Ferenc Fekete

Helping non-tech Founders transform Ideas into SaaS products @ VeryCreatives | Product Agency, SaaS & MVP Development | Startups

I've watched many startup founders fail at the same exact point: turning their validated idea into actual software.

They waste months (or even years):
→ Trying to hire the right developers
→ Burning cash on poor planning and execution
→ Second-guessing every technical decision along the way

Meanwhile, competitors move faster, investors demand traction, and the pressure to deliver keeps building more and more.

After watching this pattern destroy countless promising startups, we built VeryCreatives to fix it.

But here's what makes us different:

We don't just build your MVP and disappear. We're product people who think like founders, not just developers who code to spec.

👉 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻-𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵: We start by pressure-testing your assumptions before writing a single line of code. If the market doesn't want it, we'll tell you straight.

👉 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗱𝘀𝗲𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗱𝗮𝘆 𝗼𝗻𝗲: We build like it's our own startup, obsessing over user experience, scalability, and investor readiness from the first sprint.

👉 𝗙𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗮 𝘁𝗼 𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗱: Whether you're at napkin sketch or Series B, we've been there. We've helped founders go from zero to acquisition, and we stick around for the entire journey.

For the past 14 years, we've built products for venture-backed startups, fast-growing scale-ups, and globally recognized brands like Red Bull, Nestlé, and Philips.

The startups we work with have:
✅ Launched investor-ready MVPs in under 90 days
✅ Secured funding from top-tier investors and VCs
✅ Scaled from first users to thousands of paying customers
✅ Successfully exited to strategic acquirers

Got a SaaS idea that's been sitting in your head for months? 
Let's map out your 90-day path to launch → https://verycreatives.com/book-a-call

Co-Founder

At VeryCreatives, we are a team of expert developers who create powerful SaaS apps that solve problems and drive growth for founders with initial funding. We believe in empowering our clients with innovative software that helps them achieve their goals and stand out in their industry.

Our audience consists of driven and ambitious founders who have just received initial funding for their startup. They are looking for a software development partner who understands their vision, can help bring their ideas to life, and deliver results that will help them achieve their business goals.

Founders with initial funding have a pressing need to build their product quickly and efficiently to maximize their chances of success. At VeryCreatives, we understand this need and are dedicated to creating high-quality SaaS apps that not only meet their requirements but also exceed their expectations. We are committed to delivering value and results that help our clients succeed.

VeryCreatives stands out in the market for our ability to deliver high-quality, innovative solutions that meet the needs of our clients. Our unique approach to software development, coupled with our expertise and commitment to excellence, is what drives us to provide outstanding results to our clients.

Industries our clients operate in, using the SaaS products we've built: 
- Digital marketing, Event marketing & Influencer marketing SaaS
- Foodtech & Delivery 
- Fintech, Banking & Investments
- 2-sided marketplace platforms
- Agriculture & Livestock management
- Packaging compliance & Waste

Markets we cover: UAE, EU, UK, US.

The UK is shipping world-class SaaS 🇬🇧

Here's 20 UK startups and the core feature that makes each one worth watching:

Attio (Nicolas Sharp) → AI-native CRM that auto-enriches contacts in real time. ARR quadrupling YoY.

Synthesia (Victor Riparbelli) → Text-to-video with 230+ AI avatars in 140+ languages. $180M Series D.

PolyAI (Nikola Mrkšić) → Voice AI that handles live customer calls in 45 languages. Backed by Nvidia.

Xelix (Paul Roiter) → AI agents for Accounts Payable. Processes 115M+ invoices per year.

Granola (Christopher Pedregal) → AI meeting notepad. Auto-generates structured notes and action items from calls.

Vertice (Eldar Tuvey) → SaaS spend platform that auto-negotiates your renewals. 437% growth rate.

Signal AI (David Benigson) → Real-time monitoring across millions of sources for reputation and regulatory risk.

Plain (Simon Rohrbach) → API-first support where AI agents resolve tickets autonomously. Used by Vercel and Cursor.

Griffin (David Jarvis) → UK's first full-stack Banking-as-a-Service with a full banking license.

Primer (@Paul Anthony) → Single API connecting 100+ payment processors with no-code routing.

hyperexponential (​Amrit Santhirasenan) → No-code pricing models for commercial insurers. Backed by a16z.

Raycast (Thomas Paul Mann) → Keyboard-first productivity launcher. 800+ app integrations with built-in AI.

StackOne (Romain Sestier) → One API to connect 200+ enterprise SaaS integrations. Built for AI agents.

