Business Archives Business

Jul 26 2025

Facebook ‘Megaphone’ Powers D2C Watch Brand

Nate Lagos is vice president of marketing for Original Grain, a direct-to-consumer watch maker. He relies on Facebook advertising, but not for immediate customer acquisition.

“Platforms such as Facebook are megaphones, not salespeople,” he says.

In our recent conversation, Nate shared his marketing origins, advertising tactics, influencer management, and more.

Our entire audio conversation is embedded below. The transcript is edited for length and clarity.

Eric Bandholz: Give us a quick rundown of who you are and what you do.

Nate Lagos: I’m the vice president of marketing at Original Grain, a watch company that blends wood and steel to create timepieces that guys want to wear. I’ve been here four years, leading growth through product innovation and creative marketing campaigns. Before that, I served as CMO for a couple of smaller ecommerce brands.

The last four years at OG have been exciting, fast-paced, and at times stressful — but extremely rewarding.

My marketing journey started in college. I fell in love with the subject after my first class, but quickly realized school wouldn’t teach me how to thrive in the real world. I had one great professor, but most classes fell short. I began freelancing during my sophomore year, running organic and paid social campaigns for local businesses, and built from there.

I host a twice-weekly podcast called “Tactical & Practical.” Each episode is 10-12 minutes and delves into a single tactic we’re using or a challenge I’m facing. The goal is to create the kind of honest, tactical content I wish I had at my first CMO job at age 24, when I had no idea what I was doing.

Bandholz: How do you approach media buying and ad strategy?

Lagos: I see advertising as a way to amplify great brands, not as a tool to acquire customers directly. Platforms such as Facebook are megaphones, not salespeople. I pour budget into that megaphone because impressions have long-term value, even if they don’t immediately convert.

Nearly all of our ad budget goes to Facebook, primarily for conversion campaigns. Our average order value for new customers is $360. Their buying decisions often take months. So, we don’t obsess over daily customer acquisition costs — we focus on consistent awareness and brand affinity that pays off during key moments, such as the holidays.

Our performance metric is straightforward: If we spend $10,000 promoting a watch and earn $40,000 from it, the ads are effective, regardless of Facebook’s internal metrics. If we only make $11,000, we cut spend, test new creative, or shift messaging.

We typically advertise our top five watches, not our entire catalog. We structure our campaigns by collection, and we measure success both at the individual product level and the collection-level return-on-ad-spend. Meta accounts for 95% of our spend. The rest goes to Google, YouTube, and influencers, which we’d like to grow, though they’re harder to scale and produce content for.

Bandholz: What’s your strategy for changing ad creative on Meta?

Lagos: I’m still figuring that out. Historically, we didn’t launch a large number of ads — typically around 10–15 per week — even as we grew by over 100% last year from an eight-figure base. This year, we’ve ramped that up to 30–40 ads weekly. It’s not because we need more volume to find winners, but because Facebook won’t allocate spend unless we launch more.

The platform tends to push our top-performing ads, which is fine until those ads plateau. Previously, we could introduce new creative into the same ad set, and Facebook would distribute spend. That’s no longer happening. By increasing volume, we’re now seeing new ads spend faster and find winners more quickly.

Our full-time photographer is also our creative inspiration, handling graphic design and brand direction. We hired an operations lead earlier this year. He focuses on Klaviyo and Postscript scheduling and helps out with social and influencer campaigns. So there are three of us on the team.

Most of our messaging angles come from copy I test directly on our site. Once we see what converts there, we repurpose that language into ads.

Bandholz: Thirty pieces of content weekly takes work.

Lagos: Approximately one-third of our content consists of iterations of past winners — duplicate headlines, graphics, and photography styles. If a creative is performing, we replicate it across our top five watches and underperformers we want to push.

For new content, Chris (our creative lead) and I brainstorm weekly using a shared Canva board. I lean toward old-school inspiration — vintage Rolex and cigarette ads — while he pulls modern ecommerce and consumer-focused examples. We compare notes on what we like and dislike, and adapt our messaging and offers to those styles.

We’re intentional with testing. If we’re trying a new visual format, we’ll pair it with a proven offer, headline, and watch. If it flops, we know it’s the visual that didn’t land, not the copy or the product. It helps us stay efficient and avoid confusion when something doesn’t work.

Bandholz: What makes your top product so successful?

Lagos: We launched our top-selling watch two years ago. It’s an automatic skeleton-dial watch, so you see all the inner mechanics. It’s black-plated stainless steel with charred whiskey barrel wood, and that combo crushes. Since then, we’ve launched other watches using similar elements, and many have worked. Our founders do an incredible job designing them.

I’ve learned it’s not the marketing that determines success. We launched this watch with the same email, ad, and strategy as others. So when one sells out and the other doesn’t, no one blames marketing — it’s all about product-market fit.

Keeping this watch in stock has been the real challenge. We launched 400 units in November 2023, and they sold out quickly. We thought it was holiday timing, but it continued to sell — 500 more, then thousands for Father’s Day, and then a massive run in Q4 2024. Eventually, I raised prices and pulled back ads to slow sales.

Bandholz: You mentioned influencers. What’s your strategy?

Lagos: We’re lucky because we’re our own target audience — 35 to 50-year-old guys who drink whiskey and love outdoorsy, rugged stuff. So we’re already fans of the people we end up working with. We also survey our customers about their music and sports preferences to guide our influencer selection.

Our outreach is mostly manual. We send cold direct messages, and I occasionally reach out to agents on LinkedIn. Having big-name partners such as Jack Daniel’s and Taylor Guitars gives us instant credibility. Influencers take us seriously when they see who we work with.

We don’t do affiliate or revenue share. It doesn’t align with our long purchase cycles. Instead, we pay a flat fee for a set number of posts or YouTube inclusions. Instagram collaborations let us repurpose posts as ads. They aren’t high converters but deliver great impression and click costs.

We use codes and links to track YouTube performance and calculate revenue per thousand impressions. Some audiences, such as whiskey content creators, bring $80 RPMs, while lifestyle comedians bring $20. As long as we pay below those amounts, the channel works. We’ve also had success with truck, outdoors, and even music creators, although music has been hit or miss.

Bandholz: Where can people buy your watches and reach out?

Lagos: OriginalGrain.com. I’m on X and LinkedIn. My podcast is Tactical & Practical.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments

Jul 23 2025

Charts: Outlook of U.S. Institutional Investors 2025

In March and April 2025, Boston Consulting Group surveyed approximately 150 U.S. institutional investors on their outlook for the domestic economy.

In the ensuing report (PDF), BCG reported most investors expect President Trump’s tariff policy to have negative impacts, including higher consumer prices, weaker corporate earnings, declines in stock market performance, and slower growth in gross domestic product. Conversely, many foresee benefits such as increased government revenue and lower interest rates.

–

According to the survey, investors now expect negative impacts from tariffs to all economic sectors. Manufacturing sectors depend heavily on global supply chains, so higher input costs and retaliatory tariffs could weaken the competitiveness of U.S.-made products and pressure overall performance.

