Q&A with Mel Tsiaprazis: This Founder Built an AI Agent to Help Creators Think Like CEOs

When Mel Tsiaprazis first messaged me and said she was building a “chief revenue officer for creators,” I was curious. But when she explained that it could help with everything from pricing and contracts to burnout and business planning, I knew I had to learn more.

Because this is the part so many of us struggle with (myself included!). It’s one thing to create great content. It’s another entire beast to turn that into a business you can actually grow — and live off of.

That’s what this conversation is really about. I’ve been thinking a lot about what it takes to go from being just a creator to being a business owner. No one really teaches you the backend stuff, like how to price your work, track your money, or make smart decisions about what to focus on. And that’s exactly what Mel is trying to fix.

She’s the founder of GYST (yes, meaning Get Your Sh*t Together), and the best way I can describe it is: a smart, voice-based assistant that helps creators run the business side of things. Not another dashboard. Not more spreadsheets. Just straight-up guidance — like having a mini-COO in your pocket.

We got into everything from the myth of “just add more revenue streams” to how creators should think about equity, burnout, and building real wealth.

If you’re trying to grow your creative work into something sustainable, I think you’ll get a lot out of this one.

Here’s our full conversation below, edited lightly for clarity.

Q: On thing I’ve noticed is that a lot of creators don’t actually know how to run a business. People get into this space because they love writing or making videos, but no one teaches them how to build a business around it. I’d love to hear your take on that — how you’ve seen it show up, and how you’re trying to solve it.

A: Yes, totally. I’ve always been inspired by different types of creators. And you’re right, it often starts accidentally. People fall into it. But now, it’s shifting. My 7-year-old doesn’t want to be a firefighter or astronaut — he wants to be a YouTube star. That tells you how normalized this has become.

What hasn’t been normalized is how to build a sustainable business around it. The truth is: if you’re a creator, you’re a founder. We can talk about media empires, but that top 1% doesn’t represent the real creator economy. What really stood out to me was this stat: to earn just $100K in revenue — not even profit — you need at least five different income streams, digital or physical. That takes real operational effort. And for many creators, that’s two full days a week spent not creating.

The problem is, many don’t know how to handle that side of things.

They ignore the basics, like invoicing, contracts, taxes, because they’re unfamiliar and intimidating. But the truth is, these are solvable problems. Once you build the right structure, it’s repeatable. That’s why we’re building GYST.

We want creators to keep doing what they do best, while giving them the infrastructure to support it.

Does AI help? Of course. But do you need AI to run your business? No. Business operations aren’t new. What creators need is a system: AI can support that, but it’s not the solution on its own.

The bigger issue is that business operations are intimidating. Creators don’t know what they can deduct for taxes, how to price themselves, or even how to negotiate, especially women. We’ve found that female creators often don’t negotiate as confidently as their male counterparts. They feel unsure, and no one’s really given them a playbook.

So when we were designing GYST, we worked directly with creators. What we heard was clear: they don’t want another dashboard. They don’t want a bunch of reports. They want a conversation. They want someone to guide them. But they can’t afford a full-time team, or even a fractional one.

That’s why we’re building a voice agent. You’ll be able to talk to it and ask questions like, “How much money should I be making?” or “What kind of work should I be focused on?” or “How strong is my community?” We want creators to have the tools to build real, sustainable businesses. And that starts with getting the foundational structure in place, which most still don’t have.

Q: I remember reading something you said about the need for creator infrastructure — that there’s this massive gap. Why do you think it hasn’t been built yet?

A: I think people have tried to solve pieces of it, like here’s a tax tool, here’s a link-in-bio page, but no one has tackled the whole picture. And that’s the issue. You’re not just solving one problem. Running a business means dealing with a system of interconnected problems. That requires a more holistic solution, and that’s harder to build.

Another challenge: creators who do recognize the problem sometimes try to build their own tech. But DIY tools — what we call “vibe-coded” products — aren’t secure. They don’t protect data. They don’t handle financial or legal complexity. So there’s still a huge gap in the market.

And frankly, tech hasn’t rushed into the space because people assume creators don’t make money. I’ve had people ask, “Why would you, someone with 30 years in finance, go into the creator space?” My answer: Because there’s opportunity. The numbers are massive. Social commerce is booming. Yet most creators aren’t making real money because they don’t know how to run a business. That’s the gap.

Q: Right. And even now, most of the money still flows to the top few percent. I was just reading a Forbes report that basically confirmed that. It’s starting to shift a bit, but there’s still a long way to go. Do you think that’s beginning to change?

It’s slowly changing, yes, but not fast enough. Everyone talks about “democratization,” but what does that actually mean? It’s not just about spreading brand dollars. Paying micro-influencers isn’t democratization.

