Your Marketing Funnel Is Dead

Digital marketers spend millions crafting perfect sales funnels, yet conversion rates keep dropping. Ryan Deiss, who turned $8 million in ad spend into $50 million in revenue, sees a simple explanation: the marketing funnel is dead. "People don't need to follow your funnel anymore," he explains. "They've got options."

In this episode, Ryan shares insights from his experience leading 17 companies to over $200 million in annual revenue. He explains how customer journeys have evolved beyond traditional funnels. "Before, it was a very clean and simple funnel because you fill out a form and they'd send you some stuff in the mail, or you'd pick up the phone and call," Deiss explains. "Now, they have hundreds of options to engage in ways that you have no control over."

‍

This shift reflects deeper changes in the marketing landscape. The rise of privacy-focused digital environments has stripped away many targeting capabilities. "Targeting has largely been taken away from advertisers," Deiss notes. Instead of relying on complex targeting parameters, successful marketers now focus on clear, compelling messaging that resonates with their ideal customers.

‍

Deiss's approach treats marketing like a bank account. Each interaction either makes a "deposit" or "withdrawal" of relational equity with potential customers. Content marketing, value-driven communications, and authentic storytelling build this equity, while aggressive sales tactics or misaligned messaging deplete it.

‍

The most effective marketers today embrace this new reality. They test simple, direct problem statements in their ads and maintain consistent value across multiple channels. Success comes not from controlling the customer journey, but from showing up consistently with messages that matter to their audience.

‍

What great salespeople do is they're crystal clear on who it is that they serve... they're able to articulate the problem that person is facing better than they can. -- Ryan Deiss

‍

Listen to The Episode!

• Apple Podcast
• Spotify
• YouTube
• Audible

‍

Top 3 Reasons to Listen

‍

Strategic Evolution - Hear directly from Ryan Deiss about why traditional marketing funnels fail in today's multi-channel environment and what approaches work instead.

Proven Methods - Learn the exact testing process Ryan's companies use to identify winning marketing messages and build stronger customer relationships.

Future-Proof Strategy - Understand how privacy changes and evolving consumer behavior are reshaping digital marketing, and how to position your business for success.

‍

Follow Ryan Deiss on Social

Ryan's Website: digitalmarketer.com

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ryandeiss/

The Scalable Company: Scalable Home - Scalable.co

LinkedIn

‍

More About Today's Guest, Ryan Deiss

Building my $200M holding company to $1B by helping other business owners systemize, scale, and exit (while posting articles about the process)

‍

Ryan Deiss is a digital marketing expert, serial entrepreneur, and thought leader in the industry. As the founder and CEO of DigitalMarketer.com, he leads a community of over 15,000 paid members and 500,000 subscribers, providing cutting-edge digital marketing training and certifications. Ryan is also the founder and host of the Traffic & Conversion Summit, North America's largest digital marketing event. With a portfolio of 14 companies generating over $200 million in annual revenue, he is recognized for developing the "Customer Value Optimization" methodology and has spoken at conferences in over 60 countries. Ryan's expertise in spotting trends and his innovative strategies have established him as one of the world's leading digital marketers.

‍

Key Takeaways

• Message-First Marketing - Focus on crafting clear problem statements that resonate with your audience rather than relying on complex targeting. Test different problem statements in simple ads to identify what connects most strongly.

• Relationship Banking - Track the balance of value given versus asked for in customer interactions. Ensure sufficient "deposits" of valuable content and authentic engagement before making "withdrawals" through sales requests.

• Embrace Multiple Touchpoints - Accept that customers will engage through various channels in unpredictable sequences. Create consistent value across all potential interaction points rather than forcing a linear journey.

‍

A Transcription of The Talk

‍

Mark Drager:  Yes, you heard that right. He just said the Marketing Funnel is dead.And having spent $ 8 million in ads, generating 400k leads and $ 50 million in sales - he would know.

‍

So Ryan, you, of course, are known for your background and extensive experience in digital marketing, in advertising, and getting more people to see brands, to see companies, to come to landing pages and sales pages, and ultimately purchase. I mentioned a little bit of this in the opening. I was looking at one of your recent case studies, and you were mentioning that in the last three years, you spent over $8 million on ads, generated close to 400,000 leads, converted over 70,000 buyers, and generated over $50 million in revenue. So we're not really talking about some small numbers here. These are massive, massive numbers. And if you're listening to this and you're thinking, "Oh my gosh, our marketing budget is $25,000 a month. How does one hit these types of levels and not start to have panic attacks?" Honestly?

