get out of the video isn't 11:54 [music] at least implied very clearly 11:56 enough to get them to read the title, 11:58 then you're probably not going to win 11:59 the view. Because they didn't even see 12:00 the title in the [music] first place. 12:01 So, instead of getting that result, what 12:03 we did to make sure our thumbnail was 12:05 the one that grabbed the attention over 12:06 all of the others and actually got 12:08 clicked on is we used bright red blocks 12:10 with large white [music] text against a 12:11 dark background. And then we used a 12:13 simple male before and after 12:15 transformation from fat to shredded 12:17 because the audience is predominantly 12:19 male and Dr. Shawn in medical scrubs on 12:21 [music] the left. The reason why we used 12:22 the red blocks with the white text is 12:24 because this was working across all of 12:25 YouTube, [music] very proven thumbnail 12:27 format and way of having text in 12:29 thumbnails. Diary of a CEO, one of the 12:31 most successful podcasts, was really the 12:32 one that pioneered it and then many 12:34 others have taken it across [music] 12:35 different niches. The visual 12:37 transformation from fat to shredded 12:38 obviously immediately grabs the 12:40 attention of the target market because 12:42 it's literally visualizing the dream 12:43 outcome that they want. And then Dr. 12:45 Shawn in medical scrubs immediately 12:47 registers in the viewer's mind that he 12:48 is a doctor and therefore he is an major 12:51 authority to be able to speak on the 12:53 transformation that they want to achieve 12:55 that is right beside him in that [music] 12:56 thumbnail. So, before they've even 12:58 properly read anything or saw the title, 13:01 their brain can recognize the problem, 13:02 the transformation that they want, and 13:04 the fact that it's coming from a doctor. 13:06 And none of that is random, it's 13:08 psychology, patterns, and [music] 13:10 branding. That video is now done over 13:11 700,000 views and counting, but more 13:14 importantly, [music] 13:15 using videos like this for Dr. Shawn, we 13:17 took him from roughly 1,000 views a day 13:19 to over 100,000 views a day, all 13:21 long-form views organically in less than 13:23 a month [music] from just a few videos. 13:25 And even more importantly for his 13:26 business, it generated so much demand 13:28 that in their own words, it literally 13:30 broke [music] their email marketing 13:31 system. So, find several strong videos 13:34 the same or similar viewers chose, then 13:36 work out what they responded to. Speed, 13:39 ease, [music] certainty, novelty, 13:40 transformation, or an unfair advantage. 13:43 But when you do this, you still need to 13:44 understand what made them want the 13:47 outcome in the first place. You need to 13:48 test whether that reason fits your 13:50 viewer and topic, transfer the 13:51 psychology, not merely the words, and 13:53 then judge the finished package beside 13:56 the alternatives that you're competing 13:58 against. So, to make this crystal clear, 14:00 demand psychology tells you what the 14:02 right viewer already wants. Choice 14:04 psychology is how you turn that existing 14:06 demand 14:07 >> [music] 14:07 >> into your click. Before you publish any 14:10 video, in fact, before you actually make 14:12 the video, ask the question, does my 14:14 title and thumbnail give the right 14:15 viewer a clearer and more compelling 14:18 reason to choose this video than 14:20 everything else around it? Because the 14:23 moment they choose it, you've created 14:24 [music] 14:25 an expectation in their head. So, now 14:27 the actual video has to prove that they 14:29 made the right choice. And that is where 14:31 consumption psychology comes into 14:33 things. The moment somebody clicks on 14:35 your video, the title and thumbnail have 14:37 created this expectation. And now, 14:40 they're looking for evidence they made 14:41 the right choice or every reason to 14:43 click off. If the hook and opening feels 14:45 like the promised video, they're going 14:46 to continue. But if it feels confusing, 14:48 slow, or like you clickbaited them, then 14:51 they're going to click off. So, 14:52 achieving that click and getting that 14:53 from the viewer doesn't mean that the 14:55 choice is over. It just changes the 14:57 question from which video should I watch 14:59 to should I continue watching this one 15:01 specifically? And so, choice psychology 15:03 gets them to choose your video. 