Top Influencer Agencies NYC: Your 2026 Guide
Updated: Sep 27
Choosing an influencer agency in New York based on follower counts, engagement rates, and the size of the creator roster is outdated. Those numbers still matter, but they miss how brands actually use creator content in 2026. The best influencer work no longer lives only on a creator's feed. It's short-form and long-form video that brands turn into paid ads, run on YouTube and connected TV, reuse on product pages, and test across TikTok, Instagram, and Meta as partnership ads.
That changes what you should expect from an agency. A campaign can post strong engagement and still leave the brand with nothing usable once the posting window closes: no usage rights, no ad-ready cuts, no hooks worth testing, and no plan for paid amplification. Brands evaluating NYC influencer agencies should ask a harder question: who can find the right creators, and turn their content into video advertising that keeps performing after the post goes live?
New York is one of the most crowded influencer marketing markets in the world, so there's real choice, but also real risk of hiring the wrong model. Enterprise agencies bring process and scale. Platform-plus-service firms bring data and workflow tools. Culture-led studios bring production value and creative credibility. A credible influencer marketing agency in New York should be judged on how well its model fits your brief, which platforms it covers, how disciplined its measurement is, and whether it plans creator content as media from day one.
This guide compares NYC influencer agencies by what each one actually solves, from high-volume product seeding to premium creator video to paid amplification, so the trade-offs are clear before procurement starts.
Table of Contents
1. Busylike
Busylike belongs on this list for a different reason than a traditional influencer agency. Most NYC influencer shops start with the creator roster: who they can book, how many posts they can deliver, and what engagement they can report. Busylike starts with the video. It plans creator partnerships around the content the brand will actually run: YouTube integrations, short-form hooks, paid social variants, and cutdowns for connected TV. Then it handles production, distribution, and paid amplification with the same team.
That matters because creator content has become one of the most effective forms of video advertising, but only when it's built for distribution. A creator post that works in-feed often needs different framing, captions, and hooks to work as an ad. If those needs aren't planned before filming, the brand ends up re-shooting, re-licensing, or settling for content that doesn't perform in paid media.
Why Busylike stands out
Busylike combines influencer marketing with in-house video production, YouTube channel management, and paid video advertising. In practice, the same team can cast creators, write briefs designed for both organic and paid use, co-produce or polish the content in its studio, secure the usage rights needed for advertising, and run the amplification across YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Meta, and LinkedIn. Its AI Content Studio helps turn the strongest creator footage into the volume of versions and formats that paid testing requires.
That setup solves a common problem. Many brands split influencer work, video production, and media buying across three separate vendors. The creator brief ignores what the ads team needs. The production team never sees the performance data. The media buyer gets content that wasn't shot for paid placements. Busylike's model is designed to close those gaps.
The Nestea summer campaign through YouTube storytelling and creator partnerships shows the approach in practice: creator partnerships built around YouTube storytelling rather than one-off sponsored posts.
Best fit and trade-offs
Busylike fits brands that want creator content to work as video advertising, not just fill a content calendar.
Video-led brands: Ecommerce, DTC, consumer, SaaS, and tech brands that plan to run creator content as paid ads on YouTube, connected TV, and social.
YouTube-focused programs: Brands that want longer creator integrations and channel growth, not just short social posts.
One team for everything: Marketing teams that want creator casting, video production, and paid amplification handled together.
The trade-offs are real.
Less suited to pure product seeding: If the brief is high-volume gifting to hundreds of micro-creators, an enterprise seeding operation may be a better fit.
Paid budget recommended: The model is most valuable when there's a media budget to amplify the best creator content.
Custom scoping: Pricing isn't published, so fit depends on creator count, production needs, and paid media scope.
Busylike is a strong option for brands that see creator partnerships as a source of video advertising that can scale, not just a line in the social calendar.
2. Fohr
Fohr appeals to teams that don’t want a black-box agency relationship. Its model blends managed services with software, which makes it one of the more practical choices for brands that want outside help without giving up internal visibility.
That hybrid structure is Fohr’s real advantage. Some influencer agencies nyc firms are excellent operators but keep planning logic buried in decks and account calls. Fohr is a better fit if your internal team wants some direct line into discovery, forecasting, and campaign planning.
Where Fohr works best
Fohr works well for brands with an in-house performance or social team that wants flexibility. You can use an agency partner for strategy and execution, then keep parts of workflow or discovery closer to your team.
