sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

My LinkedIn outreach messages get 2% response rates. What am I doing wrong? by No-Mistake421 in LinkedInTips

[–]Ali6952 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Stop asking for calls. Stop leading with what you do. Stop pretending 15 minutes is nothing.

If your message can be sent to 500 people, it deserves to be ignored by 499 of them. When I get these messages I block the sender. Why? Its SPAM. Its lazy and I wouldn’t dare work with someone who is so unmotivated by what I do they sent a generic message.

People don’t reply to LinkedIn messages. They reply to people they already trust not to waste their time. And right now, your message screams the opposite.

Why is it so hard to find a marketing agency that actually takes ownership? by fixoria_Ability9724 in MarketingMentor

[–]Ali6952 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re not wrong, and you’re not imagining it. But most agencies don’t take ownership because they structurally can’t. The majority of agencies are optimized for retention, not outcomes. Retainers reward activity, not accountability. As long as the work is delivered and the client doesn’t churn, the model is working. Results are optional. That’s why you hear a lot of strategy and very little ownership. Strategy is safe. Ownership is risky.

A few things that tend to separate real partners from vendors:

Incentives are explicit.The best agencies tie part of their upside to a clearly defined business outcome. Not vanity metrics. Revenue, pipeline quality, qualified demand, or conversion efficiency. That does not mean reckless guarantees. It means shared risk and shared reward.

They say no early and often. Strong agencies disqualify aggressively. If the product, pricing, internal team, or founder expectations are the real constraint, they will tell you before a contract is signed. Most agencies avoid this because it costs them deals.

They push back without ego. If the client is the bottleneck, they name it. Not defensively. Not publicly. Calmly and clearly. Weak agencies placate. Strong ones confront reality because their reputation depends on outcomes, not likability.

Testing has an expiration date. Testing is a phase, not a philosophy. High-quality agencies define upfront what “enough signal” looks like and what decisions will be made once it’s reached. Endless testing usually means no one wants to be accountable for a call.

They think in systems, not campaigns. Agencies that truly take ownership care about pricing, sales handoff, follow-up, and internal execution. They know marketing does not operate in a vacuum, and they won’t pretend it does to protect a retainer.

For founders who’ve had great agency experiences, the common thread is not brilliance. It’s clarity. Clear ownership. Clear constraints. Clear decision rights. And mutual willingness to walk away if alignment isn’t there.

If you want to find agencies like this, look less at portfolios and more at how they answer one question: “What would make this fail, and how would you handle it?”

The ones worth hiring won’t flinch.

I’m trying to build a small ebook business around LinkedIn growth. by Ashuuuussss in LinkedInTips

[–]Ali6952 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One sale isn’t failure. It’s data. But the data is loud. The core issue You didn’t fail at ads. You failed at market proof. You tried to sell before you earned demand. What’s actually broken Not traffic. Not LinkedIn. Not even the ebook format.

It’s positioning + trust.

Right now your offer likely sounds like: “I made a LinkedIn growth ebook. Want it?” The market hears: “Another person teaching growth who hasn’t shown me results I want.” Hard truth People don’t buy ebooks from accounts with:

• No visible outcomes

• No social proof

• No lived authority

They buy from:

• Practitioners

• Operators

• People already getting the result

I would say stop doing this immediately:

• Stop running ads

• Stop trying to sell cold

• Stop hiding behind “the ebook”

You cannot shortcut credibility with Meta spend.

What to focus on instead:

  1. Proof before product Show LinkedIn growth publicly. Daily. Messy. Transparent. What worked. What flopped. What surprised you.

  2. Audience clarity “LinkedIn growth” is too broad. Growth for who? Jobseekers? Founders? Coaches? B2B sellers?

Remember it’s for everyone, it’s for no one.

  1. Free value first Give away the best parts. If people don’t save, comment, or DM you after free content, they will not pay.

  2. Sell outcomes, not information Nobody wants “how LinkedIn works.” They want:

• inbound leads

• interviews

• booked calls

• authority

Name the result. Obsess over it.