–

Sixty-seven percent of surveyed investors are holding more cash, suggesting they anticipate increased market volatility or a downturn.

–

Moreover, investors identify revenue growth and protection as the top priorities for management, while emphasizing the rising importance of financial stability and supply chain resilience.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments

Jul 12 2025

How to Survive a Million-Dollar Loss

This year I’ve sprinkled occasional “Ecommerce Conversations” episodes with real-life master classes from Beardbrand, my company. To date I’ve addressed hiring, branding, profit-building, priority-setting, and exiting.

For this installment, I’ll share Beardbrand’s experience of losing nearly $1 million across 2023 and 2024. I’ll recap how we managed to survive our worst years in business while remaining 100% bootstrapped.

It got bad. Our cash levels dropped to where they were in year one, 2014. We were hemorrhaging money.

But we’re still here — still building and still learning. We made it through without outside funding.

Here’s what the future holds for Beardbrand. My entire audio dialog is embedded below. The transcript is condensed and edited for clarity.

Ghosted

A big portion of our loss came from Target. The company had been a seven-figure account for us for years, and we thought the relationship was solid. Every year, we pitched Target our plans. Historically, the staff there provided us with clear feedback — what worked, what didn’t, and where there was room for growth.

In 2023, Target had a sustainability initiative. We revamped our packaging, switching from glass and plastic to aluminum. It’s lighter, more recyclable, and aligns with eco-conscious goals. At the same time, we increased the size of our beard oil packaging from 1 oz. bottles to occupy more shelf space and stand out.

We committed early, produced inventory, and delivered Target’s purchase orders on time. Then silence. Nothing. After years of working with us, the staff ghosted us. No feedback, no responses. Worse, they dropped us and left us with nearly $200,000 of unpaid product.

We erred by giving Target exclusivity, which meant we weren’t selling on Amazon or Walmart. That killed our ability to move leftover inventory quickly when they dropped us. By the time we finally got on Amazon, the products had already aged out. We destroyed a large quantity that had expired.

Reserves

We’ve always run Beardbrand conservatively. That means keeping a decent amount of capital in reserve — not because we’re paranoid, but because you never know when a black swan event might hit. Having that runway lets you make clear, intentional decisions rather than panicking. It gives you time to explore solutions, test channels, and get a better night’s sleep.

Thankfully, during our stronger years, we built up a solid cushion. And that cushion is what kept us afloat during the downturn. We essentially burned through all of it. But we never dipped below zero, which meant we didn’t have to take out high-interest loans, open lines of credit, or bring in outside investors.

We did have conversations just in case. I even considered withdrawing money from my personal savings. But that’s a hard decision when things aren’t going well. When you’re in the middle of the storm, it doesn’t feel like a temporary dip — it feels like a freefall. You start wondering: Is this the bottom, or is there more pain ahead?

Writing another personal check to the business, especially after years of building wealth from it, was not something I wanted to do. And neither did my partners. We were determined to find a way forward that didn’t involve doubling down with personal capital or giving up control.

Pileup

In addition to losing Target, we experienced a series of setbacks. First, the state of Texas audited us. We cooperated fully, waited for the final numbers, and instead got slapped with a tax lien. That lien triggered Brex, our corporate credit card provider, to freeze our account, despite our perfect payment history. Thankfully, American Express stood by us and kept things moving.

Then came an ADA lawsuit, a leaked 100% off coupon code, and a $20,000 air conditioner repair at our barbershop. We also faced regulatory changes that forced us to reformulate key fragrances.

We had internal missteps, such as losing a key growth team member and coasting when we should’ve pushed harder. We focused on profitability, but the business slowly declined.

We simplified our product line to meet a manufacturer’s needs, which, in hindsight, proved to be a mistake. The lesson? Partner with vendors who value your business. You don’t want to be too small to matter, or too big to be managed. That relationship needs to be just right.

We also lowered prices to drive volume, but it backfired. Loyal customers just paid less, and those who thought we were expensive still did. Meanwhile, larger packaging reduced purchase frequency, and killing off beloved fragrances hurt loyalty. Top-line revenue got cut in half.

Furthermore, when your business shrinks, fixed costs such as office leases and payroll can become overwhelming. Our $10,000 per month lease that once felt small became a big deal.

Rebuilding

The good news? Beardbrand is alive. We’ve weathered the storm and slowly started turning things around. It hasn’t been a dramatic rebound — it’s been steady, slow progress. We have focused on improving operations, addressing inventory issues, resolving stock-outs, tightening pricing, and enhancing product quality.

We now have the right fulfillment provider, manufacturing partners, and systems in place. Instead of existential crises, we’re dealing with everyday stuff — shipping issues, ad performance, and the occasional bad product batch. That’s a massive shift. It’s not glamorous, but it’s no longer a matter of survival.

We cut costs aggressively — even eliminating $15 per month software. We reestablished healthy margins. Our customer service, returns, and product quality all depend on having room to breathe financially.

The Target fallout is behind us, the tax lien is resolved, and the ADA plaintiff dropped the bogus lawsuit. My business partner stepped out of day-to-day operations, and some team members transitioned to part-time roles, which helped improve our cash flow. We’ve managed all of this without layoffs. My team is the same one that helped us grow, and they’re still incredibly talented and dedicated.

I’ve also cut my own salary and lived off personal savings to keep things afloat. But I’m optimistic. With the business stabilizing, we can rebuild our savings and start exploring new growth opportunities again.

Momentum

Survival mode means focusing on making it through the day. Some entrepreneurs try to grow their way out of problems. For us, it started with stabilizing operations. We can finally think long-term again.

We’ve begun reinvesting in growth, supporting our paid media and Meta efforts, and expanding our creative team to produce more content and ads. More creative output means more chances to connect with customers and fuel a rebound.

We’re also rethinking channels beyond direct-to-consumer. Target was a strong retail partner for years. Retail as a channel still holds potential — perhaps it’s independent salons, boutique pharmacies, and grocery stores. The goal is to diversify. Beardbrand.com will always be our home base, but we’re a business that sells to people, not just an ecommerce brand.

It’s exciting to think ahead instead of looking back. We’re aiming for 7% profitability this year — that’s breakeven in my book. It provides us with a buffer for unpredictable events, such as lawsuits, audits, and air conditioning failures. The real goal is 17% profit — that’s when we can fund growth, hire employees, and breathe easier. Anything beyond that is the sweet spot where the stress and sacrifice start to feel worth it.

I’m excited again — for the team, for the future, and what we’re building.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments

App Business Opinion

Jul 9 2025

Why the US and Europe could lose the race for fusion energy

Fusion energy holds the potential to shift a geopolitical landscape that is currently configured around fossil fuels. Harnessing fusion will deliver the energy resilience, security, and abundance needed for all modern industrial and service sectors. But these benefits will be controlled by the nation that leads in both developing the complex supply chains required and building fusion power plants at scales large enough to drive down economic costs.