Lindus Health (Meri Beckwith) → Runs full clinical trials 3x faster than traditional CROs.

Metaview (Siadhal Magos) → Auto-generates structured interview notes from live conversations. Used by Sony and Brex.

Sylvera (Allister Furey) → Satellite imagery and ML to rate the actual quality of carbon credits.

Robin AI (Richard Robinson) → LLM trained on 2M+ contracts. Reviews and negotiates legal docs for UBS and Pfizer.

BVNK (Jesse Hemson-Struthers) → Stablecoin payment infrastructure for cross-border business transactions.

Shop Circle (Luca Cartechini) → AI-powered suite for Shopify merchants. Inventory, SEO, analytics in one dashboard.

Tessl (Guy Podjarny) → Forces AI coding agents to write specs before generating code. Prevents hallucinations.

Every one of these started with a sharp product decision: solve one problem exceptionally well, then expand.

What UK startup has caught your eye recently?

Launch products customers love, then exit | 5x exits, $100M ARR created for founders

I’ve developed products for 5x exits

Shock: Don't hire a developer in 2026

Every week, a non-technical founder asks me: "Where do I find good developers?"

My answer: "Why do you need one?"

Usually they don't. Not yet.

Before you hire a developer, you need:

1. Validated problem

→ Real people willing to pay. Not just "interested."


2. Clear scope

→ What are you building? What are you NOT building?


3. User journey mapped

→ Every screen. Every interaction. Every edge case.


4. Prioritized features

→ What's V1 vs V2 vs never?

Without these, you'll waste $15-20k per month while you "figure it out."

If you DO need a developer:

Red flags:

→ Promises fast/cheap (you'll pay later)
→ Doesn't ask about your business model
→ Jumps straight to coding
→ Can't explain trade-offs in plain English

Green flags:

→ Asks more questions than you expect
→ Pushes back on features
→ Talks about users, not just tech
→ Shows similar work (not just "we can do that")

The best developers will tell you what NOT to build.

"The project will cost $50k." - Developer
 
3 months later: $120k. Sh*t. What happened?

Every non-technical founder has heard this: "It will take longer than expected."

But you can prevent it (with some high-school math)

Here's how to build an accurate cost forecast:

Step 1: Break it down absurdly small

Not "user authentication: $5k"

But:

→ Login page design: $500
→ Login backend: $1k
→ Password reset flow: $1.5k
→ OAuth integration: $2k
→ Security testing: $500


Step 2: Add complexity multipliers

→ Simple feature: 1x
→ Medium complexity: 1.5x
→ Complex/uncertain: 2x
→ Integration with third parties: 2.5x


Step 3: Add the "unknown unknowns" buffer

→ New team: +30%
→ Existing team, new domain: +20%
→ Experienced team, known domain: +10%


Step 4: Phase the budget

→ Phase 1: Core features (40% of budget)
→ Phase 2: Secondary features (30% of budget)
→ Phase 3: Polish and optimization (20% of budget)
→ Buffer: (10% of budget)


Step 5: Define cut points

If Phase 1 goes over, what do you cut from Phase 2?

Decide BEFORE you're in crisis mode.


The rule:

If you haven't scoped it in detail, you haven't scoped it.

And if you haven't scoped it, any number is a guess.

So…

Maybe pause that developer project.

Mixpanel is the only company I've seen do this 🔥

They’re putting client logos directly on each pricing tier. 

I think this is smart for a few reasons:

1. Trust at the decision point

You're comparing plans. You're about to pick one.

That's exactly when you see the logos. Trust increases right when it matters most.


2. Self-comparison kicks in

When you see "Uber uses the Growth plan" and "CNN uses Enterprise," you start asking yourself:

→ Which companies are like mine?
→ What plan are they on?
→ Should I be on that too?


3. The proof matches the buyer

→ Startups see startup logos on the Starter tier.
→ Enterprises see enterprise logos on the Enterprise tier.
→ Each plan has its own social proof. Not one generic "10,000 companies trust us" claim.

Small detail. Probably moves conversions more than most people realize.

Have you seen other SaaS companies doing this?

I've been part of 5 SaaS acquisitions.

Here's what buyers discuss privately:

When a company gets acquired, founders focus on revenue, growth metrics, and the pitch.

But after the presentation, when the acquirer's technical team goes back to their office, the conversation shifts completely.

I've seen this happen five times now. The questions they ask each other are almost always the same:

→ "Can we maintain this code without them?"

