Consequences of generic cold email templates

Last week, a $2M ARR SaaS founder showed me their "high-converting" cold email template. It was the same template I’d seen on LinkedIn.. and even in my own inbox.. more times than I can count. Word for word: → "I noticed you work in [industry]..." → "Quick question about [pain point]..." → "Would love to show you how we help companies like [competitor]..." Here’s what no template guru talks about: Your buyers are getting that exact same message from other founders too. They can spot templates from a mile away. The founder was baffled… “But this template has a 15% reply rate!” Maybe. For whoever used it first. Once it’s been copy-pasted across LinkedIn and every “growth hack” newsletter, it’s dead. The real problem with template culture: It makes you sound just like everyone else trying to sell to your buyer. And when you sound like everyone else, you get ignored like everyone else. What actually works in 2025? Stop optimizing for "reply rates." Start optimizing for qualified conversation rates. I’d rather get 2 replies from buyers who actually need what we do than 20 replies from people just asking to be removed from our list. The PipeBagger approach? 👍 We don’t use templates. We use frameworks. 👍 We research the buyer’s real business situation—their tech landscape, their company’s growth challenges. 👍 Then we write ONE message that speaks directly to their reality. Is it scalable? Maybe not instantly. Is it effective? Absolutely. Think AI emails are better than templates? Worse. Buyers' inbox flags them, and even readers can smell the AI lingo. Your message template isn’t your competitive advantage. Your ability to understand what your buyer actually needs to hear is. Stop copying. Start connecting. Have you ever caught yourself using the same template as your competitors? What changed when you ditched it? #B2B #Founder #BuyerCertainty #ColdEmailing #SocialSelling

If a #PhD is about creating new knowledge, using the same cold email template as your classmates suggests you’re not quite ready for this intellectual journey.   This week I’ve received the same email from 9 different people.   “Dear Professor… I am “insert name here” from “insert school here” interested in doing a PhD in chemical #engineering with you…” and the email continues with words about how “amazing” my research is that could be sent to one of a thousand faculty, with “insert paper title” in here somewhere.   Literally the same exact template used by 9 people.   If you can’t draft your own cold email (which should be highly targeted to your interests) what confidence does the potential #advisor have in your creativity, communication ability, and potential to be an independent scholar in the field?     STOP using these templates. DO NOT pay people for these “easy” documents. Don’t use them.   The 9 people I received the exact same email from received the same copy/paste email reply in return.   Start a genuine conversation with the potential advisor.   You can absolutely use a template to save time reaching out to people. But WRITE IT YOURSELF!!!   Tell us – in 200 words or fewer (because I get 100+ emails a day, I don’t have time to read a personal essay) with no more than ONE SENTENCE per point: 👩🏻🔬 Who you are (the highlight that’s relevant to the PI). 👩🏻🏫 Why, specifically you’re emailing (looking for x position – and don’t say “any” – be specific). 🧩 Why you’re interested in the PI’s group – specifically. DO NOT copy/paste a paper title. Show us that you’ve figured out what we do. 🦄 Why your skills align with the PI’s group. What specifically do you bring (preferably that others might not) from your knowledge, background or experience that will support the PI’s work. 🗒️ Close it out. Say you’ve attached a CV copy, you’d love to discuss any openings. 🚦YOU’RE DONE.   You don’t need someone else’s template to do this.   You don’t need AI to do this.   You need to target your search and reach out with specifics to start a real conversation. This is how you build your network and create meaningful relationships that lead to PhD admits and postdoc openings.

I received two separate cold emails this morning. One featured a photo of Donald Trump giving my agency the "Best Agency" award. The other showed Bill Gates crowning me the "greatest business mind on the planet." Both emails used the exact same phrase: "Legends recognize legends." We can all agree this is bad outreach. But why is it bad? It's the lack of insight. Even if an AI had written it, saying, "I see 2Stallions Digital Marketing Agency works with clients in the finance sector," it would still be missing the most important part. The most important part is the "So what?" You saw I work in marketing. 𝐒𝐨 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭? You noticed I liked a post on SEO by Neil Patel. 𝐒𝐨 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭? You know what projects I've worked on. 𝐒𝐨 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭? The connection is missing. The unique perspective is missing. Good outreach doesn't just state a fact; it builds a bridge from that fact to a relevant, compelling idea. It shows you've done your thinking, not just your research. Before you send your next cold email, whether it's written by you or an AI, apply the "𝐒𝐨 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭?" test. If you don't have a compelling answer, you're just creating spam. #MarketingStrategy #B2BMarketing #SalesStrategy #LeadGeneration #CriticalThinking

