Part One: Influencer Marketing 101 for Creators

Everything I'm sharing here is based on my personal experience and perspective. These views are mine alone and do not represent any current, former, or future employers.

My intention and hope in writing this is to offer a more thoughtful perspective than can fit in an unpaid short form post from somebody who has been on nearly all sides of the sponsorship conversation, including the creator side. This post is the culmination of 10 years in the creator space, more than half of it on the industry side.

The post ahead was too long for a single post (over 10,000 words), so I've split it into two parts. I recommend reading both in order. Part One covers brands and partnerships, while Part Two focuses on improving your sponsorship odds and working with talent agents:

There is surely something you will disagree with in this post and I want to be clear that this represents a singular perspective: mine. And if I could be so bold to offer you some instruction: simply take this post for what it is (my perspective) and leverage it against your own experience, knowledge, and opinions.

I've put up a subscribe with email to read further because I want this information to reach people who are genuinely interested in learning about the business side of creator partnerships. I don't post frequently to this blog and I'm not trying to monetize anything – feel free to unsubscribe after you read. I ask that you do not repost or repackage this content into other formats.

Note: All examples are made up and are fictional, but are representative of many instances over the years.

They're just out here to screw you over and get you to do free work—well no, but kinda yes. Every marketing department is told to do as much as they possibly can to hit outrageous goals with as little budget as possible. Marketing has gone through a bit of a reckoning with an overreliance on Big Data to make decisions that caused a shift from storytelling to performance-driven marketing tactics. I have faith that non-marketers will come back around to understanding that marketing is both science and art, realizing that it cannot be distilled down to singular performance-driven tactics. Nike already has, they were a powerhouse of marketing for years, the platonic ideal of a marketing team. They hired a CMO that was all about Big Data and their sales went down... they're making a u-turn back to storytelling but it'll be a while before they recover (you can learn more on the interwebs, smarter folks than I have analyzed it). Though, much to my and others' chagrin, marketing is still likely to continue to have to fight for a seat at the table earlier in planning to achieve success.

Unfortunately for creators, most influencer marketing is all about Big Data. This means all of the conversations about "creators are more than their numbers" are hurting you because at the end of the day it is all about the numbers and ROI. Even if the person you're working with on the brand or agency side thinks you are a perfect fit and your content would go well with the campaign, if the numbers don't work they won't be able to move forward in partnering with you. We'll come back to this in more depth shortly.

When a brand (e.g., consumer product, game studio, etc.) decides they'd like to do an influencer marketing campaign (organic or paid), they're looking at the importance of that particular moment, the overall budget they have for the year, and the targets they need to hit. To keep it simple and most relevant to the audience I believe will be reading this, let's use games.

A game has many beats over the course of the campaign (hopefully, lol) leading up to launch and a fixed limited budget. A lot of truly independent (no publishers or investors) game studios with small teams are run on limited budgets (unless they've had a breakout success before) and set aside as little as $5,000-$10,000 total for all of their marketing. These games rely heavily on organic influencer marketing, creators covering their game because they want to or they find it interesting, not because they're paid to. Some of these studios may decide that if they can get one unicorn of an influencer that is good at moving their audience (a few large creators get cited A LOT) that it will be enough to drive success.

What about game studios with publishers? There are a lot of different models for how publishers support games, including doing the marketing for them in-house, but for the sake of this post let's focus on publishers who let the game studio handle their own marketing and instead give them a budget. That budget is often unlocked over time and connected to specific milestones that the studio has to hit. This means when they launch a game demo it is very likely there is no budget tied to that marketing beat, which is why you get a lot of emails asking you to check out the demo with your community. It's a milestone where they can collect feedback and get market validation. If the demo doesn't perform as well as the publisher expects it to, it can impact how much more investment (budget) the publisher puts into that game.

Not to mention the most important marketing moment for many game studios is launch, and so many (if not most) spend most of their budgets around launch because that's the only time they'll be able to start recouping some of their expenses and making money. In the section on improving your odds of sponsorship, I'll explain later on how you might leverage this knowledge into being sponsored.

So when it comes to deciding when to lean into influencer marketing and when to spend budget, it's often tied to a lot more complicated metrics unrelated to you, and the idea that if a game studio really wanted to work with you they'd be able to unlock more budget is narrowly true in some cases. Most of the time there is a set amount of budget for marketing for the whole year and every dollar spent in one place is a dollar not spent in another.

