Acquiring Inbound Leads for B2B Founders with Personal Content Programs • Explaining Content, one Ugly Drawing at a time

Content steals focus, I know. Writing, formatting, visuals, posting cadence, and keeping up with comments. It becomes a weekly tax, then it gets dropped, then inbound stays unpredictable.I build an Authority Engine for B2B Tech Founders. It turns your existing knowledge into consistent content that makes you look like the category leader, without you writing a word.What you get:1) 100% custom AI voice cloneWe extract your voice from your real materials. Whitepapers, sales calls, internal docs, Slack messages, past posts, and anything else that reflects how you think and speak. No generic templates.2) LinkedIn Autopilot5 high converting posts per week, ghostwritten, formatted, and ready to publish. You do not write, format, post, or search for visuals. You approve drafts with a simple yes or no.3) Search Dominance pack2 SEO optimized long form articles per month, derived from your LinkedIn content, so your authority compounds beyond the feed.First week of content can go live within 48 hours of onboarding. You can see engagement on day 1. Your only job is approvals.I will write 3 posts for you for free using your data, so you can see the voice match before you pay. If the first week does not sound exactly like you, or better, I rewrite it until it does, or you do not pay.Best for founders who have real insight and a real product, but do not want content creation to compete with building, selling, and hiring.If you want to test the voice clone, message me: “3 posts”.

Kuba Czubajewski

IMO, this is the only realistic "future" of content marketers:

Every week, I see here new tools popping up that promise my clients they can let all their content team go because AI can do it all for them.

Not once have I seen it actually work, btw.

Content is a much deeper thing than writing a bunch of paragraphs that sound good or an infographic that looks nice.

For me, it's all about connecting the dots that are usually VERY far apart and turning it into a fresh, impactful message.

This is why I'm in love how Dropbox Dash is approaching AI for creatives.

Instead of proposing yet another "I'll do it for you" tool, they're solving one major pain most of us feel:

Not being able to connect the dots because the dot you're looking for is in a file you forgot the name of.

Sounds trivial, but OH MY GOD, the amount of time I used to spend on scrolling through my G-drive is embarrassing.

And this is where I think the whole AI for content conversation should land.

AI is incredible at recall.

Humans are still the best at judgment what matters, what’s true, what’s new, and what’s worth saying out loud.

You won't win because you can generate 50 posts a day.

But if you can pull the right inputs fast, then make a call on the angle, and ship a message people actually remember, you will win.

PS. this is not sponsored by anyone, I just saw their launch and loved it.

I’ll write 3 LinkedIn posts for free, in your voice. If it sounds like you (or better), we install your AI Authority Engine in 90 days.

I started with no money, no contacts, no fancy city office.

Picture this:

A small apartment in Poland.
No team.
Nothing to “show off.”
No one backing me up.

Every day – me, my laptop, and clients who didn’t know my name.

Most days felt like:

Write posts.
Wait.
Hope for an inbound lead.

(Usually nothing.)

B2B tech leaders... yep, tough crowd.

I’m creative, talkative, maybe too much for some.

Every call made me sweat.

Every pitch was incredibly awkward.

Sometimes I wondered if I was nuts for picking this path.

But I couldn’t quit.

I learned to spot what they really needed.

I tried new ideas - most failed, a few worked.

I worked with scraps.

Fixed broken things.

Built trust, one honest message at a time.

I got used to hearing “no.”

I got used to waiting.

But I kept sending, kept building, kept showing up.

Then, slowly...

A “maybe.”
A client who said, “you get what we need.”
A few more.

Then referrals.

All because I'm too stubborn to stop.

Now, I help B2B teams turn strangers into real leads.

One content system, built from scratch.

Starting with nothing makes you sharp.

You learn what matters FAST.

If you feel lost in your work, or your niche feels impossible, keep at it.

Your “weirdness” or “wrong fit” could be the thing they need most.

PS. What did you learn from your first clients when you started from zero?

No alternative text description for this image

Here's a 10-min flow I use with founders to create weeks of content for them:

The goal is to create one small, high-integrity narrative object that can survive multiple contexts without losing its meaning. 

The easiest way to do that is to start with a 10-minute CEO video (use Tella or Loom), because spoken answers preserve something writing tends to bleach out: conviction, nuance, and those small qualifiers that signal real experience. 

