Same number of emails. Six times the replies.
A B2B software company selling to sales and revenue leaders at growing companies sends 4,000 emails a month, and almost nobody replies.
A representative example drawn from our hands-on experience. Company details are composite, and the figures are typical of this kind of project rather than from one named client.
The problem
They have tried a tool, then a freelancer. The list is a job-title filter. Everyone gets the same email at a random time, asking for 30 minutes on day one.
What we do
Rebuild who to contact, use buying signals to reach people at the right moment, rewrite the message around that signal and make the ask smaller.
What changes
The list gets 60% smaller and replies go up about six times. Meetings go from 4 to 21 a month.
The same prospect, before and after.
Sample copy. Marcus Lind and Halden Freight are fictional.
Who to go after.
Head of Sales, companies with 50 to 200 staff, in the US.
That is a filter, not a buyer. It matches 9,800 people, most with no reason to care.
B2B companies with 50 to 500 staff that hired their first sales reps in the last year or are opening a new market, with a revenue leader in seat.
Not a fit: agencies, teams with 10 or more SDRs, companies with no sales team yet.
Reply rate by signal
Timing beats volume. The right moment is worth about five times a cold one.
The ask, step by step
Each touch asks for a little, and none of them repeat.
- Email 1Worth sending you how it works?
- Email 2Want the two-minute version?
- LinkedInHappy to share the checklist here too.
- Email 3Is this on your list this quarter?
- Email 4Should I close the loop on this?
How it works.
- 1
Redefine who to contact
From a job-title filter to a real profile of the buyer, including who looks like a fit but isn't. The list shrinks from 9,800 to 3,900.
- 2
Add buying signals
Watch for moments that mean a company is ready, like a new sales leader or open sales roles. People enter a sequence within days of a signal.
- 3
Rebuild the message
Every email opens with the signal, names the problem it usually causes and says what we'd do about it. No flattery, no company intro.
- 4
Make the ask smaller
Asking a stranger for 30 minutes rarely works. "Worth a look?" starts a conversation, and the meeting gets booked a message or two later.
- 5
Use email and LinkedIn together
Each prospect sees both channels, timed so every touch has context and nobody gets two in one morning.
- 6
Write follow-ups that add something
Each follow-up brings a new angle or something useful. Never "just bumping this up".
The change in numbers.
| Metric | Before | After 90 days |
|---|---|---|
| Emails per month | about 4,000 | about 4,000 |
| List size | 9,800 | 3,900 |
| Reply rate | 1.1% | 6.4% |
| Positive reply rate | 0.3% | 2.9% |
| Meetings per month | 4 | 21 |
| Meetings that become qualified opportunities | 25% | 45% |
Representative figures.
Where this goes wrong
Funding looks like a strong signal, but founders who just raised get flooded with email, so replies are only average. Hiring signals deserve more weight.
A smaller list feels like a step backwards. It is the point: fewer people, each with a reason to care.
Who this is for
Teams already sending a steady volume and hearing very little back.
Teams who have blamed the tool, when the list and the ask are the problem.
Common questions.
A recent, visible event that suggests a company has the problem now: a new sales leader, open sales roles, a new office, or a change of tools.
Usually not. In this example the volume stays flat. What changes is the list, the timing and the ask.
AI drafts from the research. A person reviews the messages before anything is sent.
Related case studies
All case studies →Sending a lot, hearing very little?
Bring your current sequence. We'll show you on the call what we'd change.