If the answer is no, the price drops or the deal dies. One of our clients got acquired by Adesso ($1.3B IT company) and one of the deciding factors was code quality. Their team reviewed the codebase and actually kept us as the development partner post-acquisition.


→ "How much technical debt are we inheriting?"

Every shortcut the original team took becomes a line item on a spreadsheet. They calculate what it costs to fix and deduct it from the offer. This can knock six figures off valuations.


→ "Can this handle 10x the current load right now?"

Not after a rebuild. Right now, as-is. If the answer requires re-architecting, that's another cost they subtract.


→ "Is the data clean enough to migrate?"

Messy data means months of integration work on their side. They price that in aggressively.


→ "What happens when the founders walk away?"

If all the product knowledge lives in two people's heads with nothing documented, the acquirer just bought a risk.


Most non-technical founders don't think about any of this until they're already in due diligence. By then the damage is done.

Build like someone's reviewing your codebase tomorrow. After 13 years, I've watched acquisition offers show up when founders least expect them.

What would you want to clean up in your tech stack before a buyer looked at it?

I run a 28-person agency. I used to feel guilty about an ‘empty calendar’ on a Monday. Now I try cancel all of my meetings:

And it’s helped us grow revenue 30%+.

Previously I was in every delivery meeting, every project review, every standup at VeryCreatives.

I thought I had to be in the room for things to run.

Now, our fantastic Head of Delivery meets with the PMs directly. 

And an ‘empty calendar’ means brain space to strategise on growth.

Here's what my Monday looks like now:

1. Strategy session with my co-founder Mate
→ Previous week, pipeline, finances, what's planned
→ Keeps us both aligned so neither of us needs to check in again all week

2. Sales sync
→ New leads, who handles what, timing

3. Afternoon: wide open
→ This is the whole point
→ We use that time to plan new internal tools, shape future services, figure out where we're going next

By lunchtime, the operational part of my day is done.

Everything after that is thinking time.

What's one meeting you could delete from your Monday to create space?

I've helped 5 SaaS products exit. 

Here's what acquirers actually looked at:

5 years ago, a product we developed sold to Adesso ($1.3BN/year IT business).

One of the things they noted was that technical build was a factor in acquisition.

Main problem:

Non-technical founders MOSTLY don’t think about how to build the technical foundation for exit from day 1.

Then in the event of acquisition they scramble to make the product "acquirable" and wonder why due diligence takes forever.

Here's what acquirers evaluate:

1. Code quality

Can they maintain it without you?

I've seen acquirers keep the original dev team post-acquisition specifically because the code was clean. 

Red flags they look for:

→ No documentation
→ No tests
→ Spaghetti architecture
→ Single points of failure


2. Technical debt

How much will it cost to fix?

Every shortcut you take today becomes a negotiating chip against you later.


3. Scalability

Can it handle 10x users?

Not "can we rebuild it to handle 10x." Can it handle 10x NOW?


4. Data integrity

Is the data clean? Structured? Portable?

Messy data = massive integration costs = lower valuation.


5. Team dependency

What happens if founders leave? Is knowledge in heads or in docs?

My ‘exit-ready’ lesson;

Build like someone's going to buy your company tomorrow.

Because if you do it right, they might.

Think about this while building the roadmap for your v1.

My 6-year old son tells $100M private equity firms if product ideas are ‘good’ (I’m serious).

If you can't explain your product to a 6-year old, I’ve got $100,000 on the fact that no one else will get it either.

I sit through dozens of product pitches every year.

The pattern is always the same:

Founder: "So basically, we're building a platform that leverages AI to optimize cross-functional workflows while integrating with existing enterprise systems to enable seamless collaboration and data-driven decision making."

Me: "What does it actually do?"

Founder: "...It helps teams share files."

The 6-year old test:

Can someone who has never heard of your product understand:

1. WHO it's for
2. WHAT problem it solves
3. WHY they should care

In 5 seconds?

If not, here's the formula that works:

"We help [specific person] [do specific thing] so they can [achieve specific outcome]."

Examples:

→ "We help freelancers send invoices so they get paid faster." 
→ "We help HR teams track applicants so they hire better candidates."

Trust me… my 6-year old is a great product idea validation filter.

Can you explain your product in one sentence?

Clay is one of the only companies I’ve seen do this 🔥

When you open the dashboard:

→ There's an AI chat text box.
→ It asks: "What do you want to build?"
→ You type your goal. It takes you to a chat screen. 
→ Then their AI (Sculptor) builds the workflow for you.

