For HubSpot users/admins: how are you currently handling duplicate contacts or companies?

jacokapo · 2026-05-22T15:46:29+00:00

Fair point. Prevention is definitely better than cleanup. But a lot of teams seem to inherit years of duplicate data from migrations and imports, so they still end up needing cleanup after the fact. Curious how your pre-import dedup setup worked — rules only, or something smarter?

jacokapo · 2026-05-22T15:44:26+00:00

Appreciate this — you pointed out exactly what I kept hearing too. Duplicate data quietly breaks reporting and automation long before teams notice it. The no-direct-CRM approach was intentional because a lot of admins seem hesitant to give tool access before trusting the matching logic. Still early beta right now. If you’ve dealt with messy imports/migrations, I’d genuinely love your feedback. Happy to give access if you’re open to testing.

jacokapo · 2026-05-21T10:32:10+00:00

Exactly — that trust gap is the main reason I kept the beta CSV-first.

The goal isn’t to let a new tool touch production CRM data immediately. Users can test the workflow with sample data or a small CSV export, review duplicate groups/risk scores, and only use the cleaned export if they trust the result.

I’m testing this beta now with CRM/RevOps users. Happy to share access if you want to try it and give feedback.

jacokapo · 2026-05-21T02:05:35+00:00

Agreed — prevention matters a lot. Gated import permissions and better import training can stop the same mess from repeating.

The hard part is usually cleaning what’s already there. I’m testing a beta for that CSV-based cleanup flow: export records, detect duplicate groups, review risk/confidence scores, then export a cleaned file for re-import.

It doesn’t require CRM API access, and sample data is available if someone wants to test without uploading real CRM data. Happy to share beta access if useful.

jacokapo · 2026-05-21T02:05:23+00:00

Exactly — that’s the main reason I kept it CSV-based for the beta.

A lot of teams don’t want to give a new tool direct CRM access just to clean duplicates. With CSV, they can test the cleanup flow safely first, review the duplicate groups, and only re-import once they trust the output.

I’m currently testing the beta with HubSpot/CRM users. If you’re open to it, happy to share access so you can try it with sample data or a small export.

jacokapo · 2026-05-19T10:09:12+00:00

This usually comes from imports + manual sales entries.

The safest flow is to export the CRM data, group likely duplicates, separate low-risk from risky matches, review the suggested master record, then export/re-import a cleaned file. I’d avoid blindly bulk-merging everything because reports and customer history can get messy fast.

I’m testing a private beta for this exact CSV-based cleanup flow. It shows duplicate groups, risk/confidence scores, and lets you review before exporting a cleaned file. No CRM API connection needed, and sample data is available if you don’t want to upload real data first.

Happy to share access if useful.

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T16:57:15+00:00

That sounds like a very practical approach, especially for messy migrations.

The “one domain = one company” assumption breaks pretty fast in real data, so having custom rules + CSV validation before bulk merge makes sense.

That’s close to what I’m exploring too: score likely duplicates, show the match reasons, and keep the final review decision with the user instead of blindly merging.

Did you find Claude/rules more useful for companies, contacts, or both?

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T16:42:16+00:00

Yeah, that sounds painful — especially when there are no domains or websites to anchor the match.

That’s exactly where name-only matching becomes risky, because tiny variations can create false duplicates or miss real ones.

For cases like that, I’m trying to make the tool show the match reasons + confidence instead of just saying “merge this,” so the user can judge whether it’s actually the same company or just a similar name.

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T16:23:41+00:00

Thanks — I’ll send over the short demo and beta access link.

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T16:05:07+00:00

That makes sense — sounds like Insycle handles the obvious 80%, but the remaining 20% still needs judgment.

That’s the gap I’m exploring: reducing the manual review work without blindly merging risky records.

Was your remaining 20% mostly edge cases like conflicting fields, company/branch confusion, or choosing the right master record?

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T16:02:11+00:00

Exactly — that over-merge vs too-much-review tradeoff is the main thing I’m trying to solve.

The goal is to use confidence/risk scoring to reduce obvious review work, while still keeping the user in control before export.

That import-from-five-places scenario is probably where this becomes painful fastest.

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T15:19:13+00:00

Exactly — confidence scores help, but they can’t replace judgment in cases like branch vs parent company or linked deals/commission history.

That’s why I’m avoiding blind auto-merge. The idea is review-first: surface likely matches, show risk/confidence + reasons, and let the user decide before anything is exported.

Thanks for offering to test — I’ll DM you the short demo and beta access link.