I beg you, don’t ask for “thought leadership.” 

Ask one tight prompt that forces specificity, like what buyers are getting wrong about a problem right now, what that misunderstanding costs them, and what they should do instead.

Once you have the Loom, the extraction step matters more than the editing. 

You’re looking for a structure:

Pull out:

- one contrarian claim that creates tension
- one vivid symptom that makes the claim relatable
- one constraint that makes it believable
- one before/after framing that makes the shift obvious
- one proof detail that anchors it in reality

That proof detail can be lightweight. It can be “we heard this on 12 calls this month,” or “this showed up in every deal we lost last quarter.” 

Now you take those five ingredients and you write one “source paragraph” in plain language. Don't think of any platform yet. 

Just articulate the idea clearly as if you were explaining it to a smart friend over coffee. This paragraph becomes the anchor. Every other asset is a translation of it, not a reinvention. That’s how you keep integrity when you repurpose.

From there, I like to create three outputs that each do a different cognitive job:

First, a short text post that opens with the contrarian claim and immediately explains the symptom. 

The mistake people make is opening with the claim and then drifting into abstraction. Don’t. 

Earn the reader’s trust by describing what they already see in the wild, the call snippets, the internal debates, the marketing copy that “sounds right” but doesn’t move anything.

Second, a simple carousel where each slide is a single unit of meaning. Not “tips,” but progression. The before model, the cost of that model, the constraint that keeps people stuck, the after model, and then one practical move they can try this week. 

If you can’t fit the idea on five slides without it turning into fog, the idea isn’t ready yet.

Third, a longer form piece where you unpack the constraint and the proof detail. 

This is where nuance belongs. Why the obvious fix fails. What tradeoff you’re making. What to watch out for. 

This is also where you can safely include a real example, even if it’s anonymized, because you have space to set context.

Two quality checks before you hit publish:

• If the post could apply to any company, it’s too generic. 

• If the reader can’t repeat your point in one sentence, it’s too complicated.

If you want, reply with your niche and I’ll give you 5 tight CEO prompts that reliably produce these “weeks of content” anchors.

I recently changed my banner to this one below and you might think I went insane:

This is not a typical path content people choose for their businesses.

“Free value” beyond a regurgitated ChatGPT lead magnet is a rare thing here.

My thinking is this:

I built an Authority System for copying B2B founders’ voice with AI.

It’s GOOD. Took me about a year to get here. 

And the easiest way to prove it is to show my potential clients how it works.

Yes, building a sample assistant is harder than posting fancy carousels and “vulnerable” fake-ass stories

But I’ve always been more of a show-don’t-tell kinda guy and not planning to stop now.

Curious how it works? Dm me “3 posts”

"comment on other creators' posts" is sh!tty advice:

I used to spend 2 hours per day here commenting on probably all of them big creators.

Most of them don't give a rat's a*s about me or my content.

And that's perfectly fine. Why would they?

Not once have I reached out to them in a DM, they have no reason to see my comment and think:

"I wonder what this guy is about?"

But the folks I exchanged DMs with are consistently showing up under my posts.

Because we established a more meaningful connection than a [put an insightful comment here so they see you're trying hard]

See what I'm getting at?

Connection > tactics.

Build the first one and you'll never need to think about the second one again.

A year ago I thought I had it figured out:

Build a content agency for B2B founders. Use AI to do the heavy lifting. Keep costs low, scale fast. Simple.

What actually happened: 

I spent months building something nobody wanted to pay for.

The first version of the system was basically:

1. take the founder's old posts
2. dump them into a prompt
3. generate something that kind of sounded like them

The output was fine. Technically competent. The kind of content that gets 15 likes and zero leads.

I wasn't impressed with myself tbh. Neither were my clients.

So I overcomplicated everything:

A 12-step onboarding process, 5 different content formats, a pricing page that looked like a software feature comparison matrix...

I was trying to cover every possible use case for every possible client, and the result was that nobody could figure out what I actually did.

The solution was so stupidly simple, I facepalmed when I finally got there:

I started interviewing founders instead of just ingesting their existing content.

Turns out the best content a founder can publish isn't what they've already written.

 It's what they say when someone asks them the right questions:

- the unguarded takes
- the specific stories
- the things they'd never think to write down but say out loud constantly

Once I built the system around that – extract the thinking first, then write – the output stopped sounding like AI trying to be human and started sounding like the founder on their best day.

