4
4 Comments

150 cold emails in: 1 human reply, 0 payments. What I'm changing next

Last week I posted that my first human reply came only after I stopped describing problems and started pasting the fix. Five days and about 90 more emails later, here are the straight numbers.

  • First-touch emails sent: 152 (it was 62 when I wrote the last post)
  • Human replies: still 1, which is a 0.7% reply rate. About 33 of the newer emails have had a week to answer, the rest a day or two, so I'm not calling it yet.
  • Payments from strangers: 0. I gave myself until the end of September.
  • Bounces in this batch: 3 from addresses that didn't exist, and 5 caused by me, because the recipient field dropped letters while I was automating the sending. I now check recipients in the sent folder, not on screen.

What I can read from this so far:

  1. The fix-in-the-first-email format got me a reply, but one in 150 is closer to noise than to an engine.
  2. Niche matters more than I thought. Pet shops were hard: only 20 of the 48 sites I scanned scored 80 or below, so I spent more time finding leads than writing to them.
  3. The only place I've had real back-and-forth is here. My comments got three replies within a day, including one asking whether anyone had actually used the scanner. The honest answer was "not yet."

What I'm changing this week:

  • Judge outreach by whether anyone who replies scans a second page, not by reply count.
  • Publish my scan data as open studies (30 skincare shops averaged 71/100, 46 candle shops 81/100), so owners have something to check without an email from a stranger.
  • Keep answering questions where they're already being asked.

For anyone past this point: when your first stranger paid, was it in response to the first thing you sent, or the second interaction?

on September 21, 2026
  1. 3

    One number worth pulling out separately: 8 of your 152 sends were errors (3 dead addresses, 5 your own automation bug), not real attempts. That's over 5% of the batch that never had a chance to reply, and it's a data-quality problem, not a copy problem. Fix that before you touch the email again, otherwise your reply-rate math stays noisy.

    On time, not just percentage: building and running that send took real hours, and it returned 1 reply. The forum comments returned 3 in a day for a fraction of the effort. Before writing another 90 emails, it's worth costing both channels in hours-per-reply, not just count-per-reply, since that's usually what tips people from "promising channel" to "actually reallocate my week here."

    We do the same kind of true-number-over-vanity-metric check for ecommerce sellers' books. Free audit if it's ever useful: https://jaymibooks.com/audit

    1. 1

      Good catch on the 8/152 — that's a fair "fix the mailing list before you fix the pitch" note, and I hadn't separated it from the reply rate. On time-per-reply: writing and sending is maybe 10 minutes per email once a niche is scanned and queued, so ~25 hours for 150. The IH comments took maybe 2 hours total for 3 replies in a day. So yes, hour-for-hour it's not close either. I'm not dropping email, but I'll track minutes-per-reply next to reply-rate from here.

  2. 1

    You buried the finding in the last line. One reply from 152 emails against three replies from a handful of comments here is not a close call, it is your own data telling you which channel works, and it cost a fraction of the effort. Worth taking seriously before spending another ninety emails on format. The other thing the numbers show is that your bottleneck is qualification rather than copy: twenty of forty eight sites qualifying means most of the time went into finding people instead of writing to them. Cold email multiplies whatever the qualification step hands it, so a better email against a thin list still returns close to nothing.

    1. 1

      Fair point on the sample size — one email reply next to three comment replies isn't close, and I'd be overselling it as an "email channel" if I called it one. The lead-gen point lands too: pet supplies were 20 qualified sites out of 48 scanned, so more than half my time that day went to finding candidates, not writing to them. I picked a cleaner niche today (leather goods, 18 of 33 scanned qualified) partly because of that. Not switching off email yet, but I'm weighing it against comment-thread time on a per-hour basis now, not just per-send.