Hostinger
CLOSED - $14k/video - video already recorded, awaiting Gabriele's review
Self-hosting the Hermes Agent on a Hostinger VPS: an AI agent that never sleeps, on a server that costs less than a coffee.
HOST-A — generated
Brand purple correct, real VPS dashboard, agent breaking the screen plane, silver plaque on the shelf. Ready to use.
Recommended title
I Run a Self-Improving AI Agent 24/7 on a $5 VPS (Hostinger + Hermes)
In-image text $5/mo
Pattern dollar anchor + 2 named tools
$ figure n=13, 1.43x (1.86x excl. AntiGravity); 2-tool naming n=38, 1.28x
The price IS the story. Specific and falsifiable, which is what the dollar-anchor pattern rewards.
Background depth test — flat studio vs. deep room
Same thumbnail with only one change: the background to the RIGHT of Jack, behind the monitor, is now a deep receding room instead of flat dark studio. The left side - shelf, silver plaque, lamp - is untouched. Modelled on the depth in Jack's 'Claude Code just Changed Website Design Forever' thumbnail.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| HOST-B | Hermes + Hostinger = An AI Agent That Never Sleeps Trades the price hook for the emotional promise. Right-hand side is concrete-ish but softer than an object. |
NEVER SLEEPS | equation A + B = Outcome n=18, 1.43x - most robust structure on the channel, survives every cut |
| HOST-C | Replace Your $200/mo AI Subscriptions With One $5 VPS Strongest pattern available, and it fires correctly here because the audience genuinely pays for the thing being replaced. |
$200 → $5 | cost collapse n=7, 3.19x - highest ratio in the corpus, but thin sample |
| HOST-D | I Deployed a 24/7 AI Agent in 11 Minutes ($5/mo) Effort anchor instead of value anchor. Only use if the real deploy time is close to the claim. |
11 MINS | time-box + dollar anchor time-box n=8, 1.80x; both together n=3, median 106,610 |
| HOST-E | Claude Code + a $5 VPS = Infinite Uptime Names the specific limit (uptime) rather than a vague 'superpowers', which is the difference between 1.38x and 0.68x. |
INFINITE UPTIME | equation + ceiling-removal ceiling-removal cluster n=17, median 75,909, 1.38x |
Supabase
IN DISCUSSION - contact unverified, do NOT send to kate@plug.dev
Receipts cold-open (30 videos, never paid), then a full-stack build where an Agent Skill does the setup Jack normally does by hand.
SUPA-A — generated
Brand green correct. The on-screen 'RLS: Configured / Tokens: Connected' badges are exactly the manual steps the Agent Skill concept automates. Note the stacked-slab glyph is a generic database mark, not Supabase's real lightning-bolt logo.
Recommended title
Claude Code + Supabase Agent Skills = Zero-Config Full-Stack Apps (NEW Skill)
In-image text 30 VIDEOS. $0 PAID.
Pattern equation + (NEW Skill) tag
equation n=18, 1.43x; (NEW ...) tag n=8, 1.89x - caveat: 7/8 cluster in the AntiGravity window
Thumbnail text carries the credibility claim, title carries the mechanic - H17 complementarity done properly.
Background depth test — flat studio vs. deep room
Same thumbnail with only one change: the background to the RIGHT of Jack, behind the monitor, is now a deep receding room instead of flat dark studio. The left side - shelf, silver plaque, lamp - is untouched. Modelled on the depth in Jack's 'Claude Code just Changed Website Design Forever' thumbnail.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| SUPA-B | Supabase Agent Skills Killed the Setup Step Names the exact pain (setup) rather than a generic benefit. Short, punchy, no number to defend. |
ZERO CONFIG | ceiling-removal, named limit ceiling-removal n=17, 1.38x |
| SUPA-C | I Built a $12,000 SaaS Backend in 9 Minutes (Supabase Skills) Dollar figure sits at the top of the evidence-backed $8k-$12k band. Highest-ceiling option here. |
$12,000 | dollar + time-box both together n=3, median 106,610; $8k-$12k band n=9, 1.93x |
| SUPA-D | Claude Code + Supabase Agent Skills = No More RLS Errors The sharpest option for the actual developer audience - RLS is a real, specific, felt pain. Narrower reach, higher intent. |
NO MORE RLS | equation + named specific limit equation n=18, 1.43x |
| SUPA-E | Every Level of Supabase Agent Skills Explained Cheap third test of a promising but unproven format. Flag the thin evidence if pitching this one. |
LEVEL 1 → 5 | explainer n=2, median 103,117, 1.87x - INSUFFICIENT SAMPLE, both instances cleared 95K |
Base44
CLOSED - mid-contract, video #2 - per-video rate unconfirmed
A real client brief built end-to-end in Base44 against a live clock, with the model-picker as an on-camera decision.
