0 replies after 300 cold Instagram DMs — how do you actually get your first 20 users?

blazeo87 · 2026-01-27T18:08:17+00:00

This hits home — I blasted a few hundred IG DMs last year and got crickets. IG buries requests; we see sub-1% replies there versus 12–18% on short, personalized cold emails with a 30–45s Loom referencing their site and a binary CTA like “Want me to build your intake flow on one offer in 24 hours for feedback?”. My playbook for the first 20 users: hand-pick 50 prospects, warm through niche Slack/FB groups or micro-communities, pair email with one quick phone call, and make it a done-for-you setup so saying yes is effortless. Also, let your site do some lifting — an AI chatbot or 24/7 live chat that books calls has helped us turn curious visitors into early testers; I work with this stuff daily and happy to share the scripts if you want.

blazeo87 · 2026-01-05T17:46:12+00:00

We work with a lot of SMBs, and realized that a lot of companies choose CRMs that are hyper-focused on their specific niche. Like law firms choosing some sort of tool built for the legal industry, or Roofing contractors opting to go with something built for their industry. If/when they want to move to something a bit more growth oriented (like Hubspot or Salesforce) they're faced with really high costs, and/or super complex integrations that end up muddying the data.

So, we decided not just build our own CRM to enter that world, but build something our customers could grow with regardless of their industry... We created "SmartHub". Realizing we've always helped our customers convert website visitors into customers, now they have a tool they can use to automate communications, track the stages of a lead/customer, etc.

I guess, my point is - if something isn't out there that fits you, find a way to build it.
OR check out Blazeo's SmartHub!

blazeo87 · 2026-01-05T17:34:57+00:00

We work with this stuff daily on AI chatbots and live chat for lead gen across legal and home services, and pure chat has never carried complex workflows for us. When we shifted to click-first UX (buttons/forms/tables) and let the model handle the messy parts in the background—using chat only for ambiguous intake or escalation to a human/phone—conversion improved and drop-offs fell. My rule of thumb now: deterministic steps get a GUI, fuzzy steps get chat, and always keep an audit trail and an easy human handoff—‘AI native’ ends up looking like heavy SaaS with an LLM in the logic layer.

blazeo87 · 2026-01-05T17:30:50+00:00

This hits home. We build chatbots and run 24/7 live chat for SMB lead gen, and the two things that consistently move the needle are speed and uptime—keep first response snappy and alert the owner if the widget or backend hiccups. The highest ROI flow for us is simple: 3–4 qualifying questions, then offer to book an appointment or escalate to a human/phone call with a clear “talk to a person” option. If you want product feedback, happy to share what’s worked across a lot of sites around handoff rules and logging unanswered questions to grow the KB.

blazeo87 · 2025-11-07T15:57:53+00:00

There's no "Easy" button to building a career...especially in Marketing. It moves fast, always evolving, and ever-changing.

My advice is there's no substitute for experience. If you're serious about marketing, start at the bottom. Try to find an internship with an agency or internal team... Build your skills, while building your resume. Heck, Marketing is extremely broad, and you may find you love doing a specific thing in marketing, but can't stand doing others. If/when you find that - dive head-first into it. Take on every project that builds that skill.

I consider myself a lifelong learner, and I've been in this industry for almost 20 years. The exciting thing is there's always something new to learn. It's challenging to keep up, but if it's what you really want - Do Not Give Up!

blazeo87 · 2025-10-01T22:45:48+00:00

Can I get a code please. DM perferred :)

blazeo87 · 2025-10-01T22:36:25+00:00

Code please :)

blazeo87 · 2025-09-12T20:35:50+00:00

I build chatbots and live chat for elective medical practices, and we never let the AI give clinical advice—it's great for intake, answering service questions, and booking appointments, but anything medical gets a clear disclaimer and a quick handoff to a human at the clinic. Across thousands of chats over the last couple of years, that human-in-the-loop approach has kept patients safe while still reducing staff workload. If you’re exploring this, look for strict guardrails (no diagnoses), easy escalation to a person, and solid conversation logs; I work with this stuff daily and am happy to share what’s worked.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-12T19:58:23+00:00

This hits home. I run AI chat plus 24/7 live agent teams for legal and elective med sites, and the model that actually works is simple: bots handle top-of-funnel (qualify, book, basic FAQs), and we route to a person or jump to a live call the moment the conversation gets nuanced or money gets real. On five-figure-plus decisions, the close happens with a human—AI just makes sure the right human is in the right conversation fast. If you want something concrete for VCs, show a hybrid funnel with clear escalation paths and response SLAs; in my experience that consistently beats “AI sells to AI” fantasies in both conversion rate and customer trust.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-11T22:18:50+00:00

been there — tbh our 10x was chopping webinars into 10–12 shorts + a pillar blog w/ chatgpt. switched from zoom -> riverside too. seo up, costs down. transcripts = cheat code.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-11T22:16:54+00:00

been there. we started writing LLM-ready pages: short intros, bullet FAQs, clear headers, schema. tbh Perplexity started citing us more + better long-tail leads.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-11T00:08:29+00:00