That’s especially useful when creator programs are becoming an always-on motion instead of a quarterly campaign.
A lot of brands run into the same scaling problem. The first few creator partnerships are manageable manually. Then product launches stack up, usage rights become messy, forecasting gets political, and creator selection starts relying too much on gut feel. A systemized setup helps.
For teams thinking more rigorously about this, Busylike’s perspective on scaling creator partnerships through AI-driven insights in influencer marketing is worth comparing against Fohr’s hybrid model. Fohr gives you more operational visibility. Busylike pushes further into AI-driven discovery and demand capture.
A hybrid agency-platform model is often the safest choice when procurement wants accountability and the marketing team still wants speed.
The trade-off is complexity. Small brands or one-off tests may not need this much infrastructure. Quote-based pricing also means you need a real scoping conversation before you know whether the setup fits your budget.
Fohr is not the most AI-native option on this list. It is one of the more operator-friendly ones. If your team wants a New York partner with strong client service and a model that supports both outsourced execution and internal control, it deserves a spot on the shortlist.
3. Obviously a VML WPP company
Enterprise teams usually do not fail on creator ideas. They fail on execution volume. Obviously earns consideration when the brief involves many stakeholders, a large creator roster, legal review, fulfillment, and reporting that has to stand up inside a bigger organization.
The agency’s scale is well documented. It has completed over 152,000 influencer collaborations and generated more than 5 billion organic impressions. Those numbers matter less as bragging rights than as a proxy for operating maturity. A team does not reach that level without established workflows for approvals, creator communication, logistics, and brand safety.
That makes Obviously a practical fit for brands running national launches, retail rollouts, or high-volume seeding programs where consistency matters as much as creative quality. WPP ownership also changes the buying decision. For procurement teams already working with holding-company partners, that can reduce friction across paid media, analytics, and broader campaign planning.
The trade-off is speed at the edge. Large systems are good at repeatability. They are less suited to fast testing cycles where the goal is to identify unexpected creator pockets, learn quickly, and reallocate budget in days instead of weeks.
That distinction matters more now because creator discovery is changing. Traditional agency evaluation still centers on reach, engagement, and service depth. Smart brands are adding another filter. They want to know whether an agency can identify creators, topics, and content structures that improve visibility in AI-mediated discovery, not just social feeds. An enterprise operator like Obviously can run the program at scale. An AI-native model may surface demand patterns earlier.
A useful way to pressure-test that difference is to compare polished enterprise execution with campaigns built around story fit and searchable creator content, like this Nestea summer campaign through YouTube storytelling and creator partnerships. The lesson is not that one model replaces the other. It is that future-ready creator strategy needs both operational control and better discovery inputs.
Where Obviously tends to fit best:
Operationally complex campaigns: Large creator counts, layered approvals, and formal brand governance.
Seeding at scale: Useful when product distribution and earned content volume are part of the plan.
Cross-agency coordination: WPP ties can help if influencer work needs to connect with media, creative, and measurement teams.
Smaller brands should be realistic here. Custom scopes, bigger process overhead, and enterprise-style timelines can make Obviously too heavy for an early testing phase.
For established brands, that weight can be an advantage. If your team needs a disciplined system more than a scrappy lab, Obviously belongs on the shortlist.
4. Whalar
Whalar sits in an important middle ground. It isn’t just about creator casting, and it isn’t merely a paid media shop with influencer packaging. It tends to make the most sense for brands that want creator content to work as media.
Start there, because many agency searches get this wrong. They hire one partner to source creators and another to amplify assets later. That often leads to weak briefs and underperforming content.
Why media-minded brands pick Whalar
Whalar is a good fit for brands that already know creator content should travel beyond the creator’s own feed. Strategy, production, and distribution belong in the same conversation.
That’s increasingly important as AI tools reshape creative production itself. Marketers that are exploring AI-enhanced influencers and the role of AI tools in content creation and scaling production should pay attention to agencies that understand how creator work becomes reusable media, not just campaign content.
Whalar’s strength is that media logic is built into the model. That tends to produce better lower-funnel outcomes than creator programs designed only for awareness.
A few practical notes:
Paid amplification mindset: Stronger choice if your team already buys media aggressively.
Platform proximity: Useful for brands that value current platform knowledge and optimization.
