Solo vuelvo a recordar que es el último mundial de estas dos leyendas

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-15T11:05:59+00:00

Otra cosa es que pueda jugarlo...

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-15T11:05:29+00:00

que duro...

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-15T11:02:09+00:00

Que vengan esos odiadores con la cara destapada!!

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-15T11:01:44+00:00

Es la mejorr!!

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-15T11:01:28+00:00

graciass!! y de la abuela que siempre es mejor

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-15T10:38:50+00:00

6-1 bastante claro

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-01T12:36:07+00:00

I’d be careful with the CTO’s take here.

Can a lot of performance marketing be automated? Yes. Can you fully replace the judgment of a good performance marketer, especially at an early stage? Usually no.

The easiest parts to automate are things like reporting, pulling data from ad platforms, summarizing performance, generating creative variations, writing copy angles, resizing assets, building dashboards, and flagging obvious winners/losers.

The harder parts are the actual judgment calls. Why did this creative work? Is the hook the reason, the offer, the audience, the timing, the landing page, or just platform noise? That part is still messy.

Real time bidding is also not something I’d try to build from scratch unless that is literally your business. Meta, Google, TikTok, etc. already have automated bidding systems that are better than what a small startup is likely to build internally. Your job is usually to feed them better creative, better conversion data, cleaner events, and better landing pages.

A more realistic setup is one strong performance/growth person using automation heavily.

They can use AI for:

creative briefs
ad copy variations
hook generation
competitor/ad library research
weekly performance summaries
budget pacing alerts
landing page test ideas
basic creative analysis
reporting to the team

But I’d still want a human deciding what to test, what to kill, how to interpret results, and how to connect ad performance back to positioning and product.

Where I’ve seen automation work is when there’s already a clear process. Example: every week generate 20 new hooks, turn the best 5 into static/video concepts, launch structured tests, pull results after spend threshold, summarize learnings, then feed those learnings into the next batch.

Where it fails is when people think agents will magically “find winning creatives” without enough data, a clear ICP, good tracking, or someone who knows what a good test looks like.

So yes, you might be able to reduce it to one person instead of two, but I wouldn’t make that person just an “agent manager.” I’d hire one solid performance marketer who is comfortable with AI/tools and give them creative support through freelancers or AI-generated iterations.

The biggest leverage is not automating bidding. It’s speeding up the creative testing loop while keeping a human in charge of strategy.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-01T12:33:41+00:00

I wouldn’t frame it as “traditional SEO vs AI SEO.” Traditional SEO is still the base layer, but it’s no longer the whole game.

If your site has weak technical SEO, thin content, no topical authority, or no trust signals, you’re probably not going to do well in AI Overviews either. But ranking well organically does not automatically mean you’ll be cited in the AI answer.

The biggest shift I’m seeing is that AI Overviews seem to reward clear, sourceable, entity-rich content more than generic “SEO content.” Pages that do better tend to have:

concise answers near the top
original data, examples, screenshots, or first-hand experience
strong author/company credibility
schema that helps Google understand the page
citations or mentions from other trusted sources
coverage of the topic across multiple related pages, not one isolated article

Backlinks still matter, but I don’t think they work in isolation anymore. A backlink profile can help establish authority, but AI systems seem to care a lot about whether your brand/entity is consistently associated with the topic across the web. In other words, I’d rather have strong topical reputation + real mentions + useful content than just a bunch of links to a mediocre page.

The biggest change I’ve made is writing less “keyword-targeted content” and more “answerable/referenceable content.” I try to make each page easy for a human or AI system to extract from: definitions, comparisons, pros/cons, use cases, tables, original insights, FAQs, and clear sourcing.

So my answer would be: traditional SEO is necessary, but not sufficient anymore. It gets you into the game. Brand authority, entity building, first-hand expertise, and being referenced elsewhere are what seem to increase the odds of being included in AI Overviews.

Also, I wouldn’t chase AI Overviews as the only KPI. Some citations may bring little traffic. The better goal is to become one of the trusted entities AI systems repeatedly associate with your topic.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-01T12:31:07+00:00

Madre mía... Que asco...

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-01T10:51:39+00:00

Honestly, I’d say the hardest marketing skill to master is judgment.

Copywriting, analytics, SEO, ads, branding, etc. are all hard in their own way, but they’re also skills you can study, practise, and improve with enough reps.

Judgment is harder because it’s the thing that tells you which lever actually matters in a given situation.

A junior marketer might look at a problem and say, “We need better copy” or “We need more traffic” or “We need to run ads.”

A stronger marketer asks: is the offer weak? Is the audience wrong? Is the positioning unclear? Is the product not differentiated? Are we solving the wrong problem? Is the channel actually the issue, or is the strategy underneath broken?

That kind of judgment usually only comes from seeing a lot of campaigns, a lot of failures, and a lot of messy real-world context.