To me, true democratization is when creators can build wealth. That means giving them the right tools, support, and education, so they can choose how big they want to grow. Not everyone wants to build a multimillion-pound business, and that’s fine. But they should have the option.

We also need to stop fixating only on Gen Z and Gen Alpha. I just came back from Cannes and it’s all anyone was talking about. But some of the most interesting creators I know are baby boomers, people completely reinventing themselves.

Influencers and creators aren’t always the same. We’re still lumping too many groups together and missing the full picture.

Q: Yeah, that’s a great point. I think the word “creator” still makes people think of a very narrow group — Gen Z, influencers, social-first brands. But the reality is much broader. You mentioned earlier that creators need to think like founders. That’s something I’ve been thinking a lot about too. But I also think it goes the other way—founders should start thinking like creators. Sharing, storytelling, building in public. I’d love to hear how you think about that crossover.

A: I completely agree. But even the word “founder” carries its own baggage. When people hear it, they think “tech founder” — venture-backed, in a hoodie, building an app. But founders come in every shape. A car wash owner is a founder. A dry cleaner is a founder. If you’ve taken a blank page and turned it into a functioning business, you’re a founder.

And regardless of industry, founders all face the same questions: How do I get customers? How do I recover cash? How do I scale? Creators deal with all of that, but they’ve already figured out something most founders struggle with: distribution. They’ve built community. And that’s a powerful foundation.

So when I think about creators as founders, it’s really about building on top of what they’ve already done well — community, connection, content. Meanwhile, tech founders can learn a lot from creators about showing up, storytelling, being visible.

Creators often start with community. Tech founders often struggle to build it. There’s a lot both sides could learn.

I also think there’s a growing expectation that every business — tech, services, product —offers some kind of community or experience. Even if it’s a digital product, people want that human connection.

That’s where creators have an edge. They know how to host events, show up online and offline, create moments. Tech founders tend to hide behind their product until launch. But today, people want transparency. That’s why we’re seeing more founders building in public.

I’ll be honest — it’s been tough for me. I’ve spent 30 years in finance and corporate environments. You’re taught to avoid mistakes, to never end up on the front page. Now we’re saying, “Go build in public. Share your wins, your losses, your learning.” That shift isn’t easy. But it’s powerful. And it’s helping us connect with people in ways that a pitch deck never could.

Community is your greatest distribution channel but also your sharpest mirror. They’ll cheer you on, but they’ll also call you out. That’s what makes them valuable.

Founders who’ve built product-first now need to learn how to build around community. Meanwhile, creators already have that base.

The question becomes: how do you build a business on top of that distribution engine?

And I think the offline vs. online split is dissolving. Even if your product is digital, people still want real experiences — events, connection, relationships. Creators get this. They know how to build trust in both worlds. Founders are just catching up.

Q: Yeah, and that trust is so central. It’s what makes a community more than just an audience.

A: Absolutely. And I think we need to be more honest about how hard building anything is. It’s not all wins and growth charts. It’s rejection. It’s self-doubt. It’s rebuilding something you thought would work and realizing it won’t.

Building in public helps normalize that. But it’s not easy, especially if you’ve been trained not to show your hand. Still, I see how powerful it is. We’ve had incredible people come into our world and amplify what we’re doing because they felt connected to the journey.

So yes, I think more founders should act like creators. But it’s not about doing it for clout. It’s about building real relationships. And that starts with being transparent and consistent.

Q: That’s great. Before we wrap, I’d love to hear your take on this: you’ve talked about how creators are often underestimated, and how VCs sometimes assume they don’t understand business.

A: (Laughs) I’ll say it: there are a lot of VCs who think they understand AI and community building. And frankly, many don’t. I always tell creators: listen to advice, but trust your instincts. It’s your business.

People told us to rush our AI product to market. They told us creators’ data isn’t sensitive. That’s absurd. A creator’s business is their data. There’s no way I’m building something vibe-coded with no security.

Others told us to just “buy a community.” I’m sorry, but follower counts aren’t communities. That’s the problem, too many people in the ecosystem are optimizing for numbers instead of trust. And trust is everything.

Q: Yeah, I think that really resonates—especially the point about people lumping creators into one demographic. There’s this assumption that it’s all Gen Z, short-form, entertainment-first content. But in reality, the definition of “creator” is expanding fast. How are you thinking about that shift, and who you’re ultimately building for?

A: We use the word creator, but I see them as business owners. And I say that with huge respect because being a business owner means wearing every hat. You don’t have departments. You are marketing, legal, finance, operations.

What we’re focused on are the creators who want to be founders. Not everyone does. Some creators just want to post and partner with a few brands, and that’s great. But we’re building GYST for the ones who are serious about building a business—those who already have at least two revenue lines, or want to scale and structure their operations.

