Why fake hooks in cold emails fail

We’ve all seen them: Cold emails that promise the moon and stars: “What if you could 3X your meetings with VPs of Sales?” “Unlock unlimited pipeline with one simple trick.” Here’s the thing: People are skeptical of salespeople who overpromise. Why? Because they’ve heard it all before. They’ve been burned by big claims that delivered… nothing. If tripling pipeline were that easy, everyone would be doing it. The fine print never actually guarantees results. Prospects are secretly thinking: “If it doesn’t sound like work, it’s not going to work.” Trust is out. Skepticism is in. The fix? Start small. De-risk the offer. Like this: Subject: Poke the Bear “Josh, looks like you run cold call workshops for teams with at least 40 reps. Pete Jones, VP of Sales at ACME, might be in the market for a Poke the Bear workshop—he’s hired 7 SDRs in the last 3 months. I used 6sense to surface this. There are 8 more tech sales teams that fit your ICP. Want to go over them?” Trust isn’t built on bold claims. It’s built on proof.

Most outbound emails flop— Here’s why: Ever read a cold email and thought, why are you even reaching out to me? Yeah, same. Most outbound emails don’t fail because the offer is bad. They fail because they don’t make sense to the person reading them. Here’s where they go wrong: 🚩 Fake Personalization – “I noticed your recent comment…” No, you didn’t. You scraped it and threw it into your outreach tool. 🚩 Forced Relevance – “It got me thinking about how companies like yours might be evaluating solutions for international expansion.” No real connection. Just a weak transition into a pitch. 🚩 The Premature Pitch – “At [Company], we help businesses like yours do XYZ.” Cool, but I didn’t ask. 🚩 Overly Specific Questions – “Are you currently exploring options for expanding internationally?” The odds of me saying “yes” right now are slim. But if you asked whether hiring internationally is a challenge, I might actually engage. How to fix it (And get more replies): ✅ Lead with relevance, not randomness If you’re going to reference something I said, make sure it actually ties into your email. ✅ Start a conversation, not a sales pitch Instead of jumping straight to “We help companies do XYZ,” try “A lot of teams struggle with X—curious if that’s been an issue for you?” ✅ Make it easy to reply A simple yes/no question like “Is this something you deal with?” is way easier to answer than “Are you currently looking for a solution?” —— Good outbound isn’t about hacking your way into someone’s inbox. It’s about making it worth replying to.

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

Let me expose the biggest lie in cold email right now: The "one size fits all" approach to Lead Magnets. After testing hundreds of lead magnets with our clients, here's the truth: Most lead magnets fail because they create friction. Example of what NOT to do: "Hey, can I audit your Klaviyo account?" Nobody wants to share their login details with a stranger. Or: "Let me review your sales call recordings" Who has time to dig through their calls for you? Here's what actually works: We tested this with our SaaS company ListKit: "Hey, noticed you're involved in [company]'s sales. We have a database of 500 million verified B2B leads. Mind if I share some samples specific to your industry?" Instant value. Zero work required. Personalized to them. Clear next step. Make it impossibly easy to say YES. This approach took us from $0 to $100k MRR in 90 days. But here's the important part: You need to actually deliver value when they say yes. Don't just send generic samples. Don't recycle the same list. Don't make them wait days. The moment they respond, our team creates a custom sample list for their specific industry. This builds trust and moves them naturally toward a sales conversation.

Something fascinating is happening in cold outreach... We've hit peak personalization - and it's actually making our emails less effective. Here's the counterintuitive reality: As AI makes personalization easier, it's simultaneously destroying its core value proposition. Think about it: A year ago, when you got a highly personalized email mentioning your recent conference talk or latest LinkedIn post, you'd think "Wow, this person actually did their homework." That perceived effort created reciprocity. They invested time in understanding you, so you felt compelled to at least consider their message. But now? That same detailed personalization triggers a different response: "Nice try, AI." The very tools that make scalable personalization possible are erasing the signal it once sent. When everything can be personalized with a click, personalization no longer signals authentic human interest. It's a perfect example of Goodhart's Law: When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure. Companies are racing to build ever-more sophisticated personalization engines, not realizing they're participating in their own obsolescence. Each improvement in AI-powered personalization further erodes the trust signal that made personalization valuable in the first place. So what's the alternative? The most effective cold emails I'm seeing now are surprisingly... authentic. They're brief, direct, and make no attempt to fake familiarity. They stand out precisely because they don't try to pretend they know you. The real irony? In a world of AI-powered "personal" touches, being straightforwardly impersonal might be the most human approach of all. What patterns are you seeing in your inbox? How do you respond to highly personalized cold outreach now vs a year ago?