The US and other Western countries will have to build strong supply chains across a range of technologies in addition to creating the fundamental technology behind practical fusion power plants. Investing in supply chains and scaling up complex production processes has increasingly been a strength of China’s and a weakness of the West, resulting in the migration of many critical industries from the West to China. With fusion, we run the risk that history will repeat itself. But it does not have to go that way.

The US and Europe were the dominant public funders of fusion energy research and are home to many of the world’s pioneering private fusion efforts. The West has consequently developed many of the basic technologies that will make fusion power work. But in the past five years China’s support of fusion energy has surged, threatening to allow the country to dominate the industry.

The industrial base available to support China’s nascent fusion energy industry could enable it to climb the learning curve much faster and more effectively than the West. Commercialization requires know-how, capabilities, and complementary assets, including supply chains and workforces in adjacent industries. And especially in comparison with China, the US and Europe have significantly under-supported the industrial assets needed for a fusion industry, such as thin-film processing and power electronics.

To compete, the US, allies, and partners must invest more heavily not only in fusion itself—which is already happening—but also in those adjacent technologies that are critical to the fusion industrial base.

China’s trajectory to dominating fusion and the West’s potential route to competing can be understood by looking at today’s most promising scientific and engineering pathway to achieve grid-relevant fusion energy. That pathway relies on the tokamak, a technology that uses a magnetic field to confine ionized gas—called plasma—and ultimately fuse nuclei. This process releases energy that is converted from heat to electricity. Tokamaks consist of several critical systems, including plasma confinement and heating, fuel production and processing, blankets and heat flux management, and power conversion.

A close look at the adjacent industries needed to build these critical systems clearly shows China’s advantage while also providing a glimpse into the challenges of building a fusion industrial base in the US or Europe. China has leadership in three of these six key industries, and the West is at risk of losing leadership in two more. China’s industrial might in thin-film processing, large metal-alloy structures, and power electronics provides a strong foundation to establish the upstream supply chain for fusion.

The importance of thin-film processing is evident in the plasma confinement system. Tokamaks use strong electromagnets to keep the fusion plasma in place, and the magnetic coils must be made from superconducting materials. Rare-earth barium copper oxide (REBCO) superconductors are the highest-performing materials available in sufficient quantity to be viable for use in fusion.

The REBCO industry, which relies on thin-film processing technologies, currently has low production volumes spanning globally distributed manufacturers. However, as the fusion industry grows, the manufacturing base for REBCO will likely consolidate among the industry players who are able to rapidly take advantage of economies of scale. China is today’s world leader in thin-film, high-volume manufacturing for solar panels and flat-panel displays, with the associated expert workforce, tooling sector, infrastructure, and upstream materials supply chain. Without significant attention and investment on the part of the West, China is well positioned to dominate REBCO thin-film processing for fusion magnets.

The electromagnets in a full-scale tokamak are as tall as a three-story building. Structures made using strong metal alloys are needed to hold these electromagnets around the large vacuum vessel that physically contains the magnetically confined plasma. Similar large-scale, complex metal structures are required for shipbuilding, aerospace, oil and gas infrastructure, and turbines. But fusion plants will require new versions of the alloys that are radiation-tolerant, able to withstand cryogenic temperatures, and corrosion-resistant. China’s manufacturing capacity and its metallurgical research efforts position it well to outcompete other global suppliers in making the necessary specialty metal alloys and machining them into the complex structures needed for fusion.

A tokamak also requires large-scale power electronics. Here again China dominates. Similar systems are found in the high-speed rail (HSR) industry, renewable microgrids, and arc furnaces. As of 2024, China had deployed over 48,000 kilometers of HSR. That is three times the length of Europe’s HSR network and 55 times as long as the Acela network in the US, which is slower than HSR. While other nations have a presence, China’s expertise is more recent and is being applied on a larger scale.

But this is not the end of the story. The West still has an opportunity to lead the other three adjacent industries important to the fusion supply chain: cryo-plants, fuel processing, and blankets.

The electromagnets in an operational tokamak need to be kept at cryogenic temperatures of around 20 Kelvin to remain superconducting. This requires large-scale, multi-megawatt cryogenic cooling plants. Here, the country best set up to lead the industry is less clear. The two major global suppliers of cryo-plants are Europe-based Linde Engineering and Air Liquide Engineering; the US has Air Products and Chemicals and Chart Industries. But they are not alone: China’s domestic champions in the cryogenic sector include Hangyang Group, SASPG, Kaifeng Air Separation, and SOPC. Each of these regions already has an industrial base that could scale up to meet the demands of fusion.

Fuel production for fusion is a nascent part of the industrial base requiring processing technologies for light-isotope gases—hydrogen, deuterium, and tritium. Some processing of light-isotope gases is already done at small scale in medicine, hydrogen weapons production, and scientific research in the US, Europe, and China. But the scale needed for the fusion industry does not exist in today’s industrial base, presenting a major opportunity to develop the needed capabilities.

Similarly, blankets and heat flux management are an opportunity for the West. The blanket is the medium used to absorb energy from the fusion reaction and to breed tritium. Commercial-scale blankets will require entirely novel technology. To date, no adjacent industries have relevant commercial expertise in liquid lithium, lead-lithium eutectic, or fusion-specific molten salts that are required for blanket technology. Some overlapping blanket technologies are in early-stage development by the nuclear fission industry. As the largest producer of beryllium in the world, the US has an opportunity to capture leadership because that element is a key material in leading fusion blanket concepts. But the use of beryllium must be coupled with technology development programs for the other specialty blanket components.

These six industries will prove critical to scaling fusion energy. In some, such as thin-film processing and large metal-alloy structures, China already has a sizable advantage. Crucially, China recognizes the importance of these adjacent industries and is actively harnessing them in its fusion efforts. For example, China launched a fusion consortium that consists of industrial giants spanning the steel, machine tooling, electric grid, power generation, and aerospace sectors. It will be extremely difficult for the West to catch up in these areas, but policymakers and business leaders must pay attention and try to create robust alternative supply chains.

As the industrial area of greatest strength, cryo-plants could continue to be an opportunity for leadership in the West. Bolstering Western cryo-plant production by creating demand for natural-gas liquefaction will be a major boon to the future cryo-plant supply chain that will support fusion energy.

The US and European countries also have an opportunity to lead in the emerging industrial areas of fuel processing and blanket technologies. Doing so will require policymakers to work with companies to ensure that public and private funding is allocated to these critical emerging supply chains. Governments may well need to serve as early customers and provide debt financing for significant capital investment. Governments can also do better to incentivize private capital and equity financing—for example, through favorable capital-gains taxation. In lagging areas of thin-film and alloy production, the US and Europe will likely need partners, such as South Korea and Japan, that have the industrial bases to compete globally with China.

The need to connect and capitalize multiple industries and supply chains will require long-term thinking and clear leadership. A focus on the demand side of these complementary industries is essential. Fusion is a decade away from maturation, so its supplier base must be derisked and made profitable in the near term by focusing on other primary demand markets that contribute to our economic vitality. To name a few, policymakers can support modernization of the grid to bolster domestic demand for power electronics and domestic semiconductor manufacturing to support thin-film processing.