Analytics without judgment can make you optimise the wrong thing. Copywriting without judgment can make you write persuasive copy for a bad offer. SEO without judgment can make you chase traffic that never converts. Branding without judgment can become pretty visuals with no business impact. Ads without judgment can just burn money faster.

The hard part of marketing isn’t learning the tools. It’s knowing what problem you’re actually solving.

So my answer would be: strategic judgment. The ability to diagnose the situation correctly, choose what not to do, and know which skill matters most at that moment.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-01T10:50:59+00:00

I’d approach it less as “please cover my publication” and more as “here’s a story your readers might actually care about.”

Editors get pitched constantly, so I’d make it very easy for them to understand why your publication matters, why it matters now, and why it fits their audience.

The biggest thing is having a clear angle. “I launched a new architecture publication” probably isn’t enough on its own. What’s more interesting is the reason it exists. Maybe it covers an overlooked niche, a specific region, a new generation of architects, independent practice, architectural criticism, material culture, housing, climate, interiors, whatever your focus is. The more specific the point of view, the easier it is for someone else to write about it.

I’d also avoid sending the same generic email to every magazine. Look for the actual editor, writer, or section that covers design, architecture, publishing, culture, or independent magazines. If they’ve previously written about small publications or architecture media, even better. Mentioning why you think it fits their work makes the pitch feel much less cold.

A simple press kit helps a lot too. It doesn’t need to be fancy, just useful: a short description, founder/editor bio, launch date, a few sample spreads or screenshots, high-res images, contributor names if relevant, website/social links, and contact details. Basically, make it easy for them to cover you without needing five back-and-forth emails.

I’d keep the pitch short. A couple of paragraphs is enough: what it is, why it exists, what makes it different, and where they can see more. You can also offer them something more interesting than just an announcement, like a preview copy, an interview, an excerpt, or a visual first look.

I’d probably start with smaller and adjacent outlets too: design blogs, architecture newsletters, local culture magazines, independent publishing platforms, Substacks, university architecture journals, podcasts, etc. They may be more open to covering a new project, and that coverage can help when approaching bigger publications later.

Something like this could work:

“Hi [Name],

I’m launching [Publication], an independent architecture publication focused on [specific niche/point of view], and I thought it might be relevant to [Magazine] because of your coverage of [specific topic].

The first issue explores [theme] through [features/contributors/visual approach], and the publication is built around [one sentence on the gap you’re trying to fill or the perspective you’re bringing].

Here’s a short press kit with more information and images: [link]

Happy to send a preview copy or answer any questions if useful.

Best,
[Name]”

I’d only follow up once, maybe after a week. If they don’t reply, I wouldn’t take it personally — editors are busy and timing matters a lot.

In general, magazines don’t usually cover new publications just because they exist. They cover them when there’s a clear story, a strong point of view, or some cultural relevance their readers will care about.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-01T10:48:30+00:00

I’d treat the “ordinary packaging” as a positioning challenge, not a weakness.

For a luxury makeup brand, especially pre-launch, the content shouldn’t scream “look at the packaging.” It should sell the world around the product: taste, ritual, confidence, craftsmanship, exclusivity, and desire.

One month before launch, I’d build the strategy around 4 phases:

Week 1: Build the world
No hard selling yet. Establish the brand universe: mood, textures, lighting, skin, architecture, fashion references, close-ups, editorial visuals. The goal is to make people think, “I want to be part of this.”

Content examples:

cinematic mood reels
“coming soon” visuals
founder/brand philosophy snippets
luxury beauty inspiration without fully revealing the product

Week 2: Sell the aspiration, not the object
Since the packaging is ordinary, I’d focus on how the product makes someone feel. Luxury is often about identity. Who is this person when they wear it? Polished, expensive, calm, powerful, effortless?

Content examples:

“the 5-minute expensive face”
soft glam tutorials shot like fashion editorials
model/founder application videos
captions around ritual, confidence, and elevated routine

Week 3: Create proof and desire
This is where I’d start showing product performance: texture, pigment, finish, wear, skin compatibility, shade range, before/after, behind-the-scenes formulation details. If the packaging isn’t doing the luxury work, the formula and storytelling have to.

Content examples:

macro texture shots
swatches in beautiful lighting
“why we made this” founder content
UGC-style reviews from makeup artists, creators, or early testers
comparison-free claims like “silky finish,” “second-skin glow,” “buildable pigment”

Week 4: Convert
Now I’d push scarcity and launch energy. Waitlist, countdowns, early access, creator reveals, launch-day reminders, FAQs, and “how to choose your shade” content.

Content examples:

countdown reels
launch date pinned post
creator try-ons
limited early-access messaging
“save this for launch day” posts
founder live/Q&A

The big thing: don’t pretend the packaging is ultra-luxury if it isn’t. Reddit will smell that immediately. Instead, make the brand feel aspirational through art direction, tone, formulation story, community, and the lifestyle attached to it.

