Home › Blog › Cold email templates: 36 that follow what got 2,333 positive replies
36 cold email templates by situation: first emails, follow-ups, breakups, price, proof and replies. Each tied to a pattern in 2,333 positive-reply events.
By Moe Alhosni · Published 31 October 2026 · 23 min read
Short answer: These 36 cold email templates are organised by situation: first emails, follow-ups 1 to 5, breakups, right-person asks, price anchors, proof drops, and replies to "send more info", "what's the price?", "not now" and a prospect who went quiet. Each has subject options, merge fields, a word count and the pattern in our data it follows. None is a real email from a lead. All are written new.
I'm Moe Alhosni. We write and send cold email for clients and get paid per qualified meeting, so I have a reason to make our patterns look good. That's my bias. Every "why it works" line below says what the number counts and where it comes from, so you can judge it yourself.
ROI Maximizer (ROI Maxi) is a B2B lead generation agency founded and run by Moe Alhosni. The team works from Warsaw, Poland; the company, M Ventures LTD, is registered in the UK; clients are in the UK and the US. We run cold email outbound and charge for qualified meetings that take place: a one-off setup of $1,000–$3,000, then $200–$500 per meeting, or a flat $5,000 a month. There is no minimum term. Full terms are on the pay-per-meeting pricing page.
The patterns come from replies marked Interested in our Instantly workspace between 7 August 2025 and 24 July 2026. After excluding one client's campaigns, that is 2,333 positive-reply events: 1,389 on our own campaigns and 944 on client campaigns. A reply event is one reply, not one person.
The templates are new. I did not copy any lead's email, and no lead's name, company or words appear on this page. What I took from the data is the shape: which subject lines the replies came off, which copy elements the emails that drew them carried, which step of the sequence they arrived on, and what the interested person asked for.
The figures I lean on most:
| Pattern | Figure | What it counts |
|---|---|---|
question, {Name} subject | 528 of 1,389 | Own-campaign positive-reply events |
more business/leads for {Company} subject | 235 | Same |
partnership with {Company} subject | 152 | Same |
| Press-coverage hook subject | 802 of 944 | Client-campaign positive-reply events |
| Positive replies from the fourth email or later | 31% | Own-campaign positive-reply events, by step |
| Risk reversal in the copy | 25% | Own recovered emails that drew a positive reply |
| Time-boxed ask ("this week?") | 32% | Same |
| Right-person ask | 11% | Same |
| Breakup | 9% | Same |
| Asked for a call / proof / the price | 50% / 20% / 15% | 1,364 own-campaign positive-reply events, read in full |
| Asked the price first, a B2B PR client | 23% | 366 of that client's positive-reply events, read in full |
None of these is a reply rate. The reply export has no send counts per subject line or per template, so a big count can mean a good line or a line we sent a lot. Rates by step and by industry are on the follow-up sequence analysis and reply rates by industry. The full set of numbers is on cold email statistics.
Fill every merge field with something true, then read ten rendered emails before anything goes out. A template is a shape, not a message.
| Merge field | What goes in it |
|---|---|
{{first_name}}, {{company}} | The prospect's first name and short brand name, no "Inc" or "Ltd" |
{{peer_group}} | Who they are, in their words: "logistics SaaS teams", "boutique hotels in Portugal" |
{{result_unit}} | The thing you get paid for or deliver: a held meeting, a placement, a hire |
{{proof_client}}, {{proof_number}} | One real client you may name, one real number |
{{sender_name}} | A real person's name. Title optional. No banner, no links in the first email |
Four rules before you send:
{{company}} breaks the subject line and the first sentence at once. Run the file through the lead list checker.Word counts below cover the body from greeting to sign-off, with each merge field counted as one word. Filled in, a field is often three to six words, so a sent email runs longer than its count.
A first email gives one reason to talk and asks for a short call. For a service with a named result, 70 to 110 words. For a pay-per-result offer, 40 to 80.
Subject options: question, {{first_name}} · {{first_name}}, a question · question about {{company}}
Hi {{first_name}},
Who looks after {{problem_area}} at {{company}}?
I ask because we {{what_you_do}} for {{peer_group}}, and you only pay when {{result_unit}} actually happens.