That took about a year to nail.

The offer got simpler too:

Interview you -> Write it up -> Publish it -> You approve the drafts. 

That's the whole thing.

If you want to see what it looks like, DM me "3 posts" – I'll write them for free before you spend anything.

I had a chat with a B2B founder that told me he struggles with referrals because his clients "can't explain his value." Here's how I'd fix it with content:

When clients can't explain your value, it usually means one of three things:

1/ You solved a problem they didn't know they had.

2/ You fixed something so complex they can't see the full scope.

3/ You delivered value that's invisible until it breaks.

Your content needs to make the invisible visible.

Instead of writing about what you do, write about what breaks when you're not there.

"What happens when your data pipeline fails during your biggest sales quarter"
"The hidden cost of manual processes that only surface when you try to scale"
"Why your competitors can respond to market changes faster than you"

This type of content does two things:

1/ It helps prospects recognize problems they didn't know they had.
2/ It gives current clients language to explain why those problems matter.

When clients forward your content about "hidden operational risks," they're not just sharing an article.

They're explaining why they needed you without having to understand the technical details.

Your content should make the case for your category of work, not just your company.

The better prospects understand the problem you solve, the easier it becomes for clients to refer you.

A thing we rarely discuss in marketing is how customers perceive our narrative through preloaded meanings:

We think we’re publishing a simple story about a benefit. They’re interpreting a signal about power, intent, and control. 

That gap is what Ring ran into with its Super Bowl ad about a lost dog found through a neighborhood camera network. The creative aimed for warmth and community. 

The audience, already saturated with years of privacy discourse and surveillance headlines, watched the same 30 seconds and didn’t primarily evaluate the plot. They evaluated the infrastructure implied by the plot. 

“AI + cameras” isn’t a neutral prop anymore. It’s a symbol, and symbols arrive with cultural baggage attached.

This is the real mechanism behind “losing the narrative.” It’s rarely about execution quality but about the interpretive surface area. 

When a story leaves room for people to fill in the blanks, they will. And they’ll fill them with the strongest available frame in their mind, usually the one that best matches their anxieties. 

In this case, the counter-frame was waiting in the wings, mass surveillance disguised as safety. 

Once that frame establishes itself, everything that follows stops being “new information” and becomes “supporting evidence.” 

That’s why Ring’s sudden move away from a planned partnership with Flock Safety was immediately absorbed into the same storyline. Regardless of internal motives, it read like validation, not coincidence.

The takeaway isn’t “be careful with your messaging.” That’s too shallow. 

The takeaway is that narrative is not a message you transmit. It’s a negotiation between your intent and the audience’s prior beliefs. 

And prior beliefs are not something you overcome with a nicer tone. They’re something you have to design around. If your product or campaign touches an area where trust is already fragile, you should assume your audience will run an adversarial interpretation, even if they like you, even if the ad is well made.

A better move is to treat messaging like you treat product design:

Reduce ambiguity. Anticipate misuse scenarios. Make the boundaries legible. 

Don’t just tell a heartwarming story about what your system can do at its best. Show that you’ve thought seriously about what it could do at its worst, and what you’ve done to prevent that. 

In 2026, “we’re doing this for safety” is not a persuasive claim by itself. People want to know who gets visibility, who gets veto power, and what recourse exists when the system is wrong.

Curious how you think about this. When was the last time you watched a brand’s “feel good” story and immediately felt the darker subtext the audience would attach to it?

Quick tip if you hate when AI says "It's not X, it's Y..."

This rhetorical device is called "contrastive reframing using antithesis structure."

Hard-prompt it into your content assistant to avoid it (example below).

Also, from my tests, Claude 4.6 is much better at this that GPT models.

PS. Let me know any other annoying things AI uses - I'll show you how to remove them from the outputs.

How I helped a B2B consultancy business (very niche) start showing up in AI search:

We focused on turning their LinkedIn content into long-form SEO articles built around real opinions, specific frameworks, and language that maps to actual buyer problems.

AI tools cite sources that are clear and substantive. Since their LinkedIn content had this already, expanding it into articles became much easier.

The results measured over the last 90 days:

Overall: 1,619 AI bot hits → 4,163. That's 3x.
Homepage: 514 → 946. Almost 2x.

