Bonus offer
What is Monetise Mania?
Monetise Mania is the 90-day sales competition bundled into Monetise, and it is where nearly every revenue number in the Side Hustle Summit's marketing comes from. Below is the short list of what the vendor actually states, the one point where two vendor sources contradict each other, and the much longer list of things nobody publishes at all.
We paid $1,995 for Monetise on September 7, 2026 and we publish the receipt. See the proof on our Monetise review. We have not finished the course, so nothing here is a verdict on the teaching.
It is a 90-day sales contest, included free as “Bonus 1” with the $1,995 Monetise program. The duration and the inclusion are confirmed on monetise.com. The headline prize figures are not: the widely quoted “$250,000 in prizes” appears on Whop’s blog, not on the vendor’s own offer page, and Whop is a platform Iman Gadzhi co-owns. No leaderboard, no ranking rules and no winners list are published anywhere.
Try MarketingSecrets.AI Free » Monetise enrolment is closed. This link opens Russell Brunson’s MarketingSecrets.AI: free for 14 days, then $97 a month, cancel anytime (checked October 18, 2026).
The spelling, first
The vendor spells it Monetise, British style, across monetise.com and the product itself. “Monetize Mania” with a z is the common American misspelling and lands on the same thing. Both are used below only where a source used them.
What the vendor states
The program itself is defined, tool by tool, on what Monetise is. Monetise Mania is listed in the Monetise offer stack as Bonus 1, a 90-day competition. The positioning on the offer page is that prior experience does not matter: in the vendor's own words, everyone starts from scratch and anyone can win. Entry is included in the $1,995 price. We found no separate purchase, and no upsell to enter.
On prizes, the vendor's own page is deliberately vague. It describes prizes “worth tens of thousands” and states that the top 20 finishers get an in-person invitation to one of the company's offices. It does not publish a dollar total, and it does not publish a prize breakdown.
The contradiction worth knowing about
This is the most useful thing on this page, and it is the reason we cannot simply repeat the figure everyone else repeats.
| Source | What it says about the McLaren |
|---|---|
| Whop company blog (October 15, 2025) | Describes a 90-day contest with $250K in prizes, “including a McLaren and exclusive masterminds.” Reads as: the McLaren is a prize. |
| monetise.com offer page (checked August 31, 2026) | Says a 19-year-old participant named Armando “made $111k and bought himself a McLaren.” Reads as: a participant purchased a car with claimed earnings. Not a prize. |
Those are two different claims about the same car, and both come from the vendor's side of the table. Whop is not an independent source here: Gadzhi has co-owned it since April 2025, and the post in question is Whop's own case study of its own client. We cannot resolve which version is accurate, so we publish the conflict rather than pick a side. Nothing we found shows a McLaren being handed to a contest winner.
What nobody publishes
Three absences matter more than anything in the marketing, because each one is a thing you would need in order to judge your own odds.
- The ranking rule. No page states what competitors are actually ranked on. Gross revenue, net revenue, how refunds are handled, whether affiliate or referral sales count: none of it is published. “Tracked sales” is the phrase used, and “tracked” is never defined.
- The results distribution. There is no leaderboard, no winners list and no placement record for any edition. Not a single finisher below the handful named in promotion is identifiable, and no source states what the median or bottom-half participant earned.
- The prior experience of the people named. The vendor names Armando and his $111k. It does not say whether he had run a business before, and no independent source establishes it. Anyone telling you the top finishers were seasoned operators, or that they were all beginners, is guessing.
The sessions named a lot more people than the page does
Armando is no longer the only participant named. Across sessions 1 and 2 Gadzhi put roughly a dozen names on screen with dollar figures attached, several with filmed interviews. That is worth recording, because it moves the earnings claims from anonymous to attributable. It does not make them verified. None carries a last name, a product URL or a platform record you could check, and Gadzhi is the only source for every figure.
| Named on stage | Stated result | Detail given |
|---|---|---|
| Zada, Bosnia | $210,000 total; €6,000 to €8,000 a month | Accountant approaching the end of maternity leave. Buckwheat diet product at €14.99. Filmed interview. Says she tried drop shipping and faceless content first without success. |
| Armando, 19 | $111,000 in 45 days | Ex-construction. Filmed interview. Says over $300,000 in his first three months. |
| Angelo, 26, Haiti | Over $85,000 in six months | Filmed interview. Previously unemployed. |
| Michelle (Mishad), 21, Qatar | $9,500 a month; past $50,000 total | Final-year student, previously a $300 a month sales job. Filmed interview. |
| Alex | $144,000 in 90 days | Faceless $19 product. Placed 9th in a previous edition, the only placement figure given for anyone. |
| James Hernandez, 24 | Close to $70,000 in 2026 | Filmed interview. Months of $15,000, $20,000 and $41,000. |
| Bianca, 22, Sweden | $12, then $21,000 | Used as the failure-then-success example. Her first product made twelve dollars. |
| Gail, Mexico | Over $12,000 profit | Med student on a $140 monthly stipend. Pediatric emergencies product. Note the conflict with the $48,000 figure the offer page gives for the same launch, covered on the legitimacy page. |
| Connor, Rebecca, Nadar, Ramena, Tashriek | $62,000 / $9,000 / $2,640 / $8,521 / $6,600 | Named in passing, no interview, and no time period given for several. |
Read the selection, not the numbers. Every person named made money, which is what you would expect from a promotional segment and tells you nothing about the distribution. The one figure that does speak to distribution is the $7,584 average Gadzhi gave out loud on September 7, which he said includes buyers who earned nothing. Set against a $1,995 entry price, that average is the number to argue with, not the $111k.