For non-gaming brands, it depends on if the product is a high margin product (low cost to make and sell), whether it's considered "upscale" or luxury, if the brand has a notable reputation (i.e., they're highly desired), and where in the marketing cycle that product is at.

Now that you've got a high-level understanding of how decisions are made, let's dive into budget allocation and ROI. When an influencer marketing budget is set aside it usually comes with a set of goals. To illustrate the point, here are two fictional influencer campaign overviews that might exist for a game's marketing beat:

Example Campaign Overview One 

Example Campaign Overview Two 

What is the target goal they're explicitly tracking based on those campaign overviews?

While those are clear goals they're trying to reach for those campaigns, what KPIs (key performance indicators) will they use to determine if they will get an ROI (return on investment)?

What's a good number for each of those KPIs based on the budget? Well that's a little bit of a complex answer because you also need to take into consideration the TAM (total addressable market) aka how wide of an appeal the game has.

With a well-optimized ad on the right platform you could be able to get the cost per wishlist down to 25 cents. That's what you are ultimately competing against when we're discussing ROI, optimized ads. If the same amount of money could be spent in other places, would it perform better or worse? Don't worry, I don't think we should throw influencer marketing out with the baby and bath water, we'll talk about how to prove you have ROI down below.

Now that you have all of that context for those two campaigns, how would you break up that budget? How would you determine what to pay each creator? How would you decide on an upper limit for a single creator? All of those are great questions and have many different answers that all start with "it depends," so instead I'm going to outline a few possible scenarios.

Scenario One 

Given that creators are notorious about responding to emails timely and being communicative enough, that means you have to research MORE creators than you need and email them all because you know not everyone will say yes, read your email, or even respond. So you email 100 creators in hope of locking in the number of creators you need to hit your goals within the budget and you ask them what their rates are and you begin the fun game of budget tetris in spreadsheets.

Scenario Two 

Talent Agency A has a good amount of creators who could be a fit for the campaign so you reach out, share a campaign brief, and ask Talent Agency A to suggest the creators they think would be a great fit, within budget, and would help you reach your goals.

Scenario Three 

Brand hires an agency, either a talent agency with a brand marketing entity or a brand-only influencer marketing firm. The same budget is available but now the agency needs to be paid for their work, so the brand can decide to pay the agency fee on top of the spend or they may say that's the whole budget and your fee needs to come out of the total budget. And then the agency they've hired goes back to consider scenario one or two.

Now to be fair, influencer marketing budgets range and are sometimes higher for some brands and games, but those Barbenheimer budgets are not as plentiful as you might think. I'm using Barbenheimer as an example to pick on because I saw the perfect tweet from a marketer when it happened: "Was their marketing plan amazing or did they just have a massive budget?" I know, I know... a big budget and a bad marketing plan is still a bad marketing plan, but the best marketing plans are hindered by their budgets (or lack thereof).

Pro-tip: The best ROI comes from evergreen searchable VOD content (long or short form).

Once a brand has set aside a budget they're likely to engage a marketing agency, even if they have an in-house individual who manages their influencer programs, and the reason for this is because influencer marketing takes A LOT of time. When you engage an agency they usually have a dedicated team for your account, existing relationships, understand success metrics and systems in their workflow to reduce time where it's possible. As well as, they're doing this work every day—they're watching trends, looking at new creators on the rise, and also know which creators might have a brand risk. Honestly, it's deep internet culture shit.

The amount of time influencer marketing takes is also why you are getting emails that are relevant to you but not uniquely written specifically for you. If you email 100 creators you have to set parameters, research potential creators, look at each individual channel for brand risk, fit, etc., narrow it down to 100, and then you have to email them. Before you even get to writing an email you might spend hours even with tools, and that's because tools only get you so far before a human review is needed.

Some tools try to help with this by using AI to determine something that happened recently in your content, which is why you'll get "I loved when xyz-thing happened during your stream" and it's only partially accurate. I prefer to go the route of sharing how I selected creators. For example, I might include a line in my email that says, "We looked for creators who have played x, y, and z and have not played a."