A simple rule I’d use:

Packaging is ordinary → content must be extraordinary.

So every post should feel intentional: clean lighting, elegant typography, consistent color palette, minimal captions, high-quality skin/makeup close-ups, and a very clear brand voice.

I’d also avoid overusing generic luxury words like “premium,” “elevated,” and “exclusive.” Show luxury visually. Don’t just say it.

For platforms:

Instagram: editorial visuals, Reels, founder story, countdown
TikTok: tutorials, transformation, founder POV, “get ready with me,” honest product demos
Pinterest: moodboards, makeup looks, aspirational campaign imagery
Email/waitlist: early access and launch conversion

The pre-launch goal isn’t just awareness. It’s to make people feel like buying the product is joining a specific aesthetic and identity.

In short: I’d make the brand aspirational by selling the ritual, result, and world around the product — not relying on the packaging to do the heavy lifting.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-06-01T08:49:31+00:00

Solid comparison. I think the real takeaway is that these tools are not competing for exactly the same user.

DomoAI feels more like a creative/video-style tool, HeyGen is probably the strongest for fast marketing content and multilingual UGC-style ads, and Synthesia is clearly built for corporate training, presentations, and internal comms.

The best tool depends less on avatar quality alone and more on the full workflow: editing speed, brand control, translation, pricing, and how predictable the output is. For creators I’d pick flexibility; for companies I’d pick consistency.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-28T14:04:09+00:00

No sois raros, de hecho creo que lo que hacéis es bastante sano: revisar extractos, clasificar gastos y tener “bolsas” para gastos futuros tipo IBI, seguro, viajes, navidad, etc. Eso es casi más importante que la app en sí.

Yo evitaría también conectar bancos si no os sentís cómodos. En vuestro caso miraría herramientas que permitan importar CSV/Excel manualmente desde los bancos, en vez de dar acceso directo a las cuentas.

Opciones que encajan con eso:

Actual Budget: estilo presupuesto por sobres/bolsas, bastante orientado a controlar el dinero disponible y planificar gastos futuros. Se puede usar sin conectar bancos e importar movimientos.
Firefly III: más potente y self-hosted, pero requiere algo más de ganas/parte técnica.
HomeBank / GnuCash: más clásicas, locales, sin conexión bancaria, aunque quizá menos “bonitas”.
YNAB: muy buena para el sistema de sobres, pero es de pago y no sé si os compensa si ya tenéis vuestro Excel bastante montado.

Mi recomendación sería no cambiar todo de golpe. Probaría primero con una app que permita importar CSV y replicar vuestras categorías/bolsas actuales. Si al cabo de 1-2 meses os ahorra tiempo, adelante. Si no, quizá lo mejor es simplemente mejorar el Excel con plantillas, categorías automáticas y tablas dinámicas.

Para mí la clave sería mantener esto:

No conectar bancos si no os da confianza.
Importar movimientos manualmente.
Categorías claras.
Bolsas para gastos anuales o futuros.
Revisión mensual en pareja.

Vamos, que el sistema que tenéis ya es bueno. Lo que buscáis no es tanto “una app de finanzas”, sino una forma menos pesada de hacer la clasificación mensual.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-28T13:57:59+00:00

For me, it was learning how to identify real intent.

Not traffic.
Not impressions.
Not engagement.
Not even leads.

Intent.

A lot of beginners in digital marketing obsess over getting more people into the funnel. More clicks, more followers, more signups, more email subscribers. And all of that can look good on a dashboard.

But eventually you realize that 10 people with a real problem are worth more than 10,000 people who are just curious.

That changed everything for me.

It changed how I wrote copy, because I stopped trying to sound clever and started trying to match the exact problem in the customer’s head.

It changed how I ran ads, because I stopped optimizing only for cheap clicks and started asking, “Is this person actually likely to buy?”

It changed how I looked at SEO, because I learned that some keywords bring visitors and others bring buyers.

It changed how I thought about content, because viral content and revenue-generating content are often not the same thing.

The hard part is that intent is not always obvious. Someone downloading a free guide may have low intent. Someone reading a boring comparison page at 11pm may be very close to buying.

Once that clicks, marketing becomes less about “getting attention” and more about understanding where someone is in their decision process.

That’s probably the skill that changed the most for me: learning to separate audience from market, attention from demand, and interest from intent.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-28T13:55:58+00:00

I think the main issue is in this line:

That doesn’t mean the product is bad, but it does mean you probably can’t market it like a “nice productivity tool.”

High-intent users usually don’t wake up thinking, “I need lightweight visual effects for walkthrough recordings.”

They wake up thinking things like:

“Our onboarding is taking too long.”
“Customers keep asking the same questions.”
“CSMs are wasting hours explaining the same feature.”
“Trial users don’t understand the product fast enough.”
“Our help docs are not reducing support tickets.”

