The Contrarian Thinker of Digital Entertainment/Marc Hustvedt - YouTube, Mr. Beast, Creators ~ Spark of Ages Ep 37

Marc Hustvedt shares insights from helping to scale Mr. Beast to 350 million YouTube subscribers and building a global creator brand, revealing the unique combination of traits that separates extraordinary creators from everyone else.  Check out Contrarian Thinking and Codie Sanchez to learn more about Marc's current work helping people buy and grow small businesses.

• Creator-led businesses eliminate the power imbalance found in traditional media
• The most successful YouTube integrations feel natural and appeal to the global audience
• Small, targeted audiences of 10,000 engaged followers can build lucrative businesses
• The future of media belongs to individual creators who own their businesses
• Work ethic and obsessive dedication to the craft set apart successful creators
• Jimmy Donaldson (Mr. Beast) studied YouTube content for years before finding success
• High appetite for risk and willingness to bet on yourself is critical
• Single-minded focus on "making the best YouTube videos in the world" drove their strategy
• The $3.5 million Squid Game recreation video was an inflection point for the brand
• Traditional production methods create unnecessary friction for creators

Ever wonder what makes certain creators explode while others struggle to gain traction? Marc Hustvedt, former president of Mr. Beast, pulls back the curtain on how they built one of the most successful creator brands in history expanding into ventures like Feastables Chocolate and Mr. Beast Burger.

What truly sets apart the 0.1% of creators from everyone else? Marc reveals it's a unique combination of traits: relentless work ethic, obsessive attention to detail, willingness to take massive risks, and laser-sharp focus on a singular mission. Jimmy Donaldson didn't just appear out of nowhere – he spent years making videos that barely got views, studying YouTube's ecosystem, and constantly iterating. The breakthrough came from understanding that success requires both quantity and quality, paired with the courage to bet everything on yourself repeatedly.  The $3.5 million Squid Game recreation video serves as a perfect case study of their approach. While traditional media might have stretched production over months of planning and bureaucracy, the Mr. Beast team compressed timelines dramatically. They secured one of the largest brand deals ever for a single YouTube video by creating a sense of FOMO around cultural moments. Most importantly, they eliminated the traditional production hierarchy: "We were both the studio and the network," Marc explains, allowing for nimble decision-making that put creative vision first.

Marc is now bringing his digital expertise to Contrarian Thinking as their president, where he's exploring the intersection of education and creator economy. His observation? "You don't need a hundred million people to watch a video. If you've got the right 10,000 people, you can have a very lucrative business." This shift toward highly engaged, targeted communities represents the next evolution in digital content creation.  Listen now for insights on building digital businesses, recognizing talent, and creating content that captivates audiences in today's fragmented landscape.

Marc Hustvedt: https://www.linkedin.com/in/marchustvedt/

Marc was the President of Mr. Beast from 2021 to 2024.  After graduating from the University of Michigan, he co-founded Tubefilter and the Streamy Awards.

Website: https://www.position2.com/podcast/

Rajiv Parikh: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rajivparikh/

Sandeep Parikh: https://www.instagram.com/sandeepparikh/

E

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:05):
Welcome to the Spark of Ages podcast.
Today, we're joined by MarkHustavit, a true pioneer in
digital media who's been shapingthe creator economy since the
early days.
If you've heard of Mr Beast,aka Jimmy Donaldson and I know
maybe you haven't Mark was thepresident of Jimmy's company
from 2021 to 2024, and whohelped scaled it to incredible

(00:26):
growth to over 350 millionYouTube subscribers and expanded
the brand into successfulventures like Feastables
Chocolate and Mr Beast Burger,which reached over 1,600 virtual
locations worldwide.
Mark's digital media journeystarted long before that, though
.
Born into tech royalty, his dadwas a legendary software

(00:46):
engineer at Digital who helpeddesign the VMS operating system.
For geeks like me, mark's beeninnovating since day one.
After graduating from theUniversity of Michigan, he
co-founded TubeFilter and theStreamy Awards, which are
basically the Oscars for thedigital video world.
Now Mark's bringing his digitalexpertise to Contrarian
Thinking as their president,where he's based in Austin,

(01:07):
texas.
Mark, welcome to the Spark ofAges.

Speaker 2 (01:10):
Thank you, it's great to be here.
Good to see you guys.

Speaker 1 (01:13):
It's great to have you.
I apparently have built up myMichigan connections over the
years.
My oldest son went to MichiganLaw and my youngest son is about
to go to Michigan forbioinformatics top programs in
the country.

Speaker 2 (01:29):
That's right.
Well, go blue, that's awesome.

Speaker 1 (01:31):
A lot of blue.
It's very exciting to have youhere.
You've built up just thisamazing business and I know
you're working on the next one.
I'm sure you can talk about thestats, but a total subscriber
base of over 476 million for MrBeast.
868 videos the world record foran individual mail with over
about 72 billion views.

(01:52):
Incredible earnings.
Net worth revenue growth, Ithink 2023, according to our
data is 223 million.
So just an incredible businessin a place where only a few do
really really well.
Right, this is like the notjust the 1%, but the 0.1.
So what you guys built isremarkable.
And so, mark, you've mentionedthat Jimmy Donaldson, aka Mr

(02:14):
Beast, possesses 12 great toolsthat set him apart.
From your perspective, what arethe most critical tools or
skills amongst those 12, beyondjust his on-camera presence or
editing ability?
Could you say it's this uniqueappetite for risk,
self-conviction as anentrepreneur obsession with data
.
There's so many ways you couldtalk about it, so just love to
hear the top three or four thatpop to mind.

Speaker 2 (02:36):
Yeah, and I've talked about this a little before.
I think you hit on some of themand I look for this.
When I, when I want to workwith a creator, I need to see
they have a number of theseelements in place, because part
of what I do is I come in.
I'm an operator at heart but Ilike to go all in there.
There's there's those who livein the representation world and

(02:57):
there's those who live likereally trying to build alongside
and he you know, look, a lothas been said about Jimmy and he
possessed so many differentlayers to his background and
skills, but but ultimately hehad the work ethic.
So work ethic I put incrediblyup there, the willing to take
like a high effort approach towhatever the craft of the

(03:21):
product is.
So I mean there was a chart wewould have in our decks if we
were trying to tell the storyexternally.
And you look at like the firstcouple of years of his channel
and how many videos he put outand how many subscribers, and
it'd be like he had like 600subscribers.
I'm like then the next year waslike a thousand, like it didn't
grow that much, but he wascontinually making videos and

(03:41):
they were mostly pretty bad,like some of them were Minecraft
videos or some of them werejust videos about YouTube.
But he was studying all of thatfirst gen YouTube creator
content and he was like he wouldlike commentate on the titles
and thumbnails and he wasobsessing.
So let's say high effort, highwork ethic and then an obsession

(04:02):
an obsession over, you know, Ilook at it became one of the
core traits of what we lookedfor in employees there and I
still, to this day, will almostalways look at that.
I try to assess out like, whatdo you obsess over?
The word sometimes getsmaligned and I think people over
you know overuse it like abuzzword.
But like, at the end of the day, it means you're willing to go

(04:23):
so deeply down that rabbit holeand then just continually like,
go to the edge of it and thenjust push and see, well, like,
why did that work and why didthat work, and then like, almost
like, reverse engineer it.
So he had that ability.
You know the high appetite forrisk is a real thing.
They're willing to sort offocus on what matters.
I'll say the risk factor islike of focus on what matters.
I'll say the risk factor islike he's willing to bet on

(04:45):
himself too.
So if, like, if there's achance, you know if it's cost a
million dollars but it's goingto make the video really really
exceptionally well, like andit's all the money for the brand
and all the money that you'rebasically like taking all the
money you make on this video andthen just like betting it again
on the next one.
That's not everybody who can dothat.
A lot of people actually are inthis like I need to be