15:05 Consumption psychology keeps confirming 15:08 they made the right choice throughout 15:10 the entire viewing experience, hopefully 15:12 right until the very end. Now, the way 15:13 we normally structure the hook is really 15:15 simple. Promise, proof, plan. You want 15:17 to reaffirm the promise so they know 15:19 they're getting what they clicked for, 15:20 and you want to back it up with proof so 15:22 they can trust that you can actually 15:23 deliver on that promise, and then you 15:25 give them the plan, which is essentially 15:26 the value proposition of what you'll 15:28 show them, and why it's worth 15:29 continuing. Basically, giving more 15:31 clarity behind the promise itself. And 15:33 so, they [music] can wrap around in 15:34 their head, "Okay, I can genuinely see 15:37 how they're going to help me achieve 15:39 that promise." During the hook, you're 15:40 answering three questions in their head. 15:42 Am I getting what I actually clicked 15:43 for? Can this person actually deliver 15:46 it? And is the rest of this video worth 15:48 my time? Do I feel genuinely confident 15:50 in that? That's four questions, but the 15:52 last one's not a real one. But, to be 15:53 clear, this does not just apply to the 15:55 hook. It applies to [music] the entire 15:57 viewing experience. Take this video that 15:58 we made for Glenn Cokager, for example. 16:00 Speedrunning cold calls from $0 to first 16:03 sale, brackets I show everything. You 16:04 can see we used this raw thumbnail and 16:06 this casual lower case title, [music] 16:08 and that was because that was what we 16:11 found was proven from where we got that 16:13 idea from, which is a whole separate 16:15 video. But, this was the expectation 16:17 that we set. The speedrunning part makes 16:18 it this fun challenge, and the $0 to 16:20 first sale gives a clear start and 16:22 finish, and the I show everything says 16:25 that there won't be any gaps. It almost 16:27 gives this impression of raw, I'm going 16:28 to show you absolutely everything. So, 16:30 in fact, [music] it directly what it 16:31 says. And so, I knew that when we made 16:34 this video, we needed to meet the 16:35 viewers' expectation. And so, that's 16:37 what we did. We made it a 2-hour raw cut 16:38 video, where from start to finish, he 16:41 built the campaign, he made the calls, 16:43 he booked the meetings, he did the 16:45 handoff, and then he gets paid. And he 16:47 literally shows the entire thing in a 16:49 very raw nature. The editing is very 16:52 crappy [snorts] on purpose and very 16:54 amateur, as if he edited the video. And 16:56 so, it really met that expectation of 16:57 the viewer, and he actually achieved the 16:59 outcome. So, it wasn't clickbait. It 17:00 would be very easy and common to think 17:02 that it would need to be a shorter, more 17:04 edited video. But, a polished 50-minute 17:06 breakdown wouldn't have felt like 17:07 [music] that raw start to finish 17:09 experience that the viewer actually 17:10 chose. And so, the point isn't that raw 17:12 editing or 2-hour videos automatically 17:14 retains the audience better. In fact, 17:15 probably doesn't. But, it's that the 17:17 title, the thumbnail, the hook, the 17:18 structure, the delivery, the editing. 17:20 All of it [music] needs to feel like the 17:22 same video that they actually wanted. 17:24 Every single part, every single moment 17:26 should keep confirming, yes, this is 17:28 exactly what I clicked for. And one 17:29 thing I want to make clear is that 17:31 people massively overcomplicate 17:33 retention. They add open loops, pattern 17:35 interrupts, complex storytelling 17:36 metaphors, and flashy editing without 17:39 actually asking whether the viewer wants 17:40 any of it. And a lot of the time, it 17:42 actively makes the video worse for the 17:43 viewer, especially in educational 17:45 niches. A younger viewer exploring a 17:47 broad competitive market like drop 17:49 shipping, for example, might have 17:50 genuinely want more entertainment, 17:52 faster editing, visual