“The Andromeda update just killed my business, and probably yours too?!?”

Was the title of a post in r/FacebookAds.

And all say is that the comments were a bloodbath:

===

Cost 4 people jobs this week and we ended the contributions my 5MM/year brand made to the community.
===

I now struggle to make ONE (1!!!) sale via Facebook ads. Same strategy and same creatives that were useful a while ago. I’m a bit fucked over here.

===

Every update seems to just add friction instead of add value, and the results are objectively worse than we had before. Andromeda is a failure.

===

Andromeda isn’t a failure. It’s doing EXACTLY what it’s intended to do. Removing adbuyers so that confused business owners spend more…

===

You could make a completely fair argument that Andromeda did not indeed kill Facebook Advertising…

Lots of businesses just don’t know and/or are too stubborn to adapt.

I am certain that this obviously isn’t the end of FB ads – plenty of businesses will still keep using them and getting a good ROAS out of them…

However…

That’s not what I’m interested in – whether and how brands will adapt to the ever-changing landscape of paid ads…

I’m more interested in Meta’s overall behaviour towards its users.

The last guy hit the nail on the head:

===

Andromeda isn’t a failure. It’s doing EXACTLY what it’s intended to do: Removing adbuyers so that confused business owners spend more

===

The trend is simply that Zuckerberg doesn’t care about you.

In fact:

He just sees you as a cow to milk out more money from – hence why he has no problem entshittfying your ad experience with each update.

(And he’s stopped hiding it long ago – at least in the beginning he had the facade running.)

Which leads me to an interesting parallel:

Toxic relationships.

I wager most FB ad users would have zero problems recognizing when and/or if they’re in a toxic relationship with another person…

• • Whether it’s a friend…
  • A business partner…
  • A spouse…

You name it.

Yet that same pattern recognition is almost…

Non-existent when it comes to giving Zucc incrementally more money… for an incrementally shittier experience and results?

„You think I DON’T KNOW that?!? I have to advertise on Meta because they literally have the biggest platform… and I drive a lot of traffic/sales through it.“

And that would be a fair response.

Frankly?

I don’t even disagree with it!

Well… for the most part.

Because I’m not saying you should just chuck Meta Ads in the bin and do something else…

No…

I’m just saying to use them in a way where Zucc can’t cost you a 1/3 of your business the moment he decides to put out another enshitiffying update…

I’ll let Mark Hanna – from the Wolf of Wall Street – cover this:

===

Name of the game is to move audiences from other people’s media… into your own media.

===

Specifically:

Use Zucc’s platforms to move people to the ONLY platform…

…in which YOU control the environment, message, schedule, audience, rules, tone and style:

Email.

Use it to build up an Email List/Newsletter which you can export – and therefore OWN an asset.

(If you can export it… you OWN it. Unlike with FB/IG…)

The entire first chapter of my Book delves deep into this topic – I wouldn’t have featured it if I didn’t deem it significant.

And I deemed it significant because the writing on the wall is obvious to me:

A) It will just keep getting more complex to run ads…

B) It will keep getting more expensive.

I even did a separate email on the latter titled: “Why you may soon have to start laying off your marketing department…”

All I’ll say is that the first two words of that email were “Holy Shit” – do with that information what you will.