How Gymshark should run Meta ads.
A brand built in the feed, not the search bar. The athletes are the targeting, so the plan is a creative engine first and an ad account second.
Analysis built with paid.social, the ad-planning tool from Jonas, a former Meta growth leadThe creative is the audience. Nobody searches for a legging brand they have never heard of, so Gymshark was built the only way it could be: athletes and creators wearing the product in the feed until the community became the moat. On a ~60% apparel margin the break-even sits near 1.7x, which leaves real room to spend on consideration. That room is not for clever targeting. It is for volume of native, athlete-led creative that Meta can distribute broad.
So the paid-social job is to take the best of what the Athletes and the community already make, and buy reach on it. Broad targeting, the catalogue underneath, and a steady feed of UGC and drop content on top. Judge it on blended contribution across prospecting and retargeting, and let the choreographed drops do the urgency that a static sale price never will.
Athletes first. The catalogue handles the lower funnel. The two concepts below are what a price-comparison shopper cannot get elsewhere: the community, and the drop.
How we built this plan
We modelled the economics from Gymshark's published revenue and apparel-margin benchmarks. The AOV, margin and ROAS figures are estimates, not Gymshark's data, meant to show what a creative-led, community-first plan looks like on Meta and what "good" is.