The West must also focus on the demand for energy production itself. As the world’s largest energy consumer, China will leverage demand from its massive domestic market to climb the learning curve and bolster national champions. This is a strategy that China has wielded with tremendous success to dominate global manufacturing, most recently in the electric-vehicle industry. Taken together, supply- and demand-side investment have been a winning strategy for China.

The competition to lead the future of fusion energy is here. Now is the moment for the US and its Western allies to start investing in the foundational innovation ecosystem needed for a vibrant and resilient industrial base to support it.

Daniel F. Brunner is a co-founder of Commonwealth Fusion Systems and a Partner at Future Tech Partners.

Edlyn V. Levine is the co-founder of a stealth-mode technology start up and an affiliate of the MIT Sloan School of Management.

Fiona E. Murray is a professor of entrepreneurship at the MIT School of Management and Vice Chair of the NATO Innovation Fund.

Rory Burke is a graduate of MIT Sloan and a former summer scholar with ARPA-E.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments

App Business Opinion

Jul 8 2025

The latest threat from the rise of Chinese manufacturing

The findings a decade ago were, well, shocking. Mainstream economists had long argued that free trade was overall a good thing; though there might be some winners and losers, it would generally bring lower prices and widespread prosperity. Then, in 2013, a trio of academic researchers showed convincing evidence that increased trade with China beginning in the early 2000s and the resulting flood of cheap imports had been an unmitigated disaster for many US communities, destroying their manufacturing lifeblood.

The results of what in 2016 they called the “China shock” were gut-wrenching: the loss of 1 million US manufacturing jobs and 2.4 million jobs in total by 2011. Worse, these losses were heavily concentrated in what the economists called “trade-exposed” towns and cities (think furniture makers in North Carolina).

If in retrospect all that seems obvious, it’s only because the research by David Autor, an MIT labor economist, and his colleagues has become an accepted, albeit often distorted, political narrative these days: China destroyed all our manufacturing jobs! Though the nuances of the research are often ignored, the results help explain at least some of today’s political unrest. It’s reflected in rising calls for US protectionism, President Trump’s broad tariffs on imported goods, and nostalgia for the lost days of domestic manufacturing glory.

The impacts of the original China shock still scar much of the country. But Autor is now concerned about what he considers a far more urgent problem—what some are calling China shock 2.0. The US, he warns, is in danger of losing the next great manufacturing battle, this time over advanced technologies to make cars and planes as well as those enabling AI, quantum computing, and fusion energy.

Recently, I asked Autor about the lingering impacts of the China shock and the lessons it holds for today’s manufacturing challenges.

How are the impacts of the China shock still playing out?

I have a recent paper looking at 20 years of data, from 2000 to 2019. We tried to ask two related questions. One, if you looked at the places that were most exposed, how have they adjusted? And then if you look to the people who are most exposed, how have they adjusted? And how do those two things relate to one anothe

It turns out you get two very different answers. If you look at places that were most exposed, they have been substantially transformed. Manufacturing, once it starts going down, never comes back. But after 2010, these trade-impacted local labor markets staged something of an employment recovery, such that employment has grown faster after 2010 in trade-exposed places than non-trade-exposed places because a lot of people have come in. But these are jobs mostly in low-wage sectors. They’re in K–12 education and non-traded health services. They’re in warehousing and logistics. They’re in hospitality and lodging and recreation, and so they’re lower-wage, non-manufacturing jobs. And they’re done by a really different set of people.

The growth in employment is among women, among native-born Hispanics, among foreign-born adults and a lot of young people. The recovery is staged by a very different group from the white and black men, but especially white men, who were most represented in manufacturing. They have not really participated in this renaissance.

Employment is growing, but are these areas prospering?

They have a lower wage structure: fewer high-wage jobs, more low-wage jobs. So they’re not, if your definition of prospering is rapidly rising incomes. But there’s a lot of employment growth. They’re not like ghost towns. But then if you look at the people who were most concentrated in manufacturing—mostly white, non-college, native-born men—they have not prospered. Most of them have not transitioned from manufacturing to non-manufacturing.

One of the great surprises is everyone had believed that people would pull up stakes and move on. In fact, we find the opposite. People in the most adversely exposed places become less likely to leave. They have become less mobile. The presumption was that they would just relocate to find higher ground. And that is not at all what occurred.

What happened to the total number of manufacturing jobs?

There’s been no rebound. Once they go, they just keep going. If there is going to be new manufacturing, it won’t be in the sectors that were lost to China. Those were basically labor-intensive jobs, the kind of low-tech sectors that we will not be getting back. You know—commodity furniture and assembly of things, shoes, construction material. The US wasn’t going to keep them forever, and once they’re gone, it’s very unlikely to get them back.

I know you’ve written about this, but it’s not hard to draw a connection between the dynamics you’re describing—white-male manufacturing jobs going away and new jobs going to immigrants—and today’s political turmoil.

We have a paper about that called “Importing Political Polarization?”

How big a factor would you say it is in today’s political unrest?

I don’t want to say it’s the factor. The China trade shock was a catalyst, but there were lots of other things that were happening. It would be a vast oversimplification to say that it was the sole cause.

But most people don’t work in manufacturing anymore. Aren’t these impacts that you’re talking about, including the political unrest, disproportionate to the actual number of jobs lost?

These are jobs in places where manufacturing is the anchor activity. Manufacturing is very unevenly distributed. It’s not like grocery stores and hospitals that you find in every county. The impact of the China trade shock on these places was like dropping an economic bomb in the middle of downtown. If the China trade shock cost us a few million jobs, and these were all—you know—people in groceries and retail and gas stations, in hospitality and in trucking, you wouldn’t really notice it that much. We lost lots of clerical workers over the last couple of decades. Nobody talks about a clerical shock. Why not? Well, there was never a clerical capital of America. Clerical workers are everywhere. If they decline, it doesn’t wipe out the entire basis of a place.

So it goes beyond the jobs. These places lost their identity.

Maybe. But it’s also the jobs. Manufacturing offered relatively high pay to non-college workers, especially non-college men. It was an anchor of a way of life.

And we’re still seeing the damage.

Yeah, absolutely. It’s been 20 years. What’s amazing is the degree of stasis among the people who are most exposed—not the places, but the people. Though it’s been 20 years, we’re still feeling the pain and the political impacts from this transition.

Clearly, it has now entered the national psyche. Even if it weren’t true, everyone now believes it to have been a really big deal, and they’re responding to it. It continues to drive policy, political resentments, maybe even out of proportion to its economic significance. It certainly has become mythological.

What worries you now?

We’re in the midst of a totally different competition with China now that’s much, much more important. Now we’re not talking about commodity furniture and tube socks. We’re talking about semiconductors and drones and aviation, electric vehicles, shipping, fusion power, quantum, AI, robotics. These are the sectors where the US still maintains competitiveness, but they’re extremely threatened. China’s capacity for high-tech, low-cost, incredibly fast, innovative manufacturing is just unbelievable. And the Trump administration is basically fighting the war of 20 years ago. The loss of those jobs, you know, was devastating to those places. It was not devastating to the US economy as a whole. If we lose Boeing, GM, and Apple and Intel—and that’s quite possible—then that will be economically devastating.

