Greve

feedback is gift

Same

I'm seeing "Internal Server Error" when I try to access your link?

Love seeing how feedback shaped your product. I’m building Finsight AI, and I’ve found that real user signals often change my roadmap more than my initial assumptions. What’s been the most surprising signal so far?

"People don't buy personalization; they buy better outcomes" is a masterclass lesson in positioning. It takes serious founder humility to digest brutal feedback like that and completely pivot the messaging from "AI novelty" to actual business value. Massive respect for listening and shipping the right changes so fast!

Yes potentially. It could go a long way to cover those first 15 minutes we all do on calls talking about what we're trying to achieve, and even if the call is worth it. You'll need to make the page less obviously AI-generated though if possible?

There's this idea of a "virtual sales page" which is quite popular. You could also include more info on your, a deck, guides, white papers etc.

Looks good. I would keep the page short so that the benefit is clear from the beginning.

Honest answer: yes, it would make me more likely to book if the page shows you understood my specific problem in one glance. No, if it feels like a Mad Libs homepage with my company name swapped in.

Useful when:

• the first screen names a concrete pain for that company (not “ClickUp teams struggle with productivity”)

• there is one clear next step (book 15 min) and almost nothing else

• it is obviously made for outreach, not pretending to be their public site

Too much when it looks like a mini website, overclaims research, or tries to demo the whole product. That can feel stalker-ish or salesy.

First thing I would change: tighten the hero to one insight + one CTA. Cut secondary sections. Personalized should feel shorter than a normal homepage, not longer.

Also curious how you handle accuracy. One wrong fact about the company and trust dies instantly.

I actually like the idea. If I clicked through from a cold email and landed on a page that clearly showed you understood my company and why you were reaching out, I'd be much more likely to keep reading. My only concern would be making sure the research is accurate. One incorrect assumption would probably reduce trust more than a generic page. If you can consistently get the research right, I think this could be pretty powerful for high-value outreach.

Personalized landing pages for meetings is interesting — the hard part is usually the handoff from "looks tailored" to "actually relevant."

Curious how much personalization is auto-generated from public data vs human-curated, and whether you measure show-up rate or just click-to-book. If the page feels synthetic, I'd bounce; if it references a real shared context, I'd book.

Would love to see a before/after on booking rates once you have enough samples.

Interesting idea. My worry with per-prospect landing pages is scale — researching one company for a hand-picked page is easy, but the moment you're doing outbound at volume the research itself becomes the bottleneck, not the page generation. Have you found a way to keep the "feels researched" quality when you're not doing it manually per prospect, or is this mainly aimed at smaller, high-intent outbound lists where the time per lead is already justified?

"People don't buy personalization; they buy better outcomes" is a masterclass lesson in positioning. It takes serious founder humility to digest brutal feedback like that and completely pivot the messaging from "AI novelty" to actual business value. Massive respect for listening and shipping the right changes so fast!

Building the outbound side of this for a voice product, so one concrete data point: our personalized page only started converting when it did something instead of describing something.

V1 was a research summary — here's what we found about your clinic, here's how we'd help. It read well and booked nothing. What works now is one interactive thing above the fold: the prospect taps a button and our AI receptionist calls their actual phone and handles a booking for their actual business. The research still matters, but as fuel for the demo rather than as the copy. Proof beats description, and it sidesteps the whole "is this real research or AI padding" doubt several people raised above, because they experience it instead of reading it.

Two things I'd flag from doing it:

Instrument the failure separately from the bounce. Our page can fail for boring infra reasons and in analytics that looks identical to "prospect wasn't interested." We emit a distinct demo_failed event; without that split the funnel quietly lies to you and you'll tune copy when the real bug is a timeout.

Wrong-but-confident personalization really is worse than generic. We gate anything inferred and fall back to something specific-but-safe (their vertical and city, not a guessed pain point). A page that confidently names a problem I don't have tells me your research is automated and unchecked, which is a worse impression than a plain page.

On the A/B test: meetings per click, email held byte-identical, or the email's personalization takes credit for the page's work.

Yes, personalization can help, but only when it feels relevant and not invasive. I think clear messaging, social proof, and a strong call to action matter more than simply adding someone’s name or company. Have you tested the personalized version against a standard landing page?

A personalized page would help only when it proves the sender understands a problem specific to my company. If it simply repeats public company information, it may actually make the outreach feel more automated; the strongest test is whether pain-point personalization lifts booked meetings against the same email linking to a focused generic page.

This touches on something I see constantly in outreach operations — the disconnect between a hyper-personalized email and a generic landing page kills conversion. The prospect goes from "they understand my problem" to "oh, it's a template" in one click.

The sample page for Stripe is a good proof of concept. The real test will be whether the research that goes into the page actually surfaces something the prospect didn't expect you to know — that's the difference between "personalized" and "actually useful."