movement, and 17:54 curiosity [music] in the video, and less 17:56 value. But, the founder of an 17:57 established business who clicks on a 17:58 specific tutorial because they need an 18:00 answer to a real problem that they have, 18:02 probably wants proof, and clarity, and 18:04 direct steps to the outcome that they 18:06 [music] want. You can force the same 18:08 retention tactics into both videos, and 18:10 the second one can feel overproduced, a 18:12 waste of their time, and make you harder 18:14 to trust. So, do not ask what retention 18:16 tactics should I ask. Ask instead, how 18:19 does this particular viewer want to 18:21 consume this particular idea? That's the 18:23 right question. Now, before you script 18:25 the video, you want to write down the 18:26 experience your title and thumbnail 18:27 promise. Map the shortest sequence that 18:30 delivers on it, and then choose the 18:31 delivery and editing around the viewer 18:33 and format. [music] If the title, 18:35 thumbnail, hook, structure, delivery, 18:37 editing don't all feel like the same 18:38 video, then you need to fix the part 18:40 that breaks that expectation and go 18:42 through that loop. And once you go 18:43 through that loop, and you feel 18:44 confident, then you've got a good plan 18:46 for the video, and you can go ahead and 18:47 record it. And again, retention isn't 18:48 the goal. The Glenn Coco video is more 18:50 than 2 hours long and has roughly 6% 18:52 retention. [music] 18:53 So, if you judged it purely on that 18:54 number, you'd think the video was 18:55 absolutely terrible. But, it reached 18:57 roughly 300,000 [music] 18:58 views to date, and then the next speed 18:59 running video that we doubled down with 19:01 also got 300,000 views. And then, those 19:03 videos generated hundreds of thousands 19:05 of dollars in deals. The first one, 19:06 which was the first video on the channel 19:07 from company zero, made $100,000 in the 19:09 first 30 days, and that channel, 19:11 launching it from zero with only 12 19:13 videos in the first 6 months, made over 19:14 a million dollars within that time 19:16 frame. And now it's gone on to generate 19:17 much, much more. 19:18 >> We have just about a million dollars 19:21 attributed to YouTube. [music] 19:22 >> Um, so clearly 6% retention didn't mean 19:24 the viewers were dissatisfied. The goal 19:26 here is viewer satisfaction. Did the 19:28 video meet the expectation, [music] give 19:30 them the experience that they wanted, 19:31 and leave them better off? That said, 19:33 quality and delivery do still matter 19:35 because the video needs to be 19:37 comfortable to actually watch. [music] 19:38 If you read robotically from a 19:40 teleprompter and the viewer feels 19:42 awkwardness and wants to leave, I mean, 19:44 the video's just not going to succeed, 19:45 is it? Nobody wants to watch that. So, 19:46 consumption psychology isn't about 19:48 forcing somebody to watch every single 19:50 second. What it is is about giving the 19:52 right viewer such a fitting, [music] 19:53 valuable, and satisfying experience that 19:55 they feel choosing your video was 19:57 actually worth it. That said, and don't 19:59 get me wrong, that gets you super far, 20:01 but even a completely satisfied viewer 20:03 can finish the video and never do 20:05 anything afterwards, [music] which 20:07 really when you think about it is quite 20:08 pointless if that is what actually 20:09 happens. And so, this is where 20:10 conversion psychology comes into things. 20:13 And this is the final piece of the 20:14 puzzle. Most people give the viewer a 20:17 ton of value, and then they'll randomly 20:19 stop 8 minutes in just to promote a 20:21 newsletter or book a call. Up until 20:23 then, they've been giving, but then 20:25 suddenly it feels like they're trying to 20:27 take the viewer's [music] email, time, 20:29 or money. And so, there's a real 20:31 psychological mechanism behind this 20:32 called persuasion knowledge. Basically, 20:35 what this means is that the moment that 20:37 somebody recognizes that you are trying 20:39 to persuade them, they stop only 20:41 thinking about what you're saying, and 20:43 they start questioning why [music] 20:45 you're saying it. Are you recommending 20:46 this because it's best for me or because 20:48 you want my email or money? And this is 20:50 why normal calls to actions feel so 20:52 icky. The mistake is treating it like 20:54 payment the viewer owes you for the 20:57 value that you've already gave them. 20:59 That's not how it works, and that's not 21:00 how the viewer sees it, that's for sure. 21:01 That's what a bad call to action looks 21:03 like, that can actually kill your video. 