Your competitors have ads like this too.
ViralMojo finds the ads printing money in your niche and runs this exact teardown on them: hooks named, structures mapped, claims checked.
Tear down my competitorsGet this decode for your own niche.
ViralMojo finds what's winning around your brand — organic and paid — decodes each winner the way these pages do, and writes the hooks and scripts in your customers' own words. It's a paid workspace, no free tier.
Start with ViralMojoPlans from $79/mo, flat — see ViralMojo pricing.
“You've been paying a podcast tax for your Greens.” Two words do the work. “Podcast” identifies the rival without a name (the reader knows which greens brand reads ads on her podcasts), and “tax” reframes its price as a charge she didn't agree to. “You've been paying” puts her inside the problem before she has decided whether she has one.
“The Cheaper One Is the Organic One” inverts the trade-off the reader expects, where organic costs more. It is the claim the rest of the funnel has to prove.
No price and no comparison on the image. A man holds the box toward the lens, “15 PACK” in the top corner, over a white panel reading “Every scoop contains:” / “22 Superfoods” / “5g Fiber”. The price argument lives entirely in the copy; the image only shows the product. (A second creative on the same copy, a pack beside a green drink, ends on “Real Ingredients, Real Affordable.”)
This pattern is one of dozens that stop the scroll — browse the ad hook library, with the formula behind each →
Eight beats: five in the ad copy, three on a landing page built for this one comparison. Each beat carries the move you can reuse, checked against the flags below.
Name the markupAd copy · Frame
Turns the rival's higher price into a named, involuntary charge. The name does the identifying: the reader supplies the brand herself, so Laird never has to make a claim about a named company.
“You've been paying a podcast tax for your Greens.”
Steal itName the premium your rival charges after [the cost it actually pays for, e.g. retail rent, celebrity fees, sponsorships] and call it a tax. It only works if the reader can confirm the cost exists; the flags below show where Laird stops being able to.
Price the rival, not the productAd copy · Anchor
The first number in the ad is the competitor's price, not Laird's, attached to the weakness Laird is about to exploit. Laird's own price never appears in the ad.
“$99 a month for a greens powder that isn't even organic.”
Steal itLead with [the rival's price, in the same unit you will compare in]. If you anchor on their one-time price, compare with your one-time price, not your subscription.
Say where the money goesAd copy · Reframe
Completes the tax metaphor: the premium doesn't buy product, it buys advertising. This is the line that makes the name stick, and the one with the least support (see flags).
“You're not buying greens at that price. You're buying their ad budget.”
Steal itTell the reader what [the rival's premium pays for] only if you can point at it, such as a public retail margin or a disclosed sponsorship. Otherwise stop at the name.
Checklist against the rival's labelAd copy · Differentiate
Each checkmark is written as the negative of something on the unnamed rival's ingredient list. “Not just the marketing” ties the checklist back to the tax line.
“✅ USDA Organic — the whole formula, not just the marketing”
“✅ No stevia. No "natural flavors." No soy.”
Steal itWrite the feature list as [the inverse of the rival's label], one line per ingredient the reader could check on the pouch she already owns.
Size the saving smallAd copy · Prove
After a $99 anchor, the only Laird number in the ad is a modest one: fifty-five cents a serving, on subscription. It matches the landing page's table ($2.08 against $2.63). The close then sells the switch as keeping the routine rather than changing it.
“✅ $0.55 less per serving on subscription”
“Same green glass every morning. Without the markup.”
Steal itState your saving in [the unit where it is exactly true] and name the condition (“on subscription”). A small, checkable number reads as more honest than a big percentage.
A page built for one comparisonLP · Anchor
The link skips the product page for a dedicated comparison page. Its headline restates the ad's charge as a question; the served HTML carries two versions of it, one at $99 and one at $79. We don't hold which one a given visitor is shown.
“Why Pay $99/Month for a Greens Powder That Isn’t Even Organic?”
“Why Pay $79/Month for a Greens Powder That Isn’t Even Organic?”
Steal itSend a comparison ad to [a comparison page], not the product page, and make its headline the ad's claim in question form.
