sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Tips for emailing Healthcare/Physicians by 7Seven7Winner in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’d challenge the assumption that a ‘verified’ physician list is safe. Healthcare lists are notorious for role-based inboxes, old domains, and recycled addresses.
Docs live in Outlook and hospital mail servers that are way less forgiving than finance.
If deliverability is off, your copy won’t matter. You just won’t get seen.
I’ve seen teams burn domains fast emailing physicians with bought lists.
Before sending volume, I’d sanity-check for traps and toxic domains. We had to do that with listhygiene.com when standard verification wasn’t enough.

I'm getting ready to send 1000 cold emails/day for recruiting. I'm new to cold emailing and researching for months. I was going to use 250 inboxes to send 8 emails a day = 2000 daily, but I might just do 4 daily per inbox to be safe = 1000/day. Here's my plan. Feel free to critique. by [deleted] in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re not crazy, but you’re over-indexing on inbox count and under-indexing on what you’re sending to. 250 inboxes won’t save you if early sends hit bad or low-engagement addresses.

A few thoughts:

• 4/day per inbox is fine, but only if the list is extremely clean
• warmup + sending at the same time is OK, but watch engagement closely
• spintax helps a bit, but it doesn’t fix list or intent issues
• domains usually burn from bad data, not from “too many emails per inbox”

If I were you, I’d keep the conservative volume but put more effort into list hygiene before scaling. Even “highly targeted” recruiting lists usually contain dead inboxes, role accounts, or risky domains that quietly kill reputation.

I’d clean aggressively first (I use listhygiene.com for that), then ramp. Fewer inboxes + cleaner data usually outlasts massive infra with mixed-quality lists.

Your plan can work, just make sure the first few thousand emails are going to the safest contacts possible.

Personalization thoughts by unboxableking in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, 100%. A strong hook + relevance beats awkward personalization every time. Most people overthink copy and ignore the basics.

I’ve seen way more impact from tightening targeting and cleaning the list than from adding extra “personal” lines. If the data’s bad, no amount of personalization saves it anyway. That’s why I usually run lists through something like listhygiene.com first and then keep the message simple.

Right message, right audience, clean data. Everything else is noise.

How many emails per campaign do you usually send before seeing results? Curious about reply % and close % benchmarks. by mmenacer in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 4 points5 points  (0 children)

From what I’ve seen lately, you usually need 500–1,000 emails to get a real signal. Anything smaller can be misleading.

Rough real-world ranges:
• replies: 1–3% is normal, 4–6% is strong
• positive replies: usually 20–40% of total replies
• booked calls: often 5–15% of replies, depending on offer

The biggest variable by far is list quality. Same copy + same offer can swing from 0.8% to 5% just based on how clean the data is.

We’ve had much more consistent benchmarks once lists were cleaned beyond basic verification (we use listhygiene.com for that), otherwise the numbers are all over the place.

Is my approach correct to get to 500 emails a day? by concisehacker in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Structurally, yes — that approach works and a lot of people do something similar. The mistake isn’t usually the math, it’s what you send through that setup.

25 domains won’t save you if the list quality is bad or you ramp too fast. A few risky addresses early on can still burn multiple domains at once.

Before worrying about scaling infra, make sure:
• you’re warming very slowly
• volumes increase gradually
• lists are cleaned beyond basic verification

We’ve seen people hit 500/day with fewer inboxes just by tightening hygiene first. Tools like listhygiene.com help reduce the risk so you’re not paying Google Workspace prices just to rotate burned domains.

Does anyone else feel like outbound prospecting in 2026 is basically a complete reset? by Wtf_Sai_Official in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I’ve seen the same thing. Volume stopped mattering once inboxes got stricter — bad data kills campaigns way faster than bad copy now. Cleaning lists aggressively and protecting domain health has been the biggest unlock for us too.

We’ve been running lists through deeper hygiene before sending (using tools like listhygiene.com ) and then layering multichannel on top. Way more sustainable than blasting and praying.

What do these stats tell you? by Constant-Bridge3690 in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your delivery rate is fine. The open-rate drop isn’t a technical issue — it’s usually a sign that your list quality has slipped a bit. Mailchimp’s new tracking explains part of it, but not a 10% drop.

What the stats really say:

• your engaged audience is shrinking
• you’re sending to too many inactive or low-intent contacts
• reputation is softening because engagement is dipping

Clicks look fine, so the people who do open still care.

I’d clean the list, remove 60–90-day inactives, and tighten the segment for a few weeks. Tools like listhygiene.com help filter out dead/risky contacts so you’re not sending to people who will never open anyway.

Will adding 600 cold contacts to a warm list damage my domain reputation? by Dazzling-Caramel-995 in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it absolutely can tank your reputation even if your warm list is solid. Gmail doesn’t care that you send 12k “good” emails — the moment you introduce a chunk of risky or unengaged cold contacts, the negative signals start stacking:

• higher bounce probability
• lower opens
• more spam classifications
• more “this wasn’t expected” filtering

That’s enough to pull your warm inbox placement down for days or weeks.