I don't have a strong opinion on if a brand decides to manage in-house or leverage an agency. I've done campaigns in-house and have worked at an agency—in the spirit of transparency I'm at an agency now.

MYTH: A brand working with an agency has a big budget.

REALITY: Agencies also have to work with the budgets they're given and often take work below their standard rates because not every client is going to have the budget or be in a market where their currency goes further.

Ultimately the brand should do what works best for them to achieve the results they're looking for, but from my perspective a creator getting a deal through a marketing agency creates an opportunity to build a relationship with an agency that does deals all the time, and might remember you for future deals.

So ultimately, yes, brands (and their agencies) are trying to do everything they can to meet their goals within budget, but no they aren't specifically looking to take advantage of anybody. In fact, most influencer marketing managers I know feel the best about their work when it's a win-win situation.

A common rhetoric on social media is that the only type of partnership is the one where you’re paid – I would counter that if that is the only consideration then that is just contract work. Now to be fair, most influencer marketing campaigns are simple contract work with very straight forward deliverables with very little collaboration for a fee. However, that is not the only type of partnership that exists and you can leverage different types of partnerships to build your portfolio and business.

What it is: A brand sends you their product for free in exchange for coverage, whether that's a post, review, or mention. This includes game keys, unboxing kits, and customized items just for you.

Why you might benefit from participating: If you're just starting out, this gets products in your hands to create content around without upfront costs and it helps build your portfolio. It's also useful when you genuinely want to try something and share your honest take with your audience without the pressure of a paid contract.

Red flags: Brands expecting extensive deliverables for just products. If they want multiple posts, stories, reels, and full production value for a $30 item or even an item that’s more expensive that’s not a fair collaboration. Also watch for brands that get pushy about what you say or demand approval rights like you're being paid.

What it is: Instead of monetary payment, a brand provides you with an experience – a trip, event access, a meal at a restaurant, tickets to something, a spa day – in exchange for content coverage. The experience itself is the compensation.

Why you might benefit from participating: If it's something you'd genuinely want to do and it aligns with your content, you're getting real value while creating authentic material for your audience. It can open doors to experiences you couldn't access otherwise or wouldn't prioritize spending money on. When the experience is substantial and relevant to your niche, the content practically creates itself and feels natural rather than forced. And not to mention, exclusive experience content performs well. 

Red flags: Brands that expect extensive deliverables for a mediocre experience that's not worth your time. Companies that oversell what they're offering – promising luxury but delivering basic. Experiences that come with a lot of strenuous strings attached(specific posting schedules, excessive approval processes, mandatory talking points). And watch for situations where you're expected to cover your own travel, lodging, or other costs to access the "free" experience.

What it is: You share a unique link or code, and you earn a commission when someone makes a purchase through it. Payment is performance-based, not upfront. 

Why you might benefit from participating: This works well for products you already use and recommend. There's potential for passive income if you're talking about these products anyway, and it can be more lucrative than flat-fee posts if your audience converts well. It is also good practice in learning how to convert your audience which helps you build out provable ROI (especially if you have a smaller audience). 

Red flags: Terrible commission structures (like 2% on low-ticket items), brands that want you to commit to posting minimums without guaranteed compensation, or companies with shady tracking that "loses" your conversions. Also be wary of promoting products solely because the commission is high rather than because you believe in them.

Note: Hybrid based fee + performance based programs exist where you get a minimum lower fee for a minimum number of posts but you’re also paid out on performance. 

What it is: Your compensation is tied to business results like sales growth, new customer acquisition, or revenue targets – but isn't just clicking an affiliate link. You're being measured on real campaign performance, market impact, or business outcomes that go beyond simple link tracking. They may not include an initial upfront fee but instead a MG (minimum guarantee paid out at a future date).

Why you might benefit from participating: When you know you can move the needle, this structure lets you earn based on the real value you're bringing rather than just content. It aligns incentives properly – the brand is motivated to give you what you need to succeed, and you're rewarded for impact. If you're confident in your ability to drive results, the upside can be significantly higher than flat fees.

Red flags: Performance metrics that are unrealistic, poorly defined, or that you have no real ability to influence. Brands that aren't transparent about how they're tracking results. Deals where all the risk is on you (low or no base payment) but they maintain all the control over factors that affect performance like pricing, inventory, or marketing support. Companies that move goalposts mid-campaign or don't provide you with real-time data to optimize your approach.