21:04 But, the reframe to make the best calls 21:06 to actions is actually super simple. 21:07 Because the best call to actions keep 21:09 giving value. The action becomes the 21:12 most useful next step for what the 21:14 viewer now wants. A really good example 21:16 of this is a video that we made for a 21:18 client Instantly AI. We made this video 21:20 called Watch Me Start and Sell a 21:21 Service. This video made hundreds of 21:23 thousands of dollars single-handedly, 21:25 completely organically from YouTube. And 21:26 what we did is we started and sold a new 21:28 service from scratch, and we tried to 21:30 get somebody to pay us within a 10-hour 21:31 timeframe. That was the challenge. And 21:33 after creating the offer and the 21:34 pricing, we [music] needed clients. And 21:36 so the whole narrative that we took was 21:37 that paid ads and content would have 21:39 just taken too long [music] to crack. 21:40 And so the realistic option was cold 21:42 email. Because cold email you can turn 21:44 on right now, you can send as many 21:46 emails as you want, and it's a game of 21:47 math. You send enough emails, enough 21:48 people reply, you book enough calls, and 21:50 if you take your close rate into 21:51 consideration, you close the deal. But, 21:54 the problem with cold email is that 21:56 domains would normally take around 2 21:57 weeks to warm up. This thing with cold 21:59 email marketing, you need to warm up 22:00 your domains in order to land in the 22:01 inbox. And we only have 10 hours, so 22:03 that wasn't going to work. And so 22:04 basically, we intentionally put 22:05 ourselves in this pickle where, well, 22:07 there's no way we're going to be able to 22:08 do this challenge. But, funny enough, 22:10 Instantly had just released pre-warmed 22:11 domains that we could use immediately 22:13 and skip the entire warm-up process. 22:15 This was a new feature that Instantly 22:17 just [music] released, and they wanted 22:18 to tie into a video in order to promote, 22:20 and we had to figure out how to do it. 22:21 And that's actually where this idea 22:22 stemmed from. And then it just became a 22:24 super viral video that made them 22:25 hundreds of thousands of dollars, which 22:26 is pretty nice. Within the story, it 22:28 basically became the only realistic way 22:30 to complete the challenge. And so we 22:31 didn't interrupt the video to promote 22:33 it. The viewer understood the problem 22:35 that we had, they [music] saw Instantly 22:37 become the solution. By then, the viewer 22:39 just wants us to complete the challenge. 22:40 They're bought in. And so the feature 22:41 almost becomes one of the heroes of the 22:44 video because it enables the outcome 22:46 that they [music] clicked to see. And so 22:47 it had the complete opposite effect of a 22:49 normal ad. The comments literally called 22:51 it the best advertisement they'd ever 22:52 seen. Hundreds of people were agreeing 22:55 with this, and while also talking about 22:57 how much they actually loved the video, 22:58 too, whilst [music] it being an ad, 22:59 which is, honestly, pretty unheard of. 23:01 I've never really seen that happen 23:02 before. That one video generated 23:03 multi-six figures in [music] attributed 23:05 revenue directly through the tracking 23:06 links in the description, and it was one 23:08 of the videos that helped instantly add 23:09 over a million dollars on your recurring 23:10 revenue organically from YouTube. 