B44-A — generated
Regenerated. The first attempt invented outdated model names on screen (Sonnet 3.7, GPT-4o, Gemini 2.5, Llama 4) which the sponsor would have caught; the selector buttons are now blank geometric icons with no text. Verified Base44 orange throughout, build-progress checklist visible, finished client site breaking out of the screen.
Recommended title
Base44 Built a $9,000 App in 24 Minutes (I Picked the Model)
In-image text $9,000
Pattern dollar + time-box + parenthetical hook
$ n=13, 1.43x; time-box n=8, 1.80x; $8k-$12k band 1.93x
Satisfies 'Base44 front and centre' literally - the brand name leads the title.
Background depth test — flat studio vs. deep room
Same thumbnail with only one change: the background to the RIGHT of Jack, behind the monitor, is now a deep receding room instead of flat dark studio. The left side - shelf, silver plaque, lamp - is untouched. Modelled on the depth in Jack's 'Claude Code just Changed Website Design Forever' thumbnail.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| B44-B | Base44 + Claude = A Real Client App in One Sitting Pairs the sponsor with the tool Jack actually uses - honest, and rides the established-tool search intent. |
ONE SITTING | equation A + B = Outcome n=18, 1.43x |
| B44-C | I Stopped Paying a Developer $9,000 (Base44) Highest-ratio pattern. Fires correctly - the audience genuinely pays devs. Verify the $9,000 claim is defensible. |
$9,000 SAVED | cost collapse + dollar anchor cost collapse n=7, 3.19x |
| B44-D | I Tested Base44 Against My Own Stack The honest option: directly addresses that Jack has said on camera he defaults to Claude Code. Weakest by pattern data, strongest by authenticity. Needs a fair, non-rigged framing or it reads as a paid hit piece. |
vs CLAUDE CODE | head-to-head comparison rivalry framing n=11, 0.85x - UNDERPERFORMS on this channel |
| B44-E | Base44 Lets You Pick the Model — Here's Which One Wins Built on the one genuinely brand-specific feature found in the emails. Confirm with Tal which models are actually selectable before committing. |
WHICH MODEL? | curiosity gap on a real product mechanic curiosity gap n=10, 1.04x (flat) - carried by the mechanic, not the pattern |
Genspark
CLOSED - $15k via Eezycollab - script approval required BEFORE shooting
Hermes produces an answer; hard pivot; Genspark Design ships a finished brand kit and landing page. Fable 5 firewalled out of the Genspark segment.
Brand rule: Brand prefers the title stay generic with the tool revealed mid-video. Options are flagged for compliance.
GEN-A — generated
Regenerated. The first attempt dropped the concept entirely (just a big number badge, with ice-crystals bleeding in from its style reference). This version delivers the actual before/after: dull grey wireframe in his left hand vs a finished branded landing page with hero copy, CTAs and a colour-swatch strip, logo bursting out, and the number correctly demoted to a small corner badge.