Cross-functional execution: Better for integrated launches than isolated creator drops.
Creator content performs differently when it’s built for distribution from day one. That decision shows up in scripting, hooks, framing, and usage rights.
The main downside is accessibility for smaller brands. Agencies with strong platform ties and media depth often orient around larger initiatives. If your test budget is modest, you may get more flexibility from a smaller shop.
Whalar belongs on this list because it reflects where influencer marketing is headed. Not toward vanity metrics, but toward creator-led assets that function across paid, organic, and emerging AI discovery surfaces.
5. Captiv8
A lot of brands say they want an influencer agency. What they need is a system.
Captiv8 fits that requirement better than many service-first shops. Its appeal is less about hand-holding and more about giving teams a structured way to discover creators, compare candidates, manage approvals, and measure results without stitching together five separate tools.
That matters for brands that have already moved past one-off creator tests. Once multiple departments, regions, or product lines get involved, inconsistent selection criteria becomes expensive. Reporting drifts. Creator choices get harder to defend. Reuse rights get missed. Captiv8 is stronger in that operating environment than agencies built mainly around relationship management.
When Captiv8 makes sense
Captiv8 is a good choice when the brief calls for disciplined creator discovery instead of taste-based picking. That distinction matters more now because AI systems are changing how brands evaluate influence. Reach and engagement still matter, but they are no longer enough on their own. Teams also need patterns they can use again, metadata they can search later, and content signals that travel across paid social, organic distribution, and generative search surfaces.
In practice, that favors platforms with stronger infrastructure.
Captiv8’s value shows up in a few places:
Platform plus services: Useful for teams that want agency support but also want internal ownership of part of the workflow.
Analytics-centered operations: Better for brands that need benchmarking, standardized reporting, and cleaner decision trails.
Complex org fit: More suitable for enterprise teams with regional stakeholders, legal review, and repeat campaign cycles.
As noted earlier, broad market adoption has made workflow quality more important than flashy positioning. That is the case Captiv8 makes well. It helps large teams run creator marketing as an operating function.
There is also a forward-looking advantage here. AI-driven discovery will favor brands that can classify creator content clearly, spot repeatable performance patterns, and connect campaign outputs to broader search and media visibility. Agencies that only sell access will struggle as that shift accelerates. Captiv8 is better positioned if your team wants creator marketing to feed a larger intelligence layer, not just a monthly recap deck.
For a brand that also wants to study creative execution, Busylike’s Nestea campaign case study on YouTube storytelling and creator partnerships offers a useful counterpoint. Captiv8 is stronger on management and analysis. Busylike puts more emphasis on AI-first strategy and content orchestration.
The trade-off is straightforward. Platforms with this much depth ask more from the client team. If your budget is small or your influencer work is still occasional, you may end up paying for process you do not fully use.
Captiv8 works best for brands building creator marketing into infrastructure, governance, and future visibility. That is a different purchase from hiring an agency to source a few creators for a seasonal push.
6. Cycle
Cycle is a different kind of pick. It’s less about dashboard-heavy influencer operations and more about culture-led content made with creators, then distributed like working media.
That sounds subtle. In practice, it changes the whole assignment.
Cycle fits brands that need creator work to feel editorial, current, and native to culture, not overly managed. Its Brooklyn roots and production orientation support that positioning, and Wasserman backing adds broader talent and partnership reach.
Where Cycle earns its place
Cycle is strongest when a brand wants co-created content with real production value. Fashion, lifestyle, entertainment, and consumer brands often benefit from that model because the creative itself carries much of the campaign.
That approach can outperform more templated influencer programs when the category is crowded and sameness is the main threat.
A useful market signal comes from creator roster scale elsewhere in New York. Coverage of NYC agencies notes networks with 4,000+ creators at Billion Dollar Boy and 16,000+ micro-influencers at InBeat, but also points out how little public information exists for niche vertical specialization, especially in B2B and SaaS. Cycle’s value is not massive public roster claims. It’s stronger creative and cultural packaging.
What to expect:
Premium content bias: Better for brands that care about aesthetics and production.
Culture-first planning: Strong when relevance matters more than brute-force volume.
Services-led model: Less ideal if you want a self-serve tech layer.
Cycle won’t be the first call for a procurement-led performance brief. It’s a better call when your team says, “We need creator work that people want to watch.”