23:11 [music] And that product converted 23:13 because it made the video better. It 23:15 solved a real problem, completed the 23:17 story, and helped fulfill on the exact 23:19 promise that the viewer clicked for. So, 23:21 if you sell a product or software, don't 23:23 start by asking, "How do I promote my 23:24 product?" Start with the outcome 23:26 >> [music] 23:26 >> that the viewer actually clicked for. 23:28 Map its real constraints, and then find 23:30 where your product genuinely makes it 23:32 possible, easier, faster, or better, 23:34 [music] genuinely. Then you want to help 23:35 the viewer understand why it belongs, 23:38 and then show it doing the useful job. 23:40 Just demonstrate it. And if it doesn't 23:41 help that outcome, don't force it. 23:42 Otherwise, you'll just come across as 23:43 promotional. Now, that said, if you sell 23:45 a service, coaching, or expertise, the 23:46 application of this can look [music] 23:48 slightly different because the service 23:49 normally can't really be a literal tool 23:51 inside the story. And in that case, ask, 23:54 "What would help this viewer implement 23:56 what I've already taught them that I 23:57 physically cannot [music] provide in a 23:59 non- interactive video, which a YouTube 24:01 video is?" And so, this is essentially a 24:02 lead magnet that could come in the form 24:04 of a template, calculator, a free 24:06 diagnostic, a swipe file, a checklist. 24:08 Like, for example, one of our clients, 24:09 Sam Peller, went from zero to $400,000 24:11 per month from YouTube, [music] top 24:12 channel in his niche. And one of his 24:14 successful videos was the best Facebook 24:16 ad creative strategy for 2026, got over 24:17 100,000 views. And so, that video was 24:19 basically teaching them to find proven 24:21 ad concepts and deciding what are the 24:23 best ads for them to make instead of 24:24 guessing. And so, where they'd otherwise 24:25 need to hunt [music] through Meta's ad 24:27 library in order to find these 24:29 inspiration ads, instead, we just gave 24:30 them a continuously updated library of 24:32 winning ads. And they had to opt in via 24:35 the link in the description in order to 24:36 get that. And then we got that 24:37 information, and then we called them, 24:39 and then we sold them. And Sam [music] 24:40 sells deals within the range of five to 24:42 10, or even more, thousand dollars per 24:44 month. His average lifetime value is 24:46 probably within the 50 to 100K range. If 24:48 you think about it, for the person who 24:49 clicks because they wanted the best ad 24:51 creative strategy, [music] that isn't an 24:53 interruption. It's an extra result that 24:55 they didn't expect to get. They receive 24:57 it and they're like, "Oh my god, thank 24:59 you so much." right? The video didn't 25:00 [music] need to make the entire sale. It 25:02 just made the next useful step obvious 25:05 and then the funnel can build that 25:06 needed trust for a bigger commitment. 25:08 They opted in, they [music] got put on 25:09 the newsletter, the newsletter nurtured 25:11 them and they got all these emails and 25:13 eventually they took action and they 25:14 bought. And to be honest, sometimes a 25:15 direct call to action is the most useful 25:17 next step as well. Like I can literally 25:19 demonstrate this right now with this 25:20 video. [music] If you're an established 25:22 business or brand and you want to grow 25:24 your YouTube channel but you want us to 25:26 actually grow the channel for you, 25:28 there's a link in the description where 25:30 you can apply to work with us. And if 25:32 you qualify, you'll be able to book a 25:33 call directly with me or my team and on 25:35 that call we'll give you a free YouTube 25:36 [music] strategy for your channel 25:37 including the video ideas that we think 25:39 you should make. If the strategy aligns 25:41 and [music] we both think it's a good 25:42 fit, then we'll run the channel and grow 25:43 it from there for you. And if it 25:45 doesn't, you'll still walk away with a 25:46 free strategy anyway and some video 25:48 ideas that you can use for yourself. So 25:49 it's really a win-win. And so you can 25:50 click that link in the description, you 25:52 can book a call and we will chat and we 25:54 will see if it's a good fit. Now you see 25:55 what I did there? I can give you that 25:56 direct call to action because it 25:58 genuinely helps, potentially you in a 26:00 way I physically cannot through the 26:01 video. And so I can teach the psychology 26:03 here for free but I can't personally 26:05 look at your channel, understand your 26:06 business and give you the exact