My LinkedIn content generated ORGANIC 500,000+ impressions in the last 90 days. Not because I post more. Because I built a content engine. Every Friday at 6 a.m., our best‑performing posts are automatically researched and drafted. I only fine‑tune them. Here is the exact system behind it: Step 1: Foundation (built once) ↳ Voice profile per person: Each team member has a defined writing voice and role ↳ ICP map: We map buyer tiers and the GTM problems they actually care about ↳ Content pillars: 3 repeatable themes tied to the pipeline ↳ Hook + CTA frameworks: Best‑performing structures saved as Claude skills ↳ Design system: Brand colors, layouts, and templates locked into Claude Tools: Claude Python Step 2: Research layer (runs weekly) ↳ Apify scrapes LinkedIn to detect high‑performing posts in our niche ↳ Fellow captures transcripts from client calls ↳ Internal Slack debates often become the best post ideas. Client conversations are our highest‑signal source. Every Friday at 6am, the system delivers a draft for the whole team. Tools: Apify Fellow - AI Meeting Assistant Claude Step 3: Production (90% AI, 10% human) ↳ 50+ hook variations generated and ranked by expected performance ↳ Claude drafts the post in each author’s voice ↳ Hook + body matching tests, which combination works best ↳ A 5-dimensional rubric grades tone, clarity, insight, and rewrite suggestions Tools: Claude Code Scripe Step 4: Repurpose the engine ↳ One high‑performing LinkedIn post = one validated idea ↳ The idea gets rebuilt for other formats ↳ Our “best‑performing database” updates daily This compounds the system. Step 5: Maintenance ↳ Python scripts maintain the automation via GitHub ↳ Monthly refresh of tone, data, and frameworks ↳ Weekly updates of best‑performing posts The longer this runs, the smarter the system gets. The real difference: Most teams use Claude like a better ChatGPT : Prompt. Copy. Paste. Forget. We built Claude Code as the operating system behind our content engine. That’s how one idea becomes a pipeline‑generating system. Have you started automating your content workflow yet? Comment ENGINE and I’ll send the full setup. P.S. If your team spends hours writing posts every week, you don’t need more writers. You need a content system. We can build that for you : - ) | 151 comments on LinkedIn

2024: “AI will replace SDRs, it’s cheaper & more effective” 2026: … API bills entered the chat They used to brag about cutting headcount with AI Just to realise that it might be cheaper to keep the human SDRs See, in 2026 people are waking up. What became clear: 1. Human in the loop will outperform AI only outreach 2. Good personalisation gets your replies, not meetings 3. AI’s good at personalisation, but doesn't get the context What does move the needle forward is a good offer. So, you need to A/B test at least 6 different offers to see what sticks 1 data 2 teardown 3 audit or diagnostic 4 checklist or benchmark 5 money back guarantee 6 freebie (Claude skill, Clay table, LGM cold email campaign setup, etc) Talking about A/B test, also don’t forget to test: - Subject lines - Openers - Social Proof - Call-to-action - Length of an email I always set up in LGM 6 different A/B tests going at the same time How do you A/B test stuff? | 158 comments on LinkedIn

>50% of outbound success is following up (tastefully) until you make the sale or get told to F off. This is a great example: 1. Person cold calls Daniel: he doesn't answer. 2. Tries a couple weeks later: he doesn't answer. 3. Tries 11 days later: They talk for 27 mins. Most sellers would have stopped after not getting a pick-up from call 1. The same goes for cold email. Outside of leads that explicitly say you're not interested, you should reach them again 30 days post-initial touch. Just because they aren't ready right now does not mean they won’t be eventually. | 41 comments on LinkedIn

>50% of outbound success is following up (tastefully) until you make the sale or get told to F off. This is a great example: 1. Person cold calls Daniel: he doesn't answer. 2. Tries a couple weeks later: he doesn't answer. 3. Tries 11 days later: They talk for 27 mins. Most sellers would have stopped after not getting a pick-up from call 1. The same goes for cold email. Outside of leads that explicitly say you're not interested, you should reach them again 30 days post-initial touch. Just because they aren't ready right now does not mean they won’t be eventually. | 39 comments on LinkedIn

