Growth & Strategy
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Medium-term (3-6 months)
Three years ago, I was obsessed with growth hacking. You know the drill—viral loops, product-led explosions, the whole "build it and they'll magically find it" fantasy. I'd read every case study about Dropbox's referral program and Airbnb's Craigslist hack, convinced I could engineer viral moments for my clients.
Then reality hit. Hard.
After watching multiple startups burn through budgets chasing the next "growth hack," I discovered something that fundamentally changed how I approach client acquisition: the Bullseye Method from Gabriel Weinberg's "Traction." The difference wasn't just in results—it was in building sustainable, predictable growth instead of praying for lightning strikes.
The problem with growth hacking isn't that it doesn't work. It's that it's treated like a magic wand when most businesses need a systematic approach to finding what actually drives growth. We're so busy looking for the sexy, viral solution that we ignore the boring, profitable channels sitting right in front of us.
Here's what you'll learn from my three years of testing both approaches:
Why the Bullseye Method's systematic channel testing beats random growth experiments
The specific framework I use to prioritize acquisition channels (and why most founders get this wrong)
Real examples of when growth hacking backfired and systematic testing saved the day
How to apply the Bullseye Method to your specific business stage and budget
The one-page framework that helps you focus on the 20% of channels that drive 80% of results
If you're tired of throwing tactics at the wall and hoping something sticks, this approach will change how you think about customer acquisition forever. Let's dive into what the industry gets wrong about sustainable growth.
Industry Reality
What every startup founder thinks they need
Walk into any startup accelerator or scroll through any growth newsletter, and you'll hear the same mantras repeated like gospel. Growth hacking is the holy grail. You need viral coefficients above 1.0. Product-led growth is the only way to scale. Find that one magical channel that will explode your business overnight.
The industry has convinced us that growth should look like a hockey stick, and if you're not seeing exponential curves, you're doing something wrong. We've romanticized the Dropbox referral story so much that every founder thinks they need their own "aha!" moment—that one clever hack that will unlock infinite growth.
Here's what the conventional wisdom tells you to do:
Start with product-led growth: Build virality into your product from day one
Optimize for viral coefficients: Every user should bring in more than one additional user
Move fast and break things: Try 50 growth experiments and see what sticks
Focus on vanity metrics: User acquisition numbers matter more than sustainable unit economics
Copy successful growth hacks: If it worked for Uber or Airbnb, it'll work for you
This advice exists because success stories get the spotlight. We hear about the 1% of companies that achieved viral growth, but we ignore the 99% that built sustainable businesses through systematic, boring channel development. The industry conflates correlation with causation—just because successful companies had viral moments doesn't mean viral moments caused their success.
The real problem? This approach treats customer acquisition like a lottery ticket instead of a systematic process. You're essentially gambling that one random experiment will be your golden ticket, rather than building a predictable growth engine.
But here's what I discovered after working with dozens of startups: the companies that actually scale consistently aren't the ones chasing viral moments. They're the ones that methodically test, measure, and double down on the channels that work for their specific business model.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
The wake-up call came during a project with a B2B SaaS client who was convinced they needed to "hack their growth." They'd heard about some company that grew 500% by posting on Reddit, so naturally, they wanted their own Reddit moment. Their actual product? Enterprise software for manufacturing companies. Their target customers? 50-year-old plant managers who probably hadn't been on Reddit since... well, ever.
But that wasn't the real problem. The real issue was their approach to customer acquisition looked like throwing spaghetti at the wall. They'd tried Facebook ads (failed), cold email outreach (mediocre results), content marketing (too slow), influencer partnerships (wrong audience), and were already planning their next "experiment"—a TikTok strategy for manufacturing software. I'm not making this up.
When I started working with them, they had data from six different channels, but no systematic way to evaluate which ones were actually working. They were measuring everything—traffic, clicks, impressions, downloads—but couldn't tell me their customer acquisition cost or lifetime value for any single channel. Classic growth hacking mentality: try everything, measure everything, optimize nothing.
The breaking point came when they spent $15,000 on a "viral marketing campaign" that generated exactly three trials, none of which converted. That's a $5,000 cost per trial for a product with a $200 monthly subscription. Even their most optimistic projections couldn't make those numbers work.
This was my first real exposure to what I now call "growth hacking paralysis"—when you're so busy chasing the next shiny tactic that you never fully develop any single channel. They had surface-level knowledge about a dozen different strategies but mastery of exactly zero.
That's when I introduced them to the Bullseye Method. Instead of trying to be clever, we were going to be systematic. Instead of chasing viral moments, we were going to find their one or two profitable channels and master them completely.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
The Bullseye Method isn't sexy, but it works. Here's exactly how I implemented it with that B2B SaaS client, and why it completely changed their growth trajectory.
Step 1: Channel Inventory and Brutal Honesty
First, we listed every possible acquisition channel that could work for their business. Not the channels they wanted to try—the channels that made logical sense for reaching manufacturing plant managers. We ended up with 19 potential channels, from trade publications to industry conferences to LinkedIn outreach.
The key insight here: we weren't looking for the most exciting channels. We were looking for channels where our ideal customers actually spent time. Revolutionary concept, right?
Step 2: The Three-Bucket Prioritization
This is where the Bullseye Method gets its name. We divided those 19 channels into three buckets:
Bullseye (Top Priority): Channels that were most likely to work for our specific customer and business model. For this client, that was LinkedIn outreach, industry publications, and trade show partnerships.
