Creator Empowerment: $150K ROAS in Q3 2025

The whole idea of democratizing production, the kind of thing Matt Stanton has been talking about, is about giving more people the keys to high-end media tools and distribution so they can actually get their work seen. It’s a fundamental change that’s supposed to upend the old media guard and really help creators build something for themselves.

Deconstructing the “Creator Empowerment” Campaign: A Q3 2025 Retrospective

Back in Q3 2025, we launched our “Creator Empowerment” campaign because we were seeing a huge demand for more accessible production technology and this whole democratized media thing. The objective was simple: get more people actively using our new AI editing tools and push them over the finish line on their first project. We put a $150,000 budget against it for the 10-week run between July 1 and September 9, with some very specific numbers we needed to hit.

Strategy and Core Objectives

Our strategy wasn’t just about awareness, it was about getting people to adopt the tools and then hopefully advocate for them. It’s one thing to have powerful features, but it’s useless if people feel intimidated or can’t get a result they’re happy with. We set some tough goals for ourselves:

• Bump up monthly active users (MAU) by 15%.
• Get a 25% increase in projects finished using the new AI features.
• Cut down the time it takes a new user to complete their first project by 20%.
• Keep our return on ad spend (ROAS) above 3.0x.

Let’s be real, the market for creative tools is incredibly crowded, so we had to stand out. Our whole pitch was built around the idea that our new AI stuff gave you pro-level results without the brutal learning curve you get from other software. This focus on making things easy was a direct nod to Matt Stanton’s philosophy of actually helping creators by getting technical junk out of their way.

Creative Approach: Show, Don’t Just Tell

We went all-in on user-generated content (UGC) and authentic creator stories for the creative. Why? Because we were convinced that seeing real people get amazing results with our platform would be far more persuasive than some slick, over-produced ad we cooked up internally. The main assets we ran were:

• Short-form video testimonials: We found a bunch of new creators and had them film 15-30 second clips showing off quick edits, which were perfect for running as TikTok Spark Ads and on Instagram Reels.
• Interactive tutorials: These were step-by-step guides we put right inside the platform to show off specific AI tools, like our audio cleanup or background remover, and we promoted them on social to drive people in.
• Display ads: We ran the usual static and animated banners across the Google Display Network and some niche forums for creatives, using direct calls to action like “Create Your First Project Free.”

We made a conscious decision to avoid technical jargon in our copy. Nobody wants to hear about “neural network-powered segmentation,” they just want “one-click background removal.” That kind of simplification was absolutely necessary to connect with the aspiring creators and small business owners who make up our target audience.

Targeting and Channel Mix

Our targeting approach mixed demographic, psychographic, and behavioral signals to get pretty specific. We were looking for:

• Demographics: People aged 18-45, mostly in the 25-34 bracket, living in cities and suburbs in North America and Western Europe.
• Psychographics: Anyone whose interests included content creation, digital marketing, graphic design, photography, or running a small business.
• Behavioral: We specifically went after people who had already been poking around competitor sites, had downloaded free trials for other creative software, or were watching video editing tutorials online.

The budget allocation was heavily weighted toward the platforms where our audience goes for inspiration and to learn new skills:

• Social Media (70% of budget): This was mostly TikTok, Instagram, and LinkedIn Ads. We used TikTok and Instagram for broad engagement with the creator community, while LinkedIn was for getting in front of small business owners and marketing managers.
• Search Advertising (20% of budget): Straightforward Google Ads buys for keywords like “easy video editing,” “AI creative tools,” and brand names of our competitors.
• Display Advertising (10% of budget): Programmatic buys across a bunch of creative communities and tech review sites.

Putting 70% of the money into social, especially short-form video, wasn’t an accident. We saw those platforms as the natural home for our core message about making creation accessible, not just another place to run an ad.

Performance Analysis: What Worked, What Didn’t

After 10 weeks, we had a mountain of data that gave us a pretty clear picture of what we got right and what we got wrong. Here’s how the numbers shook out:

Successes: The Power of Authenticity

Hitting a 3.5x ROAS was a huge win and beat our goal, proving our spend was efficient. A huge piece of that success came from the micro-influencer deals we ran on TikTok and Instagram. That spend which was 40% of our social budget, delivered an average CTR of 3.2%, way higher than the 1.9% we saw from our own ads. The authenticity you get from those smaller creators with super-engaged followings is just something you can’t buy.

The other big win was our interactive video tutorials. The data was crystal clear: users who watched one of those videos were 45% more likely to finish their first project than users who just got the text-based help docs. It proved our theory that for new users, even with simple tools, seeing is believing and a hands-on guide is everything.

We also hit our goals for MAU and completed projects, which suggests the message about democratized media innovation was the right one. Getting the time-to-first-project down by 23% was a great result, as that’s a classic drop-off point for people trying new creative software.

Challenges and Unexpected Findings

Of course, it wasn’t all perfect. Our initial CPL on Instagram Reels ads was a painful $9.20, way over the $7.50 we had projected. The cost was just getting driven up by intense competition for creative eyeballs in those ad auctions, and the conversion rate from a view to a signup wasn’t strong enough. We spotted that trend in the first three weeks, thankfully.

Our display ads were another weak spot. They served up tons of impressions (over 10 million), but the CTR was a measly 0.8%. It built some awareness, sure, but it didn’t drive direct signups. This just confirms what many of us already know: for this kind of acquisition, display is much better for retargeting than for finding new leads.

A small but interesting thing we noticed was how creative performed in different regions. Ads showing diverse creators worked well everywhere. But if a creative was too niche or had a very specific cultural reference, it tended to fall flat outside of that one demographic, which is just a good reminder that you need broad appeal if you’re trying to reach a global audience.

Optimization Steps Taken

When we saw the high CPL on Instagram Reels, we didn’t wait around. In week four, we moved 20% of our Instagram budget over to TikTok Spark Ads. That move saved the day, as the TikTok CPL came in at just $6.80 and brought our blended average back down toward our goal. The Spark Ad format, where we could just boost good organic UGC, fit our authentic creative strategy perfectly.

For display, we stopped using it for broad targeting and switched to retargeting halfway through the campaign. We started showing those banners only to people who’d hit our website but didn’t sign up, or who started a project but bailed. This change gave us a 15% lift in conversion rates from our display spend for the second half of the campaign.

We were also running A/B tests constantly on copy and visuals. One of the clearest winners was emphasizing the outcome of using the tools (e.g., “Launch Your Podcast Today”), which performed about 10% better on CTR than ads that just talked about the features (e.g., “AI Audio Enhancement”). People care about what they can make, not the tech specs.

We also quickly built a new onboarding flow for anyone who came from a social media ad which included a short welcome video that pointed them straight to an AI-powered project. That one little change helped us get that additional 3% reduction in the time it took for a new user to complete their first project.

Lessons Learned and Future Outlook

This “Creator Empowerment” campaign really drove home a few key things about marketing for industry leadership in production tech. First, authentic content beats polished ads every time, especially when you’re talking to a community of creators. They can smell a fake a mile away and want to see people like themselves in your marketing. (My own take: way too many brands are still burning cash on hyper-produced ads when a simple, honest testimonial would work better.)

Second, you have to be ready to move budget around fast. The only reason we beat our ROAS target is because we spotted the high CPL on Instagram and weren’t afraid to pull the plug and shift that money to TikTok. A campaign isn’t something you can just set and forget. It needs constant babysitting.

And finally, the whole campaign was a proof of concept for democratized production. When you make it easier for people to create high-quality media, you don’t just get more users, you get a more interesting and active community. That’s exactly the future Matt Stanton described, one where good ideas can come from anyone, not just people with deep pockets or technical backgrounds.

The Q3 2025 “Creator Empowerment” campaign proved that if you focus on what users actually need, use authentic creative, and stay agile with your budget, you can get serious growth and build a real community in the production tech space.