I’ve bootstrapped $0-1m ARR 3 times, and I’m about to do a 4th time with MoltSets. Here’s my 5-step plan for creating a lean, mean, high-velocity growth machine: To set the stage: - Moltsets is unlimited contact data APIs built for Clay and Claude Code - It will be PAINFULLY simple, with a throw away price ($27/mo) - All customer inquiry (pre and post signup) will be handled by AI agents ——— Now, the 5-step playbook to get to $1m ARR for the 4th time. Step 1: Tap into the power of the “Founder Brand”. Thanks to Dave Gerhardt for putting me on to this. I’m going to create a huge amount of awareness for this by posting about it, doing a weekly live show, and making YT videos. Step 2: Ride an epic wave. The explosion of people posting about Claude on LinkedIn is second only to the explosion in Anthropic’s actual revenue in March ‘26. I want on the wave. Step 3: Give creators BIG visibility in exchange for UGC. I’m not exactly sure how I’m going to do this but I’m going to make a Claude-first weekly live workshop show. I believe my founder brand and that topic will pull a larger audience than creators can pull themselves by orders of magnitude. I will also engage with ANY post that tags MoltSets from my personal account. (DM me if you’re interested in being a creator.) Step 4: Keep the product painfully simple We are going to obsess over high quality data with disruptive subscription pricing. The product will only ever do 5 things - people search, company search, email enrichment, phone enrichment, and email validation. Step 5: Run it all w/ AI Simplicity will allow us to run it all customer interaction through Intercom Fin, like we did w/ RB2B. Robb Clarke will once again create world-class documentation that will make it all possible. TAKEAWAY We are still VERY early with MoltSets. There’s also a a few core things I have NO IDEA if they will work or not. But here is one thing I know FOR SURE that we’re doing right… 2025 was about building WITH AI. 2026 and beyond will be about building FOR AI. DON’T GET LEFT BEHIND Join the MoltSets waitlist here: https://lnkd.in/g8xXTCQr BETA starts soon! | 67 comments on LinkedIn

We've run enough campaigns to know exactly where outbound breaks. The data is always pointing at the same place. Most teams inherit an offer from their inbound messaging, paste it into a cold email, and wonder why nothing comes back. They blame the copy. They blame the channel. They test a new subject line. But when you look at what actually drives replies across every campaign we've run, the breakdown is always the same. 80% offer. 15% messaging. 5% infrastructure. Here's what each part actually means in practice: The Offer (80%) ↳ Cold audiences don't respond to repurposed inbound messaging. ↳ Before anything goes out, stress test it: outcome, mechanism, risk reversal, pilot path. Messaging (15%) ↳ If the offer is strong, copy just needs to communicate it clearly ↳ Rewriting copy on a weak offer is optimizing the wrong thing Infrastructure (5%) ↳ Deliverability, domain setup, and data quality decide if you reach the inbox ↳ Get it wrong and nothing above it matters Most teams never audit this split. They go straight to the copy and wonder why the reply rate doesn't move. The teams that consistently get replies aren't the ones with the best copywriters. They're the ones who got the offer right first and built everything else around it. Volume doesn't burn your TAM. Weak offers do. Apply for our no-cost pilot: https://bit.ly/C17Pilot Repost to help others close more sales. Follow Enzo Carasso 🧲 for outbound systems and revenue execution. | 60 comments on LinkedIn