This cold email had everything… except relevance. First up in a series of Cold Email Teardowns — here’s the breakdown. They were pitching a unified inventory system for brands selling on Amazon, Etsy, and TikTok Shop. We’re Zoronto — a retention marketing agency. We don’t manage SKUs. We manage email and SMS performance for ecommerce brands. ✅ What They Did Well: ▸ Strong, clear value prop ▸ Relatable problem framing (“feels like running multiple businesses”) ▸ Soft CTA with a clean opt-out ❌ But Here’s What Went Wrong: Wrong Persona → We don’t sell physical products. We help others grow theirs. Name Mismatch → Email came from “Michael,” but introduced himself as “Amar.” That’s an instant red flag. Sketchy-Looking Email Domain → Sent from getfirsteigen.info — not even remotely close to their company’s name. Big trust drop. No Branded Signature → No title. No website. No LinkedIn. Just a wall of text with no proof it’s a real company. Zero Social Proof → Mentions other D2C brands but gives no names, no numbers, and no credibility markers. Weak Exit CTA → “Reply ‘End’ if these messages aren’t for you.” That’s passive and misses a chance to redirect or requalify. 🤔 So What’s the Real Problem? ✘ It’s not the writing. ✘ It’s not the tone. ✔It’s the data. Bad data = bad targeting. Bad targeting = wasted time, damaged trust, and zero results. 💡 What Great GTM Teams Know The best sales and marketing teams don’t start with copy. They start with context. At Minko.ai, we help revenue teams: 👉 Build clean, enriched, and verified lead data 👉 Segment by role, need, and timing 👉 Power outreach that actually lands 👉 Because when your data is right, the rest of your system works like it’s supposed to 🧠 Final Thought You can’t automate your way out of irrelevance. And you definitely can’t scale with guesswork. Start with data. End with results. Seen better? Seen worse? Drop your favorite cold email hits (or horror stories) below — let’s learn from the good, the bad, and the wildly off-target.👇

In every outbound messaging workshop I run with sellers, ~8% of the team's cold emails fall into the "ugly baby" category. Ugly baby = showing up to a baby shower, uninvited, to let someone know how busted their baby is. And, it's especially common for people who use AI to automate their cold emails. Here's an example of one I received this AM + why it falls flat + how to change the tonality: 1 - The opener confidently tells me what my business does. But, it's incorrect. Automation is the opposite of what I teach. This is why talking AT the reader often falls flat. The first line is the most important real estate of a cold email. This is the risk of using AI/automation to do "personalization-at-scale". Inaccurate personalization is worse than no personalization at all. You'd be surprised how often I see this. 2 - Then, it tells me how ineffective I am at running my business. Even if they're correct, no one likes to be told their baby is ugly. Instead, root the problem in empathy + unsure tonality. "Not sure if it feels tougher to..." is a great way to tee up a problem statement, without insulting them. Point to a problem in the environment - not the reader themselves. 3 - Then, it assumes its assumption is correct and pivots to a pitch. "We help founders like you". Like me? What am I like? Ah, yes...per above...incompetent! 4 - The CTA is great. It's an offer to help size the pain of my current state. Offers that do this make fabulous CTAs. Problem is - the rest of the message makes me feel that if I showed up to this call, I'd be speaking to an arrogant know-it-all. Our cold email message is our prospect's movie trailer to what our sales experience will feel like. How we open is how we win (or lose). Cold outbound shouldn't be an afterthought.

