George Bonaci

Yeah, absolutely. You should like triple down on that. I think that another mistake most startups make is they see something that works and they're like, okay, great. Let's increase our spend. Let's double it. Let's triple it. Ideally, if it's working, you take that channel to saturation as quickly as possible.

Like if you graph out what the results are over a long period of time, you're probably going to see it approach an asymptote. You're going to see the incrementality of those results start to like decay.

Like if you graph out what the results are over a long period of time, you're probably going to see it approach an asymptote. You're going to see the incrementality of those results start to like decay.

Like if you graph out what the results are over a long period of time, you're probably going to see it approach an asymptote. You're going to see the incrementality of those results start to like decay.

So, so yes, but it depends. So if you're able to graph that response curve going from 10K to 200K, obviously you're probably not going to be able to go to 10K to 200K overnight. If you were, that actually would probably be a good problem to have. But yes, if you're able to like graph that response curve and see when something goes from linear to start to decay in terms of response.

So, so yes, but it depends. So if you're able to graph that response curve going from 10K to 200K, obviously you're probably not going to be able to go to 10K to 200K overnight. If you were, that actually would probably be a good problem to have. But yes, if you're able to like graph that response curve and see when something goes from linear to start to decay in terms of response.

So, so yes, but it depends. So if you're able to graph that response curve going from 10K to 200K, obviously you're probably not going to be able to go to 10K to 200K overnight. If you were, that actually would probably be a good problem to have. But yes, if you're able to like graph that response curve and see when something goes from linear to start to decay in terms of response.

That tells you it's like, OK, we're no longer getting an expected output given the input. And then we have a conversation if the returns are worth it. So figuring out the asymptote where things start to actually plateau is the most important thing. And I think most companies or most startups, at least, they get to that asymptote too slowly.

That tells you it's like, OK, we're no longer getting an expected output given the input. And then we have a conversation if the returns are worth it. So figuring out the asymptote where things start to actually plateau is the most important thing. And I think most companies or most startups, at least, they get to that asymptote too slowly.

That tells you it's like, OK, we're no longer getting an expected output given the input. And then we have a conversation if the returns are worth it. So figuring out the asymptote where things start to actually plateau is the most important thing. And I think most companies or most startups, at least, they get to that asymptote too slowly.

And they should really be scaling much, much faster if they find something that works. Having said that, I think like most things saturate probably more slowly than people expect. And so going from 10K to 200K might not be as insane as it sounds, but it depends. You've got to watch it.

And they should really be scaling much, much faster if they find something that works. Having said that, I think like most things saturate probably more slowly than people expect. And so going from 10K to 200K might not be as insane as it sounds, but it depends. You've got to watch it.

And they should really be scaling much, much faster if they find something that works. Having said that, I think like most things saturate probably more slowly than people expect. And so going from 10K to 200K might not be as insane as it sounds, but it depends. You've got to watch it.

the only right answer is that yes, CACs become more expensive. As you get more and more market share, it makes sense that every incremental acquisition is going to cost more than previous. Having said that, I think the reality is that's usually not true. Usually you figure out new products to sell that actually make the LTVs improve. You figure out new geographies to break into.

the only right answer is that yes, CACs become more expensive. As you get more and more market share, it makes sense that every incremental acquisition is going to cost more than previous. Having said that, I think the reality is that's usually not true. Usually you figure out new products to sell that actually make the LTVs improve. You figure out new geographies to break into.

the only right answer is that yes, CACs become more expensive. As you get more and more market share, it makes sense that every incremental acquisition is going to cost more than previous. Having said that, I think the reality is that's usually not true. Usually you figure out new products to sell that actually make the LTVs improve. You figure out new geographies to break into.

You figure out new channels that work. You figure out maybe that, hey, actually combining different channels has a halo effect and you're not fully capturing that and what the customer acquisition cost is. So the reality is that No, it takes a really long time to get to the point where the macro effect of saturation is hitting your CAC, but that's how I think about it.

You figure out new channels that work. You figure out maybe that, hey, actually combining different channels has a halo effect and you're not fully capturing that and what the customer acquisition cost is. So the reality is that No, it takes a really long time to get to the point where the macro effect of saturation is hitting your CAC, but that's how I think about it.

You figure out new channels that work. You figure out maybe that, hey, actually combining different channels has a halo effect and you're not fully capturing that and what the customer acquisition cost is. So the reality is that No, it takes a really long time to get to the point where the macro effect of saturation is hitting your CAC, but that's how I think about it.

I think it's a reasonable framework. I think you have to have some threshold that you agree on as a business. Like this is what we're willing to spend and this is what we think a customer is worth. But the reality is it's like false precision. Like you're not going to know what your LTV is if you've been in business for a year or six months or whatever it might be.