50 skills applying Alex Hormozi's published frameworks to LinkedIn. 25 for content, 25 for outreach.
The Value Equation, the Core Four, the lead magnet structure, the guarantee types and the Rule of 100 were written for offers and paid acquisition. Most of them transfer to LinkedIn cleanly. A few do not, and this says which.
Inside: every skill written out with its fail-closed rule, the frameworks each one is built on, and the three places the translation breaks.
Frameworks credited to Alex Hormozi, from $100M Offers and $100M Leads. Applied here, not reproduced.
AI Driven, Personalized Outreach on LinkedIn: Prosp 💜
Section 1Setup: The Frameworks, and Where They Break
The frameworks these 50 skills are built on, and the three places they do not transfer.
Worth reading first, because applying a framework outside the conditions it was built for is how you get a well-executed wrong thing.
The frameworks used
All from Alex Hormozi's published work, principally $100M Offers and $100M Leads.
The Value Equation. Perceived value rises with the dream outcome and the perceived likelihood of achieving it, and falls with time delay and effort required. Four levers, and most people only pull the first.
The Core Four. Four ways to get leads: warm outreach, posting free content, cold outreach, and paid ads. Everything else is a variation.
The lead magnet principle. Give away the solution to a narrow problem, and sell the implementation. A magnet that solves nothing builds a list you cannot convert.
The guarantee types. Unconditional, conditional, anti-guarantee, and implied. Each removes a different kind of risk.
The Rule of 100. A hundred primary actions a day, every day, across whichever of the Core Four you have chosen.
Trim and stack. List every problem, list every solution, then cut what is low value and high cost to deliver, and stack what is high value and low cost.
Hook, retain, reward. The content structure. Get attention, hold it, and make the holding worth it.
More, better, new. The three growth directions, in that order. Do more of what works before improving it, and improve it before adding a channel.
Where the translation breaks
Three places, and applying the framework unchanged in these is a mistake.
1. The Rule of 100 does not survive LinkedIn's ceiling.
A hundred primary actions a day works where the channel has no cap. LinkedIn has one: roughly 20 connection requests a day and 100 messages a week, account-wide rather than per campaign. An account attempting 100 outreach actions a day gets restricted.
The translation: 100 actions, but only one of the four buckets is uncapped. Comments are effectively free up to 60 a day. Sends are not. So the hundred becomes roughly 20 sends, 40 comments, 20 profile visits and 20 content actions, rather than 100 of anything.
2. Scarcity and urgency do not work the same way.
On a sales page, scarcity is a mechanic the reader expects. In a cold DM from a stranger, it reads as pressure and it is the fastest way to get ignored or reported.
The translation: scarcity belongs in the offer, not in the outreach. Use it when someone has already raised their hand, never in message one.
3. The Grand Slam Offer is not a first message.
A fully stacked offer with guarantees and bonuses is the right thing on a page someone chose to visit. Sent cold, it is a wall of text from a stranger.
The translation: the offer gets built in the conversation, not in the opener. Message one has one ask answerable in ten words.
The context files
Every one of the 50 skills reads these. Build them first.
context/
├── offer.md the value equation, filled in
├── icp.md who, and who this is explicitly not for
├── voice.md three of your real posts, pasted in full
└── proof.md one row per result, permission column
offer.md, structured on the value equation:
# Offer
## Dream outcome
What they actually want. In their words, not yours.
## Perceived likelihood of achievement
Why they would believe it works. The proof, the mechanism, the
guarantee.
## Time delay
How long until the first useful result. Not the full result.
The first one.
## Effort and sacrifice
What they have to do, give up, or learn.
## The four levers, ranked
Which of the four is weakest for us right now?
That is the one to work on.
## Guarantee
Type: unconditional / conditional / anti / implied
The exact wording:
What it costs us if it is claimed:
## Who this is not for
The "four levers, ranked" field is the one that does the work. Most people try to improve an offer by making the dream outcome sound bigger, which is the lever with the least room in it. Time delay and effort usually have more.
