I’m going to say the quiet part out loud: Continuing to gate-keep information in the age of AI is insane.
Not “unhelpful.” Not “a little outdated.” Insane.
We’ve been living in the era of democratized information for a long time. And now AI has turned the faucet into a firehose. I started using ChatGPT in December of 2022, and even back then it was obvious where this was headed: information was about to become cheaper, faster, and more accessible than ever.
So it’s bewildering to me that I still see gurus, business coaches, and marketing bros running the same dusty playbook: provide the what, not the how, because the how is where you get them to hire you.
Honey boo… they can find the how flashing its shit around these AI-streets like it’s Sharon Stone.
And yes, it takes time to get to the how that actually fits your business, your constraints, your capacity. But let’s not pretend the “how” is locked in a vault anymore. It’s not. In the real world: the “how” is everywhere. Which means the value has shifted.
You’re no longer just selling “the how.”
If information is cheap — and it is — everything is shifting to relationships and genuine, human connection.
So why are we still doing this? Why are people still publishing vague, empty “recommendations” in their 2026 Coaching Trends Report… the kind of recommendation that gives just enough to make someone scratch their head and wonder if they’re dumb — and then feel like the real-real is only available if they hire you?
Because that move? Whether you call it “strategy” or “protecting your IP”… it often lands as fog. And fog converts. Clarity builds trust.
Pick one.
If Your Marketing Requires Fog, This Isn’t For You
Let me be clear, I’m not saying you have to give away the farm. I’m not saying you owe the internet your entire brain.
I’m saying if your marketing depends on leaving people slightly confused, slightly hungry, slightly unfinished — so they pay you to “complete the thought” — that’s out of integrity.
And if that’s your model? This isn’t for you.
Because people can feel the contradiction: The same folks preaching trust and relationships and “the market has changed” are still gate-keeping. Still playing by old rules. Still pushing their offer before any trust has been built, and it has a deep wide-reaching impact on the industry.
The “Trust Recession” + The Gate-Keeping Problem
Let me give you a very real example.
An online business coach — we’ll call her Winona — put out a 2026 coaching business trends report. She even had some surveyed data to back it up. She talks about what’s “not working” and what’s “working.” She references the trust recession, talking about how buyers are more cautious and skeptical, so it takes them longer to make a decision.
Then she gets to the part where she outlines the “shifts” in the industry, and what we can do about it. And it’s the most vague fluff I’ve ever seen.
It’s basically:
“Your sales cycle is longer.”
“You need more nurture.”
“Build trust faster.”
Which sounds smart… until you realize it’s not instruction. It’s a horoscope.
Even ChatGPT nailed why it annoyed me so much (though, far less spicy than how I framed it):
“What you pasted (“your sales cycle is longer, you need more nurture, build trust faster”) is accurate but it’s basically a weather report. It names conditions. It doesn’t tell you what to do on Monday.”
Exactly.
Again: naming a condition isn’t teaching. It’s just describing the sky. And here’s what that vagueness does, whether Winona intended it or not:
It creates an open tab in someone’s brain. They close the PDF and maybe their body does that little clench — shoulders up, jaw tight — and their mind goes:
“Okay… I kind of get it?”
“But I have no idea what to do.”
“Maybe I’m the problem.”
“Maybe I just don’t understand business.”
“Maybe I need to hire her to feel smart again.”
That “I need to hire you to conclude this open tab” feeling is a major reason the online space feels like a trust landfill.
Not because people are protecting IP, but because people are pretending they taught something when they didn’t.
I’m Not Anti-IP. I’m Anti-Bullshit.
Let’s reiterate, I don’t believe in giving everything away for free.
I believe in Intellectual Property. I believe in the power of how someone weaves information together. I believe in the magic of lived experience, pattern recognition, taste, and the ability to see what matters and what doesn’t.
But “protecting IP” is not an excuse to be vague.
Because there’s a difference between withholding proprietary depth (valid), and hiding behind generalities while calling it “value” (lazy at best, manipulative at worst). If you’re going to talk about trust, then act trustworthy. Be specific enough that potential clients can take a real step without needing to worship you first.
The Coaching Space Has Been Indoctrinated for Years
This isn’t new. Not my frustration with it, and not the behavior itself. The “teach the what, not the how” adage has been in full operation since the dawn of the online course era. And it has ALWAYS annoyed the shit out of me.
Because here’s the thing, I’m a smart cookie. I’m curious. I’m open. I’m a voracious consumer of knowledge. And I’m not alone.
So when someone edges me right to the point of “ohhhh I can feel the insight landing” and then cuts me off from the finale, I’m not left feeling intrigued. I’m left feeling pissed off.
And I know you know the exact feeling I’m talking about, because you’ve probably felt it too:
You attend a webinar.
You read a masterclass transcript.
You download a trends report.
And at the end, if someone asked you, “Cool — what’s your next step?” You couldn’t answer. Or you could almost answer — it’s right at the tip of your brain — but you can’t quite get there. Or worse, you leave feeling helpless, like maybe you’re the one who can’t execute, maybe you just don’t get business, or maybe you’re the one with the problem.
Most of the time? It’s not you. It’s the person holding the container.
And no, it’s not always intentional. A lot of people are repeating what they were taught without self-awareness, without critical thinking, without any real audit of whether their teaching actually lands—and no, judging whether your stuff is landing based on sales is not good enough.
Some of them think they’re giving enough of the how… and they’re not.
And yes, some people do know exactly what they’re doing. They’re selling hope and confusion and positioning themselves as the only bridge to certainty. Those scammers can fuck right off. I smell them a mile away (and I hope you can, too).
So Why Does So Much “Education” Feel Like Air
There are a few reasons vagueness persists — and yeah, some of them aren’t great. But first, I want to name the most common good-faith reason people hide behind fog: Fear.
They could be afraid that if they give specific recommendations and someone misapplies them, they’ll get blamed. They’re afraid of the “I tried your method and it didn’t work” comment. They’re afraid specificity will create a level of accountability they can’t control.
And that fear isn’t imaginary.
People who actually care don’t want to cause harm. They don’t want to steer someone wrong. They don’t want to be publicly wrong. And it can be genuinely confronting to pour your heart into something and have it not work for someone — especially if you’re a leader who’s built your identity around being helpful, competent, safe.
But the solution isn’t to become vague. The solution is to teach with boundaries and context. Because in the real world, not sticking the landing for a handful of people is… normal. Not a scandal. Not proof you’re a fraud. Not evidence you’re shit.
Sometimes it just means: it was never going to work for them — their business model, their capacity, their season of life, their skills, their nervous system, their constraints. That’s allowed. That’s human.
And sometimes it means: there’s something for you to refine. The recommendation needs more context. The sequence needs adjusting. The teaching needs a better “when this doesn’t apply” clause. Cool. Leaders take the arrows. You learn. You get sharper.
And if you can’t take the arrows yet — if one “this didn’t work for me” comment sends you into a spiral — that’s not proof you should teach less clearly.
That’s just a call to expand your capacity as a leader.
So start by saying the truth out loud:
“This is a starter version.”
“This works best if you already have X.”
“If you don’t have X, do this instead.”
“If you try to apply this at scale without support, you’ll break it.”
That’s what integrity looks like: not pretending your free content can solve every nuance, but also not making people decode a horoscope just to take a step.
Now—some fog is fear. And some fog is strategy.
Fog is easier to sell. Specific instruction forces precision. Precision forces accountability. Fog lets you sound smart without being pinned down.
Specificity risks accountability. If you give a recommendation and someone tries it and it doesn’t work, now you have to deal with nuance. Nuance is inconvenient when your business model relies on clean testimonials.
Frameworks are easier than instruction. A framework can sound like “how,” but it’s often just labeling. Naming categories isn’t the same as telling someone what to do next.
They confuse inspiration with implementation. Being moved is not the same as being equipped. A lot of webinars are emotional experiences with a sales pitch stapled to the end.
They optimize for conversion, not comprehension. People are taught explicitly to keep the audience slightly unsatisfied — because hunger converts.
And look: I’m not saying you can’t sell.
I’m saying if your marketing requires fog to work, you’re not building trust.
You’re extracting.
Here’s The Fix: Minimum Viable Implementation
So what’s the solution?
Minimum viable implementation.
A starter version of your framework. A concrete first step. Something someone can actually run without needing your paid container to complete the thought.
This is how you protect your IP and stop contributing to the trust collapse.
Free content (or a webinar, or a trends report) should give someone:
- starter path they can execute
- a clear next step
- and a truthful boundary around what happens inside paid support
Not “here are the five phases of my proprietary method” with no instruction.
Not “build trust faster.”
Not “nurture more.”
Not “show up consistently.”
Actual implementation. Something they can sink their teeth into.
Instead of “Nurture More”
“Nurture” isn’t a vibe. It’s a sequence.
If your report or webinar says “nurture more,” the MVI version is:
Write a 7–10 email nurture sequence for new subscribers that answers:
- Who is this for / not for?
- What problem do you actually solve?
- What does your process look like?
- What objections are normal?
- What proof do you have?
- What should they do next?