The 7-Email Sequence that books +51% more meetings (3 Initial Emails + 4 Strategic Bumps) “Finally… this feels intentional.” That’s what a VP of Sales said after we rebuilt their outbound sequence. Before that, it looked like this: ● Random first emails ● “Just bumping this” follow-ups ● No logic behind the touches Here’s what actually works: 1) Trigger-Based Email ↳ This is the first email you send when you can anchor your outreach to a real trigger, hiring, funding, a tech change, a product launch, expansion, etc. ↳ The structure is simple: Trigger → Pain → Proof → Soft CTA. ↳ It works because it gives the buyer a reason to care now, not later. 2) Competitor Email ↳ This is when you know they’re using a competitor. ↳ You acknowledge what the tool is good at, then highlight the gap that usually forces teams to look elsewhere, and invite a conversation around that. ↳ It reframes without sounding like an attack. 3) Bold Observation Email ↳ This one is short and direct. ↳ You make a sharp observation about what they’re doing, point out the common pattern, and end with a curiosity-based close. ↳ No pitch. Just a call to conversation that gets them to self-diagnose. Then the bumps: 4) External Resource Bump ↳ Instead of “checking in,” you share a relevant third-party resource tied to their context. ↳ This borrows authority and makes your follow-up feel useful, not needy. 5) Data & Stats Bump ↳ Lead with a number that makes the problem measurable. ↳ Stats make pain tangible, and tangible pain gets replies. 6) Thoughtful Context Bump ↳ This is where you re-anchor urgency without pressure. ↳ You remind them why it’s relevant based on their situation, without sounding like you’re chasing. 7) Clarification Email ↳If they didn’t reply because they were confused, this fixes it. ↳You restate what you do in one line, clarify why it matters to them, and ask a clean alignment question. That’s the system. No begging. No random nudges. No volume increase required. If your cold email strategy sounds like begging, DM me “REPLY” and we’ll fix the sequence properly (let’s see if we’re a fit, and let’s work on your next campaign together) PS: Grab my FREE +10 cold email templates like +6847 sellers did already herehttps://lnkd.in/e4QY3TPW | 30 comments on LinkedIn

I send 50,000 emails per month and if i had to rebuild my outbound stack from scratch today, here's what I'd use. 1. Email infra --> I'll go with Zapmail --> Clean deliverability and decent pricing. --> I've never had a reason to second guess it. 2. List building --> Depends on the use case, but AI Ark, Apollo.io, Sales Nav cover most of it. --> If I needed niche data I'd scrape directories 3. Enrichment and Qualification --> Clay. No doubt on this one. --> Clay is whatever you mold it to. --> If you know how to build enrichment prompts in there, that's the skill. 4. Copywriting --> Currently using Claude. Just Claude. --> I've tried Gemini. It doesn't hit the same. 5. Sequencing --> Smartlead for email, GetSales.io for LinkedIn. --> I've used lemlist, Instantly.ai, Heyreach, etc. Are there better options? Probably. Do I care? Not really. I genuinely couldn't care less between this one or that one. They all do the same thing. Pick one. 6. Call recording --> Fathom.ai. Free, simple, does the job. --> I switched from Fireflies because it was free. What I wouldn't bother with? Claude Code. Bit of hype, not much ROI for what I actually do. P.S. If you wanna see how we write emails like no one else, and generate tons of meetings for our clients, book in a call here: https://lnkd.in/euDUSQyx | 12 comments on LinkedIn

If I had $10k/month to kick off my outbound system, these are the 10 tools I'd first buy: 1. List building ↳ Clay: TAM sourcing, signal-based filtering, full TAM in one table ↳ Apollo: TAM sourcing to complement Clay ↳ LinkedIn Sales Nav: TAM sourcing to get more Tier 1, Tier 2 accounts 2. Enrichment ↳ Clay: waterfall enrichment across 50+ providers in one run ↳ Prospeo + Icypeas , FullEnrich : email waterfall, verified contacts ↳ ZeroBounce: validation before anything touches an inbox 3. Deliverability ↳ EmailGuard : inbox placement tests and blacklist checks every 24 hours ↳ EmailBison : sending volume adjusts automatically based on real placement data ↳ n8n + Airtable : limits scale up or down automatically based on inbox score ↳ lemlist multi-channel sequencing ↳ Heyreach, Expandi: for LinkedIn campaigns (cold + brand awareness) 4. Signal stacking ↳ Factors.ai + RB2B, Vector 👻 : website visitors identified and routed back into outbound ↳ Trigify.io : LinkedIn engagements ↳ Clay: hiring, funding, tech stack changes all in one table 5. AI scoring ↳ Clay + OpenAI + Claude accounts scored by ICP fit, signal strength, engagement ↳ Tier A (8–10) → direct outreach ↳ Tier B (5–7) → automated sequence ↳ Tier C (<5) → ad audience or content nurture, not direct contact 6. Outreach ↳ Lemlist: omnichannel, multichannel (email, LinkedIn, voicenotes, WhatsApp) ↳ EmailBison, Instantly, Smartlead: email-only 7. CRM and automation ↳ HubSpot: every contact, every tag, every stage in one place ↳ n8n: signal triggers routed into CRM tasks automatically ↳ Airtable: deliverability dashboard across all clients, real-time ↳ Slack: automated report on every client, every morning 8. AI agents ↳ Aria: nurtures LinkedIn connections, qualifies intent, and books meetings ↳ Rex: handles every outbound reply, follows up by signal strength ↳ Both run 24/7 on n8n + Claude. AI SDRs. 9. Content + SEO ↳ AirOps, Ahrefs: content generation for AEO ↳ Scripe , Taplio: LinkedIn content 10. Conversion ↳ HubSpot: source of data + pipeline tracking ↳ Dock: proposals and sales rooms ↳ Fellow AI Meeting Assistant: Every call is auto-transcribed and summarized ↳ Calendly + Stripe: booking and payments The 10 tools I'd buy on day one of any rebuild: Clay, HubSpot, lemlist, Make, Slack, Scripe, Fellow, Calendly, Vector, Apollo. What tool did I miss and you’d add? | 118 comments on LinkedIn