The honest note on attribution
The frameworks in this guide are Alex Hormozi's, from $100M Offers and $100M Leads. They are credited throughout and they are worth reading in full rather than through someone else's summary.
What this guide adds is the translation to LinkedIn, the places the translation breaks, and the skill files that run it.
What it deliberately does not do is reproduce his writing or present his thinking as ours. Where a framework is used, it is named.
You can point this at any framework. The skills are structured so the underlying model is a file you can swap. If you prefer someone else's offer framework, change offer.md and most of the 50 still run.
Section 2The 25 Content Skills
25 content skills. Five groups of five.
Built on hook-retain-reward, the value equation, the lead magnet principle and trim-and-stack.
Offer clarity, 5
Content that does not know what it is selling produces engagement and nothing else.
---
name: value-equation-auditor
description: Score the offer on all four levers and name the
weakest. Run before any content.
---
SCORE each 1 to 10, with the evidence:
Dream outcome: how badly do they want this
Perceived likelihood: why would they believe it works
Time delay: how long to the FIRST useful result
Effort and sacrifice: what do they have to do
THE OUTPUT IS THE WEAKEST LEVER, not the average.
Most people try to improve an offer by inflating the dream
outcome. That lever has the least room in it, because everyone
is already claiming the maximum.
Time delay and effort usually have the most room and almost
nobody works on them.
FAIL CLOSED if "perceived likelihood" scores high with no proof
row behind it. That is a claim, not a score.
---
name: dream-outcome-namer
description: State what they actually want, in their words.
---
PULL from real sources: their posts, comments under competitor
posts, your own call transcripts, support tickets.
OUTPUT twelve verbatim phrases, quoted exactly.
NEVER paraphrase into marketing language. If they said "I can't
tell what any of it is doing", record that, not "attribution
challenges".
FAIL CLOSED on a dream outcome you inferred rather than heard.
---
name: time-delay-shortener
description: Find the first useful result, and make it sooner.
---
IDENTIFY the earliest point at which they get something they
can use, not the point at which the full outcome arrives.
THEN ask what would have to change to halve it.
OUTPUT the current time to first value, the possible time, and
what it costs you to get there.
THIS IS THE LEVER NOBODY PULLS. A thirty day engagement where
something useful lands on day two converts differently from one
where nothing lands until day thirty.
---
name: effort-reducer
description: Find what they have to do, and remove some of it.
---
LIST every action required of them, from first contact to
result.
PER ACTION: can we do it for them, do it with them, or remove
it entirely?
OUTPUT the three with the highest effort relative to their
value.
FAIL CLOSED on removing an action that is load-bearing. Some
effort is what makes it work.
---
name: not-for-definer
description: Who this is explicitly not for. Six of them.
---
PER EXCLUSION: who, and one line on why it fails for them.
RULES
An offer for everyone converts nobody. If this list is empty,
the positioning is too broad to build content on.
THIS GOES IN THE CONTENT, not just in the file. A post that
names who it is not for is trusted more than one that does not.
Hook, retain, reward, 5
---
name: hook-writer
description: Lines one and two. The only part most people read.
---
WRITE FIVE per post.
THE TEST: delete the body. If the hook still feels complete, it
is a summary, not a hook.
SIX SHAPES: the contradiction, the specific number, the
admission, the narrow checkable claim, the open question, the
mid-scene open.
PICK THE ONE THAT IS TRUE, not the loudest. You defend it in
the comments.
FAIL CLOSED on a hook you could not defend if challenged.
---
name: retention-checker
description: Does the post hold attention past line three?
---
CHECK, line by line:
Does each line earn the next one?
Is there a point where the reader learns nothing new?
Does any paragraph exceed three lines?
OUTPUT the exact line where attention most likely drops.
HOOK, RETAIN, REWARD. Most posts do the first and skip the
second, which is why the reward never lands.
---
name: reward-checker
description: Did the reader get something for finishing?
---
ASK: what can they do now that they could not before reading
this?
If the answer is "feel motivated", the post rewarded nobody.
OUTPUT the specific takeaway, in one sentence. If you cannot
write it, the post is not finished.
