Guide

How to vet an AI agency or "mentor" before you pay

A checklist for vetting an AI agency or mentor

The AI gold rush has produced a wave of agencies, "mentors," and partnership programs — some excellent, some hollow. After my own experience (which you can read on My Experience), I put together the diligence checklist I wish I'd run more rigorously up front. None of this is complicated. Most of it takes ten minutes, and it can save you weeks and real money.

1. Type their bare domain into a browser

Not the funnel link they sent you — the actual root domain, by hand. Does it load? Does it return an error? A legitimate operating business almost always has a working homepage. If the front door is broken, that's not proof of fraud, but it's a question worth answering before you go further. (In my case, the root domain returned a 403 Forbidden.)

2. Separate the person's brand from the business

Many AI "mentors" have a polished personal brand — a slick YouTube channel, big income claims, a confident LinkedIn — sitting on top of a business you can't actually verify. A personal brand is marketing. It is not evidence of a real operation with real clients. Look for the business underneath the personality.

3. Ask for verifiable proof of clients

Anyone can say "I've helped hundreds of people." Ask for specifics you can confirm: named case studies, references you can call, a portfolio you can inspect. If the answer is always a screenshot of a dashboard or a testimonial with no last name, treat the claim as unverified.

Income screenshots and "$25M" thumbnails are claims, not proof. Proof is a client who will pick up the phone.

4. Watch the direction of the "leverage"

In a real partnership, both sides bring something and both sides give. Be cautious when the entire conversation is about what you must bring — money, connections, an existing audience — and the fallback is always "or you pay me." That's not a partnership structure; it's a sales structure wearing a partnership costume. There's nothing wrong with paying for genuine value, but be clear-eyed about which one you're actually being offered.

5. Make them earn your prep, don't just give it

"Watch these videos before our call so we don't waste time" is reasonable once. But notice when the prep is all one-directional — hours of their content as a price of admission, before they've shown you anything verifiable in return. Your time has value too. A serious counterparty respects that.

6. Get the offer in writing before money moves

What exactly do you get? Over what timeframe? What are the deliverables, the milestones, the refund terms? If a five-figure decision is being pushed on a live call with urgency and no written agreement, slow down. Real businesses put their offer in writing because they intend to stand behind it.

7. Search for other people's experiences

Search the person's and the company's name alongside words like "review," "scam," "complaint," and "refund." Read the results critically — both the praise and the criticism — and weigh them. One angry post isn't a verdict; a pattern is a signal. (This very page exists because I wished I'd found an account like it first.)

8. Run a small, reversible test first

Before any large commitment, find the smallest possible way to work together and see how they operate: do they show up on time, communicate clearly, and deliver what they said? How someone handles a small, low-stakes interaction is the best predictor of how they'll handle a big one. If the small test goes sideways, you've learned what you needed to learn cheaply.

The bottom line

Vetting isn't cynicism — it's respect for your own time and money, and frankly it's what good operators expect you to do. The people genuinely worth working with will pass these checks easily and won't be offended that you ran them. The ones who get evasive or apply pressure when you ask reasonable questions are telling you something. Listen.

This is general guidance based on my own experience and opinion. Read the specific account that prompted it on My Experience and the evidence on Proof.