‍

Ryan Deiss: Well, in fairness, that was over three companies. We've got 17 companies as a whole in our portfolio group. So collectively, over the last 12 months, we did a little over $200 million in revenue. Like I said, that's broken up over multiple businesses. It's big, but it is a collection of smaller businesses. So I completely understand and relate to that.

‍

And look, we didn't start off going out there and spending, you know, a couple of million bucks a year on paid advertising. You start small, and when it works, you scale up and you grow. I think the challenge that a lot of small businesses run into—and the reason they struggle with online advertising, paid media, things like that—is they never get an offer that works because they don't know how to start from that point.

‍

They'll just have a business, and their business has a website, and they'll go, "Ah, we need to get traffic to our website. We should buy advertising." And then when that advertising doesn't work, they say that advertising doesn't work. In marketing, there are only ever two things: there's the offer and the amplifier. Okay, that's it. You have the offer. You need something to amplify that offer. All advertising—Meta ads, Google ads, Facebook, Instagram, you know, buying an email drop to your buddy's newsletter, fantasy football newsletter list, whatever—it’s amplification. The question is, what are you amplifying? Where are you sending and directing that traffic? That's your offer. And if that offer doesn't work, if it's not resonating, if it doesn't get the right people to raise their hand and go, "Ooh, I need this," no form of amplification, no advertising, no marketing at the end of the day is going to work.

‍

And so that's where it begins. It's just one offer that actually starts to work with a small pocket, and then you optimize it, you scale it, and next thing you know, you're turning around and investing a lot. I like to say, "We invest in advertising. We don't spend it because we expect a positive return on that investment."

‍

Mark Drager: And now, if you were to go one step back—though, of course, there's audience and targeting—it's interesting to me that you say there's offer and amplification. Would you rather tweak the offer and tweak the offer and tweak the offer? Would you rather focus more on the right audience or the tighter audience? Or is it kind of a chicken-and-egg situation, one or the other?

‍

Ryan Deiss: Well, it's a great question because if you'd asked me that seven-plus years ago, I would have said, "Yeah, do a lot of work on your audience and your targeting," because in the first era—don't want to sound like the old guy yelling at clouds, but you've been around this for a while, so you are that old guy. I've been doing this for spring and ever. I made my first sale online and started buying online advertising in 1999 when Google was still a science fair project.

‍

So yes, I've been doing this for a long time, and when Meta ads, Facebook ads launched in 2006-2007, it was a massive breakthrough because what they gave advertisers was the ability to hyper-target exactly who they wanted. You could go into the back end of what was then just Facebook—now it's the Meta ad platform—and say, "I want to target people who specifically like this thing, but they don't like that thing, and they live in this city, and they watch this TV show," and you could get so specific and targeted slowly over time. This always happens in new media: hyper-targeted media becomes more mass media now for a variety of reasons, many of which are privacy-driven, many of which are just Meta wanting more money.

‍

Targeting has largely been taken away from advertisers. So the idea to say—and this is why so many people who are on the media buy side are like, "Oh yeah, we’ve got all these tricks and hacks to crush it in your Meta ads"—the only advantage that we now have as marketers and advertisers is on the messaging side, it's on the offer side. There's very little targeting that can be done. In fact, a lot of what we're doing is we don't do much targeting because you can't. So we go fairly broad with our targeting, and we will actually write in the ad, "Attention, this person. Attention, our ideal client." We'll even say it in a video ad, "Attention, Round Rock, Texas pet owners." Right now, you don't have to go to the back end and target that because you kind of can't, but if you literally tell Meta and Google who it is that you want to reach, they're pretty good at this point. They're leveraging more sophisticated AI tools, and we have access to put that ad right in front of exactly the ideal person.

‍

So we target through our messaging. We don't target through the back end, through the actual targeting levers that you used to be able to pull. That being said, the big advantage is on the messaging, on the copy, on the offer side. That is where it is now, and it's where it always used to be. If you go back to pre-Google, go back to the old admen—if you ever watched the TV show Mad Men, it was the copywriters, the David Ogilvys of the world. They made the big bucks, drove the fancy cars, lived in the big houses, and went to the banging parties because all the advantage was on who could craft the best message. The pendulum swung to who could use the tool the best and figure out the algorithm and figure out the targeting; it has now swung back to offering and messaging.