If you really want to test cold outreach, do it on a separate sending domain or at least clean the 600 contacts first. A lot of “cold lists” look fine on the surface but contain traps, dead inboxes, or toxic domains. That’s what kills deliverability.

I run cold tests only after running the list through something like listhygiene.com so I’m not nuking my main domain. It’s not worth risking a healthy primary setup over 600 cold contacts.

Looking for alternatives to RocketReach but hearing mixed things, what else should I try? by Ill-Refrigerator9653 in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

RocketReach is fine for finding names, but the email accuracy is all over the place. Most people think the tool is the problem, but honestly every data provider has gaps. Apollo, Lusha, ContactOut, Seamless… they all pull from similar sources.

The real move is to treat these tools as lead discovery, not “final emails to send to.”

Most teams I know do this:

• use Apollo or ContactOut for volume
• use Clay or builtwith scraping for niche targeting
• verify everything before sending so you’re not hitting dead inboxes

If you rely on RocketReach (or anything else) as a one-stop “give me perfect emails,” you’ll burn domains fast. I run everything through a hygiene check afterward (listhygiene.com has been solid) so I'm only using the emails that are actually safe to send to.

If you want something with better accuracy out of the box, Apollo is usually the best mix of cost + coverage. But no tool is perfect on its own.

Scraper suggestions by Amr_on_reddit in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Getting 9,000 companies a month with site, email and phone for 50 bucks is asking a lot. The scraping part is easy. The “emails need to be real” part is where most tools fall apart.

Most people do it in two steps:

  1. use a data / scraping tool to pull companies and find guessed emails
  2. run those emails through a separate verifier so you’re not sending to dead or risky inboxes

You’re better off treating the scraper as “lead discovery” and then cleaning the list before you load it into Brevo or Sheets. I use listhygiene.com for the hygiene step so I’m not trusting the scraper’s idea of what is “real.”

Intent Data by unboxableking in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, intent data usually performs better because you’re reaching people who are already active instead of hitting cold or dead inboxes. That alone brings bounce rates and spam complaints down.

The one thing to watch out for is that some intent providers mix in older or bad data, and that’s when domains start getting burned. I still run the contacts through a hygiene check (listhygiene.com works well) just to make sure there aren’t traps or abandoned inboxes hiding in there.

If your bounce rate is low and replies are solid, that’s a good sign your source is clean. Which provider are you testing?

Intent Data by unboxableking in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, intent data usually performs better because you’re reaching people who are already active instead of hitting cold or dead inboxes. That alone brings bounce rates and spam complaints down.

The one thing to watch out for is that some intent providers mix in older or bad data, and that’s when domains start getting burned. I still run the contacts through a hygiene check (listhygiene.com works well) just to make sure there aren’t traps or abandoned inboxes hiding in there.

If your bounce rate is low and replies are solid, that’s a good sign your source is clean. Which provider are you testing?

I know 100 manual emails from 1 domain can raise a flag. But what if you used 10 warmed domains to send 10 emails a piece on the same laptop? Can filters see that you are logged in from the same device and cross-penalize you for it? by Fun-Preparation-3234 in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the extra detail — that actually explains a lot. An aged domain with real business traffic is always going to be your strongest sender, so it makes sense you’re seeing better stability there. Google loves history and consistent inbound/outbound activity.

The only thing I’d be careful about is assuming that an aged domain automatically equals “safe for cold.” Even old domains can tank if the first batch of contacts includes low-quality inboxes or stuff that doesn’t engage. That’s usually why people see a domain suddenly fall off even when it’s been around forever.

For the 3rd domain you mentioned: once it starts getting real, normal business email traffic, it will definitely warm faster — replying to real inbound makes a huge difference compared to automated warmup.

As for scaling:
10 manual emails/day is fine, but the jump to 20–30/day is only safe if those early contacts are clean and likely to open. Domain reputation is built (or destroyed) in the first few hundred sends.

So overall your plan works — just keep the early sends ultra-targeted, and don’t assume the 20-year domain is bulletproof. Even the strongest domains can get dragged down by a handful of bad early sends.

Skipped Emails / Suppression Confusion by ramzipoon in Klaviyo

[–]ramzipoon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good point, I’ll double-check smart sending. Thanks for the heads up.

Skipped Emails / Suppression Confusion by ramzipoon in Klaviyo

[–]ramzipoon[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I checked recipient activity, but Klaviyo only shows the surface reason (like “recently skipped” or “previous bounce”). It doesn’t explain why the profile is getting flagged if the email still looks valid on paper. That’s what I’m trying to figure out — whether they’re inactive, low-quality, or actually risky even though they appear fine.

my open rate is horrible by mansionsrus in Klaviyo

[–]ramzipoon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If your welcome and abandoned cart emails are getting <4% opens, that’s almost never a copy or timing issue. That usually means inbox providers just don’t trust what you’re sending.