Potential (Test Next): Channels that might work but had lower probability or higher complexity. Cold email, content marketing, and referral programs made it here.
Long Shot (Maybe Later): Everything else. Yes, TikTok went in this bucket.
The rule: you can only focus on your Bullseye channels until you've either proven they work or definitively proven they don't. No jumping around. No shiny object syndrome.
Step 3: Systematic Testing with Real Metrics
Instead of running random experiments, we designed proper tests for each Bullseye channel. For LinkedIn outreach, we set up a 30-day test with specific targets: 500 connection requests, 20% acceptance rate, 5% meeting booking rate, 10% trial conversion rate.
We tracked everything that mattered: cost per lead, cost per trial, trial-to-paid conversion, and customer lifetime value. Not vanity metrics—real business metrics that told us whether each channel was profitable.
Step 4: Double Down on What Works
After 90 days of systematic testing, the results were clear. LinkedIn outreach was generating trials at $180 cost per acquisition with a 15% trial-to-paid conversion rate. Industry publication ads were more expensive ($320 CAC) but brought higher-quality leads with 25% conversion rates.
The traditional growth hacking approach would have been to keep testing new channels. Instead, we doubled down on these two proven channels and optimized them ruthlessly. We hired a LinkedIn outreach specialist. We increased our publication ad spend. We stopped testing new channels and focused on mastering the channels that worked.
The Framework That Changed Everything
The difference wasn't just in the systematic approach—it was in the mindset shift. Growth hacking asks: "What clever tactic can we try next?" The Bullseye Method asks: "What channel will consistently deliver profitable customers for the next 12 months?"
That's the distinction between tactics and strategy. Growth hacking optimizes for clever. The Bullseye Method optimizes for predictable.
Channel Focus
Bullseye forces you to test only 3 channels at a time, while growth hacking spreads effort across dozens of experiments. Focus beats scattered effort every time.
Sustainable Metrics
Track cost per acquisition and lifetime value from day one. Growth hacking often optimizes for vanity metrics that don't translate to revenue.
Systematic Testing
Instead of random experiments, create controlled tests with clear success/failure criteria. Most growth hacks fail because they're not properly measured.
Long-term Thinking
Bullseye optimizes for channels that work consistently for months, not viral moments that spike and die. Predictable growth beats viral growth for building real businesses.
The results weren't immediate, but they were sustainable. After six months of focusing exclusively on LinkedIn outreach and industry publications, my client had:
Monthly recurring revenue grew from $12,000 to $47,000. More importantly, they could predict their growth month over month because they'd mastered their acquisition channels. They knew that spending $5,000 on LinkedIn outreach would generate approximately 28 trials, and 4-5 of those would convert to paid plans.
The cost predictability was the real game-changer. Instead of hoping that this month's experiments would work, they could plan their customer acquisition spend with confidence. They knew their customer acquisition payback period was 4.2 months, so they could make informed decisions about how aggressively to scale.
But here's what surprised me most: their "boring" systematic approach started attracting attention in their industry. Other manufacturing software companies started asking how they were growing so consistently. Their methodical case studies became more valuable than any viral moment could have been.
The final validation came 18 months later when they raised their Series A. Investors weren't impressed by growth hacking stories—they were impressed by predictable, profitable customer acquisition channels that could scale with increased investment.
That's when I realized the fundamental difference: growth hacking optimizes for stories you can tell at conferences. The Bullseye Method optimizes for businesses you can actually scale.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
After implementing the Bullseye Method across multiple client projects, here are the seven lessons that fundamentally changed how I approach customer acquisition:
1. Distribution beats product quality every time. Your brilliant product means nothing if you can't systematically reach customers. Focus on mastering distribution before perfecting features.
2. Constraints force better decisions. Limiting yourself to three channels prevents the scattered effort that kills most growth initiatives. Constraints create focus, and focus creates results.
3. Boring channels often outperform sexy ones. LinkedIn outreach beat TikTok marketing for B2B software. Trade publications beat viral content for manufacturing. Your customers care about their problems, not your creative marketing.
4. Predictability trumps virality. A channel that consistently delivers 10 customers per month is infinitely more valuable than one viral moment that brings 100 customers and then dies.
5. Most "failed" channels weren't properly tested. Growth hacking fails because people abandon channels after surface-level attempts. The Bullseye Method requires deep testing before moving on.
6. Your competition is probably doing growth hacking wrong. While they're chasing viral moments, systematic channel development gives you a sustainable competitive advantage.
7. Founders need to own the testing process. You can't outsource channel discovery to agencies or junior marketers. Understanding your customers deeply enough to pick the right channels requires founder-level insights.
The biggest mindset shift? Stop asking "What growth hack should we try next?" Start asking "What channels can we master completely?" That question leads to sustainable businesses instead of viral moments.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups looking to implement the Bullseye Method:
Start with channels where your ideal customers already consume content (industry publications, LinkedIn, specific communities)
Focus on customer acquisition cost and lifetime value metrics from day one—vanity metrics kill SaaS businesses
Test only 3 channels maximum until you find one that works consistently
Build relationships in your industry rather than chasing viral moments that don't convert
For your Ecommerce store
For ecommerce stores applying systematic channel testing:
Focus on channels where your specific customer demographic shops and discovers products
Test systematic content creation over viral social media moments for sustainable traffic
Prioritize channels with measurable return on ad spend rather than engagement metrics
Master 1-2 profitable channels completely before expanding to new acquisition methods