If that's you, are you free for 15 minutes this week?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: question, {Name} was the subject on 528 of 1,389 own-campaign positive-reply events, the largest single family, and the body asks a real question so the subject is honest.
Length: 35 words.
Subject options: more {{outcome_noun}} for {{company}} · more clients for {{company}} · {{company}} and {{peer_group}}
Hi {{first_name}},
We help {{peer_group}} like {{company}} win {{named_outcome}} within {{timeframe}}.
For {{proof_client}}, that meant {{proof_number}}.
Are you available for a short call next week?
Best,
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: more business/leads for {Company} was our second-largest own subject family (235 positive-reply events), and the body follows the four-line shape in our converting copy: promise, one proof number, a time-boxed ask.
Length: 27 words.
Subject options: partnership with {{company}} · {{company}} and {{your_company}} · referrals between us
Hi {{first_name}},
We work with the same kind of clients as {{company}}, {{shared_customer_type}}, but we don't do {{their_service}}. When our clients need it, we have nobody good to send them to.
Would a referral arrangement make sense for you? Happy to explain how we'd run it in 20 minutes, Thursday or Friday.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: partnership with {Company} carried 152 own-campaign positive-reply events. In our agency partnerships segment, 32% of the 289 people who replied positively said "interested" in so many words, the highest share of any large segment (unique people, all clients).
Length: 53 words.
Subject options: {{task}} at {{company}} · how {{peer_group}} handle {{task}} · {{first_name}}, {{task}}
Hi {{first_name}},
{{your_company}} {{what_it_does_in_plain_words}}.
How it works: we {{step_1}}, then {{step_2}}. It takes about {{process_number}}, and the part left for your team is {{what_is_left_for_them}}.
{{peer_group}} use it to {{result}}.
Are you free for 15 minutes on Tuesday or Wednesday?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: a reader believes what they can picture, so this one shows how the work gets done before the result. This principle is in our copy system but not yet proven in our reply data, so test it against Templates 1 and 2 rather than replacing them.
Length: 40 words.
Subject options: {{company}}'s {{trigger_short}} · your new {{role}} · {{trigger_short}}
Hi {{first_name}},
Saw that {{company}} {{trigger}}. When {{peer_group}} do that, {{common_problem}} tends to land on the {{role}}'s desk within a quarter.
We {{what_you_do}}, paid per {{result_unit}}.
Is that you, or is someone else on the team the right person?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: we have no count for trigger subjects, so I won't pretend to one. The close borrows the right-person fallback, which sat in 11% of our own emails that drew a positive reply.
Length: 40 words.
Subject options: {{company}} · {{problem_area}}, {{first_name}} · {{peer_group}} {{outcome_noun}}
{{first_name}}, is {{problem}} on your list this quarter?
If it is, we {{one_line_offer}} and you pay only for {{result_unit}}. Free for 15 minutes on Tuesday?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: the subject lines our 1,543 interested leads replied to had a median of four words (unique people, all clients), and our own-offer emails that converted ran 40 to 80 words. This is the short end of both.
Length: 26 words.
Subject options: {{company}} in {{named_place}} · {{company}} featured in {{outlet}} · {{company}} x {{named_place}}
Hi {{first_name}},
We'd like to help {{company}} {{outcome}} in {{named_place_1}}, {{named_place_2}} and {{named_place_3}} within {{timeframe}}.
For one {{proof_client_type}} client in {{region}}, we {{proof_number}} over {{proof_period}}, which brought a clear rise in inbound interest.
Are you available to chat sometime this week?
Best,
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: 802 of 944 client-campaign positive-reply events came off a press-coverage hook, and named outlets appeared in 77% of P1 Communications' converting emails. Use it only if you can deliver the places you name.
Length: 43 words.
Subject options: {{peer_group}} and {{problem}} · the {{model}} problem · {{first_name}}, {{problem}}
Hi {{first_name}},
After working with enough {{peer_group}} on {{task}}, the pattern is the same. The {{tool_or_vendor}} isn't the problem. The {{model}} is.
{{model}} means {{how_it_fails_1}}. It also means {{how_it_fails_2}}. Nobody notices the gap until {{moment_of_pain}}.
{{your_company}} works differently: {{what_it_is}}, priced {{how_it_is_priced}}. That removes {{the_cause}}.
