Advertise on podcast: Lab-Grown Marketing by Evidenza

Sales and marketing alignment might be the biggest fantasy in B2B. After decades of dashboards, handoff frameworks, attribution models, and “smarketing” workshops, most companies are still running the same internal knife fight. This week on Lab Grown Marketing, Jon and Peter argue that the problem isn’t failed alignment — it’s the assumption that alignment should exist in the first place. Drawing on new synthetic research and LinkedIn behavioral data across 7,000+ B2B companies, they reveal why sales and marketing almost never target the same customers, why MQLs distort behavior on both sides, and why the pursuit of shared metrics may actually make performance worse. The guys revisit the infamous “Tokyo Test” — the moment LinkedIn’s brand awareness disappeared overnight — to unpack why sales teams dramatically underestimate the power of marketing until it’s gone. Then they introduce a different solution entirely: strategic misalignment. Instead of forcing sales and marketing to do the same job, companies should divide labor correctly, align around customer needs, and let each team execute independently against different parts of demand. Turns out the biggest opportunity in B2B growth might not be tighter alignment. It might be finally admitting alignment was never the goal. 00:00 - Introduction – Sales & Marketing misalignment 03:40 - The Tokyo Test – what a near-empty event taught us about brand 09:10 - The case for strategic misalignment 13:00 - Million dollar data – survey of 500 marketers vs. 500 salespeople 20:25 - The Circles of Doom – LinkedIn's 7,000-company alignment study 28:30 - Division of labor – the Adam Smith prescription for sales & marketing 35:55 - The MQL problem – the metric distorting both teams 40:00 - Category entry points – the one thing sales and marketing can agree on

A 10-table restaurant in Harlem became a $2.7 billion CPG brand by mastering one thing: being easy to want and easy to buy. Rao’s didn’t scale the restaurant—it scaled the desire. Jon and Peter break down how Rao’s built extreme mental availability through myth, scarcity, and cultural relevance—then paired it with physical availability through disciplined distribution. From mafia mystique to premium pricing, every move reinforced the same positioning: this is not everyday sauce. Also, Peter has a special guest joining him today: Eric Skae — the CEO who took Rao's from 5% annual growth to 40% in four months, and is now running the exact same playbook at Carbone Fine Food — for a rare inside look at how the brand actually scaled. They unpack the full playbook—segmentation, positioning, pricing, distribution, and brand assets—and show why Rao’s is one of the cleanest real-world examples of Ehrenberg-Bass in action. If you want to understand how brands actually grow (and why most B2B companies get it backwards), this is the case study. 00:00 - The $2.7B question 03:13 - RAO's History and Strategy 17:44 - Segmentation and Targeting 24:08 - Positioning 28:14 - Line Extensions 30:48 - Distinctive Brand Assets 38:46 - Non-Synthetic Salon: Interview with Eric Skae, CEO of Carbone Fine Food 1:06:12 - Future Predictions of Carbone 1:09:23 - Ideas Wrap 1:15:36 - Commercial Outcomes 1:17:41 - Million Dollar Data 1:20:59 - B2B Lesson

From Sam Altman to Jeff Bezos to Mark Zuckerberg, the pattern keeps repeating—leaders dismiss advertising right up until they need it to scale. Advertising isn’t a necessary evil. It’s the system that makes modern markets work. This week, Jon and Peter take on one of marketing’s most persistent myths: that advertising is annoying, manipulative, or optional. The reality looks very different. They unpack why advertising isn’t persuasion—it’s infrastructure. It connects buyers and sellers, subsidizes access, fuels competition, and quietly funds the innovations shaping the future. Including AI. Backed by new synthetic research, they reveal how people actually feel about advertising (hint: it’s not what you think), why even ad professionals misunderstand it, and how better framing completely changes perception. If advertising is the engine behind growth, innovation, and access—why does everyone keep pretending otherwise? 00:00 — The Most Misunderstood Engine in Marketing 02:10 — From the Feed: “I Hate Ads”… Until You Need Them 09:54 — Marketing Mental Models: Ads as Infrastructure 13:53 — Advertising Is a Weak Force (That Scales) 17:30 — Access, Innovation, Competition, and Survival 20:56 — Million Dollar Data: Do People Actually Hate Ads? 23:51 — Why Ad People Hate Ads the Most 26:48 — Good Ads vs Bad Ads 27:30 — Final Take: Advertising Is the System

