Technical demo
Thomas Frank
Explain a complex workflow.
- Evidence
- Detailed Notion tutorials and a documented production workflow.
- Check first
- Own templates, category conflicts and exclusivity.
SAMPLE 01 · PRODUCTIVITY SOFTWARE
Three creators.
One clearer decision.
A software tutorial, a creator-business story, or a focused productivity test? Match the creator to the job.
Illustrative campaign, not a client result. Evidence dates: Nov 2025–Mar 2026. Current activity, rates and availability need checking.
For a new inspection of live commercial offers, read the planning-app conflict study. It uses a different brief and explains what changes the diligence order.
OUR FIRST DILIGENCE PICK
Thomas Frank, for a technical demo.
The clearest workflow-teaching fit in this historical sample. Check conflicts with his Notion products before moving forward.
The example brief
An English-language workflow app wants an educational YouTube integration that explains the product and leads to a trial.
Budget & target geography: not suppliedCompare the roles, not just the reach.
Research judgments · not performance scoresCreator-business story
Ali Abdaal
Connect the tool to a bigger goal.
- Evidence
- Historical creator-business videos with commercial CTAs and partner disclosure.
- Check first
- Owned products, commercial terms and audience fit.
Focused productivity test
Matt Ragland
Show a practical daily habit.
- Evidence
- Creator-productivity positioning and historical planning content.
- Check first
- Current sponsor inventory and software-demo depth.
DECISION MAP
What does your campaign need to do?
- Teach a detailed workflowStart diligence with Thomas
- Tell a creator-business storyExplore Ali’s integration fit
- Test a practical productivity angleExplore Matt’s current inventory
All paths still require budget, current activity, audience and conflict checks. No booking or performance prediction is implied.
The decision in one table.
| Decision factor | Thomas | Ali | Matt |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best sample angle | Technical tutorial | Creator-business narrative | Habit / planning test |
| Evidence to inspect | Workflow case study | Partner / trial CTAs | Planning content |
| Key uncertainty | Category conflicts | Commercial terms | Current inventory |
| Audience & conversion | Not verified | Not verified | Not verified |
Inspect dated evidence & source links Open the research trail
Evidence review
Date boundary: the examples below are historical public examples from November 2025 through March 2026. They do not establish current September 2026 activity, availability, or campaign readiness; refresh the public record before a live recommendation.
| Creator | Dated public samples | Fit and open questions |
|---|---|---|
| Thomas Frank Directional assessment: strong technical fit |
Historical March 2026 examples: Notion’s new Dashboards (17 Mar; ~43.2K views in a third-party snapshot), time tracking in Notion (6 Mar; ~9.5K). | Strong tutorial and workflow evidence. Check conflicts with Notion and his own templates, exclusivity, rates, availability, and audience geography. Sources: official site, Notion case study, public metrics snapshot. |
| Ali Abdaal Directional assessment: strong integration fit |
Historical March 2026 examples: How I’d Create Content in 2026 (26 Mar; 240,386 views, 8,600 likes in YouTube search metadata; #ManychatPartner), and If I Started YouTube from Scratch (12 Mar; 171,414 views, 5,400 likes). |
Strong commercial-integration evidence and productivity/creator-business fit. Owned productivity products and likely premium terms require a conflict and capacity check. Source: official about page. |
| Matt Ragland Directional assessment: focused test fit |
Historical November–December 2025 examples: WRAP annual review (23 Dec) and This Practice Will Put You Ahead… (14 Nov; ~28.6K views in a public snapshot). | Clear intersection of creator economy and productivity. Good candidate for a focused test, but current sponsor inventory, rates, audience geography, and software-demo depth are unknown. Sources: official site, year review. |
Read the method & limits What this sample cannot establish
Limits of this sample
- Follower and view counts are volatile public snapshots, not forecasts.
- URL reachability only shows that a link responded. Search metadata, vendor reports, and anti-bot-limited pages do not independently verify every underlying factual claim.
- The dated examples are historical; current activity, availability, conflicts, and terms must be verified before a live campaign recommendation.
- No private demographics, audience quality, fake-follower assessment, pricing, availability, or conversion data was available.
- A product mention is not automatically a paid sponsorship; explicit partner disclosure, commercial CTA, brand case study, and vendor-reported campaign results are kept distinct.
- The niche is a research hypothesis, not validated demand.
For a downloadable copy, open the evidence sections you want and use your browser’s Print → Save as PDF. The visual overview is designed for printing.
YOUR CAMPAIGN, YOUR SHORTLIST
A clearer choice for US$250.
Three creator profiles. A visual recommendation. Evidence you can inspect.
Enquiries are open. Payments are currently disabled; no charge to submit a brief.