If that matches what you're seeing, can we take 20 minutes on Thursday?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: a confident close beats a hedged one ("worth comparing?" is banned in our system), and naming the cause gives an expert's reason to reply. Filled in, it runs past the 70 to 110 words of our winners, and it is untested in our data, so treat it as a separate variant.
Length: 58 words.
Each follow-up does one new job. "Just bumping this" is a repeat. All of these go in the same thread with no new subject; the subject options are for the day you have to start a new thread.
On our own campaigns, follow-up 1 drew 25% of positive-reply events, follow-up 2 drew 11%, follow-up 3 drew 12%, follow-ups 4 and 5 drew 8% each. The full step tables are in how many follow-ups a cold email sequence needs, and more follow-up shapes are in cold email follow-up templates.
Subject options: same thread · {{first_name}}, forgot this · one thing I left out
{{first_name}}, forgot to add: you only pay for {{result_unit}} that {{condition}}. Nothing for {{failure_case}}.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: follow-up 1 was our second-largest step and risk reversal sat in 25% of our own emails that drew a positive reply. Only send this if it's true; if you charge a setup fee, say so.
Length: 15 words.
Subject options: same thread · another angle on {{problem_area}} · {{company}}, one more angle
{{first_name}}, one more angle.
Most {{peer_group}} we speak to {{observed_gap}}. If {{company}} is the same, that gap is the part we fix.
A short call, or is this the wrong quarter?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: same problem, new reason. Follow-up 2 still drew 11% of our own positive-reply events, and an angle the first email didn't use gives the reader something new to answer.
Length: 32 words.
Subject options: same thread · yes or no, {{first_name}} · {{problem_area}} this year?
{{first_name}}, is {{problem}} something {{company}} wants to fix this year?
A yes or a no is plenty. Either way I'll know whether to write again.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: the fourth email and later drew 31% of our own positive-reply events, and a one-word ask is the cheapest reply in the sequence.
Length: 26 words.
Subject options: same thread · how this works at {{company}} · what week one looks like
{{first_name}}, in case it helps to see the work:
Week one, we {{step_1}}. Week two, {{step_2}}. From week three, {{step_3}}. Your team spends about {{time_needed}} a week on it.
Want me to map that onto {{company}} on a 20-minute call?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: follow-up 4 drew 8% of our own positive-reply events, the same as follow-up 5, which is why we keep these steps on big lists. Showing one piece of the mechanism per step gives a reason to write that isn't a bump.
Length: 41 words.
Subject options: same thread · before {{season}} · {{company}} and {{deadline}}
{{first_name}}, a timing point.
If {{company}} wants {{result}} before {{season_or_deadline}}, the work has to start about {{lead_time}} earlier. That's why I'm writing now and not in {{month}}.
Is a call next week useful?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: in a seven-step P1 Communications campaign, follow-up 5 drew 45 human replies on 5,953 emails sent, more per email than follow-ups 3 and 4. A real deadline is new information.
Length: 34 words.
A breakup says you'll stop, then stops. In all four 2026 campaigns we measured by step, the last email was the weakest or joint-weakest step, so keep it to a few lines and don't plan around it.
Subject options: same thread · closing the loop · last note from me
{{first_name}},
I'll take this as a no for now, which is completely fine. I won't write again.
If {{problem}} comes back on the list, you know where I am.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: the breakup sat in 9% of our own emails that drew a positive reply. This version doesn't ask for sympathy, which is the line I cut most often from other people's breakups.
Length: 30 words.
Subject options: same thread · busy or not keen? · {{first_name}}, I'll stop here
{{first_name}}, I get the feeling this isn't a priority, so I'll stop here.
If you've just been busy, reply "later" and I'll come back in {{month}}.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: the "not keen, I'll stop; if you've been busy, glad to talk" structure converted repeatedly in our own copy. It turns a yes into one word.
Length: 27 words.
Subject options: same thread · one last thing · for when {{problem_area}} comes up
{{first_name}}, last one from me.
If {{problem}} comes up later, this is the {{free_resource}} we give clients before they start: {{link}}. No reply needed.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: a link is fine at the end of a sequence, never in the first email. This gives a reason to come back without a guilt line. We have no separate count for it, so test it against Template 14.