I think some people are calling it China shock 2.0.

Yeah. And it’s well underway.

When we think about advanced manufacturing and why it’s important, it’s not so much about the number of jobs anymore, is it? Is it more about coming up with the next technologies?

It does create good jobs, but it’s about economic leadership. It’s about innovation. It’s about political leadership, and even standard setting for how the rest of the world works.

Should we just accept that manufacturing as a big source of jobs is in the past and move on?

No. It’s still 12 million jobs, right? Instead of the fantasy that we’re going to go back to 18 million or whatever—we had, what, 17.7 million manufacturing jobs in 1999—we should be worried about the fact that we’re going to end up at 6 million, that we’re going to lose 50% in the next decade. And that’s quite possible. And the Trump administration is doing a lot to help that process of loss along.

We have a labor market of over 160 million people, so it’s like 8% of employment. It’s not zero. So you should not think of it as too small to worry about it. It’s a lot of people; it’s a lot of jobs. But more important, it’s a lot of what has helped this country be a leader. So much innovation happens here, and so many of the things in which other countries are now innovating started here. It’s always been the case that the US tends to innovate in sectors and then lose them after a while and move on to the next thing. But at this point, it’s not clear that we’ll be in the frontier of a lot of these sectors for much longer.

So we want to revive manufacturing, but the right kind—advanced manufacturing?

The notion that we should be assembling iPhones in the United States, which Trump wants, is insane. Nobody wants to do that work. It’s horrible, tedious work. It pays very, very little. And if we actually did it here, it would make the iPhones 20% more expensive or more. Apple may very well decide to pay a 25% tariff rather than make the phones here. If Foxconn started doing iPhone assembly here, people would not be lining up for that job.

But at the same time, we do need new people coming into manufacturing.

But not that manufacturing. Not tedious, mind-numbing, eyestrain-inducing assembly.

We need them to do high-tech work. Manufacturing is a skilled activity. We need to build airplanes better. That takes a ton of expertise. Assembling iPhones does not.

What are your top priorities to head off China shock 2.0?

I would choose sectors that are important, and I would invest in them. I don’t think that tariffs are never justified, or industrial policies are never justified. I just don’t think protecting phone assembly is smart industrial policy. We really need to improve our ability to make semiconductors. I think that’s important. We need to remain competitive in the automobile sector—that’s important. We need to improve aviation and drones. That’s important. We need to invest in fusion power. That’s important. We need to adopt robotics at scale and improve in that sector. That’s important. I could come up with 15 things where I think public money is justified, and I would be willing to tolerate protections for those sectors.

What are the lasting lessons of the China shock and the opening up of global trade in the 2000s?

We did it too fast. We didn’t do enough to support people, and we pretended it wasn’t going on.

When we started the China shock research back around 2011, we really didn’t know what we’d find, and so we were as surprised as anyone. But the work has changed our own way of thinking and, I think, has been constructive—not because it has caused everyone to do the right thing, but it at least caused people to start asking the right questions.

What do the findings tell us about China shock 2.0?

I think the US is handling that challenge badly. The problem is much more serious this time around. The truth is, we have a sense of what the threats are. And yet we’re not seemingly responding in a very constructive way. Although we now know how seriously we should take this, the problem is that it doesn’t seem to be generating very serious policy responses. We’re generating a lot of policy responses—they’re just not serious ones.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments

Jul 5 2025

MNLY’s At-Home AI Powers Men’s Health

Next-gen health and wellness is an apt description of MNLY. Luke Hartelust launched the platform in 2021, pronouncing it “manly,” and then pivoted twice while remaining focused on modern care for men.

The current version combines AI with home-based testing, diagnoses, and nutrition. Customers pay an upfront fee and a monthly subscription afterward.

In our recent conversation, Luke shared the company’s origins, growth, mistakes, and more. The entire audio of that discussion is embedded below. The transcript is condensed and edited for clarity.

Eric Bandholz: Tell us about your work.

Luke Hartelust: I’m the founder and CEO of MNLY, a men’s health and wellness platform. We use at-home diagnostics, AI, and advanced tech to create custom supplement, lifestyle, and nutrition solutions.

My background is in fitness franchising. I led multiple locations across Southern California and worked closely with male entrepreneurs and executives. That experience revealed gaps in men’s healthcare, particularly in the lack of proactive, preventative approaches.

Telehealth has improved access to care, but the model has flaws. Most providers have long waitlists — often up to 90 days for lab results and treatment plans due to backlogged consultations.

At MNLY, we streamlined the process. We removed the practitioner bottleneck and built a scientific advisory board to train a complex AI model. The result is an automated analysis and quick, personalized health recommendations, going from signup to actionable results much faster than traditional telehealth providers.

Bandholz: Walk me through the customer journey.

Hartelust: Customers start by purchasing our at-home blood sample kit — a simple finger prick using dried blood spot sampling, eliminating the friction of in-person visits. Once received, our partner lab processes samples within hours.

While awaiting results, users complete an 86-question health assessment. It focuses on seven areas: concentration, confidence, stamina, mood, sleep, libido, and recovery.

We combine lab and assessment data — roughly 100 data points per user — to generate a clean, easy-to-understand health dashboard. It explains results and provides reference ranges, visuals, and comparison metrics. An overall health score benchmarks the data.

Next, our AI builds a personalized health plan, including nutrition suggestions based on biomarkers and lifestyle hacks such as breathwork and even testicular cooling for hormone support.

Finally, we formulate a custom dietary supplement. Based on the user’s data, our AI prescribes specific nutrients and doses. We then manufacture the supplement and ship every 30 days. It’s fully automated.

Bandholz: What does it cost customers?

Hartelust: The initial lab kit is $199. Supplements are $249 per month.

We recommend retesting with new blood samples every three to five months. Each time new bloodwork is submitted, our system updates all biomarkers, adjusts supplement dosages, and revises the health plan. Users experience clear visual progress, including changes to their overall health score.

We’ve just completed our first year in business. It’s our third iteration under the MNLY brand. We launched in 2021 as a nutritional subscription box provider, with two attempts.

A year ago, with this version, we didn’t prioritize retention. Our small team focused on product development, and we lacked an automated customer journey to guide and remind users about retesting. We started those reminders 90 days ago.

From an ecommerce perspective, not building that journey sooner was one of our biggest missteps. Many customers experienced strong results in the first six weeks — improved libido, mood, sleep, recovery, and focus — but when those effects plateaued, some dropped off around the five- or six-month mark. Even though biological improvements continued, users weren’t always aware without updated data. That’s why consistent testing and communication are now central to our retention strategy.

Bandholz: What’s your growth strategy?

Hartelust: As a startup raising capital in a tough market, I needed a strategic partner to expand our reach. I secured a deal last year with Hyrox, an indoor fitness competition, as its exclusive U.S. men’s health partner. I landed the deal with just a minimal viable product and a pitch deck, right before Hydrox’s U.S. expansion took off.