Recommended title
I Built a $10,000 Brand Kit With One Prompt
In-image text $10K
Pattern dollar anchor + how-I frame
$8k-$12k band n=9, median 106,610, 1.93x
Names no tool - zero attribution risk under the brand's naming rule.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| GEN-B | $10,000 of Design Work for One Prompt Highest-ratio pattern, still tool-agnostic. Sharpest cost framing of the set. |
ONE PROMPT | cost collapse + dollar anchor cost collapse n=7, 3.19x brand-rule safe |
| GEN-C | A Full Brand Identity in 8 Minutes Effort anchor. Cleanest option if the real build time is genuinely short. |
8 MINUTES | time-box n=8, 1.80x brand-rule safe |
| GEN-D | Most AI Gives You Answers. This One Ships. Lowest script-rejection risk of any option - it is literally the brand's own positioning line. |
ANSWERS vs SHIPPED | curiosity gap + brand's own differentiator verbatim curiosity gap n=10, 1.04x (flat) - value is in using the brand's own approved framing brand-rule safe |
| GEN-E | Hermes + One Prompt = A Finished Brand Strongest structural pattern, but names Hermes in the title - check with Eezycollab whether that breaches the naming rule before using. |
FINISHED | equation A + B = Outcome n=18, 1.43x - most robust structure names a tool — check brand rule |
Gamma
NEGOTIATING - $5k internal figure - Fiona is waiting on a reply
Sales call ends, transcript walks through Fireflies into Gamma's API, out comes a branded client-ready proposal deck.
GAM-A — generated
Verified Ultramarine correct, deck fan breaking out of the meeting-transcript screen, Gamma wordmark bottom-left. The client logo on the deck is a placeholder brand.
Recommended title
I Built a $10,000 Client Proposal in 6 Minutes (Fireflies + Gamma)
In-image text $10,000
Pattern dollar + time-box + 2 named tools
both together n=3, median 106,610; $8k-$12k band 1.93x; 2-tool n=38, 1.28x
Stacks three validated cues from different families - the corpus rule that most reliably beats piling cues from one family.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| GAM-B | Fireflies + Gamma = Client Proposals While You Sleep Most robust structure. Right-hand side is a concrete deliverable, which is what separates the 646K version from the 11.9K version. |
WHILE YOU SLEEP | equation A + B = Outcome n=18, 1.43x |
| GAM-C | Stop Paying a Designer $2,000 Per Pitch Deck Highest-ratio pattern and it fires correctly - agencies really do pay for deck design. Note $2,000 sits below the $8k-$12k sweet spot; it is defensible per-deck but a weaker anchor. |
$2,000/DECK | cost collapse n=7, 3.19x |
| GAM-D | 10 Meetings → 10 Client Proposals in 6 Minutes Directly dramatises the batch capability Jack already demoed on camera. Thin pattern evidence but the strongest product truth. |
10 DECKS | compression / batch framing compression sub-form n=2, median 114,420, 2.08x - INSUFFICIENT SAMPLE |
| GAM-E | The Proposal System That Closes AI Clients Narrowest reach, highest intent. Slots into an existing content pillar rather than competing with the build-video format. |
CLOSES CLIENTS | outcome framing, plugs the client-acquisition pillar his 4 client-acquisition videos run 2.4k-5.3k views - a smaller but highly-qualified audience |
Relume (integrated - video 1 of 2)
CLOSED - $20k for 2 integrated videos ($10k each, 50% upfront each) - scripts starting, Zhara reviews
Host video is Jack's free choice. Relume gets a first-minute mention, the platform shown on screen, and a pinned link. Florian's approved angle: Relume structures the site (sitemap/wireframe), Replit builds it - for people with no design skills and no site structure in mind.
Brand rule: Jack himself refused Relume's name in the title and logo on the thumbnail (performance grounds) - final terms. Titles must NOT name Relume. Naming Replit is fine.
REL-A — generated
Fully unbranded per the locked terms (no Relume name or logo anywhere). The grey wireframe sitemap vs finished coffee-brand site tells the exact story the first-minute Relume segment will tell. Depth background baked in.