Most ads aren’t ignored because they’re bad. They’re ignored because they assume attention that doesn’t exist.The real problem isn’t a “worst-case scenario” — it’s the default one. In this episode, Jon and Peter break down why modern advertising must be designed for half a second, sound off, mid-scroll. They unpack the picture superiority effect, why visuals are processed up to 20x faster than text, and why branding is mandatory while messaging is optional — no matter how smart your copy sounds in a deck. From Renaissance garb to Geico geckos, the guys explore why distinctive visual assets outperform clever words, why most marketers massively underinvest in imagery, and how AI-generated visuals are already beating human-made ads on clicks and purchase intent. If your ads only work when people pay attention, they’re not really working.

AI slop? Not so fast. This week on Lab Grown Marketing, Jon and Peter make the case that AI isn’t cheapening marketing — it’s upgrading it. From voice-first workflows to a sudden boom in “storytelling” jobs, the guys explore why the real productivity unlock of AI isn’t faster typing… it’s better thinking, spoken out loud. They kick things off From the Feed with a surprising Wall Street Journal signal: job postings for storytellers are exploding. Why now? Because when content becomes infinite, narrative coherence becomes scarce — and valuable. In Million Dollar Data, Jon shares fresh synthetic research showing just how bad most companies are at telling a clear story (spoiler: only 6% think they do it well), and why committees, fear, and diluted positioning keep killing narrative power. Finally, in the Synthetic Salon, a very-not-Morgan-Housel guest drops a simple but dangerous idea: the best story wins. In a world where products are copyable and content is free, storytelling isn’t fluff — it’s the moat. If you’re still typing your way through the AI revolution… this episode might convince you to start talking instead.

Marketers love data. More dashboards. More cuts. More “just one more slide.” But what if more data doesn’t make you smarter — it just makes you slower?This week on Lab Grown Marketing, Jon and Peter go deep on the signal-to-noise ratio and the uncomfortable truth hiding inside modern marketing teams: sometimes the thing you’re asking for is the thing delaying your best decision.They kick things off From the Feed with a tweet that hits a little too close to home — why adding more information can actually make automated systems (and humans) worse at choosing. Then in Million Dollar Data, they reveal results from a synthetic survey of 1,000 global CMOs… and yes, the numbers will surprise you. Most leaders swear more data helps them make better decisions — but the same people admit something else that completely flips the story.If you’ve ever felt “data-driven” right up until you were data-driven off a cliff… press play. 02:18 — From the Feed: more data = slower decisions 4:12 — Million Dollar Data: 1,000 CMO survey results (the paradox) 9:58 — Marketing Mental Models: The horse racing study

Everyone loves the idea that the best product wins. It’s clean, comforting, and almost always wrong. This week on Lab Grown Marketing, Peter and Jon take on the product delusion — the belief that product superiority alone guarantees success. In From the Feed, the guys use a timely media moment to revisit an old debate: why better products so often lose to better distribution. It’s a familiar pattern, and one that keeps repeating itself across entertainment, tech, and now AI. Then, in Million Dollar Data, Jon shares new synthetic research exploring where the product delusion actually lives inside modern organizations — and who’s finally starting to let it go. The results might surprise you, or they might confirm everything marketing has been quietly complaining about for years. Finally, in Synthetic Salon, Peter and Jon sit down with a very on-brand guest to talk defaults, familiarity, and why being easy to choose beats being objectively better. In a world where products are increasingly copyable, the real advantage shows up somewhere else entirely. Product matters first. Everything else matters most. 02:40 — From the Feed: Netflix, HBO, and the Myth of Product Superiority 23:42 — Million Dollar Data: Who Still Believes the Product Delusion? 31:05 — Synthetic Salon: Defaults, AI, and Why Distribution Always Wins

Marketers keep talking about brand building — meanwhile, half of today’s brands are quietly dying. Jon and Peter are here to stop the funeral. This week on Lab Grown Marketing, the guys break down how to avoid brand death in the synthetic era — why it happens, what causes it, and what the top 1% are doing differently. We open with Move 37, where Jon shares the story of how AI beat the world champion of Alpha Go and explains the shift from making “one ad” to making “infinite ads.” Peter argues the old model wasn’t just slow — it was creativity-blocking. Yes, there are framework jokes. In From the Feed, Jon and Peter dissect the internet’s latest identity crisis: brands acting like people, people acting like brands, and why the line keeps getting blurrier. Then, in Million Dollar Data, Jon shares new findings showing that most “breakthrough” assets aren’t novel — they’re consistent. Peter walks through why repetition remains the most underrated growth lever in the synthetic century. We wrap with this week’s Synthetic Salon, where the guys tackle the real question: How do you keep a brand alive when everything is changing? The rules are simple, the execution isn’t — but the payoff is massive. Four segments. One mission. No brand funerals. 3:30 - Move 37 8:26 - From the Feed 18:13 - Million Dollar Data 30:55 - Synthetic Salon