Cold outreach to executives: a game most sellers lose and shouldn’t play with their current skill set. The way most play is poisoning the buyer landscape with run rate high velocity prospecting motions. There is SO MUCH OPPORTUNITY for sellers who learn to do it right. But here’s what you need to overcome first: Facts: Only 6.4% of cold emails to C-level execs get a reply - sellers are losing 93 out of 100 times. Why? 1. Copywriters fuel centralized demand gen teams with email sequences made for broad markets. Then mass distribute them across wide definitions of their ICP (corporate speak for spam). This “non-hyper-relevant” outreach does nothing but piss off customer executives, many of whom receive 400+ unsolicited emails per DAY. 2. Tens of thousands of sellers copy “top-performing templates” from LinkedIn gurus. They work… until they don’t. Executives sniff out when they've been sent email templates faster than savvy investors flee a crypto scam. Strike two. 3. Sellers will actually attempt a well thought-out email but then every follow-up is “did you get my email?”, “I’m still waiting for your reply…”, or some other needy, begging request to drive activity for the rep, not value for the executive. These motions are making you worse, not better. Each email template you borrow from anyone else delays when you actually learn how to think and how to write. If you want to start executive conversations consistently, master these 4 non-sexy skills: 1. Contextual Intelligence Deep account research isn’t about getting informed. You are investigating how to make business transformation in a room full of people who have been burned by noobies before. That means reading annual reports, earnings calls, exec interviews, and investor presentations. You’re not just looking for facts. You’re hunting for patterns—proof that your solution matters to them. That’s how you earn executive trust. 2. Multi-layered Personalization Mention their job title or recent funding…and you’ll get ghosted like everyone else. It’s not about flattering their ego. It’s about relevance. Real personalization means: - Tying your message to a specific initiative they own - Speaking their language - Aligning with their budget cycle - Giving them a clear POV on why this matters now That’s when a CFO, CIO or VP will pause and think, “This seller actually gets it.” 3. Point of View Development In enterprise, you’re not just up against other vendors. You’re competing with status quo, internal priorities, and budget battles. That’s why you did the research, to form a sharp, strategic point of view on how you can help: “What transformation could this company achieve with our solution—and why now?”. Make your POV concise (2–3 sentences), tied to business outcomes. Don’t lead with product features or vague ‘we help companies do X’ lines. If you’re an experienced seller looking to level up outbound in 2025, comment “Skills” and I’ll send the Forum Workshop invite for this Friday

This cold email landed straight in the trash, despite being from an "AI SDR platform." Here's exactly why it failed: 1. Terrible intro personalization. "NAME - saw you went to Miami U. How was it?" This is lazy if it's your only layer of personalization. If you're going to personalize, do it right. The prospect knows immediately this is automated - and poorly done at that. Even basic Clay enrichment would have prevented this embarrassing mistake. 2. Too obvious of a pain point. "Do you ever get tired of manually researching prospects...?" This reads like every other cold email in their inbox. Prospects are numb to these generic pain points. You need to be more specific and tie it to their actual business challenges. Example, in this case: "I know how hard it is to find perfect fit accounts based on your existing clientele" 3. Over-reliance on "we" language. Every line is "we started," "we're an," "we're trusted." This is a classic mistake - focusing on yourself instead of the prospect. Your cold emails should be about THEM, not you. 4. Extremely weak social proof. "We're trusted by tons of companies." What companies? What results? This vague claim adds zero credibility. Name specific companies in their industry or share concrete metrics from case studies that matter to them. 5. Hard CTA with no value established. Jumping straight to "free demo next Tuesday" without establishing any real value is why this email failed. Always use a soft CTA that offers value first. Remember: Even AI tools need proper configuration. Poorly executed automation is worse than no automation at all. What's the worst cold email you've received lately?

You keep sending cold emails because they're cheap and easy, but you're burning potential clients faster than you're winning them. Cold email persists despite poor results for one simple reason: it's virtually risk-free (or so it seems). That's the trap so many companies fall into. The "why not try it" mentality creates a significant cognitive blind spot. The calculation seems straightforward: 1. Low cost to implement 2. Minimal time investment (especially with AI) 3. Virtually unlimited scale 4. Even a tiny success rate feels like a win But this calculation misses crucial hidden costs: 1. Brand damage - each poor outreach associates your brand with spam 2. Burned prospects - you only get one first impression 3. False metrics - vanity metrics like "open rates" mask true effectiveness 4. Opportunity cost - time and energy not spent on better strategies 5. Market pollution - contributing to the noise that makes everyone's outreach less effective Companies rarely measure these costs, so the ROI calculation is fundamentally flawed. They see 100 emails sent, 2 responses, and 1 meeting as a success because the direct cost was low, while completely missing the 98 people who now have a negative impression of their brand. It's like fishing with dynamite - cheap and easy, but devastating to the ecosystem and ultimately self-defeating for the fisherman. ----------------- 🚀 𝗜 𝗔𝗺 𝗧𝘆𝗹𝗲𝗿 𝗞𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗲𝘆 🔺 Marketing strategist, entrepreneur, & business mentor 🔺 Growing businesses through strategic marketing and ICP-driven content 🔺 Championing storytelling and marketing automation 🔺 Keynotes on GTM, content mastery, & AI/digital transformation 🔝 Connect with me