One thing I'd watch: if the research layer pulls from public sources (LinkedIn, company blog, etc.), the prospect already knows all of it. The magic is when the page connects dots they haven't connected themselves — e.g., "you're hiring for ops, your tech stack has three tools that don't talk to each other, here's how that's costing you."

Honestly yes — but only if the personalization shows you actually understood my

specific problem, not just "Hi {{FirstName}}". A page that reflects back my exact

use case kills the "will this even work for me?" doubt, which is the real thing

blocking the booking. Generic name-tokens do nothing for me.

Speaking as someone on the receiving end of a lot of cold outreach: research about my company doesn't impress me, an accurate statement of my problem does. A page that diagnoses what companies like mine lose when the problem goes unfixed will out-convert a page that recites my own website back to me. Make the research power the diagnosis, not the decoration.

Honest answer from the list side of this — I build LeadGrid (leadgrid.eu), the boring step upstream of you: the verified local-business list people run outbound against. So I see where the clicks come from before they ever reach a page.

For most cold campaigns the page isn't the first bottleneck. If the list is loose or the targeting's off you never get the click, and no page personalization saves a message that hit the wrong person. Where I think Greve earns its keep is the tier below your best 50 prospects — worth a real email, but not worth hand-building a page for. If the page carries the "I actually looked at your company" signal you can't fake at volume, that's the gap.

The test I'd want before believing it moves meetings: does the personalized page lift booking rate on clicks you already get, email held constant? That isolates the page from the list. The 89% open-rate from your other post is doing a lot of work but it's measuring the wrong end for this question. Rooting for it though — the after-the-click blind spot is real.

honestly yeah — I think for me the landing page mismatch is real, but it's downstream of a bigger thing: does the prospect believe you actually looked at their business specifically, or did you just personalize the wrapper. if the page references something clearly real and specific about them, I'd trust it more than the same page with their logo swapped in. curious how deep the "real research" goes on your end — like verified facts about them, or more inferred/generalized from their industry?

I think it could help, especially when the page reflects something genuinely specific about the company rather than just inserting a logo and name.

For me, the landing page is probably not the first bottleneck. The offer, timing, and credibility still matter more. But once someone clicks, a page that clearly explains why the solution fits their business could absolutely improve the chance of booking.

I’d be curious to see whether personalized pages increase meetings, or mainly increase time spent on the page.

Prioritizing honest feedback over upvotes is the right approach. One tactic that helped us was asking people what they expected the product to do before showing them how it actually worked. The difference between those expectations and reality often revealed where the positioning needed improvement.

The real test is whether personalization improves qualified replies, not just landing-page engagement. I’d compare a pain-point-specific page against a strong generic page, because adding logos and company details may feel personalized without making the offer more relevant.

I like that this goes beyond just creating landing pages. The research + personalized page + follow-ups in one workflow makes a lot more sense than juggling multiple tools. I'd be curious how accurate the company research is in practice. Congrats on the launch!

There is an assumption here that we know about the prospect already. Also, where did we get the email from? How did they join the email list? Was that from a page? What if they have seen my website before and now when they go, they see a different website? What level of personalisation are we talking about?

So many questions in my head but when I look at this closely, it totally makes sense. Personalisation will drive engagement. Not every customer is stuck to the same space. Just have to ensure that I do proper classification of the customers based on the journey before I utilise such a product.

Well done and Congratulations for your launch.

P.N. I had a look at your website and realised it is good for B2B. Totally makes sense. But B2B selling goes beyond websites. I can see that this can work for SMBs though. What a great idea!

Congrats on shipping, Vishal. I launched my own first app two days ago, so "honest feedback over upvotes" really lands for me.

Here is what actually happened on my day, in case it helps set expectations: as a solo maker with no existing audience, the vote count stayed small, but the two genuine comments I got were worth far more than the number. One of them asked for a feature that happened to be next on my roadmap, which was the best validation I got all day. So I would lean fully into your instinct and treat the day as a way to collect honest feedback and a lasting backlink, not a traffic spike.

One thing that helped me get real replies: ending the post with a single specific question instead of a general "what do you think", which you are already doing with your three questions. Good luck today.

Personalized landing pages could help, but only if the personalization goes beyond inserting a name and company logo. I’d test whether pages built around a prospect’s specific pain point outperform a strong, focused generic page—otherwise you may just be adding more work without improving replies.

Congrats on shipping. Quick question: did VCs bring up your .com during diligence? Seeing brand assets become a Series A filter for AI startups now.

Interesting approach. Extending personalization beyond the email into the landing page makes the outreach journey more consistent. The engagement data could also make follow ups more relevant, provided the setup remains fast enough for teams running campaigns at scale.