This week, Jon and Peter resurrect one of marketing’s most misunderstood — and most financially powerful — ideas: the 60/40 rule. If half of B2B marketers still claim brand “isn’t a priority”… well, the guys have thoughts. First up in From the Feed, they break down the newest Marketing Week report, where human respondents (adorable!) reveal why they still don’t believe brand delivers ROI. Then Jon and Peter unpack why ROI might be the worst way to measure anything — especially brand — and why B2B’s obsession with short-termism is slowly starving growth. Next, they revisit Les Binet & Peter Field’s 20+ years of econometric evidence, tracing how the 60/40 rule actually works — and why marketers keep misinterpreting it. Finally, in the Synthetic Salon, they welcome the Pocket Professor to explore how AI is shifting the balance between demand creation and demand capture — and why brand becomes more important, not less, in the synthetic century. Timestamps:01:11 — From the Feed: Why marketers still think brand doesn’t drive ROI09:54 — Marketing Mental Models: The truth behind the 60/40 rule22:57 — Million Dollar Data: Binet & Field, econometrics, and the Aston Martin effect29:37 — Synthetic Salon: How AI changes demand creation vs. demand capture Feat. Pocket Professor

What if everything marketers believe about precision is, well… probably wrong? In this ep, Jon and Peter crack open the illusion of certainty that defines modern marketing — and expose why “the right person, the right message, the right time” might be the industry’s biggest fantasy. From LLMs to audience targeting, they’re breaking down how marketing magic is more about managing uncertainty than mastering control. First up in From the Feed, the guys explain why it’s time to give LLMs a break. After all, they can’t be right about everything — so why are people riding so hard on a probability machine’s accuracy? Then, Jon and Peter survey synthetic marketers to see if they think probabilistically or deterministically. Do most marketers really think success is as simple as finding the right person, with the right message, at the right time? Yes. Errr — probably. Finally, in Mental Model and Synthetic Salon, the conversation takes a quantum leap as the guys channel Niels Bohr to explain why probabilistic thinking isn’t just for physicists — it’s the future of marketing. They explain why chasing perfect targeting and timing narrows your reach, and how embracing uncertainty can open the door to true scale. 01:40 - From the Feed 05:44 - Million Dollar Data 23:42 - The Synthetic Salon Feat. Niels Bohr

How can you add a little more movie magic to your marketing mojo? Jon and Peter dive into the theory of blockbuster marketing and explain why movie marketers either go big – or risk getting buried.   First up, they break down how Warner Bros. just beat Disney at its own game, raking in $1.3 billion to Mickey’s measly $1.2 billion. How can the blockbuster strategy work for a variety of industries? And why, oh why, are movies stuck in an endless cycle of prequels upon sequels upon threequels (*cough* Marvel, we’re looking at you *cough*)? The guys discuss the state of the movie attention economy and break down why familiarity, distinctiveness, and total merchandising are the three key components to winning big at the box office. And later, they turn to the synthetic data to expose how marketers really bet their budgets — does playing it safe with a bunch of small bets really pay off? Or does a little a less job security and a lot more risk reap more reward?   03:30 From the Feed – WB Beats Disney at the Box Office 07:39 Synthetic Salon – Anita Elberse Fan Breaks Down Blockbuster Strategy 15:51 Mental Model – From Movie Studio Marketing to B2B and B2C 29:42 Million Dollar Data – Are Marketers Afraid to Bet Big?