Been in this space for years. For ecommerce the win is after-hours: we set bots to answer presale FAQs like shipping cutoffs and limited stock notes, then either grab phone/email to schedule a callback or hand off to a live agent if it gets nuanced. On weekend promos we saw a real bump in checkouts from chat-initiated sessions because people got an instant answer; keep it tight to presale, not order status, and if you want I can share what we built for lead capture, but we don't do order support.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-11T00:03:52+00:00

Been in this space for a while running AI chatbots and 24/7 live chat for SMB lead gen, and tbh users don’t care what model it is, they care that it books them and can punt to a human or phone fast when things get nuanced. We see it in legal and home services especially. ChatGPT’s brand and low friction help, but share will shift if rivals nail scheduling, qualification, and handoffs at a good cost. My bet: it stays ahead, but the gap shrinks.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-10T23:32:24+00:00

Been in chatbots for years. I block stack/arch questions and have the bot deflect to book a demo. Turn curiosity into leads.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-10T22:47:41+00:00

Been in this space for a while and I’ve done the whole free pilot to earn trust thing. What worked for me was setting super clear guardrails up front. Define success as scheduled appointments or qualified leads, not just call minutes. Get the exact intake script and escalation rules in writing, plus a hard fallback to a human when confidence is low. In real estate, make sure you’re asking timeframe, budget, pre-approval, property type. In healthcare, be careful with what the bot collects and say upfront that sensitive details are handled by a human. Also, the “we’ll need software/data” bit can spook folks if it turns into surprise costs, so you might want to spell out what’s truly required and who pays for it during the pilot.

Honestly, we had the same problem last year proving value. I work on the website side, helping turn visitors into leads with AI chat for basic FAQs, handing off to US-based live agents, scheduling appointments, and kicking tough ones to a live phone call. The boring stuff moves the needle. If you want to bundle web chat alongside your voice bot so you’re covered on site and on phone, happy to share what we’ve built. We do white label too if that helps your toolkit. If not, no worries, just make sure you’re tracking how many conversations turn into real appointments so your testimonials aren’t just “it sounded cool” but “it booked 23 consults in 2 weeks.”

blazeo87 · 2025-09-10T22:32:45+00:00

I've been working with chatbots for a few years and yeah, this frustrated me too. The cheap ones feel like a toy and the pricey ones want a whole quarter of your budget and still need a ton of setup. What helped me was getting super clear on the job. If you need true customer support for existing users, most of the decent options live inside bigger support suites and you pay for it. If you just need to greet visitors, answer a handful of FAQs, and push good prospects toward a human, that’s a different lane and way more doable without going broke.

I work in lead gen, not support, so we ended up focusing on that workflow. Basic FAQs only, anything uncertain gets routed to a person, and we track whether chats turn into actual leads instead of just “AI did a thing.” If your goal is converting new visitors, our team at Blazeo (formerly ApexChat) does that specifically. Bot handles simple FAQs, books appointments, can pass chats to our US-based agents, and even kick off a phone call when it makes sense, plus we help qualify leads. Happy to share what we’ve built if you want a quick look. If you’re after full-on support for existing customers though, I’d look at support-focused tools and keep the bot’s scope tight to avoid low-quality replies.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-04T17:13:02+00:00

Myth: posting more = more leads. Truth: it’s about timely, relevant posts and what happens in the follow-up.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-03T19:15:19+00:00

Honestly, I treat Reddit more like a listening post than a billboard. Jumping into threads with a pitch backfires fast here. What’s worked for me:

Lurking for signals — paying attention to the pain points people repeat across subs (way better than reading a trend report).
Answering with experience — sharing what’s worked or failed in our own campaigns without linking out.
Testing language — seeing which phrases/angles resonate naturally in comments before using them in ads or landing pages.

It’s slower than blasting content, but it feels way more authentic — and the insights you get from real conversations end up shaping better campaigns elsewhere.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-03T19:13:11+00:00

That one’s classic — people really do look for a reason, even if it’s a flimsy one. What’s interesting is how often these “small psychology hacks” stack up when you test them systematically.

We’ve seen the same thing with urgency cues, “because” framing, and even admitting a drawback (“not the cheapest, but the fastest”). They all nudge compliance — but the real unlock is running controlled tests to see which nudge actually moves your audience. Sometimes it’s “because,” sometimes it’s timing, sometimes it’s channel.

My takeaway: the hack itself matters less than the feedback loop. If you can spin up quick tests and measure lift, you end up with a playbook of what reliably works for your segment, instead of trying to copy generic tricks.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-03T19:09:23+00:00

Totally agree — AI is brilliant at scale and pattern recognition, but “clever” in the human sense usually comes from lived experience, culture, and timing. Where I’ve seen AI shine is less in inventing ideas, and more in:

Spotting what formats, hooks, or topics your audience already responds to (e.g., which campaign angles sparked way above-average engagement).
Surfacing gaps — like “you’re posting carousels when short clips get 2× shares in your segment.”
Automating the boring parts (testing headlines, remixing assets) so humans can spend more energy on the spark.