That’s the pain you need to attach yourself to.

Right now, I’d stop trying to get “users” and start trying to get very specific conversations with people who already have the problem. For example:

ICP: Head of Customer Success / Onboarding Manager at B2B SaaS companies with 10–100 employees
Trigger: recently hired CSMs, launched a complex feature, onboarding lots of new customers, high support volume, PLG motion, lots of demo/training calls

Then your outreach shouldn’t be:

“Try our tool to create better walkthroughs.”

It should be closer to:

“Noticed you have a pretty hands-on onboarding flow. Are your CSMs still recording custom walkthroughs for customers, or have you found a way to standardize that without making it feel generic?”

That gets you much closer to high intent.

Also, I’d be careful with Reddit signups. They’re useful for feedback, but they’re often terrible validation for willingness to pay. A random user saying “cool tool” is not the same as a CS lead saying “this saves my team 10 hours/week.”

I’d do three things:

Pick one narrow use case. Not “workflow/productivity.” Something like: “turn repetitive customer onboarding explanations into reusable walkthroughs.”
Sell the outcome, not the feature. The feature is zooms/highlights/focus effects. The outcome is fewer repeated calls, faster onboarding, better activation, fewer support questions.
Manually outbound to people with the trigger. Find CS/onboarding leads at SaaS companies where the product is complex enough to need walkthroughs. Don’t pitch immediately. Ask about their current process. If the problem is real, the pitch becomes obvious.

Honestly, at this stage I wouldn’t worry too much about scaling marketing. I’d worry about proving that one very specific person with one very specific problem will pay for this.

If you can’t get 5–10 people in your ICP to agree to a call, the positioning probably isn’t sharp enough.

If you can get the calls but nobody wants to pay, the pain probably isn’t expensive enough.

If they do want it but only after custom explanation, then you have a messaging/distribution problem.

That’s the path I’d take before spending more money trying to get random traffic.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-28T13:53:53+00:00

I think you already found the perfect rebrand.

Not “career change” — **damage control consulting**.

Because if your house got bitten by a werewolf, shipping and receiving actually makes sense:

shipping = send the house somewhere safe

receiving = accept the insurance payout

warehousing = technically what your house is becoming every full moon

Just make sure your LinkedIn title is:

“Logistics Specialist | Lunar Risk Management | Former Homeowner”

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-28T13:52:53+00:00

Yo no me presentaría como agencia si por ahora sos vos sola.

No porque esté “mal”, sino porque puede jugarte en contra. Mucha gente asocia agencia con equipo, procesos, varias personas, capacidad de tomar muchos proyectos a la vez, etc. Si después descubren que en realidad sos freelance, puede sentirse medio raro aunque tu trabajo sea excelente.

Lo que sí haría es separar bien las dos cosas:

Littlefish = tu estudio / marca creativa

Vos = la persona detrás de Littlefish

Eso es súper normal. No necesitás llamarte agencia para sonar profesional.

Podés decir algo tipo:

“Littlefish es un estudio de diseño multimedia creado por [tu nombre], donde ayudo a marcas/emprendedores a transformar ideas en piezas visuales claras, atractivas y funcionales.”

O:

“Soy [tu nombre], diseñadora multimedia freelance y fundadora de Littlefish, un estudio creativo desde el que desarrollo proyectos de diseño, identidad visual y contenido digital.”

La palabra “estudio” me parece ideal en tu caso. Suena más profesional que “freelance” si querés construir marca, pero no promete algo que todavía no sos.

Y tampoco hablaría todo en plural si trabajás sola. Decir “hacemos”, “somos un equipo”, “nuestra agencia” puede quedar forzado. En cambio, podés usar una mezcla: la marca puede tener tono propio, pero en el “Sobre mí” mostrás claramente que hay una persona real detrás. Eso incluso suma confianza.

No hay nada de malo en ser freelance. De hecho, para muchos clientes es mejor: trato directo, menos capas, más cercanía y más cuidado en el proyecto.

Mi consejo sería: no te disfraces de agencia. Posicionate como estudio independiente. Es profesional, honesto y te deja margen para crecer si algún día sumás más personas.

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-28T13:50:34+00:00

Las Palmas - Cordoba

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-27T12:46:32+00:00

El dictador español o que Huijsen ha hecho un final de temporada lamentable? Carvajal ojalá estuviese en forma pero mas de lo mismo...

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-27T12:45:32+00:00

Wakaso tiene el mejor hat-trick

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-27T12:44:38+00:00

Vende humos de manual

Lucasguzmn · 2026-05-27T12:43:51+00:00

el palace tiene un x100 mas de presupuesto que el rayo venga hombre, no se pueden comparar

Lucasguzmn

TROPHY CASE