We sent 10M+ cold emails to learn these lessons. You can read them in 30 seconds. Here are 12 things that changed how we approach outbound: 1) The best campaigns start with a strong offer, not strong copy 2) Most bad leads are actually bad targeting decisions 3) Personalization can't fix a weak value proposition 4) Founders often target companies too early or too late 5) Buying signals outperform demographic filters 6) Companies that are actively hiring are often easier to book 7) Most campaigns fail before enough data is collected 8) One relevant insight beats ten personalized sentences 9) A prospect's priorities matter more than your solution 10) The highest reply rates usually come from narrow ICPs 11) Outbound scales when positioning is clear 12) Most founders don't have an outbound problem, they have a market-message fit problem The funny part? Most of these have nothing to do with email. They're sales, timing, positioning, and understanding who actually needs your help. Which one do you disagree with? | 85 comments on LinkedIn

We sent 10M+ cold emails to learn these lessons. You can read them in 30 seconds. Here are 12 things that changed how we approach outbound: 1) The best campaigns start with a strong offer, not strong copy 2) Most bad leads are actually bad targeting decisions 3) Personalization can't fix a weak value proposition 4) Founders often target companies too early or too late 5) Buying signals outperform demographic filters 6) Companies that are actively hiring are often easier to book 7) Most campaigns fail before enough data is collected 8) One relevant insight beats ten personalized sentences 9) A prospect's priorities matter more than your solution 10) The highest reply rates usually come from narrow ICPs 11) Outbound scales when positioning is clear 12) Most founders don't have an outbound problem, they have a market-message fit problem The funny part? Most of these have nothing to do with email. They're sales, timing, positioning, and understanding who actually needs your help. Which one do you disagree with? | 83 comments on LinkedIn

How to do ABM like the top 1%: 1. Buying-committee > Single-person One person = curiosity. 1-3% response rate Two+ = committee forming. 3-4x higher response rate → Build your triggers around account-level activity, not JUST person-level. 2. Trigger-based > Cadence-based A: M/W/F on a fixed cadence B: reaching out within 2-4 hours of a high-value signal: pricing page visit, repeat content engagement, job change. (bare minimum to stay top of mind) → Build your sequencer around their intent and engagements. Nurture them if they're not ready. 3. Multi-channel > Single-channel Pick one channel and run 5-7 touches on it vs. 3-7% response rate Email, LinkedIn, and call with 2-3 touches: 5-12% response rate → Stop one-channel approach (good MVP). Orchestrate across three. 4. Reply triage playbook > Ad-hoc Old school: handle replies ad-hoc, no playbook. New school: specific rule of engagement: → Positive → demo invite sent within 24h → "Not now" → 90-day nurture sequence triggered automatically → Wrong person → multi-thread the account + ask for a referral in the same reply → Have clear rules of engagement for your common scenarios + make the execution easy for SDRs. We can help with that and triage these through HubSpot Salesforce + Instantly, Smartlead/preferred sequencer. 5. Account-based ROI math > Per-email ROI math One account, 5 messages, 1 reply, $200k deal vs. 5,000 emails, 50 replies, 0 deals → Do ABM and combine ads + content + email. (eg. use ZenABM ) 6. Regularly update your ICP > Quarterly, take a look at old dashboards Have no ICP doc/messaging - update quarterly, vs. auto-update your tiered accounts & contacts, source new ICP fit companies, and tier them out. Clear ICP + strong data foundation + iterative messaging matrix = lower CAC If someone else needs this, repost ♻️ What’s the biggest challenge in keeping these 6 patterns? P.S. If you do ABM with a minimum of $20k / mo and want to combine content, ads, and outbound to improve CAC, book a time with us. | 80 comments on LinkedIn

