Home › Client results › US media-placement firm
Last updated: 10 November 2026
In short: a US firm that places client stories in national and trade media signed a two-month test with us in September 2026. The first three weeks went badly: 8,318 people emailed, 18 replies, one meeting. An audit found a dirty list and copy that did not match how the firm sells. We rebuilt both. In the first eight days of the new campaign, from 2 to 10 November 2026, 11 people replied with interest and one meeting was booked. This page is a turnaround in progress, not a finished result.
A US media-placement firm that gets companies written about in the outlets their buyers read. It sells to marketing owners and founders at US companies across many industries. The firm is not named.
Sending started on 5 October 2026. On 8 October we audited the list and the copy. About a quarter of the people on the list had changed jobs, and about half sat outside the profile we had agreed with the firm. The copy had typos and leaned on syndication numbers, which read as paid placement to many buyers.
| Round | Dates | People or emails | Replies | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| First campaigns | 5 to 24 October 2026 | 8,318 people emailed | 18 | 1 meeting booked; 16 not interested, 12 of them asked to be removed |
| Retarget with new copy | 25 to 29 October 2026 | 4,757 emails sent | 8 | 1 positive reply, a referral to a colleague |
Targeting. We stopped emailing the old segments and rebuilt the audience. The new campaign went only to people neither earlier campaign had reached: 16,189 people, checked one by one against the upload, with blocklisted companies left out.
Copy angle. On 29 October the firm's own team told us how they describe the service, and the copy was rewritten around that. It tells one earned-media story, says the client approves every story before it goes out, and drops the syndication claims. There are no links in the emails. Every step ends with a sign-off, a postal address and a plain line on how to stop the emails. The rules we followed are in why cold emails get no replies.
Deliverability. Thirteen of the firm's sending mailboxes showed Google inbox placement under 90% on 2 November 2026, and daily limits were rebalanced across the mailboxes on 4 November. Sender bounces on the new campaign were 8 of 2,895 sends (0.3%) on 2 November.
Reply handling. Every reply is drafted by our team, the CRM is updated in the same pass, and a booking link goes to anyone who asks for a call. How we answer interested replies is on how to reply to an interested cold email.
| Measure | Figure | Period |
|---|---|---|
| People in the rebuilt campaign | 16,189 | Loaded 30 October 2026 |
| Positive replies | 11 | 2 to 10 November 2026 |
| Meetings booked | 1 | 2 to 10 November 2026 |
That is more interest in eight days than in the three weeks before it. It is still early, and a booked meeting is not a held one: we bill per qualified meeting that took place. We will update this page when the test ends.
The list was dirty. About a quarter of the people had changed jobs and about half were outside the agreed profile. The copy also leaned on syndication numbers, which many buyers read as paid placement. 8,318 people emailed produced 18 replies and one meeting.
A fresh audience of 16,189 people no earlier campaign had reached, copy rewritten in the firm's own words about earned media, no links, an opt-out line and postal address in every email, and rebalanced sending limits on the weaker mailboxes.
From 2 to 10 November 2026, 11 people replied with interest and one meeting was booked. The test is still running.
Most campaigns need fixing after the first few weeks. Showing what broke and what we changed is more useful to a buyer than a single good number.
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