That usually means higher budgets and more production discipline. If that’s not the brief, there are easier options on this list.
7. Social Studies
Social Studies earns its place for a reason many brand teams underweight. Speed is not a nice-to-have in influencer marketing. It changes outcomes.
A strong strategy deck does not help much if creator outreach starts late, approvals drag, and the launch window closes before the campaign has real traction. Social Studies is built for that operational reality. The agency looks strongest when a brand already knows what it needs and wants a partner that can cast, brief, coordinate, and report without turning a straightforward campaign into a long planning exercise.
That matters in New York. Product drops, press moments, retail events, and seasonal launches often move on compressed timelines. Local presence still helps when the work includes in-person logistics, last-minute swaps, or creator coordination tied to a specific venue or date.
What Social Studies does well
Social Studies is a good fit for execution-heavy programs. The value is less about grand brand theory and more about getting the campaign live with the right creators, clear deliverables, and reporting a busy in-house team can effectively use.
That operating model has limits, and brands should be honest about them.
If the brief calls for a big creative platform, multi-channel brand storytelling, or a future-facing AI discovery plan, Social Studies may not cover the full need on its own. Therefore, the distinctions within this list are important. Traditional influencer agencies can run strong campaigns around reach and engagement. AI-native partners such as Busylike are built to answer a different question too, which is how creator content shows up in generative search, recommendation systems, and LLM-driven discovery.
That does not make Social Studies the wrong choice. It makes it a clearer choice.
Use Social Studies for:
Tight launch timelines: Retail, beauty, food, hospitality, and other deadline-driven consumer campaigns
Operational lift: Internal teams that need help with casting, outreach, briefing, approvals, and reporting
NYC-based coordination: Campaigns with events, local creator attendance, or hands-on production logistics
One practical caution. Fast casting only works when the brief is precise. Vague messaging, loose creator criteria, and late feedback usually produce content that ships on time but performs like average sponsored media.
The trade-off is straightforward. Social Studies is better for brands that need momentum and competent execution now. It is less suited to brands choosing an agency around proprietary tech, self-serve infrastructure, or AI-led visibility strategy for the next phase of search.
8. The Influencer Marketing Factory
The Influencer Marketing Factory is a strong fit for brands that judge creator work by tracked revenue, not reach. It was an early mover in TikTok influencer marketing and says it has run more than 5,000 campaigns tied to over $500 million in tracked client revenue. Its New York office is at 1 Liberty Plaza in Lower Manhattan, and clients have included Google, Warner Music, Sony Music, Foreo, and Bumble.
Where The Influencer Marketing Factory fits best
Its biggest strength is measuring performance creator by creator: each influencer's results are tracked with unique codes. It also produces creator video for brand use, with media rights that cover advertising, which matters if you plan to run creator content as paid ads.
TikTok-first brands: Consumer, music, and app brands where TikTok drives discovery.
Performance-focused teams: Buyers who need creator-level attribution, not campaign-level averages.
Watch-out: Its model is built around KPIs, so brand-building mandates focused on premium creative may need a different partner.
9. Socially Powerful
Socially Powerful earns its place for brands that want creator campaigns and paid social run by one international team. What began as an influencer agency has grown into a full social agency covering influencer marketing, paid media, and advertising. It's often ranked among the top YouTube influencer agencies, and it runs campaigns across YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, Twitch, and Chinese platforms like Weibo and WeChat.
Why global brands pick Socially Powerful
The agency has its own influencer platform, Aria, which it uses for creator discovery, outreach, and collaboration. In New York specifically, it pairs organic creator posts with paid amplification targeted by zip code and borough, and tracks results through to foot traffic, online orders, and app installs. Clients have included The Body Shop, Tefal, Azzaro, and Xiaomi.
Multi-market launches: Brands that need consistent creator campaigns across the U.S., Europe, the Middle East, and China.
YouTube programs: Brands that want longer-form creator content, not just short posts.
Watch-out: It's headquartered in the UK, so confirm how much of your account team is based in New York.
10. Amra & Elma
Amra & Elma is the rare agency whose founders are influencers themselves. Twin sisters Amra and Elma Beganovich built it from their own combined following of more than two million, and clients include Nestlé, Netflix, Bvlgari, Wells Fargo, Uber, Johnson & Johnson, and Swarovski.
