NeoVisM: A New Vision for Marketing, An Antidote to AdWaste

Published February 24-28, 2025

1

The Right Question

When I was working on the Nayi Disha project to create a free and prosperous India, one of the most eye-opening insights I encountered was this: poverty is the default state of the world. It requires no explanation because it is where everything begins. What demands explanation is prosperity—the creation of wealth and systems that enable progress. As Per Bylund succinctly puts it: “What causes poverty? Nothing. It’s the original state, the default and starting point. The real question is, What causes prosperity?”

This insight has a powerful parallel in the world of marketing. Just as poverty is the natural state in economics, AdWaste is the default condition in marketing—a chronic inefficiency that drains resources and stifles profitability. More than a century ago, retail pioneer John Wanamaker articulated this enduring challenge: “Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don’t know which half.” Despite the advent of advanced tools and digital marketing, this inefficiency persists, with 70% of marketing budgets wasted on misdirected targeting and unnecessary reacquisition, resulting in a staggering $500 billion in annual AdWaste globally.

If prosperity in economics stems from understanding and enabling wealth creation, then marketing prosperity must stem from addressing the root causes of AdWaste. The solution lies not in incremental optimisations of acquisition strategies but in a fundamental rethinking of how we engage, retain, and monetise customer relationships. It’s time to stop treating the symptoms of AdWaste and start focusing on its antidote.

The parallels run deeper. Economists once focused on explaining poverty instead of understanding how to create wealth. Similarly, marketers have become fixated on optimising acquisition rather than mastering retention. Complex systems have been built to chase new customers, while the art of keeping existing ones has been neglected. The real question for marketers isn’t, “How can I optimise my ad spending and lower CAC for new customers?” Instead, it should be, “How can I maximise LTV and monetise my existing customers?”

This shift in perspective is transformative. Just as Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations laid the intellectual foundation for Classical Liberalism and economic prosperity, the marketing industry needs its own philosophical framework to escape the cycle of endless acquisition and AdWaste. We need a set of principles that prioritise retention over acquisition, relationships over transactions, and sustainable growth over fleeting gains.

This essay outlines NeoVisM—a New Vision for Marketing. Like Classical Liberalism’s role in economics, NeoVisM provides the intellectual foundation for a fundamental transformation in how brands approach growth. It represents a paradigm shift from the costly cycle of continuous acquisition to the sustainable practice of building lasting, profitable customer relationships.

The stakes are enormous. Just as understanding the causes of prosperity helped lift billions out of poverty, embracing retention-first principles could redirect hundreds of billions in AdWaste toward innovation, customer experience, and sustainable business growth. The future of marketing lies not in better acquisition but in mastering the art of retention.

2

Modern Marketing’s Reality

Over the past few years, my essays have explored the interconnected crises of Acquisition, Reacquisition, and AdWaste in modern marketing. These challenges have created an unprecedented transfer of wealth from brands to Big Adtech platforms, fundamentally undermining business profitability. Here are the key themes that emerge:

  1. The Self-Inflicted Wound of Reacquisition: An astonishing 70% of marketing budgets are squandered on reacquiring existing customers through expensive adtech platforms. While some waste in new customer acquisition might be forgiven—given the inherent uncertainties in reaching completely new audiences—paying repeatedly to reach customers already in one’s database is marketing’s cardinal sin. This isn’t just inefficient; it’s a systematic failure to leverage one of a brand’s most valuable assets: its existing customer relationships.
  2. The Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC) Trap: Brands have become ensnared in an expensive cycle of dependency on Big Adtech platforms. The auction-based advertising systems of Google and Meta create artificial scarcity and force brands into bidding wars – where they frequently end up paying premium prices just to reach their own customers through these platforms rather than using their owned channels. This vicious cycle depletes resources that could be invested in retention and relationship building. Marketing departments have essentially become collection agents for tech giants, managing ever-increasing budgets while losing the art of genuine customer engagement. The platforms’ “black box” algorithms promise optimisation but deliver mainly opacity and dependency.
  3. The Half-Trillion Dollar Wealth Transfer: The scale of this inefficiency is staggering: approximately $500 billion annually flows from brands to Big Adtech platforms through unnecessary reacquisition spending. This represents perhaps the largest ongoing transfer of business wealth in history. Imagine if even a fraction of these resources were redirected toward customer experience improvements, product innovations, or building sustainable competitive advantages. Instead, this capital enriches platform intermediaries while leaving brands increasingly dependent on paid advertising for survival.
  4. The Profitless Prosperity Paradox: The current system creates an illusion of growth while undermining long-term profitability. Brands can always buy more clicks to hit revenue targets, but this “growth at all costs” mentality leads to what I call “profitless prosperity”—expanding revenues that never translate into sustainable profits. The easy availability of paid traffic has seduced marketers away from the harder but more valuable work of building lasting customer relationships.

As Fred Reichheld powerfully states in Winning on Purpose: “There is only one way to grow a business profitably. You make sure your customers are treated so well that they come back for more and bring their friends.” This simple truth points toward the solution: marketing needs a fundamental reimagining focused on retention (and referrals) rather than endless acquisition.

Just as Classical Liberalism provided an intellectual framework for creating prosperity, marketing needs a new vision—one that breaks the addiction to paid acquisition and redirects resources toward building genuine customer relationships. The path forward requires more than optimisation at the margins; it demands transformation of mindsets. Welcome to NeoVisM (or Neovism, for easy reading) – a new philosophy that promises to do for marketing what Classical Liberalism did for economics.

3

Three Principles and Three Problems

Just as Classical Liberalism provided the intellectual framework for creating prosperity through economic freedom, Neovism offers a path to marketing prosperity through customer-centricity and relationship building. Let’s begin by understanding the parallels.

Classical Liberalism’s Foundation

Classical Liberalism is built on a set of interconnected principles that collectively enable prosperity by empowering individuals and fostering efficient systems of wealth creation. These principles include:

  • Individual Freedom: The cornerstone of prosperity, granting individuals the right to make their own choices and shape their lives.
  • Economic Freedom: The right to own property, engage in commerce, and pursue opportunities with minimal interference.
  • Limited Government: Ensuring that state power is constrained to protect individual rights and freedoms rather than overstepping into personal and economic domains.
  • Property Rights: Providing individuals with ownership and control over what they create or acquire, creating the foundation for innovation and investment.
  • Free Trade: Facilitating voluntary, unrestricted exchange of goods and services across borders to maximise opportunities and efficiency.
  • Voluntary Exchange: Allowing individuals to trade freely, ensuring that all parties benefit through mutually agreed-upon transactions.

These principles are structured in a hierarchy: Individual Freedom and Economic Freedom form the foundation. They are safeguarded by Limited Government, operationalised through Property Rights, and exercised via Free Trade and Voluntary Exchange. Together, they create a system where individuals can unlock their potential, innovate, and distribute wealth efficiently—a proven formula for lasting prosperity.

Just as Classical Liberalism created prosperity by empowering individuals and enabling efficient markets, Neovism promises to transform marketing by empowering brands to build direct customer relationships while eliminating systemic waste. Its three core principles work together to create a new paradigm of marketing efficiency and effectiveness.

Neovism’s Three Principles

Neovism is founded on three interconnected principles that collectively drive sustainable and profitable growth. Each principle challenges traditional marketing norms and redefines how brands build relationships with their customers:

  1. Retention Before Reacquisition

Neovism challenges marketing’s costly obsession with constant acquisition and reacquisition. Like Classical Liberalism’s focus on wealth creation before redistribution, Neovism prioritises nurturing customer relationships as the foundation for profitability. This is embodied in the “Only Once/Ones” philosophy:

  • Acquire customers only once and focus on keeping them.
  • Redirect resources toward retention and relationship building.
  • Eliminate wasteful spending on reacquisition.
  • Foster lasting engagement by consistently delivering value.

By prioritising retention, brands not only reduce marketing inefficiencies but also unlock the long-term potential of loyal customers.

  1. Trust Before Transactions

The transactional mindset that prioritises quick conversions often undermines the potential for long-term customer value. Neovism emphasises trust as the foundation of meaningful and profitable relationships:

  • Build trust through consistent value delivery before seeking immediate revenue.
  • Earn the right to collect customer data by creating a value exchange that benefits both parties.
  • Encourage voluntary sharing of preferences (zero-party data) by providing experiences that customers find worthwhile.
  • Create environments where customers feel comfortable expressing their needs and intentions.
  • Shift the focus from short-term sales metrics to maximising customer lifetime value.