The company’s events grew in a year from 2,000 athletes to 14,000, and its audience — 50,000 social followers, 30,000 email subscribers, and 200 gym partners — aligned perfectly with our brand. We paid for the sponsorship, but it gave us massive exposure, credibility, and direct access to our core demographic.

We could have taken out, say, $100,000 in Meta Ads. That same $100,000 in a strategic Hyrox sponsorship gets us brand equity, athletes, investors, and a much lower acquisition cost — around $200 per customer, far better than we could achieve with ads alone.

Bandholz: How do you convert Hyrox athletes?

Hartelust: A presence on-site at the competitions is our most effective strategy. We recently wrapped an eight-month national tour where we set up our brand installation inside each venue. Our core leadership team was there to bring deep product knowledge, passion, and real connection.

The sponsorship provided us with access to email lists and social media audiences. Before the competition, we emailed attendees with offers, a discount code, and booth details. We reminded them of the promotion during the event and shared recaps after. We encouraged the participants to show the code at the booth for a lower rate.

Bandholz: How did you raise the capital to fund such a complex launch?

Hartelust: I spent the first six years of my career building wellness and fitness studios and nurturing strategic relationships. When we sold the company in 2021 for several million dollars, I reinvested some capital to start MNLY. But, again, before our current model, MNLY failed twice as a subscription box concept. I lost a lot on those early versions before pivoting to what we have now.

Launching this model required more than just personal funds, so I began raising a true pre-seed round about 18 months ago. I had raised capital before, but never for a startup. I tapped every possible connection — friends, family, clients — and hired a virtual assistant for cold outreach. One of our venture capital partners shared a valuable investor database. I ended up doing roughly 250 pitches and raised just under $800,000.

This round focused on micro angels rather than traditional VCs. Many brands rely heavily on Meta ads and lack a real connection. We leveraged our Hyrox community and offered equity to athlete ambassadors, which provided us with additional operational capital. That blend of brand, relationships, and community has fueled our growth.

Bandholz: Where can people support you?

Hartelust: Our website is getMNLY.com. We’re @getMNLY on Instagram and Facebook. I’m on LinkedIn.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments

Jul 2 2025

10 Books on Slowing Down, Stepping Away

In the summer, busy people are supposed to relax and rejuvenate. Yet ecommerce owners and team members struggle to slow down and step away. Here are 10 books to help. Who knows, perhaps a little downtime will spark a creative idea!

The Brain at Rest

The Brain at Rest

by Joseph Jebelli, PhD

“The Brain at Rest: How the Art and Science of Doing Nothing Can Improve Your Life” is a scientific guide to leaving overwhelm and burnout behind and finding healthy, sustainable ways to achieve goals. Jebelli argues that by allowing the brain to rest with activities such as baths and long nature walks, we can lower stress and elevate productivity.

A-B-C Delegation

A-B-C Delegation

by Stefan J. Feuerstein

“A-B-C Delegation: The Manager’s Guide to Effective Delegation” reminds us that entrepreneurs can take time off only by delegating tasks and responsibilities. Feuerstein has led organizations of all sizes in the U.S. and Latin America, providing a simple framework and handbook for delegating without micromanaging or losing control.

Unplug

Unplug

by Richard Simon

“Put down your phone, pick up your life” says the author of “Unplug: How to Break Up with Your Phone and Reclaim Your Life.” A former journalist and longtime director of website strategy for Georgetown University, Simon cites the shocking statistic that Americans spend on average 75 equivalent days a year looking at their smartphones! He provides tips for setting the device aside, drawing on insights from wellness experts and ordinary people.

Sustainable Ambition

Sustainable Ambition

by Kathy Oneto

“Sustainable Ambition: How to Prioritize What Matters to Thrive in Life and Work,” by the host of the Sustainable Ambition podcast, challenges readers to be as strategic about their life goals as their careers in this Amazon #1 New Release. Oneto suggests forgetting “the myth of work-life balance” and adopting her “Right Ambition, Right Time, Right Effort” framework to “dream big” while avoiding burnout. A companion workbook and planner are also available.

Meditations for Mortals

Meditations for Mortals

By Oliver Burkeman

In “Meditations for Mortals: Four Weeks to Embrace Your Limitations and Make Time for What Counts.” Burkeman asks, “What if purposeful productivity were often about letting things happen, not making them happen?” Published last fall, the book is available in multiple formats and languages and won a 2024 Goodreads Choice Award for Nonfiction. Burkeman’s book on time management, “Four Thousand Weeks,” was a 2021 New York Times bestseller.

Feel Good Productivity

Feel Good Productivity

By Ali Abdaal

In “Feel Good Productivity,” Abdaal asks, “Does productivity always have to be a grind?” In this 2024 Goodreads Choice Nonfiction nominee, he draws on psychological research and real-world success stories to create principles for preventing burnout and promoting fulfillment, offering simple changes to live better and feel happier.

Stop Overthinking

Stop Overthinking

by Nick Trenton

In “Stop Overthinking: 23 Techniques to Relieve Stress, Stop Negative Spirals, Declutter Your Mind, and Focus on the Present,” Nick Trenton promises his techniques can help overcome negative thought patterns. His ideas are more tried and true than groundbreaking, but a 4.5-star rating from 13,000 Amazon reviewers demonstrates their widespread value.

The Joy of Missing Out

The Joy of Missing Out

by Tanya Dalton

Fortune magazine listed “The Joy of Missing Out: Live More by Doing Less” as a Top 10 Business Books winner in 2019. In it, Tanya Dalton offers readers an action plan for change — to identify what’s important and discover their purpose — with printable worksheets to help shift readers’ perspectives and live abundantly.

Breath

Breath

by James Nestor

Per Nestor, eating right, exercising, youth, and thinness mean nothing if you aren’t breathing properly. In “Breath,” a 2020 Best Book by National Public Radio and a Washington Post Notable Nonfiction book of the same year, he delves into the latest scientific research and ancient practices to overturn conventional wisdom and explain the benefits of breathing right.

Wherever You Go, There You Are

Wherever You Go, There You Are

by Jon Kabat-Zinn, PhD

Kabat-Zinn is a pioneering researcher on how mindfulness meditation can prevent and heal illnesses and reduce stress, having authored several books on that topic. This classic, “Wherever You Go, There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life (30th Anniversary Edition),” has sold more than 1 million copies since its publication in 1994 and has been updated to reflect new research.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments

Jun 28 2025

Ecommerce to Real Estate: An Owner’s Story

Shakil Prasla once owned 12 ecommerce consumer brands generating $50 million in combined annual revenue with 50 employees. But he grew weary of the fluctuating revenue and non-stop marketing, so he pivoted during Covid to wholesale personal protective equipment.

That’s when he and I last spoke. The PPE business, Gloves.com, had misgauged demand and lost, initially, a whopping $6 million. He has since recovered and pivoted again, this time to real estate and convenience-store gas stations.

