793 matched the filter. 10 made the list.
I research outbound accounts: which ones, why now, who to contact, and what to say. Your team sends.
One build, start to finish
Most of the work is throwing things away
Bars are drawn to scale. That is why the last one is almost invisible.
41%
of what reached the evidence check died once I opened the raw record
Seven of the seventeen accounts that reached the evidence stage were cut. One looked perfect on the filter. Right size, right stack, hiring salespeople. Then I pulled the actual job postings. Fourteen open roles, exactly one revenue seat in the US, and the only AE opening was in Australia.
You get the cut list too, with the reason for each one. That part is usually more useful than the picks.
What arrives with every account
Evidence, not adjectives
A dated signal
From public sources: job postings, company pages, funding records, tech stack. With the date and the link.
The person who owns the problem
Confirmed still in role. Not a title that matched a search string.
A work email, cross-checked
Against more than one independent source. Where it can't be verified, it says so.
A first message
Grounded in that evidence and nothing else. If the evidence doesn't support a claim, the message doesn't make it.
What I don't do
The list is shorter than the pitch
- No scraped guesses and no lead databases sold by the thousand.
- No invented urgency. No "I noticed your impressive growth."
- I never touch your LinkedIn or your domains. Your team sends.
- No padding a list to reach a round number. If seven hold up, you get seven and the reason there aren't ten.
Who this fits
Fractional sales leaders, consultants, small outbound teams
People sending ten to twenty accounts a month who can't afford half of them to be wrong. If you have an SDR team burning through a hundred and fifty a month, the arithmetic doesn't work for either of us and I'd rather say so now.
Questions
The things people ask before they send an ICP
What do you need from me to start?
An ICP in a sentence. Who you sell to and what you sell. If it turns out to be too broad to research I will say so and ask one question back.
How is this different from a lead database?
A database hands you what the filter returned. I open the raw record on every one and throw away the ones that do not survive it. Last build that was 41% of what reached the evidence check, seven of seventeen, and the cut list ships with the batch so you can check me.
What if my pool is too small?
Then I tell you before you commit to anything. Some ICPs support forty accounts a month for a year. Some support four months and then start repeating. It is a countable number and I would rather show it to you now than have you find it in month five.
What if a list is wrong?
Every account says where it is weak on the card, before you send anything. If a fact is wrong, tell me which one and I will show you the source it came from.
Do you send the emails?
No. I never touch your LinkedIn, your domains or your sending. Your team sends. What arrives is the research and a first message you can edit or ignore.
How long does it take?
Ten accounts in a few days. Most of that time goes into the ones that fail verification and have to be replaced, which is most of the work.
I'd rather show you than pitch you
Tell me your ICP. I'll research ten accounts against it and send them over, contacts included, with the evidence behind each one. And the ones I cut, with the reason.
No charge, nothing owed. Judge it on the output.
Get ten researched accountsOr message me on LinkedIn if that is easier.