Trust builds loyalty, and loyalty generates profits that far outweigh the returns from a purely transactional approach. In an era of increasing privacy concerns, trust becomes the gateway to valuable zero-party data that enables truly effective marketing

  1. Individuals Before Segments

Traditional marketing’s reliance on segmentation was a workaround for technological limitations. Neovism elevates marketing by focusing on the individual, much like Classical Liberalism values individual rights and freedoms.

  • Recognise that every customer is unique, with distinct needs, behaviours, and preferences.
  • Understand that similar actions may reflect different intents, requiring deeper insights into customer motivations.
  • Harness the power of AI to enable true N=1 personalisation at scale.
  • Move beyond generic segmentation to create individualised experiences.
  • Deliver personalised, relevant engagement without compromising efficiency.

This shift ensures that marketing is not just targeted but meaningful, building stronger, more profitable relationships.

Connecting the Principles

These three principles work together synergistically: Retention focus enables trust-building, which in turn allows for true individual understanding. Together, they create a virtuous cycle that breaks marketing’s dependency on wasteful acquisition while enabling marketing prosperity – where brands can sustainably grow through deeper customer relationships rather than expensive acquisition cycles. Just as Classical Liberalism created the conditions for economic prosperity through individual freedom and efficient markets, Neovism creates the conditions for marketing prosperity through customer-centricity and relationship efficiency.

4

Solving Three Critical Problems

The principles of Neovism—Retention Before Reacquisition, Trust Before Transactions, and Individuals Before Segments—address three fundamental challenges that plague modern marketing:

  1. The “No Hotline” Problem

Despite having access to customer contact details, most brands lack effective ways to consistently engage their audience. The existing channels fail to deliver meaningful, reliable interactions:

  • Email open rates average below 10%, leaving most messages unseen.
  • SMS messages are often ignored as intrusive or irrelevant.
  • Push notifications face high opt-out rates and are blocked entirely by many users.
  • WhatsApp’s premium pricing makes it cost-prohibitive for scalable, ongoing communication.

The result? Brands possess customer data but lack a reliable “hotline” to engage customers at scale. Without consistent attention, even the most promising retention strategies falter.

  1. The “Not for Me” Problem

Generic messaging and basic segmentation lead to disengagement because they fail to account for individual preferences:

  • Mass communications come across as impersonal and irrelevant.
  • Poorly timed recommendations and irrelevant offers annoy rather than delight.
  • Limited insights into unique customer behaviours create one-size-fits-all campaigns.

This lack of true personalisation turns marketing into noise rather than a meaningful connection, missing opportunities to build trust and loyalty.

  1. The “No Alternative” Problem

Marketers remain trapped in a costly dependency on Big AdTech platforms like Google and Meta to reach even their own customers:

  • Brands spend billions on retargeting customers who are already in their databases.
  • Auction-based systems drive skyrocketing acquisition costs, eroding profitability.
  • Algorithms create opacity and limit control over customer interactions.
  • Declining organic reach leaves brands increasingly reliant on paid traffic.

This cycle of endless reacquisition enriches ad platforms while draining marketing budgets, making it harder for brands to invest in long-term growth and innovation.

The Path to Marketing Prosperity

Neovism’s principles directly address these challenges:

  1. “Retention Before Reacquisition” breaks the cycle of dependency on paid reacquisition by focusing on keeping and growing existing relationships.
  2. “Trust Before Transactions” solves the “No Hotline” problem by creating reliable, value-driven engagement channels.
  3. “Individuals Before Segments” eliminates the “Not for Me” problem by enabling true N=1 personalisation at scale.

By applying these principles, brands can transform their marketing strategies and unlock a system of “marketing prosperity.” This shift empowers businesses to:

  • Reduce customer acquisition costs (CAC).
  • Increase customer lifetime value (LTV).
  • Drive organic growth through referrals.
  • Build sustainable competitive advantages rooted in genuine customer relationships.