‍

Mark Drager: I mean, listen, I own a brand strategy company, so I'm glad we're moving back to the idea of core messaging, offer differentiation, and all of those things. But I do bump into—I've bumped into business owners, I've bumped into leaders who have this mentality: "We're not good at sales, we're not good at marketing," because there's this idea that a really great salesperson can sell anything to anyone.

‍

And if we extend this analogy to what we're talking about with digital marketing, with advertising, there is still this perception out there that somehow, five or ten years ago, we could do all of this stuff in marketing, in advertising, in targeting, but it's largely gone today, as you're saying, right? So anyone who says that you can is really overselling, right? Because the systems just don't work that way anymore.

‍

Ryan Deiss: They're either lying intentionally or their information is outdated. It's just not how it works anymore. It just isn't, to a certain extent—I wish that it did. But again, as somebody who values messaging and copywriting as a skill and as a craft, and look, that is all because everybody thinks, "Oh, I can just pull up ChatGPT, and it's going to tell me what I need to say." Guess what? Everybody freaking thinks that. And so what you have is essentially commoditization from a targeting perspective, commoditization of a messaging perspective.

‍

So, if you can actually craft good, solid messaging, then you will win by default because nobody else even bothered to freaking show up. And the reality is, winning on the messaging front isn't as hard as everybody thinks What great salespeople do is they're crystal clear on who it is that they serve. They're very clear on their ideal client profile, their ICP. They know it. They know these people. And what they're able to do is they're able to articulate the problem that person is facing better than they can the best salespeople in the world, who are called doctors.

‍

Okay, because we walk into their office, and they go, "Hey, take off your shirt, put on this little freaking scrub," and we do it. They walk in with a rubber glove and say, "Hey, Ben, I'm gonna stick this freaking needle in you." And we're like, "Okay, right? Why do we do that?" Because they built up brand trust, for sure, but also because when we walk in with a pain, they name the pain, they tell us what our problem is, and they diagnose it far better than we could. And that's what creates trust, and that's what great marketing does. That's why what great selling does. That's why great marketing—the best messaging—simply calls out to the problem.

‍

I mean, you wanted to hear what's working today. Here's the simplest thing in the world that's working today: we brainstorm a list of 30 problem statements, 30 problems that our ideal client would state in their own words. And this comes from a collection of just our own research conversations that we've had with clients and prospects, data that we've gathered from our customer support, from our salespeople. Also, you can go to ChatGPT and say, "Hey, ChatGPT, act as a [insert your person here], and give us the biggest problems that you face when trying to accomplish whatever the end result is." It'll give you a bunch of them.

‍

If you create a list of 30, we'll then go and run Meta ads based on one ad with just that problem statement in the image. So the entire ad is literally just the problem statement verbatim. No pretty pictures, nothing—just the problem statement—and that is some of our highest converting ads. We'll run 30 of these tested, and the one that gets the most, usually two or three, will get a higher percentage of click-throughs. We will turn those into prettier ads, except when we don't.

‍

What is really effective right now is simply calling out, "Hey, if you're this and you have this problem, here's a solution that works remarkably well right now." In advertising, it works in text, image ads, video. It's the message. Like they say to politicians, "It's the economy, stupid." I say to business owners, "It's the messaging, stupid." But you're not stupid—I love you.

‍

Mark Drager: And now, is there a comfort? So we work with a lot of B2B businesses that may have very niche or very small populations. We're running a campaign right now where there's only 14,000 people in a given geography that we're trying to touch. And so we have been very focused with the problems, very focused with the message. But the organization we're working with is a little uncomfortable with others seeing it. And so, if you're removing this targeting, if you're saying, "Hey, Texas manufacturers or Texas well drillers in the oil and gas industry," how do we—or is this just something to embrace? Get comfortable, or how do you create the ads in a way that attracts the people you want while also not being too worried about the fact that you're going to show this to people who you don't want to target?

‍

Ryan Deiss: Well, I mean, so you don't want to target—you’re going to show it to people who don’t want to see it. Because nobody actually woke up this morning and said, "Oh, I’d like to see more advertising." I guess one day, one Sunday a year, that happens at the Super Bowl, right? Because, let’s be honest, it's entertaining. It’s not really advertising. Yeah. So, yes, get comfortable with that. Advertising is inherently interruptive. It just is. Sales is inherently interruptive, but people who are in a state, who have a particular issue or challenge, they want to be interrupted.