That’s our core user: the business-minded creator. The person who doesn’t just want content to go viral— t hey want their business to be sustainable, hire people, and grow. When they do that, we know we’ve done our job. And they’ll likely keep using GYST because it becomes their operating system and the foundation they build on.

Q: When it comes to having multiple revenue streams, what do you think is the biggest challenge creators face when they’re trying to expand?

A: Knowing where to focus. There’s a myth that more revenue lines automatically mean more success. But every new stream adds complexity, and you can’t run on empty.

The real question creators should ask is: Start, stop, or continue? Is this new revenue stream aligned with your goals? Do you actually have the bandwidth? And if you’re adding a sixth or seventh stream — should that be one business across multiple countries, or multiple businesses in one country? There’s no universal answer. You need to define what success looks like for you.

For example, we were invited to expand to Japan. Great opportunity on paper, but I don’t speak Japanese, we have no local presence, and we’re still launching. So I had to say: not now. That kind of discernment is critical.

The same applies to creators. If you’re running five revenue lines, you need to evaluate: which ones are profitable? Which ones are lead magnets? Which ones drain your time but generate little return?

And then there’s physical product. That’s a whole different level of risk. You’re carrying inventory. You have real costs if it doesn’t sell. A lot of creators come from digital, where margins are clean and upfront investment is low. They’re not always ready for the reality of physical goods.

Q: And what about equity? You mentioned earlier that creators should be cautious about that, too.

A: Yes, and I say this as someone who believes in creators taking equity. In fact, we’ve carved out 5% of our cap table specifically for creators to become investors in GYST. But they need to be clear-eyed about what equity means.

Just because you’re “on the cap table” doesn’t mean you’ll see a payout. If VCs have preferential shares, you could get nothing. Plus, equity doesn’t pay your rent. You’re taking on risk in exchange for a potential future gain that may never come.

So I encourage creators to ask: what does this opportunity really mean? What’s the trade-off? And do I understand the financial structure I’m entering?

And one more thing — going global sounds exciting, but it brings serious complications. The moment you’re earning across borders, you’re dealing with different tax systems, payment processors, compliance rules. That’s not something most creators are prepared for.

So again, it comes back to asking: What am I building, and why? Every revenue line is basically a mini-business. You need to be intentional about which ones you keep, which ones you test, and which ones to shut down.

Q: Could you walk me through a simple use case for GYST — say, a creator with a few income streams? What would that look like?

A: Sure. Imagine a fashion creator with three revenue lines — brand deals, affiliate links, and digital products — spread across five platforms. GYST’s voice agent, GIO, becomes their consigliere. It pulls in performance data from social media, ecommerce platforms, and analytics tools to create a full picture of their business.

Then the creator can ask GIO questions like:

You can also set goals, whether that’s landing more sponsorships, growing email subscribers, or launching a product. GIO tracks your progress and surfaces insights over time. It’s like having a growth officer on call 24/7—loyal only to you, with zero judgment.

You talk to GIO just like you’d talk to a business coach. The creator stays in control — GIO doesn’t make decisions, but it gives them the clarity and confidence to act. It’s not just tracking — it’s asking smart questions, helping you reflect.

We’re even adding mental health safeguards. GIO will be programmed to notice signs of burnout, working too many hours, dropping into negative sentiment, and prompt you to slow down. That part really matters to us.

Q: That’s really smart. The brand calculator you mentioned also stood out to me, especially since brand pricing is such a black box for creators.

A: It’s wild how little transparency there is, considering that brand deals are the main revenue stream for most creators. We built a dynamic pricing engine into GIO. Just like hotel rates fluctuate with seasons and demand, creator pricing should reflect exclusivity, timing, IP ownership, and production value.

So if a brand wants to book you for Paris Fashion Week? That’s not a standard rate. GIO factors in context — audience sentiment, reach, brand fit — and gives you a pricing range, with rationale. That way, when you negotiate, you’re not guessing. You’re showing up with real data.

And to be clear, our goal with GIO is to help creators make more money. Not in a get-rich-quick way, but through real strategy. That won’t happen in month one or two. But if you’re using GIO consistently, you should start seeing a return that far outweighs what you pay for it. I don’t want creators stressing about whether they can pay their bills. I want them building long-term businesses that support real lives.

It’s not about chasing media empires. It’s about asking: What do you want to build with your community? And how can we support that?

GIO is our growth agent, focused on revenue and strategic decision-making. But we’re already working on others.

Next up:

All of these agents will be designed around the same principle: simplify the backend so creators can stay in their zone of genius.

—

How you can connect/follow Mel and GYST:

—

That’s all for this week! If you’d like to pitch yourself for a future Q&A, submit the form here: