Their customers knew the glove’s manufacturer by name. They did not know who sold it to them. That was the brief.
A supplier its buyers could not name, on a product they could not touch before buying. What five months of imperfect delivery looks like from the inside.
The partner supplies work gloves and safety equipment to builders, factories and tradespeople across Turkey: fast, competitively priced, reliable. What it did not have was a name of its own in the customer's mind. Ask a buyer what brand they trust and they would name the manufacturer printed on the glove, not the company that got it to them. That gap, a supplier doing a brand's job without a brand's recognition, was the real starting point; the social media came second.
The obstacle
Bought online, judged by hand
E-commerce has one structural weakness for a product like this: nobody can touch the glove before they buy it. Texture, flexibility, grip, the things that decide a purchase, do not survive a product photo on a white background. Most competitors in the category are not active on social media at all, which is an opportunity, but it also means there was no local playbook to borrow from. The content had to do the touching the customer could not.
The system
Two weeks, one shoot, every format
Regular content across Facebook and Instagram, on a two-week planning rhythm, built to a fixed visual language: the brand's own red, consistent fonts, a 3D mascot reserved for programme and brand-trust content, and a rule that every format carries its own safe-zone and naming standard. Comments get worked daily, in the brand's own voice, and one shoot a month feeds weeks of platform-native cuts rather than a single video repurposed without adaptation.
The decision that mattered
The decision that mattered more than any single post
Not every reaction to machine-assisted content is hostile. One comment on a generated Reel said, plainly, that real footage would have been better. It was a fair point. The reason generation entered the workflow at all was not preference: budget, schedule, and the practical difficulty of filming this business's own premises made real footage hard to get consistently. The partner asked for it, and the request is on record. Rather than defend the choice, we turned it into an offer: send us the product, let real customers use it in their own workshops and sites, and we will build content from what happens. Cost: the product and shipping. No influencer fee.
A smaller signal came the same way: a customer comment mentioned using one of the gloves at the gym, a use case the brand had not planned content around. That is where the next content angle came from.
Delivery
Delivery, measured
- Facebook 63 posts in 91 days, about 4.8 a week, inside the contracted three to five a week band.
- Instagram 32 posts in 76 days, about 2.9 a week, modestly under the same band.
- Facebook followers Plus 95 over 13 weeks on one measurement basis; a second basis in the same export reads differently.
- Scope expansion LinkedIn, TikTok and YouTube added as a two-month trial at no charge, initiated by us, running through 30 September 2026.
We have withheld reach, engagement and website-click totals because the available reports conflict. The zero-click entries may reflect tracking gaps, but that has not been established. We are reconciling the records before drawing conclusions from them.
What the paid team is seeing
A third-party read, stated as one
The partner's paid-media team reported a snapshot of 15 orders, seven attributed to content we produced. This is their account of one day. It does not estimate the ongoing share of all orders.
One campaign snapshot they shared shows why: across 14 ads, six live and the rest paused for testing, the six creatives of ours that were running had spent 33,737 TL (about £520) and returned 1,322,563 TL (about £20,300) in purchase value, a return of roughly 39 times, across 147 purchases at an average cost of 229.50 TL (about £3.50) each. Sterling is at the 2 September 2026 rate of roughly 65 lira to the pound; the lira figures are the record.
It is a third-party read from the brand's own ad team, on one campaign window; we did not measure or export it ourselves.
The brand also agreed to a trial across three additional platforms. That extends the work; the trial's results need to be assessed separately.
This is five months into an ongoing partnership, sourced from our own social export dated 31 July 2026, the founder's transcript, and our growth proposal. No reach, engagement or website-click figure is published, because two of our own reports conflict on them. No customer name, photo or quote is used, since no written consent is on file. The paid-team figures are a third-party read, labelled as one. The partner's name is withheld at the founder's decision.
What you would get
The same start, before anyone talks about money
A Free Audit goes looking for gaps like this one. Request yours.