Where Amra & Elma earns its place
Its creator-side perspective is strongest in luxury, beauty, fashion, and lifestyle, where creators' taste and credibility carry the campaign. Beyond influencer marketing, it offers video production, photography, events, and media planning and buying, so brands can combine creator content with polished production.
Luxury and beauty brands: Categories where aesthetics and creator credibility matter as much as reach.
Brands that want the creator perspective: Teams that value founders who know how creators think, price, and work.
Watch-out: Its services span SEO, PR, and media buying, so confirm which team will lead your influencer program day to day.
11. Socialfly
Socialfly is a practical option for mid-market brands that want influencer marketing connected to social media management and paid ads. The women-founded agency describes its approach as an ecosystem where influencer campaign insights inform paid targeting and organic content builds community. Clients have included the Girl Scouts, WE tv, Conair, Nest Fragrances, and Univision.
Why teams choose Socialfly
Its advantage is integration at an accessible scale. Influencer campaigns, content production, paid acquisition, and social media management all sit with one team, which suits brands that don't want separate vendors for creators and ads. It also expanded its social capabilities by acquiring Townhouse Digital in 2022.
Mid-market brands: Teams that need influencer work plus ongoing social management without enterprise retainers.
Always-on social: Brands where creator content feeds a steady organic and paid calendar.
Watch-out: With a team of 10–49, it isn't built for very large, multi-market creator programs.
12. Goat
Goat is built for brands that want influencer marketing measured like media. Arron Shepherd, Nick Cooke, and Harry Hugo founded it in 2015, and it was known for data-led, end-to-end campaigns that integrate targeted paid media. WPP acquired Goat in 2023 and merged it with INCA, creating an influencer operation with more than 350 employees across 34 markets.
When Goat is the right call
Goat makes sense when influencer spend is large enough to be planned and bought alongside the rest of the media budget. It has tracked the performance of more than 50,000 influencer channels and over 250,000 pieces of content, and has worked with Dell, Beiersdorf, Meta, Uber, and EA.
Media-led programs: Brands that want creator content planned, bought, and measured alongside paid media.
Global scale: Advertisers running influencer campaigns across many markets.
Watch-out: Obviously, earlier on this list, is also a WPP company. If you're shortlisting both, ask how each is positioned within WPP and whether your competitors are clients of the same group.
Top NYC Influencer Agencies Comparison
Agency | Implementation Complexity 🔄 | Resource Requirements ⚡ | Expected Outcomes 📊 | Ideal Use Cases 💡 | Key Advantages ⭐ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Busylike | Medium: creator casting, production, and paid media on one team | Moderate to high: creator fees, in-house production, and paid amplification budget | Creator video that performs organically and as paid ads across YouTube, connected TV, and social | Ecommerce, DTC, consumer, and tech brands running creator content as video ads | Creator partnerships plus in-house production and paid video; YouTube management |
Fohr | Medium, platform onboarding plus managed‑service workflows | Flexible, self‑serve or full managed service; budget scales with scope | Predictive performance estimates, influencer reach and conversion tracking | Brands wanting forecasting + managed influencer programs or hybrid workflows | Hybrid agency + platform, predictive modeling, strong NYC client service |
Obviously (VML/WPP) | High, enterprise logistics and multi‑market coordination | High, large casts, global ops and enterprise budgets | Large-scale earned content, integrated creative and paid media outcomes | Global/enterprise brands running complex, multi‑market creator programs | Enterprise scale, product seeding/gifting, WPP/VML integration |
Whalar | Medium–High, platform partnership integration and paid distribution | Medium–High, creator fees plus paid amplification budgets | Measurable lower‑funnel impact through creator-led media amplification | Brands seeking platform‑informed targeting and media amplification | Direct platform partnerships, strong media + creator integration |
Captiv8 | Medium, platform onboarding with optional managed services | Moderate, software licensing or managed services; analytics investment | Data-driven creator selection, benchmarking and measurable campaign metrics | In‑house teams needing discovery/analytics or brands wanting full service | Comprehensive discovery/analytics platform, AI-driven audience insights |
Cycle | Medium, creative co‑creation and production logistics | High, studio resources, on‑location shoots and premium production costs | Culture‑driven premium content and distributed working media | Brands prioritizing premium creative, culture‑first campaigns and shoots | Studio production capabilities, Wasserman talent/partnership access |
Social Studies | Low–Medium, streamlined rapid casting and outreach processes | Moderate, resources for fast creator outreach and campaign execution | Fast time‑to‑market activations and scaled creator outputs | Seasonal launches, time‑sensitive campaigns needing speed | Rapid large‑scale casting, NYC presence for in‑person collaboration |
How Much Does an Influencer Agency in NYC Cost?