(05:07):
profitable and take money offthe table, and I kind of look at
it like a sort of a traditionalbusiness model.
And instead, what I think he'dfocused on was like the number
one mission.
It was like the best YouTubevideos in the world.
And we have it on our walls.
We're here to be YouTube first.
It was like we make the bestYouTube videos in the world, not

(05:31):
the best produced videos in theworld, and if you don't know
the difference, ask Jimmy.
It really was.
This single, single focus isanother trait that I think was
just absolutely part of thesuccess.
It meant you could you couldliterally like be literally
outsourced for a period of timethings like Facebook, so like
there would be cuts on Facebookbut it'd be made by like another
company because, like the, thepeople in that building, the

(05:54):
ones you actually invested in,should be like the best in the
world.
His ability to recruit peopleis actually really strong to
talent.
You know what's the oldexpression?
Like game recognizes game.
There there's, there'sdefinitely that sense of like he
would.
He had he had the ability to.
He would talk to almost anyone,like pick up the phone and call

(06:14):
them, and that's that'sinitially how I got to know him.
I was actually working with thefine brothers and was running
their business with them in LAand he would call and he would
ask all kinds of questions andlike that was just part.
That's part of what he does.
He's just like willing to askdirect questions and I think
that's what like great foundersdo in general, rather than go
through sort of formal channels,is like just get to the, get to

(06:37):
the person who knows the thingand get them on the phone.
That's awesome, yeah.
So I mean I could go on a lotabout this.

Speaker 1 (06:43):
I think you nailed it right, you said it's hard being
a super hard worker.
It's almost a core element, butnot just.
There are a lot of people whowork hard but they're not
focused and he's obsessive,where other people may just jump
from thing to thing.
So he's obsessive and then hereaches out to great talent and

(07:03):
reaches out for advice about it.
So he's an A player, he'sattracted A players and that
obsession then bleeds off to therest of his team.
He's only going to attractthose types of people who are
like him.
So I think it's a great way ofputting it together.
Then, when you, as part ofbuilding this, the thing that
made Mix Mr B, or what it'sknown for, is the Squid Game

(07:23):
video.
It's a $456,000 squid game inreal life, right when you.
You did this complex productioncompletely.
Uh, did a almost a real lifewithout the death version, or
simulated death version, of asquid games.
Could you walk us through someof the thinking behind that?
That project and it's reallyambitious and usually in,

(07:46):
frankly, in YouTube it was known, at the time at least, to do a
lot of stuff, as opposed tosuper high quality stuff,
whereas you guys had like a $3.5million budget, right, I mean.
So just talk us through this.

Speaker 2 (07:57):
Yeah, that was an inflection point, for sure, that
was fall of 21.
And it was, yeah, I mean,things were working already for
the company and the channel.
There was a certain momentum,but there was nowhere near the
infrastructure, you know, evento pull off that.
That was super ambitious.

(08:17):
It was you know, all the tradesthat we talked about set a big
goal, a big, ambitious goal.
Let's recreate Squid Game inreal life.
The trend had had, you know, itwas sort of obvious that this
had become a cultural moment andthere was the first wave of
quick, derivative content thatwould come and there would be
other channels that did redlight, green light or versions

(08:37):
of the game, but you could tellthey were all watered down and
so you had, you see, you knew,we knew we had to move super
fast, but we also had to do itwith spectacle, like really,
really big.
In a way that was true to thehow would Mr Beast do this thing
?
And of course it would be.
Yeah, let's actually get 456people and let's get the

(09:00):
costumes and let's get the gamesright.
And when you think about it,there was no.
It sounds like oh well, great,it was pretty easy.
Just follow these games rightwas a scripted show and and
you're making irl, unscriptedentertainment, which is what we
made you don't actually knowwhat's going to happen and you
actually don't know.
There's no actual playbook forred light, green light, like you

(09:22):
.
Just you can't just like googlehow to play like green light
and how to pull that off.
Remember, production point ofview, that was a massive amount
of engineering that went intopulling that off and
transforming a horse arena inrural north carolina into a
stage that then could, we couldplay, and an incredible amount
of work went into that and somany people worked on this video
and they were super talented.

(09:43):
I would say it was, you know,move quick, set a a very tight
deadline.
So so, like, one of the biggesthacks, of course, was just
overall, was that like we shrunktime.
We we focused on how do we, howdo we get the most out every
day and how do we not fallvictim to sort of traditional
and and really even theentertainment industry tends to

(10:03):
get in this stuff like, well, weneed this much time for
development and creative andthen we'll lock the budgets and
we'll, you know, just sort of awell-defined way of doing things
.
Well, we would like this isYouTube, so you still needed to
like, shrink that down andfrankly respond to the trend,
because there would be a pointwhere it was too late after the
holidays.
So we ended up releasing itlike thanksgiving of, or maybe

(10:26):
it was actually two days afterthat.
It was a saturday afterthanksgiving so just as people
are getting off the family stuff, getting tired of the family,
oh yeah, it was perfect greataction, great, a great time to
release, because, because thecommunal viewing and and like
people were discovering it.
But you could.
If you waited too long, there'dbe a problem like after the
holidays, like you know, we getstale and people get into

(10:46):
holiday mode, right totally soanyway, quick I mean it was like
no formal budgeting processvery like, very much like write
some numbers on the whiteboardwall and just go like send teams
as a business person were youkind of skeptical.

Speaker 1 (11:01):
I mean, you know you've done other types of
production.
That's a big number, did youhave?
You had the capital, obviously,to do it.

Speaker 2 (11:08):
Well, we had to go get it like we actually like we
went out and a lot of things.
We had to go get a brandexcited about this, comfortable
with it, and ultimately createthis like sense of FOMO, like
this is going to be a huge thing.
We ended up actually securingone of the largest brand deals
at the time ever for a singleYouTube video and it was well

(11:30):
above the quote of where we wereat at that time.
But, as with sometimes, youjust know it's going to be a big
deal, right, it was sort of itcould have been a sports analogy
.
This was a game seven versus amid-season game, so this was
like you had to go obviouslysecure a brand partner and
ultimately take again a very bigbet.

(11:52):
It was not.
The company was certainly notlike.
This was nothing.

Speaker 1 (11:58):
You're talking about this extraordinary appetite for
risk.
Would it have been one of thesethings that if it didn't work,
would that be the end?
Would that have been the end?

Speaker 2 (12:24):
scrapped, weren't good enough to upload or had to
be reshot, that type of scrap orjust didn't work.
They just kind of flopped andwere low performance.
The goal was always a one outof 10.
If you don't, if you're aYouTuber, one out of 10 is your
last 10, it's your number oneout of the cohort.
So it depends.
I mean, obviously there arecertain types of failure that
can be existential.

Speaker 1 (12:39):
But if it was a five out of 10-, you guys had enough
and had enough momentum thatpeople would have backed the
next one.
So that's really cool.
So this brings me to the nextone.
So you talked about how fastyou had to move right, this
incredible operational speed andexecution.
So what did Mr Beast understandabout entertainment and how
does it drive go to market thattraditional Hollywood didn't

(13:02):
understand?
Yeah, and I would even gofurther with that question and
say frankly, I don't even thinkYouTube necessarily understood,
because around that time, oreven before that time, youtube
was paying creators to justcrank out hours and hours of
content.
So that also wasn't great.
You guys went for highproduction value.

Speaker 2 (13:19):
Yeah, it's funny because right while we were
shooting and prepping that video, we were finishing what would
be the last YouTube originalthat we would do.
It was that last crop ofYouTube original.
I remember we were pulling anall-nighter at SoFi Stadium in
LA filming Creator Games 3.

(13:39):
We had Logan Paul and Zach Kingand all kinds of creators in
this.
Um, it was actually two videoseries, if you will, that was
funded by youtube and I rememberwe we actually thought like why
, what, what, what did we needto do a youtube original for
outside of capital?

(14:00):
It added all of these otherlike process steps and in fact,
what they did is they would paira traditional production
company with the creator because, of course, when you're
spending millions of dollarsthis sort of typical network
behavior, right, they're likewell, we want you to work with a
real production company.

