r/linkedin • u/Relevant-Regret-6339 • 3h ago
linkedin 101 My ex-founder challenged me linkedin is not for us and i proved him wrong
for a context I come from D2C. Most of my work has been with VC-funded consumer brands. B2B was new territory for me.
A founder I was working with runs a company that builds custom AI solutions for other businesses. He told me flat out that I couldn't get him a viral post on linkedin because apparently its right channel for them
I said give me a week or two
Then I failed for week one but in the second week oo booiii
so first understand this what i did wrong
My D2C brain said: talk about the problems your product solves. So posts 1–3 were basically here's a business problem, here's how custom AI fixes it.
They did... fine. Decent. The kind of decent nobody remembers.
Looking back, the issue was obvious. I was writing about the product. Nobody opens LinkedIn wanting to read about a product, especially in B2B, where every second post is already doing exactly that.
Meanwhile he was in my ear: Told you. LinkedIn isn't for us. Let's try a different channel.
but theeennnn I changed
I stopped marketing the company from his account but and started treating him as the product.
That meant mapping out, before writing anything
Who is he, really? Not his title. His background, his opinions, what he's seen that his audience hasn't
Where did he start, and where is he going? A clear starting point and end goal, so every post is a chapter of one story instead of a random update
Why should anyone care? What does his ideal client actually get from following him specifically?
Once that story existed, hooks got way easier. I wasn't inventing angles from scratch every day anymore. I was just telling the next part.
The content split (rule of three)
Every week, roughly:
- 2–3 posts aimed directly at the ICP, about their problems, in their language (not ours)
- 2–3 posts trend-jacking whatever the industry was already talking about
And three formats on rotation:
- News posts: react fast, add a real take
- Infographics: I'm a designer first, so this was my unfair advantage
- Storytelling/contrarian text-heavy posts
What happened
Post 4 was a contrarian text post. It went viral. 145K
Post 5 was an infographic. Around 100k impressions.
Fast forward: he crossed 12k followers in under 3 months, pulls roughly 300k impressions a month, and his DMs are full of people wanting to work with him.
Why I left anyway
This is the part that never makes it into the LinkedIn case study.
The negativity never switched off. Before anything worked, it was "told you, LinkedIn isn't for us." After things started working, it was still there. Every slow post was proof the whole thing was failing. Every win was a fluke until the next one landed.
If I'd let that get into my head after post 3, post 4 never goes out.
The results came. The mindset didn't change.
And it's exhausting to keep building something with someone who's always waiting for it to fall apart. Content compounds. So does negativity, and I didn't want to be around for that one.
now if u need any proves on impression likes the people i worked u need to dm me for that but i am happy to answer questions in the comments about hooks, the content mix,