Label table, then price tableLP · Disqualify
Before any price, a side-by-side of ingredients against “Other Greens”: organic, fiber source, sweetener, “natural flavors”, soy, refrigeration. Then the price table, whose first rows put a Laird box at $39.00 beside the rival at $99.00. Two rows down, the servings row reads 15 against 30.
“Here’s why clean eaters are choosing Laird over the brand you're thinking of.”
“For a full month of servings, just add two packs to your cart.”
Steal itLead the price table with [the like-for-like unit: per serving, or per month's supply]. If the pack sizes differ, put the matched quantity in the first row instead of an instruction under the table.
Close on the unit that's trueLP · Close
The page ends where the ad began, back in per-serving terms, and folds organic, prebiotic and cheaper into one sentence.
“At $2.08 per serving on subscription, you're getting organic greens with prebiotic fiber for less than what you'd pay for a non-organic alternative.”
Steal itClose on [the one comparison that survives a like-for-like check], with its condition attached.
⚠ Check these before you copy it
- “$99 a month for a greens powder” On Laird's own comparison table, $99.00 is the rival's one-time price; its subscription is “$79.00/month”. The ad anchors on the rival's one-time price and then quotes Laird's saving “on subscription”. Mixing the two makes the gap look wider than either like-for-like comparison.
- “The Cheaper One Is the Organic One” This is true per serving and per month: two Laird packs cost $78.00 one-time or $62.40 on subscription, against $99.00 or $79.00, about 21% less either way. But the table leads with $39.00 against $99.00, a 15-serving box beside a 30-serving one, which reads as about 61% cheaper. The creative itself shows “15 PACK”.
- “You're buying their ad budget.” No source is given for the unnamed rival's marketing spend, and the rival is never identified (“the leading greens powder”, “the brand you're thinking of”), so the reader cannot check the claim or the “Other Greens” prices. We don't hold the rival's actual prices on Sep 24.
- “Loved by 8,000+ People (and counting).” No source or basis for the count appears on the page.
- “Comparison as of” The date under the table is a prerendered placeholder, not a fixed audit date: an earlier pull on Sep 24 showed Tuesday, September 22, 2026, and ours later the same day showed Wednesday, September 23, 2026. Don't read or quote it as the date the rival's prices were checked; we don't hold when that happened.
- This part is real: “✅ $0.55 less per serving on subscription” matches the page's table exactly ($2.63 − $2.08). That is the claim in this funnel you can copy without a caveat, because it names its unit and its condition.
Ad copy (Library ID 1466492421981053)▾
You've been paying a podcast tax for your Greens. $99 a month for a greens powder that isn't even organic. You're not buying greens at that price. You're buying their ad budget.
Laird Organic Prebiotic Daily Greens:
✅ 22 organic superfood ingredients
✅ USDA Organic — the whole formula, not just the marketing
✅ Prebiotic fiber from apple, grape and blueberry
✅ No stevia. No "natural flavors." No soy.
✅ $0.55 less per serving on subscription
Same green glass every morning. Without the markup.
Make the switch 👇
Headline: The Cheaper One Is the Organic One
Landing page (lairdsuperfood.com/pages/lp-greens-comparison, Sep 24, 2026)▾
Why Pay $99/Month for a Greens Powder That Isn’t Even Organic? / Why Pay $79/Month for a Greens Powder That Isn’t Even Organic? (both in the served HTML)
Instead, Try These Organic Greens Loved by 8,000+ People (and counting).
22 organic superfood ingredients. Prebiotic fiber from real food. No stevia, no "natural flavors," no soy—and $0.55 less per serving than the leading greens powder.
Laird Organic Prebiotic Daily Greens vs. Other Greens · Here’s why clean eaters are choosing Laird over the brand you're thinking of. · Comparison as of Wednesday, September 23, 2026
Price table · One-Time Price: $39.00 vs $99.00 · Subscription Price: $31.20/month vs $79.00/month · Servings per Order: 15 vs 30 · Price per Serving (One-Time): $2.60 vs $3.30 · Price per Serving (Subscription): $2.08 vs $2.63
For a full month of servings, just add two packs to your cart.
At $2.08 per serving on subscription, you're getting organic greens with prebiotic fiber for less than what you'd pay for a non-organic alternative.