What the September 7 session added
Presenting the offer live, Gadzhi described mechanics the written pages do not carry. The leaderboard is wired directly to buyers’ Whop accounts, so placement updates as sales land and is measured on the platform he co-owns. Entrants can hide their name from the public board. The prize for the top 20 is a one-day in-person mastermind at one of the company’s offices, which he said cannot be bought at any price.
Two of the three absences below survive that. Placement is now known to be measured by Whop-tracked sales, which answers part of the ranking question. It still does not say whether the figure is gross or net, or how refunds are treated, and no winners list exists for any edition.
The earnings claims carry no disclosure
This is a straightforward, checkable finding. Monetise's pages carry specific revenue
figures: $23.9M+ in tracked sales sitewide, $8.9M, $15M and
$31M for successive 90-day runs, and the individual $111k. On
September 7, 2026 Gadzhi added a per-person figure out loud: the average member has made
$7,584, which he said includes buyers who made nothing. We
could not find an income disclosure, an earnings disclaimer or a typical-results statement
attached to any of them, including that one. On the date we checked,
monetise.com/disclaimer returned a 404.
The $7,584 figure is the most useful number the seller has given and the least checkable. An average that genuinely includes non-earners is the right shape of statistic to publish. Said on a livestream with no denominator, no period and no method, it cannot be verified, repeated or audited by anyone outside the company.
That is worth stating plainly and worth keeping in proportion. The absence of a disclosure is not proof that a figure is false. It does mean no published basis exists for treating any of these numbers as a typical outcome, and the FTC's stated position on earnings claims is that advertisers should not present exceptional results as representative ones.
How many editions have run
The vendor implies at least three. Its event page describes the sequence as $8.9M in tracked sales the first time, $15M the second and $31M the third. What it never does is name those runs, give them dates, or confirm that all three were Monetise Mania rather than a differently branded challenge. Searches for “Monetise Mania 2” and “Monetise Mania 3” return no vendor page defining either. If you are trying to work out which contest a given testimonial came from, that information is not published.
One edition now has a name and an exact figure
Updated September 9, 2026. The set on the September 8 session carries a leaderboard board behind Gadzhi for the whole 82 minutes. It reads MONETISE MANIA 2, $15,064,202 earned. That is the first time we have seen an edition numbered and its total given to the dollar rather than rounded to “$15M”.
It resolves less than it looks like it does. A numbered edition confirms the runs are the same contest rather than differently branded challenges, which was one of the open questions here. It does not date the edition, name a winner, or say how many people entered. A gross total with no denominator is the same claim it always was, stated more precisely. $15,064,202 across an unknown number of participants supports no per-person conclusion at all.
On stage Gadzhi read the sequence as $8.9 million, then a figure he described as nearly double, then roughly $31 million, and said the runs are each 90 days. He also stated the tracking mechanism plainly: “we know those numbers are real because we co-own the platform that everything runs on.” That is an argument for the numbers being internally accurate and against them being independently checkable. Both things are true at once.
The claim ledger for Monetise Mania
Same treatment as every other page here. Status and date on each row, and the source named.
Monetise Mania is a 90-day competitionListed as Bonus 1 in the Monetise offer stack.
Entry is included in the $1,995 Monetise priceNo separate purchase and no entry upsell found.
Top 20 finishers get an in-person office invitationStated on the vendor offer page alongside prizes “worth tens of thousands”.
No income disclosure accompanies the revenue figuresChecked monetise.com, the offer page and event.monetise.com. The disclaimer URL 404s.
The prize pool is $250,000Appears on Whop's blog, which Gadzhi co-owns. The vendor's own page gives no dollar total.
A McLaren is one of the prizesContradicted by monetise.com, which describes a participant buying one with earnings.
What competitors are ranked onNo published rule states the metric, the refund handling or whether referrals count.
Who has won, and where everyone else placedNo leaderboard or winners list exists publicly for any edition.
The start and end dates of each editionThree runs are implied by revenue figures. None is named or dated.
What this means if you are deciding
Monetise Mania is a real bonus with a real duration, and for the right person a 90-day competitive sprint is genuinely motivating. That is the honest case for it. The honest case against treating it as a reason to buy is simpler: a contest whose ranking rules, results distribution and winner list are all unpublished cannot tell you anything about your own likely outcome. Use it as a bonus you might enjoy, not as evidence about what the program returns.
The same reasoning drives the score in our Side Hustle Summit review, and the full Monetise review covers what the rest of the $1,995 buys.
How this site makes money: we earn a commission if you register for the summit through our links. We are not paid to reach a conclusion, and the organizers have no review or approval over anything published here. Full disclosure.