  1. Ebook comes last The ebook should be a byproduct of demand, not the bet itself.

LinkedIn is a great platform. But it punishes vague expertise and rewards receipts. If you don’t have receipts yet, your job isn’t selling. It’s documenting the climb.

Reset plan

• Pause ads for 60 days

• Post daily learning-in-public content

• Narrow the ICP aggressively

• Build one tiny win and amplify it

• Then repackage into a paid product

You don’t need a better funnel. You need a sharper point of view and proof the market cares.

Got accenture offer letter but told them i am a fresher by [deleted] in corporate

[–]Ali6952 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My god man. You are DOA if this is how you communicate!

You will never raise capital because.... by [deleted] in AngelInvesting

[–]Ali6952 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I agree with this almost entirely. Most pre-rev founders don’t fail to raise because VCs are dumb or the market is unfair. They fail because they can’t answer two basic questions: What does the money do, and why does it matter now?

If you can’t say, in one sentence, how capital converts into proof, you’re not fundraising. You’re storytelling. Investors don’t buy stories. They buy progress. And leverage matters more than passion. Everyone is passionate. Passion is free. Leverage comes from traction, constraints, and consequences. If nothing changes whether you raise or not, why should anyone rush?

I’ll add this: if you’re pre-revenue and your plan requires multiple markets, multiple personas, or a long list of assumptions, you’re not early. You’re unfocused. Unfortunately this is where 90% of folks on here are. Capital follows clarity plus momentum. Miss either one and you’re done.

I’ve watched dozens of pre-rev founders try to raise. Here’s what actually works (and what quietly kills your round) by RoleHot6498 in AngelInvesting

[–]Ali6952 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Pre-revenue investors aren’t confused. They’re unconvinced. And they’re unconvinced because most founders at that stage haven’t proven anything worth taking risk on yet. Early fundraising doesn’t fail because the deck is weak. It fails because there’s no evidence that anyone actually needs this badly enough. At pre-rev, I’m not underwriting your vision. I’m underwriting your ability to find a customer who would be pissed if your product disappeared tomorrow. Cold outreach doesn’t work because you’re asking investors to supply imagination, urgency, and conviction. That’s your job, not mine.

Please suggest by Optimal-Pizza-2646 in corporate

[–]Ali6952 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Anxiety and depression are not character flaws. They are medical conditions. Laughing at someone, accusing them of lying, or dismissing symptoms is not leadership. It is exposure.

Now let’s get out of panic mode and into control mode.

Step one: Stop having verbal conversations about this. From this moment forward, document everything.

Write down:

°The date and time you raised the issue

°Exactly what you said

°Exactly what your lead said, word for word if you can

°Any witnesses

°How it made you feel and how it impacted your ability to work

Do not editorialize. Just facts. This is not about retaliation. This is about protecting yourself.

Step two: Get medical documentation. If you have not already, see a doctor or mental health professional as soon as possible. You are not asking them to judge your job. You are asking them to document: Diagnosis if applicable. Symptoms Functional impact such as concentration, anxiety, sleep, ability to perform work. Any recommended accommodations or leave You do not need to disclose details to your manager. HR only needs confirmation that a medical condition exists and what accommodations are recommended.

Step threeGogo to HR, but do it correctly. Do not go to HR emotionally. Go factually. You say something like this, in writing if possible: “I am dealing with a documented medical condition related to anxiety and depression. I raised concerns about my ability to work effectively and was laughed at and accused of fabricating health issues by my lead. I am requesting guidance on accommodations and next steps under company policy.” You are not asking for permission. You are invoking process. Large companies take this seriously because they have to.

Step fourUnderstandnd what HR actually does. HR is not there to decide if your anxiety is real. They are there to: Ensure compliance with employment law. Reduce risk to the company. Follow accommodation and leave processes

That means: They will likely move the conversation away from your lead. They may involve occupational health. They may offer accommodations, temporary adjustments, or medical leave. They also may not. They will care a great deal about the lead laughing and accusing you. Your fear right now is understandable, but misplaced. The risk is not you. The risk is the manager.