‍

Now, I'm going to give you a mindset thing, and then I'll give you a tactical solution. So, mindset first: in any given audience segment, we find that there are three to six percent of those people—if they're semi-targeted—who are ready, willing, and able to buy something from you now. Now, there's a massive chunk of that group that will buy later at some point. Dean Jackson and I have been talking about this for 20 freaking years: customers are those who will buy now, and those who will buy later. And that said, yeah. And there are some never-buyers, and they’re few and far between, and they look a lot like the later-buyers.

‍

So, yeah, there’s the nows. And so much of this is just showing up enough that the people who are ready to buy now, you get them, because it’s a different three to six percent every day, every week, every month. So you just have to consistently show up. So that’s a mindset: don’t think you’re more important than you are, especially from a B2B perspective. "Come on, you’re fine. They’re busy. They’re gonna move on with their lives."

‍

The other tactic is, though, if you’re truly dealing with an addressable market—what’d you say was 14,000? Yeah, if you’re dealing with an addressable market, that’s 14,000—you might just go with more of an account-based sales and marketing motion, where you say, "Okay, if there’s a 14,000 total addressable market, can we just build a list? Can we compile a list—whether we hire somebody, do this, buy the list, or just, heck, have my kids just go in there and fill stuff out." I mean, what's the point of having kids if you can't do some child labor, right? And build these lists, and you can now take those lists, add them as a custom audience into Meta and into Google, and advertise to just those people. So, I'm a big fan of either very broad targeting, where we target through the messaging, or hyper-specific targeting, where it's account-based, and we're saying, "No, no, these are the people that we want to put our message in front of." So, let's load those folks up into a custom audience and advertise just to them, just that group. If you're doing that, by the way, and this 14,000—what would an average contract value be for that?

‍

Mark Drager: This is for a nonprofit professional association, so they're really just looking to maintain membership.

‍

Ryan Deiss: Yeah. So you're doing that—you’re probably aligning it also with some old-school direct mail. Maybe you're dropping some of that. It's a small enough addressable market that you should have a multi-front type deal. And the beautiful thing about that is you can run ads on an impression-based perspective, not a click-through rate, but an impression-based perspective because you don't care if they click. You just wanted them to see.

‍

Mark Drager: Right now, we have a CPM of $3, which is pretty amazing.

‍

Ryan Deiss: I'm a direct response guy, but I think one of the worst things that you could do as a business owner is demand that everything be perfectly accountable and perfectly attributable.

‍

Mark Drager: That was the next thing I was going to ask about in terms of outdated things and things that don't work. So a few things: obviously, attribution used to be much simpler, and it's much more complex now, and we have to maybe get comfortable letting some of that go. Also, there used to be an idea that you drop an ad, they land on a page, they do or they don't—a squeeze page—and then you'll capture their information, follow up once or twice. But now, we are seeing really extended sales cycles with 30, 40, 50 touchpoints in a given cycle with a lot of chaos. Is this just to be embraced because this is the world we're in? Or what are you doing to try and still push people through some kind of funnel or process?

‍

Ryan Deiss: Yeah, the funnel is dead. It just isn't how it works anymore. I look, I was one of the main people who trumpeted the concept of the five-step funnel. I was right there, and I announced at my opening keynote at Traffic and Conversion Summit in 2021. That's not how it works anymore. People don't need to follow your funnel. They've got options. Now, look, there used to be this thing called a phone book—this, we should not be surprised, triple-A towing, right? Like, we should not be surprised that these things change. They always have. Humans don't change, okay? Humans don't change. What they now have are far more options to engage with brands than they did before.

‍

Before, it was a very clean and a very simple funnel because, yeah, you fill out a form and they'd send you some stuff in the mail, or you'd pick up the phone and you'd call, and you were on whatever pipeline they put you on because there were no other options to engage with that brand. Now, they have hundreds of options to engage in ways that you have no control over. So, you could try to push back against that and force everybody through your funnel so that it's more trackable, but your conversion rates are gonna be obliterated, and people are gonna opt  out. They're not gonna do that. They're gonna go with the people who are willing to sell to them the way they want to be sold to.