Every hit is ChatGPT or Perplexity pulling from their site while a buyer is actively researching. That's pipeline you'd never see in a cold outreach report.

If you want to see what this looks like for your niche, reply ENGINE and tell me what you sell.

200,000 people just watched a creator get stood up by a brand's AI chatbot:

Reformation used AI to manage its influencer outreach. It confirmed a collaboration, set up a store visit, and ran weeks of back-and-forth with a creator.

She drove an hour to the store, shot video in the dressing room... The manager had no idea who she was.

TikTok called it "an AI bot that went rogue." Reformation sent her a sweater as an apology.

Here's my read on what actually happened: 

AI made commitments nobody at the brand had authorized. And no human was watching the inbox it was running.

The bot did exactly what it was built to do - respond, confirm, follow up. 

But nobody told it where to stop. That's a systems failure.

AI doesn't know when it's overstepping. The tool runs until you build a stop - and plenty of AI marketing setups skip that step entirely.

There are places where automation works well: segmentation, sequences, content drafts.

And then there are contexts that require a human in the seat: real commitments, real relationships, anything a creator or partner will hold you to.

I put a lot of emphasis on that while working with my clients on their content assistants.

First draft can (and should) come from the AI. But the human editor before anything goes live is a must. 

Doesn't matter how good your AI tool is. If there's no one monitoring what it's agreeing to, you're one post away from a mess.

The CEO of impact put it well: "Human credibility becomes more valuable, not less."

That's the thing marketing teams running AI tools aren't accounting for right now, imo.

GTM for Early Stage SaaS | Co-founder @ Datapad | SaaS Growth Advisor | Reforge | 1x Exit |

I’m a marketer, 2x entrepreneur with 1x exit, and helped companies to go from 0 to 8 figures.

My achievements:

- Built 2 VC backed startups with one exit

- Built a 7 figure productized marketing agency

- Became a mentor in top accelerators such as: 500, Plug and Play, Techstars

- Got to work with the portfolio companies of amazing investors such as A16z, Craft Ventures, YC

- Built a podcast with 20k downloads in a year-figure

- Transformed my body more times than Christian Bale ☺️

John Ozuysal

SEO and AEO agencies are dead

I replaced my $15k/mo agency with Claude Code.

Here is what my agent does:

- Creates content strategy around topics such as "ultimate guide to xyz" or "what is xyz" - zero defendability for AI search 

- Optimizes each post with [some made-up name] framework

- Found my ICP in 5 seconds, even though I couldn't figure it out for a year 

[screenshot of the flow] - I have no idea what any of this does. Neither does the person who built it.

We used this agent for 6 months, and below are the results from the AI search

[screenshot of Google Search Console]

And yes, we are tracking AI search from GSC, so all the AEO tools are unnecessary

I spoke with a CMO of Series B B2B SaaS last week about their AEO

He was furious.

"ChatGPT is telling people we're too expensive for small teams." - not correct at all

We pulled up the sources AI was citing.

Competitor blog posts. Reddit threads from 2021. A review site that hadn't been updated in 18 months.

His first instinct?

"We need more PR. More brand mentions. More visibility."

No. You don't.

That's not your problem.

Your problem is you never created content that answers the questions buyers are actually asking.

Best tools in your category. Alternatives. Comparisons. Use cases by company size.

You left that to competitors and review sites.

So now they're the source. Not you.

You're not invisible. You just handed the microphone to everyone else.

Early-stage companies have the opposite problem.

AI genuinely doesn't know they exist yet.

PR and brand mentions actually matter there.

But for you?

Create the content that answers buyer questions.

Become the source AI cites.

Stop letting competitors control your narrative.

TLDR: Assess your current situation before you invest in any AEO-related activity

---

If you want us to build a free AEO roadmap for you, apply from the link on my profile

Your buyers trust ChatGPT more than your sales team.

That's not an insult. That's just how people make decisions now.

They ask AI for recommendations. They get a shortlist. They do follow-up questions. By the time they land on your site, they've already decided whether you're a contender.

But here's the problem:

Most B2B SaaS companies have zero control over what AI says about them.
AI is citing outdated competitor blog posts. Old Reddit threads. Review sites that haven't been updated in over a year. And it's confidently presenting that information as if it's current.