Congrats on shipping.

Something I learned running paid traffic to my own SaaS: personalization matters less than message-match. My activation rate moved when the landing page's first screen repeated the exact promise of the thing that brought the click — same words, same claim. Personalized pages are the strongest version of that idea, so I think you're onto something real.

To your third question, honestly: as someone on the receiving end of cold emails, a personalized page doesn't get me to reply — the first line of the email does. The page's job is to not lose me after I'm curious. So I'd position it as "stop losing the prospects who click" rather than "get more replies."

One suggestion: before adding features, run a small A/B on reply/meeting rate with vs. without the personalized page. That one number becomes your whole Product Hunt tagline.

Twenty years of selling Microsoft services taught me that personalization only pays when the deal size justifies it. For a list of 100 named accounts at $50K+ ACV, a page built around the prospect's actual environment is worth every minute; for high-volume outbound it just raises your cost per send. I'd position Greve as an ABM tool for expensive deals and price it accordingly, not as a cold-email add-on.

Congrats on the launch! Wishing you a great Product Hunt day. Hope you get valuable feedback and a successful launch.

The honest-feedback-over-upvotes framing is the right call. One thing

that helped us: ask people what they'd expect the product to do before

showing them what it does. The gap between those two is usually where

the positioning problem is.

that's cool

Congratulations on the Product Hunt launch! I like that you're asking for honest feedback instead of just upvotes. Personalized landing pages definitely make outreach feel more relevant. One thing I'd be interested in seeing is a few real-world case studies with conversion improvements. Wishing you a successful launch!

Congrats on the Product Hunt launch! The personalized landing page approach is really smart for cold outreach. Wish you all the best with the launch!

Congrats on shipping, Vishal ,that's a real milestone regardless of how launch day numbers turn out.

On your specific questions: yes, this is a problem I've run into constantly. We do a lot of cold outreach ourselves, and the gap between "personalized email" and "generic landing page" is one of the most common places a warm lead goes cold. It creates a weird dissonance he email made me feel like you did your homework, then the page makes me feel like a random visitor again.

One thing I'd push on: how does Greve handle personalization when you have thin or no data on the prospect (small company, no public info, etc.)? That's the case that breaks a lot of "personalized" tools they either show something obviously templated (which is worse than generic, because now it looks like a failed attempt) or they take too long to generate anything meaningful. If you've got a strong fallback for that scenario, that's worth highlighting on the PH page itself, because it's usually the first objection technical buyers raise.

To your direct question yes, a personalized landing page absolutely increases my odds of replying to a cold email, but only if the personalization references something specific and true, not just my company name dropped into a template. The moment it feels inferred-but-generic, it reads as more effort than a plain email, for less trust.

Will go drop an upvote on PH too, feedback aside, good luck today.

Hi Vishal!
Huge congratulations on launching Greve! It is truly impressive that you saw it through and shipped.

You asked for honest feedback.
It is a major conversion drop when you send out a high-intent email but the traffic you send the leads to lands on a general homepage. If the destination still feels generic and like a corporate brochure, there is less going to be value in customizing the message.
The first thing you should do is make sure your fallback page works 100% perfectly. If there isn't much or any data about the potential customer available, the default page should be as polished and planned as a personized page so they are never presented with something that appears to be broken.

If the page they created is in referencing my company and mentioning specific pain points and use cases it immediately tell me they put in a lot of effort and are relevant. It helps separate that from all the automated template emails.
Voting is good for the ego, however, building things that actually make a difference to the rate of responses is important. Best of luck the rest of the launch day. I look forward to dropping by the PH page to have a look!

It is a great idea. How does the product ensure research correctness ?

This hits a real problem — but I think the bottleneck is earlier in the funnelthan the landing page.

I've been doing cold outreach for my own product recently, and the biggestconversion killer isn't the landing page quality. It's that the email itself doesn'tfeel personal. If I send someone a generic "Your podcast has 438 episodesand no short-form clips" — that's already a custom landing page, just in textform. The personalization has to happen before they click.

The question I'd ask about your tool: does it help with the emailpersonalization, or only the post-click experience? If someone gets ageneric cold email but lands on a page with their name on it, that mightactually feel weirder than a generic landing page — like "how do they knowmy name but the email was clearly a template?"

That said — specific use case where I think this would crush: high-value B2Boutreach. If you're sending 10 emails a day to named accounts and each onegets a page with their company logo, a relevant case study, and a personalvideo — that probably converts. The volume play (500+ cold emails/day)might not.

Genuinely curious: have you tested this against a control group (same list,generic landing page)? That data would be more interesting than anything onProduct Hunt.

Good luck for launch! Would ask for a 'coffee chat' feature though

Best of luck with the launch! I'm in a similar position - I am planning to launch this week but decided to delay for a day or 2 to improve the product a bit more. Will definitely give it a look!