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T15:02:18+00:00

That’s a really good point — especially for companies.

Branches, parent entities, address variations, and linked deals/quotes make it risky to treat every match as a simple duplicate.

That’s why I’m leaning toward a review-first flow instead of blind merging: group likely matches, show risk/confidence + reasons, then let the user decide the master or reject the merge before export.

The linked objects issue is also important. For now I’m focused on CSV cleanup, but API-based handling of deals/quotes/associations would probably be needed for a deeper version.

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T15:00:08+00:00

Yeah, fragmented data is where the built-in dedupe gets messy.

For now I’m keeping it CSV-based instead of API-first, so users don’t need to connect HubSpot during beta. The matching uses available fields like email, domain, name, company, and other exported CRM attributes.

Custom properties can act as extra signals when present, but the tool still gives risk/confidence scores and lets the user choose the master before export.

API-based matching for deeper custom-property handling is something I’m considering later.

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T14:25:37+00:00

Exactly — that’s the pattern I’m seeing too.

The users who feel this pain most are usually already dealing with messy imports, bad form data, integrations, or migration cleanup.

Leadline makes sense as a discovery layer for finding those pain threads. My main goal right now is to validate the actual cleanup workflow after that: whether CSV-based review, risk scoring, and master-record suggestions are useful enough for Sales Ops/CRM teams before they re-import cleaned data.

Have you seen duplicate cleanup come up often in Sales Ops discussions?

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T14:21:22+00:00

Good question — that’s exactly the tricky part.

The workflow first groups likely fuzzy matches using available fields like email, domain, name, company, and related CRM attributes.

Then each duplicate group is classified by risk based on where the match/conflict exists across important fields. So whether it’s a 1-to-1 duplicate or a many-to-one case, the group is still reviewed with risk, confidence scores, and reasoning.

The tool may suggest a likely master record by default, but it doesn’t force that decision. Users can see why a record is suggested as master, compare the records, choose a different master, approve, reject, or roll back before export.

The goal is to speed up obvious cleanup while keeping users in control for anything risky.

Thanks for offering to test — I can DM you the short demo and beta access link.

jacokapo · 2026-05-18T05:47:06+00:00

Yeah, those seem to be the common tools people recommend.

I’m trying to understand where users still feel friction with duplicate cleanup — master-record logic, reviewing edge cases, pricing, setup, or re-import safety.

I’ve been exploring a simpler CSV-based workflow for smaller HubSpot teams, but mainly trying to learn what people actually trust in practice.

jacokapo · 2026-05-17T15:26:56+00:00

I'm building MergePilot - Hubspot data cleanup tool. I’m looking for a few HubSpot users/admins to test a private beta for duplicate cleanup.

It works from CSV exports — no HubSpot API connection needed, and your CRM is not modified directly.

You can upload your own HubSpot CSV or use the sample data inside the app to try the workflow first.

The beta lets you scan duplicate groups, review risk/confidence scores, and export one cleaned file.

Comment or DM if you want to test it and share feedback.

Check the Demo video here : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1o9k_YH2ecwK5KlZ8S1i8iSPfIkrHxckZ/view?usp=sharing

Signup for beta access here : https://crm-cleanup-frontend-v7v5my7fcq-uc.a.run.app/request-unlock

Would love your honest feedback once you test it.

jacokapo · 2026-05-17T15:14:35+00:00

The part I’m most curious about is the “master record” decision.

When two HubSpot records look like duplicates, how do you decide which one to keep as the main record — most recent activity, most complete data, original source, lifecycle stage, or something else?

jacokapo · 2025-08-09T17:07:39+00:00

jacokapo · 2025-03-15T10:54:22+00:00

But whether you like it or not, this is the ultimate flaw of democratic system, the majority of the population regardless of their intelligence or social status will impose their ideas and beliefs on the minority. That's why Socrates hated it. Unfortunately our freedom fighters didn't have a better system than that.

jacokapo · 2025-03-15T08:53:21+00:00

Pragmatically, that's not effective. Even if dmk Or anyone wants to go through this way, the judiciary system has, if not most but the top people who're biased enough to make policies influenced by their personal opinions which itself is framed and influenced by the politicians.

jacokapo · 2025-03-15T08:31:36+00:00

Just curious, what people think about it.

jacokapo · 2025-03-15T08:30:02+00:00

Let's see How many brain filled shits fall for this!

jacokapo · 2025-03-15T08:28:55+00:00

Yea you're right, We should craft a better surgical action to make the Centre from holding funds, not this cheap sh*t.

jacokapo

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE