Frank Greeff's Founder-First Posting Playbook

Frank Greeff's Founder-First Posting Playbook

I stumbled across Frank Greeff's LinkedIn and had that "wait... what?" moment.

He's sitting at 20,377 followers, posting about 6.4 times per week, and still pulling a Hero Score of 132.00. That combo is rare, because high frequency usually melts engagement. But his numbers say the opposite: the audience isn't just tolerating the volume, they're rewarding it.

So I went down the rabbit hole. And I pulled two comparison creators with almost identical "engagement efficiency" (Hero Score): Dan Rosenthal (132.00) and Bas Gosewisch (131.00). Different sizes, different vibes, same general signal: they know how to get people to react.

Here's what stood out:

• Frank's posts read like a voice note from a founder friend - messy on the surface, engineered underneath.
• Dan wins with crisp growth thinking and builder energy, but Frank feels more personal and "in-the-arena".
• Bas proves you don't need a huge audience to hit top-tier engagement - tight positioning and clarity can do a lot.

---

Frank Greeff's Performance Metrics

Here's what's interesting: Frank isn't "big" by LinkedIn celebrity standards, but he performs like someone much bigger. Hero Score 132.00 with 20k followers suggests his posts are consistently getting reactions relative to audience size. And with 6.4 posts per week, he isn't waiting for inspiration. He's building a habit, then letting the habit compound.

Key Performance Indicators

And before we get too deep into "strategy", I want to compare the playing field.

Side-by-side snapshot (all 3 creators)

What jumped out to me is the "efficiency" of Bas. A 131 Hero Score at 3,804 followers usually means the content is landing with exactly the right people (not everyone, just the right ones). Dan has the biggest audience, but Frank is the most visibly consistent based on posting cadence.

---

What Makes Frank Greeff's Content Work

Frank's style has a pattern: it feels casual, but it isn't accidental. It reads like "I just typed this while juggling kids and a startup" (and sometimes it probably is), but the structure keeps showing up.

1. Story-first credibility (the "I was there" advantage)

The first thing I noticed is how often Frank anchors an insight in a moment.

Not a generic lesson.

A moment.

A run in the rain. A founder conversation. A DM. A frustrating system in Australia. A "this slapped me in the face" realisation.

And then he earns the right to zoom out.

Key Insight: Start with a specific moment, then pull a principle out of it.

This works because people don't argue with scenes. They can argue with opinions. Scenes are sticky. Also, founders trust founders who show receipts in the form of lived detail, not "thought leadership" vibes.

Strategy Breakdown:

2. High-frequency posting without sounding like a content machine

Posting 6.4 times per week is basically "always on".

You'd think that would get repetitive.

But here's the thing: Frank doesn't post like a calendar. He posts like a person with momentum. The vibe is "I'm in it right now" not "It's Tuesday so here's my framework."

Also, he uses spacing like a weapon. One or two sentences per paragraph. A single line to land the punch. It makes frequent posting easier to consume because skimming still delivers the point.

Comparison with Industry Standards:

One more detail that feels "tactical": best posting windows for his style skew evening (9-10pm local), and sometimes early morning (around 1am) for the more rant-ish or contentious takes. That timing matches the tone. People doomscroll at night. Rants land at night.

3. A voice that's informal, but still "serious builder"

Frank has that classic founder voice blend:

• conversational
• optimistic
• a little chaotic (in a human way)
• occasionally spicy (but not mean)

He'll bend grammar for pacing. He'll use fragments. He'll toss in "I'll be honest" and actually be honest.

Now compare that with Dan and Bas:

• Dan is more "growth playbooks" forward. Cleaner and more productized.
• Bas is more "growth lead clarity". Tight, performance-minded, usually less personal chaos.

Frank's edge is that he can talk about business problems while still sounding like someone you'd actually want to grab coffee with.

4. Soft CTAs that don't ruin the vibe

This one surprised me because it's easy to mess up.

A lot of creators build a great story then spike it with a cringe CTA.

Frank usually doesn't.

He'll go light:

• "Follow along"
• "Link in comments"
• "Let the guessing games begin..."

And sometimes he sets boundaries (which weirdly increases trust): not looking for investment, don't be offended if we say no, etc.

The psychology is simple: when the CTA doesn't feel like a transaction, people stay in "conversation mode" and comment more.

---

Their Content Formula

If you wanted to copy Frank's approach without copying his life, you can.

The "formula" is less about topic and more about flow: hook, context, tension, realisation, clean close.

Content Structure Breakdown

The Hook Pattern

Frank's hooks usually do one of three things:

1. Start a tiny argument
2. Drop a status signal without bragging
3. Open a curiosity loop with a real moment

Template:

"Everyone says [common belief].

We disagree."

Or:

"Today I had a realisation about [painful business thing]."

Or:

"Here is one of the most ridiculous things about [system/market]."

Why this works: it forces your brain to pick a side or ask "what happened?". And because the next lines are spaced out, you're basically pulled forward.

The Body Structure

Frank's bodies feel like talking. But you can see the steps.

Body Structure Analysis:

And this is where comparing creators is useful. Dan tends to compress the "story" part and spend more words on the "model". Bas often leads with clarity and practical growth thinking. Frank is the most scene-heavy, which is why his posts feel human even when they're persuasive.

The CTA Approach

Frank's CTAs are basically "permissionless". They don't demand.

He'll invite.

He'll tease.

He'll ask a question.

And that matters because on LinkedIn, comments are social proof. A soft CTA increases the odds people reply with their own story.

Here's a simple comparison of end styles:

---

The "same Hero Score" mystery (and what it really means)

Frank and Dan both show 132.00 Hero Score. Bas is basically there with 131.00.

So why does it feel like three different "types" of creators?

Because Hero Score (as a concept) is about engagement relative to audience, not personality.

Frank gets there with storytelling and founder identity.

Dan gets there with growth operator value and AI playbooks.

Bas gets there with niche relevance and performance credibility.

Different paths. Similar output.

Creator positioning comparison

If you're trying to build your own presence, this is the part to steal: pick your trust trigger and repeat it until it becomes your "thing".

---

3 Actionable Strategies You Can Use Today

1. Write in scenes, not summaries - Start with a real moment (even small) so the lesson feels earned.

2. Post more often, but reduce friction - Use short paragraphs and one idea per post so frequency doesn't turn into fatigue.

3. End with an invitation, not a pitch - A simple question or "follow along" keeps comments high without killing trust.

---

Key Takeaways

1. Frank's edge is human momentum - he posts like he's mid-journey, not presenting from the finish line.
2. High frequency can work - if readability is nailed and the voice stays real.
3. Dan and Bas prove there are multiple "winning" styles - playbooks (Dan) and niche clarity (Bas) can match founder storytelling (Frank).
4. Hero Score parity doesn't mean sameness - it means each creator found a repeatable way to get their audience to react.

Try one Frank-style post this week: a tiny scene, one lesson, one soft close. See what happens. And honestly, tell me if it felt easier to write.

---

Meet the Creators

---

This analysis was generated by ViralBrain's AI content intelligence platform.