A client paid me $5,000 a month to be their wingman. (Spoiler: no bar fights involved.) They paid me to be their "inbox" wingman. And as soon as I read their sequences, I found the problem in < 3 minutes. Every email ended the same way: “Would you be open to a 30-minute call?” That’s like walking up to someone at a bar and saying, “Hey Girl, can I have your number?" Maybe Brad Pitt could pull that off. The rest of us? We need to break the ice with the best dad joke, and then, maybe buy a drink. Cold email works the same way. There are 3 commitment levels you can ask for in a cold email. 1️⃣ “Mind if I send you a quick Loom video / audit / one-pager?” Why this works: ✅ You’re offering something. ✅ The prospect has nothing to lose by saying yes. 2️⃣ “Can you fill out this quick form so I can tailor something for you?” Why this may work: ✅ It takes more effort, but there’s a clear payoff. ✅ They give info, you deliver something relevant. 3️⃣“Let’s book a 30-minute call.” Why this DOES not work: ❌ This is the big ask. ❌ Lead with it before offering anything. 9 out of 10 cold emails jump straight to Level 3. Learn to ignore the urge to use that CTA and offer something before asking. What CTA do you use in your outreach right now?

4 reasons your cold emails get deleted in under 2 seconds. And it’s not because of the subject line. Most teams spend hours working on the copy, yet their reply rate still sits at 1%. And it's because your emails fail to connect with your audience on a meaningful level. Applying the 4U's framework will change that: 1/ USEFUL - Does this solve a problem they're already sitting on? → Weak: "I'd love to connect and learn about your business." → Strong: "We added 40% to a client's sales in your exact position without adding headcount." 2/ URGENT - Is there a reason to act now, not next quarter? → Weak: "Hope you're having a good week. Let me know if you'd like to connect." → Strong: "Your current outbound is leaking 6 figures a week, worth 20 minutes Friday?" 3/ UNIQUE - Is this an angle they haven't heard this week? → Weak: "We help companies generate more leads through outbound." → Strong: "Most agencies rewrite your copy while we rebuild the offer your SDRs are pitching." 4/ ULTRA-SPECIFIC - Is the claim concrete enough to be believed? → Weak: "This will help others increase sales over time." → Strong: "We hit $2.3M ARR in 28 weeks with the same team and infrastructure. The only change was the offer." Hit all 4 U's to turn your email into a message worth replying to. Want to see what good outbound looks like in practice? Apply for our no-cost, no-risk pilot: https://bit.ly/C17Pilot Repost to help others close more sales. Follow Enzo Carasso 🧲 for outbound systems and revenue execution. | 80 comments on LinkedIn

I present to you: The most OVERPLAYED cold email of all time. Here’s what makes this a top 1% terrible email: 1. “Re:” in subject line to trick the prospect into thinking it’s a response (you aren’t tricking anyone). 2. Fake intro saying they tried to call you (they didn’t). 3. Fake mutual connection reference (you don’t know the mutual connection and neither do they). 4. “Sent from my iPhone”: using 2019 cold email tricks in 2026. Let’s give it up for this SDR 👏 | 20 comments on LinkedIn