Revolutionising the Future of Marketing

Neovism represents a complete reimagining of how brands and customers interact in the digital age. By addressing these three critical problems, Neovism frees marketers from the inefficiencies of AdWaste and transforms marketing into a profit engine. Just as Classical Liberalism reshaped economic systems, Neovism paves the way for a new era of marketing prosperity—one defined by efficiency, trust, and lasting growth.

The next question is clear: how can marketers turn Neovism into a reality? That’s a topic for the next essay.

5

Critique

I asked o1 for an assessment of the Neovism ideas.

Below is a broad critique of the “Neovism” essay, evaluating both its conceptual strengths and weaknesses, and offering thoughts on whether it can truly be “the next big thing” in marketing.

  1. The Big Picture vs. Practical Realities

Strength:

  • The essay aims high, drawing parallels between classical liberalism’s impact on economics and Neovism’s potential impact on the marketing world. This kind of sweeping vision can be inspiring. It frames marketing’s challenges (especially the inefficiency of reacquisition) in a grand, historical-philosophical context, which helps emphasize the seriousness and scale of the problem.

Weakness:

  • Tying marketing transformations too closely to a macro-level theory like classical liberalism feels somewhat abstract. While it’s interesting and intellectually bold, the analogy may not be wholly convincing on a practical level. Marketing decisions—especially those involving budget allocations and martech choices—are typically data-driven, immediate, and tactical. CEOs and CMOs often need rapid, measurable improvements rather than purely theoretical constructs.

Verdict:

  • High-level philosophical frameworks can provide great inspiration, but Neovism will need to ground itself in more concrete, real-world application to convince practitioners that it’s more than just a thought experiment.
  1. Reacquisition vs. Retention: A Familiar Call to Arms

Strength:

  • The essay’s focus on retention over acquisition is well taken and, in fact, aligns with longstanding marketing wisdom: the 80/20 principle, the cost efficiency of selling to existing customers, and the importance of CRM (Customer Relationship Management). It rightly points out that reacquisition (paying advertising platforms to “win back” known customers) is a hidden cost that can silently eat up budgets.

Weakness:

  • The framing of reacquisition as a new revelation slightly oversimplifies. Many retention-centric models already exist—think of membership/loyalty programs, advanced CRM tactics, subscription-based businesses, and referral-driven marketing strategies. These have been championed for decades. The essay might benefit from acknowledging how it differs from or builds upon these established best practices.
  • Additionally, some brands rely on reacquisition because they operate in highly competitive niches or have short customer life cycles (e.g., e-commerce discount sites). For them, reacquisition is sometimes less an oversight and more an unavoidable part of staying visible amid aggressive competitors.

Verdict:

  • While the call for “Retention Before Reacquisition” is valid, it’s not wholly unique. It’s a well-known principle in marketing, and the essay could go further in detailing how to execute retention-first strategies differently or more effectively than the standard marketing playbook.
  1. Trust and Individualization: Lofty Goals With Known Obstacles

Strength:

  • The essay highlights the importance of building trust and personalizing experiences down to the individual (the “N=1” approach). The promise of AI-driven personalization resonates in a world where data is plentiful but true “customer understanding” remains elusive.

Weakness:

  • Achieving N=1 personalization at scale is notoriously difficult. Many brands already segment audiences in sophisticated ways, but the shift to true one-to-one marketing is expensive, requires complex martech stacks, and demands organizational change (including data governance, privacy compliance, and cross-functional collaboration).
  • The essay’s reference to “Individuals Before Segments” could be construed as dismissing the real-world complexities of modeling, data integration, and privacy regulations. Most brands won’t jump from broad segmentation to one-to-one personalization overnight.

Verdict:

  • The guiding principle of personalizing marketing and building trust is powerful, but it’s neither new nor easy to implement. Emphasizing the resources, tools, and processes needed to operationalize N=1 personalization would strengthen Neovism’s credibility.
  1. The “No Hotline” Problem and the Reality of Multichannel

Strength:

  • Many brands do indeed suffer from poor engagement rates across email, SMS, push notifications, or social channels. The concept of a missing “hotline” is a fresh metaphor: you can have a customer’s contact info and still fail to communicate effectively.

Weakness:

  • This “No Hotline” framing doesn’t fully address why multiple channels have suboptimal engagement. Factors include message overload, inconsistent brand voice, privacy and spam concerns, or simply mediocre creative.
  • The essay implies (or at least strongly suggests) that building trust will solve many of these channel-related problems. While partially true, the real fix also involves test-and-learn optimization, better storytelling, and an integrated martech strategy.