Speaker 3 (14:19):
They want the girls in the room, yeah.

Speaker 2 (14:22):
And wow, the cultural difference.
So so you know I'd I'd been atat Beast long enough We've done
some videos and had seen justjust how nimble you were, even
just the way we shot.
I mean even just like handheldsmall camera profiles, running
gone, like literally like ourcamera team with athletes is the
best way to describe them.

(14:43):
And then we show up at SoFi I'mnot joking, there were guys,
these like older gentlemen withcameras on their shoulders, just
kind of looked like they werefilming a basketball game or
something, and we were kind oflooking around like do they
realize what's about to go downhere we're doing a hide and seek

(15:03):
in SoFi.
Do they realize what's about togo down here we're doing a hide
and seek, and so five and assoon as jimmy says start, they
are going to sprint in everydirection and logan takes off
and everybody said takes off.
It was we didn't even bringenough camera of our team, so we
were using their team and theirteam.
I remember these camera opsjust were like slow and and you
could see there was I.

Speaker 1 (15:23):
I honestly like so, so like you, you guys found like
sort of the track artists oryou know the game, the folks
that are willing to break rulesor break the normal rules to to
drive the production of thisright.
So you don't have to just belike a nimble.

Speaker 3 (15:36):
You don't just have to be like, uh, you know, a
nimble company.
You actually actually neednimble human beings on the
ground to move and capture thesepeople that's so interesting.

Speaker 1 (15:49):
By the way, folks, that's Sandeep who's back and
joining us after a little bit ofa hiatus, so go ahead, Sandeep.

Speaker 3 (15:58):
Oh yeah, no, sorry, I'm jumping in as the producer
just to say because this youknow, this is, this is, this is
very much in my, in my world,Mark, like you've talked about
with me how you guys and youmentioned a little bit, but like
ditching budgeting, like thatis that?
Like talk about a totally wild,you know, reversal from the

(16:18):
norm, right, Like from how we dostuff in Hollywood.

Speaker 1 (16:22):
What does that mean?
To ditch budgeting?

Speaker 2 (16:24):
We didn't have line producers and we realized, like,
look at the traditional setup,it often had to do with power
and trust.
If you get down to sort of rootcause right, the, the, the
general suppliers ofentertainment, are generally not
the buyers of entertainment andthey're not the end consumer.
So you have these differentsteps right.
So it's a production companymakes content that is ordered up

(16:45):
by a buyer, which is a networkwho's trying to reach the end
consumer.
Well, we were both the studioand the network, so like we
didn't need that step necessary.
It doesn't mean we didn't needto have general frameworks for
what certain formats should cost, but the objective was a one
out of 10 video keep and theniterate, make it better and

(17:06):
better and better and grow thechannel so that if we said, okay
, fine, it's roughly, it's goingto cost us this, we'll do this.
All right, roughly three and ahalf million dollars Great, low,
mid, high.
It's three to $4 million Great.
Let's try to hit that bullseyesomewhere in that target.
Now let's go.

Speaker 1 (17:26):
You threw a general number in.
You didn't have to do line byline budget analysis.

Speaker 3 (17:31):
Traditionally you have a line producer who is
basically your onset cop that ismaking sure every line and
every department is notoverspending, and this is not
how you guys were thinking aboutit.
It's like you were taking those, that energy, that resource and
devoting it, you know, intowhat mattered more for the video
, into whatever it isexperimentation or R&D for, like

(17:56):
how the heck you're going topull off the Squid Game thing
live.

Speaker 1 (17:59):
you know like right Is that the idea, but I mean a
lot of time, these things.
Just the costs escalate onceyou get there and as you realize
things, they just explode.
How do you just say, well, I'mgoing to put three or 4 million
in, let's see what happens?
How do you prevent three frombecoming six or eight?

Speaker 2 (18:14):
Well, it's a good question.
I'll say, look, part of it isultimately creative is in charge
.
We were a creative led companyand a lot of people say that
very few actually have thestones to run it that way and
like Jimmy did and that meansthat like if, if, if we showed
up and looked at it day of andit wasn't ready, I say we, that

(18:36):
crane isn't big enough.
I don't, I don't think we'vegot it, let's get another crane.
It meant because you're you'redoing it for the viewer's sake.
You're like this is going to bea better video.
You didn't need to go make somebusiness justification.
So business production,everything else was in service

(18:58):
of creative and that's what theviewers reward.
The viewers kind of inherentlyknew that and that's what the
viewers reward.
The viewers kind of inherentlyknew that, that they were going
to have, they were going to besurprised and delighted by holy
cow, how are you guys doing this, how are you doing that?
And then, like the profitswould follow and ultimately we
can talk about business model ina second.
But I think at the core it'sgrow, this attention engine,

(19:23):
this thing that you can't stopwatching because it's like the
most interesting thing in theworld.

Speaker 1 (19:27):
It just totally surprises you as you watch it.
Like they really did this.
They really threw him in awater and threw him into a pool
with his chains tied, his feettied to a chain, and then a
character would negotiate withMr Beast and try to get more
money out of it.
It's just really clever stuffthat you guys put in to get it
there.
And then a character wouldnegotiate with Mr Beast, right,
and try to get more money out ofit.
It's just really clever stuffthat you guys put in to get it

(19:49):
there.
Maybe talk about the businessmodel.

Speaker 2 (19:52):
I think the note here is that this is why I love
creator businesses the creativewho is the creator owns the
business I see.
So it means that you have to goback to the power structures.
You look at a lot oftraditional business and media
or even digital media.
You take that era of venturefunded.
They put the suits in charge,they bring in a bunch of C-suite

(20:14):
and the creatives would eitherbe contracted they'd pitch a
show you know one of they theypick up one of Sandeep shows and
and yet he's not the owner ofthat company's owner of his
company, but but ultimately,like the ones that were that
were buying the show, here was acase where, like, the creative
owned the company, so it wasgoing to ultimately had both the

(20:36):
business sense in their headand then ultimately, the you
know make the best product andhe would always say look, let's
make the best product.
So that, of course, then wehave to make sense of it and
part of my job is to make senseof it of like.
Where are we actually going tolike, build actual like value
and actually return cash?
Because ultimately the thingeats a lot of cash.

(20:57):
That's right.
Cash cycles in media are fairlyquick in digital media, which is
great.
If you make a video and itbangs right like totally 100
million views, you're gettingpaid.
Oh, you know, call it 60 daysmax from youtube after you got
upload.
A lot of your revenue ishappening right away.
And then there's sort of it's a, it's a long curve and a tail,

(21:19):
so you'll just keep.
It becomes part of your libraryand it's just kicking off cash.

Speaker 1 (21:24):
Is that the way you think about this?
So when you put out, when youget ready for the video, you
have this notion, like you talkabout, where right after you
release it, there's going to bea pop because your advertising
is based on CPMs Cost perthousand you get so much for
advertising, but you also have asponsor yeah who's helping to
back it?
what like what?
Do you think that there's apercentage of the production

(21:45):
they're covering?
Or maybe you have sponsors andthey're covering it, especially
the one that you highlight inthe video that you guys have so
clever you know, really cleverproduct placement as part of
this?
Yeah and so how do you thinkabout percentages and numbers
for each element and and thetiming of that?

Speaker 2 (22:00):
yeah, obviously at each stage of the growth you
want it to keep somewhat in linewith the performance of the
videos.
So you had to know how muchyou're getting from the brand.
Let's start with that.
That was sort of a known number.
You signed a contract.
Typically it would be one ormultiple videos with some sort

(22:21):
of advanced payment, some sortof payment mid-stage, and then
certainly payment when youupload, because you sort of
delivered it at that point intime and our rates kept going up
as the views got higher and wehad a, you know, a wonderful
return rate of advertisers theywere getting.
They were seeing the beasteffect and how powerful it could

(22:44):
be, especially with the rightintegration and then the right
cta, like it could be gamechanging for a squid game.
It was brawl stars.
That's a globally availablefree to play game.
I think I saw it past threebillion dollars in total revenue
.
You might want to check me onthat.
I know it crossed two at somepoint.
You think about how I lovedthat category because it's it's

(23:08):
so lucrative right?