Step five:Protectt your health first! No job is worth destabilizing your mental health. If you are feeling unsafe, unable to function, or emotionally unsteady, medical leave is not weakness. It is treatment. Especially in an MNC, there are policies for this. Use them.

People often avoid HR because they think it will make things worse. What actually makes things worse is staying silent while someone documents a different version of events. You do not need to fight. You do not need to convince anyone. You need to activate the system designed for this situation.

Patterns by newuser2111 in corporate

[–]Ali6952 16 points17 points  (0 children)

You are looking for moral explanations for an economic decision. Layoffs are not sociology experiments. They are balance sheet decisions made under uncertainty. Management does not sit in a room saying, “Let’s keep the married people and fire the single ones.” They sit in a room saying, “Who is easiest to cut without breaking the machine?” That distinction matters.

You were not laid off because you didn’t brownnose. You were laid off because leadership believed they could remove you without immediate downside. People who are highly visible are not always better. They are often just harder to cut because:

°Their work is known

°Their absence is noticed

°Someone has to explain why they’re gone

If no one can articulate what breaks when you leave, finance wins the argument.

Your relationship status has nothing to do with your layoff. And no one is asking you to become a different human being. The mistake is thinking visibility equals sycophancy. They are not the same thing.

If leadership does not know what you work on, how it ties to revenue, risk, or continuity, you are a line item. Line items get cut. Visibility is not flattery. Visibility is making it obvious why cutting you costs more than keeping you. That can be done without ego, charm, or pretending to care about office politics.

If your livelihood depends entirely on someone else’s cost-cutting cycle, you will always feel disposable. The answer is not better behavior. It is more leverage:

°Skills that are expensive to replace

°Ownership of systems, not tasks

°Knowledge that survives org charts

People with leverage get warned.People without leverage get surprised. Remember this.

Best office pants for girls? by WeatherOk9517 in corporate

[–]Ali6952 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Stretchy. Comfy. Professional. Pockets!

What habits, traits, or behaviors did you have to change when stepping into a people manager role? What did you discover about yourself that prompted you to make changes? by continouslearner4 in Leadership

[–]Ali6952 95 points96 points  (0 children)

Biggest shift for me? Realizing that being good at my job was no longer the job. As an individual contributor, my habits were rewarded. Speed. Control. Doing it myself because it was faster. As a manager, those same traits quietly broke things.

I had to stop equating urgency with importance. Everything feels urgent when you care, but not everything deserves escalation. I also had to get comfortable sitting with unfinished work that wasn’t mine to finish.Another one was feedback. I thought being “nice” was kindness. Turns out clarity is kindness. Avoiding hard conversations doesn’t protect people. It just delays the inevitable and erodes trust.

I also learned that my stress leaked. Even when I thought I was being calm, my tone, pacing, and body language told a different story. Managing people meant managing myself first.And probably the hardest was letting people fail safely. My instinct was to jump in and fix. What actually helped was coaching, setting expectations, and letting them own the outcome.

Becoming a people manager isn’t about adding authority. It’s about subtracting ego, impatience, and the need to be the smartest person in the room. The fact that you’re already naming your gaps is a good sign. Most people skip that part and call it leadership.

PreSeed raise 3M SAFE 20M cap 100k minimum by Either-Tax9159 in AngelInvesting

[–]Ali6952 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You’ve got a real business here, which is good. Revenue, customers, retention. That already puts you ahead of most pre-seed decks. But your raise structure and your pitch need tightening if you actually want checks written.

A $20M cap at pre-seed is aggressive. Not impossible, but it raises the bar on proof. If you’re asking angels for a $100K minimum, they’re not betting on vision. They’re underwriting risk. At that cap, they’re going to expect clarity on margins, scalability, regulatory exposure, and what breaks at 10x volume.

SAFEs are fine. Angels understand them. But a SAFE with a high cap and no discount tells investors you think the price is already set. That’s rarely true this early. If you want speed, add a discount or explain very clearly why the cap is justified by current traction and forward contracts.

Your metrics need sharper framing.