I've seen AI tell buyers a product is "too expensive for small teams" based entirely on a competitor's comparison post from 2022. Completely inaccurate. But that's what the buyer heard.

So how do you take back control?

You become the source.

Step 1: Identify the 20-30 buying questions your ICP is asking AI right now. Turn your paid search keywords into questions.

Step 2: Ask those questions yourself. Look at what AI cites. What source types? Who gets mentioned?

Step 3: Fill the gaps. If AI cites a listicle, get on that listicle or create a competing one. If it cites a forum thread, go give a real, transparent answer. If it cites a video, make one.

Step 4: Optimize your help center so it answers every specific feature, integration, and use case question a buyer could ask in a follow-up.

Do this consistently for 6 weeks, and you'll see the shift.

The brands that control their AI narrative now will own their category later.

"Recently raised Series A" is not a buying signal. It's a crowded inbox.

The intent data told us they raised a Series A.

What it didn't tell us: where they're actually bleeding cash.

"Recently raised Series A" - yeah, so did 47 other vendors in their inbox.

"Just hired a CMO" - congratulations, you and every other growth agency just sent the same pitch.

We were competing on speed, not relevance.

So we built something different.

Our internal tool doesn't just pull signals. It stacks them.

Series A in last 6 months? Cool. Everyone knows that.

But Series A + running Google Ads + zero organic traffic for their keywords + no competitor comparison pages?

Now we're talking.

That's a company burning cash on paid because their content strategy doesn't exist. That's someone who needs what we actually do.

The tool creates an AI agent that hunts for these signal combinations. The ones we define. The ones that actually matter to our specific service.

Our list went from 2,000 "warm leads" to 47 companies.

But those 47 companies? They actually respond.

Because when you reach out, you're not pitching.

You're diagnosing a problem they didn't realize they had.

We've tried everything. Content. Cold email. Mass outreach. Paid ads.

This signal-based ABM is crushing all of it on ROI. (No random ABM)

Not because the list is bigger.

Because the list is real.

I think AI search visibility trackers are useless 

Why? 

Because I keep seeing AEO case studies with screenshots of the search console

I guess we are all missing something because my GSC is not giving me AI search visibility data 🤣 

Sad thing is, some of these posts are getting 500 comments

We are running an AI search sprint free for 3 SaaS companies

👇

We're opening up 3 free pilot slots to show you exactly where you stand on AI search and what to do about it.

Here's what you'll get:

- A full AI search audit of your brand vs your top competitors

- Your 30-day AI search content strategy + the brand mentions you need to build

- Your first revenue-focused content — written and ready to publish

We hand-pick the companies. We're not looking for volume. We're looking for fit.

That means Series A B2B SaaS. $1M+ ARR. A category worth owning. And a team that will actually execute on what we hand them — because we're not interested in doing great work that sits in a Google Doc.

Q2 2026 cohort has 3 spots.

If you think you're the right fit, apply from here: https://tally.so/r/442j4A

I haven't been to a graveyard in years.

Turns out I didn't need to, I just needed to open LinkedIn.

People here love the Kill Channels:

RIP Email. 

RIP Agencies. 

RIP Content. 

RIP Thought Leadership. 

RIP Ads.

At this point, everything's been declared dead at least 100 times.

And yet... somehow they all keep showing up to work on Monday.

Haven't invested in AEO yet? 

Don't start with content 👇

Start with a diagnosis.

Before creating any content, figure out whether the issue is visibility, representation (citation control), or both.

Later-stage companies usually already have visibility. The risk is how they’re being represented.

 AI search often pulls from competitor blogs, old Reddit threads, reviews, and third-party posts that don’t reflect the company’s current narrative.

The first step is to identify the URLs influencing AI answers and audit them for accuracy.

In parallel, build earned content quickly so AI systems learn from the company’s own materials, not someone else’s.

Earlier-stage companies typically have a visibility problem and a representation problem.

Start by mapping the prompts you want to win, then identify which URLs currently influence those prompts (often listicles and Reddit threads).

From there, focus on earned visibility by participating in those conversations and getting included where influence already exists.

Once there’s more budget, expand into creating content designed to compete for broader, category-level prompts.

We just increased AI search visibility for a B2B SaaS client by 100% in 30 days.

Want to see how we did it?

You can't. The case study doesn't exist. I made it up.