Speaker 1 (23:09):
Because in that one they have in the game.
You either buy the game or inthe game you're buying things
and they're just if it works, itreally works.

Speaker 2 (23:17):
Yeah, plays the global audience.
Well, you know, we'd have somebrands come to us that would be
for US only and they'd be like afinancial services product and
they're like, ah, well, it's foryou got to be 18.
And you start just narrowingthe box a little bit and you're
like, yeah, you're going to payfor the total audience If you're

(23:38):
going to take our spot.
You're buying out, effectively,the spot you're going to take.

Speaker 1 (23:42):
you know, you, there's all this sort of wasted
audience that are going to seethat because we, you know you
can't regionalize integrationsat this point maybe one day and
no, but I think what you'rebringing up is a really great
point about this is that, aspart of being the creator, that,
if you're creatively led, partof picking a great sponsor is
making sure you're appealing toyour audience, right?

(24:04):
You're not just taking it formoney.
You could take it for money,right, and some of these
financial firms will pay a lotfor access to a small portion of
that audience, but you want tomake it.
Even the promoted item shouldbe part of the show and should
be interesting to a wide groupof people.
So it's a really smart way oflooking at it.

Speaker 2 (24:22):
Oh yeah, with Squid Game we had actually made Brawl
Stars integrated into a gameelement and the contestants are
like throwing, like their dodgy,and it was like thank you,
brawl Stars, thank you, brawlStars.
And I know my kids at homewould be with their friends and
they would start playing andthey'd be like, thank you, brawl
stars, thank you.

(24:42):
But it became like its ownlittle meme in a.
In a sense, it's just the powerof integrating into something
that culturally relevant is wassuper valuable and the right.
The brands that understood thatwere rewarded.
So so yeah but hopefully thatanswers your question.
That does it really helps.

Speaker 1 (25:00):
Yeah, so you have a brand deal, you have your CPMs,
you have follow on.

Speaker 2 (25:06):
Yeah, so I exactly.
So what we think about is branddeal ad rev from YouTube
specifically, and that's largelydetermined on.
You know.
You wanted a duration where youhad a long enough video to pop
mid roll, kind of basic YouTube101 stuff.
So one of the over eightminutes long, longer videos
typically could generate more adbreaks, could generate more

(25:27):
revenue, but ultimately, again,it wasn't revenue.
First it was make the bestYouTube videos first, but you
had some sort of niceassociations with longer videos.
Then you had downstreamsyndication.
So we launched fast channelslike Roku and Samsung TV and
there's like whole dedicatedchannels on the grid where you
can just watch beast contentwhich is fun, and so that kicks

(25:50):
in, obviously Facebook and thencut downs for other platforms.
So there would be an ancillarypool of revenue, but you wanted
to return the cash as much aspossible with those first two
buckets.

Speaker 1 (26:01):
Nice, and so now you're the president of
Contrarian Thinking.
It's a business, media andeducation company and you're
building on.
So now you have this greatexperience of what you learned
and built together at Mr Beastand navigating the creator
economy.
So what do you believe is themost significant contrarian
insight or approach needed forbusinesses and individuals to

(26:22):
find their spark?
How do they achieve outsidegrowth in today's crowded
digital landscape?

Speaker 2 (26:27):
Oh, that's a great question.
Well, so, by the way, I willsay Cody Sanchez is going to be
a household name in a few years,when maybe even a lot of people
already know about her.
But, like, she has that samepackage in many ways that I saw
in Jimmy the work ethic, thedrive, the willing, just

(26:48):
discipline and obsession.
She comes from the businessworld and was former Wall Street
turned private investor and isnow teaching people how to buy
small businesses.
So very, very fascinatingbusiness model.
This part for me, and what Ifind really interesting, is how
big the opportunity is.
With call it the education andinfo products world, you're

(27:11):
seeing the creator world, whichwhich really learned first how
to go native to the platformsand speak directly to an
audience, and then you have thiswhole coaching world, which
goes way back to Tony Robbins inthis space, dave Ramsey in this
space.
And the more I look like theseare wildly successful cashflow
driven businesses that are notventure backed, but that the and

(27:33):
I think that the spark for meis, like you don't need a
hundred million people to watcha video.
If you've got the right 10,000people that watch it can, you
can have a very lucrativebusiness.
And I know of small channelswho who are doing coaching
programs and masterminds makingmillions of dollars.

(27:54):
There's one I am not joking,not a single video has more than
10,000 views.
Yeah, and and all the peoplecame from YouTube.
They like did a wholemastermind, like people who paid
in person.
How many people they all raisedtheir hand of how many found
you?
So I think the algorithm isgetting really efficient at
finding the rights of.

(28:14):
In that particular example,that person explains how to do
VSL funnels, video sales lettersand like the whole the very
specific niche-y stuff withinpaid ad streams.
But like it's so, it's soperfectly aligns to that niche
that, like those who are seekingit out are quickly find it and
then it you know you startwatching that the algorithm
already matched it.

(28:34):
Whether you subscribed or not,you're going to get served that
content.
So that's the opportunity.

Speaker 1 (28:39):
So that's the opportunity.
You have a much more focusedaudience, much more focused
objective, but then you can't.
How do you chart?
Is it?
Is the business modelnecessarily about, then, CPMs or
or media, you know it's.
It's more about getting them toan event, or buying the next
level, advice, or buying aworkshop, or buying maybe a tool
Is that?

Speaker 2 (29:02):
a workshop or buying, maybe a tool?
Is that?
Yeah, is that the thing?
I think?
I think the big trend here isthat that that monetization
strategy is is going to be lessreliant on the media side of it.
Media is the tool to reach theaudience, but you bring them
through a funnel.
If we're using marketinglanguage, your top of funnels,
your youtube, you bring them.
Or it could be instagram.
It could be a series of thingsyou're testing and you're on
your multiple platforms and youneed both short and long form

(29:23):
content, but ultimately, bringthem into that next step and
that could be just a greatquestionnaire filtering them on
your landing page.
It could be a dedicated page,and so what's the product that
could be?
I think you're seeing a lot ofgroup coaching masterminds.
I think courses are a bit,they're getting a little bit

(29:46):
played out, even the people whopay for courses.
The completion rate, or evenwatch rate, is super low.
It was surprisingly lower thanI thought.

Speaker 1 (29:53):
Unless you have like a Duolingo for finance.

Speaker 2 (29:57):
it's really hard oh gosh, if we all could have that.
I'm on a 344-day streak onJapanese, so I'm trying to hit
my first year.

Speaker 1 (30:09):
I love that.
Yeah, I think I'm on450-something and it's hard
because I'm doing Hindi andthey're not as good in Hindi as
they are in Spanish, where myfriends are.
So luckily, because my friendsthey're pushing me along.
Yeah, so let's talk a littlebit about some of what sparks
you and what drives you.
You did talk about this quite abit already, and I think it's a

(30:31):
great description of how you'vemoved from business to business
similar type of business to asimilar kind of business.
So you co-founded airclicknet incollege.
So going back to your way, back.

Speaker 2 (30:43):
You did your homework .
I was at Michigan yeah,Michigan.

Speaker 1 (30:47):
As an early internet business rewarding users with
airline miles for clickingbanner ads you mentioned.
The great moment of success forAirClick was receiving cease
and desist letters from all themajor airlines that you've kept
framed so you're in.
Michigan.
You faced a moment of whetherto leave school or go to
AirClick.
What was your thinking?
What was your internal calculus?

Speaker 2 (31:08):
Luckily, I had a mother, specifically, who valued
education and was like you gotto stay in school, so I had the
family influence and pressure, Ithink, also realizing that you
know that there's this was goingto be tough and I think that
like it wasn't, it wasn't goingto be easy.
I think we were onto somethingand I think it was a great

(31:29):
experiment and project and I Ithink everyone should do like
and now it's so much easier todo.
I like if I had the AI toolsthat we had, I probably would
have like 20 of these thingsgoing at one period of time in
college just for fun, just tolike see what's going on.
I mean we had to manually, withphp, build the whole database
and like like it was just aclunky thing but it worked.

(31:49):
We got people and we got allthese freaking flyer sites
because everyone was justlooking for ways to maximize
miles and we were like cool,like people are also looking for
ways to get people to click onads and we're like well, the
people who travel a lot are likehigher, their HHO is higher and
there's just a more valuablecustomer.
So we got some brands excitedabout it and basically did these

(32:12):
money losing campaigns at first, just to get some testing.

Speaker 1 (32:16):
You were living the case study.
If you're taking economics andyou're doing this, you're
learning the case study, and Ithink you were writing code too
right, so you had both together.
You were combining both as partof your school experience.

Speaker 2 (32:28):
I got my brother involved and my brother now he's
been like 20 years at Google asan engineer.
So it was great for him and himand I both.
You never remember that well,so it was fun to work with him
Making your brother do the codework.

Speaker 3 (32:46):
that's always important.
Well, you said.
I think at one point you saidyou said that, would you say
that?
I said no, I know a thing ortwo about making your brother do
the heavy lifting something isthe best at it.

Speaker 1 (32:55):
You.
You mentioned right content isthe new code.
When did you realize that, like, you, built a business that was
based on code air click?
When did you realize that youbuilt a business that was based
on code AirClick?
When did you realize that?
Was there a point there whereit just hit you?

Speaker 2 (33:05):
It was probably going back to the Guild and Sandeep's
days when we started to realizethat anybody could go direct to
an audience.
It now became about all of allthe you could experiment and
engineer with that.
That's what I loved about thetube filter community that we

(33:26):
had and we were all just sort oflike figuring it all out
together.
And I think that yeah, and thenand then you guys were like I
mean, you guys were superstars,like we were all kind of like
starstruck when y'all would comearound, cause you were like
your when y'all would comearound, because you were like
your show was so popular and itwas.
You know, obviously you won abunch of streamies and it was
that.
That's like what we're tryingto reward.

Speaker 3 (33:45):
We're like that you guys didn't need a buyer to tell
you yeah, I'm buying you saythat because, like, my
experience of it at the time toowas like we didn't even know.
We were like like it's almostlike the analytics or something
wasn't there yet.
Like Like I, I didn't, I didn'teven know how popular it was
really.
Like we were just in our ownlittle world, in our own little

(34:06):
you know, just like hey, hopingthat our PayPal button would
fill up enough so we could shootthe next episode of the guild
that we had no concept of likehow far reaching it was at the
time.
So it's, it's just funny tohear that you know you guys felt
that way about us, we were justlike we're, you know, like

(34:27):
everybody else is looking

Speaker 2 (34:28):
for the next opportunity to just to continue
creating.
So it's really kind of wild,yeah, I mean, it was that I,
that that was what drove me andbecame that's when I got
obsessed.
It was honestly that era, thatget certainly the guild there
was.
There was other little there'slike tiki bar tv and just like
tiki bar, like like people whowere just kind of doing their
own thing and it had.
It had some some parallels toindependent music scene and just

(34:49):
like a lot of the way peoplewould self-distribute and what I
was always obsessed with wasthe sort of distribution hacks
that people would figure out andthat led me down that whole
long part and was a part of mycareer where I made some movies
and comedy specials withcreators.
Cause I thought it was.
I was like wow, we can likehack the iTunes charts If we
like, go to iTunes and we sendpeople there and if you surge at

(35:12):
the right time that in a minuteyou know you do a bunch of
sales right away, it all of asudden pops up on the charts and
that that generates moreactivity because you're and sell
that to Netflix or whatever.
But and I think that wasultimately like and that's what
now the YouTube community.
That that's the underpinningsof it, sharing the sort of
learnings and secrets of, like,basically, growth and growth

(35:36):
marketing, in a way, likethere's so many cross parallels
with marketing.
And yet the code itself waslike, effectively, the's what I
mean.
The content can be code.
Did we create an emotional hook?
Did we get them early enough tocommit to the video, to pay off
the expectation of the click?
Like the click had a lot, likethe click trigger drove some

(35:59):
emotional response that chosethat one out of that.
We have to study why that clickand then pay it off in the
first 30 and and I think thoseare that's what separated those
who who really rose to the topof YouTube and the ones who
would struggle and they'd belike I don't know, I'm sort of
just making this episodic showand nobody's watching and I'm

(36:19):
like, cause you're not reallythinking about that part,
there's an engineering.

Speaker 1 (36:23):
So that's the part that I find really interesting
about you, right?
Is that you see growthmarketing.
Of course I'm from a growthmarketing company.
As part of figuring, as part ofhacking this together.
You're looking at the data asyou're going, right, you're
watching components of the dataas it's moving, and so I'm
wondering where some of thatcame from, right?
So you came from a familyobsessed with computers and

(36:45):
technology.
Your father was a greatsoftware engineer VMS operating
system, one of the foundationalmini computer operating system.
For those who are geeks, Iactually know a little bit about
it because I was at one pointat Sun and Solaris product
marketing group, so I had tolearn about operating systems
and kernels and how to market itactually.

(37:07):
So do you find that one of thethings when you're building
operating systems and kernelsand how to market it actually?
So do you find that one of thethings when you're building
operating systems is you reallyhave to know the core, the first
principles about how thingswork and generalize it?
Does that resonate with you interms of what you do for your
businesses or when you work withcreators?

Speaker 2 (37:23):
Yeah, I've never really thought about that that
way and I love that.
You, by the way, know VMS andno we don't.

Speaker 3 (37:29):
I never really talk about my dad.

Speaker 2 (37:31):
He had a tragic car accident in 84.
He got really head injured andsort of ended his career a
little early, sorry about that.
No, it's all good, I mean, it'slife right, but it's such an
interesting way of thinking.
It's even even at michigan theway they taught cs, and I don't
know if they still teach it.
But you started with binary andthen you moved up to assembly

(37:53):
and then you couldn't, youcouldn't learn c until you you
learned literally how, and youhad to take hardware right
alongside software so youunderstood integrated circuits,
you understood why there waslike an and gate, an orgator,
and you'd understand fundamentallogic of how the systems worked
.
And to me that's like when Iapproach a business too and I'm
I become sort of a littleannoying sometimes because I I

(38:15):
get deep in everybody'sdepartment and I'm like, yeah,
yeah, so show me this funnel inhubspot, like, show me all of
the logic steps, I want to seethe trick, like the tree, don't
just, don't just tell me what itdoes, I need to see it.
And like, because ultimately Ican't, I can't help a system
grow and debug the system unlessI understand it.

(38:36):
And I think I hadn't reallythought about it in paralysis,
but I guess that's what computerscience and probably sure Some
family background maybe helpedme get into.
Yeah, it's interesting.

Speaker 1 (38:47):
Yeah, no, it's amazing.
So let's jump a little bit tothe media ecosystem.
So the media ecosystemcontinues to fragment.
Where do you want to put yourattention in the future, like,
what kinds of entertainment areyou excited about making?
And then how do you make thosecreative choices?