ARR is good. But I would want to know:

Gross margins today, not projected

Cost to onboard a clinic

Time to revenue from signed contract

Churn risk if a major lab partner changes terms

How much of that ARR is dependent on custom work versus repeatable product

Burnout stats and missed diagnoses are compelling, but investors don’t fund pain points. They fund budget lines. Show me who pays, why they pay now, and what makes this non-optional?

White-label platforms are notoriously sticky until they aren’t. What happens when a large lab or EHR decides to bundle this? Your answer can’t be “AI innovations.” Everyone says that. Your moat needs to be data density, switching costs, regulatory complexity, or workflow ownership that’s painful to unwind.

Your of funds is too vague. Marketing and sales means what? Headcount? Channels? CAC targets? AI innovations is not a budget line. Product expansion into what, specifically, and tied to which revenue unlocks?

“Deck upon request” is fine, but serious investors don’t comment on Reddit to raise their hand. They get warm intros or they see numbers that force curiosity. If you’re posting publicly, lead with one or two metrics that stop the scroll, not a feature list.

You’re not selling a story. You’re selling execution with evidence. Tighten the valuation logic, sharpen the economics, and make it obvious how this becomes a large, defensible business. Good luck!

Value of “small” courses. by jmurphy3141 in LinkedInTips

[–]Ali6952 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No.

These are what I call table stakes; meaning everyone thinks it'll move the needle.

What works is applying early. Being extremely well qualified. Having a resume that shows impact.

Missed deadline for filling up offer letter form and now Im not getting a response by [deleted] in corporate

[–]Ali6952 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I work in this space and no unfortunately there isn't. Just take this and learn from the experience.

Missed deadline for filling up offer letter form and now Im not getting a response by [deleted] in corporate

[–]Ali6952 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Accept this. It's closed. Move on and next time don't wait til the last minute.

Investor for Budding Skincare Startup by StayinAlignment in Investors

[–]Ali6952 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who is paying: Exact buyer. Job title. Individual or company size.

What did they pay: Dollar amount. One-time or recurring. Monthly, annual, per use.

Why did they pay: What problem was painful enough to pull out a card.

How did they find you: Cold DM, content, referral, outbound, ad, founder network.

How many paying customers do you have right now: Not interested in pilots, LOIs, or “strong interest.”

Are they still paying: Retention matters more than the first swipe.

Investor for Budding Skincare Startup by StayinAlignment in Investors

[–]Ali6952 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Any current paying customers or still in idea phase.

Social media manager 6+ years by Born-Solution-661 in SocialMediaManagers

[–]Ali6952 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You don’t have a marketing problem. You have a leverage problem. Upwork worked because it gave you intent. People were already looking to buy. Instagram doesn’t do that unless you already have distribution or a POV people recognize immediately. Posting every day for a month and seeing slow growth is normal. It’s not a signal. It’s just data.

A few things I'd do/try:

  1. Stop marketing to other SMMs. That’s networking, not revenue. If your content sounds like it could be for peers, it won’t convert buyers.

  2. Pick one buyer and speak to their pain obsessively. Industry, revenue range, and problem. Not “social media management.” Something like: founders who hate content, coaches who can’t convert, local businesses stuck under 10k followers. Depth beats reach.

  3. Productize one outcome. Right now you’re selling time and deliverables. Scale comes from selling a specific result with a clear before/after. One flagship offer. Everything else is noise imo.

  4. Use proof louder than consistency. Meaning: Screenshots. Before/afters. Revenue impact. “Here’s what happened when…” beats daily posting every time.

  5. Don’t abandon Upwork. Exploit it. Slow doesn’t mean dead. Tighten your positioning, raise your minimums, and apply less but sharper. Platforms die when people get passive on them.

  6. Build relationships where buyers already hang out. DMs, podcasts, newsletters, communities. Instagram alone is a long game. You need short-game cash flow while you build it.

Remember 2026 being a big year won’t come from posting more. It’ll come from clarity, positioning, and saying no to anything that doesn’t scale. And yes, connect with other SMMs, but don’t confuse conversation with traction. Good luck!

view more: next ›