With AI and everyone selling fractional services, especially lead gen, do yo feel the incoming pings are getting worse, increased and redundant? I feel that AI use cases would be better suited for problems that actually need help vs giving folks more tools to flood inboxes. You know causality; outcomes and intent vs pushing activity instead of actually doing business. Anyone up for a discussion?
AI Lead Gen is getting people calendars full of slop. People are looking for validation in the form of high volume instead of using AI to scale a system that already works. A business doing less than $25k-$50k per month doesn't really need AI yet because they don't fully understand the market and their fit. But if you want a quick cash grab, sell AI implementation to unassuming business owners, I guess π€·ββοΈ
Totally; I would also argue that anyone can use AI for anything (and should), but are not thinking it out non impulsively. Everyone can pay the 25 bucks or w/e for Apollo themselves (which has AI driven integration already) and is what folks are using for those factional services.
Patrick, that 'causality' point is the entire game. Most 'AI Lead Gen' is just high-velocity guessing. The reason inboxes are flooded with 'slop' (spot on, Ace) is that people are using AI to scale activity instead of scaling intent detection. Anyone can pay $25 for Apollo and spray-and-pray, but thatβs just a digital megaphone. I treat GTM as an engineering problem, not a volume problem. Iβm an active builder in this space, and Iβve found that the only way to avoid the 'redundancy' you mentioned is to wire a true Signal-to-Action loop. I run a Python worker (Nexus) that monitors 'World Signals' specific tech-stack shifts, hiring triggers, or SEC filings and only initiates a move when there's an actual causal reason to talk. If the AI isn't acting as a filter for intent, itβs just a floodgate for noise. Real business happens in the 'uptime' of your infrastructure, not the density of your outboxes
