What John Peslar Gets Right About Content

What John Peslar Gets Right About Content

The first time I saw one of John Peslar's posts, I did a double take. Here was a solo founder in Canada talking about agentic AI agents, debugging workflows at 2am, and turning that grind into clean, punchy posts that people actually want to read. With 31,953 followers, 23,170 connections, and a Hero Score of 1133.00, he's playing in a different weight class than most solo builders.

I wanted to see if that was just a one off or if there was a pattern. So I put John side by side with two other solid creators - Julien Renaux in France and Jan Thyen in Germany - and started comparing how they show up and how their numbers stack. Turns out, there is a pretty clear recipe hiding in plain sight.

Here's what stood out:

• John behaves like a professional operator who happens to write, not a writer who occasionally builds - that flips the whole feel of his content.
• Compared with Julien and Jan, he squeezes a lot more perceived authority out of every post by anchoring ideas in tools, time, and money.
• His structure is almost boringly consistent - hooks, fast context, sharp insight, clear CTA - which is exactly why it works.

---

John Peslar's Performance Metrics

Here's what caught my attention about John's numbers. His audience is big enough to matter but still small enough that conversations feel personal. A Hero Score of 1133.00 puts him right up with or above creators who have smaller audiences but similar engagement strength. That usually means two things: people are actually reacting to what he says, and his posts are being engineered for clarity, not just vibes.

Key Performance Indicators

Now, it gets more interesting when you put all three creators side by side.

Creator Comparison Snapshot

What surprised me is how tight the Hero Scores are. John is only slightly ahead of Julien and Jan on that metric, even though his following is more than 10x larger. That usually means Julien and Jan are pretty sticky with smaller audiences, while John has figured out how to maintain that engagement quality at scale.

---

What Makes John Peslar's Content Work

When you zoom out, John's advantage is not that he's a better "writer" in the traditional sense. It's that his posts feel like live notes from the front lines of building AI products. The writing just happens to be sharp enough that those notes spread.

Here are the main moves he keeps repeating.

1. Hybrid operator-teacher positioning

The first thing I noticed is how John positions himself. He is not just "posting about AI" - he's clearly building things: getdeals.ai, leadpanther.ai, getinterviews.ai, plus teaching inside the Agent J community. His content reads like someone who shipped something in the morning and wrote about it in the afternoon.

So instead of generic "AI is the future" takes, you get posts that sound like: here is what actually broke in this workflow, here is the fix, here is the upside. He talks to builders and operators as peers, not as an influencer shouting from a stage.

Key insight: Teach from your own builds, not from theory. Every post should feel like you just learned or tested something and now you are handing over the playbook.

This works because people who care about AI agents do not want motivation. They want shortcuts that save them money, time, or technical pain. John anchors that with specifics - tools, prompts, hours spent debugging - so his authority feels earned, not borrowed.

Strategy Breakdown:

2. System driven content instead of vibes

John's posts often have a "secret", "catch", or "system" at the core. He will push on a pain point - AI that is "easy", generic prompts, messy automation stacks - then flip the script with a named mechanism or clear workflow.

Compared with a typical creator who might just say "AI is changing everything", John ships systems: prompt frameworks, sequencing logic, debugging flows. Even when he is being dramatic, there is usually a concrete method waiting in the middle of the post.

Comparison with Industry Standards:

Now compare that with Julien and Jan.

How John, Julien, and Jan differ in content focus

Julien and Jan both have strong, focused topics, but they often sit either very technical (Julien) or very executive (Jan). John hits this interesting middle - technical enough to be useful, simple enough that a busy founder can act on it fast.

3. Storytelling that respects your time

John's posts move quickly. Short lines. Lots of whitespace. One idea per sentence. He is not trying to sound clever, he is trying to keep you moving.

You will often see a tiny story: "6 months ago I was debugging..." or "This morning every AI went dark..." Then he snaps into the lesson and the system. No long build up, no heroic arc. Just enough narrative to make you care, then straight into the mechanism.

That rhythm matters. It means readers can scan on mobile, grab the key idea in a few seconds, and decide fast if they want to comment, save, or click.

4. Consistent, sustainable posting cadence

With roughly 2.7 posts per week, John sits in a sweet spot: visible enough to stay top of mind, not so constant that you start to tune him out.

Compared side by side:

If you are a solo builder, this is encouraging. You do not need to post 3 times a day. You need to post clearly, regularly, and about work you are actually doing.

---

Their Content Formula

When you read a few of John's posts back to back, a simple formula appears. It is not complicated. It is just very disciplined.

Hook that grabs attention.

Context that builds tension.

Insight that flips your assumptions.

Mechanism or system that shows exactly how to act.

Clear CTA that tells you what to do next.

Content Structure Breakdown

The Hook Pattern

John's hooks are almost always doing one of three things: triggering curiosity, challenging a lazy assumption, or pointing to a "Code Red" type risk if you ignore the change.

Template:

"[Bold claim or danger signal]."

"[Short line raising the stakes]."

"[Curiosity line hinting at a specific system or secret]."

You might see something like: "RIP generic AI prompts. The real money is in systems." Then a quick contrast line, then the tease for a framework. It is simple, but it nails three things at once - emotion, stakes, and a promise of structure.

Use this when you want to shift how people see a problem, not just share an update. The key is that you must actually have a system or clear explanation ready. If the body does not deliver, the hook feels like clickbait and your Hero Score will not stay high for long.

The Body Structure

The body of John's posts is where his builder brain shows up. He uses a very repeatable structure that you can steal.

Body Structure Analysis:

Notice what is missing: long theory sections, big motivational speeches, and endless definitions. He assumes you are smart and busy. He gives you just enough context to understand why the system matters, then hands you the steps.

The CTA Approach

John is not shy with CTAs. He often asks you directly to like, connect, and comment a keyword so he can send a resource. It is structured, clear, and usually written in a 1/ 2/ 3/ pattern.

Something like:

"Want the full agent workflow?"

"1/ Like this post so it reaches more builders."

"2/ Connect with me (I need this to DM you)."

"3/ Comment 'AGENT' and I will send the system."

Psychologically, this works because it turns engagement into a fair trade. You are not just helping his metrics. You are trading a small action for a concrete resource that saves you time. Plus, the numbered format is fast to read and easy to follow.

---

3 Actionable Strategies You Can Use Today

You do not need John's exact niche to borrow his playbook. Here are three moves you can start using in your next post.

1. Anchor every post in a real event or build - Instead of thinking "what should I post?", ask "what did I ship, test, or break this week?" and write from there. It instantly makes your content more grounded.

2. Name your systems, even if they are simple - Turn your process into a titled framework. People remember and share names. It also forces you to tighten the logic.

3. Use precise CTAs, not vague asks - Swap "Let me know what you think" for a specific action: like, save, comment a keyword, or ask for a resource. Clear direction usually means higher engagement.

---

Key Takeaways

1. Operator first, creator second beats generic thought leadership - John's authority comes from building AI products, then teaching from that experience in tight, high signal posts.
2. Systems and specifics win against vague inspiration - The reason his Hero Score is so strong is that people can actually do something with what he shares.
3. Simple structure, repeated consistently, is a quiet superpower - Hooks, tension, system, CTA. It is not sexy, but it is reliable and scalable.

Long story short: if you are trying to grow as a creator around your work, study how John packages his builds into repeatable stories and systems. That is what I learned from studying his content alongside Julien and Jan. What do you think?

---

Meet the Creators

---

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