Speaker 2 (39:05):
I mean, I obviously have been.
My bet is always, for the lastcouple of decades now, been on
creators, and a lot of peoplesay that and they're really just
trying to grift off creators ina way.
I actually mean the atomic unit, I think, of a media company is
one meaning that we are drivenby single personalities leading

(39:29):
media companies, and I thinkthat trend is just continuing
and continuing.
They sort of reach, you know,even Barstool or some of these
that are sort of the modern, sothey have a singular founder
right, but then they growanother star and then that star
like you know, alex Cooper getsa $60 million Spotify deal and

(39:50):
has to leave.
Like I don't even know thatthere's anything you could have
done to stop that force.
It's like a force of energythat when it, when it's going to
leave it's, and there's very,very few examples of media
companies retaining creatorstars.
I talk a lot sometimes aboutBuzzfeed being the ultimate
opportunity they were one of thebest at generating through

(40:13):
their creative fellowshipprogram is just the way they
like approach the process ofmaking YouTube, that they
actually had one of the besttalent pipelines ever and they
would try guys and SophiaNygaard and name it tons of,
tons of talent came out ofeedand yet they all left.
They didn't know how to retainthem.
So I think still I don't.
And so then I'm like, well, youcan't fight sort of the laws of

(40:35):
physics, right.
And so to some degree I thinksome of the laws of physics are
small companies led by creatorswhere they own the company.
That's stable state becausethey can make when they want to
make.
They can pivot quickly.
You're not beholden to someinvestor timeline or expectation
of what the business should be.
Obviously there's investors nowtrying to get into that space

(40:57):
and trying to buy pieces of it.
I think good luck.
I mean, there's certainly risksthere.
There's key person risk, allthat kind of stuff.
So trend-wise, think that's.

Speaker 1 (41:07):
That's where I'm at so the focus on the great
creator.

Speaker 2 (41:11):
In your case, you're obsessed by the single creator
at a time right, as opposed tothe portfolio creators because
you can build off of that andbuild continuity off of that I
think that people obviously wantto watch or listen to one
person could be a group ofpeople.
I, when I say creator, I youknow.

Speaker 1 (41:28):
A creative group?
Yeah, you could put.

Speaker 2 (41:30):
Dude, perfect in the same, but you know it's that
kind of where it is in a sense.
But having 30 of those undersome sort of corporate umbrella
you know people are trying it, Iyou know it just historically
doesn't tend to work.
The incentives aren't alignedcorrectly, it's hard to manage
and it gets a little tricky.
What about agents?

(41:54):
Does it work?
Look the concept ofrepresentation and I've gone all
ways on this, but I basicallysee them as like they're force
multipliers if applied correctly.
There's certainly trends andhabits of agents around
transactional mindset andshort-term thinking.
Where you're sort of because ofthe incentive alignment is
around commissioning the sort ofcash portion of a deal you
sometimes, if not managedcorrectly, that can get off
track Like.
So example, you're brought intoa deal like there's one for

(42:17):
like a million dollars andthere's one for $5 million.
The million is probably abetter long-term strategy and
the 5 million isn't.
But it's a bunch of cash andit's a crypto deal and you take
the cash Like that and thetendency to steer towards that
is there.
That being said, having tobuild everything in-house like
one of the challenges with asingle creator business is

(42:38):
you're just not getting marketvisibility, so you want to know
where the market really standsand I think the agencies have
proven to be good.
They get market intel veryquickly and they're able to find
decision makers and route.
It's really in how you manageand who that person is.
That is your agent.

Speaker 1 (42:57):
And then what about the studio production companies?
And then, of course, there'sthe streaming platforms, right,
Streaming platforms areinteresting for reach.

Speaker 2 (43:04):
I think it's why Netflix is the other YouTube
right, they are now the twobiggest video platforms.
Youtube is number one, netflixis number two.
One is an open system and oneis a closed system.
If you're trying to reacheverybody in the world, you
probably want to be on both, andso there's strategic value to

(43:25):
get to both of them.
A lot of people only focus ontrying to get on netflix and, by
the way, I'll say netflix also,yeah, also, yeah and others but
.
But yeah, I only think theinteresting ones are global.
I wouldn't waste your time withregional stuff or like the us
only things.
I.
I mean that in least the way Ithink about it, at least.

(43:47):
I suppose for some people thattotally works to do a
country-specific show.
But generally the trend is,especially if you're building a
brand that is global, go global.
So I think there's value todoing something there.
But you don't want tocannibalize your asset of the
channel that you've created.
So that's why, if you look,even with Beast Games on Amazon,

(44:09):
the channel on YouTube keptuploading consistently and still
is meeting the viewerexpectations, even if, like,
okay, there's this othernarrative and storyline and they
really smartly marketed into itwhere there was the lead-in to
it that then went to AmazonPrime.
That's cool.

Speaker 3 (44:29):
Well, speaking of a lead-in, I'm going to take this
opportunity to jump and leadinto our game, because we're
getting to that part of theepisode.
Let's do it All right, mark,you are in the hot seat.
Welcome to this part of theshow.
It's called Spark Tank.
So you're now in the Spark Tank, and this is where marketing
legends come to flex theirstrategic muscles and
occasionally, while trying toreach for ideas that seem just
out of grasp, they pull thosestrategic muscles, landing them

(44:51):
on the 60-day DL.
Today we're joined by the oneand only Mark Hustved, former
president of MrBeast, theMrBeast YouTube empire, and the
man who turned that soundscompletely impossible into this
is just Tuesday afternoon at theoffice.
But tonight we're not talkingabout burying people alive for
50 hours or giving away privateislands like they're party
favors.
Instead, we're diving into themad, magnificent world of

(45:13):
marketing stunts.
Okay, so, from skydives fromspace to disappearing fast food
icons, we've scoured the historyfor the most audacious,
brilliant and downright weirdcampaigns ever conceived.
Some that even Mr Beast mightsay that's a bit much.
So here's how this is going towork.
All right, I'm going to readyou guys three statements.
Two of them are true, bonafide,real tales of marketing genius

(45:34):
that made CFOs everywhere clutchtheir pearls.
One of them I completely madeup.
So your job is to sniff out thefake and I'm going to count
down three, two, one, and youguys will reveal your answer at
the same time.
No Googling, no consulting yourinner circle, no getting your
friend on the phone, mark MrBeast for a lifetime.

Speaker 1 (45:51):
No AI feed into my headset.

Speaker 3 (45:54):
All right, you guys ready to separate fact from
fiction?
Yeah, let's go, okay.
Round number one Burger Kingonce encouraged customers to
unfriend 10 people on Facebookin exchange for a free Whopper,
resulting in over 230,000friendships ended before
Facebook shut down the campaignB, so we'll call it an A.

(46:17):
That's choice A, choice B.
In 2017, skittles launched acampaign where they sponsored an
exhibit at the Boston Museum ofScience to teach refraction and
create indoor rainbows thatwould then precipitate actual
Skittles C.
Red Bull sponsored arecord-breaking 24-mile free
fall from the edge of space,generating over 50 million live

(46:38):
stream views and cementing RedBull's reputation for extreme
stunts.
Which of these is not the truemarketing stunt?
All right, you guys ready,ready, bring it on Three.
Two, one B, okay, or two yeahtwo I guess it makes sense to do
the numbers, that's right.
So Mark says two, rajiv, yousay one, all right, well, you

(47:05):
guys are both right in that.
The Red Bull one was definitelytrue.
Red Bull Stratos event was oneof the most successful branded
stunts in history, setting worldrecords and boosting Red Bull's
brand visibility.
The next correct one, or thenext true one, is in 2009,.
The Whopper sacrifice campaignwas well documented and received

(47:26):
widespread media coverage forits boldness and viral, viral
reach.
So, I'm sorry, rajiv, that'sright.

Speaker 1 (47:31):
The Skittles I did want to believe that one was
true because it's really clever.
But I was like why would youever tell somebody to unfriend
someone?
That's just evil.

Speaker 3 (47:42):
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 1 (47:43):
Because it's attention getting.

Speaker 3 (47:44):
it's attention getting, and I do think Skittles
should try to make realrainbows that rain Skittles.
That was my idea.

Speaker 1 (47:49):
I thought that was so cool Good pitch.
Remember Museum of Science,where it's fun to find out
Exactly.

Speaker 2 (47:56):
I grew up there.

Speaker 3 (47:58):
Yeah, yeah, boston Museum of Science.
That was another tell that itwas.
Obviously.
I wrote that because it's theplace I'd go.
Okay, round number two.
All right, so Mark is in thelead, hopping off right out of
the gate here.
Well done, all right, roundnumber two.
Number one Snickers oncelaunched a hidden camera
campaign in escape rooms acrossthe country, where an actor in a
giant monster costume pops outat unsuspecting players who have

(48:20):
to then feed it to Snickers totame the hunger beast.
Two IKEA once built a fullyfurnished apartment inside a
Paris subway station, allowingcommuters to live in it for a
week to demonstrate the brand'sspace-saving solutions.
Or number three Taco Bell onceclaimed to have purchased the
Liberty Bell in Philadelphia,announcing it would be renamed
the Taco Liberty Bell in afull-page ad causing a national

(48:45):
stir.
Which one of these is not thereal marketing campaign?
All right, ready.
Three, two, one.
Display your answers.
Okay, mark says one was fake.
Rajiv says three was fake.
All right, so number two was,in fact, real.
So you guys both got that right.

(49:05):
The IKEA transformed theAlbuquerque Metro Station into a
live-in showroom, with fivepeople living there for six days
, attracting global mediaattention.

Speaker 1 (49:14):
It's just too good.

Speaker 3 (49:15):
That was true, it's brilliant.
Here's the other true one.
This 1996 prank was an AprilFool's joke.
Taco Bell later revealed thejoke and donated $50,000 to the
National Park Service.
So once again, two for two.
Two, mark, way in the lead here, cause while Snickers has run
very many, you know, a lot ofcreative campaigns, there's no

(49:36):
record of a worldwide escaperoom.
I really do like that, you that, that you believe my stupid
ideas so much.
That's like, that's I loveoutlandish stuff.

Speaker 1 (49:48):
I mean, what can I say?
Well, you guys want stupidideas, so much I love Outlander
stuff.

Speaker 2 (49:49):
Well, you guys want to know the hack.
You actually pick the dumbestidea of the three and then
that's usually the one Becausethe others wouldn't have gone
viral and we would be talking.
That's right, right, right.

Speaker 3 (50:05):
Okay.
Well, let's see if this holdsup.
All right, this is the thirdand final round.
Of course, for this one, pointsare doubled, you know, so that
we can give my brother afighting chance.
Here we go.
Number one KFC once launched achicken sandwich into the
stratosphere using ahigh-altitude balloon and
documented the journey in aviral video.
Two Coca-Cola once installedhappiness machine vending

(50:26):
machines on a college campusthat dispensed everything from
flowers to entire pizzas,delighting unsuspecting students
.
Or?
Three Pepsi tried a surprisetaste test campaign centered
around convincing disappointedrestaurant patrons who ordered a
Coke at a restaurant but wasthen asked you know, is Pepsi
okay?
And this resulted in a viraldigital ad campaign, as many
customers surprisingly favoredPepsi in the blind test.

Speaker 1 (50:49):
All right, hold on a second.
So you have KFC sending achicken sandwich to the moon.

Speaker 3 (50:53):
Not to the moon, but like to the stratosphere, to the
stratosphere.
That would be wild, Just to thestratosphere.
Yeah, yeah, they're notclaiming they went to the moon.
And the happiness machine, thehappiness machine, vending
machine and this Pepsi sort ofgorilla taste test campaign.
Okay, all right, ready Three,two, one.
Okay, you both did not choosenumber two.

(51:18):
So, rajiv, you chose number one.
Mark, you went for number three.
You both didn't choose numbertwo.
The Happiness Machine campaigndid, in fact, become a viral
sensation, with millions ofYouTube views and positive press
for Coca-Cola's brand, soyou're both right on that.
Now the other real marketingcampaign.
In 2017, kfc partnered with theWorldview Enterprises to send a
zinger chicken sandwich to theedge of space, and the stunt was

(51:41):
widely covered in media.
Once again, my brother believedmy BS idea.

Speaker 1 (51:45):
Mark is the best outlandish marketer.

Speaker 2 (51:49):
I remember these.
I realize I spend a lot of timeon the internet.
They pay attention to brandcampaigns.

Speaker 3 (51:55):
I love it.

Speaker 2 (51:56):
Yeah, actually wild hack.
If you ever go to Cannes CannesLion Marketing Festival, you go
into the basement of the Palais.
All of these randominternational marketing
campaigns are put up there forart.
I love it and when I can getsome free time I just wander
around and read all thosecampaigns.
So this kind of stuff I love Ilove it.

Speaker 1 (52:14):
That's I'm going there the next time I'm going to
that museum.

Speaker 2 (52:17):
I was just in can last year but we did not know to
go there, so it's only duringcan line oh, it's only during
that week yeah, yeah, it's onlyif you're there Otherwise, but I
think you can just see themonline.

Speaker 3 (52:29):
All right, Well so Mark, clearly the victor here of
Spark Tank.
Well done, I mean just a cleansweep, I mean absolutely.

Speaker 1 (52:38):
I think you might be the only one that's ever gotten
all three.

Speaker 3 (52:41):
I think so too.
Three for three.
I don't think I've seen thatbefore.
So well done, mark.
I do have to know which ofthese should I go out and pitch
the Skittles, taste the Rainbow,the Snickers, surprise Monster
or the Pepsi ad campaign?

Speaker 2 (52:57):
surprising more people customers who beg for a
Coke at a restaurant.
None of them, they're just not.
None of those I think would popoff.

Speaker 3 (53:02):
Damn it and go viral.
This is why Mr Beast didn't.
I couldn't get a job there.

Speaker 1 (53:08):
Oh well, there you go .

Speaker 3 (53:09):
Oh well, I love it, I love it.

Speaker 1 (53:11):
Okay, this is awesome .
I really thought it would bethe Pepsi one, because I thought
that would be really a greatsurprise to catch.
But maybe they don't want toacknowledge Coke that much
anymore.
They think they're just.

Speaker 3 (53:26):
Yeah, when they say is Pepsi, okay, I'm like like,
absolutely not.

Speaker 1 (53:33):
You know, I'd rather drink a water.
Sorry, that's just me.
There you go.
Well, there goes your nextsponsorship for this quest.
I'm out.
All right, that's awesome.
All right, mark.
I got, uh, one or two morequestions if you still have time
, so I'd love to like to shoot acouple at you.
This is so much fun to hang outand learn from you.
What's your personal moonshot?

Speaker 2 (53:50):
Oh God, that's an interesting question.

Speaker 1 (53:54):
And try to do it in one sentence, one or two
sentences.

Speaker 2 (53:57):
What's your personal?
Oh God, oh God.

Speaker 1 (53:59):
Because then I can ask you more things.
Give us the log line.

Speaker 2 (54:02):
All right, all right, so this is a rapid fire.
Yeah, so this is a cool rapidfire.
Yeah, let me.
Oh God, this is really a trickyone.
God, I need a quick answer.
I mean, I have dreams we'regetting into like hopes and
dreams, but personal moonshot, Imean I'd like to make, I'd like
to figure out personalizedvideo experiences so that each
person has a differentexperience and we somehow use AI
to do that.

Speaker 1 (54:22):
That's awesome.
Sundeep, he's your man.
You, sunday, he's your man.
You guys should get backtogether on this Interactive
film.
Man, how about this one?
Do you have a favorite lifemotto?

Speaker 2 (54:30):
No, God, there's so many.
If you didn't have one.

Speaker 1 (54:33):
What pops to mind?
Do the work, Do the work.
I like that.
It's kind of like it's almostthe next stage of do your job.
Do the work, do the work, getit done.
Yeah lot.
If you could instantly gainmastery in a skill completely
unrelated to your professionalfield, what would it be?

Speaker 2 (54:50):
Piano.

Speaker 1 (54:51):
Piano why?

Speaker 2 (54:52):
I love the way a piano sounds, almost any song on
a piano, and I've been tryingto like teach myself as a little
hobby piano, so I'm actuallylearning.
I'm learning an Adele songright now, which one?
I never someone like you, andjust literally, literally.
I didn't take piano lessons asa kid.
That was not my instrument, sothis is like totally new to me

(55:12):
wow, it's a big retraining.

Speaker 1 (55:14):
It's a.
I've learned piano.
It is really hard to masterwhen you're a bit older and I
only got good at, only gotdecent at it by memorizing, not
necessarily by reading sheetmusic.
Okay, what's a seemingly smallact of kindness or generosity
you've received that had adisproportionately large impact
on you?

Speaker 2 (55:34):
Oh, I don't know if it's kindness, I guess it's
kindness.
I would have to say, like peoplereaching out and acknowledging,
when I lost my mother, it wasthe amount of empathy that my
professional and personalnetwork had just meant a lot.
That my professional andpersonal network had just mental
law.
It just people attuned to yourlife.
Moments like that and I guessthat's an act of kindness.

(55:55):
It really had an impact on me.
I still think about that and itmakes me more conscious of
recognizing the humans, of allthe people that we interact with
, to be more present in theirlives.

Speaker 1 (56:05):
I love that.
Thank you, that was amazing.
And final one if you could havea billboard with any message to
your younger self, what wouldit say?

Speaker 2 (56:16):
Stay curious.
Yeah, probably stay curious.
I know it's a borrowed quote,of course.

Speaker 1 (56:24):
By the way, at the end of the show I end with be
ever curious.

Speaker 2 (56:29):
I didn't even know that I should have done my
homework.

Speaker 1 (56:31):
I didn't know that, which is why I was so happy that
Anand and Salip got you for theshow.
So thank you so much for beingwith us.
I think it's just amazing to bewith someone who sees the
business side as an art in andof itself of working with
incredible creators.
I appreciate your level ofobsession and how that drives

(56:53):
not just great quality contentthat moves people, but also just
brings about great success andinspiration.
So, mark, thanks for being withus.

Speaker 2 (57:02):
Thank you.
Thank you for having meTerrific discussion and let's do
it again sometime.

Speaker 1 (57:06):
All right, great, and plus you got to win the game.
So I was gonna say thanks forkicking my brother's ass, thanks
for beating me.
Nothing makes me happier thanwhen I humble my older brother's
games great, I'll.

Speaker 2 (57:17):
I'll send you an address for the t-shirt thank
you guys for for booking markhusfeld.

Speaker 1 (57:36):
I mean it just is so.
Frankly, I am not the targetaudience for for mr beast, but I
found it really interesting andcompelling.
Or maybe maybe I haven't reallyrealized I'm one of the ones
who aren't, I think you don'tknow that you are the.
When I watched it I was justhaving a blast and I love all
the integrations and I love thecleverness by which they did it

(58:00):
and I was like I can't believethis is a show only for YouTube.
I'm just blown away by thelevel of thinking and production
and product integration andmarketing.
It's just, it's wonderful stuff.
It's wonderful content.

Speaker 3 (58:13):
Yeah, I mean, he said it right.
He said that they wanted to bean intention engine and I think
they definitely accomplishedthat on, you know, the world's
most foremost global platform toconsume entertainment, right.

Speaker 1 (58:32):
And I think of attention in terms of some of
the latest books written by it,where our political leadership
does it to create controversySure, and this is just more pure
attention-grabbing fun.

Speaker 3 (58:45):
That's right.

Speaker 1 (58:46):
With some risk to it.
This is fun to watch, that'sright.

Speaker 3 (58:49):
With some risk to it, it's just fun to watch.
It's joy, yeah, and you know,one of his 12 keys that you guys
didn't touch upon was, you know, in the creators that he looks
to work with there's have a goodheart, and you know, but that's
something that he does espouse.
And certainly certainly Jimmyand Mr Beast.
They're all about literally.

(59:14):
There's videos where they helppeople who haven't seen before.
Blind people get the operation,the surgery that is so hard to
afford to be able to see.
It's unbelievable to watchsomebody see for the first time.
It's those types of things,these big ideas, that and the
way they rally.
Yes, it's all about.
It is about getting views, it'sabout making sure your efforts
are rewarded.
But it comes from these innateideas of wanting to better the

(59:39):
world and enough people thinkingthat, yeah, I want to see that.
I want to see how someone goesout there and literally pedals
the metal, puts the work in tobetter the world.
That's right.

Speaker 1 (59:51):
Yeah, well, that's what I like about what Mark said
.
Right, he encapsulated a lot ofthese characteristics in do the
work.
I like his point about it'sworking hard and being obsessive
.
There are many people who I'vemet who they show up every day

(01:00:11):
on time, they do work and theygo home but because they're not
obsessed about what they'redoing, they don't see the nuance
and insight that they could toreally bring things forward.
Like table stakes is, you haveto work.
But doing the work meaningdigging in and obsessing about
the details.

(01:00:32):
And obsessing about the metrics, about the detail is where you
find he described it well, wherehe talks about how, when he
releases something, he looks atthe arc of traffic and tries to
see how it connects to theactual content.
In an industry, when you createcontent, a lot of people like
to just do it and move on to thenext thing.
I know I have that feeling, butyou have to go back and say, no
, what really resonated and whatdid it?

(01:00:53):
And that's what they do.
It seems like they do it.
They obviously have the recordof success to do exceptionally
well 100%.

Speaker 3 (01:01:01):
I really it personally pinged me pretty hard
the me pretty hard, the idea ofobsession, because it sort of
hearkened me back to a time whenI was so obsessed about the
stuff that I was making, in partbecause I had more time.
Right, I have a family nowThings are just so different but
there was a time where I wasobsessed with the Legend of Neil
or stuff that I would createand I would just put in all

(01:01:22):
those hours and those extrahours Couldn't go to sleep until
I finished the episode or thisreally small detail that was
really nagging at me and it sortof made me long for that.

Speaker 1 (01:01:34):
Oh, you're not an old man yet, just yet.

Speaker 3 (01:01:36):
Yeah, exactly, well, you got to find it again.
It's not over, but it'srediscovering continuously.

Speaker 2 (01:01:42):
Yeah, it's rediscovering.

Speaker 1 (01:01:43):
And I think there's also this thing Maybe we'll talk
about it one day, maybe we'lleven get Arthur Brooks on this
where when you're younger, youdo put in a lot of hard work in
terms of obsessing aboutsomething, but then, as you get
older, what happens is, or moremature, you know what
characteristics you need todrive in the people who work

(01:02:03):
with you and you're theconnector, being that puts all
these things together.
So you're not working the 16hours on one item, but you're
helping others who are obsessed,who are part of that obsessed
team channel their energyappropriately, which is
basically what Mark exactly does.

Speaker 3 (01:02:22):
He identifies the right creator and then helps
them put that obsession in theright place.

Speaker 1 (01:02:26):
So I thought that was really interesting, fun,
illuminating, and it's a greatcross-section between
entertainment and business andgreat to have you with us.
So I was super excited to haveyou with us and to play the game
again.
Obviously, I got bested, but inthe best way, so I appreciate
it.

Speaker 3 (01:02:43):
In a way, I got bested too, because I couldn't
fool him on one of themThreshing him.
Oh, Appreciate it.
In a way, I got bested too,because I couldn't fool him on
one of them Brushing him, ohwell, all right.

Speaker 1 (01:02:50):
Well, you tuned it for me well, so great job with
that, all right.
Thanks for listening.
If you enjoyed the pod, pleasetake a moment to rate it and
comment.
You can find us on Apple,spotify, youtube and everywhere
podcasts can be found.

Speaker 3 (01:03:04):
Yes, and this show is produced by Anand Shah and
edited by Sean Marr and AidanMcGarvey and Lauren Bolland.

Speaker 1 (01:03:11):
I'm your host, rajiv Parikh from Position Squared, an
AI growth marketing companybased in Silicon Valley.
We've got some really cool newAI offerings that we will be
putting out to the market.
Taking our service, and we'veturned it into tech and I'm so
excited to show it off to you.
Oh man, it is going to be gamechanging how you can enter in

(01:03:31):
what you're looking to marketand how you're looking to market
, and our system takes ourexpertise and gives you a full
plan on how to make it happen.
So come visit us atposition2.com Awesome.

Speaker 3 (01:03:43):
This has been an effing funny production.

Speaker 1 (01:03:45):
And we'll catch you next time.
And remember, folks be evercurious.