Recommended title
I Built a $10,000 Client Website in Replit (Zero Design Skills)
In-image text $10,000
Pattern dollar band + tool name + capability-gap hook
$8k-12k band n=9, 1.93x; tool naming n=103, 1.98x
Relume owns the first-minute 'how I structured it' beat - the whole segment is legitimately about Relume, satisfying mention+platform-shown without an ad break. Replit carries the search intent.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| REL-B | Replit + One Secret Weapon = $10,000 Client Websites The 'secret weapon' IS Relume, revealed in minute one - sponsor gets an intrigue-framed entrance without breaking the no-name-in-title rule. |
SECRET WEAPON | equation + curiosity gap on the unnamed tool equation n=18, 1.43x - most robust pattern |
| REL-C | How I Scope $10,000 Websites in 10 Minutes (Before Any Code) Positions Relume as the step Jack's agency does before touching a builder - the strongest fit for video 2 if REL-A is video 1 (avoids two near-identical Relume segments). |
10 MINUTES | how-I frame + dollar + time-box, agency-workflow angle time-box n=8, 1.80x; how-I outperforms how-to |
| REL-D | Zero Design Skills to $10,000 Client Website (Full Workflow) Directly speaks Florian's stated audience: people who don't know how they want the site structured and can't design yet. |
$0 SKILLS | transformation frame + dollar band dollar band 1.93x |
| REL-E | The First 10 Minutes of Every $10,000 Website I Build The 'first 10 minutes' IS the Relume segment - elegant structural alignment between packaging and the paid placement. |
FIRST 10 MIN | process-reveal curiosity curiosity gap n=10, 1.04x (flat) - carried by specificity here |
TopView AI via Sponseer/Aoniz (dedicated 1 of 2 - MCP campaign)
CLOSED - $40k total for 2 dedicated videos, invoice INV-12 issued - both due August
Dedicated video anchored on the MCP topic, featuring TopView (AI-generated product video ads). Sponseer explicitly rejected integration - dedicated only.
Brand rule: Naming preference unconfirmed - confirm with sponseer@aoniz.com whether TopView must appear in the title. Options flagged both ways.
TVM-A — generated
Composition and monochrome TopView chip are right - but the sneaker rendered as a recognisable Air Jordan with the Jumpman mark. Nike trademark in a sponsor thumbnail is a real risk: regenerate with a generic sneaker or swap the product before publish.
Recommended title
Claude + TopView MCP = Product Video Ads on Autopilot
In-image text ON AUTOPILOT
Pattern equation A + B = Outcome
equation n=18, 1.43x - most robust pattern
MCP is native Jack territory; the equation pairs a trusted tool (Claude) with the sponsor exactly like his 646K best-performer did.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| TVM-B | I Built a $9,000 Product Ad Inside Claude (TopView MCP) 'Inside Claude' is the curiosity hook - ads don't get made in a chat window, until they do. |
$9,000 | dollar band + how-I + parenthetical $8k-12k band n=9, 1.93x |
| TVM-C | 5 INSANE MCP Use Cases (Ads That Make Themselves) Only if the video genuinely covers 5 distinct MCP workflows with TopView as the flagship - the decay data says don't lean on this twice. |
5 USE CASES | numbered list + superlative CAUTION: format decayed hard across reuse (223K to 20K over four uses) |
| TVM-D | Agents Now Make Your Video Ads While You Sleep (MCP) Tool-agnostic title - the safe option if TopView prefers staying out of the title. |
WHILE YOU SLEEP | ceiling-removal / always-on promise ceiling-removal cluster n=17, 1.38x |
| TVM-E | Your Product Photos Are Now Video Ads (Claude MCP) Leads with the viewer's asset (their product photos) rather than the tool - strongest for a general small-business audience. |
PHOTO TO AD | transformation frame directional - matches TopView's core anything-to-ad mechanic |
TopView AI via Sponseer/Aoniz (dedicated 2 of 2 - Seedance 2.5 campaign)
CLOSED - same $40k package - urgency tied to Seedance 2.5's imminent release
Dedicated video anchored on Seedance 2.5 (new video-gen model), featuring TopView's product-ad pipeline on top of it. Newsy timing matters - this one should ship close to the model's release.