1. Yes. I've been trying to do more targeted outreach for an AI infrastructure product, and generic cold emails have had pretty poor response rates. A personalized landing page feels like it gives the recipient immediate context instead of making them figure out why they're being contacted. I haven't validated whether it improves conversion yet, but it's a pain I've definitely run into.

1. I'd probably add lightweight analytics around engagement - things like time on page, where people drop off, and whether they click through. That would make it easier to iterate on the personalization instead of just measuring replies.

1. Personally, yes - but only if the personalization is genuine. If the landing page clearly shows the sender understands what I'm building or why they're reaching out, I'm much more likely to continue reading. If it's just a template with my name swapped in, it doesn't really change anything.

Congrats on launching! I’m building Finsight AI for SMBs, and I’m curious — how do you balance personalization with scalability when creating landing pages?

I do cold outreach for my own project so I'm your target user here. Honest answer to Q3: a personalized page wouldn't make me reply, but a broken-looking link would stop me clicking. On that note, greve.io has no og:image, so shared links show up with no preview image. Funny given the whole pitch is about the click feeling personal.

Checker I'm building flagged it: metablast.dev/meta-tag-checker?url=https://www.greve.io/

Curious if it's useful to you or not.

Good luck with the launch, Vishal — I literally launched on PH

yesterday myself, so I know the feeling.

To your third question: yes, it would matter to me. I'm doing

link-exchange outreach right now, and the emails I actually reply to

are the ones that show they know MY site. A personalized landing page

signals effort before I even read the offer — that's exactly what

generic cold emails lack.

First thing I'd improve: make sure the personalization goes beyond

"{FirstName} at {Company}" — people smell mail-merge instantly. The

deeper it goes (their logo, their brand colors, one line about their

actual product), the stronger the effect.

I just tried it and it didn't even pull the names correctly. Just grabbed it from the URL with no spacing i.e. "MicrosoftOffice" or "AmazonWebServices" which was a big distraction.

This comment was deleted a month ago

That's actually a super solid idea!

Most definitely something that many starting businesses can use.

I will be checking it out actually, and will try to give feedback.

Wishing you luck!

It's an interesting idea — making the post-click experience personalized is just as important as the email itself.

One thing I noticed is that some of the generated pages feel very AI-generated. People are becoming quick to recognize "AI slop," and that can hurt trust. More control over the generation process could help. Things like controlling style, limiting gradients/em dashes/generic sections, and specifying what the page should prioritize.

Right now it seems like the user mostly provides the input site and gets an output, but giving users more control over the result could make the pages feel much more authentic.

Nice

looked interesting so I tired clicked on the website, it says internal server error.

The disconnect between a personalized email and a generic landing page also shows up further down the funnel. A prospect replies, then the actual follow up sits in a thread for a week because three other things caught fire that day. Same broken promise, just later in the sequence. Fixing the click experience raises reply rates, but if the follow through after the reply is inconsistent, the relevance built into the first message still gets wasted.

I build landing pages for local businesses and this is basically the whole pitch I give clients — doesn't matter how good the ad/email is if the page it lands on doesn't match the promise. curious what "relevant" ends up meaning for you, dynamic content per segment or just better message-match copy?

I want to do small scale outreach via email to potential customers. We have an amazing demo for them in the form of a PDF.

I'm worried links lead to mail going to spam - have you found this to be the case? Do you think it'd be worse to include a link or attach a PDF?

First thing, I like the orange design. I tested it, and I love this tool — it does its job and delivers an incredibly clean, sleek, flat design with a beautiful template.

This is excellent.

It's an excellent tool that I already recommend.

First five seconds? Don't try to be super personalized, aim for the vibe that this was made just for them. Right at the top you want to hit them with three things fast: a concrete trigger from your company, a plausible pain point, and a clear next step. If the page starts with generic AI or outreach copy, the magic's already gone. The biggest win probably isn’t “create pages” but “show which research angle got attention.” That’s a tighter result for outbound teams. Quick test: run two versions – one that opens with the sender’s offer and one that opens with prospect‑specific research. I’m betting the research‑first approach will crush cold traffic.

I think the idea makes sense, but I'd stay on the page only if it immediately showed me something specific about my company or the reason I was contacted. If it still feels generic after the first few seconds, I'm probably closing it.

I'd also be careful not to overdo the personalization. There's a fine line between "this is relevant" and "how do they know all this?" Getting that balance right could make a big difference.

What stood out to me is that you're treating the landing page as part of the conversation rather than the destination.

The interesting question isn't whether the page is personalized—it's whether it creates continuity. If the click feels like a natural continuation of the email instead of a context switch, you've removed a lot of the friction that usually kills cold outreach.