ideas 26:08 that, well, I would [music] propose to 26:11 you without actually speaking to you. 26:12 And so even the call itself gives the 26:14 right viewer something valuable and 26:17 whether they ultimately become a client 26:18 or not, it doesn't really matter. And 26:19 notice as well when I gave you that call 26:21 to action as well. Like I didn't 26:22 interrupt the video eight minutes in 26:24 with just a "By the way, if you want to 26:26 me to grow your business YouTube 26:27 channel, you can click on the 26:27 description." Like I didn't do that. It 26:29 was actually at a point where I was just 26:31 planning out this video and I was like, 26:32 "Oh, that's probably a good example 26:34 where I'm using [music] my own call to 26:35 action as an example and maybe some of 26:37 you would like that extra help." That is 26:39 when a direct call to action works best, 26:41 when the action itself genuinely gives 26:43 the right viewer more value. So before 26:45 you add any CTA, ask the question, "How 26:48 can I genuinely help this viewer even 26:50 more beyond what I can physically give 26:52 them in this video and have it come from 26:55 a place of like that genuine question. 26:57 [music] And a very key thing here is 27:00 would you recommend it in the same way 27:02 if you have no affiliation to it? 27:04 Because that is what you should be 27:05 keeping in mind whenever you get that 27:07 call to [music] action. And also to make 27:08 sure the timing's right, does the 27:10 commitment match the trust and desire 27:12 that you've created? Because if your 27:13 only answer is, "I want that email, 27:15 call, or purchase." then you're still 27:17 thinking about what [music] you want to 27:18 take. And I promise you it's going to 27:20 have the exact opposite result that you 27:21 want. So, when a video doesn't perform, 27:24 stop treating YouTube [music] like some 27:26 black box and assuming that there must 27:28 be a problem with the algorithm. Simply 27:30 ask, "Which decision did the viewer not 27:33 make?" Think about [music] it. Which 27:35 decision did the viewer not make out of 27:38 those four steps that I laid out? Did 27:40 the right viewer not even care about 27:42 that idea in the first place? [music] 27:43 Did they care, but they chose another 27:45 video instead? Did they click, but they 27:47 didn't continue watching? Or did they 27:49 watch, but they never [music] committed 27:50 to the next step. Once you identify the 27:53 decision that isn't happening, you've 27:55 identified the bottleneck. And then, you 27:56 can [music] fix that specific problem 27:58 instead of randomly changing the title, 28:00 editing, or CTA and hoping that 28:02 something works without actually having 28:03 a clue. You have to understand this. 28:05 YouTube performance is the result of a 28:08 chain of viewer decisions. [music] Find 28:09 the decision that isn't happening and 28:11 you found the bottleneck. Viewers make 28:13 the decisions that algorithm measures 28:15 and scales that. That doesn't mean 28:16 making great videos is effortless. You 28:18 still need the research, execution, and 28:20 [music] iteration, but the diagnosis 28:22 becomes embarrassingly simple. And if 28:24 there's one part of this process that 28:27 businesses specifically get wrong, it's 28:29 that final part, which is converting 28:30 viewers into actual buyers. Because if 28:32 you do it badly, the call to action can 28:34 literally kill the video and you still 28:36 end up with no conversions at the end of 28:38 it. But if you do it properly, it can 28:39 make the video even more valuable, help 28:41 it perform better, and convert at an 28:43 incredible high rate. [music] And that 28:45 is how we create individual videos that 28:47 have generated hundreds of thousands of 28:48 dollars. So, if you want the exact 28:49 system to turn viewers into [music] 28:51 buyers backed by literally millions of 28:53 dollars in directly attributed YouTube 28:56 sales, then click this video here and 28:57 [music] I'll walk you through the entire 28:59 thing end to end from the very first 29:01 point of what you need to [music] be 29:02 doing all the way to the very last point 29:04 in the funnel and everything in between. 29:05 I'll see you over there.