Length: 25 words.
The right-person ask sat in 11% of our own emails that drew a positive reply, 9% of P1 Communications' and 6% of a B2B PR client's. Referrals are the warmest replies in the set, so have Templates 18 and 19 ready before you need them.
Subject options: same thread · right person at {{company}}? · who handles {{function}}?
{{first_name}}, did my note reach the right person?
If not, who at {{company}} looks after {{function}}? A name is all I need.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: it asks for one name, not a meeting. In our hospitality PR segment, 5% of interested replies were referrals, the highest share of any segment (unique people, all clients).
Length: 23 words.
Subject options: {{referrer_first_name}} suggested I write · from {{referrer_first_name}} · {{referrer_first_name}} pointed me to you
Hi {{first_name}},
{{referrer_first_name}} said you look after {{function}} at {{company}}, so I'm writing to you directly.
In short: we {{what_you_do}} for {{peer_group}}. For {{proof_client}}, that came to {{proof_number}}.
Are you free for 20 minutes this week or next? I've copied {{referrer_first_name}} so they know I followed up.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: the subject is true and names someone they know, and the body repeats the first email's promise-proof-ask shape. Use it only when the referrer really did name them.
Length: 48 words.
Subject options: same thread · thank you · thanks for the pointer
Thanks, {{first_name}}. I've written to {{referred_name}} and copied you once so they know where I came from. I'll leave you out of the rest of the thread.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: the person who pointed you on is often asked about you later. A short thank-you keeps that answer kind. We don't count these; it's house practice.
Length: 28 words.
A price anchor answers the cost question before it's asked. A B2B PR client's interested prospects asked the price first in 23% of 366 positive-reply events; on our own campaigns it was 15% of 1,364. A sequence that never mentions money leaves that question to stall the thread.
Subject options: same thread · what this costs · {{company}}, on budget
{{first_name}}, a note on cost, since it's usually the first question.
Smaller budgets, around {{low_range}}, cover {{basic_scope}}. Larger ones, {{high_range}}, add {{extra_scope}}. Most {{peer_group}} start at {{typical_start}}.
I'd pin the exact figure on a 20-minute call. Tuesday or Wednesday?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: it gives a range in the email and saves the exact quote for the call. Answering a price question with "let's discuss on a call" is one of the banned moves in our system.
Length: 40 words.
Subject options: same thread · {{in_house_role}} or us · the in-house cost
{{first_name}}, one comparison that usually comes up.
A {{in_house_role}} costs about {{in_house_cost}} a year before they {{first_result}}, and you pay that whether it works or not. We charge {{price_model}}, and {{failure_case}} costs you nothing.
If that maths is worth checking for {{company}}, are you free on Thursday?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: it moves price from "is this expensive?" to "compared with what?", with the risk reversal that sat in 25% of our own converting copy. Put only real figures in both slots; the cost per meeting calculator helps.
Length: 48 words.
Proof was asked for in 20% of our own 1,364 positive-reply events. Yet case-study numbers sat in only 2% of our own emails that drew a positive reply, against 28% of a B2B PR client's. Our own copy under-used proof, and these three fix that.
Subject options: same thread · what this looked like for {{proof_client}} · {{proof_client}}'s numbers
{{first_name}}, a concrete example.
{{proof_client}}, a {{proof_client_type}}, came to us with {{starting_point}}. In {{timeframe}}, {{result_with_number}}.
{{company}} looks similar on {{similarity}}. Shall I send the two-page version, or is a call easier?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: one named client and one number is the proof shape our system asks for. Ours, for example, is PR Noir: 27 leads that became 10 qualified meetings and a $90K deal in 45 days.
Length: 32 words.
Subject options: same thread · an example for {{peer_group}} · {{company}}, three examples
{{first_name}}, rather than describe it, here are {{example_count}} recent examples for {{peer_group}}:
{{example_1}}
{{example_2}}
{{example_3}}If {{company}} wants one of these by {{deadline}}, a 20-minute call this week is the next step.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: examples were asked for in 12% of a B2B PR client's positive-reply events and 6% of ours. P1-style sequences put two or three live placement links for the prospect's industry at step 3.
Length: 33 words.