He’s an example of resilience, priorities, and seizing opportunities. He shared those lessons and more in this our latest conversation.

Our entire audio is embedded below. The transcript is condensed and edited for clarity.

Eric Bandholz: Give us a rundown of what you do.

Shakil Prasla: I own Gloves.com. We primarily sell disposable protective gloves for medical, food service, and other industries, mostly wholesale. We import from overseas, store our inventory in warehouses, and have a team of sales representatives who build relationships and sell to large distributors, such as Sysco.

Sysco, in turn, supplies restaurants and businesses like McDonald’s and Taco Bell. Orders flow through backend integrations, and while we use automation, we’re essentially a logistics company: importing, storing, and distributing goods.

I acquired the business with a private equity group. The brand has been around for over 30 years, so it came with an established sales history. When evaluating it, we looked at total market share — disposable gloves are a surprisingly massive, multi-billion-dollar industry. They’re used everywhere: hospitals, nail salons, barber shops, grocery stores, even gardening.

While gloves are our core offering, we also provide other disposable wearables, such as bouffant caps and beard covers. What I learned from ecommerce is that consumables drive strong repeat business. Customers reorder when they run out, which increases lifetime value and makes the business model attractive.

I bought my first online business in 2013, before acquiring ecommerce brands was popular. I enjoyed improving and growing them. By 2018, I owned 12 brands, generating over $50 million in annual revenue with more than 50 employees.

During Covid, I sold most of my brands and transitioned into wholesale distribution of personal protective equipment. Now, I’m also involved in real estate — buying land, building strip centers, and gas stations around Austin, Texas.

Bandholz: You scaled this business quite a bit.

Prasla: We acquired the company with just the inventory — no team, no tech — so we had to rebuild it from the ground up. Fortunately, it had been a large business with strong brand recognition, so we focused on the low-hanging fruit: reactivating old customers.

We reached out to clients from 15 to 20 years ago and informed them that the brand had new ownership, improved service, and the same trusted products. We addressed past issues and emphasized improvements — faster shipping, better pricing, and consistent product quality. That approach worked well, and many customers returned.

Unlike ecommerce, where you’re constantly running ads on Facebook, Google, TikTok, and writing emails, we don’t rely on traditional marketing. Our sales reps do the marketing. They follow KPIs, and their bonuses are tied to performance. That incentive structure has been a key driver of our growth.

Bandholz: How do you find operators and get aligned so they can thrive and help scale the business?

Prasla: I realized early on that operations aren’t my strength — I get bored by the day-to-day details. Back in my ecommerce days, I started outsourcing operations. I hired someone from what was then oDesk (now Upwork) to handle customer service, agency calls, and other tasks. At first, it was messy because I didn’t have proper operating procedures, but I refined the process over time.

Finding great people is hard. A one-hour interview isn’t enough. Candidates are selling themselves, and what they present isn’t always accurate. So there’s a trial-and-error phase.

Today, we use staffing agencies, LinkedIn, and platforms like Monster. My human resources team handles job postings, and we make sure to clearly outline the role — for example, “I need a leader to run a nine-figure business and inspire sales reps.” That clarity helps attract the right people.

Incentives are also critical. Some candidates seek a stable income, while others prefer a lower base pay with high performance bonuses. I try to understand what motivates them and tailor compensation accordingly.

To filter applicants, we include a short questionnaire: “If you were running this company, how would you grow it?” Only thoughtful responses move forward. Then our team conducts interviews, and I speak with the final candidates. That’s the process that’s worked for me.

Bandholz: What is your relationship with the CEOs?

Prasla: I keep it simple. One 30-minute call per week, focused on high-level strategy. We review a dashboard with key metrics, including revenue, what’s working, what’s not, and where the opportunities lie. I get the agenda in advance, and we stick to it.

I don’t micromanage. My job is to empower, not control. I give CEOs guardrails — for example, “Let’s grow from $1 million to $1.2 million this year.” Then I ask how they plan to do it. They break it down into quarterly and monthly KPIs. Maybe the goal is to increase conversion from 1% to 1.5% through home page A/B testing. I guide the direction, but they own the execution.

That ownership is key. When they create the plan, they’re more committed to achieving it.

Compensation for a seven- or eight-figure company typically includes a base salary ranging from $150,000 to $300,000, plus phantom equity that vests over time, profit sharing, and performance bonuses.

If my CEO brings in an extra $1 million in value, I’m happy to share in that. It’s about alignment — when they win, we all win.

Bandholz: Tell us about the shift into real estate and convenience stores, and getting into strip malls.

Prasla: My move into real estate came from two things I noticed in ecommerce. First, the ecommerce revenue was unpredictable. One month it would be up, the next it would drop due to factors such as algorithm changes, underperforming ads, or supply chain issues. It was stressful, and I wanted more stability. Second, I wanted to build long-term wealth through equity, not just profit. Real estate gave me both.

It’s been a fun challenge. I enjoy negotiating land deals and working with brokers, developers, and banks. Once I find a property, the real planning begins — figuring out the building footprint, engineering, architecture, and sometimes dealing with environmental or access issues. It’s rewarding to see a project come to life from the ground up.

I’m not the general contractor — I hire one to manage all the subcontractors, including plumbing, roofing, MEP, and foundation, among others. We also work with about 20 professionals per project, including architects, engineers, and traffic consultants. Financing typically requires a down payment of 20–35%. After construction and getting a certificate of occupancy, it takes about six months to stabilize.

This isn’t a flip strategy for me — I plan to hold the properties long term. Traffic at busy intersections brings consistent footfall, unlike the volatility of ecommerce.

After years of grinding, experiencing burnout, and incurring some losses driven by ego, I’ve reevaluated what truly matters. I have two young kids, and now my priority is time — being present. I built a stable financial base, and now I’m focused on enjoying the next chapter.

Bandholz: Where can people find you?

Prasla: Gloves.com is our business for disposable products. Our convenience stores — called Snack Stop — are in Austin, Texas, where I live. I’m on LinkedIn.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments

App Business

Jun 26 2025

Job titles of the future: Pandemic oracle

Officially, Conor Browne is a biorisk consultant. Based in Belfast, Northern Ireland, he has advanced degrees in security studies and medical and business ethics, along with United Nations certifications in counterterrorism and conflict resolution. He’s worked on teams with NATO’s Science for Peace and Security Programme and with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, analyzing how diseases affect migration and border security.

Early in the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, international energy conglomerates seeking expert guidance on navigating the potential turmoil in markets and transportation became his main clients. Having studied the 2002 SARS outbreak, he predicted the exponential spread of the new airborne virus. He forecast the epidemic’s broadscale impact and its implications for business so accurately that he has come to be seen as a pandemic oracle.

Browne produces independent research reports and works directly with companies of all sizes. One of his niches is consulting on new diagnostic tools—for example, in his work with RAIsonance, a startup using machine learning to analyze cough sounds correlated with tuberculosis and covid-19. For multinational corporations, he models threats such as the possibility of avian influenza spreading from human to human. He builds most- and least-likely scenarios for how the global business community might react to an H5N1 outbreak in China or the US. “I never want to be right,” he says of worst-case predictions.

Navigating uncertainty

Biorisk consultants are often trained in fields related to epidemiology, security, and counterterrorism. Browne also studied psychology to understand how humans respond to disaster. In times of increasing geopolitical volatility, he says, biomedical risk assessment must include sociopolitical forecasting.

Demand for this type of crisis planning exploded in the corporate world in the aftermath of 9/11. Executives learned to create contingency plans for loss of personnel and infrastructure as a result of terrorism, pandemics, and natural disasters. And resilience planning proved crucial early in the covid-19 pandemic, as business leaders were forced to adjust to supply chain disruptions and the realities of remote work.

Network effects

By adding nuanced qualitative analysis to hard data, Browne creates proprietary guidance that clients can act on. “I give businesses an idea of what is coming, and what they do with that information is up to them,” he says. “I basically tell the future.”

Britta Shoot is a freelance journalist focusing on pandemics, protests, and how people occupy space.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments

App Blockchain Business cryptocurrency Opinion

Jun 26 2025

The Bank Secrecy Act is failing everyone. It’s time to rethink financial surveillance.

The US is on the brink of enacting rules for digital assets, with growing bipartisan momentum to modernize our financial system. But amid all the talk about innovation and global competitiveness, one issue has been glaringly absent: financial privacy. As we build the digital infrastructure of the 21st century, we need to talk about not just what’s possible but what’s acceptable. That means confronting the expanding surveillance powers quietly embedded in our financial system, which today can track nearly every transaction without a warrant.

Many Americans may associate financial surveillance with authoritarian regimes. Yet because of a Nixon-era law called the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and the digitization of finance over the past half-century, financial privacy is under increasingly serious threat here at home. Most Americans don’t realize they live under an expansive surveillance regime that likely violates their constitutional rights. Every purchase, deposit, and transaction, from the smallest Venmo payment for a coffee to a large hospital bill, creates a data point in a system that watches you—even if you’ve done nothing wrong.

As a former federal prosecutor, I care deeply about giving law enforcement the tools it needs to keep us safe. But the status quo doesn’t make us safer. It creates a false sense of security while quietly and permanently eroding the constitutional rights of millions of Americans.

When Congress enacted the BSA in 1970, cash was king and organized crime was the target. The law created a scheme whereby, ever since, banks have been required to keep certain records on their customers and turn them over to law enforcement upon request. Unlike a search warrant, which must be issued by a judge or magistrate upon a showing of probable cause that a crime was committed and that specific evidence of that crime exists in the place to be searched, this power is exercised with no checks or balances. A prosecutor can “cut a subpoena”—demanding all your bank records for the past 10 years—with no judicial oversight or limitation on scope, and at no cost to the government. The burden falls entirely on the bank. In contrast, a proper search warrant must be narrowly tailored, with probable cause and judicial authorization.

In United States v. Miller (1976), the Supreme Court upheld the BSA, reasoning that citizens have no “legitimate expectation of privacy” about information shared with third parties, like banks. Thus began the third-party doctrine, enabling law enforcement to access financial records without a warrant. The BSA has been amended several times over the years (most notoriously in 2001 as a part of the Patriot Act), imposing an ever-growing list of recordkeeping obligations on an ever-growing list of financial institutions. Today, it is virtually inescapable for everyday Americans.

In the 1970s, when the BSA was enacted, banking and noncash payments were conducted predominantly through physical means: writing checks, visiting bank branches, and using passbooks. For cash transactions, the BSA required reporting of transactions over the kingly sum of $10,000, a figure that was not pegged to inflation and remains the same today. And given the nature of banking services and the technology available at the time, individuals conducted just a handful of noncash payments per month. Today, consumers make at least one payment or banking transaction a day, and just an estimated 16% of those are in cash.

Meanwhile, emerging technologies further expand the footprint of financial data. Add to this the massive pools of personal information already collected by technology platforms—location history, search activity, communications metadata—and you create a world where financial surveillance can be linked to virtually every aspect of your identity, movement, and behavior.

Nor does the BSA actually appear to be effective at achieving its aims. In fiscal year 2024, financial institutions filed about 4.7 million Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) and over 20 million currency transaction reports. Instead of stopping major crime, the system floods law enforcement with low-value information, overwhelming agents and obscuring real threats. Mass surveillance often reduces effectiveness by drowning law enforcement in noise. But while it doesn’t stop hackers, the BSA creates a trove of permanent info on everyone.

Worse still, the incentives are misaligned and asymmetrical. To avoid liability, financial institutions are required to report anything remotely suspicious. If they fail to file a SAR, they risk serious penalties—even indictment. But they face no consequences for overreporting. The vast overcollection of data is the unsurprising result. These practices, developed under regulations, require clearer guardrails so that executive branch actors can more safely outsource surveillance duties to private institutions.

But courts have recognized that constitutional privacy must evolve alongside technology. In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Jones that attaching a GPS tracker to a vehicle for prolonged surveillance constituted a search restricted by the Fourth Amendment. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a notable concurrence, argued that the third-party doctrine was ill suited to an era when individuals “reveal a great deal of information about themselves to third parties” merely by participating in daily life.

This legal evolution continued in 2018, when the Supreme Court held in Carpenter v. United States that accessing historical cell-phone location records held by a third party required a warrant, recognizing that “seismic shifts in digital technology” necessitate stronger protections and warning that “the fact that such information is gathered by a third party does not make it any less deserving of Fourth Amendment protection.”

The logic of Carpenter applies directly to the mass of financial records being collected today. Just as tracking a person’s phone over time reveals the “whole of their physical movements,” tracking a person’s financial life exposes travel, daily patterns, medical treatments, political affiliations, and personal associations. In many ways, because of the velocity and digital nature of today’s digital payments, financial data is among the most personal and revealing data there is—and therefore deserves the highest level of constitutional protection.

Though Miller remains formally intact, the writing is on the wall: Indiscriminate financial surveillance such as what we have today is fundamentally at odds with the Fourth Amendment in the digital age.

Technological innovations over the past several decades have brought incredible convenience to economic life. Now our privacy standards must catch up. With Congress considering landmark legislation on digital assets, it’s an important moment to consider what kind of financial system we want—not just in terms of efficiency and access, but in terms of freedom. Rather than striking down the BSA in its entirety, policymakers should narrow its reach, particularly around the bulk collection and warrantless sharing of Americans’ financial data.

Financial surveillance shouldn’t be the price of participation in modern life. The systems we build now will shape what freedom looks like for the next century. It’s time to treat financial privacy like what it is: a cornerstone of democracy, and a right worth fighting for.

Katie Haun is the CEO and founder of Haun Ventures, a venture capital firm focused on frontier technologies. She is a former federal prosecutor who created the US Justice Department’s first cryptocurrency task force. She led investigations into the Mt. Gox hack and the corrupt agents on the Silk Road task force. She clerked for US Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy and is an honors graduate of Stanford Law School.

Ecommerce MGMT 0 Comments