The cold emails which got me meetings at Twitter, LinkedIn and GitHub
startupmoon.com
startupmoon.com
There's a ton more in there that is really great advice, but as someone who was a relatively successful salesman, if you're not a salesman and you're criticizing this or think this is cheesy, please understand this is how you "sell".
When this is being done to you, most people don't realize it, and even like the presentation. Even as someone trained in many of these techniques, you know they're being used, but if done properly it just makes for a pleasant experience and you don't even care.
I(nterest)
D(ecision)
A(ction)
Someone once told me that other salespeople are the easiest to sell to. Maybe because on some level they're rooting for you to succeed, or maybe because they're more extroverted.
My observations seem to bear that out, but I don't have a huge sample size. I'm curious whether you think that's true?
p.s. I was tempted to open this with, "I saw your comment on HN and wanted to get your advice...". :) But I'm not trying to be a meta smartass. I'm genuinely curious.
In that regard, I'd say I'm just like every other person who isn't a salesperson :)
Yes I'm cynical, but good looks have been found to have a significant influence on success at interviews.
However, if thats the only type of person your clientele will talk to, theN hire a smart, driven brunette, or blonde or a guy who walks some other part that fits the role.
The reason: everybody figures out if you can get away with that you have to have pretty amazing techical skills.
(Haven't come around to the second edition yet but the first edition follows me. Covers everything from cabling and datacenter layout to hiring, firing and salary negotiations.)
There's a lot of truth to this. We once approached a team in a "big telcom". Another team at the company referred us to them because the product was relatively successful for their purposes. The new team took the time to listen to us, and I think understood our value proposition, but these guys were dinosaurs. The prospect of changing how they do things, and taking a risk buying an expensive product was not interesting to them. They seemed more interested in coasting until their upcoming retirement.
Not sure what it was about Dan's post, but it really resonated with me and motivated me to make 8 sales pitches yesterday. Already got 2 replies, one negative, one positive. Point being, if you don't shoot, you can't score.
The mail starts with some random blurb about the company. Honestly I don't care (yet). All I would think is: Why are you contacting me? How did you find out about me? They say they solve problems. Which problems? How are they related to my field of work?
After that I wouldn't even care to read the rest. Sorry, this is bad execution.
One thing I would like to add from personal experience: It's really easy these days to connect to a lot of people on LinkedIn that you have never met or even heard of before. I am tempted to say the acceptance quote of a "cold connection" is about 50%.
Once your network has a decent size, you can connect to almost anyone from your industry (in our case gaming and mobile) even if you only have a free LinkedIn account (like I do) because you have a least a couple of people from their company already within your 2nd/3rd degree connections, and then you can literally add the entire board. Believe me, more C-level guys than you might think will accept you if your profile looks like you are a decent person.
The reason I writing all this is that I have been much more successful getting meetings through LinkedIn than through cold email. I feel that if I send a LinkedIn message to somebody I am connected to (but that I do not know whatsoever), that person is much more likely to a) open the message in the first place because the sender is not anonymous but rather has a name, face, and a job, and therefore b) also much more likely to read/digest what I am actually writing. And from here it is only really about what you have to say and sell anyways....
The bottom line is that while LinkedIn is a tool intended for connecting people that know each other, it actually works best for connecting (and selling something) to people you do not know at all.
Give it a shot!
(Actually I did read the article, and in it she says "cold emails produced 7 meetings at Twitter, Klout, LinkedIn", so either she sent 7 cold emails or the title should use 'that' not 'which')
> I cannot get passed the title
I think, and please correct me if I'm wrong, this should be "I cannot get past the title". :)
A bit of lenience might be in order since the author is from Israel and English may not be her first language (then again, native speakers might not necessarily do better).
I appreciate that the which/that distinction is tricky, but one is a restrictive clause and the other is not, changing the meaning of the sentence.
"To pass often means to move past, and this is where confusion can arise. Of note, to pass can also mean to sail past, to fly past, to run past, to hop past, etc. - the method of moving is irrelevant. This is worth bearing in mind, because if you have used a verb indicating motion already, then it will be partnered with past and not passed."
The verb here would be "get". See the examples at the bottom for use as a preposition.
Or did I now fuck it up again? ;)
"passed" is something that happens or happened to you, like on the freeway you can say you have been passed by another vehicle.
"past", on the other hand, in this context is a state that refers to your location. Like in, "I'm past the red line". When you have to get past something, your position in relation to that something is expressed by that word.
Intuitively, I'd say that if it's the answer to an imaginary question of "where", it needs to be "past". If it's the answer to another question, like "what happened", it's "passed".
> I appreciate that the which/that distinction is tricky, but one is a restrictive clause and the other is not, changing the meaning of the sentence.
You're right, but I think we have to take non-native speakers into account. Also, the implication that those were the exact same emails doesn't really change with that, it only gets weaker. In my experience, people use that in the same way express a definitive relation. As in "those are the cats that ate the cheeseburgers" I get the impression that a specific set of cats are involved in a specific cheeseburger incident. That doesn't really change if you say "those are the cats who ate the cheeseburgers".
Past \Past\, prep.
1. Beyond, in position, or degree; further than; beyond the
reach or influence of. "Who being past feeling." --Eph.
iv. 19. "Galled past endurance." --Macaulay.
[1913 Webster]
Until we be past thy borders. --Num. xxi.
22.
[1913 Webster]
Love, when once past government, is consequently
past shame. --L'Estrange.
[1913 Webster]If you don't want me to mark your email as spam: * Do your research about me and my company and what we need. If we're a scala shop, yeah, I'd be interested, but if we're a python shop, you're likely to annoy me with your pitch for a scala product. * The fact that you're the co-founder certainly helps. * Use your company's email. Using a random gmail account makes me think that you're using it as a throwaway account. Don't even think of using hotmail, yahoo, etc. * Don't spray. If I find out that you've sent emails to 5 of my co-workers at the same time, you're much more likely to go to spam.
I've been on the other side, and these are all rules that I've used when I tried to get people interested in my products.
When I get a proper email directly to my inbox, it immediately gets my attention and it's likely to get a reply.
BUT, the messages I send try to be laser focused and I have a good success rate of conversions (~20%)
If I get a direct email that is definitely not based on a template means that that person a) found my mail and b) spent some time on the process, so I usually reply as courtesy.
I applaud your approach, although I think it's difficult to get noticed in a noisy channel and LinkedIn messages are overused.