Subject options: same thread · a {{industry}} example · similar to {{company}}
{{first_name}}, I can't name them, but here's one close to you: a {{size}} {{industry}} firm in {{region}}, {{result}} over {{timeframe}}.
If we get to a call, I'll ask them whether they're happy to speak to you.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: most clients can't be named, and an unnamed percentage reads like a guess. Size, industry, region and one number is the next best thing.
Length: 37 words.
Across our own campaigns and two clients' campaigns, to July 2026, 1,257 leads replied Interested and then went silent for two days or more. Of those, 215 had asked the price, for proof or for details, and 128 had asked for a call. Those two groups are where to start. More of these, by what happened before the silence, are in email templates for a prospect who went quiet.
Subject options: same thread · did this reach you? · re your question on {{topic}}
{{first_name}}, you asked about {{their_question}} on {{day}}. Did my answer reach you?
Short version: {{one_line_answer}}.
Still useful to talk on {{slot_1}} or {{slot_2}}?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: it refers to their words, not yours, and restates the answer so they don't have to scroll. The "re your" subject is only for when they did ask, in that thread.
Length: 24 words.
Subject options: same thread · sorry, {{first_name}} · your question on {{topic}}
Sorry, {{first_name}}. You asked {{their_question}} and I never answered. Here it is:
{{full_answer_in_three_sentences}}
If that still fits, {{slot_1}} or {{slot_2}} for a call?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: the 215 who asked a question are the group with a reason to reply. Apologise once, answer fully, then ask.
Length: 24 words.
Subject options: same thread · our call · {{first_name}}, that call
{{first_name}}, we never got that call in the diary. My fault.
{{slot_1}} or {{slot_2}}, your time? Thirty minutes.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: 128 of the 1,257 had already asked for a call. They said yes once; two times make the second yes one word.
Length: 19 words.
Subject options: same thread · {{offer_short}}, again · {{company}} in {{quarter}}
Hi {{first_name}},
You were interested in {{offer}} back in {{month}}, and the timing wasn't right.
Since then, {{new_proof}}. Is {{quarter}} a better time to look at it?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: new information, not "just following up". It names the old interest honestly so the email isn't a cold pitch dressed as a reply.
Length: 28 words.
Examples were asked for in 6% of our own positive-reply events and 12% of a B2B PR client's; how-it-works questions in 4% and 10%. The full reply playbook, with what to send for each ask, is in how to respond to a positive cold email reply. These two are shorter variants.
Subject options: same thread · how it works · the short version
Happy to, {{first_name}}. Three sentences:
{{sentence_1_what_we_do}} {{sentence_2_how}} {{sentence_3_what_you_pay}}
One question so I send the right detail next: is this for {{use_case_a}} or {{use_case_b}}?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: a PDF from a stranger is one more thing to open. Three sentences answer it in the thread and the question keeps the conversation going.
Length: 24 words.
Subject options: same thread · before I send it · quick check
Will do, {{first_name}}. Before I send anything long: is {{problem}} on the list for this quarter, or should I come back to you later?
Either answer is fine.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: "send me info" is sometimes a polite no. We have no data on how often, so this asks instead of guessing, and a "later" goes straight to Template 34.
Length: 29 words.
Give a range in the reply. Price was asked in 15% of our own 1,364 positive-reply events and 23% of a B2B PR client's 366. Our own answer, with our real numbers, is in the reply playbook.
Subject options: same thread · pricing · cost for {{company}}
Hi {{first_name}},
We charge {{pricing_model}}. For {{peer_group}}, that usually lands between {{low_price}} and {{high_price}}.
Where you sit depends on {{driver_1}} and {{driver_2}}. {{what_is_not_charged}}.
I can narrow it on a 20-minute call. {{slot_1}} or {{slot_2}}?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: model, range, what moves it, then a call. A dodge reads as a no, and the price-first share is high enough that this reply gets written every week.
Length: 35 words.
Subject options: same thread · on the price · a smaller option
Fair, {{first_name}}. The {{price}} covers {{component_1}}, {{component_2}} and {{component_3}}.
If it's {{component_3}} that doesn't fit, we can drop it and the cost comes down to {{lower_price}}. If it's the whole idea, tell me and I'll leave it there.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: it explains the price instead of defending it and gives a real smaller option. The exit line keeps it honest. This is practice, not a counted pattern.