Send one weekly email that does one of the following (rotate them):
- teach one belief shift / distinction
- tell a client story (before → after → what changed)
- show behind-the-scenes of your process
- address a common objection (time, money, fear, capacity)
- invite to a next step (call, application, offer)
Add one re-engagement email every 30–60 days to older leads:
- “Still relevant? Here’s what’s changed. Here’s what to do next.”
That’s nurturing. Not “stay top of mind.” Not “provide value.”
A real path.
Instead of “Build Trust Faster”
Trust is not “be authentic.” Trust is evidence + clarity + consistency. (Over time.) If your report says “build trust,” the MVI version is:
Create a proof library that lives in one place:
- 3 case studies (even small wins, but specific)
- 5 testimonials that name the problem and the outcome
- 1 results snapshot post that’s not hype-y, just clean and factual
Pro-level trust move: when you share testimonials or client wins, link to their website or Instagram, name their business, or tag them (with permission). Don’t just use “Sarah, 32” with a headshot and call it good enough. The bullshit surrounding fake testimonials is real. This is a subtle but powerful way to say: I’m not playing — this is a real human.
Make a How It Works page (or a pinned post) that explains:
- what happens first
- what happens next
- what happens when people get stuck
- how long it typically takes
- what results look like (realistic, not fantasy)
Publish a values / boundaries statement:
- who you don’t work with
- what you won’t promise
- what you prioritize (integrity, sustainability, no coercive sales)
And here’s the integrity line: The depth in paid support isn’t “here are my values and boundaries, look how clean my brand is.”
The depth is: can you live them when it costs you something? That’s what people pay for. That’s the work. Trust isn’t built by saying “trust me.”
It’s built by removing uncertainty.
Instead of “People Need More Touchpoints”
A touchpoint isn’t “post more.” It’s repetition in different formats. The MVI version is:
Pick one core idea per week and repeat it as:
- one email
- one post
- one short video
- one story sequence (or a live)
Put your CTA in the same place every time:
- “Reply with ___”
- “Apply here”
- “DM me ___”
- “Book a call”
Consistency isn’t frequency. It’s coherence.
Instead of “Provide More Proof”
“Proof” isn’t saying you’re good. Proof is showing what happened. The MVI version is:
Write 3 case studies in this format:
- Here’s where they were.
- Here’s what we did (in plain language).
- Here’s what changed (with specifics).
- Here’s what was surprising / hard / real.
Record 3 short testimonial prompts and send them to clients:
- “What were you struggling with before?”
- “What shifted?”
- “What would you tell someone considering this?”
And if you don’t have clients yet? Then you show:
- your process
- your thinking
- your skill in action (audits, teardown examples, live coaching clips)
No fog. No pretending.
What People Are Actually Paying For Now (And Why It’s Not “The How”)
This is the part that changes everything in the AI era: People aren’t paying you for information. AI can generate information all day long. The how is everywhere.
Now, people pay for:
- Discernment — what matters for them vs what’s noise
- Sequencing — what to do first, second, third — and what not to touch yet
- Troubleshooting — what to do when reality doesn’t match theory — because it won’t
- Implementation support — review, edits, accountability, follow-through
- Human connection — a relational experience where you feel met
- Resonance + witnessing — someone tracking your story over time, reflecting you back to yourself, naming what’s true without performing for you
- Attunement — someone who can read your nervous system and patterns
- Growth-edge support — someone who knows where you’re most likely to self-sabotage, overcomplicate, or bail, and can guide you through that exact friction point
That’s the real bridge between free and paid: not “I kept the secret steps from you,” but “I can help you walk your talk when it gets real.”
If You Say You’re About Trust, Act Like It
This is the part where I get really direct: if you want to build trust — build it.
Don’t tell me you’re about trust while you serve me slop. Don’t preach relationships while you keep people stuck in confusion loops. Don’t talk about how AI is changing everything while you keep selling like it’s 2016 and information is scarce.
Information isn’t scarce.
Attention is scarce.
Capacity is scarce.
Discernment is scarce.
Integrity is scarce.
Humanity is scarce.
So if you want me to give up my precious coin, prove to me you’re not just saying words. Prove to me you can deliver clarity. Prove to me your paid work goes deeper — not because you finally reveal the secret steps, but because you can actually guide someone through the friction where most people quit.
And if you’re reading this as a coach, a creator, a teacher, a marketer — here’s the question you should sit with:
When someone finishes your content, can they name their next step without needing to hire you to feel smart again?
If the answer is no, cut the shit.
You don’t need to give away the farm. You just need to stop selling fog.
AI Disclaimer: This blog was written by me, Henri. I did use AI to check grammar, flow, and to make sure what I was saying made sense. Roughly 10% of this is AI-generated edits. The rest is all me, baby.