What it is: You and a brand create content together where both of your names/brands are prominently featured. Think joint campaigns, collaborative content series, or co-hosted events where it's clear you're working together as partners rather than just being hired talent. These can be a paid or unpaid collaboration.

Why you might benefit from participating: This positions you more as a peer to the brand rather than just a contractor. It can elevate your credibility, expose you to their audience while they tap into yours, and often involves more creative collaboration than standard sponsored posts. Plus, it looks better on your media kit than a one-off sponsored post.

Red flags: Brands that want equal billing but expect you to do all the heavy lifting on content creation. Partnerships where they get to use your name and association but you have no say in the final output. Deals that give them all the upside (like owning all the content) while you're just getting "exposure" in return.

What it is: A brand uses your name, likeness, or intellectual property to create and sell products – think your own product line, a collection with your name on it, or limited edition items. This goes beyond content creation into product development and sales.

Why you might benefit from participating: This is real business building. You're creating tangible assets that can generate ongoing revenue through royalties or profit-sharing. It adds legitimate credentials to your portfolio, gives you something concrete to point to beyond social posts, and can open doors to bigger opportunities. When done right, you're building equity in something, not just trading time for money.

Red flags: Brands that want your name and audience but give you zero creative control over what's being made or how it's marketed. Contracts that don't include fair royalties or profit-sharing – if they're making money off your name, you should be too. Companies that are clearly just slapping your name on existing inventory with no collaboration. Deals that give them all the rights to use your likeness in perpetuity across any product they want without additional compensation. And watch for brands that want to lock you into exclusivity across entire product categories while keeping all the upside for themselves.

What it is: A brand pays you a flat fee to create content featuring their product or service. This is the standard influencer campaign with clear deliverables, timelines, and talking points.

Why you might benefit from participating: Direct payment for your work, plain and simple. When the rates are right and the brand aligns with your content, it's a solid income stream that values your audience and creative skills.

Red flags: Brands that won't let you redline the contract or negotiate terms, campaigns that require you to make claims you can't verify, or rates that are insultingly low for highly complex creative work they're requesting.

Note: Many contracts are boilerplate and include a clause about likeness rights in perpetuity; the red flag is if the brand refuses to budge. In my experience, many legal teams push for this to be included as a CYA and marketers are not specifically looking to use your content in perpetuity so just redline the agreement when you get it. That isn’t to say there are not shady individuals and companies out there so definitely redline it. 

What it is: An ongoing relationship where you regularly represent a brand over an extended period, usually several months to a year. This typically includes multiple posts, exclusive partnership terms, and sometimes events or other appearances.

Why you might benefit from participating: The value exchange should feel balanced – your sustained advocacy and audience access in return for their sustained investment in you, whether that's through payment, product, exclusive access, or other meaningful support. When it's a brand you love, you get to build a genuine narrative with your audience over time rather than one-off posts. 

Red flags: Programs where the value exchange is completely lopsided – exclusivity clauses that block you from working with entire categories of brands while they're barely compensating you, ambassador programs that are really just affiliate schemes dressed up with a fancy title, or brands that want ongoing access to you and your audience but offer no real value to you.

What it is: You receive ownership stake in a company or product line in exchange for your involvement, whether that's promotion, creative direction, or ongoing representation. This means you own a piece of what you're building.

Why you might benefit from participating: This is wealth building, not just income. If the company or product line grows, you grow with them. You have skin in the game and a seat at the table, which often means more creative control and strategic input. For the right opportunity, this can be life-changing money and set you up long-term in ways that paid posts never will.

Red flags: Equity that's so diluted it's essentially worthless, or ownership in an LLC with no real path to liquidity. Vesting schedules designed to make it nearly impossible to realize value. Deals where you take on significant risk and work but have zero control over business decisions that directly affect your equity value. Companies that aren't transparent about their cap table, valuation, or financial health. 

Ultimately what types of partnerships you choose to accept is up to you and only you. Be wary of individuals telling you what you should or shouldn’t do for your business who do not have to live with the consequences.

Congratulations you’re 40% of the way there, continue to part two!