FAIL CLOSED on a post whose only reward is agreement.
---
name: hook-last-rewriter
description: Write the body first, then the hook.
---
A hook written first constrains the body to fit it, which is why
so many posts have a strong line one and nothing underneath.
ORDER: body, then hook, then humanise.
---
name: humanizer
description: The final pass on everything.
---
Numbers not all round. No perfect parallelism in lists. One
genuine break in the flow. Case studies carry one vague detail
beside one specific one. Not every post resolves. No em dashes.
TEST: could a competent person have written this in five
minutes? If it reads like a committee, that is what it reads as.
Lead magnets, 5
The principle: give away the solution, sell the implementation.
---
name: magnet-definer
description: Define a magnet that solves a narrow problem
completely.
---
THE PRINCIPLE: give away the solution to ONE narrow problem.
Sell the implementation.
A magnet that teaches nothing builds a list you cannot convert.
A magnet that solves everything removes the reason to buy.
OUTPUT:
The ONE problem it solves, stated narrowly
What is literally inside, as OBJECTS
The ONE item useful on its own
What it deliberately does not cover
THE RELATEDNESS TEST, and it is not optional:
They use this and it works. What do they need next?
If the answer is not what you sell, this is a content piece
with a CTA on it.
FAIL CLOSED if you cannot list objects. It is not finished.
FAIL CLOSED on the relatedness test.
---
name: magnet-type-picker
description: Which of the four magnet types fits this problem.
---
1 REVEAL A PROBLEM they did not know they had. An audit, a
checker, a teardown.
2 SAMPLE OR TRIAL. A piece of the full thing.
3 ONE STEP of a multi-step process, done completely.
4 THE FULL SOLUTION to a narrow problem.
TYPE 1 CONVERTS BEST when they do not know they have the
problem. Type 4 converts best when they know and are stuck.
OUTPUT the type, with why that one for this audience.
---
name: magnet-post-writer
description: Three variants, three keywords.
---
A ANNOYANCE what is irritating about the current answer
B PAIN what it costs to keep doing it that way
C RESULT the outcome, then the mechanism
Variant C requires real approved proof. If there is none, write
a second angle on A or B rather than inventing one.
THREE KEYWORDS, same family, never numbered.
CTA BY CONNECTION STATE:
Mostly connected: Comment "[WORD]" and I'll DM it over.
Mostly not: Comment "[WORD]" and connect so I can send
it. PS. Already connected, just comment.
FAIL CLOSED if the delivery is not planned first.
---
name: give-until-asked
description: Decide whether this post is a give or an ask.
---
COUNT the last ten posts. How many asked for something?
RULES
The ratio that works is give heavily, ask rarely. A feed where
every post has a CTA trains the audience to scroll.
ONE magnet post a week, not every post.
OUTPUT the current ratio and whether this post should be a give.
---
name: magnet-diagnostic
description: 30 days after. Stop at the first failure.
---
1 Low comments the hook, or the magnet was not worth
asking for
2 Low delivery the branch or the cap. Mechanical.
3 Delivered, no
replies the delivery message had no question
4 Replies, no
conversations THE MAGNET IS UNRELATED TO WHAT YOU
SELL. The expensive one.
5 All fine, nothing
closes price or fit
Proof and belief, 5
The second lever of the value equation. Perceived likelihood of achievement.
---
name: proof-librarian
description: One row per result, with a permission column.
---
client | permission (YES / ANONYMISED / NO) | sector | size |
the problem | what we did | the number | timeframe | source
THE RESULT COLUMN needs a number you can defend. "Improved
their pipeline" is a sentence, not a result. Leave the row out.
TWELVE SOLID ROWS beat forty thin ones. Every writing skill
picks the closest match, and a thin match produces weak output
that passes review because nothing is technically wrong.
FAIL CLOSED on a claim with no row.
---
name: mechanism-explainer
description: Why it works, not just that it works.
---
A result with no mechanism is a claim. A mechanism makes the
result believable before they have tried it.