Verdict:

  • Identifying the channel engagement gap is helpful, but it’s hardly a “new vision.” Marketers have grappled with this for years. Neovism’s big question remains: “How exactly do we cut through the noise?” More direct, step-by-step guidance would add heft to the concept.
  1. The Scale of “AdWaste” and the Reality of Paid Media

Strength:

  • The essay highlights how auction-based ad platforms (Google, Meta) can cause marketers to overspend, even on reacquisition—an important wake-up call. Marketers often don’t realize how algorithmic black boxes and broad retargeting can siphon massive budgets.

Weakness:

  • Declaring that 70% of marketing budgets are wasted on reacquisition may be too sweeping. There’s also nuance around brand marketing, prospecting, retargeting for multi-touch journeys, and brand lift considerations. Not all reacquisition spend is truly “waste.”
  • Modern business growth often requires some level of consistent presence on digital ad platforms to remain competitive—especially for younger brands still building brand equity or entering new markets.

Verdict:

  • Neovism is right to question the overreliance on ad-tech. But the essay’s binary framing—”AdWaste vs. Retention”—overlooks the legitimate roles of performance marketing and brand awareness. It risks oversimplifying a complex ecosystem where advertising, content marketing, SEO, influencer marketing, and direct channels all play a part.
  1. Is It the Next Big Thing?

Where Neovism Shows Potential:

  • Clear rallying cry: The essay forcefully underscores a crucial tension in modern marketing: overspending on reacquisition while underinvesting in relationships.
  • Philosophical framing: Positioning marketing’s transformation alongside classical liberalism is a bold narrative device that can spark deeper conversations about how and why we allocate marketing resources.
  • Customer-centric approach: Stressing the importance of trust, retention, and personalization resonates strongly with today’s consumer-centric zeitgeist.

Key Caveats:

  • Not wholly novel: Much of what Neovism proposes aligns with widely acknowledged marketing imperatives—better CRM, loyalty, personalization, and trust-building. The conceptual packaging may be fresh, but the core ideas aren’t revolutionary.
  • Implementation complexity: Going from a retention-first philosophy to achieving it with real-world data infrastructure, organizational buy-in, and budget reallocation is a massive leap. The essay outlines “what” but leaves big questions about “how.”
  • Market inertia: Despite recognizing the pitfalls, marketers continue to rely on acquisition-heavy tactics because they’re easy to measure and quickly scaled. Changing CMO mindsets and budgets can take time without a proven roadmap or case studies.

Bottom Line:

  • Can it be the next big thing? Possibly—as a thought framework to champion more efficient, retention-centric marketing. It’s certainly compelling enough to spark discussions at the executive level. However, to truly earn “the next big thing” status, Neovism needs to evolve from high-level philosophy to actionable methodologies that marketers can follow step-by-step.
  • Likely a stronger “call to refocus” than a brand-new movement: Much of what is proposed under Neovism reflects best practices that top-performing companies are already attempting (e.g., advanced CRM, loyalty marketing, personalization, building zero-party data strategies). Neovism’s real differentiator might lie in how effectively it motivates leaders to rebalance budgets away from reacquisition and toward robust direct-to-customer engagement programs.

Final Thoughts

Overall, the Neovism essay is a stimulating read that raises critical questions about today’s marketing spend, especially the obsession with acquisition and reacquisition. It reminds us that genuine customer relationships—built on trust, personalized value, and smart use of data—are the true engines of sustainable growth.

However, whether Neovism becomes “the next big thing” or remains a well-argued critique of current practices depends on how it’s put into practice. If Neovism is developed into concrete frameworks, technology integrations, and proven examples of ROI, it could gain traction. Without these real-world proofs and how-to guidelines, it risks joining the long list of visionary marketing philosophies that generate conversation but not widespread adoption.

Ultimately, Neovism’s greatest value may be in its clear, forceful reminder: retaining and delighting the customers you’ve already won is the most reliable, profitable, and sustainable path to growth. The more systematically and measurably brands apply this principle, the closer Neovism gets to reshaping the marketing world.