Channel-offer fit

I made up a word to describe why followers ain't revenue

Channel-offer fit is a term I made up to describe the adhoc conversations I’ve been having with some folks on Twitter about how followers doesn’t always translate to revenue.

Followers ≠ revenue

I have about 1k followers on LinkedIn compared to 5k on Twitter, but 90% or more of my revenue comes from LinkedIn audience. The gap is mind-boggling, and definitely runs against the grain of what Twitter gurus like to say about building an audience.

That’s where channel-offer fit comes in.

There’s simply a better fit between the offer I’m offering on LinkedIn to the audience I have there, compared to the not-so-good fit between the offerings on Twitter to my Twitter audience.

A better fit means:

• Tighter audience and content niche match. I follow and interact with mostly designers, UX designers on LinkedIn, and my content is all design-related and targeted at them

• There’s also other folks who work in the public sector/non-profit space who are interested in design and are in my LinkedIn network, so the content strategy works for them too

• Buy intent is higher. My Twitter audience are mostly other indie makers. They can make things themselves. Whereas in LinkedIn, people are there for professional growth and networking. There’s also more money flowing through in corporate training and outsourcing projects.

• There’s less content creators in my LinkedIn network compared to Twitter, so it’s easier to stand out on LinkedIn. Building in public had taken off on Twitter, and it’s getting saturated, so harder to stand out from the noise.

So the lesson here?

Don’t listen to the BS that gurus say about growing a huge audience in order to monetize.

Buy intent is more important than attention and impressions.

Followers ain’t revenue.

---