OUTPUT: the specific thing you do that produces the outcome,
in one paragraph, specific enough that a competitor could not
say the same sentence.
FAIL CLOSED on a mechanism that is just the category name.
"We do outreach properly" is not a mechanism.
---
name: guarantee-writer
description: Pick the type and write the wording.
---
FOUR TYPES:
UNCONDITIONAL money back, no questions. Strongest, riskiest.
CONDITIONAL they get the result or you keep working. Needs
a defined result.
ANTI no refunds, stated confidently, with the
reason. Works when the audience is cynical
about guarantees.
IMPLIED performance-based. You win when they win.
OUTPUT the type, the exact wording, and WHAT IT COSTS YOU if it
is claimed at the current rate.
FAIL CLOSED on a guarantee you have not costed. An uncosted
guarantee is a liability, not a lever.
---
name: objection-preempter
description: Answer the objection in the content, before the DM.
---
TAKE the five objections you hear weekly. Write one post each
that answers one of them completely.
An objection answered in public is answered once for everyone.
The same objection answered in DMs is answered a hundred times.
FAIL CLOSED on an objection you cannot answer honestly. Change
the offer instead of the copy.
---
name: case-study-post
description: One result, told so it is believable.
---
STRUCTURE: the situation, the specific problem, what you did,
the number, the timeframe.
ONE VAGUE DETAIL beside one hyper-specific one. Real memory is
uneven, and a story where every detail is crisp reads as
constructed.
NAME THE THING THAT DID NOT WORK. A case study with no friction
in it is discounted entirely.
FAIL CLOSED without a proof row and its permission value.
Volume and consistency, 5
---
name: rule-of-100-linkedin
description: The Rule of 100, translated to a capped channel.
---
THE ORIGINAL: 100 primary actions a day, every day.
THE PROBLEM: LinkedIn caps outreach at roughly 20 connection
requests a day, account-wide. A hundred sends gets an account
restricted.
THE TRANSLATION, 100 actions across four buckets:
20 connection requests or messages. The capped bucket.
40 comments on other people's posts. Effectively free.
20 profile visits. Free, and they drive reciprocal visits.
20 content actions. Drafting, replying to your own
comments, engaging with people who engaged with you.
OUTPUT today's split, and what is left in each bucket.
FAIL CLOSED on any proposed split exceeding the daily ceiling
in the capped bucket. The other three absorb the difference.
---
name: more-better-new
description: Which of the three growth directions to work on.
---
IN ORDER:
MORE do more of what is already working
BETTER improve what is working
NEW add a channel
MOST PEOPLE SKIP TO NEW because it is more interesting. That is
the most expensive of the three and the least likely to work.
OUTPUT: is there headroom in MORE? If yes, that is the answer
and NEW is not on the table.
FAIL CLOSED on a NEW recommendation while MORE has headroom.
---
name: cadence-setter
description: Three a week, one a day maximum.
---
Same-day multiples suppress each other, so the second post
costs you the first.
A MISSED DAY BEATS A THIN POST. Publishing to hit a number
trains the audience to skim.
FAIL CLOSED on two posts in one day.
---
name: content-pillars
description: Three repeatable topics, never themes.
---
"Cold email" is a topic. "Growth" is a theme and produces
nothing.
THE TEST: if you cannot talk about a pillar for twenty minutes
without notes, it is not yours.
FAIL CLOSED on a fourth pillar. A fourth means one is not
working and nobody has admitted it.
---
name: content-diagnostic
description: Weekly. Stop at the first failure.
---
1 Low reach the engagement work is not being done
2 Reach fine,
low comments the post resolved the tension
3 Comments fine,
no delivery the branch or the cap
4 Delivered, no
conversations the delivery message had no question
5 All fine,
followers flat the profile
ONE change per week.
more-better-new is the skill most worth running before any of the others. Adding a channel while the existing one has headroom is the most common and most expensive mistake available.
Section 3The 25 Outreach Skills
25 outreach skills. Five groups of five.
Built on the Core Four, trim-and-stack, the value equation applied to a message, and the lead-getter sequencing.
The Core Four on LinkedIn, 5
---
name: core-four-mapper
description: Which of the four lead-getters you are actually
running, and which you are neglecting.
---
THE FOUR: warm outreach, free content, cold outreach, paid ads.
ON LINKEDIN they map to:
WARM your existing connections, people who engaged with
your posts, people who viewed your profile
CONTENT posts, comments, carousels
COLD connection requests to strangers
PAID ads, and InMail to a degree
OUTPUT: how many leads came from each in the last 90 days.
ALMOST EVERYONE OVER-INDEXES ON COLD and under-works warm,
because cold is the one you can scale by doing more of it and
warm requires remembering who already engaged.
FAIL CLOSED if you cannot attribute leads to a bucket. Fix the
tagging before anything else.
---
name: warm-list-builder
description: The cheapest lead source, and the most neglected.
---
BUILD the list from:
People who commented on your posts more than once
People who reacted to three or more posts
People who viewed your profile after engaging
Existing connections matching the ICP who you have never
spoken to
THE FIRST GROUP IS THE WARMEST LIST YOU HAVE. Someone who
commented twice has chosen you, and almost nobody acknowledges
it.
THIS COSTS NOTHING from the connection request budget, because
they are already connected. It is the only outreach that does
not consume the ceiling.
OUTPUT the list, ranked by engagement frequency.
---
name: warm-opener
description: The message to someone who already engaged.
---
STRUCTURE
Line 1 the specific thing they said or engaged with, named
Line 2 one observation that adds to it
Line 3 one question
RULES
NEVER pretend it is a cold message. "I came across your
profile" to someone who commented on your post last week reads
as a mail merge.
Reference the exchange, not the profile.
No pitch in message one.
FAIL CLOSED if you cannot name what they engaged with.
---
name: cold-outreach-budgeter
description: How much cold you can actually run.
---
THE CEILING: roughly 20 connection requests a day and 100
messages a week, ACCOUNT-WIDE rather than per campaign.
THREE CAMPAIGNS AT 20 EACH means the account attempts 60 a day,
which is how accounts get restricted.
OUTPUT the split across every active campaign, totalling at or
below the ceiling.
A NEW ACCOUNT starts at 10 a day and builds to 20 over a
fortnight. A profile with no sending history suddenly running
at full rate is the clearest possible pattern.
FAIL CLOSED on any proposed total above the ceiling.
---
name: channel-sequencer
description: Which of the four to work on, in order.
---
MORE, BETTER, NEW.
WARM FIRST, always. It costs nothing from the ceiling and the
leads are already qualified by their own behaviour.
CONTENT SECOND. It is uncapped and it makes the other three
work better.
COLD THIRD, inside the ceiling.
PAID LAST, and only when the first three are saturated.
FAIL CLOSED on adding paid while warm has unworked leads in it.
warm-list-builder is the highest-return skill in this set. Messaging an existing connection does not consume the connection request budget at all, which makes it the only outreach that scales without touching the ceiling.
The message as an offer, 5
The value equation applied to a 300-character message.
---
name: message-value-check
description: Score the message on the four levers.
---
A MESSAGE IS A MINIATURE OFFER. It asks for something and
offers something in return, even if that something is only
attention.
SCORE:
Dream outcome what do they get by replying
Likelihood why would they believe it
Time delay how long before it is worth their while
Effort how hard is it to reply
EFFORT IS THE LEVER THAT MATTERS MOST IN A DM and the one
nobody works on. A question answerable in ten words has low
effort. One requiring thought has high effort, and high effort
on a cold message gets no reply regardless of how good the
offer is.
OUTPUT the weakest lever and the fix.
---
name: effort-minimiser
description: Make the reply as easy as possible.
---
COUNT:
Characters in the message. Over 300 reads as a template.
Questions. One. Two gets the easier one answered.
Decisions required. A question with three options is three
decisions.
Words needed to answer. Over ten is too many for a stranger.
OUTPUT the message rewritten for minimum effort, with the
character and word counts.
