I’ve been on the hub for a couple of months now, and I’m seeing case studies from agencies that went from 100% Russian market to having meaningful international revenue. Which is the dream for me. But honestly, I’m not sure where to actually start.
Like, I could just start pitching my agency to every US brand I can find. But that feels—I don’t know—spammy? And I’d probably get rejected a lot because they don’t know my work and my portfolio is all Russian market stuff.
Here’s what I’m wondering: Do you start by building relationships with other agencies first, before going direct to brands? Or do you pitch brands and hope they take a chance? Or is it some mix?
I’ve also noticed that a lot of successful posts on the hub talk about “leveraging Russian market expertise as a differentiation.” That sounds great, but I don’t actually know what that means in practice. Like, what are US brands looking for when they think “Russian market expertise”? Is it just cheaper labor? Is it actual strategic insight about the market? Something else?
And then there’s the portfolio question. My Russian work is solid, but it’s in Russian. Does it even move the needle with US decision-makers, or do I need to create case studies specifically tailored to international audiences?
I’m also worried about capacity. If I’m serious about this, I probably need to hire someone who speaks native English and understands US market expectations. That’s an investment before I even have the revenue. How do you balance that?
What was your actual starting point when you decided to go global through the hub? What worked, and what was a waste of time?
I started exactly where you are. Here’s my path:
First, I did NOT go direct to brands. That felt wrong for all the reasons you mentioned. Instead, I built relationships with 4-5 other agencies on the hub who had successful international operations. I wasn’t trying to partner formally—I just wanted to learn their playbook.
What I learned: most of them didn’t start with pitching. They started by contributing to the hub—sharing case studies, answering questions, building credibility. That attracted inbound interest from brands.
So my second move: I created a case study. Not a Russian case study repackaged for US audiences. A NEW case study where I ran a hypothetical campaign for a fictional US brand using my Russian market expertise. Showed the thinking, the strategy, the expected outcomes. That one piece generated way more inbound than I expected.
On the Russian expertise angle: US brands care about Russian market STRATEGY. They don’t just want your local networks—they want to understand how to approach the market differently. Consumer behavior, regulatory landscape, competitive dynamics, media differences. That’s the insight they’re paying for.
It’s not cheaper labor. If that’s what you’re offering, you’re already losing to a dozen other agencies charging less. The value is strategic clarity about an unfamiliar market.
On the hiring question: I didn’t hire anyone upfront. I started by contracting with a US-based strategist for maybe 10-15 hours per month. She helped me translate my thinking into US-market language, reviewed my case studies, helped me understand what US brands actually care about. Cost me less than hiring FT, but gave me the native perspective I needed.
Once I had actual client work coming in, THEN I hired FT. By that point, I had revenue to justify it.
I’m seeing the opposite path working for some creators: they started by connecting with US creators and collaborating on small projects. That gave them visibility to US brands through the creator community. By the time they pitched agencies, some already knew them from creator work.
So there’s multiple entry points, not just brand direct or agency partnership. The creator angle might actually be easier for Russian agencies because there’s less gatekeeping.
From the US brand side, here’s what we actually care about when we think about international partners:
- Do they understand OUR market first? (Not just, can they execute in their market)
- Can they bring unique insights that inform our approach?
- Are they reliable and communicative?
- Do they have a realistic view of what’s possible in their market?
That last point is huge. We’ve rejected agencies that oversold what they could deliver in their market. Credibility matters more than enthusiasm.
So when YOU’RE pitching: show that you understand both YOUR market AND the US market. That’s the differentiation.
On portfolio: don’t redo everything. But do add context. Like, “We ran this campaign in Russia. Here are the results. Here’s what was different about the market that shaped our approach. If we were running this for a US brand, we’d adjust this, this, and this.” That analytical thinking is way more valuable than a pretend US case study.
I think the relationship-first approach is right. Like, I started by just being active on the hub—answering questions, sharing what I knew, connecting people. That built trust. Then when opportunities came up, people were like “oh, I know Svetlana, let’s bring her in.”
It’s slower than direct pitching, but it works because you’re already vetted socially.
On capacity: I think the contract model Alex mentioned is smart. Get a fractional collaborator who can help you translate your thinking and manage some of the client work. That’s way less risky than hiring FT before you have the revenue.
One more thing: find one US-based partner agency or strategist who gets what you’re doing and will actually refer you or collaborate. That one relationship, if it’s strong, can be worth way more than a hundred cold pitches. That person becomes your credibility bridge.
Measure what matters: not just “did I get inbound from the US?” but “what was the quality of those inquiries?” Like, I track: What percentage of US inquiries convert to actual projects? What’s the average project value? How is it compared to my Russian business?
If you’re spending energy on US market and it’s not moving the needle, you need to know that quickly so you can adjust your approach.
On portfolio: include data. Not just pretty case studies. Show: What was the goal? What was the result? What did the market conditions require that we had to adapt to? That’s what US decision-makers actually want.
When I was expanding internationally, the one thing that actually worked was finding 1-2 people already operating in the new market who could vouch for me. Not formal partnership—just credibility transfer. Like, “Hey, Dmitry’s agency does solid work. We’ve collaborated with them.”
That one endorsement opened more doors than anything else.
On capacity: don’t hire before you have proof of concept. Get a contractor, validate the model, THEN build the team if it makes sense.
As for Russian expertise angle: I think the brands who actually want it are the ones who are serious about the Russian market longterm. The ones just fishing don’t care about depth. So focus on attracting the serious ones. Your case studies should be enough to filter for that.