Influencer agency pricing has two layers, and many brands only budget for one. The first is the agency's management fee. In 2026, influencer agencies typically charge in one of four ways: a percentage of creator spend (15–30% of the creator fees they manage), a flat monthly retainer ($3,000–$30,000), a project fee ($5,000–$50,000 per campaign), or a performance-based model with a lower base fee plus bonuses.
What you get varies a lot across that range. At the low end, retainers usually cover execution only: finding creators, managing logistics, and reporting. Higher retainers add strategic direction. The second layer is the creator fees themselves. Many agencies charge a retainer and add a percentage on top of every creator fee, so a $5,000 creator deal can end up costing $6,000 to $6,500. These are national benchmarks. New York agencies, with higher overhead and larger clients, often price toward the upper end.
For video-led creator programs, a third cost matters just as much: usage rights. Fees for reusing creator content outside the creator's own channels (in paid media, whitelisted ads, on your website, or in retail media) are usually separate from the posting fee. That's where cheap campaigns become expensive: the brand pays for posts, then has to pay again to run the best clips as ads. Long-term deals help.
Retainer-style creator partnerships typically cut the cost per post by 15–25%, and more than half of brands now use retainers or ongoing partnerships instead of one-off posts. Agencies also start to pay for themselves once creator spend passes about $15,000 per month. Below that, working with creators directly or through a platform is often more efficient.
When you compare proposals, ask every agency for itemized pricing that separates the management fee, creator fees, markup, production costs, usage rights, and paid amplification budget. Two proposals with the same total can buy very different things. One may include licensed, ad-ready video you can run for a year. The other may deliver posts that disappear from feeds in 48 hours.
From Shortlist to Partnership Your Agency Playbook
The agencies that win pitches aren't always the agencies that fit the job. Strong decks, familiar logos, and polished creator rosters can hide a weak operating fit, vague measurement, or a model that stops at the post.
Start with what you need the program to do. A brand launching across multiple markets with legal review and complex approvals will usually benefit from an enterprise operator such as Obviously. A team that wants software plus services may prefer Fohr or Captiv8. If creator content needs to perform in paid media, Whalar deserves a close look. If the brief depends on cultural credibility and premium production, Cycle is often the better choice. If speed matters more than process, Social Studies can be the practical answer. And if you want creator content produced, licensed, and run as video advertising across YouTube, connected TV, and social, Busylike is built for that brief.
Ask these questions before procurement turns the process into a pricing exercise:
How do you choose creators beyond audience match? Look for a method that weighs category fit, on-camera credibility, content quality, and whether the creator's style will hold up as a paid ad.
What usage rights do you secure, and for how long? A cheap campaign gets expensive fast if the brand can't reuse the best clips in ads, on product pages, in email, or in sales material.
How do you turn creator posts into ads? Ask whether briefs include ad-ready hooks, alternate openings, captions, and multiple aspect ratios, and who edits the paid versions.
How do paid and organic connect? Strong programs plan partnership ads, whitelisting, and creative testing from the start instead of treating them as afterthoughts.
How do you measure business impact? Views and engagement are useful diagnostics, but they aren't enough if the brand cares about qualified traffic, branded search lift, conversion rate, or cost per acquisition in paid media.
How do you handle platform volatility? Ask what happens when ad costs rise, a platform's reach drops, or a creator underperforms mid-campaign.
Budget fit matters earlier than many teams admit. Agency pricing in New York varies widely by service model, creator fees, production needs, and paid media scope. Agree on the scope before the RFP grows too large. It saves time and reduces the risk of choosing an agency that is either overbuilt or underpowered for the assignment.
The choice itself is simple. If the work is a defined influencer campaign with clear platform goals, choose the agency whose operating model matches that brief. If you want creator partnerships to become an ongoing source of video advertising, with content made for organic reach and paid performance at the same time, choose a partner built for that.
If that's your brief, talk to Busylike. Its New York team combines creator partnerships, in-house video production, YouTube channel management, and paid video advertising in one operating model, so the content your creators make keeps working long after the post goes live.