FAIL CLOSED on a message requiring more than ten words to
answer.
---
name: opener-writer
description: The first message from a dated signal.
---
Line 1 the signal, dated and specific
Line 2 the inference drawn from it
Line 3 the question
Under 300 characters. One ask. Never mention the product in
message one. No compliments. No em dashes.
BANNED: "I came across your profile", "I help [vertical] with
[service]", "are you open to a quick chat", "quick question
for you".
FAIL CLOSED on a category reference dressed as a signal.
"Works at a SaaS company" is fit, not intent.
---
name: connection-note-writer
description: Under 200 characters. No ask.
---
THE NOTE HAS ONE JOB: get the accept.
AN ASK HALVES ACCEPTANCE and the accept costs you nothing, so
the ask is pure downside at this stage.
IF THERE IS NO SIGNAL, send no note. A blank request
outperforms a generic one, because a generic note tells them
you have a list.
FAIL CLOSED on a note containing a question.
---
name: scarcity-placer
description: Decide whether scarcity belongs here at all.
---
SCARCITY AND URGENCY WORK where the reader chose to be there.
On a page, in an email they opted into, in a conversation they
started.
THEY DO NOT WORK IN A COLD DM. From a stranger, urgency reads
as pressure, and it is the fastest way to be ignored or
reported.
RULE: no scarcity before they have raised their hand.
OUTPUT: does this message come after a raised hand? If no, cut
the scarcity entirely.
FAIL CLOSED on manufactured scarcity. A deadline that is not
real is the one thing that cannot be walked back.
Lists and targeting, 5
---
name: trim-and-stack-list
description: Trim-and-stack applied to a prospect list.
---
THE FRAMEWORK: list everything, then cut what is low value and
high cost, and keep what is high value and low cost.
APPLIED TO A LIST:
VALUE how likely are they to buy, and for how much
COST how much send budget and research do they consume
HIGH VALUE, LOW COST contact this week
HIGH VALUE, HIGH COST contact, but research first
LOW VALUE, LOW COST template sequence, whatever capacity
is left
LOW VALUE, HIGH COST cut entirely
MOST LISTS ARE FULL OF THE LAST CATEGORY and nobody cuts them
because a bigger list feels like more pipeline.
OUTPUT the four groups with counts.
---
name: signal-finder
description: A dated, verifiable reason to contact them now.
---
TIER 1 budget is moving: hiring for the role, raised in 90
days, new leader in 60, named the problem in 30
TIER 2 problem visible: a gap on their site, a competitor
comment, expanding
TIER 3 fit only
RECORD THE DATE AND THE URL. It goes in the message and they
will check.
FAIL CLOSED on an undated signal. Write NONE.
---
name: fit-filter
description: Keep, drop, unsure. Cheapest setting.
---
12-word reason per row. Keep dropped.csv.
Below a 40% drop rate usually means the search was too narrow
rather than the list being unusually good.
FAIL CLOSED on guessing. UNSURE is a valid output.
---
name: list-grader
description: Eight dimensions, A to F. Below B nothing sends.
---
ICP fit, title accuracy, affordability, completeness,
deduplication, recency, reachability, signal strength.
SIGNAL STRENGTH predicts reply rate better than any other
dimension. A B-grade list where most rows carry a tier 1
signal beats an A-grade list with none.
FAIL CLOSED below B.
---
name: engager-scorer
description: The order you work the list in.
---
DEPTH x FIT, each 1 to 3. Maximum 9.
At 20 a day a 400-row list is five weeks of the entire budget.
THE ORDER IS THE CAMPAIGN, not the size.
FAIL CLOSED on an unscored list entering a sequence.
Sequences, 5
---
name: sequence-builder
description: Four touches, node by node.
---
THE SHAPE:
1 Condition: is the lead already connected
2 YES: message
3 NO: connection request, then message on acceptance
4 Wait 3 days, follow-up on a different angle
5 Wait 5 days, close-out
NO WAIT CARD after a connection request. Acceptance
auto-detects over two weeks, checking every 24 hours.