High open rates feel like a win. Until subscribers never trust you again. 𝟳 𝘀𝘂𝗯𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗼𝘆 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁: 𝟭/ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗳𝗮𝗸𝗲 "𝗥𝗲:" 𝘀𝘂𝗯𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲 "Re: Following up on our conversation" You've never talked to them before. Opens the email expecting a reply. Realizes it's a cold pitch. Feels tricked, not interested. → Deception opens emails. Also closes relationships. 𝟮/ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘂𝗳𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝘂𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 "Your account will be suspended" "Action required within 24 hours" Nothing is actually urgent or wrong. They panic, click, then realize it's fake. You borrowed anxiety tactics from scammers. → False alarms train people to ignore real ones. 𝟯/ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗻𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝗱𝗿𝗼𝗽 "Sarah mentioned you'd be interested" No Sarah. No mention. Complete fabrication. Opens expecting a referral. Gets a cold sales pitch instead. → Lying about connections is relationship poison. 𝟰/ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘃𝗮𝗴𝘂𝗲 "𝗬𝗼𝘂'𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗻" 𝘁𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲 "You've been selected" "You made the list" "Congratulations, you qualified" Opens expecting good news. Gets a sales pitch for a paid program. → Fake exclusivity creates real resentment. 𝟱/ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 "Did you get my last email?" This IS your first email to them. Opens thinking they missed something important. Realizes you're gaslighting them. → Manufactured FOMO backfires hard. 𝟲/ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗿𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄 Subject: "The 3 secrets to X" Email: "Sign up for my webinar to learn them" Promised value in the subject. Gated it in the email. → Bait and switch kills future opens. 𝟳/ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗸𝗯𝗮𝗶𝘁 "You're making a huge mistake" "This could ruin everything" Opens fearing something's wrong. Email is just generic advice. No actual mistake. No actual danger. → Manufacturing fear creates real anger. They optimize for one metric: open rate. They destroy every metric that matters after. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝘂𝗯𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗶𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿: Not what your email said. How you made them feel when they opened it. Tricked. Manipulated. Lied to. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻: First email: 60% open rate from trickery. Second email: 20% open rate from broken trust. Third email: Spam folder. You can trick someone into opening once. You can't trick them into trusting you. Subject lines aren't about maximizing opens. They're about setting honest expectations. High opens mean nothing if the relationship is dead. ♻️ Repost if trust matters more than open rates. ➕ Follow me, Louis Shulman, for more tactics to stay top of mind and beat the competition. 📧 Join our weekly marketing newsletter: https://lnkd.in/gYGzEeTb

I just got another hilariously bad cold email that was clearly written by an AI tool. It referenced my university (I graduated 15 years ago), and some obscure event they host. No human would ever write this. What the people using these AI SDR tools are missing is that bad personalization is MUCH worse than no personalization. Personalizing an email isn't only about tailoring your pitch to the prospect. It is about building trust with the person on the other end. When someone sees you've genuinely invested time to learn about them and their role or company, there's a sense of reciprocity. "They've spent time to get to know more about me, I may as well hear them out." There's no shortcut to this. Personalization requires a lot of human judgement and creativity. It comes from actually wanting to help people solve real problems. AI can understand the patterns of messages, but it doesn't understand what humans would actually say to each other. When you hit "send" on something that is written by a machine you're not only missing the mark on the pitch - you're also destroying trust. This is worse than just sending a templated email. At least that's honest, and not trying to fake something. When people detect something is amiss, you've damaged your reputation forever. Sadly, I think eventually more scammers and spammers are going to get ahold of these tools, and the inbox will be ruined forever. Until then, send wisely!