I think this solves three problems at once:


1. The blank canvas problem

Clay is powerful but notoriously hard to start with (lot’s of features).

Beginner users will open it, see an empty table, and don't know where to begin.

This prompt box removes that moment. 


2. Slow learning curve

A lot of tools teach you their features via an onboarding. 

But then over a few years they launch 10+ other features you have no clue how to use.

This Clay feature speeds up the learning curve:

→ You describe the outcome
→ The product figures out which features to use
→ You learn by watching it build


3. HUGE time and cost savings. 

For a lot of large products such as Clay, there are off shoots of service based agencies that build with the product for you.

Now you literally do not need to hire an agency.

The product builds what you need for you.

Making it more fun to use.

-

Have you seen other tools do this?

Why US innovation labs pay $500K for what Hungarian teams build for $100K (and get better results):

I just watched an enterprise innovation lab spend $500K on a product that never saw a single real user.

Then in same quarter, we shipped a similar concept for a German client. 

It took six weeks, it cost much less…. and in the end was live and taking payments vs the US one (zero payments).

The problem is US labs have been trained to solve every problem with a 20-person team.

Think about what happens when you have a massive budget:

→ You hire a product manager.
→ You hire three designers.
→ You hire a scrum master.
→ You hire eight developers.
→ You hire two QA engineers
→ And a DevOps team.

Everyone needs to justify their role. So they build. And build. And build.

👉 The PM adds features to show progress
👉 Designers polish screens nobody asked for
👉 Developers architect for scale you don't have
👉 QA tests edge cases that won't exist for years

Six months later, you have a beautiful product that solves nothing particularly well.

OR-

With that same $500k budget, you could run 10 separate validation sprints at $50k each. Even if 8 fail completely, you still walk away with 2 validated concepts to scale.

Compare that to putting the budget on one product that takes six months to discover nobody wants.

Agree or disagree?

Fireflies.ai hit a $1B valuation.

How to copy their MVP strategy:

Founders Sam Udotong and Krish Ramineni would dial into calls as "Fred from Fireflies.ai", sit silently, take notes by hand, and send them 10 minutes later.

They did 100+ meetings like this. Completely manual. 🤯

→ Zero development cost to validate
→ Learned exactly what users needed (by doing the job themselves)
→ Proved people would pay $100/month BEFORE investing in code
→ Only automated after hitting $750/month revenue

What I take from this:

Before you scope features, before you wireframe, before you hire anyone:

Can you deliver the core value manually? Without hiring any developers?

If yes, do that first. Talk to those customers. Understand the problem deeply.

Then build.

-

P.s.

We use Fireflies.ai at VeryCreatives.

We switched from Fathom because it felt more complete and could even log our internal calls in Hungarian. 🇭🇺

Could you imagine Fred joining your call to take notes?

What's stopping you from delivering your product's value manually this week?

Most launches fail in the handoffs. Here's the 20-minute test that catches them.

If we work together on a launch, I will ask you to do one thing that feels annoying:

Close Figma.

Forget your test accounts.

Take a brand new signup and do one complete job in one sitting:

👉Invite the teammates you expect them to invite.

👉Import the messy file they will actually import.

👉Hit the permission edges you are secretly hoping they never hit.

What I keep seeing is the same:

Teams test features in isolation because it feels faster.

Users live in journeys.

Journeys fail in the handoffs.

So, pick one job that really matters.

Time yourself doing it end to end on a fresh account.

Write down every time you pause, swear, or ping someone for help.

Fix the three worst moments before you celebrate anything.

It is not glamorous work, but it has saved more launches for us than any marketing campaign.

When's the last time you did a full journey test on a fresh account?

Hiring a developer is the most expensive mistake a non-technical founder can make. Do these 7 things to save $50k+ for your MVP (avoid Upwork/Fiverr):

1. Define your product strategy first

→ Spend 2-3 days defining exactly what you're building and why. 
→ Don’t scroll Upwork/Fiver for a developer.


2. Create detailed user journeys

→ Every screen. Every interaction. Every edge case.
→ If you can't draw it, you can't build it.
→ Otherwise you’ll end up trusting a developer with the entire thing.


3. Prioritize features ruthlessly

→ What's your V1? V2? Never?
→ Cut 50% of what you think you need.


4. Wireframe everything

→ Before design and before code. Do wireframes.
→ It’s cheap to change (trust me on that one). 


5. Weekly demos with the developer

→ See progress. Catch misunderstandings early.
→ Fast feedback loops save thousands.


6. Fixed scope, not fixed time

→ Tell the developer "Build these 10 features" not "work for 3 months."
→ Not "work for 3 months." or "work for 10 hours this week."


7. Kill features that aren't working

→ Sunk cost fallacy kills startups.


The math:

A few days of product strategy work upfront can prevent $50k-$100k in wrong features.

I've seen founders spend $80k building the wrong thing. Then start over.

Don't be that founder.

The fastest way to make $100k MRR with SaaS 

Copy all of your competitors features:

No, seriously.

But only once you take this into account.

Your competitor has 50 features. 
They’re proven over 5+ years.
They’re clearly making revenue.

Just copy them all right?

Here's the problem:

Your competitor built those 50 features over 5 years.

They added most of them because:

→ A big customer asked for it
→ Someone on the team thought it was cool
→ They were trying to justify a price increase

They probably regret half of them.

What to do instead:

1. Identify their core value proposition (usually 2-3 features)
2. Find which features their customers actually use (check G2 reviews, Reddit, support forums)
3. Identify what they do poorly (read 1-star reviews)
4. Build that. Better.

Don't compete on feature count. 

You'll lose.

Compete on solving one problem exceptionally well.

What's the one thing your competitor does that you could do 10x better?

Slinging Inboxes

I do stuff for fun nowadays. Enjoying every minute of it

Ben Rasmussen

Cold email success follows a brutally simple formula.

Create an offer better than everybody else. 
Get a lead list of people you'll send it to. 
Get $3 per month inboxes to send emails from. 
Send 10,000 emails per day. 
Book calls. 
Close deals. 
Collect cash.

That's the entire game.

But most agencies complicate this unnecessarily. They add layers of complexity that don't improve results.

Advanced deliverability tactics. Sophisticated personalization systems. Complex automation workflows. Multi-channel sequences.

None of that matters if you haven't nailed the basics.

The fundamentals are almost embarrassingly simple. But simple doesn't mean easy.

Creating an offer better than everybody else requires understanding what your market actually wants. Not what you think they should want.

Getting a quality lead list means knowing exactly who has the problem you solve and budget to fix it.

Sending 10,000 emails daily requires infrastructure. Multiple domains. Multiple inboxes. Systems that don't break.

Booking calls means your offer resonated enough to get a response. Closing deals means you can actually deliver on what you promised.

These steps sound straightforward until you try executing them consistently.

Most people fail at step one. They never build an offer compelling enough to cut through inbox noise.

Others nail the offer but can't scale volume. They send a few hundred emails and wonder why results are inconsistent.

The magic happens when you execute all steps simultaneously. Great offer plus massive volume plus solid closing process.

But entrepreneurs keep searching for shortcuts. They want the sophisticated strategy that bypasses fundamentals.

There isn't one.

Master the basics first. Everything else is just optimization on top of a foundation that either works or doesn't.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more cold email reality.

Most cold email agencies die within 6 months.


Not because they picked the wrong niche.
Not because their copy sucked.
Not because deliverability killed them.


They died because they signed one broke client with a trash offer, got yelled at, and became too scared to do lead gen ever again.


What actually happens:

You're desperate for your first client. 
You book a call with someone who says they're doing $30k/month. 
They have employees. 
They "close 50% of their sales calls."

You think,”Ahh, this is legitimate.”

So you sign them.

But what they don't tell you is they've never closed a stranger in their life. 

Every client they have came from warm referrals or someone they've known for 10 years.

You start sending them cold traffic leads.

Their close rate goes to 0%.

They blame your leads. 

"These are garbage. This doesn't work."

But the reality… 

They run a shitty business that only works with warm traffic.

You can't fix that with better email copy.

Now you're stuck. 

You got yelled at. 

You're insecure. 

You stop doing outreach because you're scared of going through that again.

Your pipeline dries up.

Revenue hits $0.

And you go, "Cold email doesn't work..."

You shut down.


Here's the fix:

Stop signing clients who don't have a proven cold traffic offer.

Interview them on the call. 

Ask,
"How do you currently get clients?"
"What's your close rate on strangers vs. referrals?"
"Have you ever run paid ads or cold outreach before?"

If they've only closed warm traffic, walk away. 

It doesn't matter how desperate you are.

When you sign clients with real cold traffic offers, everything flips. 

It's easy to get them results. 

They're happy. You keep doing lead gen. More clients come in.

That's the cycle you want.

Pick better clients. Everything else comes on its own.

Your cold email campaigns don't fail because of your subject lines.

They're failing because when prospects click your domain, they find absolutely nothing.