But you'd have believed it, right? Because you've seen 15 posts this month saying almost exactly that.

Here's the problem: a lot of people claiming to grow AI search visibility are backing it up with Google Search Console screenshots.

It does not tell you how often your brand appears in AI-generated responses. 

It does not tell you what AI systems say about you. It does not measure anything that would reasonably be called "AI search visibility."

Posting a GSC screenshot as proof of AEO results is either a misunderstanding of how this works or a deliberate misdirection aimed at people who don't know the difference.

If someone is showing you clean dashboards and confident attribution, ask them which tool produced it and how it works.

If the answer is a Google Search Console screenshot, walk away.

4 types of competitor-focused content I use to generate pipeline for SaaS

👇

1. Competitor vs You

You must own this story. If a prospect types “[competitor] alternative” into Google and only sees their page, you already lose. Create clean “You vs Competitor” pages that talk in revenue, churn, onboarding time, not vague feature lists. Show how you reduce risk, cut time-to-value, or lift expansion revenue.

2. Competitor alternatives

These people are in market now. They already pay for a tool. They just hate something about it. Create list posts like “7 alternatives to [competitor] for remote CS teams” and rank for those terms. Include your product in the list, show screenshots, add simple pricing context, and link to a focused trial or demo page. This brings high-intent trials fast.

3. Competitor comparisons

Big brands fund your pipeline. Use their demand. People search “[competitor A] vs [competitor B]” every day. Write posts and pages like “[A] vs [B] vs [You]” and speak to a specific ICP: “best for product-led teams”, “best for agencies”, “best for low-ACV SaaS”. You ride their brand search while positioning your product as the right fit for a clear segment.

4. Competitor use case content

Show how to do a key job in competitor tools, then show the simpler version in your product. “How to build a QBR dashboard in [competitor]” → then you show it takes 9 steps there and 3 in your app. If a competitor cannot support that use case, say it clearly and own the gap. This is where many of your best switch deals come from.

----

If you want us to generate a free AEO report, check the link on my bio !

I see people bragging about creating blog posts with Claude code for AEO

Sad thing is, they are still creating blog posts such as:

- What is [topic]

- Ultimate guide to [topic]

You clearly have no idea how AEO works, otherwise you wouldn't create these and call them "AEO" focused posts

Why you don’t show up in AI search?

Here’s the simplest answer:

You have no content.

And nobody knows, mentions, or talks about your brand.

That’s it.

AI systems don’t “discover” brands magically.

They reflect what already exists on the internet.

Once you accept this, everything else makes sense.

Only then do details start to matter:

Entity optimization
Query fan-outs
Topical authority etc..

AI is selling your competitor using your outdated content.

You’re funding their pipeline for free.

Your buyers trust ChatGPT more than your sales team.
Not because sales is bad.
Because this is how people make decisions now.

They ask AI for:
- Shortlists
- Comparisons
- Pricing context
- “Is this tool right for a company like mine?”

By the time they land on your site, they already “know” you.
Or they think they do.

Here is the problem I see with B2B SaaS teams I work with:

AI is pulling from:
- Old competitor blog posts
- Stale Reddit threads
- Year old review pages

I saw AI call a product “too expensive for small teams”
based only on a competitor comparison from 2022.
Totally wrong.
Still, that is what the buyer heard.

You need to take back control.
You become the source.

Here is the play I use with clients:

1/ Map the real buying questions
Turn your main paid search keywords into questions.
You want 20–30 questions your ICP would ask AI today.

2/ Audit what AI says
Ask those questions in ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity.
Note:
- Who gets mentioned
- What sources get cited
- What formats show up

3/ Fill every gap
If AI cites a listicle, get on that list or build your own.
If it cites a forum thread, go answer with a clear, honest take.
If it cites a video, create a stronger, updated one.
If a competitor listicle is sharing outdated info about you - ask them to fix it

4/ Fix your help center
Make sure it answers:
- Features
- Integrations
- Use cases
In the same language buyers use in follow up questions.

Do this for 8 weeks with focus, and you start to see the shift.

taplio

The Battle

Kuba Czubajewski

John Ozuysal

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreKuba Czubajewski's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreJohn Ozuysal's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Kuba Czubajewski

John Ozuysal

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Kuba Czubajewski's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreJohn Ozuysal's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreKuba Czubajewski's LinkedIn Performance