‍

I would suggest that what we're now seeing as longer sales cycles have always been the case. We just didn't have any visibility into what was going on in and around the prospects, actions beyond what we were doing. So our piddly, measly data and what we were doing allowed us to operate under the delusion that it was this very clean and simple funnel. I don't think it was ever the case. I don't think it was as chaotic and multi-touch as it is now because there weren't the different touchpoints that we have today. But I don't think that it ever was as clean and simple as we perceived it to be. Now, all we're doing is getting increased visibility into what always has been.

‍

Mark Drager: In your mind, can you speak to how you look at the difference between brand or content marketing or more inbound, organic versus direct response advertising based on more targeted ad spend-based marketing? Do you see these lines blurring, or are there still very clear divides between your goals and your objectives, and which one is the right one to pull off the shelf?

‍

Ryan Deiss: Branding and direct response is a spectrum. On one end of the branding spectrum, you have just your classic Super Bowl-style ads that are way more entertaining than direct response. On the opposite end, you've got a countdown timer with an "act now" or "this is going to go away forever," and we're going to steal your cat if you don't buy today. You've got it as a spectrum, and what's going to be most appropriate is living along that spectrum.

‍

If you're only ever in brand mode and you never ask, then you won't get results. If you only ask and never brand, then your business isn't gonna last very long. So, I don't like to think about it in terms of branding and direct response. Not that I think those are wrong terms, but I think maybe another set of terms to overlay on top of that is any communication that you do is going to make a deposit of relational equity or a withdrawal of relational equity. Some things that you do will make very large deposits of relational equity. Some will make very large withdrawals of relational equity. There's nothing wrong with making a withdrawal as long as you have adequate funds on deposit, and I think that's the mistake.

‍

Like, you could have a ton of money at the bank, you can make a massive deposit, you can make a massive withdrawal, and as long as you’ve got enough on deposit, that's totally fine. If you withdraw more than you have, that's a problem. I think the mistake that brands get into is they don't think about that, and they don't have this idea of how much they have on account in terms of relational equity with these different prospects. Are we balancing that out? It differs across industries for what you might need to do, but if you put it in that term—not like branding, but more like, are we making regular deposits of relational equity? Content marketing is a great way to do that, right? Are we delivering value in advance? Are we giving away some great free stuff that makes them think nicely about us? Are we even telling a little bit about us, creating some relational bonding where they know our origin story and connect with us at a deeper level? So maybe it's not content or value, but it's a relational connection. All of these can be deposits of relational equity, and the timing and extent of the ask should be in proportion to the give. That's a more helpful frame.

‍

Now, it does lead me to think, though—whether withdrawal is only an ask or whether friction, frustration, miscommunications, and missteps also create withdrawals. Those are degradations of relational equity. It's great— I haven't thought about it exactly the way you described it, but yeah, when you drop the ball, you screw something up, you make a mistake. Look, we've done this. We've had email campaigns where we were building a series, and it was supposed to be triggered over a certain amount of time, and it was only supposed to go to legacy people. And like, "Oops," click the wrong button, and next thing, a massive chunk of our list just got seven emails in their inbox in, you know, two minutes, and they're pissed off. That's a mistake, right? It's a mistake, but it was absolutely a degradation of relational equity.

‍

What that means is we probably can't follow up the next day and be like, "Yeah, sorry about just blitz-creating your freaking inbox. You want to buy this thing? No?" And I think we intuitively understand this. Like, if you're just a normal freaking human being, you get a sense of it. One of the best things I did was put my mom on my email list because my mom would be like, "The heck?" Because if your own mother's sick of hearing from you, that's a problem. So, I just think it is—

‍

Mark Drager: Or she doesn't understand what you're talking about. I mean, that's a problem too, right?

‍

Ryan Deiss: Well, depending on the business, it may not matter, because—I am—that is one thing I'll tell you. I think a lot of the time, it's about dumbing down and speaking to what I always want to speak to—my ideal client. And if that means that some people don't understand, I'm actually okay with that. But for the most part, my mom's an intelligent woman, and we're not doing anything that complicated, so she can hang in there. I just think, man, just be normal. Just ask yourself, "Would it be okay if I sent this? I'm only going to send this to one person." That's one thing you mentioned, Dean Jackson. Dean's better at this than anybody else. You're sending this email. I get it. You're doing a blast or a broadcast. They're receiving it as an individual in their inbox. How's that going to feel? How would you feel if you got it?