FOUR TOUCHES MAXIMUM. After that the answer is no.
FAIL CLOSED above the daily ceiling. State the split instead.
---
name: angle-varier
description: Every touch a different angle.
---
FOUR TOUCHES, four angles:
1 the dated signal
2 the problem it implies
3 one piece of proof, if you have it
4 permission to say no
NEVER "just following up". That is not an angle, it is a
reminder that you want something.
FAIL CLOSED on two touches making the same point.
---
name: close-out-writer
description: Touch four. Permission to say no.
---
"Assuming this isn't a priority right now, which is fine. Want
me to check back in Q[X]?"
THIS OUTPERFORMS THE TWO TOUCHES BEFORE IT COMBINED, because
permission to say no removes the pressure that was stopping
them replying.
FAIL CLOSED on a fifth touch.
---
name: voice-note-scripter
description: Under 20 seconds, roughly 50 words.
---
Written for speech. Contractions, sentences that run out of
breath, one filler word. No lists, because nobody says "three
things" out loud.
NEVER SENT ALONE. Always paired with a written message.
FAIL CLOSED on a script over 60 words.
---
name: merge-prompt-writer
description: Per-lead personalisation at send time.
---
ONLY THE OPENING LINE VARIES. Keep the ask identical across
leads so results are comparable and failure is diagnosable.
State the fallback for an empty variable. Never "Hi ,".
FAIL CLOSED on a prompt not previewed against real contacts.
Replies and closing, 5
---
name: reply-classifier
description: Seven categories, confidence 1 to 10.
---
INTERESTED, TIMING, OBJECTION, WRONG_PERSON, NOT_INTERESTED,
AUTO_REPLY, ESCALATE.
Below 8 confidence, escalate. Sarcasm, brevity and politeness
all read the same in text.
NEVER auto-send to NOT_INTERESTED.
WRONG_PERSON is the most valuable and most commonly binned.
Ask who owns it, and feed the answer into the ICP.
---
name: objection-handler
description: Agree, add one fact, ask.
---
NAME THE OBJECTION PRECISELY first. "Not interested" is an
absence of one, not an objection. Ask what is behind it.
THREE MOVES: agree with the part that is true, add the one
thing they do not know, ask a question that moves it forward.
ON PRICE: never answer with features. Work the cost of the
problem with them, using their numbers. If the quantified cost
is smaller than the price, say so.
IF THEY SAY NO TWICE, stop.
---
name: guarantee-deployer
description: When to introduce the guarantee.
---
NOT IN THE OPENER. A guarantee in message one answers an
objection they have not raised, which tells them you expect it.
USE IT when they have named the risk. Price, incumbent,
"we tried this before".
OUTPUT the guarantee type that fits the objection raised, and
the wording.
FAIL CLOSED on a guarantee not in offer.md.
---
name: next-step-closer
description: Decide IF before HOW.
---
ASK when they named a problem, asked about price or timeline,
or two substantive messages went each way.
DO NOT ASK on a one-line reply. Ask one more question instead.
THE ASK: name the length and the agenda. "15 minutes, three
questions, no deck." Offer the link AND two concrete times.
Never "let me know what works".
TAG AFTER BOOKING so the sequence stops.
---
name: outreach-diagnostic
description: Weekly. Stop at the first failure.
---
1 Acceptance below 15% the note, or the list
2 Replies below 10% the first message
3 Meetings low the ask is mistimed
4 Nothing closing price or fit, not outreach
5 Volume low the cap split
ONE change per week.
ALSO MONTHLY: which signal tier produced the booked meetings.
One line, and it changes next month's targeting more than
anything else.
Three things to remember
- Warm before cold, always. Messaging an existing connection does not consume the connection request ceiling, which makes it the only outreach that scales without risk.
- Effort is the lever that matters in a DM. A question answerable in ten words gets replies that a better offer in a longer message does not.
- The Rule of 100 holds, but only one of the four buckets is capped. Twenty sends, forty comments, twenty profile visits, twenty content actions.
The frameworks decide. Prosp runs the sending inside the ceiling 💜
