Key Steps to Crafting a User-Centric Product:

Here's what I've learned running businesses that do $25 million a year:

Apollo and ZoomInfo are decent at finding companies - maybe 70% coverage there. But when it comes to finding the actual people inside those companies? Most of my clients see between 10% to 50% coverage. Usually it's around 20-30%. Why is the coverage so bad? Simple. These platforms mainly scrape LinkedIn.

Think about it. You know the owner of that small manufacturing plant making extruded corn snacks - like Cheetos? The guy with 50 employees and $2 million in revenue? He's not on LinkedIn. His plant manager isn't either. But they exist, they have budget, and they need services.

Same story in healthcare, construction, etc. These decision makers exist, but they're invisible to traditional databases.

What 90% coverage actually looks like

Last week we generated 300 meetings for our clients. This week alone, 30 for ourselves.

One of those clients is a debt recovery service in Colombia. Their offer is brutal they recover 80% of accounts over 90 days overdue in just 60 days, charging 100% success fee. We're getting them between 40 and 60 meetings per month.

The difference? We're reaching decision makers their competition can't even see.

Where the missing 70% actually are

After building lists for 80+ high-ticket B2B companies, here's where we find people:

We use 18 different data sources. Not one or two. Eighteen.

• Google searches (programmatic, not manual)

• Google Maps (especially for SMBs)

• Patent databases

• Chamber of Commerce records

• State business registrations

• Industry associations

• Conference attendee lists

• News mentions

• Podcast appearances

• And about 9 more sources

Our AI agents - we use Clay and custom n8n workflows - search all these sources automatically. They don't just find companies; they find the actual people making decisions.

The infrastructure most companies don't have

We manage about 2,000 email inboxes for our outbound. Two thousand. Why so many? Because if you send more than 30 emails per day from one inbox, you're going straight to spam. But with 2,000 inboxes, properly warmed up using AI, with parallel domains (never use your main domain), we hit 95% inbox placement. Not the promotions folder. Not spam. The actual primary inbox. Each parallel domain costs about $12. You need domains like yourcompany-automation.com, yourcompany-solutions.info. Different variations that protect your main domain reputation.

The three pillars that actually matter

I like to draw this as a triangle because it's one of the strongest geometric figures.

Pillar 1: The Offer Has to solve a real problem. Like recovering 80% of overdue accounts in 60 days with 100% success fee. That's an offer nobody says no to.

Pillar 2: The List The right companies AND the right people inside them. Not the 20% everyone else sees - the full 100%.

Pillar 3: The Infrastructure/Vehicle The technical capability to reach them. The 2,000 inboxes, the warm-up process, the sequencers, the unified inbox to manage responses.

Remove any pillar and everything collapses. It's like a three-legged stool.

What incomplete data is actually costing you

Your SDRs making $80K a year? They're spending 70% of their time doing research instead of selling. That's $56K per year per SDR wasted on manual research.

You're competing with everyone else for the same 20% of inboxes that Apollo shows. Those people get 200 emails a week. Your message is just noise.

Meanwhile, the plant manager who's NOT in Apollo? His inbox is clean. When he gets something relevant - and I mean actually relevant to his actual problems - he reads it. He responds.

The difference between 20% and 90% coverage

With 20% coverage (typical Apollo/ZoomInfo):

• You need 5,000 companies to find 1,000 contacts

• Those 1,000 contacts are oversaturated

• 0.5% response rate if you're lucky

• Maybe 5 meetings from 1,000 emails

With 90% coverage (using AI agents and 18 sources):

• 1,000 companies gives you 3,000-4,000 contacts

• Most have clean inboxes

• 5-15% response rates

• 50-150 meetings from the same effort

How we implement this (week by week)

Week 1-2: Set up infrastructure

• Create parallel domains

• Set up email inboxes (start with 20-50)

• Configure warm-up process

• Install sequencer systems

Week 3-4: Build your proprietary list

• Run AI agents across 18 sources

• Score each prospect (1-10 scale)

• Verify emails and phone numbers

• Identify the real decision makers

Week 5-6: First meetings arrive

• Launch sequences with proven playbooks

• We use 12 email playbooks, 8 LinkedIn approaches

• A/B test everything

• Scale what works

The investment vs the return

Full service (we do it for you): Starting at $2,997/month

Compare that to Apollo or ZoomInfo at $15,000-$30,000 per year, showing you 20% of the market that everyone else also sees.

Last week: 300 meetings for clients. That's not a typo. Three hundred qualified meetings where decision makers explicitly agreed to talk.

Questions about finding hidden decision makers

Is all this even legal? Yes. Everything is public information. Patents, business registrations, news mentions - all public. We're not hacking or buying shady lists. Just doing research at scale.

What industries have the worst coverage? Manufacturing (maybe 10% in traditional databases), Healthcare (15%), anything in Latin America (8-12%), Construction (10%), SMBs in general (10-20%).

Why don't big companies know about this? They do. Private equity firms especially. Why do you think they find deals nobody else sees? They're not using Apollo.

Can this work for high-ticket offers only? The math works better for high-ticket ($10K-$100K+ deals) because you can invest more per lead. But the methodology works for any B2B.

The bottom line with real numbers

You're either seeing 20% of your market or 90% of your market. There's no middle ground.

Your competition is fighting over the same recycled 20% from Apollo. Their inboxes are destroyed. Their response rates are trash.

Meanwhile, 80% of your market has clean inboxes, real problems, real budgets, and they've never heard of you or your competition.

We generated 300 meetings last week reaching that 80%.

What would 300 meetings do for your pipeline?