‍

Mark Drager: Dean makes it look so easy; it's deceiving. Actually, he is so good at it that it's deceiving, isn't it?

‍

Ryan Deiss: Dean is brilliant as a human being, but he also is so down-to-earth and connected. He doesn't get overly philosophical. He can get very philosophical, but he doesn't find tremendous joy in overcomplicating things. His genius is in its simplification, but he also stays connected enough to people and is just kind and jovial enough that he knows how to communicate effectively. A lot of it is also practice. I think very often, when we go to write an email, we get into a different mindset and think, "Okay, I have to craft this email marketing message." One of the things I started doing was going back into one of our brands to write some of the email copy we had. The marketer left, and I thought, "You know what? I want to do it. I want to see if I still have some chops." I pulled up HubSpot or ActiveCampaign, whatever, and started composing it there. It was hard. I pulled up Google Docs and thought, "This doesn't feel right." So instead, what I did was I pulled up Gmail and started typing the subject line, writing the email as though I was writing it to one person, and it came out sounding like a normal freaking email.

‍

So, if you're struggling to write copy—like email copy and marketing copy—go to a platform where you do normal communication. Go to email, maybe even get out your phone and text it, and see how it comes out there. I bet you're going to find this a lot more effective.

‍

Mark Drager: My little hack is, I love dictation, so I'll go for a walk, and I will dictate a whole bunch of garbage, but somewhere in there is something, and then we can always clean it up later.

‍

Ryan Deiss: I respect the heck out of that. When I talk, I think by talking, it is the most rambly, cluttered mess in the world. Even the best AI tools are like, "We give up."

‍

Mark Drager: I think too many people expect things to be one and done. One of my favorite groups—listen, this is not an analogy—I love the Beatles. Wow, everyone loves the Beatles. But I've spent a lot of time over the years, deep-diving into some really specific things. You know, Phil Collins, in his memoir, talks about the fact that he played drums on George Harrison's solo album and got cut from the album because he didn't realize at the time they would do like eight different versions of a song and then pick the best one. I think often, you know, I went to film school. I come from film, I come from marketing. I think most people think that you can do one draft, two drafts, and it's great. Yet, most really great pieces of work often require quite a bit of work, quite a bit of revision, a few different angles, a few different takes, a little bit of time. That's why I like the transcription—because at least it's just the first something.

‍

Ryan Deiss: Yeah, no, I think that's great. I should probably go back and try it again. I think animals have gotten better.

‍

Mark Drager: Give it a shot. Give it a shot. So, final question for you. I really do appreciate your time being on the podcast, but last question—I like to end with: What would be your number one tip or strategy to help those of us listening sell more?

‍

Ryan Deiss: Right now, today, we're just—we talked about Dean Jackson, so I'm just going to say what I think Dean Jackson would say. You have a list of people. Probably, if you're listening to this, you have a list of people. Send a simple, one-line, what he calls a nine-word email out to them, saying, "Hey, are you still interested in [whatever thing], [whatever goal, outcome] you know that they would like to achieve?" Sign your name and just leave it at that. Don't make an offer. Try to start a conversation. I really do believe everything old is new, and it's becoming cool again as the world is getting more AI-horrific. I think people are going to start wanting to engage with actual intelligence a lot more. And if you're willing to engage your audience in conversation when nobody else will, you're going to find that you get the sale. Nobody else is doing it. Everybody's wanting to rush when they're zagging.

‍

Another great email you could send out is just, "Hey, especially in B2B, you know, hey, [person's name]. How can I help [company name] move faster?" Just, "Hey, [person], how can I help [company name] move faster?" I can tell you, we've used this in tons of companies. It's so effective because if you're moving slow, you want to move faster. If you're moving fast, you wish you were moving faster. It's a way to basically say, "How can I help?" without coming across as a know-it-all or making it seem like you're putting them on the defense. Just, "Hey, so and so, anything I can do to help [company name] move faster?" It is just a magical little email that I've seen work time and time again. So, whether you send out the Dean Jackson version—which is, "Are you still interested in achieving [whatever result] you know they want?"—or, "Hey, can I help [company name] move faster?" If you're unsure about what they want, send that out to your list today, and you're going to get some people responding. If you engage in a conversation, you'll likely get some prospects. It'll turn into some deals.

‍

‍