That all seem pretty similar to the ads on the front page of google search results.
Just generate 200 of those and test them to see if any of them standout.
The Utility in these models is not that they are perfect or better than humans at all times, but that it is very cheap and to generate something of value across many domains.
But testing 200 scripts giving cliche-ridden and inaccurate descriptions of your product isn't very cheap, it's very expensive compared with asking somebody that actually understands your product to write one or two better scripts...
But having someone who is a bad writer but understands your product take a look at 200 generated copy lines and pick their favorites for A/B testing is much cheaper than having someone who understands your product and is a good writer writing ~20 lines and A/B testing those.
No it isn't. Copywriting starts very cheap, and getting a text-generator that doesn't understand your product to finally generate something which looks like it does isn't any less time consuming than writing words (especially short form copy). 200 iterations of generated copy stressing that the advantage of using ChatGPT for copywriting is its team's experience of SEO in slightly different ways are all equally useless to promote ChatGPT, the service which doesn't have a team of experienced writers and doesn't have experience in SEO.
And the really expensive bit of copywriting is the failed conversions. A LLM which when prompted to generate an ad for a particular market is trained to produce something which looks as similar to the competition and as much like an ad as possible isn't likely to generate the highest conversions....
Just generate 200 of those and test them to see if any of them standout.
The Utility in these models is not that they are perfect or better than humans at all times, but that it is very cheap and to generate something of value across many domains.