Let me explain what's actually happening:

You send a cold email. 

Prospect is intrigued. 

They want to verify you're real before replying.

So they do what every human does...

They copy your sending domain and paste it into their browser.

yourcompany dot com

404 page.

Gone. They never reply.

You have no idea this just happened. 

You think it's the script. 
So you rewrite the opener 10 times. 
You A/B test subject lines. 
You add personalization tokens.

None of it matters.

Because the real problem is you don't exist on the internet.

For example:

Let's say you send 10,000 emails. 

You get a 2% reply rate. 

That's 200 replies.

Of those 200, maybe 50 are interested enough to check if you're legit.

They Google your domain. Nothing.

You just lost 50 qualified prospects who were ready to book a call. 

Not because your offer was bad. 

Because you had no trust infrastructure.

Now multiply that across every campaign you run.

You're bleeding meetings every single day and blaming the copy.

Here's the fix:

Build a landing page before you send a single email.

It doesn't need to be fancy. It needs to exist and answer these questions:

What do you actually do?

Why should they believe you can do it? (social proof)

What's the risk if they try? (guarantee)

That's it.

Then link the domain in your email signature. Let prospects verify you're real without asking.

When they see a real business with proof and a guarantee, reply rates go up. 

Ghosting goes down.

The script was never the problem.

Stop rewriting emails. 

Start building the infrastructure that makes prospects trust you before the call even happens.

Cold email works when you look like a real business. 

Everything else is just noise.

Cold email in 2026 isn't broken.

Personalization is actually effective one percent of the time.

The other ninety-nine percent? You're wasting hours for convenience.

This might be the most expensive lie in cold email. 

The belief that personalization magically transforms campaigns.

It doesn't.

Most personalization serves ego, not results. It makes you feel good about your outreach. 

Like you're being thoughtful and strategic.

But prospects don't care that you noticed their recent LinkedIn post. They care whether your offer solves their problem.

Personalization often becomes procrastination disguised as strategy. You spend three hours researching fifty prospects instead of sending to five thousand.

The math doesn't work.

Even worse, people use edge cases to justify their approach. "What if this prospect is special and needs customization?"

Sure. That happens. In very few cases.

Maybe you're reaching out to enterprise accounts worth millions. Maybe you're targeting twenty key decision makers in your entire market.

Then personalize away.

But if you're doing lead generation at scale, personalization kills your economics. You're trading volume for a marginal improvement in response rate that doesn't justify the time investment.

The "what if the prospect is special" argument is just fear of rejection at scale. It's easier to personalize fifty emails than face five hundred non-responses.

I get it. Rejection hurts less when you can tell yourself you tried really hard on each email.

But this approach keeps you broke.

The cold emailers making real money understand something uncomfortable. Most prospects aren't special. They have the same problems, want the same outcomes, and respond to the same clear value propositions.

Treat them accordingly. Send volume. Let the offer do the work.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more cold email insights.

The richest cold emailers I know don't obsess over subject lines.

They don't spend weeks crafting hyper-personalized templates. They definitely don't warm up domains for three months before launching.

They just quietly send massive volume with grand-slam offers.

This pattern keeps appearing. The people making serious money from cold email operate completely differently than what gets taught online.

While beginners optimize subject lines and debate personalization strategies, top performers focus on one thing: offer quality combined with volume.

They understand something fundamental about outbound. The offer matters infinitely more than the wrapper it comes in.

A mediocre subject line with an incredible offer will outperform a creative subject line with a weak offer every single time.

These operators typically work within B2B services or software. Markets with active demand and clear value propositions.

They're not trying to educate prospects on why they need something. They're reaching people who already understand the problem and presenting an obviously superior solution.

The volume component matters too. They send aggressively. Tens of thousands of emails daily across multiple campaigns.

But volume without a strong offer just scales failure. The offer does the heavy lifting.

Meanwhile most agencies spend months perfecting deliverability tactics and personalization systems. They launch with weak offers wrapped in perfect execution.

Then they wonder why results don't match their effort.

There might be a lesson here about priorities. Build an offer so strong that prospects would respond even if your email had typos.

Then scale the hell out of it.

Follow me Ben Rasmussen for more cold email reality.

taplio

The Battle

Ferenc Fekete

Ben Rasmussen

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreFerenc Fekete's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreBen Rasmussen's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Ferenc Fekete

Ben Rasmussen

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);}Ferenc Fekete's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreBen Rasmussen's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreFerenc Fekete's LinkedIn Performance