Length: 39 words.
Subject options: same thread · a way to test it · starting small
{{first_name}}, if a full {{engagement}} is too big a first step, we can start with {{pilot_scope}} for {{pilot_price}} over {{pilot_length}}.
You'd see {{pilot_output}} before deciding anything else. Shall I write that up?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: proof was asked for in 20% of our own positive-reply events. A small paid test answers the price and the proof question at once. Only offer a pilot you'd actually run.
Length: 33 words.
"Later" was 1% of our own positive-reply events. It is rare, so each one is worth handling by hand. Take them out of the sequence the same day.
Subject options: same thread · {{month}} it is · back in {{month}}
Understood, {{first_name}}. I'll write again in {{month}}, not before.
So that email is useful: what has to happen first, budget, a hire, or something else?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: it turns "not now" into a date and one question, then stops the sequence. "Later" is a date; "remove me" is an opt-out, honoured within 10 business days under CAN-SPAM.
Length: 26 words.
Subject options: same thread · as promised, {{month}} · {{company}}, {{month}}
Hi {{first_name}},
You asked me to come back in {{month}}, so here I am. Last time you mentioned {{what_had_to_happen}}.
Has that happened, or should I leave it for now?
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: it proves you listened by repeating their condition. Two easy answers, both useful.
Length: 30 words.
Subject options: same thread · before {{month}} · something for in between
No problem, {{first_name}}. One thing that may help before then: {{useful_resource}}.
I'll check in on {{date}}. Nothing from me until then.
{{sender_name}}
Why it works: a resource with no ask keeps the thread warm without a sequence. Say when you'll write and keep to it.
Length: 22 words.
The structure above holds across markets. What changes is the proof, the vocabulary and the person who actually buys. Cold email templates by industry has two templates each for SaaS, IT services, agencies, consulting, recruitment, finance vendors, manufacturing and hospitality and travel brands. Real emails from our own agency sequences, mistakes included, are in cold email templates for agencies. Subject line data is in cold email subject lines.
Don't send these if you have no proof yet. Templates 2, 7, 18 and 22 depend on a real client and a real number. Without one, send fifty emails by hand, close a deal, then come back.
Don't hire us if your whole market is a few hundred accounts. Write to them yourself. And if your domain fails its SPF, DKIM or DMARC check, fix that before anyone writes a word: check your setup.
There isn't one. The most common subject on our own positive-reply events was question, {Name} (528 of 1,389), and the most common elements in our converting copy were a time-boxed ask (32%) and risk reversal (25%). Template 1 combines all three.
40 to 80 words for a pay-per-result offer, 70 to 110 for a service with a named result. Follow-ups shorter. The first emails here run 26 to 58 words before the merge fields are filled and grow once they are; Template 8 runs longest.
Four to five emails by default. On our own campaigns, 31% of positive-reply events came from the fourth email or later. The per-step data is in how many follow-ups a cold email sequence needs.
Use the structure, never the brackets. Every merge field needs a true value, and the proof has to be yours. Read ten rendered emails before you launch.
No. They're new templates written to follow the patterns in our data. Real, lightly edited emails from our own sequences are in cold email templates for agencies.
If you pay someone to write and send these, get three things in writing:
Ours is written out in what counts as a qualified meeting. Then run your deal size through the ROI calculator. If you'd rather talk it through, book 30 minutes.
About the author: Moe Alhosni, founder of ROI Maximizer. Before that he spent four and a half years in sales at Moody's in London, most recently as Assistant Director, Sales, working with banks, asset managers and private equity firms. He runs the campaigns behind the first-hand data on this site. LinkedIn
After Moody's he was Sales Director at Coinshift, a Web3 treasury management company (2024). Before Moody's he worked at BLOM Bank France in London on settlements and customer service, including AML/KYC record updates. Full career
Or run the free GTM teardown on your own site for the ICP, cold email and numbers specific to your company.
ROI Maximizer is a trading name of M Ventures LTD, registered in England and Wales, company no. 15554493. Registered office: 4 Beau Street, Bath BA1 1QY, United Kingdom. moe@roimaxi.com
© 2024–2026 M Ventures LTD. Privacy notice · Editorial policy · Methodology · Corrections