It’s the season finale, and Jon and Peter are bringing in the big guns: Professor Mark Ritson, the man who can make or break your marketing ego in a single sentence. Ever wondered how to beat Roger Federer at tennis? It’s basic math to Mark: you simply don’t play him. Mark’s breaking down some of his top marketing lessons of all time in a few words or less, discussing what he really thinks of *that* Sydney Sweeney ad, and explaining why “knowing the language of the boardroom” is worthless if you can’t actually do the marketing. He also waxes poetic about the main difference between B2B and B2C marketing, dishes on the future of AI (spoiler: it’s not just hype), dunks on NFTs (aka “Idiot magnets”) and the metaverse (just stupid), and tells Jon and Peter just how insane they really were leaving LinkedIn. If you’ve ever wondered whether marketers need MBAs, personas, or an overpriced metaverse avatar, the answer is the same: absolutely not. Strap in — this finale is sharp, brutal, and very Ritson. 02:32 - Walking Down Memory Lane with Mark Ritson 04:15 - Mark Ritson on Marketing 23:10 - Is B2B Really Any Different from B2C? 32:45 - The Future of AI

What do Weight Watchers, Tropicana, ABRDN, Jaguar, and HBO all have in common? You guessed it — terrible rebrands. In this ep, Jon and Peter are putting risky marketing moves under the microscope to ask the question — just how much risk is too much? First, they’re diving into the feed and covering some of marketing’s biggest acts of brandilism. Why are so many brands turning into blands? And are there better ways for marketing to take the risk out of risky business (like, oh, say… rebranding)?   Step away from the computer and drop the rebranding stick immediately because Peter and Jon are explaining why category optionality is a far superior solution, keeping a diverse customer base is king, and how AI can be a clutch component to making your customer research completely risk-free. Plus, how do CFOs and CMOs really feel about risk management? Peter and Jon unpack the data to get to the juicy center of your CFO's cold, steely heart before heading into the Synthetic Salon to chat with Rory Sutherland and Nassim Taleb about the perception and safety of brand in decision-making.   01:17 From the Feed – The Risk of a Rebrand 09:33 Million Dollar Data – How Marketers and CFOs Think About Risk 16:02 Mental Model – Why Marketing and AI Derisk Business 26:38 Synthetic Salon – Sori Rutherland

Back from Cannes and still reeking of overpriced rosé, Peter and Jon tackle the pain point marketers love to hate but can’t stop obsessing over: measurement. In this episode, they take a flamethrower to the click-through cult and ask the real question: why are we still chasing metrics that don’t matter? First up in From the Feed, the boys unpack the 95-5 rule thanks to a spicy little post from a French professor and dive into why most brands are over-indexing on the 5%. Can we finally just agree? Brand is the real engine of demand. And why do 8 out of 10 marketers still worship at the altar of click-through rate? You know… the metric that hasn’t correlated with purchase intent since like, ever. Can Jon and Peter talk some sense into the cult of CTR? They introduce the CMO Scorecard — a smarter framework for measuring what actually matters (creative, media, and outcomes) and explain how your obsession with CTR might be negatively impacting your brand’s performance. Finally, in the Synthetic Salon, they welcome Fannie Duke (not Annie, obviously), the probabilistic princess of poker and marketing realism. She explains how in both games and marketing, you can make the right decision and still lose. So then, just how much does measurement matter in a game of chance?   03:07 From the Feed — The 95-5 Rule Receives Pushback 11:29 Million Dollar Data —  Enough with Click Through Rates Already 17:51 Mental Model —  How to (and NOT to) Think About Measurement 35:07 Synthetic Salon — Probabilistic vs. Deterministic (ft. Fannie Duke)

This week on the pod, Peter and Jon are done talking about the marketing renaissance — so they’re leaping into the new age of marketing maximalism. When it comes to ad targeting, more is more. So why do so many marketers keep trying to hypertarget the “perfect” audience? After all, brands used to succeed before targeting was invented… so is it possible it just isn’t as important as we’ve been led to believe it is? In a recent article, 67% of people targeted as parents didn’t actually have any kids… so that begs the question — how accurate is hyper-specific targeting anyways? And is it possible you’re really just being scammed? Then, the guys reveal what the only number that matters in marketing is and why they live by the mantra “go broad or go broke.” Are you shooting yourself in the foot by limiting your targeted audience? And just how much targeting is too much targeting? And later, Peter and Jon break down the synthetic stats on how B2B and B2B marketers prioritize targeting vs. reach before heading over to the Synthetic Salon for a lively showdown with Helena, a die-hard hypertargeting fan. Can Peter and Jon convince her to embrace the maximalist mindset? TBD.   01:30 From the Feed — When Ad Targeting Goes Wrong 04:43 Mental Model — Reach Maximalism 12:37 Million Dollar Data — Targeting vs. Reach 19:04 Synthetic Salon — The Case for Hypertargeting