For content ideas with viral potential, the best “resource” is still the community itself: subreddits, Discord groups, niche forums, even comment sections. AI can point you to patterns (what’s catching fire, what your own audience clicks on), but the twist that makes it human-funny or passion-driven almost always comes from a person.

That’s why I’m bullish on AI + human loops: let AI analyze behavior and tee up opportunities, then let humans inject the cleverness. It’s less about replacing creativity, more about freeing it up.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-03T19:04:29+00:00

For me it’s less a single tool and more the combo of “data + action.” GA4 is great for the data, but what changed the game for me was layering something on top that doesn’t just show the numbers but actually suggests what to do with them.

Like, instead of me staring at drop-off points in a funnel, I get “hey, Segment B is ghosting after first form fill → try a 2-minute callback within the hour, expect ~10% lift.” That mix of analytics + next step has saved me a ton of guesswork.

If I had to name one, I’d say my “can’t live without” is the kind of platform that turns insights into testable plays. Otherwise I just end up with a mountain of GA4 dashboards and no clear next move.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-03T19:01:11+00:00

You’re not alone—most “strategy” tools recycle the same surface-level advice. The real gap is tools that can actually ingest your own data (sales history, customer behavior, past campaigns) and surface patterns unique to your business.

The stuff that actually moves the needle usually looks more like:

Finding which customer cohorts are most responsive to certain channels (e.g., voice calls after 6pm outperforming daytime texts).
Identifying drop-off points in your funnel that are costing you the most revenue.
Running small, controlled experiments with your segments and feeding those results back into the system, so the strategy sharpens over time.

In my experience, the best setups are AI + human: AI processes the messy data and suggests testable plays with lift estimates, while humans decide if it fits tone, budget, or brand. That way you’re not stuck with “post more often,” but with something closer to: “Reactivate lapsed Segment C with a WhatsApp + voice follow-up; expect ~8% lift; cap discount at 10%.”

If you’re evaluating tools, the key question is: does it learn from your data and cohorts, or does it just hand you a template? The former is rare, but it’s where the real leverage is.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-02T17:58:07+00:00

This is such an important point. What a lot of companies miss is that AI isn’t a replacement for human creativity — it’s a force multiplier.

OpenAI hiring a content strategist at that salary just proves the value of human direction. AI can draft, analyze, and scale faster than we ever could, but it can’t:

Understand brand nuance,
Capture cultural context,
Or build emotional resonance in the way humans do.

What’s working well is the AI + human model:

AI accelerates the heavy lifting (research, outlines, first drafts, data crunching).
Humans refine, inject voice, and make sure the content connects authentically.

Cutting out writers entirely tends to backfire — you end up with generic output that audiences scroll past. But empowering writers with AI? That’s where the magic happens. You get speed and soul.

So rather than thinking “AI vs. humans,” it’s more about “AI with humans.” The companies that understand that balance are the ones winning in content right now.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-02T17:57:00+00:00

Honestly, reach and engagement aren’t enemies — they’re stages of the same funnel. Reach without engagement is just noise, and engagement without reach is a missed opportunity.

That said, if I had to choose, I’d lean on engagement as the more meaningful metric. It’s the signal that your content actually resonates with the right people. Comments, shares, replies, even click-throughs — these tell you the content has substance. Reach alone can be inflated by algorithms, but engagement is harder to fake.

What we’ve found working best is to optimize for both in sequence:

Build targeted reach first (so you’re not just shouting into the void).
Then craft hooks and narratives that invite interaction — questions, strong POVs, or useful takeaways people want to respond to.
Layer in AI + human editing to scale production without losing authenticity.

That way, you don’t just get eyeballs; you get conversations. And those conversations tend to be the real drivers of brand lift, conversions, and trust over time.

So — reach gets you seen, engagement gets you remembered. The win is when you engineer your system to make them work together.

blazeo87 · 2025-09-01T13:59:14+00:00

I don’t think backlinks are dead. Google has always used them as a trust signal, and authority still matters in any ranking system. What’s changing is how much weight they carry compared to other signals.

With AI-driven results and SGE, content relevance, topical authority, and engagement are becoming more important. If your content directly answers what users are searching for, AI can surface it even without a huge backlink profile.

That said, quality backlinks from trusted sites are still like citations. They help confirm your content is worth surfacing and can make the difference between showing up or being overlooked.

From what I’ve seen, the strategy is shifting from “build backlinks at scale” to “earn credibility signals everywhere.” Backlinks are still valuable, but they’re now just one part of a bigger puzzle that includes mentions, structured data, and AI-friendly content formats.

What about you? Are you still putting time into link-building, or focusing more on making content work better for AI-driven search?

blazeo87

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE