Case study 01 · CrownCards (client) · Statics · Oct 2026

"They thought it was a scam too."

People think rip apps are rigged. I turned that doubt into the ad.

BrandCrownCards: open digital packs on your phone and get real trading cards

My roleResearch, angle, hooks, copy, building the statics

PersonaAlready rips on other apps and assumes they're all rigged

Output10 statics, then a second round after client feedback

01The insight

I read the App Store reviews and the Reddit threads asking "is CrownCards legit?"

One-star reviews: the odds are rigged and you can't cash out.

Five-star reviews: many started with that same doubt, then changed their mind.

"Was skeptical at first but the packs are so fun to rip and it's real!"
App Store review

So the likeliest buyer already rips somewhere else and expects to get burned. "We're legit" won't move them. Every app says that.

02The angle

Let other skeptics say it's real, in their own words.

A review that admits the doubt sounds like them, so it's hard to wave off. A star rating isn't.

The offer was a free pack with no deposit, because a skeptic won't pay to find out.

03The hook

I wrote 15 hooks and kept the 10 that were clearest, most specific and most believable. The lead: THEY THOUGHT IT WAS A SCAM TOO. It says their thought out loud, and "too" puts them with people who changed their mind.

04Rules

Reviews word for word, typos included. A skeptic spots a polished fake.
No dollar amounts. A number next to a pull reads like a promise.
Cards are shown as what's in the packs, never as a reviewer's pull.
Every ad looks different. Meta groups lookalike ads, so ten lookalikes count as one test.

CrownCards static ad: They thought it was a scam too, three App Store review cards next to a phone showing a PSA 10 Pikachu, code LILPUMP for a free pack — The lead ad.

CrownCards static ad: so fun to rip and it's real, App Store review from a skeptic — The same insight, led by one review.

05After the client's review

The team liked the lead ad. The owner then ruled out the word "scam" and switched the offer to the main code, which needs a deposit. What I changed:

Offer: moved every static to the main code. One review mentioned not spending a dollar, so I swapped it for another real review instead of editing the quote.
Wording: dropped "scam" but kept the job. A later static answers the same doubt as an FAQ: "Is Crown Cards real?"
Layout: the offer as the headline, less text, brighter colours.

CrownCards static ad: is Crown Cards real, five questions answered — The next round: same doubt, no "scam".

06What the client said

Discord message from the CrownCards team about the They thought it was a scam too static: really cool. Answers main objection that most users will have, and offers great social proof, and prominent offer, explained well

07What I'd take to the next brand

Five-star reviews that start with a doubt make strong hooks: the objection and the answer in one sentence.
When a word gets banned, keep the insight and change the words.

Where AI fit: AI drafted concept and hook options. I picked the concept, set the rules, built every static and checked every quote and claim against the source. No performance numbers are shown.

See the brief Next case study