You can now target companies by who they sell to, keyword searches across the whole website, how companies show up for Google searches and more. Second post about Prospeo's update comes with a video so you can see it here. They asked me what filters would I want to see in the platform and they added so much great stuff. Filter for companies that sell to small business owners, or sell to legal teams, or sell to marketing, plus the size of the companies they sell to and the market they're in. And other things like - 1. Keyword search now reads the whole website — page bodies, titles, URLs, SEO descriptions — not just the company description. Huge difference in recall. 2. Business-model and type filters: SaaS, marketplace, e-comm, agency, consulting, manufacturing, plus flags like "has a public pricing page," "has an enterprise plan," "usage-based pricing." 3. AI attributes: do they offer a demo, do they have an API, do they have a blog. 4. Google Discovery: find companies by who ranks for a given keyword. All of it is in the API, not just the UI. Honest read on data quality: for a quick, well-defined list it's great. If you need a complete TAM exactly to spec, still pull the broad list and run your own website prompts to finish it. As a fast starting point, I haven't seen filters like this anywhere else. I go over all of the updates in the video update here. | 12 comments on LinkedIn

These four cold email templates are all you need to book 50 sales calls per month. Walk through of each: 1. Promotion Play: best used for when the prospect is less than six months post-promotion. 2. Trigger Event: this can be used after a prospect announces fundraise, product release, or any other big announcement. 3. Colleague Redirect: this is a tactic that makes the email look much more personalized, even though it is quite easy to automate (just a good way to break through the noise). 4. Case Study mirror: this is timeless. It's just an easy way to make an email look way more personalized and break through the noise. Steal these and let me know if you have any questions. | 11 comments on LinkedIn

9 out of 10 teams run an outbound campaign, look at the positives, and ask “did it work?” If yes they re-load it and run until the answer is “no” They’re reactive When it arrives at “no”, whether immediately or eventually, they then ask “what will work?” And go do that Right in front of your blind little eyes - is the answers (or questions) to your problems You launch to 1000 people and get 2 positives “It works”…. Really you should be thinking “what did the other 998 think when they saw this?” “What is true of the people who ignored this that isn’t of who said yes?” “What would everyone else had been more interested in?” A bunch of much broader, more vague, yet revealing questions Maybe your idea of who you can help and your actual market are not the same thing Maybe your words for an idea that would be agreeable to your audience don’t make sense, and you think the idea sucks when really you write confusingly Maybe you had an amazing list and copy, domains were cooked, and results are not representative of “the truth” Similarly, you may need to ask “what % of 20 hand raisers for our lead magnet became customers vs the 3 for cold outbound to meetings?” I’ve seen 2 for 3 on cold direct meetings vs 0 for 20 on random freebies Keep your attention focused on what matters (business outcomes), not the half steps But I’ve also seen 0 for 0 on direct meetings, and 3 for 10 on lead magnets; they’re not bad - it’s just a piece of the puzzle Feedback loops = outcomes now serve to inform inputs of tomorrow If your universe of “what is possible?” Exists solely of copy pasting ideas from elsewhere into repos to solve things for you… you’re gonna have a bad time in the future imo… Time will tell; my bet is placed :)

Most teams that struggle to get results from outbound do one of two things: 1. They increase the volume of activity without fixing the underlying issues. 2. They stop doing outbound and try the next shiny thing. Neither will help you get more leads. There are three things you need to build trust and credibility with outbound: Signal. Proof. An irresistible offer (or pilot). The companies that convert cold audiences consistently understand this. First, they identify the signal: → Hiring spikes → Funding rounds → Expansion activity → Operational changes Something changed in the business. That creates urgency. Then they layer proof: → Specific client outcomes → Relevant competitor examples → Real numbers tied to real companies Generic claims do not build belief. Specific evidence does. Then they reduce risk with a pilot: → A teardown → A sample → A short engagement → Something tangible before commitment That’s where trust compounds. The prospect feels understood. They believe the outcome is possible. And they experience value before they’re asked to commit. Most outbound fails because teams try to sell before trust exists. The best systems warm cold audiences before the pitch ever happens.

Over the last few months, I've been using Claude Code extensively for almost everything except outbound. Here's why. I just kept going back to my old setup because it felt more comfortable.