Sabo @MrColdEmail

@coldemailchris the OG 🫶

@levikmunneke @B2Bluka You can do 5/domain no issues

@Christian_rson Bought = in the market willing to pay and can be poached with a better positioning

every SaaS company publishes case studies on their website with the customer's real name, real company, real logo, and the exact result they achieved. that is a published customer list with proof of budget, proof of need, and proof that the customer is willing to buy in your category. sitting on a public webpage. indexed by google. with a "read more" button. a guy I know scraped his top competitor's case study page last month. 38 case studies. each one named the customer's company, the contact person (usually VP or director level), the problem they had before buying, and the result after. 38 proven buyers. with their names attached. who already believe in the category. whose specific pain points are documented in the competitor's own marketing. he ran the 38 company names through AI-Ark. pulled the original case study contact where possible, or the current decision-maker in the same role. 34 enriched. cold email body referenced the competitor's own case study: "[first name] - saw the [result] your team achieved with [competitor]. most teams at that stage start hitting [specific limitation] around month 8-12. we handle that layer differently. quick loom to compare?" you're complimenting their decision, referencing a result they're proud of, and offering a comparison at the exact moment the honeymoon phase with their current vendor is wearing off. 12 replies out of 34 emails. 35% reply rate. because you aren't cold. you read their vendor's marketing material and turned it into a warm conversation. 5 booked calls. 2 closed at $11,200 average. $22,400 from a webpage the competitor designed to attract new customers, not lose existing ones. the competitor wrote a case study to prove their product works. they accidentally wrote you a lead list proving the buyer has budget. fr

@kai_cabero big brrr

@MichaelSaruggia

a billboard on the highway outside your competitor's headquarters costs $1,200/mo. their entire sales team sees it twice a day. their customers see it during site visits. their CEO sees it on his commute and has to pretend it doesn't bother him. a guy I know rented a billboard 400 feet from his biggest competitor's office park. the creative was simple. his product logo, a 4-word tagline, and a QR code. nothing aggressive. nothing mentioning the competitor by name. the first week, 3 of the competitor's own employees applied for jobs at his company. they scanned the QR code from the parking lot. the second week, a prospect who was evaluating both products mentioned the billboard on a sales call. "I keep seeing your name on my drive to [competitor]'s office. figured I should at least look." he closed that deal at $34,000 annual contract. $34,000 from a $1,200 billboard that was originally purchased as a joke to mess with a competitor's sales team. total ROI calculation is almost meaningless because the psychological damage to competitor morale is unquantifiable. their sales reps now drive past his brand every morning before they log in to sell against it. the billboard has been up for 4 months. he's closed 6 deals where the prospect mentioned it unprompted. $148,000 in revenue. $4,800 in total billboard rent. every digital marketer on this app is optimizing CPMs on meta while ignoring a $1,200/mo channel with zero competition, 100% viewability, and the side effect of demoralizing your competitor's entire office. btw the billboard company lets you geo-target mobile ads to anyone who drives past. so the physical billboard feeds a digital retargeting audience. two channels from one placement. run it

@ethanejk welcome to the big leagues

@ethanejk Instantly deceives you with OOO, track actual reply rates, positive reply rates but most importantly cash collected people fall into the trap of high reply rates, here is an avg campaign for us, some offers we pull +1M/d and average +500 positive replies 150 ish calls

a $500 newsletter sponsorship reaches 40,000 targeted readers in your exact niche. the same 40,000 impressions on meta costs $2,800. 82% cheaper. same eyeballs. and the newsletter editor's credibility transfers to your ad because the reader trusts the person who curated it. a guy I know sponsors 4 niche newsletters per month. $500 each. $2,000/mo total ad spend. each sponsorship includes a 3-sentence blurb with a link to his landing page. last month: 160,000 total impressions across the 4 newsletters. 2,400 clicks. 340 landing page conversions. 89 free trial starts. 23 paid conversions at $1,200 annual contract. $27,600 in first-year revenue from $2,000 in newsletter ads. that's a 13.8x return. the same $2,000 on meta got him 22,000 impressions, 180 clicks, and 4 conversions last quarter. he checked. newsletter operators price their sponsorships based on what other newsletters charge. not based on what meta or google would charge for the same audience. that pricing gap is the entire arbitrage. a 40,000-subscriber newsletter in the fintech space charges $500 per sponsorship. meta would charge you $2,800-$3,400 to reach the same 40,000 fintech professionals. the newsletter operator has no idea they're sitting on $3,400 of ad inventory and selling it for $500. btw the best newsletters have waitlists for sponsors. lock in rates now before the operators figure out what their audience is actually worth. the window on this is about 12-18 months before everyone catches on