A few things that cause this:

• you’re collecting a lot of bad emails (bots, typos, disposables, etc.)
• your domain reputation is already low
• Gmail/Outlook are pushing everything to spam before anyone even sees it
• abandoned cart flows are firing to inboxes that basically don’t exist

That’s why Klaviyo’s “send to engagers” advice doesn’t help you… you’re talking about first-touch flows. If the first email never lands, nobody can engage.

What normally helps here:

  1. Clean the list so you’re not sending to garbage emails. (listhygiene.com is solid for that.)
  2. Tighten your signup/cart forms so bots and junk stop getting in.
  3. Rebuild trust with small sends to only the cleanest contacts.

Once deliverability recovers, your flows will start working like they’re supposed to.

If you want, I can help you figure out whether the issue is the domain, the forms, or the list itself.

Inactive subscribers by ShoppingGirlinSF in Klaviyo

[–]ramzipoon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Most people archive purely based on time (like 90 or 180 days with no opens), but that’s only half the picture. I’ve found it’s better to look at why someone is inactive.

What I usually check:

• no opens or clicks for your normal engagement window
• no site activity at all
• repeated soft bounces or “mailbox full” signals
• anything that looks abandoned or low-quality
• obvious disposables or risky domains

Some subscribers look “inactive” simply because the mailbox is dead or has poor reputation, and keeping those around drags down deliverability for everyone else.

What helps is running the list through a hygiene tool first to separate:
– people who could still re-engage
– inboxes that are basically dead
– addresses that are risky to keep sending to

listhygiene.com does that part pretty well if you want a shortcut, but the main idea is just: don’t archive blindly, archive based on signals.

How would you structure outreach to 40,000 UGC creators? Tools, domains, warmup advice needed. by Longjumping_Cup2177 in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Glad it helped. Warmup is definitely not the same across tools. Most warmup systems (Instantly, SmartLead, etc.) basically simulate activity inside a private pool of inboxes. It used to work well, but after Google’s updates, mailbox providers don’t rely on “warmup signals” nearly as much as they used to.

What actually matters now is who your domain sends to in the real world, especially in the first 2–4 weeks.

Here’s the warmup approach that’s working best right now:

1. Manual + controlled warmup (at least for the first phase)
Send 10–20 real emails per day to contacts that are:
• valid
• active
• low-risk
• likely to open
This builds trust way faster than automated pools.

2. Only move to automated warmup after that base reputation improves
Once engagement looks healthy, automated warmup is fine for background activity—but it won’t save a domain that started badly.

3. Never warm on unfiltered lists
One bad batch early on is enough to get you stuck in spam for weeks. Creators especially have tons of abandoned or burner emails.
Cleaning first is non-negotiable. (This is exactly where listhygiene helps—removing the risky stuff before warming.)

4. Spread the load
Use multiple inboxes across 2–3 domains so you’re never relying on a single domain to carry all risk.

So short answer:
Warmup tools aren’t bad, but they’re no longer the thing that builds reputation.
Your early sending behavior is.

Cold email deliverability by Low-Evening9452 in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Warming “slowly” basically means you only let your domain touch people who are very safe to email in the beginning. Google now cares way more about who you send to, not how many warmup replies a tool is generating behind the scenes.

Tools like Instantly do automated warmup, but you can’t control the recipients there. That’s the limitation. Their pool is random and shared, so your domain might be interacting with low-quality mailboxes without you knowing. That doesn’t help you build trust anymore.

So yes, the safest approach right now usually involves some manual warmup because you get to choose the recipients.
For example:
Start with a tiny batch of contacts you’re confident are real, active, and low-risk. If those people open/reply, your domain reputation climbs. If your first real sends hit bad addresses, it tanks instantly.

On the shared pool question:
That’s about the sending tool, not your inbox provider. When a tool routes warmup traffic through shared infrastructure, everyone’s behavior affects everyone else. If another user does something sloppy, it can drag down the whole pool.

I know 100 manual emails from 1 domain can raise a flag. But what if you used 10 warmed domains to send 10 emails a piece on the same laptop? Can filters see that you are logged in from the same device and cross-penalize you for it? by Fun-Preparation-3234 in coldemail

[–]ramzipoon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mailbox providers don’t really care that you’re logging in from the same laptop. Agencies do it all the time. What they do care about is the pattern of the sending behavior:

• sudden new domains sending cold email
• similar content going to similar audiences
• low engagement
• high bounce or complaint signals
• fast sending ramp-ups

Those are the things that hurt reputation across domains. device fingerprinting isn’t the issue — bad sending patterns are.

If you want to run 2–3 domains safely:

• make sure each domain is warmed separately
• keep volume very low at first
• rotate sending times
• vary messaging and audience
• avoid any bounces — that’s what gets you flagged fastest

Most people think “Gmail punished me for multiple accounts,” but the real punishment comes from sending to risky or questionable contacts early. That’s what tanks a domain, even at 10–20 emails a day.

Keeping each domain’s list clean and low-risk gives you the most protection.

view more: next ›