Brand rule: Same as MCP video - confirm TopView title-naming preference with Sponseer.
TVS-A — generated
The photo-to-commercial jump reads instantly - dull still on the timeline, cinematic teal-magenta bottle bursting out. TopView chip monochrome as specified. Accent colours are category convention, not a brand claim (TopView brand kit still TODO_VERIFY).
Recommended title
Seedance 2.5 + TopView = $9,000 Product Ads in Minutes
In-image text $9,000
Pattern equation + dollar band
equation n=18, 1.43x; $8k-12k band 1.93x; known+novel pairing = his 646K formula
Exactly the structure of his best performer: fresh-model intrigue (Seedance hype) + sponsor as the practical wrapper.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| TVS-B | I Tested Seedance 2.5 on a Real Product (Wild Results) Review-style framing rides the release-week search wave harder than any other option. |
REAL PRODUCT | test frame + superlative modifier superlative as modifier 1.70x headline / 1.22x controlled |
| TVS-C | $5,000 Product Ad for $50 (Seedance 2.5) Fires correctly: businesses genuinely pay thousands for product video. Verify both numbers are defensible before scripting. |
$5,000 TO $50 | cost collapse n=7, 3.19x - highest ratio in the corpus |
| TVS-D | Seedance 2.5 Makes the Ads Studios Charge $5,000 For Same value story as TVS-C without committing to a specific paid-tool price claim. |
$5,000 ADS | dollar anchor + implied comparison dollar anchor n=13, 1.43x |
| TVS-E | Every Level of Seedance 2.5 Explained (Beginner to Pro) The definitive-reference play for a brand-new model; cheap third test of a promising format. |
LEVEL 1 TO 5 | explainer n=2, median 103,117, 1.87x - INSUFFICIENT SAMPLE, both instances cleared 95K |
Pippit (pippit.ai)
VERBALLY AGREED - $30k dedicated video - invoice not yet sent, contact nathan@invite.jellyotter.org
Per Florian: avatars + brand design, 'anything to video'. CAUTION: the actual brief/terms email is missing from the pulled thread - deliverable specifics are unverified. Confirm with Nathan before scripting.
Brand rule: No naming constraint found (thread incomplete) - confirm.
PIP-A — generated
The fan of vertical ad cards works, and the small presenter figure rendered as a mini-Jack avatar - which is accidentally truthful to Pippit's avatar feature (your own avatar sells your product). Keep or regenerate per taste. Brand hex TODO_VERIFY; wordmark chip monochrome. Reminder: the deal brief itself is still unverified with Nathan.
Recommended title
I Built a $9,000 Video Ad Campaign With One Prompt (Pippit)
In-image text $9,000
Pattern dollar band + how-I + parenthetical
$8k-12k band n=9, 1.93x
The 'anything to video' promise expressed as a concrete, falsifiable build.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| PIP-B | Pippit + One Product Photo = A Full Video Ad Campaign Minimum-input-maximum-output is the strongest way to dramatise an anything-to-video tool. |
PHOTO TO CAMPAIGN | equation A + B = Outcome equation n=18, 1.43x |
| PIP-C | This AI Turns Anything Into Video Ads in 8 Minutes Tool-agnostic variant if Pippit prefers the mid-video reveal (as Genspark did). |
8 MINUTES | time-box + tool-unnamed curiosity time-box n=8, 1.80x |
| PIP-D | $2,000/mo of Video Editing for $0 (AI Avatars) Sharpest hook if the avatar feature is the campaign's centrepiece. Verify the pricing claim. |
$2,000 TO $0 | cost collapse n=7, 3.19x - highest ratio; fires because businesses really pay editors monthly |
| PIP-E | AI Avatars Just Got Scary Good - I Made One Sell My Product The mass-audience option; the thumbnail question invites the is-it-real inspection click. |
IS THIS AI? | novelty + demonstration directional - avatar uncanny-valley content travels broadly |
Hosting.com (A2 Hosting)
STATUS UNCERTAIN - CRM says closed but the amount is conflicted ($20k triage note vs commission-based vs their $14k/integration quote) and the email thread is absent from the pull. CONFIRM format + rate with Ram Pramod (ram.pramod@hosting.com) before scripting.
Web hosting / AI website builder video, topic Jack's choice. Hard constraint from Jack himself: keep it general-audience - no VPS/agent complexity ('too complicated for the general audience'). Payment triggers on delivery of an unlisted video link.
Brand rule: Format unconfirmed (Notion says dedicated, unverified). Titles below work either way.
HOS-A — generated
Clean, general-audience, zero VPS/agent imagery per Jack's own rule. LIVE pill + prompt bar tell the one-prompt-to-live-site story. CAUTION: format and rate still unconfirmed with Ram; verify the $3/mo price before locking this number in anything public.
Recommended title
One Prompt, One Live Website - Hosting Included ($3/mo)
In-image text $3/mo LIVE
Pattern transformation + price anchor
price-anchor logic of the proven $5/mo Hostinger frame
General-audience by design: no agents, no VPS, just prompt-to-published-site. Verify the real entry price before locking the number.
Alternate titles & in-image text — thumbnails not yet generated
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| HOS-B | The $3/mo Website Stack That Replaces $200/mo of Tools Fires correctly for anyone paying Wix/Squarespace/Webflow money. |
$200 TO $3 | cost collapse n=7, 3.19x - highest ratio in corpus |
| HOS-C | I Tested the Cheapest AI Website Builder on a Real Client 'Real client' imports Jack's agency credibility into a commodity category. |
CHEAPEST? | test frame + real-stakes qualifier review framing rides comparison search intent |
| HOS-D | I Built a $9,000 Website With a $3/mo AI Builder The value-vs-cost tension IS the thumbnail: two numbers, absurd ratio. |
$9,000 / $3 | dollar band + cost contrast $8k-12k band 1.93x + cost-collapse energy in one line |
Fish Audio (short-form + Skool)
CONTRACT DRAFTED, NOT SIGNED (CPP agreement awaiting review) - $5,000 short-form package (Reel/TikTok/YT Short, DEDICATED) + Skool community feature (scope unresolved, leans integrated, unpriced). Publish before Aug 17. Contact: Sun Milk, sunmilk@fish.audio.
Voice cloning, TTS with emotion tags, S2.1 Pro API. Mandatory short-form elements are non-optional: voice-clone demo, TTS demo, S2.1 Pro API mention, affiliate link, hashtags. These are HOOK LINES for short-form, not YT long-form titles.
Brand rule: Blocker: get the CPP agreement reviewed/signed before producing anything.
No thumbnail yet
pick a title ID below and it gets generated (~$0.05, about a minute)FSH-A — recommended, not yet generated
Recommended title
HOOK: 'I cloned my voice in 60 seconds - listen to this.'
In-image text 60-SECOND CLONE
Pattern short-form hook - demonstration + time-box
covers the mandatory voice-clone + TTS demo elements in one beat
The clone speaking IS the content - zero setup, instant proof.
All title options — no thumbnails generated yet
| Pick | Title | In-image text | Pattern & evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| FSH-B | HOOK: 'This AI voice has emotions. Watch it act.' Emotion tags are the demo moment competitors cannot match. |
IT ACTS | short-form hook - capability reveal emotion-tag TTS is the differentiator named in their own emails |
| FSH-C | HOOK: 'My AI clone runs my community announcements now.' Makes the unresolved Skool feature concrete: voice-cloned announcements as the community integration, with affiliate link in the post. |
MY CLONE WORKS | short-form hook - bridges to the Skool deliverable one asset serves both deliverables |
| FSH-D | SKOOL POST: 'I gave my community a voice - the exact setup (S2.1 Pro API)' Scopes the vague 'community feature' into something deliverable. Confirm scope with Sun before committing. |
n/a (text post) | Skool integrated feature - workflow share + affiliate link matches Jack's existing Skool post history of tool-workflow shares |