the single most valuable google search in B2B is "[your product] vs [competitor]." the person typing that search has already decided to buy. they're choosing between two options. the page that ranks #1 for that search literally decides who gets the deal. most companies let a random blog from 2022 control that page. some affiliate marketer wrote a 900-word comparison, slapped adsense on it, and now controls $2.3 million in annual purchase decisions for products he's never used. a guy I know publishes one comparison page per competitor. "[his product] vs [competitor name]." genuine comparison. real feature tables. honest about where the competitor is better. but the framing, the structure, the conclusion, and the URL are all his. he published 7 comparison pages in january. by march, 4 of them ranked on page 1. combined monthly search volume: 11,200. every single visitor is in active buying mode. he doesn't run ads to those pages. he doesn't promote them on social. google sends him 11,200 visitors per month who are already holding a credit card and trying to decide between him and someone else. total cost to produce all 7 pages: $0 if he writes them. $840 if he pays a writer. one-time spend. the pages have been generating inbound for 5 months with zero maintenance. the irony is that his competitors could do the same thing. they don't because writing an honest comparison where you admit weaknesses feels wrong to a marketing team. so they leave the narrative to strangers. the stranger picks whoever paid the highest affiliate commission. fr

@oritheoracle1 Eastern europe?

every person commenting on your competitor's youtube video is telling you 3 things about themselves simultaneously. they're interested in the category. they have a specific question (which means a specific pain point). and they left their name attached to it in public. youtube comments are the only place where prospects self-identify their exact problem, in their own words, under their real name, on a platform that links directly to their other social profiles. a guy I know scrapes the comment sections of his top 3 competitors' youtube channels every week. not every comment. just the ones that contain a question. "how do you handle X?" "does this work for Y?" "what about Z?" those questions are buyer-intent signals that the commenter typed voluntarily, with their google account attached, which links to their linkedin, which gives you their company name and title. he processes about 200 quality comments per week. enriches 140 of them to linkedin profiles. runs the company name through AI-Ark for a verified work email. cold email references the exact question they asked on youtube: "[first name] - saw you asking about [specific question] on [competitor]'s video. we built [product] specifically to solve that. want a quick look?" reply rate: 9.1%. because you're answering a question they actually asked, in a place they thought nobody was watching. the competitor spent $4,000 producing the video. you spent $0 harvesting the leads it generated. btw the comments section never gets deleted. a video from 2023 still generates comments from organic search traffic today. the lead list compounds without anyone doing anything. run it

@ToddBrison I made all this up in the shower

bland AI just raised $50 million because a $200/mo voice agent books more meetings than a human making $74,000 a year. 3.5 million calls per week. 100 languages. 45-minute enterprise conversations. zero commission negotiations. zero sick days. zero "I had a rough morning" energy on the first 20 dials. one of their early customers added $40 million in annual revenue from automated lead qualification alone. another hit $430 million in annual revenue from AI-powered outbound calls. these are numbers from the fundraise press release, not a landing page. a human SDR dials 60 numbers on a great day and spends 40% of their time "researching" on linkedin, which is code for scrolling with a crm tab open. the AI dials 400. per day. every day. starting at 8:01am in every timezone simultaneously. a guy I know replaced his 3-person SDR team with one AI voice agent 6 weeks ago. the agent runs a 4-question qualification script and transfers warm leads to a single human closer. the closer only talks to people who already said yes. old cost: $222,000/yr in salaries, plus $14,400 in software seats, plus 3 months of ramp time per hire. new cost: $200/mo plus $0.04 per minute of call time. roughly $2,600/mo total. closed $127,000 in the first 6 weeks. from a robot that doesn't negotiate equity and has never once asked to "jump on a quick sync." the companies posting "hiring SDR" on linkedin right now are posting the job listing equivalent of "hiring someone to hand-deliver telegrams." the role has about 18 months of oxygen left in its current form. fr

@vallcodes 🫶

a SaaS company in denver shut down their blog 9 months ago. deleted the wordpress install. let the hosting expire. their meta retargeting pixel is still firing. the blog posts are cached on google. people still click them from search results, land on a cached version or a web archive mirror, and the pixel fires. the visitor gets added to a meta custom audience that the dead company stopped running ads to in october. that audience is still sitting in meta's ad manager. growing. 340 new visitors per month being cookied into a retargeting pool that nobody is retargeting. a guy I know found this by accident. he was checking a competitor's old blog for content ideas and noticed the pixel was still loading in the page source. checked meta's audience overlap tool and estimated the dead audience at roughly 12,000 people. he built a 1% lookalike off a similar audience in his own ad account (same niche, same demo signals) and ran $1,400 in ads against it for 30 days. the lookalike outperformed his cold prospecting audiences by 3.2x on cost per lead because the base audience was already pre-qualified by the dead company's content. the dead company spent 4 years building that blog audience. he spent $1,400 and 20 minutes in ads manager to access a version of it. btw meta doesn't expire custom audiences. they sit in the ad account indefinitely. there are thousands of dead companies with live pixels still feeding audiences that will never see an ad again. unless someone else knows where to look

@aon_pro Ai ahh comment

@just_sebastianb Yessir

@_futuredays Yessir

@Sipulisopuli AI calling is legal