Dickie Bush vs Richard van der Blom: Generosity beats contrarianism on LinkedIn
Dickie Bush wins on raw engagement (227 avg) and conversation rate (50.4%) by positioning himself as a generous resource-giver, while Richard van der Blom leverages bold contrarian claims and data reports to reach a larger audience (266k followers). Choose Dickie if you want to build trust through free value; choose Richard if you want to stand out through provocative takes.
Dickie Bush 🚢
I talk about digital writing & personal progress
Richard van der Blom
LinkedIn Strategist | Algorithm Research-Backed | Helping Entrepreneurs Turn Visibility Into Revenue Without Living on the Platform | 350K+ Trained | Keynote Speaker
- Dickie: generous teacher. Richard: contrarian truth-teller. Different paths, same niche.
- Dickie drives 2x conversation rate (50.4% vs 28.5%) with problem-solution hooks.
- Richard reaches 111k more followers despite lower engagement per post.
- Both post 15+ times weekly on Sundays with problem-solution formats.
Side by side
| Dimension | Dickie Bush 🚢 | Richard van der Blom |
|---|---|---|
| Voice | Direct, results-oriented, generous authority figure who gives away frameworks and templates freely. | Authoritative data-driven skeptic who challenges LinkedIn myths and calls out platform shortcomings. |
| Content mix | Monetizing writing, LinkedIn growth, AI tools, ghostwriting, and writing templates dominate. | Algorithm updates, LinkedIn myths, content strategy, and platform critique form the core pillars. |
| Hook style | Time investment hooks ('I spent X hours') and direct problem statements with resource offers. | Numbered lists with negative outcomes and bold irrelevance statements ('Your X doesn't matter anymore'). |
| Engagement pattern | 227 average engagements per post with 50.4% conversation index (replies dominate). | 422 average engagements per post but only 28.5% conversation index (likes/reposts dominate). |
| Posting cadence | 15.4 posts per week with 1.1% repost rate; mostly original content. | 15.3 posts per week with 2.1% repost rate; slightly more reliant on reposts. |
Who wins what
266k followers vs 155k for Dickie, a 71% advantage built on contrarian positioning.
50.4% conversation index vs 28.5% means Dickie's audience replies 1.8x more often.
Templates, prompts, and frameworks are inherently more saveable than algorithm reports or critiques.
Both post 15+ times weekly on Sundays with identical problem-solution format and similar repost discipline.
Pick Dickie Bush 🚢 if…- You want to build a community that replies and engages deeply (50.4% conversation rate proves it works).
- You're selling courses, templates, or services and need warm leads from engaged followers.
- You believe in the 'give first' model and want to position yourself as a generous expert.
- Use 'I spent X hours' hooks paired with specific resource offers (his top post hit 2,429 engagements with this formula).
- Create lead magnets disguised as generous posts: templates, prompts, frameworks that require a DM or comment to unlock.
- Adopt signature phrases like 'Want access?' and 'I'll send it to you over DM ASAP' to drive direct conversations.
Pick Richard van der Blom if…- You want maximum reach and don't mind lower conversation rates (266k followers is the proof).
- You have data or research to share and want to position yourself as the truth-teller.
- You thrive on contrarian takes and challenging conventional wisdom in your niche.
- Lead with bold, contrarian statements that flip conventional wisdom ('Your X doesn't matter anymore' format).
- Back up claims with data reports or analysis (his Algorithm Report teaser drove 1,475 engagements).
- Use numbered lists with negative outcomes as hooks ('5 ways LinkedIn silently kills your post' hit 2,403 engagements).
LinkedIn rewards two opposite strategies equally well: generosity and contrarianism. Dickie wins at depth (50.4% conversation rate) by giving away valuable resources and building trust, while Richard wins at scale (266k followers) by challenging assumptions and positioning himself as a data-backed skeptic. The real lesson is that your voice matters more than your format. Both use problem-solution hooks and post 15 times weekly, but Dickie's 'here's the solution, I'll help you' approach creates loyal repliers, while Richard's 'here's the uncomfortable truth' approach attracts followers who want to feel informed. Pick the voice that matches your personality and audience, not the one with bigger numbers.
More comparisons featuring Dickie Bush 🚢 or Richard van der Blom
VS
Dickie Bush vs Lara Acosta: Authority vs Relatability on LinkedIn
VSLara Acosta vs Richard van der Blom: Emotion beats data on LinkedIn
VSDevin Reed vs Richard van der Blom: Stories beat data on LinkedIn
VS
Dickie Bush vs Luke Matthews: Volume beats virality on LinkedIn
VSAsh Rathod vs Dickie Bush: Vulnerability beats authority on LinkedIn
VSDevin Reed vs Dickie Bush: Story sells, systems scale on LinkedIn