I collect examples and observations about copy that earns attention and may persuade people to buy. These are reactions and predictions, not campaigns I created or tested; they complement my notes on clear headlines win statics and winning ad creative.
On January 4, 2025, I called an unidentified static ad “Simple but genius” and said its copywriting was noteworthy. I shared https://t.co/gwPVmPkJP5, but the captured post does not describe the ad or identify who created it.
On March 31, 2025, I called an unidentified static ad “Simple but genius” and praised its line, “Don’t bring the eye-bags to the office,” saying it “hits deep for a lot of people.” I reported that the ad had 196K likes and shared https://t.co/djqBrQEqYR; the post does not identify its creator, advertiser, or product, or clarify when the count was observed.
On May 25, 2025, I observed that a simple headline can do very well and gave this formula: clear problem solving + simple wording + social proof = ggwp. I shared https://t.co/OyM8PMlVsB, but the captured post does not describe the linked example or provide evidence for the observation.
On August 19, 2026, I described seeing a woman I estimated to be “60ish” reading a long-form native on Facebook while waiting in a store line. It was “Block after block of pure text,” and I said she was hooked. I predicted that whoever wrote the copy would get her as a customer, but the post does not establish that she bought anything or identify the writer, business, or offer.
Related: static ads worth studying, simple statics beat overproduced ads, clear headlines win statics